UNFASHIONING THE OBJECT - VOGUE TRASH - DERELICTION - EXCESS

We discussed excess - the excess that Bataille wrote of as more a problem than scarcity. How does excess figure in art production, and value permanence? Does value continually shift? When does an artists' work reach a plateau of historical significance that its value begins suddenly increasing at the rate of infinite increment? There is an implicit [intentional] contradiction in the ideologues of conceptual art, quoted by Douglas Huebler, in not wanting to add anything more to the world of images /objects, yet to projects that are in process of recording 'everything' or 'everybody' in the world. The Impossible destination. If we video everything that occurs as an 'event' then there is no event. What process of censoring the image then is called for? How is that kind of subtraction from excess in any way effective as bringing change, or as a truth process? Does the arbitrary construction and destruction of immediate images recorded on mobile phones imply a different [better] cognizance of the world? Reading Roland Barthes' Empire of Signs gives a clue to the Japanese mentality of surface of a world without any hidden inner necessity or 'soul'. No guilt, no permanence, no morality, just what it is...is this the 'fashioning' of surface that Vogue represents without anxiety about death, or the transience of things, and the inevitability of corruption?