Showing posts with label Liz Magic Laser. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Liz Magic Laser. Show all posts

Monday, March 30, 2020

Archive Art

Robert Boyd

Just before coronavirus shut everything down, I went to San Antonio for Novel Ideas, Blue Star Contemporary's art book fair. The keynote speaker was Julie Ault, who had been a member of the art collective Group Material from 1979 to 1996. Group Material is probably best known for the AIDS Timeline produced in 1990. They produced research-based artwork, usually very political. Listening to Ault speak got me thinking about this kind of art. I've seen examples of it many times over the years, but for whatever reason, Ault prompted me to think of it as a specific genre of art. A kind of art that doesn't, as far as I know, have a name. I've been calling it "archive art" in my mind, but if any of you know an already existing name, please let me know.



I stumbled across a workable definition while reading America Starts Here, a big art book about the work of Kate Ericson and Mel Ziegler. It's been on my "to-read" shelf for a long time, and this quarantine moment seemed like a good moment to crack it open. The first essay is by Bill Arning, written before he moved to Houston to become director of the Contemporary Art Museum. In it, he wrote:
The list of strategies Ericson and Ziegler used to make artworks seemed very unusual at the time, though today's young artists regularly employ these methods, which include the following: 1) Researching arcane areas of knowledge and pursuing a passion for the aura of the archive; 2) Using mapping and other similar ways of schematizing life; 3) Creating a system that dictates all significant visual decisions about a work's presentation; 4) Employing found elements rather than causing something new to be made; 5) Viewing the entire country as a text to be read, engaged and decoded; 6) Using natural materials, like stone, leaves, and water, as they are inflected or coded by culture; 7) Critically engaging decoration and architecture for what they reveal about society; 8) Using Americana as topic, material, or motif; 9) Engaging cultural institutions, museums, and monuments, such as the Supreme Court, libraries, and universities; 10) Investigating governmental decisions about urban space and making them public; 11) Collecting and collating found language, which can subsequently function as a kind of found poetry; 12) Using the practical business decisions of others as a structuring device for works; 13) Designing projects that exist in multiple states, each of which creates meaning; from the first research to the final use of materials; 14) Insertting delays into a process that unnaturally extends the in-between period of a simple task such as landscaping or cleaning, rendering otherwise invisible processes conspicuous and examinable; 15) Allowing works to disappear through transformation, making them cease to be "art" and instead begin to fulfill a useful function; 16) Cooperating with people outside the specific disciplines of the art world in a way that gives them a non-artistic way to participate; 17) Choosing to work with each other as collaborators.
That is quite a list! And really, I think the totality of this list only applies to Ericson and Zeigler. But I think big portions of the list apply to many of the artists who create "archive art," like Group Material.

In 2012, artist Robert Gober produced a notable example of archive art for the Whitney Biennial. He created a mini-exhibit of work by Forrest Bess. The archive part of came in vitrines devoted to Betty Parsons (Bess's gallerist) and John Money, a researcher who studied sexuality and who corresponded with Bess. This doesn't exactly fit into the approach outlined by Arning, except maybe 1) and 4). But it did require original research on Gober's part. This micro-exhibition was expanded into a major solo exhibition by the Menil Museum. Gober is not typically an archive artist--he is best known as a maker of intriguing, enigmatic objects. But he totally stepped up to the plate and knocked it out of the park in this project.

Two years later, the Biennial had another notable piece of archive art, The Gregory Battcock Archive by Joseph Grigely. Grigely serendipitously discovered a bunch of Battcock's papers in the building where he had his studio in 1992. Battcock was an art critic who appeared in several Andy Warhol films over the years and was the subject of a notable Alice Neel painting. He was murdered in 1980; the murder remains unsolved. In his statement about the work, Grigely describes the archive as a kind of portrait of Battson: "A document is both a material artifact and a node within a network of human relations. We both draw and draw out Battcock from these relations--the artists he talked with, the critics he argued with, the meals he shared, the students he taught, and the tricks with whom he had sex--they are all here, some with names, some with pseudonyms." I remember being fascinated by The Gregory Battcock Archive when I saw it at the Biennial--it was perhaps where the idea of "archive art" first lodged itself in my mind as a distinct category. That said, the problem with such art is that it doesn't have much visual interest. I'd much rather see an Alice Neel painting.


Alice Neel, David Bourdan and Gregory Battcock, 1970

The lack of visual pleasure is the biggest failing with this genre of art. But Kate Ericson and Mel Ziegler are exceptions to this airless approach. The work they did fits into Arning's schema while also being visually beautiful.


Carrie Schneider, installation at the CAMH, 2014

One local artist who has long engaged in this kind of artwork is Carrie Marie Schneider. Her exhibition, Incommensurate Mapping, at the CAMH in 2014 was a perfect example. She studied the CAMH's archives and used them to critique the CAMH in an amusingly subversive way. I wrote about this exhibit at length when it came out in two posts for this blog.

There have been other notable examples of this kind of art (loosely defined) in Houston. For example, City Council Meeting, a semi-theatrical piece of participatory artwork put on by Aaron Landsman, Mallory Catlett and Jim Findlay under the auspices of DiverseWorks at the El Dorado Ballroom in 2012, or Liz Magic Laser's Tell Me What You Want to Hear at DiverseWorks in 2012. Or Ericson and Zeigler's Red House (1979) and several other projects from the same time in Houston, as well as an installation at DiverseWorks in 1987. Obviously, DiverseWorks has been a major venue for this genre of art for several decades.

For me, this work sometimes is remarkably good. The idea of researching and presenting one's research has a natural appeal to a bookish person like me. It depends on how well the artwork is constructed and how much the artists' obsessions line up with my own. In the case of The Gregory Battcock Archive and Incommensurate Mapping, they worked for me very well indeed.



Friday, November 1, 2013

From Here to Afternoon: Labor and Formalities

Betsy Huete

Revealing and the concealment of information: it’s a formidable issue that artists and curators alike frequently contend with in presenting to the public. Places like the CAMH or the MFAH, for instance, provide detailed museum placards laying out the exhibition’s historical context or even outright meaning of the work. Most galleries provide some sort of handout, again rooting the work and/or the artist(s) within a particular context. Places like the Menil, on the other hand, provide very little information to the viewer other than the title, year, and artist, greatly entrusting the viewer to enact meaning onto the work—for better or worse. Patrik Haggren and Mikhail Lylov's latest curatorial effort From Here to Afternoon, up now at Glassell, somehow jockeys these two positions.



Exhibition entrance

Albeit written in somewhat ambiguous and fairly impenetrable language, Haggren and Lylov do provide a written document explicating the context and meaning of the exhibition. Also, there are writings scattered throughout the space that functionally anchor and appropriately provide context, and even meditate on a contemporary art exhibit’s positioning within modes of labor and efficiency. But given their equivalence in scale to and spacing between the actual artworks, the writings seem to bear their own weight as autonomous art forms, and work surprisingly well as such. The transmutation of written explanation to art object is a surprising and innovative move that simultaneously informs and subverts meaning—a smart ambiguity that relies on the viewer to fill in the blanks. Another notable treatment (or lack thereof) of the space is the omission of artist and title placards. The result is a cohesive and deeply nuanced yet nebulous grouping: a curation drafted as an unintentional collaboration between artists. While totally practical and probably necessary, it makes the image list attached to the handout seem almost disappointing.


Installation view, front gallery

Placing trust in the viewer to properly engage with the work is a respectable although risky move here—this is an exhibition that requires time. Lots of it. With its text-heavy, historicized, and intellectual agenda, glazing over the work and shrugging it off as an exploration of the banalities and dignity of labor as well as the manipulation of its laborers seems like a tempting prospect. This isn’t fresh territory, after all. Between the Touch Sanitation (1970-80) project of Mierle Laderman Ukeles, Vito Acconci’s Step Piece (1970), or even Houston’s currently running Shrimp Boat Project, effort used as both a material and concept in art has been in play at the very least since the post-minimalists. Fortunately, for the viewer and Haggren/Lylov alike, it doesn’t take too long to realize that in this situation, labor is instead used as a stepping-stone to engender abstraction and formal concerns.


Installation view, middle gallery

That’s not to say that these issues aren’t prevalent in the work, or aren’t meant to be included, or shouldn’t be a part of the work. It’s that they immanently present themselves through a corroboration of visual and textual abstractions resulting from actual systems of efficiency, like the photographic motion studies of Lillian and Frank Gilbreth, speech conducting, and shipping containers, just to name a few. One clear example of this is the Laban-Lawrence studies of rhythm and labor, examined here through the lens of Romana Schmalisch. She uses these studies, conducted and published mostly in the 1940s, to explore the texture and rhetoric of efficiency, the most effective of which is Notation of Efficiency (2013). Situated in its own cozy dark room, the piece consists of a single slide projector, operating as an outmoded PowerPoint presentation. It’s a sequence of facts, visual aids, and Laban-Lawrence diagrams that hardly make any sense to the layperson. While seeming to do nothing more than explain a system, Schmalisch’s dead-pan delivery reveals subtle humor, making intense studies of movement like wrapping a Mars Bar feel fascinating, concise, and utterly ridiculous. She also controls the cadence of the projector, its intermittent clicking flying through some slides while spending way too much time on others. It’s a clever way of forcing the viewer to focus on phrases or images he would normally disregard, rendering certain aspects of these studies as not only important, but foreboding, manipulative, and slightly terrifying.


Romana Schmalisch, Notation of Efficiency, 2013, Slide projection and model (bamboo sphere)

Another instance of slide projector usage occurs with Liz Magic Laser’s The Digital Face (2012). In the main part of the exhibition space, two projected images face each other on opposite walls. They are two dancers, Alan Good and Cori Kresge, silently reenacting the choreography of George H. W. Bush’s 1990 and Barack Obama’s 2012 State of the Union address, respectively. The slides present images of frozen movements punctuating various points of the speeches. Overall, the piece is a fairly hilarious and extremely intelligent isolation of the movement and texture of political rhetoric, and poignantly fits in the show. But the piece originally existed as a performance at MoMA PS1 and usually shows up in galleries as a dual-channel video, and so much of the humor, nuance, and impeccable movements of the dancers is thus lost in this iteration. While the use of outmoded technology transplanted the viewer to a correlating time period in Schmalisch’s work, it doesn’t make sense with Laser’s. It’s a curatorial attempt at cohesion that cuts The Digital Face off at the knees—a grave misstep.


Liz Magic Laser, The Digital Face, 2012, Two slide projector installation

As previously stated, there are several pieces that quite purposefully lack immediacy, that demand extended attention, and Elke Marhofer and Mikhail Lylov’s Hongkong Turbulence (2013) is one of them. Although the running time is unstated, the looped video likely takes over half an hour to cycle through. The video initially reads as boring and self-indulgent observations of the transportation, shipping, and packing of commodities—a piece that is blanketly ungenerous to the viewer. But after about ten minutes or so (hang in there!), the work suddenly shifts from tedium to intense satisfaction. As it cyclically demonstrates machines and people binding, packing, smashing, crushing, compartmentalizing, selling, beeping, and deconstructing massive amounts of things, the work abstractly and formally, and almost ethnographically, reveals the innards of contemporary systems of efficiency.


Elke Marhofer and Mikhail Lylov, Hongkong Turbulence, 2013, 16mm film transferred to HD video

From Here to Afternoon makes interesting and borderline risky curatorial decisions that, while sometimes hurting the work, also enable it and create formal and conceptual relationships that would not likely exist if each piece were seen by itself. It also uses art to vocalize and think through overshadowed historical moments, and it’s usually presented the other way around in a standard contemporary context.

From Here to Afternoon runs until November 24, 2013, at the Glassell School.

Share

Thursday, April 4, 2013

Pan Recommends for the week of April 4 to April 10

Dean Liscum and Robert Boyd

There is a hell of a lot of interesting, diverse art events and exhibits happening in town--way more than what we have listed here.  Check Glasstire for a much more complete listing. It's exciting but also a bit depressing that it is getting hard to actually see everything in Houston. Here are a few things to see this weekend.

THURSDAY


This isn't the sculpture Jonathan Clark is unveiling Thursday night--but it's similar!

Jonathan Clark at Skyline Art Services, 5 pm. Clark's sculpture is just exhilarating like a high school stage band with a groove. Plus, music, food, drinks and art featuring the Kashmere Stage Band!

FRIDAY




an adult Frida look-alike contest Friday and a kids Frida look-alike contest Saturday afternoon.


We have no idea who these people are!

Liz Magic Laser: Tell Me What You Want To Hear at Diverseworks, 7-9 pm. Art that explores interview techniques? We may try these out on some unsuspecting artists.


Alissa Blumenthal courtesy of Tatiana Istomina

Alissa Blumenthal: A small retrospective at Art Palace, 6–8 p.m. The fictional artist gets a non-fictional gallery exhibit.


Matt Messinger, Dancers, 2013

Matt Messinger: New Paintings at Devin Borden Gallery, 6–8 p.m. The low-key Houston artist gets a well-deserved gallery show.

SATURDAY



"The Challenging Phenomenon of Jermayne MacAgy," lecture by Chelby King at William Reaves Fine Art, 2 pm. The first professional director of the CAA (which later became the CAMH), MacAgy is a key figure in Houston's art history. William Reaves Fine Art is currently showing a group show of Houston Modernist painters from the 50s and 60s (the MacAgy years).


Eric Fischl, Tumbling Woman

Eric Fischl: Cast & Drawn at McClain Gallery, 2-4 p.m. The figure in bronze, glass and watercolor,. Just so you can say, "Yeah, I saw that."



Earl Staley: The Speed of Life at New Gallery/Thom Andriola at 6–8 p.m. Professor Art returns with a show of new work. 



Illustrate the End: The Art of Vincent Fink at El Rincón Social,  8 pm – 12 am. Because the folks at El Rincon always keep it interesting.


Share