Book excerpt: 'Each precedent is an image. It is an image produced by judicial mechanisms of power, and it has a clear aesthetic value. Can any image produced by prosecutors, investigators or judges be called a precedent? No. What constitutes a precedent is only the aesthetically valuable product of their work that they create in the process of judicially oppressing an artist and their art. To make a precedent happen, however, the artist should turn this oppression against power itself. For that is when the artist effects a turn-around so much needed by art. They turn upside down the perennial disposition between art and power, making power work for art.'