'ä-mij

Looking Through Semiotics...2

2008-05-16T16:46:22Z

Looking Through Semiotics

2008-05-14T18:45:00Z

Abstract: In this series of posts I will looking first at semiotics (semiology) beginning with a definition and critical examination of semiotics, which I will use as a starting point for re-viewing several artist's work or thoughts (writing, statements and interviews).

What is semiotics?
Semiotics is a difficult concept to define because the easiest definition fails as it spirals into semantics. Defined as "a study of signs" the immediate question becomes: "What is a sign?" In the case of semiotics a sign can include text (language), images (paintings, photographs, street signs) and body language. The purpose of examining these sign systems as described by a founder of the study Ferdinand de Saussure is to develop a science.

"A science which studies the role of signs as part of social life. It would form part of social psychology, and hence of general psychology. We shall call it semiology (from the Greek semeîon, 'sign'). It would investigate the nature of signs and the laws governing them. Since it does not yet exist, one cannot say for certain that it will exist. But it has a right to exist, a place ready for it in advance. Linguistics is only one branch of this general science. The laws which semiology will discover will be laws applicable in linguistics, and linguistics will thus be assigned to a clearly defined place in the field of human knowledge."

Saussure's view that semiotics is a "science" is one method for understanding this study of signs. For another major semiotician, Charles Pierce, semiotics was a "formal doctrine of signs" and a sign is "something which stands for somebody for something in some respect or capacity...every thought is a sign".
Semiotics can be further defined in relation to "structuralism". Saussure along with Claude Levi-Strauss and Jacques Lacan are among those related to methods of structuralism.

"Structuralism is an analytical method which has been employed by many semioticians...Structuralists seek to describe the overall organization of sign systems as 'languages' --as with Levi-Strauss and myth, kinship rules and totemism, Lacan and the unconscious and Barthes and Greimas and the 'grammar' or narrative. They engage in a search for 'deep structures' underlying the 'surfaces' of phenomena. However, contemporary social semiotics has moved beyond the structuralist concern with the internal relations of parts within a self-contained system, seeking to explore the use of signs in specific social situations. Modern semiotic theory is also sometimes allied with a Marxist approach which stresses the role of ideology."

Roland Barthes in the late 60s described the aim or semiotics as

"to take in any system of signs, whatever their substance and limits; images, gestures, musical sounds, objects, and the complex associations of all of these, which form the content of ritual, convention or public entertainment: these constitute, if not languages, at least systems of signification."

Another scholar Umberto Eco states, "Semiotics is concerned with everything that can be taken as a sign". Or, in other words, semiotics is concerned with anything, which 'stands' for something 'else'. Contemporary semioticians study signs not in isolation but as part of semiotic sign systems. Paying particular attention to studying how meanings are made. Contemporary semioticians are "concerned not only with communication but also with the construction and maintenance of reality."
Obviously, there is a lot discrepancy between the many definitions of semiotics and the analytical approaches taken. For my purposes here I will try to contain the discussion to the most essential ideas and issues, as I understand them. I think it will be possible to see many of the issues raised by semiotics in action by looking at several artist's writing or thoughts from their statements. Most of my information on semiotics is from Semiotics for Beginners by Daniel Chandler. I will leave the citations and heavy research lifting to him and the wikipedia. I will also include a bibliography at the end of this post.

A Brief Look at Semiotics

Chandler begins with much of the information I have represented above and gets into the nuts and bolts of semiotics with his description of "signs". As already mentioned signs can be "words, images, sounds, odors, flavors, acts, or objects...but such things have no intrinsic meaning and become signs only when we invest them with meaning." According to Charles Pierce (representative of one form of semiotics) "Nothing is a sign unless it is interpreted as a sign" not unlike a Duchampian understanding of art making. Signs are the starting point of semiotics and Charles Sanders Pierce and Ferdinand de Saussure are seen by Sanders as representative of the two most dominant forms of semiotics.
Saussure's understanding of signs is based on a two-part model of signifier, the form, which the sign takes, and the signified, the concept it represents. A sign must have both parts to function. For Saussure neither concept need exist in a material form and a sign is read as frozen in time. Chandler uses the words of Susanne Langer to round out this idea. "In talking about things we have the conceptions of them, not the things themselves...signs directly mean the conceptions of things". In this way signs are immaterial concepts. Signs are also defined as "arbitrary" because they have no intrinsic value. Sanders explains that there is nothing "tree like" about the word tree. Saussure also argues that signs only make sense as part of a formal, generalized, and abstract system. For Saussure language and linguistics is a branch of his science of signs and "within the language system everything depends on relations, mostly of one sign to another...both signifier and signified are purely relational entities." Chandler further complicates this by adding that for Saussure the relation of signs is always negative and oppositional. What characterizes each sign most exactly is being whatever the others are not.
Charles Pierces' understanding of semiotics argues that signs differ in how "arbitrary/conventional or by contrast transparent" signs are. Pierce argues that signs are never fully arbitrary and can thus be "classified". He theorized that 59,049 types of signs exist. Despite this number Pierce helpfully suggests three major modes of signs: Symbols, Icons, and Indexes. These categories function as typologies and refer to how signs refer to their signified. The relationships are "the icon by a quality of its own, the index by real connection to its object, and the symbol by a habit or rule for its interpretant" (3). Semiotics seems plagued by word play, Chandler is constantly aware that word choice is incredibly important in trying to define these differences, but difference as mentioned before is how all signs are defined.

Why Semiotics!?
After spending a week reading Chandler's Semiotics for Beginners I realize that I can't hope to cover the entire scope of the topic. I hope I have provided enough to at least facilitate a basic understanding of semiotics but before I dive into looking at some art work I want to re-present some of the positive and negatives of using a semiotic approach.

Anti/Pro Semiotics
Chandler suggests many positive reasons for pursing a semiotic approach but he is careful to also layout the pitfalls of the approach. As a starting point language (signs) define reality. Chandler claims that because of this it is possible to use semiotics as a "potentially unifying conceptual framework and a set of methods and terms for use across the full range of signifying practices, which include gesture, posture, dress, writing, speech, photography, film, television and radio". Further, using either a structuralist or social semiotic approach can clarify meaning by look at underlying structures and conventions or by exposing how different meaning can be drawn out for different readers. Almost by default this means that semiotics can cause us to examine meaning and context that might otherwise be taken for granted as simply convention or tradition. This quality of semiotics is seen as "denaturalizing" conventions and not allowing for passive interpretation. We are constantly reminded that signs and their meaning is constantly mediated.

"For Roland Barthes various codes contribute to reproducing bourgeois ideology, making it seem natural, proper and inevitable. One need not be a Marxist to appreciate that it can be liberating to become aware of whose view of reality is being privileged in the process. Many semioticians see their primary task as being to denaturalize signs, texts and codes. Semiotics can thus show ideology at work and demonstrate that 'reality' can be challenged."

Beyond examining how meanings are created semiotics allows for multiple interpretations. Further, semiotics explains that meaning must be sought, or worked for. Using advertisements as an example Chandler explains:

"Signs do not just 'convey' meanings, but constitute a medium in which meanings are constructed. Semiotics helps us to realise that meaning is not passively absorbed but arises only in the active process of interpretation. In relation to printed advertisements, William Leiss and his colleagues note:

'The semiological approach... suggests that the meaning of an ad does not float on the surface just waiting to be internalized by the viewer, but is built up out of the ways that different signs are organized and related to each other, both within the ad and through external references to wider belief systems. More specifically, for advertising to create meaning, the reader or the viewer has to do some 'work'. Because the meaning is not lying there on the page, one has to make an effort to grasp it.'"

Of course Chandler is careful to expose the weaknesses of the semiotic approach. Some of the strengths of semiotics function as double edged swords. The structuralist approach for example is critiqued for ignoring the social context of meaning and interpretation.

"We must consider not only how signs signify (structurally) but also why (socially); structures are not causes. The relationships between signifiers and their signifieds may be ontologically arbitrary but they are not socially arbitrary. We should beware of allowing the notion of the sign as arbitrary to foster the myth of the neutrality of the medium."

Social semiotics has largely accommodated this critique, however. The first Chandler provides is one which I have also exposed above. Semiotics lacks broad consistency in "scope and methodology". Semiotics is also vulnerable because of reliance on individual interpretation. As Chandler puts it:

"At worst, what passes for 'semiotic analysis' is little more than a pretentious form of literary criticism applied beyond the bounds of literature and based merely on subjective interpretation and grand assertions. This kind of abuse has earned semiotics an unenviable reputation in some quarters as the last refuge for academic charlatans."

Chandler compounds this by stressing that because of a tendency to over rely on an individual analyst semiotics can fail to provide evidence or provide only heavily biased evidence.

"Certainly, in some cases, semiotic analysis seems little more than an excuse for interpreters to display the appearance of mastery through the use of jargon which excludes most people from participation. In practice, semiotic analysis invariably consists of individual readings."

There are many other criticisms of semiotics but these feel the most important to me.

The Semiotic Approach in Action
I will use Chandler's DIY tips found here for this, and I will post the results of the process next.

Bibliography

Semiotics for Beginners

Wikipedia Pages

1. Semiotic elements and classes of signs (Peirce)
2. Semiotics
3. Semiotic Elements and Classes of SIgns

4. Theories and Documents of Contemporary Art, A Sourcebook of Artist's Writings
5. Art in Theory 1900-2000, Charles Harrison and Paul Wood.
6. Themes of Contemporary Art: Visual Art After 1980, Chapter on Language in Art.

video links for presenaton on cleaness

2008-05-05T23:17:13Z

forbes uk, new soap "beauty wash"

sexy dove ad

scrubbing bubbles parody ad

action scrubbing bubbles, they do all the work for you.

sweating took over my life, then i found MAXIN antipersperant

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Bb3DwQVSNls

paul merton soap advert

hulu video, marge simpson cleaning kitchen

viva paper towel mom and son fight and make mess, soak it up!

food and soap

http://www.ayurvediccure.com/herbal_essence.htm

fabreze ad video

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=4853913

Karen Kilimnik at MCA Chicago, Review

2008-04-20T21:59:12Z

Review of Karen Kilimnik's Mid-Career Retrospective at the Museum of Contemporary Art Chicago

The show, Karen Kilimnik, at the MCA is "the first major" look at the artist's work (1). Helter-scelter scatterings of acid tabs, chopped up cocaine and unidentifiable pills on the floor of the MCA highlight the poignant dialogue between the fairy like dandies in oil paint and the excessive sometimes scary fetishizing of the Kilimnik's other installations. The success of the show is in careful but not fussy display of the work. Most of the paintings in oil or acrylic are placed evenly on two opposing walls with a central vein of the work found on the floor between the paintings. More like spills and happy accidents than highly formalized installations one gets the sense that the formal qualities of the sculptures are as important as the over the top content.
An artist who "emerged in the late 80s and 90s" Kilimnik's work is full of the tension and excess of the turn of the decade (1). Thankfully, the work goes far beyond the confines of that context. A combination of fashion models and dandies, the paintings assert facility. The apparent ease with which the artist puts paint to surface like the spills of pills on the floor reassert the idea of excess but are further complicated by the choice of placement and subject matter. One example of this tension is in a small room. A circular burgundy velvet couch placed in the center of this room serves as a vantage and resting zone to take in the dozens of paintings hung salon style. It is no accident though that this room be filled almost floor to ceiling with small paintings. Sitting on the plush velvet reinforces the excesses represented in the paintings. A pattern develops out from the portraits of dandies, models and ambiguous villas or fairytale landscapes. Found in this room Prince Charming, with an uncanny resemblance to the Hollywood playboy Leonardo DiCaprio from the film The Man In the Iron Mask, the painting seems to epitomize the paintings in the room. Complete with a feather in his hat "Prince Charming" is the quintessential dandy. The question quickly becomes: "What do dandy's, fashion models and fairy tales have in common?" How does a painting like Prince Charming relate to sparsely applied black pencil lines of Brigitte Bardot Shopping in Shorts or Snow White?

Kilimnik, in an interview with Frieze Magazine, claims that all this (art) is for her (2). This answer is consistent with the fantasies she creates. As another author puts it:

Kilimnik practices a particularly knowing sort of fantasy. Looking at these seemingly guileless works, the observer is involved in a guessing game. Does she understand more than she lets on, or less? Somehow both options have the same effect - a kind of slightly embarrassing, yet oddly joyous, bafflement (3).

But what is joyous about the remnants of last night's binge? No one likes to clean fresh vomit from porcelain fixtures and given the performative suggestion of the sculptural spills--- vomit seems inevitable. This dirty little secret is the elephant in the room. For all her beguiling childlike answers Kilimnik's work constantly reminds us of the darker side of her fantasy world even if it is just for her. But this stream of creepiness is not just in the pills on the floor. Many of the paintings hold this secret also. The dark landscapes, like The Moonstone, suggest a darkness or danger just around the next turn. The hollowness in the eyes of her models and their anorexic complexions or the aggressive pencil or ink marks point to something insidious. Several drawings scattered on the floor appear to be remnants of a savage perhaps drug induced fight as they lie bleeding with red paint or nail polish on the floor. I recall the film Fear and Loathing in Los Vegas and the ether induced bender, "There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge, and I knew we'd get into that rotten stuff pretty soon." Kilimnik has gotten into that rotten stuff, though, she won't admit it.

Kilimnik's work gets into more than just fantasy and nightmare, however. The painted works also indicate an investment in art history. As another critic points out Kilimnik is fascinated by eras (60s, 80s, 1880s) and modes. She has painted Stieglitz inspired images, and French princes, together with current "It Girls" (3). But there is nothing random in her selection of inspiration. Again, fantasy and excess are involved but there is also a larger narrative at play. The point it seems, of the painting current "It girls" and long dead prince Charming's is a masked social critique. After all what are we to make of this comparison? The work seems to say 'I am easy, sweet and nonchalant' but the implied social critique still resonates. The tension and excitement of the work for me is in the not knowing where the artist is in all this. Does she secretly wish to be an "It girl"? Or does she know something about it that we don't. Does she recognize the depravity of her fantasy? I think she does.

works cited in order of appearance.
1. http://www.mcachicago.org/exhibitions/exh_detail.php?id=66
2. http://www.frieze.com/issue/article/karen_kilimnik/
3. http://www.frieze.com/issue/article/the_uses_of_enchantment/

Thinking About Space...A Proposal that Worked.

2008-04-01T15:42:33Z

After all the "issues" with this project the class was sent home to cry. Just kidding, D sent us home to reconsider this project. Was the project still worth doing or should we focus our energy on something else. We were assigned to three groups of 3 or 4. Two ideas were produced. The one included here was written by myself, "Pony", and "Squirrel" (I won't include their full names for their privacy). If I get permission from the authors of the other proposal I will try to post it also. Anyway, here it is.
_____________________________________________________________________

Curatorial Proposal Notes for Devening Projects and Editions

When developing this idea our major considerations were that the final proposal ensure the full group's participation, and that it loosely employed the idea of "space".

The theme we settled on then not only reflects both these considerations but also reflects the context of the project, artists as curators/editors/facilitators a role that is familiar and unfamiliar simultaneously. As artists we make curatorial choices everyday but rarely do we make those decisions for another artist, in this way then we are visiting this role.

Our thinking about the theme of tourism is meant in a very loose sense, in fact we are most interested in related ideas rather than strictly tourism. We described tourism as reflected in our context in the sense of being a stranger in a strange land which is familiar and unfamiliar. In the context of the class we thought of tourism as a modifier of space, sites become compromised, invaded, distorted, infested, interrupted. And as a modifier of self, 'the other', conflict, relational oppositions, transformations, and exoticism.

In providing a conceptual framework for the this show we aimed for a project which when actualized would necessitate the participation of every member of the class. With this aim in mind we have outlined two options, giving no preference to either. The main considerations for both ideas were: How will we get the work? How will we choose the work? How will we show the work? When will this be implemented?

______________________________________________________________________

How will we get work?

This is the most flexible area of this project. There is no reason to exclude any method of gathering work. Here are two options we thought of.

1.Gathering work will be accomplished by a open call for submissions, and or, via recon at current BFA show and the later MFA show. Submissions will be made via digital images (emailed).
2. Each person in class is responsible for finding a work that relates to this theme.
3.Use both this methods.

_______________________________________________________________________

How will we choose the work?

1. All work will considered for it's fulfillment of the theme.
2. We will review all entries as a class and vote by show of hands.

How will we hang the work?

1. Show is 're-curated' or re-hung by teams of 3-4 each week for the duration of the show.

2. Divide space into 11 areas that are as equal as possible. Each person is responsible for presenting their space in relation to the spaces adjacent and opposite, etc to their space.

When will this happen?

1.Proposal/call - send out ASAP

2. Guerrilla studio visits

3. Submissions due by - 4/16

5. Work reviewed as a group in class 4/17 (digital)

6. Work due by ?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some notes on this proposal.

This write up is what was presented to the class and despite some reservations about the idea of "tourism" the class has pretty much decided that this is the proposal we will work on. Also, most everyone rejected the idea of partitioning the gallery into many smaller spaces. DD also advised that an open call would end in disappointing results.

Thinking About Space...What's Next?

2008-03-09T20:50:00Z

The last entry was at the proposal stage of this project at Devening Projects. I wish at this point I could announce that I won (I mean I like winning) and that my proposal will be the one this class works on... Unfortunately, that is not at all the case. This project has run into some serious turbulence.

What were the proposals?

I would paste them here for all to see, but I don't want to hassle with asking permissions from the proposal authors...So, I will say that in general there were two types of proposal: The project based idea (like my own) or the idea that we simply invite an artist(s) to execute a site specific work in the space, or that we show one artist's work.

So what is the big deal, where are the issues?

The problem is difficult define. The class dynamic is a weird combination of disinterest and frustration with the project. Partially I think this is rooted in the original introduction of this project as aimed at being both a curatorial project and beyond the participants of the class. Which I believe was understood by most as being necessarily not a project based work. DD has since explained that he simply intended to discourage the class from simply hanging their own paintings in the space. DD has also clarified that we may/should look at this project as an opportunity to "facilitate" rather than curate a proposal idea. The other problem, that of disinterest, is harder to explain because I am not personally disinterested. I my own understanding is that just about any proposal could conceivably be conceptualized in terms of space. I think the Kwon essay does a good job expressing this view. If site specificity is semantic then anything goes!

Where does this leave the project?

Well after a very frustrating class last Thursday no one is really enthusiastic about this project anymore. Few things are more annoying than getting nothing done after two hours of discussion. The class went back on forth on the merits of doing this project. Most agreed hanging one artist's work would be a lame thing to do. DD tried to get us to express what it was WE wanted to do without result. Anyway, for those who are not convinced that space is an interesting idea to consider I will here list as many things as I can think of as related to space.

SPACE RELATED

Heidegger: Art and Space. Space as scientific, place, dwelling.

Kwon: Site specificity! And all things related, socio-economic, political, dimensions, institutions, participants, site as words.

Artists: Andre Cadere, Eric Orr, Robert Smithson, Banksy, Rothko, Y. Klein, C. Andre, Kosuth and so on and so forth...

A link from WIRED.com

link there are several amazing installations related to being surveillance. Definitely worth checking out if you missed it. My favorite is Access by Marie Sester. Her portfolio is here.

I can even think of movies related to these ideas, movie which literally take place in space. 2001 A Space Odesey, from 2007 I think the film Sunshine. An older one Dark City, takes place in space on a floating city being used to study humans. Pop classics like the Matrix considers space.

I recall that while at Calvin College my sculpture class with Adam Wolpa engaged in at least two projects which are interesting to consider here. PLANT! and the installation of a german? artist's work at the UICA in Grand Rapids. I don't remember too many details about the artist, but the project was essentially a packet of things that she sent to the gallery, we had specific instruction on how to install. I suppose this is enough?

One last thing!

DD has made it clear that the only real limitations are that the project be executed to professional quality show and that the work be good enough to "transcend the space" fancy speak for being a darn good show. All this said I am curious if anyone out in the internets has an idea that they would like to see done?

Thinking About Space...5. The Proposal

2008-02-15T21:05:11Z

The last entry was meant to cover this topic but I ran out of steam. I think though that the discussion of site specificity is an important one in my consideration of this project. We were introduced to this topic in a class room. As part of the description of both the class and this project we were asked to read articles, look into Zumthor's Kolumba, Richter's stained glass window at the Cologne Cathedral, and asked to attend a special Saturday edition of glass at D. Devening's studio space and his gallery space Devening Projects + Editions. I have already touched on the articles and the window and museum. So, today I will put down some of my thoughts on the class session.

What is Devening Projects + Editions?

I am sure that Dan has a fancy description of his project space on his website...Instead I will just say the room where our project is to take place is smallish, rectangular, features two types of lighting (flourecent tubes, and bright white track lights). The walls are immaculate except for a remnant of the original space, a wooden beam which protrudes about 5 inches from the rest of the wall effectively breaking the space of the wall to the right.
The space is entered from a single door which faces the far wall.
I will say again here that the project space was introduced to us as part of Dan's art practice. Something like "Yes, I definitely consider curating part of my practice."

So what's the idea?

These days I have been thinking a lot about the internets. More specifically about the "social" role(S) played out on the internet. I have been intrigued by sites like digg or communities like stumble, or flikr, or even facebook. There are several things which are interesting to consider in this case I want to consider youtube.com as a virtual space/site/dwelling. Millions of people around the world across just about every demographic actively use youtube to upload, watch, share, and comment on mostly short videos. Most of the content then is really shitty DIY home video style stuff. But, often the most popular videos are advertisements like the new Indiana Jones movie. So, despite the availability of millions of vids. people still choose to watch an advertisement...Another quite curious thing is wild popularity of the voyeuristic vid. I have seen many videos of "the others" doing curious things...perhaps the most shocking and even disgusting of these vids. are the reaction tapes to the porno clip two girls one cup. The idea that people live out these social situations for the entertainment of everyone is curious. Youtube also serves as an archive for shared social memory in this way. Apart from the tourist vids. of nice places like the Cologne Cathedral youtube is also saving odd social situations. In addition to all these above reasons/ideas youtube also allows the ability to comment. The user comment board is another very odd thing to consider. Why is it that people feel the need to write "first" if they are first to comment? One of the funniest things I have ever heard is news media referring to "Anonymous" commentors or author's as a "terrorist" organization. The comments are hilarious even though it seems more often than not they are just for the LULZ.

My official proposal for the DD space then is to install several (or as many as possible) projections with sounds in the space and on these screens play youtube or other social network style site content on these screens with the following rubric: all content must be produced by someone/anyone from the area of Devening's project space. The content should be shown with the comments, and the ability to comment should also be available in the gallery space.

For some other information on the internets and terms like LULZ and trolling check out the Encyclopedia Dramatica. Keep in mind that everything on that site if meant to offend, but its all for the LULZ. Or just google LULZ. http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=lulz&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2

Thinking About Space...4. The Proposal

2008-02-08T22:25:00Z

In my introduction to these series of posts on SPACE I wrote briefly about a curatorial project which my class will be proposing for our instructor's gallery space, Devening Projects + Editions. This entry is a compilation of my thoughts on this project. I will limit this entry to a brief definition of "the white cube", issues of site specificity, and issues related to curatorial projects or artist as curator. In pursuit of this end I will include some ideas from Miwon Kwon's essay "One Place After Another: Notes on Site Specificity" all quotes then will be from this essay unless otherwise stated.

What is the white cube?

In January I had the opportunity to see some Chelsea galleries and New York City for the first time. In introducing the idea of site specificity is important to consider Chelsea galleries as the epitome of the "white cube". For those outside art related fields it may seem strange to consider the immaculate white walls, high ceilings, and bright lights as anything more than a perfect place for showing and selling art. For some artists and curators the idea of the white cube is more than just a nice space, it is the embodiment of the "institution" against which they must react. But what makes a space a "white cube"? A white cube is space designed for the viewing art most often with the end of selling work in mind. A white cube then is meant to be a perfect setting for this end, the viewing space should not interfere or hinder the viewing of the art in anyway, the space should recede from the work and leave you and the work "in the clearing". The white cube then is a sort of no-place space, a not specific site, an "innocent space" (39).

What is site specificity? A Look at Miwon Kwon's Essay

Site specificity according to Kwon can be defined as a mode of thinking which emerged in the late 60s and early 70s which was a reversal of the modernist paradigm of thinking of art work as "autonomous, self-referential, transportable, placeless, and nomadic" (38). Site specific work is further characterized as having at least two distinct approaches. The second approach leads to a third mode which I see as derivative of the second.

The first is characterized by emphasis on the physical. Richard Serra, according to Kwon would fall into this first category. This first type stresses "the physical inseparability between a work and its site of installation" (39). The second mode of thinking of site specificity is "informed by the contextual thinking of minimalism, various forms of institutional critique and conceptual art" (39). This model emphasizes a challenging of "the innocence of space and the accompanying presumption of a universal viewing subject" (39). Artists like Michael Asher, Marcel Broodthaers, Hans Haake, and Robert Smithson fall in this category of thinking. Importantly this second mode includes the firsts consideration of physical and spacial terms but stresses the "cultural framework defined by the institutions of art" (39-40). Kwon describes this further:

"The modern gallery/museum space, for instance, with its stark white walls, artificial lighting, controlled climate, and pristine architectonics, was perceived not soley in terms of basic dimensions and proportion but as an institutional disguise, a normative exhibition convention serving an ideological function. The seemingly benign architectural features of a gallery/museum, in other words, were deemed to be coded mechanisms that actively disassociate the space of art from the outer world, furthering the institution's idealist imperative of rendering itself and its hierarchization of values "objective," "disinterested," and "true" (40 my bold).

This idea can be extended "to encompass interrelated but different spaces and economies...the studio, gallery, museum, art criticism, art history, the art market, etc. that together constitute a system" which is inextricably connected to and controlled by "social, economic, and political pressures" (40). All these things together are what make a site specific and to be specific to such a site is to decode, recode, or expose the institutional conventions at play (40-42). An even further extension of this mode leads to a third notion of the site specific. The third mode as described by Kwon is characterized by several ideas with much overlap from the second. I will list the characteristics here rather than work through Kwon's explanation.

Characteristics of the third mode for site specificity:

a focus on institutional effects and techniques as they circumscribe the definition, production, presentation, and dissemination of art
a de-aesthetization ie withdrawal of visual pleasure
dematerialization of the art work
resistance to commofication
stress temporal boundaries
the viewer becomes active in viewing and critique of institution and or work of art
work not solely physical
impermanence
work is integrated into social, political, etc. realm
spatial expansion, radio, internets etc.
informed by broad range: sociology, literary criticism, psychology, etc.
attuned to pop culture
site is not a pre-condition
site becomes semantic
curatorial framework becomes a site
location can be discursive
anything can be a site!
site specificity no longer is in an indexical relationship to physical space
(40-46)

The last characteristics in bold are those which most clearly represent this third mode of site specificity. Finally, I will emphasize that according to Kwon

"these modes are not stages in a linear trajectory of historical development. Rather, they are competing definitions, overlapping with one another and operating simultaneously in various cultural practices..." (46)

Kwon in her essay uses these three notions of site specificity as a launching pad for her further discussion of site specific art. Though interesting in the examination of the success of site specific art work I do not have the energy to include notes on that discussion here. Instead I will skip ahead to her discussion of artist as curator.

The Birth/Death of the Author? Artist as Curator...

What happens when site specific becomes a semantic game? According to Kwon it can result in "a hermetic implosion of auto biographical and subjectivist indulgences, and myopic narcissism is misrepresented as self-reflexivity" (53). Wow! The artist becomes a sort of commodity, but not in the sense of a celebrity that is "produced/consumed" but more in the sense that the artist reflects what has already occurred in relation to "production and labor relations...which are no longer bound to the realm of manufacturing things but is defined in relation to the service and management industries. ..What artists provide now, rather than produce, are aesthetic, often "critical-artistic," services" (53). So, artists have become "negotiators, coordinators, compromisers, researchers, organizers, interviewers, etc...aesthetics of administration" and "artists now function as authorial figures in their own right" (53 my bold). This change in thinking has led to a reemergence "of the centrality of the artist as the progenitor of meaning" when as already stated can result in "a hermetic implosion of auto biographical and subjectivist indulgences, and myopic narcissism is misrepresented as self-reflexivity" (53). Wow!
________________________________________

So what to do about this project?

RUN FORREST! Ok. So this is an abrupt end. But I am out of time. Tune in later for a look at the project specifics and some proposal ideas!

Thinking About Space...3. Richter's Stained Glass

2008-02-06T19:09:00Z

Another installment of thoughts on SPACE.

The focus today is Richter's stained glass work for the Cologne Cathedral. I will again just add a couple links with a short summary of the article...

I saw this article on WIRED months ago but did not pay to close attention to it. The article is short and does not say much about the window.

This second article from sightandsound.com is longer and more informative about the project and Richter's thought process on the whole thing. The author does make some claims that are seemingly based on anecdotal evidence more than anything else...

An article from artforum.com has some interesting commentary on the religiousness of the work. Interesting considering that Richter stays "neutral" on the topic. This article from artnet.de suggests that Richter's work in this case is evolution in Richter's ideas. A change from "antagonism" to this change of heart. "I'm less antagonistic to 'the holy', to the spiritual experience, these days," he said. "It's part of us, and we need that quality."

Just for good measure a New York Times article...It's good but does not say anything new...

Now some video links.

This video is a personal video of the interior of the cathedral prior to the new Richter window. It is good to see the plain glass window, and to get a sense of the immensity of the cathedral interior and the echoing sounds.

I hoped to find a nice video of the Richter window but could not. So, that's all for now.

Thinking About Space...2, Martin Heidegger : "Art and Space"

2008-01-31T16:50:00Z

This entry was meant to be nothing more than my notes from Heidegger's "Art and Space". I have changed my feeling on this. I will include instead notes for the article as far as I have typed them (about half) and additionally include some links to the rare article discussing this topic.

The first such link is to a partial book on google books. I found it very insightful but also completely annoying that it is abridged by the google preview of the book. Starting at the bottom of page 146 and continuing to the end of the preview. The author here discusses "Art and Space" in terms of the revolution in Heidegger's thinking and in terms of the artist .Chillida (wiki). who the author sees as a representative of Heidegger's thoughts. The author also points out some important aspects of Heidegger's "Art and Space," for example, he points out that "dwelling" is defined as in opposition to domination and occupation.

Another abridged google book preview. The pages of this article that I read starting at 263 where a discussion of Heidegger's choice of language in discussing space. The author describes Heidegger's feeling that language is in "an essential and special relation to place and space...in at least two respects: first in the character of place and language as "gathering" and second in the character of language and space as both "differentiating" or "dif-fering" ---although as space and place themselves belong together, so too does such gathering and differing."

Below: my notes outlining Heidegger's "Art and Space". I have tried to do no more than simply understand what he is on about... For this purpose I have numbered all the paragraphs from 1-34. For each paragraph I have will write what I believe to be the major points.

Martin Heidegger "Art and Space" translated by Charles H. Seibert

1. Introduction:
a. Sculpted structures are bodies formed by demarcation.
b. Demarcation is inclosing and excluding.
c. Space is occupied by the sculpted structure.
d. What is the SPECIAL CHARACTER (truth) of SPACE?

2. What does is a sculpture?
a.The sculptured body embodies space.
b. " " " is a domination, and occupying of space.
c. " " " matches the technical scientific conquest of space.

3. What type of space are we talking about?
a. Sculpture deals with Artistic space.
b. Scientific and technological space also exists.
c. Do both ideas of space share anything in common?

4. What do these two ideas of space share in common if we know that scientific space is (below)
a. Space: is infinite, homogeneous expanse, not distinguished at any of its possible places, equivalent toward each direction.
b. Space is not sense perceptual.

5. What does artistic space have to do with the above understanding of space?
a. Space understood this way "challenges man increasingly and ever more obstinately to control it.
b. Artistic space also follow this challenge.
c. Does this shared idea of space limit artistic space to this understanding? (see paragraph 4).

6. Is this understanding of space complete or limited?
a. Are all other understandings of space "only subjectively conditioned prefigurations and modifications of one objective cosmic space?

7. How does this singular understanding of space work in terms of other historical understandings of space?

8. Historical understandings of space are not helpful...

9. What about understanding space as 'the sublime'.
a. Space as belonging to primal phenomena.
b. We know that there is nothing that can be shown to have existed before space.
c. Therefore, we know that the special character of space must be defined in light of this but is that even possible?

10. Defining space in this singular manner has led to an impasse.
a. We can not define artistic space this way

11. We CAN understand artistic space three ways
a. as an object present-at-hand.
b. the space, which encloses the volume of the figure
c. the space, which subsists as the emptiness between volumes.

12. A definition of art: "is the bringing-into-the-work of truth, and truth is unconcealment of Being.
a. it follows from this definition of art and truth that "genuine space (what uncovers its authentic character) begin to hold sway in the work of art".

13. BUT how do we find the special character of space?
a. Language!
b. Introduction of words used in relation to space: clearing-away.
c. Defines clearing-away as "to clear out, to free from wilderness, bring forth the free, the openness for dwelling."
d. Clearing-away brings forth locality.

14. Clearing-away is the release of PLACES.

15. What happens when the action of clearing-away occurs?
_____________________________________________________

Thinking About Space...

2008-01-28T21:33:34Z

This semester I am taking an MFA seminar course with Dan Devening. This class "Privileging Space" will look at how location, site, and context add "layers of potentially resonant meaning to a work". Near the end of the course the class has also been tasked with creating a "collaborative curatorial project that will result in a public exhibition at devening projects + editions" in June 2008.

This entry is a look at Peter Zumthor. I will list links with a short description of the article. In a second entry I will outline my notes on two articles related to the topic 'space'.

The wikipedia entry for Peter Zumthor. A good general description of Zumthor, including his "interests" which apparently include good cigars and margaritas.

An article from Royal Academy of Arts. Zumthor is revealed through some fantastic quotes to really live up to his reputation of speaking phenomenologically. The article also does well in describing Zumthor's attitudes toward architecture. My favorite quote is this one on Heidegger: "If I read a crazy guy like Heidegger' - who came from this part of the world - 'he's too much for me but sometimes I read something and do see what he's trying to say. I understand him as trying to look for the essential and not for fashion.'"

Zumthor wrote a book: Thinking Architecture this is a link to a site with some quotes and nice images from that book.

Another short article on Zumthor's practice. From an association of freelance architects "DESSA".

A video.

This is a video of a walk through of Peter Zumthor's Kolumba museum.

This is part two but I could not locate part 1 in English. About ten minutes long. A nice tour of Zumthor's bath house including a short interview.

Well that is all I have time for now but coming soon I will post my notes on Heidegger's "Art and Space".

Work from this semester...

2007-12-07T21:00:00Z

The following is all my work since August...

Things I'm thinking about...

2007-11-27T16:40:00Z

These are some of the images I am thinking about right now. The first is a drawing I made of the photograph which follows, and the third image is from a larger painting of the rough riders. The fourth image is a different painting above President Bush, as he pleaded for Congress for war funds.

I am thinking of painting a painting of my drawing from of the janjaweed rider and the first image of the rough rider.

I Kid You Not! Proof of AI.

2007-11-18T20:16:26Z

After playing around with Windows XP voice recognition software for several hours my roommate and I were shocked to discover that during our debate about the functionality of voice recognition and deciding together that windows sucks the computer had been thinking. I kid you not. We looked up from our debate to find that the computer had entered "HAVE ASKED WHAT I AM" into a google search...INCREDIBLE!

Midterm Examination: Modern and Post-Modernism

2007-11-16T16:13:42Z

Below are my responses to 3 questions posed for my art history midterm
examination. I think the questions are worth posting alone, and I
figure I wrote answers so I may as well post them also...

Question 1
Given: You are in the Museum of the Art Institute of Chicago with a friend (my friend is George Costanza) and he asks "How did we go from that (Seurat) to that (Mondrian)?

Seurat: Sunday Afternoon on the Grand Jatte, 1886

Mondrian: Composition No.1, Gray-Red, 1935

George: "How did we get from Seurat to that
Mondrian?"

Joe: "We got from Seurat to Mondrian by painting a lot of naked women.
Seriously though, there is tons of porn around here!? Anyway, to
answer your question more specifically. We need to go back to the
other room. Take a look at those Monet's. Pretty, right? Well the
question the impressionists were asking themselves was something like
'What is the point of painting "realistically"? Obviously, the most
accurate thing to paint is the single fleeting instant of light.' The
impressionists were after a different sort of realism. Seurat, who was
hung out with the impressionists, did not like this idea too much.
So, Seurat paints the "Grand Jatte" and essentially ends the
impressionist agenda. He wanted to paint more of what could not be
seen. The "Grand Jatte" is really Seurat's manifesto for a different
kind of art, a more politically active art, in other words it is the
manifestation of the artist's engagement in politics but it is also
painted in such a way that calls attention to the relativity of color.
Each little dot of color looks the way it does only because of the
color next to it. His sort of pixelation approach is a sort of
abstraction. So, we go from one way of seeing to another. Take a look
over there."

George: "Oh...I don't really want to look at that...not that there's
anything wrong with that."

Joe: "No, not at the naked man...Not that there's anything wrong with
that...Look at the Cezanne. Cezanne, also
started as an impressionist, but he was smarter than them and probably
not as into nakedness. Anyway, he figures out that if you close one
eye things look different. So, he makes a bunch of paintings with
only one eye."

George: "I've always wanted to be an architect..."

Joe: "No! You don't get to be an architect or a dentist today! George!
Ok. Ok. So, Cezanne's one eyed paintings seem really cool to Picasso and Braque who come around
a bit later. So, Picasso and his buddy, not that there's anything
wrong with that, get to thinking about things like Cezanne. They
decide that he is on to something and they carry on making paintings.
I guess one of them is the 'Des Moiselles D'Avignon'. Which is also
basically just porn. Anyway, the point is that at some point everyone
stops caring about seeing altogether. Which is funny, because they
still are drawing tons of naked ladies. Matisse is another
dude who likes Cezanne but loves the naked ladies. So, he makes a
bunch of paintings of frolicking ladies running around in nice pretty
colors. Matisse decides that painting is no longer about observation
and he makes some paintings about painting (more naked ladies).

George: "Boooooring!"

Joe: "Ok, George. You are going to listen to me or I am going to stab
you in the eye...I guess where I am going with this is: Artist's
started looking at the world differently and eventually decide that
the world pretty much sucks. But before they come to this conclusion
some of these guys are totally loony talking about burning museums and
speed and stuff. Eventually, all this questioning of what is painting
for and what makes a painting a painting leads people to different
answers. Some of them think they are at the top of a social pyramid
where the artist prophet is at the top leading the stupid masses.
Others decide that life sucks, and what they really want to do is play
irrational games and talk like they don't know how to talk. One guy
even decides that he can't figure out who he is so he takes things he
finds with him places, like a urinal and a bottle rack. I guess he
could'nt be certain of anything, so he could not decide if would need
a pee later. Anyway, ---George! You are not even listening to me
anymore---Mondrian is pretty fed up with all this craziness and he
decides that he is a pimp so he calls his painting "DA STYLE". He rejects
representation completely, meaning no more naked ladies or dudes with
third legs. George! I told you it was a bad idea to try to pick up
ladies at the museum."

George: "It would'nt be so bad if you would let me be an architect."

Question 2

Select two artists whom you would make a case for including in future classes.

Discuss how the text book analyzes them
Question areas that the textbook does not address
Argue for why they should be included in future classes

The selection: Alfred
Stieglitz and George Grosz.

The artists Alfred Stieglitz and George Grosz are described in by
the textbook in terms of there respective art movements, straight
photography and New Objectivity respectively. What interests me about
these artists is the larger implications of their art practices.
Stieglitz and Grosz are described as part of movements somewhat larger
than themselves, but, there is relatively little mention of the larger
implications of their work. Both Stieglitz and Grosz should be
included in future classes because of the gateway they open to asking
larger questions and should not be simply relegated to the confines of
another art "ism".
First, Alfred Stieglitz, the straight photographer, magazine
editor, and egomaniac. As the textbook describes Stieglitz, his work
in photography is largely a competitive attempt to keep pace with the
virtuosity of Strand. The textbook underplays the importance of
Stieglitz's notion of "the purity" of the photographic form. As
Stieglitz champions Strand he is also jealous of Strand's success
and---according to the book---therefore inspired to create. The
textbook is also generous in it's description of the famous "The
Steerage". The book describes a "distribution of wealth" in the image
implying that Stieglitz' photo has a specific pro-poor agenda, a false
assumption. This is the larger question of interest in discussing
Stieglitz. How does the subject of the image effect the concept of
the photograph? Did Stieglitz care at all about the division of
classes he photographed? Were Stieglitz' real concerns not simply
formal? Does it matter?
The politics of art and art making are often questions leading
controversy. In addition to these questions of the political
implications of Stieglitz' straight photography are questions about
photography in general which have not been addressed in depth in
class. For example, the effect of photography on other "isms" or
indeed the implications of making art at all in the age of mechanical
reproduction. Of course here I am referring the Walter Benjamin and
wishing that an art history class will someday provide further insight
into the decoding of Benjamin's essay on mechanical reproduction and
ideas of "aura" and "purity".
George Grosz like Stieglitz is described mostly in terms of his
particular ism. In the case of Grosz: New Objectivity. The textbook
characterizes Grosz' work as being one branch of the movement, the
"veristic". The book describes how despite being a movement interested
in depicting the real, it wished first and foremost to do so in terms
of paintings (art) at the exclusion of photography. The book also
describes New Objectivity as a return or perhaps a departure from
"modernism". Or in the case of Grosz an abandonment of Dada. Grosz is
also briefly described in relation to portraiture and photography.
Grosz, according to the book was misguided in his idea of portraiture
and the book says photography becomes the victor of this conceptual
battle because of its "mechanical" nature.
Like Stieglitz, Grosz is of interest to me not because of the
questions which were answered by the book but because of the questions
which were not. I am interested in the success or failure of art and
politics or the political in art. Similar to "The Steerage" is it
possible to ignore the content/subject of the work of art? Should we
totally aestheticize art and ignore the politics of the work? I would
phraze this last question "Can we" but I know we do, as is commonly
the case with the "Grand Jatte". I want answers.

Question 3

Expand on the statement: "A major theme in the history of modern art
has been the balance between reflecting the world and intervening in
the world".

George: "A major theme in the history of modern art has been the
balance of between reflecting the world and intervening in the world."

Joe: "George, stop reading the wall plaques they are mostly nonsense
some old white man wrote."

George: "What's nonsense about this statement?"

Joe: "Well, George, let me explain. Modernism is a particularly long
period to describe by one statement, first of all. Hundreds of
artist's lived and died in the time summarized by this statement. The
idea of the statement in general is a simplification. To understand
art as a "reflection" can be understood to mean: art is a mirror.
That understanding often also takes for granted the idea that a mirror
cannot cause change. An idea I reject. What I am saying is that even
"reflection" is intervention but I do not think that is what this
statement means to imply. The notion that a theme in modern art is a
balance between reflection and intervention I understand to mean, art
that is representational (reflection) versus art that is politically
motivated (intervention). Obviously, we can easily
see that the statement despite its oversimplification can be
illustrated easily by looking at any movement or ism of modernism.
For this purpose I will describe four artists from at least four
distinct episodes in modernism: Picasso, Tatlin, Kandinsky, Duchamp.
First, Picasso, known for his influence in terms of cubism and of
course his porno work, "Des Moiselles D'Avignon." Picasso is
interesting because his career is so long. Long enough to carry
through many isms. Picasso is milestone character in the development
of art in terms seeing in new ways. Cubism sees reality in terms of a
sort of theory of relativity. Picasso painted in terms of some
observation of the "real" world, so, his paintings are in a way a
reflection of the world. At times he even adds bits of the world
(newspaper clippings) to his paintings. Picasso is interested in a
semiotics of painting. Though, later Picasso becomes a painter who
gives up on modernism and returns to neo-classicism this act is also a
reflection of the world. In addition, it is common to ignore the
communist nature of Picasso's personal politics which later are
embodied in his "Guernica" a so-called surrealist painting. Picasso is
an interesting case study because of his well known communist ideals
of which he wrote and spoke. A painting like the "Guernica" is curious
because of its direct relation to an actual event. The painting then
is a reflection, but the power of the anti-war statement can not be
downplayed--an intervention.
Tatlin like Picasso is spurred to produce largely because of his
political leanings. As Russian Constructivist, Tatlin, hoped to
created works of art that embodied his Marxist ideals. He wished to
create a more universal art. Art which was not a simple reflection of
the world in terms of representation but art which came from the
everyday material of the world. He wished to take basic elements and
make them collectively more than they are. Tatlin's deep connection to
his political ideals inspired him to create work which he saw as
non-alienating and for the working class using the materials of the
working class. Now, to define Tatlin in terms of reflecting the world
is an interesting problem because his work is non-representational.
So, Tatlin then almost by default falls into the intervention in the
world category.
Wassily Kandinsky falls somewhere between Picasso and Tatlin. His
painted works are non-representational of the visual world but are
intended to convey a sort musical aspect. Kandinsky
is interested in making visual art more like music, more direct, more
emotional. But Kandinsky does occasionally draw objects which clearly
look like "reflections" of objects in the seen world. Canons for
example. Kandinsky wants to make art which is more universally
accessible like Tatlin, but Kandinsky sees himself as the leader of
the masses. Kandinsky in his writing describes a society with artists
at every level of a social triangle, leading their respective levels,
but with an artist prophet (himself) leading all at the top. Artist's
like Kandinsky believe in universals and ideals. Later artist's like
Marcel Duchamp find themselves in direct opposition to universals.
Duchamp is a famous doubter. He doubts and questions everything.
He questions the validity of the painted form and opens the idea of
art to include practically everything and anything an artist calls
art. Duchamp in some ways is reflecting the doubt of the world after
the destruction of the world wars. His questioning of the expectations
of the work of art eventually lead him to the "ready made." It is by
questioning everything Duchamp is reflecting a world that is in shock
but he is also clearly intervening in that world.
The idea of reflection versus intervention as a theme in modern
art is a prickly problem to dismantle. Artists throughout modernism
have worked representationally or abstractly or expressively.
Regardless of the artists' methods the work is still an in some way an
intervention. In this way even not "making" art objects, like Duchamp,
is at once reflection and intervention.