For our show in December, I’d like you to consider the possibility of performance. Since the early 1900’s
Futurismo and then
Dada brought forth new ways of doing art. Back then, performance art was seen as
futuristic theater or
dada events. In the late 1950’s they called them “happenings.” It was about the action and the body; a moving painting, live-sculpture, less-than and more than theater. Performance is like art in the living flesh: sensual, weird, ephemeral and always cathartic. If done well, it touches you, and makes you think.
20 comments:
some people see the use of the title as being rather irrelevant or just an accessory. in expressionistic/abstract/contemporary art, i think the title is just as important as the piece itself. it can arouse humor, thought, or just that moment of "aw, yes." a perfect instance of this is "add one meter to a mountain." when i saw the picture, i thought, "interesting, a group of naked people piled on top of each other." then, i saw the title and had one of those, "haha, that's great," moments. i don't know if there's any kind of social statement that you usually see, but the title in relation to the documentation (photo) of the performance is enough to be an awesome piece of art. i guess it could be interpreted that the people are forming themselves into a shape to try to match the contour of the mountain top. thus, becoming more intimate with the mountain in the most natural state, and adding to its mass with other living beings. you could take a lot of assumptions from this particular piece just by making observations that are untainted by a quick google search. pretty sweet.
True, Josh. Titling matters a great deal.
After seeing the ana mendieta exhibition, i finally understand the importance of performance art because your presentation of it doesnt do anything for someone who is completely unfamilar with the idea. How can one image express the feeling of a whole performace? I would guess thats the reason that performance exists. It would be awesome if you could provide video or links to video of some performace art.
I like the idea of performing randomly in public becuse your forcing an audience. Also its probably the most sovereign way to view art because the viewer didnt choose to go to a museum or a place that is made specially to view art.
oh, the second part of my comment was in reference to the shintaro and zhang haun pieces.
These examples are odd when looking at them they all seem so random and i dont quite understand the message they are trying to convey. I have not been exposed to much performance art but of what i have seen i always find myself confused with what the artist is actually doing. I like the idea of incorporating art with the body and movement. it adds interesing ryhthm, can incorporate music, and there are usually interesting costume/make up that is a whole other creative element. I also like the idea of doing performance on the street where the artists can recieve the raw expressions/reactions of passer-bys. sometime i definitly want to try making a costume like that giant white thing and dance around a crowded street just to see people's reactions.
Videos of performances are not necessarily easy to get, but i liked this site, Check it out:
http://www.vdb.org/
Click artists and go from there (by clicking the little camera)
I could never do performance art for our show or any other. I don’t have the nerve for putting on any kind of performance (hence why I work back stage for theater). Plus I like my artwork to be more permanent than performance art. I don’t want something I’ve done to just be a good idea for something that someone remembered happening, I want it to be more tangible than that (hence why I don’t like web design I like to do stuff for print in graphic design).
Naomi: The photographs of these performances are -in a way- permanent (if permanence happens to be the issue). Yet, you're pretty close to theater, an ephemeral art form.
wouldnt you think it as permenant if you filmed your performance ... i would think this as being the same as viewing a painting.
Some performances are filmed. But they don't have to be. In fact, they can be repeated. In this, performance shares the transient quality of theater.
In some cases it will be nice to have videos/performances, but not everyone can do it.
If i get some slides, can I use the projector from the department?
Heidi
I saw a spectacular performance art piece last week at the UC. There were 8 long poles about 10ft high with people on top. The poles bent slightly so the people could move and also twirl. They would bend toward one another and the men would dance with the women. They were very animated and moved like mimes. There was opera music playing loudly and the performers were dressed in colorful outfits. The men wore black suits and the women wore vibrant puffy dresses. There faces were painted white like mimes. From far away I thought they were puppets. The way they moved was incredibly light and playful. I have never seen so many people in the middle of the day watching a performance. This kind of performance art was very magical and unique.
sarah: i know what you're talking about. but i thought that was more like theater...sorta like the cirque du soleil and cirque ingenieux choreographies/performances...
which brings me to my question:
how do you differentiate between performance art from the visual artist's point of view from theater, street theater, dance, or any other combination of performing art?
why does there have to be a different name attached to it if it's just coming from a visual artist?
is it because it's spontaneous?
i'm sure some amount of planning goes into performance art...
i do like the ephemeral qualities of performance art or any kind of art for that matter.
sometimes it's nice to think about it in your head, like a secret that only you know--they work like memories.
i see no problem or inconveniece with that--it's almost magical.
I think that performance art is very challenging because a performing artist creates art spontaneously with their own body and experiences and the most important thing is that there is an immediate connection with artist. this is why it is so important to create a relationship between the performer and the audience to be able to communicate your message.I think that the work of a performer is to entertain while exploring and engaging people into social, cultural, and intelectual subjects.The fact that this kind of art is not limited by time and space because it can happen anywhere and that it allows improviscation makes it very unique.
i did not mean to say that there is an immediate connection with the artist, but with the audience sorry!!
I must say personally that performance art sometimes confuses me.. especially when i think about those that ocurred during the 60's. Don't get me wrong.. there's a pretty clear understanding of such perfomances and happening say by.. Yoko Ono, especially the one where she asked the audience to cut away her clothing piece by piece until she was completely naked. Her main objective: vulnerability. And then there's another man (his name escapes me) where his performance was that he paited some words with blue and orange paint, DRANK the organge paint, and then proceeded to fly through the canvas he had just painted. The message there: no so clear. It's interesting, dont get me wrong, but why?! Also. is there a specific definition of what is perfomance art? Is it to get a point across? Is money involved? If so, would those creepy guys who dress and look like robots on the streetcorner be considered perfomance aritsts?
On another note, I would like to add that in my high school, I was involved in a "fluxus" event. The details escape me, but it involved each of the people in my "group" creating a kite which was to be flown during a certain day at school. We went on the rooftop of the theater building, and i must say that the outcome was rather intriguing, especially after seeing images taken from below.
How about this provisional definition: 1- Performance art is unprecedented and ephemeral. 2- It involves the audience with taste, smell and sounds and 3- It should be short.
Hi, sorry it's taken me so long to post a comment so let me start by saying that I truly do find performance art intriguing but I don't think I would have the guts to do it myself. I like spontaneity in art and some of the images shown to us by Prof. Triff are pretty cool! I think if I did performance art, it would be like Shintaro Miyake's with the big whote suit like Amanda said, where they can't see my face (until possibly the end)!Zhang Huan' "My New York" also caught my eye. It looks like he's trying to make some sort of statement on strength-perhaps in light of the trade center towers or maybe he thinks everyone is just concerned with having muscles (at least it looks like he's wearing a muscle suit). Titles I also think are essential to the piece because they are what draws you in. When people hear something that sounds cool, they want to go see what it's about. Sometimes it can get tricky though in that something might sound cool but it turns out to be totally stupid. So, carefully picking a title, I feel, is one of the hardest-if not the hardest-thing to do-for an artist it's like naming their child. All in all, I I'm beginning to be more accepting of performance art than I was at the beginning because I now understand the concept behind it. One question is, how do artist make money through performance art or is there any money to be made-really? Can you buy a performance or not? I know you can auction artist pieces off, but can you do that with performance? Ah, just wondering.
I have little experience with performance art; it has little appeal for me for a couple of reasons.
First, is the idea of it being forced on one-either in the sense that it sometimes occurs unannounced in a public place, or in another sense, in that one feels that a particular work cannot be fairly evaluated without staying for the duration. In art that is not extended over time, one can spend as much or as little time as one sees fit with the piece. If its performance, though, it seems almost an obligation forced on one to experience the entire performance in order to know it; its an imposition of sorts on one's time.
For me, part of the appeal of art is to be able to hold something in preserved state, so to speak, and be able to return to it anytime one wants. This doesn't work for performance art though-it can't be held, its too much of an experience rather than an object, and I have a psychological preference for objects (possibly as a security function).
I am curious as to the appeal of the big fuzzy white suit to some of us; it seems trite and silly to me. I think I've seen it many times before--it looks rather Eater bunny like to me (but perhaps bred with an alien grey). Is just getting a surprised reaction from strangers that much of a thrill??
Art can have a functional dimension, if it does -or brings forth- something for the viewer, spectator. Performance -I think- has this particular quality to it.
Post a Comment