CAMERA/ACTION: PERFORMANCE AND PHOTOGRAPHY

This article presents an interesting view of the uncomfortable harmony between performance art and photography. Although the two are hugely different and in some ways defeating to the other, this writing proves that the two can be used to defy those preconceptions and excel each other to a different plane. Although photography may seem counterintuitive to a live happening, it is a fact (as proven through the many examples of the article) that it has been and most will continue to be used as documentation and often an extension of the piece. Some may feel that this relationship is inappropriate, but when it comes down to it, that doesn't mean it won't work or people won't partake in it.

The main issue to remember is that all aspects of a work are more or less under the control of the artist. If an artist feels that photography would hinder his/her work, then he/she should find a way to eliminate it from the equation. Photography is not some unstoppable force invading the performance art world. If it is used, it should be used at the artist's discretion to either record or compliment the artist's "vision." True, archiving a performance in some way changes its dynamic, but a talented artist should consider this change and account for it accordingly.

Reaction to Marisa S. Olson's Performing the Moment

In Marisa Olson's essay, she touches upon a number of interesting issues in regards to performance art. The most interesting of those is the evolution of performance art's relation to the camera and other archival tools. The growth of these tools into integral aspects of performance work has been so subtle and logical that it takes an astute observer to point out said trend. Unfortunately, I feel that the author has done little more than point out the trend and its examples where a reader expects some sort of higher realization. True, the materials of performance art have changed dramatically, thereby changing their relationship to art and the art itself, but what does it matter? Olson has created an interesting foundation on which she could form a higher level argument, but she comfortably ends her essay before  anything essay worthy has really been exploited. Is modern performance art more effective than early examples? Has the distance imparted by cameras and recordings taken away from the visceral quality of early performance or is it a powerful comment of modern society? Why has performance art changed in such a way? Has performance come full circle in that some are attempting to regain the original sensibilities of the work? Where will the trend go from here? Where should it go from here? Perhaps it was Olson's intention to inspire such inquisitions, but more likely there is more that could have/should have been written about the issue.

Performing the Moment- "Ready, Set.... Action!"

In this reading, Olsen addresses and expands on Walter Benjamin’s essay: "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction." While she explains his original concept of "auratic distance," I find myself both agreeing that this is a fundamental truth of today's art world, but in the same token I disagree that it is something inherently associated with the emergence of digital media.

"Auratic distance," without the aid of digital media, is naturally inflicted on older works of art that we may describe as "classic", "aesthetic" or as generally being from any different age and/or era. This happens simply because we as individuals are removed (in both time and space) from the artwork's original "unveiling", it's original place of installation and the social circumstances that surrounded it. We will never experience a classical work of art is it was originally intended to be experienced.

However, I will agree whole heartedly that the use of photography and digital media has exacerbated this phenomenon by showing images in various scenarios, texts and mediums. Instead of describing "auratic distance" as being a degenerative syndrome, it can be argued that there is another aspect of this said aura in which we gain. Rapid replication and the ability to reach out to a massive audience is just another medium for artists to play with. It changes the nature of the aura, but in the same token, it can breathe life into something old and bring a fresh new perspective to art.

For example: Chris Burden's 'Shoot.'
It appears that photography is an afterthought concerning this piece: the photos merely act as proof of a moment that has already past. Supposedly (and hopefully I'm not wrong in assuming this) the action was the true work of art; in true conceptual fashion- the moment, or the "happening", was the pinnacle of art itself. The dematerialization of the object may have detracted from any importance that could be attributed to a physical token such as a photograph.

Later artists would attribute more importance to the mediums of photography and film, allowing these mediums to play a far larger role than merely documenting "proof" of an event. That something *has* happened is no longer the required focus of a work. Care and thought may now be given to the documentation of an event, and how its presentation may influence an audience. If something is installed in a gallery or broadcast indiscriminately over the internet: this will effect how a work is seen and/or experienced. If participation is promoted, the aura of such a work may become mutable and transient with every new contribution or viewing. Something such as this makes the theory of "auratic distance" merely another hue for the performing artists palette.

As Olsen's essay continues, It appears that she is saying the same thing that I'm thinking, here... but is this agreeing with, or contesting Benjamin's original essay?

I began to read his essay here:
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm

It appears that Benjamin's theory is far more complex than I could originally gather from Olsen's brief rehashing of events.
In fact- now that I've browsed through it a few times, I'm going to go print it out and read it in earnest before I start thinking up any more potentially incorrect assumptions.

Primary sources are awesome- the end.

Performance Actions

-http://www.e-flux.com/projects/do_it/itinerary/itinerary.html

In his piece “Les Ecoliers”, Christian Botlanski has created a work executed by another artist of subjects he has never met for which he receives credit. I think that his idea of using school portraits is a clever one as they are such emotionally loaded objects. Basically, his project recreates a page of a yearbook in a new form (blown up on a wall). I personally appreciate this piece not only for its questioning of the role of the artist, but its ability to discretely and subliminally cull such powerful emotions inherent to memory.

This piece is characteristic of Botlanski in that it deals heavily with memory and loss (two themes characteristic of looking back on school portraits). It also memorializes the anonymous subject by not only enlarging their photo, but deeming them particularly important enough to make into art.

-http://www.e-flux.com/projects/do_it/itinerary/itinerary.html

The backbone of Dan Graham’s “Do-it-Yourself Two-Way Mirror Mylar Window” is the distinction between public and private space and the consequential blurring of that line. By essentially superimposing images from one onto the other or making one a mirror while leaving the other a window calls into question aspects of reality, appropriateness and voyeurism.

Dan Graham’s ability in numerous fields in reflected in this piece. In addition to visual art, Graham is also respected as a music writer and an architect. Clearly, this piece identifies with architecture and the importance of structure in the piece. In addition, the overall concept and poeticism of the work is indicative of his talent as a lyricist.

Week 3: Performing the moment

In her essay, Olson’s main focus is the discussion of decontextualization, “auratic distance”, and telepresence concerning the documentation of performance art via photography. Since photography has long raised the issue of lessening authenticity and destroying a work's "aura", the same line of reasoning is applied to the use of photography in performance. Some performances and their various traces emphasize the increase of these qualities, such as Burden’s “Shoot” in 1971 and more recently Labat’s “Hooter’s Project.” Other performances change the audience’s relationship around by making them instrumental yet distant to the actual performance, such as Goldberg’s “human robot” and the website “Do It” at e-flux.com. In all these cases, the documentation of the work is essential, yet still only serves as a single moment in time of the actual performance. The essay seemed to focus on photography as the main means of preserving “proof” of a performance, but while it can be useful I think that the means of preservation should be fitting and keep as true to the original performance as possible. In my opinion the reproduction doesn’t have the same effect as the actual act of performance, but I think its existence is still critical to the longevity and accessibility of the work.

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2002/04/24_tele.html

Photography and Performance

The questioning of photography as an art form is a particularly interesting argument to me. Since the advent of photography, it has been hotly debated as an art - or non-art - form. "Performing the Moment" addresses this, along with the evolving role photography plays in performance art. It is "mechanical" in nature, and thus can only be considered a form of documentation. Yet, photography can have astounding visual impact - oftentimes beyond that of painting and other forms of visual art. Photography has an inherent "realness" that cannot be achieved by virtually any other means. A photograph has the ability to capture detail so accurately that the viewer rarely questions whether the subject of the photo is an actually recorded moment in time. But it is because of this also, that photography as an art form is questioned. Without the apparent hand of the artist present, or his interpretation of a subject physically present, how can the viewer communicate with the artist through his work? The viewer can see the strokes of a painter (as mentioned in the text), but not in a photograph. I disagree with this view - simply because a photographer has the ability to capture his subject in a split second (most of the time), does not mean the elements of color, composition, style, and scale are not just as carefully considered as in a painting. Photography, like many art forms, has many methods. Some are more purely scientific and objective, while some are radically abstract and interpretive. This is one of the reasons why photography will ultimately find a substantiated place in the art world.

Abstract photography - art photography:
http://www.pbase.com/image/76235012
http://www.pbase.com/image/75748008
http://www.pbase.com/williamgruner/image/56433043
http://www.pbase.com/khtaylor/image/57755102
http://www.pbase.com/ctfchallenge/image/52084453
http://www.pbase.com/mrutter/graphic

Week 3: Performing the Moment

Performing the Moment

Marisa S. Olson

The essay begins by explaining a very popular essay entitled “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” by Walter Benjamin. He discusses the argument of decontextualizing a work of art as it is reproduced. It is defiantly true that taking a piece out of its context it looses a piece of its originality and no longer has the same effect on the viewer. With the advances in photography and digital reproduction the loss of originality is that much easier. This type of reproduction does not work as well when it comes to performance art. One piece she writes about is Chris Burded’s piece titled “Shoot” consist of a friend shooting him in the arm with a rifle. This piece relies on the shock of the viewer in the moment. The only evidence of the situation are a couple of pictures and the scar on his arm. Photographs are the only piece and can in no way be considered the piece so there really is not a means of reproducing the moment. Any reproduction of the piece would lack the originality. Another group discussed in this essay is the Surveillance Camera Players (SCP). Their performances consist of them using surveillance cameras like television cameras. They perform protest pieces in front of the camera. People stop and watch the performance from the streets. By using camera’s as a piece of performance I feel that they are not promoting decontextualizing works of art, rather promoting the use of reproduction to gain support for their protest cause. On their website they reveal maps of all the surveillance cameras all over New York. This allows other artist to pick up where they left off and reproduce their piece as many times as necessary.

http://www.notbored.org/the-scp.html

Olson-"Performing the Moment"

This is essay begins by discussing the relationship between performance art and photography. She also talks about how crucial and important documentation is for a performance piece. Unfortunately, a majority of performance pieces that have taken place only have photo documentation, which does not do them justice. Personally I think photographs are a great form of documentation, however not always the best choice, especially when it comes to performance art. It should not be the only option. Olson uses Chris Burden’s “Shoot” as a perfect example of this. Like other performance pieces, Burden’s would have had the most impact if seen in person. For those today, however, who were unable to see the piece, I believe they would have benefited if they were able to see a video recording. A video would provide more of a shock than a photo, after seeing a sequence of the photos; the outcome would be pretty predictable. In this case, there isn't even any photographic evidence of the event, only after it had occurred. Olson also brings up a good point when it comes to the idea of how to exhibit a project, such as those at “Do It”. What does an artist do when they are not physically present or affecting the outcome? The artist would have to rely on the participant to document the act and share it.

The Surveillance Camera Players:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RILTl8mxEnE

Performing the Moment

I feel as if as long as I have been attending classes here, that the concept of recording performances in terms of photography or video have always been under fire as whether or not this ruins the relationship between the viewer and the performance. I have come to my own conclusion that while the records do not do justice to actually attending one of these happenings they provide for somewhat of an invitation for an individual to further explore something they had missed. Now pardon me if you disagree but I don't feel as if I should not be allowed to experience Chris Burdens "shoot" partially for the fact that I was not alive in 1971. Now while I look through these documentations of the event I do actually keep in mind that I am missing out on a few important pieces of the performance (ie. the sound of the gun, Burden's initial reaction to the piercing)

As far as old pieces being altered to accommodate for new technology, I see the importance of holding on to original recordings, however I feel that using new knowledge to enhance old documentation is not necessarily a bad thing. The first thing that came to mind as I read this article (and reviewed some of the other blogs) was music. Constantly you will see new cd's come out that are listed as being "enhanced" or "remastered" frankly I find as a listener that I enjoy these new issues a little better however I understand that just like a "remix" some parts of the original are left out destroying the validity of being an original. What this all leaves me with is viewer choice because the bottom line is these performances have a purpose. Whether it is to challenge issues or to entertain these changes or recordings might achieve their goal or they might not, it is up to the viewer to explore all of these options and find out if they can reach the relationship that the author is trying to establish.

http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/works/shoot/

Performing the Moment

Performing the Moment

This reading discusses the various aspects of the photograph and its association with performance art. In previous decades, in which photography served as the only proof of action, corporeal traces were considered ripe and innovative. These performances involved some kind of action and used the medium of photography as a form on documentation. However, some argue that there is some sort of separation between the viewer and the action itself, created through the use of a photographic medium. Olson sites Lobat’s “Hooters Project” as an example of this existence, in which the viewer is separated from those carrying out the action. Moreover, many argue that photography, as a form of art, is adding distance between the viewer and the work of art itself. I would have to disagree agree with this statement because photographs allow a moment of time to be captured as an image. Without photography, we would be unable to recreate these moments exactly as they occurred, or be able to look back on a moment with proof of its action and existence.
http://www.tonylabat.com/the-hooters-project.html

Reading Response 3

Time Based

"Performing the Moment" was about the documentation and significance of performance art done the first time and the reiterations afterwards. It discussed "the distance the viewer and the original work" in which the audience could be a part of the work or observe after the act through photographs and videos in a museum. Also, Olson raises the question of future reproductions of performance art because of old materials being banned and replacing it with newer technology.

As much as I'd love to agree with the idea that seeing the original is better than seeing a photograph of it, I don't think it is the best idea for performance art in the far future. How could one recreate a moment in time exactly if the conditions are not the same? Even if it was, would it end up the same as previous performance? Also, the argument presented in the end of the article makes it seem more likely that photographs and video would become the ultimate documentation of performances because the materials itself could be banned our out-dated in the future.

On a lighter note, here's a link to SCP, because their concept is an entertaining and important one.
http://www.notbored.org/the-scp.html

Performing the Moment

This reading addresses the debate over the decontextualiztion of the work of art due to new photographic media. Questions about the significance of the reproduction of a work's authenticity arise as some claim the reproductions distance the viewer from the pure experience of the original work. The reading recalls the work of Joe Burden in "Shoot" 1971. He had a friend shoot him in the arm with a .22-caliber riffle. Some photographs and scars were the only proof of the performance. The photograph was used as a form of documentation in this case. I feel the photograph could have also taken the identity of the work in which it creates a window into the performance. Regardless of what constitutes the work itself, photographic documentation can prove crucial to the survival of the work. How is photography different than a descriptive artist statement? The photograph actually bares a relationship to the actual performance as a relic that was present at the exact moment that the work was performed. There is a difference between the original and a reproduction however, I do not think credit should be taken away from a medium that offers so much.
http://www.panoramas.dk/fullscreen2/full22.html

Third response entry: Performing the Moment

This article discusses the debate of photographic reproduction as art. Walter Benjamin claims that photographs take works of art out of context, and create a distance of the viewer from the aura and the authenticity of the work of art. This is true. If one were to see the Mona Lisa in person, whether or not behind thick bullet proof glass, they will get a sense of awe and excitement, but when they see on of the billions of photographs of it, they won’t feel a thing.
The article then describes how the term “trace,” (a term for etching upon the body), for photography came from a Chris Burden performance where he was shot by a friend with a shotgun. Then, as reproductions of concept, other artists have done less harmful and less permanent things to their body before taking pictures of it.
The article then goes on to explain the evolution of documentation of art, meaning the video camera. This allowed artists to perform real time. They no longer had to use still shots. One such example of an odd way to do this is from The Surveillance Camera Players, who use New York’s surveillance cameras as their own. Their work is to protest the breaking of the 4th amendment by authority. Photographers, however, have not all succeeded to video. Gerald Slota and Dan Ragland are incorporating performance with photographs in a different way. Instead of taking photos of performance, they are performing actions on the photos themselves. Just by ruining the photos with chemicals and scratches, I don’t think that makes very good art, whether it’s performative or not.

Here is a Q&A about photography and news crews as performance art:
http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0021jB