the thing with performance art is.... i guess you had to be there.
http://youtu.be/belENkAOx7g?t=7m5s
On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 08:35:17 -0700
michael szpakowski <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think you've slightly got the wrong end of the stick here Johannes
> - Annie was defending MA against our schoolchild snickering. I worry
> if *any* vigorous critique of a successful female artist is now going
> to be interpreted as misogyny , without a single shred of evidence to
> back this claim up.
>
> Just in case though let me even up my position - I'll propose the
> male equivalent -an artist who likewise reeks of faux piety and
> takes themselves far too seriously - Bill Viola - yuck, pass the sick
> bag.
>
> Up with tastelessness! Art is not sacrosanct, is not so fragile we
> have to wrap it and its proponents up in cotton wool...
>
> michael
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Johannes Birringer <[email protected]>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
> <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 4:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Abramovic 512 Hours
>
>
>
> dear all
> somewhat surprising to see the relative heat of the discussion on a
> performance artist and her 512 Hours exhibition at the Serpentine,
> and thus I wonder really what provoked the sustained critique of her
> practice here, in these pages; maybe Annie's abhorrence? I went to
> see the performance in July, and was prepared to be critical and
> ended up have my own critical thoughts, even wrote some notes down
> somewhere, and probably I had become all too apprehensive of the hype
> surrounding her MoMA show, back a while, and the high handedness of
> the film then released about her. The thing with the dog i find
> tasteless and silly, and bad satire if that at all; and rather than
> arguing about satire, or the "power systems" in place to make history
> happen (and I do read Patrick as stating his respect for her work of
> the 70s and 80s and 90s, and three decades of live art, often on the
> edges, for me gained her nothing but admiration, even if I may have
> reservations about the spiritual or metaphysical path she engineered
> around 2002 --- I remember walking over to her House with the Ocean
> View installation, and that was not long after the events of 9/11 in
> New York and noted a shift, and she must have noted it too and
> probably realized she could do Rothko Chapel stuff -- and then turned
> into the odd self-presencing durational rituals etc), I really
> wondered, Annie, whether what we are reading now is a strange twist
> where (gender politics?) bashing a successful female artist whose
> work definitely will have had resonance, who was able to show work in
> major museums, is becoming de rigueur (I guess Carolee Schneemann,
> Cindy Sherman, Kara Walker, Adrian Piper next?).
>
> Johannes Birringer
>
>
>
>
> >>
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 7:28 AM, marc garrett
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> wrote: Well, Marina Abramović’s work will survive — however, not
> because of quality but because of the power systems in place to make
> history happen for artists who adhere to the role and myth of genius,
> it is all part of the inside joke for those who rule the ‘propriety
> based’ art world.
>
> Or her work will survive in its cultural resonance because even in
> the smallest intervention, before fame made her an icon, there was
> sufficient strength and luminosity to her work to affect people. Such
> resonance by no means implies a pile of handsome coffee table books
> or a sheaf of academic papers—it only suggests that art changes
> people, in some measure, directly, in their lives.
>
> -- Paul
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 7:28 AM, marc garrett
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> wrote: Hi Michael & Annie,
>
>
> > your kindness does you credit but I do think there absolutely has
> > to be
> >space for humour, even sharply parodic or satirical humour in art.
> >If the work is solid it will survive it.
>
> Well, Marina Abramović’s work will survive — however, not because of
> quality but because of the power systems in place to make history
> happen for artists who adhere to the role and myth of genius, it is
> all part of the inside joke for those who rule the ‘propriety based’
> art world.
>
>
> >Ironically the various satirical japes she has engendered help to
> >confirm her in this role.
>
> Sadly, this may be true ;-(
>
> wishing you well.
>
> marc
>
>
> > HI Annie
> > your kindness does you credit but I do think there absolutely has
> > to be space for humour, even sharply parodic or satirical humour in
> > art. If the work is solid it will survive it. An interesting
> > question is why MA and not you. I would venture: (1) You are deeply
> > serious about your work but you don't give off the aroma of pious
> > smugness which I'm afraid for me MA does. (2) Although you set up
> > rigorous structures in your work you are open to surprise, to human
> > frailty and intervention ( indeed I'd argue that it is one of your
> > central themes) - you *trust* people - MA shuts out the
> > intervention of others in her Serpentine piece - people have to
> > give up phones, cameras, whatever at the door. This particular
> > response ( the pug piece) comes as no surprise to me. I had given
> > some thought to how one might assert the rights of the audience
> > ( including those of other artists -the right to record, to think
> > contrary thoguhts and act upon them &c) vis a vis the Sepentine
> > performance but couldn't think of anything that either wouldn't
> > involve me getting arrested or would cost too much. (3) MA is an
> > art superstar/celebrity. My starting point is that someone in this
> > extraordinarily unnatural & privileged position has to repeatedly
> > prove that they are worth it. Ironically the various satirical
> > japes she has engendered help to confirm her in this role. cheers
> > michael From: Annie Abrahams
> > <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> To: NetBehaviour
> > for networked distributed creativity
> > <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
> > Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 2:22 PM Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour]
> > MARINA ABRAMOPUG the genius! I wouldn't like to be made fun of like
> > this, would you?
> >
> > M A made some errors, but the performance this is referring too was
> > good as far as I am concerned Best
> > Annie
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:27 PM, helen varley jamieson
> > <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > it's great :)
> >
> > On 21/08/14 11:19 AM, marc garrett wrote:
> >> MARINA ABRAMOPUG
> >>
> >> The 'official' genius performance artist at Serpentine | best
> >>show yet ;-)
> >>
> >> g
> >>
> >> More...
> >> http://go.shr.lc/1w2Alcp
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
> HI Annie
> your kindness does you credit but I do think there absolutely has to
> be space for humour, even sharply parodic or satirical humour in art.
> If the work is solid it will survive it. An interesting question is
> why MA and not you. I would venture: (1) You are deeply serious about
> your work but you don't give off the aroma of pious smugness which
> I'm afraid for me MA does. (2) Although you set up rigorous
> structures in your work you are open to surprise, to human frailty
> and intervention ( indeed I'd argue that it is one of your central
> themes) - you *trust* people - MA shuts out the intervention of
> others in her Serpentine piece - people have to give up phones,
> cameras, whatever at the door. This particular response ( the pug
> piece) comes as no surprise to me. I had given some thought to how
> one might assert the rights of the audience ( including those of
> other artists -the right to record, to think contrary thoguhts and
> act upon them &c) vis a vis the Sepentine performance but couldn't
> think of anything that either wouldn't involve me getting arrested or
> would cost too much. (3) MA is an art superstar/celebrity. My
> starting point is that someone in this extraordinarily unnatural &
> privileged position has to repeatedly prove that they are worth it.
> Ironically the various satirical japes she has engendered help to
> confirm her in this role. cheers michael
>
> ________________________________
> From: Annie Abrahams <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 2:22 PM Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour]
> MARINA ABRAMOPUG the genius!
>
> I wouldn't like to be made fun of like this, would you?
>
> M A made some errors, but the performance this is referring too was
> good as far as I am concerned
>
> Best
> Annie
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:27 PM, helen varley jamieson
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> wrote:
>
> it's great :)
>
> On 21/08/14 11:19 AM, marc garrett wrote:
> MARINA ABRAMOPUG
>
> The 'official' genius performance artist at Serpentine | best show
> yet ;-)
>
> [g]
>
> More...
> http://go.shr.lc/1w2Alcp
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
