Remilia’s art-as-cult is an inversion of Bourriard, for whom the art object is valued primarily for its impact potential within an interconnected global system. Bourriard’s “micro-utopia” considered reality to be a result of the work.
For Remilia's memetic project, this is reversed. The work is a result of the social-psychological machine surrounding it, whether it be the “Warholian groupchat”, the free-associative algorithm arranging PFP assets, or the swarm consciousness of the user fandom.
The reality is the project, and the work serves to proliferate that reality. As such, the point of control lies in who is in and who is out – in addition to what kinds of things the ‘memeplex’ encourages. Focus shifts from the traditional artist's full control over the product of art to that of a sage ruler working with the social flows which result in art.
For over a year now, the problem of art and the internet is beginning to be reconciled. When Dean Kissick said the American pavilion at the Venice Biennale should have been simply a Milady, he wasn’t kidding.
Yet where is the art criticism?
Text excerpted from “Four Notes on Reading Remilia Collective”.