Session One 1-day
Instructor: Merete Røstad
Art as a Way of Thinking Marco de Michelis
“The true artist helps the world by revealing mystic truths.” [Bruce Nauman, 1967]
Who reveals the mystic lies? Are these not equally as hidden as those truths? [rt]
Robert Jauss poiesis- transform, poetic power and aesthesis- renew, cathartic freedom
Art as a form of knowledge and cognitive experience---Gesamtkunstwerk, where all forms share the same foundation Wagner [Nietzsche], Bauhaus, post-WW2
Not so sure I agree with the “conclusion-less close” the author mentions, I think it was more of a conclusion that retained openness...specifically thinking Duchamp and his progeny. Also, the notion of the Gesamtkunstwerk I think should be viewed through a lens of rediscovery, or perhaps a naming of something which existed long before, perhaps always, but was not addressed until it was again, and at that point it was ‘re-branded’... [rt]
“The need to step beyond the traditional disciplinary boundaries appeared to be more a result of internal dilemmas within the singular discipline than a search for a new unitary synthesis.” [2]
“Philosophy, art and science come into relations for mutual resonance and exchange, but always for internal reasons.” [Gilles Deleuze, 2]
Internal. The reasons are always an outward projection of what is contained within, and what is contained within does not have clear boundaries, it is a mish-mash of overlapping ideas and identities. This internal relationship deserves to be accurately represented in the manner by which it is externally revealed. [rt]
The external space in which the internal is exhibited. [rt]
Beyond traditional spaces
How traditional is traditional? What are the parameters of the word ‘traditional’?[rt]
Peter Osborne- “architecturation” of contemporary art [3]
How can contemporary art be ‘architecturalized’ if once architecture was accepted equally as an art form with these other forms that are now dealing with issues (again) which were for a time limited to that specific form? [rt]
architecture introduces meaning related to specific social or collective issues (Jeff Wall- modernism with a social content) [3]
“When the protagonists of the dialogue move beyond the disciplinary confines to finally change their status… the process suddenly becomes devoid of interest.” [4]
Taking this into the area of contemporary discussions surrounding identity...when a transgender person becomes the gender by which that person identifies, what becomes of the issues that relate to the biological form associated with gender? ...insert other ways of self identification which can have biological, psychological or sociological differences…how is the mish-mash, the overlap and the gaps which become boundaries to be addressed? [rt]
How can we still consider utopia today? [4]
1964 Bloch-Adorno conversation: Adorno- utopia is reached in the continual repetition of ‘today’ and Bloch- “something is missing” we are aware that perfection has not been reached. [4] the vision of the impossible to achieve perfection remains a part of the desire that drives us and cannot be eliminated…
De Michelis writes this has been eliminated to a degree from the individual work of art or architecture, yet remains to be found in the form of the large-scale international exhibition. I don’t really agree with this. Perhaps it is found in the large-scale international exhibition, that I don’t deny, but it is probably still equally to be found in the individual work of art...which might be overlooked or remain unheard because of the glare and volume of those large-scale international exhibitions. [rt]
Yona Friedman- “universal utopias not only impossible but are even dangerous”...[5]
Frederic Jameson- “archipelago of utopias”[5]
L. Moholy-Nagy - the arts cannot be isolated into separate territories[5]
Everyone has a different idea of what utopia is...and personal definition of utopia is always changing...there exists a state of constant flow from one to another. [rt]
Art’s Indecent Proposal: Collaboration. An Attempt to Think Collectively Derya Ozkan & Oda Projesi
I found reading this interview to be frustrating, but after thinking about it a few days I decided that means it was successful in relating the meaning and experience of this type of art. Looking again at the title of the article the two words that pop out at me are ‘indecent’ and ‘attempt’, one [attempt] I find quite fitting, accurate in its relation to Oda Projesi, the other [indecent] less fitting as far as accuracy in its relation to what Oda Projesi is trying to say the the work is...but fitting if one applies it to how the work is trying to be portrayed.
Of the various points of the conversation--empathy, representation, production of space, I found the conversation that evolved around authorship to be the most revealing at the limits placed upon the expression of the proposal/project by language and context. I kept feeling the conversation was running in one direction, slammed into a wall, then turned to run in another direction only to slam into another wall. I do not feel Oda Projesi was ever able to clearly define what they were doing because they were trying to do so using a vocabulary that simply does not apply...and they were trying to justify the use of that vocabulary as a way to deny its relevance to the project.
Specifically relating to the idea of collective authorship,which they appear to want to describe as something ‘new’ is in fact quite old; Oda Projesi seemed to me to express a defensive need to deny a level of control of the project specifically related to the ideas of collective authorship, that they cannot avoid being in possession of within the boundaries of the language they are using to describe and define it. In one regard I felt if they would accept the boundaries created by the language they would be able to leap over them, instead by denying that those boundaries applied, are even present, they trip over them. What is more, I do not think challenging the idea of authorship will facilitate the production of new forms as long as it is subjugated to the language of the old. However it could, within the framework of that older language breathe new life into older forms which might not currently be recognized or acknowledged by the status quo...and this is perhaps what they are really attempting to do. The project and its notion of authorship as a product of capitalism I find to be very idealistic, and false. Capitalism has done as much as other systems to discourage and depress the idea and realization of ‘authorship’, which is a concept with more grounding in psychology. Approaching authorship as it relates to curatorship from a psychological-political as opposed to a systematic-political stance might make the attempt not bear more fruit, but also a truly indecent proposal.
Curating in the Twenty-First Century Hans Ulrich Obrist
Advice from E. Glissant on how to deal with globalization in terms of curating:
engage in the discourse= go global
avoid the discourse= stay local
mundiality= engage with global dialogue in a way in which different results are produced daily
Obrist chose the third way.
Yona Friedman- inspiration for ‘curating beyond the masterplan’ architectural reference… everything is organized and planned ‘top down’ leaving little room for chance and those different results to pop up daily, and this H-U. Obrist sees as what opened him to the possibilities of producing exhibitions within exhibitions
...matryoshkas, but not always the same doll, instead different dolls...but I think this is a fitting metaphor because in the end those exhibitions within exhibitions are related by form, like the dolls, just the surface is painted differently…[rt]
“...the right to your own utopia”- Cedric Price. H-U. Obrist influenced not by the utopia as utopia, but as it relates to the flow, the passing of time which allows for change, progression, development...Price’s The Fun Palace and John Cage’s music of uncertainty
What I find more interesting in this essay by H-U. Obrist than in the interview with Oda Projesi is Obrist does not deny the application of the existing language to what he does, he embraces it in order to change it. He acknowledges his sources for inspiration, the people he worked with, but he also assumes a (large) degree of authorship. [rt]
“...the idea of making exhibitions in a very small environment…” [3]
The way Obrist explains why he does and continues to do the small exhibits is very reflective of the process of curation...revealing it is an artistic as much as a curatorial process. I wonder if this approach would be better suited to proposals such as that of Oda Projesi, allowing the time and space to develop the language that the proposal needs on the small scale, or to find a way to approach the existing language they are working with in order to make what they are doing clearer? [rt]
“...it is important that we bring poetry together with visual art again,...” (Cy Twombly) [3]
The poem is the smaller exhibition. Are those small exhibitions within larger exhibitions poems within a collection? Stanzas within an epic poem? [rt]
Kasper König- from him Obrist learned the “craft of curating” [4]
Example of acknowledgement of the history, the language, not denying it but simultaneously differentiating what he does from it. [rt]
‘Cities on the Move’- virus- shifting and changing, each time different while playing the game of global dialogue, but still a timeline of growth…the architecture chamber of torture in London version ”between an apotheosis and an apocalypse”...there is no center for the avant garde of the 21st century...the archipelago [5]
re: Beuys erweiterte Kunstbegriff...relationship of art and curating is not reciprocal...curating follows art but never the other way around...and when the definition of art expands, so too must the the definition of curation [6]
Obrist is very logical in his approach to all this. But what happens when the logic fails the art? Is this where collaboration comes in; but can we only move forward collaboratively?[rt]
The ‘display feature’ [7]
Interesting how Obrist keeps coming back to the city...cities are always collaborations, yet they are inhabited by individuals...or not? Is it the individual who always escapes to the rural area? Perhaps it is because of the collaborative origin of the city that it has become such an appropriate metaphor for Obrist’s approach to curating and the exhibitions he has curated. It would be interesting to see if he could translate this to a more rural approach instead of leaving it in the realm of urbanism.[rt]
Town in Tunisia [8]
Why leave it as an ‘art project in Tunisia’...make it real. There are plenty of cities waiting to be built in China, for example. A large architecture firm was recently via an international, invitation-only competition awarded a job to build a huge hospital in city in China. After they won the competition they were also informed that they needed to design the city to go around the hospital so the workers would have a place to live...Why leave this to the architecture firms, ask the curators and artists to do this! [rt]
Marathons, manifestos and laboratories new approaches to old ideas? Obrist is not trying to reinvent the wheel, just trying to get it to move in a new direction.[rt]
I came across the following review while reading this.[rt]
Who’s Driving? The Artist as Curator Becky Shaw
“However, perhaps in reality the skills are not unique, but simply a socially created distinction serving the needs of institutions. [4]
Much truth to this. There has always been an overlap, and when distinctions are made it seems they occur often after the fact to suit a particular situation, and eventually become accepted in more general terms. Artist-critic-curator roles and identity are all constructs and classifications.[rt]
Equality in the relationship
Is there ever true equality in any relationship, or is this just a utopian ideal? I think it is utopian ideal, which is fine, but the reality of relationships, especially ‘successful’ relationships is that there is an exchange...which means mutual respect is a more realistic aim than equality. Perhaps that is how the relationship between artist and curator needs to be addressed, rather than in terms of equality. K. Lavers response is on target here, one leads, the other follows and at times the role is reversed...because the respect within the relationship enables this...respect is a key to a productive conversation...otherwise it is not a conversation, it is a monologue.[rt]
Ceri Hand- fluid relationship “...For me the role of the artist is totally dependent on who that artist is and how they like to work…” [5]
The curator as ‘broker of visibility’ to handle the details of getting the artists’ work realized within the agreed upon context [5]
K. Large acknowledges the impossibility of equality in the artist-curator relationship and the reality for her as curator of ‘having the final say’.[6]
I am fine with someone having the ‘final say’, as long as it is arrived at via a means of mutual respect...this means if the artists’ work no longer fits the curator’s vision than either retains the right to change or pull out and deal with whatever the consequences resulting from the decision are…hopefully, if the relationship has been respectful whatever that decision is, it is respectful. [rt]
“Art is never produced by one person.” “...visibility structures produce the art we examine.”[8]
Authorship in art is never exclusive to the individual because in order for it to be deemed art it must be ‘examined’, and in order to be ‘examined’ it must be made visible, and ‘visibility’ only results through structures...structures are constructed by groups...I am not in agreement with this because I believe there is much left unexamined, much that occurs beyond the structures we construct...we don’t know all art, therefore we cannot say art is never produced by one person. We could say the art which we know, the art we have examined is never produced by one person because the structures through which it becomes known to us are constructs of the group. [rt]
The Curatorial Turn Paul O’Neill
Curatorial approach to process is an act of demystification; 1960s criticism’s turning away from the object to address the space--“neocriticality”-- leading to an approach of putting more out there for discussion.
Liam Gillick “So people you might have met before who in the past were critics were now curators.”
This moved the writing/discussion from the journal to the catalogue…
Connecting this to “Who’s driving?”; the roles are not new, and the definitions remain in place, but now the people move between them more fluidly and the boundaries between the definitions are more fluid. Like the statement in “Who’s driving?” the medium through which art becomes ‘known’ is the exhibition...and that is in the hands of the person or people operating under the title ‘curator’, no matter what other title that person or people might operate under in a different context/with a different medium...artist or critic. [rt]
Group versus Single Artist Exhibitions
Logical that the group exhibition allows more curatorial exploration because more voices means someone must speak louder than others in order for some semblance of organization or clarity to occur. Therefore the voice of the curator becomes important in the group exhibition. This does not mean the other voices are not heard...see example of H-U. Obrist and his small exhibitions within the larger exhibitions...but still the idea of the small existing within the large is his voice. The Solo Exhibition is about the artist, therefore the logic is the voice of the artist is heard above that of the curator...perhaps the curator’s voice should be in harmony to that of the artist, to give it a fullness. But the curators voice is still heard when it is in harmony to the artists…[rt]
“...writing about exhibitions has further reinforced the merit of writing practice as a subject worthy of study” [243]
I believe it is through writing that the boundaries between the constructed roles of artist-curator-critic have the most potential to dissolve. [rt]
The curator as caretaker versus the curator as creator [243]; Bourdieu quote [243]
My concern is that for the public art is only valued as such when it is made known via the act of curation. If this is the case then it becomes vital for the artist to also become a curator, not just of his or her own art--whatever form it may take-- but also as a curator of other art which supports (harmonizes) with that which the artist/curator wishes to ‘demystify’. [rt]
“Exhibitions are therefore contemporary forms of rhetoric, complex expressions of persuasion whose strategies aim to produce a prescribed set of values and social relations for their audience.” [244]
Considering the Whitney Museum of American Arts recent decision to suspend its Biennial exhibition after moving to its new building, with much larger spaces. Is this a move away from the large group exhibition to a series of smaller, more focused solo and small group exhibitions? Or is it in response to the new space? Or to the reactions towards the recent Biennials? Or is it pointing to another curatorial turn? --the “center sustains the periphery” (247) or a continuous “culture as spectacle” (248) which makes sense in regard to the new location in the Meatpacking District just below the Chelsea galleries where every Saturday is “culture as spectacle”. But it does impeach upon the role of the global curator...in the case of the Whitney, if they shift to all ‘in house’ then the institution will retain control over the “jet-set flaneur”.[rt]
When discourse becomes supplement or substitution for practice (according to Beech & Wade it is the same)...for Foucault discourse conjures and performs power.
When the artist is curator and critic he or she controls the discourse, retains the power; when the institution controls the discourse the institution retains the power...so what happens to the curator or critic who is not artist, who is not aligned with the institution. What will the future portend for him or her? [rt]
“professionalization and differentiation….hierarchically arranged job description” [249] (re)structuring of previously existing conditions brings the curator from a hidden role into the center of the discourse
I would call this the ‘Vanna White’ effect after the woman known as the sexy turner of letters on an American TV game show. Game shows always had a ‘host’-- a man in a stylish suit and tie, maybe an actor who had moderate success earlier in his career, forced to take a gig hosting a game show...and game shows had girls in evening gowns who assisted the host by silently showing the prizes or, like Vanna White, turing over the letters/chips to reveal the answer. The girls were always unknowns, wanna be actresses and models, hired to look sexy and remain silent. But then Vanna White became the actual named side-kick to the host, and she still really only turned the letters over. Do curators who only ‘caretake’ become Vanna White, entering the discourse in name unless they also transcend into the realm of ‘creator’? What about the curators associated with institutions? [rt]
Jonathan Watkins (1987) --curating is like Duchamp’s readymades
This comparison is for me all the more reason that artists need to assume the role of curator! Duchamp definitely was his own curator, and I feel those who have followed his path have been too. Perhaps it is Duchamp to whom we can trace this curatorial turn back to? But then Robert Storr (2005) is also on point about Oscar Wilde’s 1890s take on “The Critic as Artist”... according to Storr the curator is not the artist because the curator is not critic, and the artist is not critic...but Storr is very much in that mid-20th century paradigm strictly separating these roles. [rt]
Correction information in this text by Paul O’Neill, the Documenta IX curated by Jan Hoet did not take place in 1991 as stated in this text, but in 1992.[rt]
One thing this text made me think about in another way is the structure of BFA/MFA thesis exhibitions. I noticed in the past few years (because I was not consciously following this previously) that there was a shift from solo exhibits to group exhibits, which I’m assuming occurred in the mid-1990s. (I did a solo BFA show in 1991, the university at which I did this now does group BFA and MFA exhibitions). Personally I do not like these exhibits and I find the work presented tends to get lost, or at least loses meaning it might otherwise have in this format. For example, I live in a city with the oldest art & design school in the USA, the Rhode Island School of Design. RISD reserves the local convention center for a week at the end of the Spring Semester for a group MFA exhibit of all their majors...this year 178 candidates participated in that show.http://gradexhibition.risd.edu/info . Other than practical reasons...the increase in the number of candidates for both degrees which has occurred in the past quarter century relative to the time/space to produce solo exhibits at any institution...I could not see the ‘why’ behind this move. The work of each artist probably gains little from that type of exhibition, and the viewer also goes away with less than they probably would have had they had the opportunity to engage with a single (or even a smaller group) artist’s work. However in this type of exhibition the institution, assuming the role of curator, retains control of the discourse. Having seen the power in a solo exhibition, where the candidate, BFA and MFA, is both artist and curator...no wonder most institutions would want to take over that role…[rt]
Soon after finishing these readings a relevant article on Damien Hirst appeared in The Guardian.[rt]