ABSTRACT
In the cultural critique of capitalism, appropriation is a vision of labor, one that is vividly tied to the Marxist notion of alienation. The political theorist Bertell Ollman has given an influential account of its central place in Marx’s conception of man. Ollman writes, “In its most general sense, ‘appropriation’ means to utilize constructively, to build by incorporating; the subject, whether stated or implied, is man’s essential powers. For Marx, the individual appropriates the nature he perceives and has become oriented to by making it in some way a part of himself with whatever effect this has on his senses and future orientation” (Ollman 1971, 89). Under capitalism, however, appropriation takes the form of estrangement and alienation. As Ollman notes, Marx’s concept of appropriation is implicitly envisioned in the figure of the artist; for example, Marx likens full and personal appropriation to the painter’s appropriation of a sunset (Ollman 1971, 23). Thus the artist is compellingly envisioned as a full, self-conscious, self-expressive and authentically productive individual, the artist and his appropriation of the material world contrasts with alienated labor, and this is one of theoretical pillars around which the “work” of artists has been understood throughout the twentieth century.
