The Hatred of Administration
Few characterizations of politicians and artists are more damning than that they are “mere administrators.” The persistence of negative characterizations of enforcements of order is remarkable in these two fields. From critiques of early liberalism to critiques of digitalization, “administration” functions on occasion as a metaphorical figure for the cessation of aesthetic and political vibrancy. Given the many forms of oppression that have been realized through it, its fundamental disapproval seems to require no further explanation. The antithesis between “the political/aesthetic” and “the administrative” would thus lie in the fundamental contempt for the latter. This PhD project, however, pursues a different line of thinking. It argues that this antithesis is historically conditioned and that it has structural roots in the respective concepts. The aim is therefore to examine the historical causes of the persistence of this aversion, which has more often than not proven to be an unintended kinship.
Alongside this runs the question of whether administrations perform aesthetic efforts themselves. Speaking in general terms, one could say that the nature of administration consists in implementing formats. As regulatory bodies, they install obligations that contribute to the texturing of reality. However, the evidence of the entities they execute remains fragmentary at best. In the absence of a specific addressee, administrative offices are those systemic units within large-scale organizations that must address their experiential deficits. Thus, a bureaucratically organized state is an object that is in itself unexperienceable, yet whose subjects nevertheless come to feel “it” at least indirectly through the experience of their administration. Assuming that the scope for collective self-determination remains drastically limited without administrative forms of action, and given that bureaucracy is an element of every modern form of government, an examination of its aesthetic capabilities contributes to the question of whether and to what extent administrations can be specifically democratic in the way they appear and operate.