"Fantasy Beyond Control" and "Art as a Performative Act"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zSA9Rm2PZA Both articles required for class reading today contribute a unique perspective to performative video pieces. "Fantasy Beyond Control" spends time discussing how these kinds performances do not interact with the viewer but are a one-way mirror, but then suggests there are certain ways that video can interact with its viewers in non-conventional forms. "Art as a Performative Act" focuses on the movement that makes up performance pieces. The link at the top is to Martha Rosler's 1975 short film "Semiotics of the Kitchen," which demonstrates several of the aspects of performance art touched upon in these articles. The movement in this case is not the camera movement or movement within the frame, but movement of the individual. Martha's movements are not extreme but they are powerful in their subtlety: the film demonstrates her containment, within the frame, within the walls of the kitchen, and abstractly within the boundaries of a woman's role in society. Her movements are small enough to not push these bounds, but they are swift and full of an anger which becomes more and more apparent as the film continues. This film also challenges our ideas of how a viewer can interact with the subject: at first glance, the performance seems to be Martha showing us around her kitchen, naming the different parts, but we can relate to her suffering, on a physical and a social level. She constantly breaks the fourth wall, looking straight and defiantly at the viewer, which makes us realize that what we are watching is not a one-way mirror after all, but a dynamic critique of society.

art as a performative act

Lynn Herchann’s article opens a new way of seeing the interaction between audience and art and art performer. It reminds me of an article—I forget about the name— that I have read written by psychologist William James, saying that thought is continuos within personal consciousness which transcends time and space. Therefore, conscious is something purely subjective, which is taken advantage by the artist in the creation, and after reading Herchann’s argument, also used by art itself during the performative presence. I guess some reason why courant de conscience becomes so popolar now. Those art is itself a conscious communication  between artist and the viewer, maybe even between the art and the viewer. There is no right or wrong in these kind of art. The conscious becomes some medium that makes the art penetrate into people’s mind and subconscious. Usually viewers themselves become fellow travellers with conscious flowing together.

Those arts has no right or wrong. Corresponding to Lynn Herchann’s argument, “the viewer has no choice but to construct meanings on his or her own out of the interactions in consciousness between different elements; there are no given meaning”. Everything depends on viewer’s point of view and feeling. With different individuals, the perceptions diverse. 

There is a film that I would relate to the above point of view— Paranoid Park. The director Gus Van Sant is doing so gorgeous in picturing a video art that communicates with audience in conscious level. Gus Van Sant does not want to reveal any sad reflection in society through a teenager’s accidental crime. I don’t even think the director expect the audience to involve in the depressed mood. There is no “what is what ” in his film, nor is there any determined or expected value. Paranoid Park is just a film that uses fancy art techniques of filming to tell a teenager’s story and tells some unknown truth. Any other meaning has to be constructed by the viewers themselves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jz7V0sQ-Tac

Performance Art Performed by Who?

Both what we have read and our class discussions of specific pieces of performance art have dealt predominantly with the effects of a particular piece of performance art on the audience.  It seems that, in calling a piece performance art, form takes a back seat to intent, which makes perfect sense, as performance art, like other art, is all about expression.  

If we look at the form of performance art as malleable, I think it's interesting to think about different possibilities for the identity of the performer.  In most pieces, we see either the artist carrying out an action, or we see a stand-in for the artist performing that action.  To what extent, though, could there be a piece of performance art that involves the audience performing the action?  We see this to an extent in Yoko Ono's "Cut Piece."  But where do we draw the line in terms of what can be considered performance art?  I'll try to get the conversation moving by posting a segment of the video game Silent Hill: Downpour (Vatra Games, 2012)

The 1997 film Funny Games by Michael Haneke seeks to challenge the notion that spectators enjoy watching violence by presenting them with a film is truly disturbing in its violence, without being simply disturbing because of gore.  I feel that the opening of Silent Hill: Downpour is a similar statement, to the effect of "So you think you like being violent in games?  Well here, do this."  

Warning: Extremely violent, even by my desensitized standards.  

2:25 to 5:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kNkX8OC2_o

To what extent might we consider something like this, which isn't video, to be performance art set up by the developer and performed by the player?  Is it completely different, or not so different?  

Response to "Art As a Performative Act"

In the reading, the debate was about whether the presence of other would have influence for the action of others. Also, the author of the article argued with several examples. The game players are good example to state the issue in a more general situation. For most situations in our daily life, people may not have the feeling of being watched. Since most people would check around to see what others are doing, but never try to observe other’s actions. Once they know they are being watched, things changed. There is an example that people type faster than they normally do when they are told that they are being monitored. Also, they will make more mistakes at the same time. My opinion is that whether people are doing performative action or they are doing their daily activity. The conscious of the presence of others would still influence their action. What comes into my mind was the performative art “Painting/Retoque” from Belgian artist Francis Alÿs. What he does was just painting on street. However, all the cars pass him actually made a particular element of his work. If the audiences and the card were missing, the work does not seem that interesting anymore.

http://www.francisalys.com/public/painting.html

Performative art

After reading Art as PErformative Enactment, I started looking for a performance piece that I had never seen before. As Lynn Herchann says, in performance art, "the viewer has no choice but to construct meanings on his or her own out of the interactions in consciousness between different elements; there are no given meaning." Rather than try and decipher what the artists was trying to convey, I watched Centers, by Vito Acconci, one of his works that I haven't yet seen. In this piece, he stands and points to the camera for 25 minutes. My interpretation of this piece was that Acconci was forcing the viewer to look within themselves and address all the things that would warrant someone sternly pointing a finger at them. What I didn't realize however, was that Acconci was pointing at himself in a mirror the whole time and that the image is turned around as him pointing at us. This type of realization is what I love about performance art. I could get something completely different from the piece than the person next to me, however, it would still be valid. And it the end, when I learn the true intention of the artist, it just forces me to look at a different way which is also exciting! 

Vito Acconci's Centers

Performance art: The Alchemy of Light

In the reading I felt that performance art was portrayed to move people. It often talked about touching people but I took it in a sense as performance art is to make the view feel something. Whatever the case may be the person who is doing the piece is giving up their body at times for the view of others. I always liked to describe performance art as the ideas that run in the back of your head and are finally let all out in the open for the whole world to see. I chose the piece "The Alchemy of Light" by DandyPunk today. I chose this piece because it made me feel how light is really an empowering thing. without light the world would be dark. This piece I believe is performance art because it makes me respond in someway and makes me think about the way we use light. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UG2Xn_qDT0s

Performance Art is Interactive

Both of the readings for today's class discussed performance art and how it requires some sort of interaction from the audience.  Hershman's article posed the question whether or not one can observe something without it influencing them.  I would say a simple no.  Anytime something is seen, it has an effect on the viewer.  This would seem to be especially true of art, since art is trying to connect with the audience and evoke a feeling out of them.  In "Art as Performative Enactment," the point is made that the viewer always creates his or her own meanings from their experience in viewing the artwork.  Clearly, everyone is from a different background, which would lead to different interpretations and interactions with artworks.  

An interesting example I found of performance art (I have no idea how I stumbled upon this...) is a video of Jay-Z performing "Picasso Baby" for six hours.  I am not particularly fond of Jay-Z's music, but that's not the point here, so I looked past it.  By performing the same song, over and over, for six hours, the song's meaning will change based on the different audience members and Jay-Z's level of energy for each performance.  The video shows him rapping at different audience members and those audience members interacting with Jay-Z in different ways.  This will also change how each performance is received, both by those individual audience members and by the entire audience as a whole.  For example, one of the audience members starts to dance with Jay-Z and this would give her a more direct influence on this particular performance and it likely increased the energy level for the rest of the audience.