A project by Pedro G. Romero,
curated by the artist and Valentín Roma

For more information on the Archivo F.X. fxysudoble.com

The F.X. Archive operates around the taxonomies and classifications that relate language and reality. The basis for these operations is a vast archive of images of the anti-sacramental political iconoclasm in Spain between 1845 and 1945, which were ordered under a critical index of topics that come from the visual constructions of the wide field of the modern project.

Since the end of the nineteen nineties, the F.X. Archive has worked in many directions, either in collecting images and documents that show the importance that the phenomenon achieved in Spain from the end of the 19th century to the middle of the 20th century, promoting by means of seminars and publications the reflection about this topic, or by activating from the artistic, social and political practices, the relevance of the iconoclasm as a constitutive element of the behaviours and ways of our community.

In this sense, in recent years, the F.X.Archive has tackled a series of works – the political community, the economic order, established violence, which is defined around the economy, a topic to which he already dedicated some previous attempts – Silo, the shameful community, Don Dinero; Wirtschaft / Ökonimie / Konjuntur– which now join this discursive line. As in other projects, F.X.Archive is based on the register itself of the economy in the representations, images, definitions and legends, that stores: disfigured faces, devastated buildings that show the true structures, temples confiscated for new community uses, gold and silver, even paper money, everything that is thrown to the flames, that is to say, an absolute lack of interest for destruction.

From here on, of this degree zero of the economy, concomitant tool have been explored: the zero expense proposed by John Ruskin for the relation of works of art and things of the world, the zero value given by William Carlos Williams to the performing work of art, that cannot be based on an alteration of the value of good; or the remains of Felipe Aláiz, who wrote: “A painting can have a value in pesetas or dollars. This is evident because paintings are sold. If the painting is pawned for ten thousand pesetas and it is a landscape, a vegetable garden that is only worth two thousand in the normal market, what can we think about vegetable markets and the market of paintings?”

In effect, the economy is understood as an economy of art understood, not only in relation to the operations of buying and selling and price, the artistic stock market as Silverio Lanza called it, but also as a dividing up of the classification and taxonomy of artistic things in the world, and even of economy in the sense of containment or adequate distributions of gift, material or expressive resources. This restriction of the field obeys the confirmation according to which, and contrary to what has been understood so far, the modern artistic superstructure has been, not a result, but a vanguard of the operations of financial capitalism, a privileged position of its experiment, and possibly a laboratory of its transformation. This double articulation between economy and aesthetics, between the power and the glory, refers us to Giorgio Agamben who questioned the modern process of secularisation and one that recuperates the effective application of the desecration, returning to this word the original sense, that action that returned things to their common use.