The first "current" performance artist I would like to start thinking about this week is Vito Acconci. Born in New York (1940) Acconci began exploring art first through poetry but felt that the genre was too restricted, and eventually turned towards performance art. Playing with the ideas of private space versus public space and the connection between performer or artist and the audience Acconci's work has manifested itself in videos as well as live performances. He hoped to "define [his] body in space, find a ground for [him]self, an alternate ground for the page ground [he] had as a poet."
Some of Acconci's most famous pieces include the public performance Seedbed (which Marina Ambramovic later reenacted in her work "Seven Easy Pieces") and also the video performance Undertone. This week I'm going to think about both of them. Below I'm posting a video excerpt from Undertone as well as the written directions for the performance of Seedbed (pictured in top right corner).
Seedbed “Room A: Activated on Wednesday and Saturday The room is activated by my presence underground, underfoot – by my movement from point to point under the ramp. The goal of my activity is the production of seed – the scattering of my seed throughout the underground area. (My aim to concentrate on my goal, to be totally enclosed within my goal.) The means to this goal is private sexual activity. (My attempt is to maintain the activity throughout the day, so that a maximum of seed is produced; my aim is to have constant contact with my body so that a maximum of seed is produced; my aim is to have constant contact with my body so that an effect from my body is carried outside.) My aids are the visitors to the gallery -- in my seclusion, I can have private Images of them, talk to myself about them: my fantasies about them can excite me, enthuse me to sustain – to resume – my private sexual activity. (The seed ‘planted’ on the floor, then, is a joint result of my performance and theirs.)”
Masturbation!! It's foreign to most of us that this completely private act could ever be made so public. Yet, in both of these pieces Acconci blurs the line between fantasy and reality and also between private and public space. In Seedbed Acconci physically masturbates beneath the floorboards of a ramp and the "audience" in the gallery can hear his words (essentially his fantasies about them walking above him) over loudspeakers. The audience (however unwilling they may be) become just as much of a subject within the art as Acconci himself is. In Undertones Acconci forces the viewer to become part of his fantasy, drawing us into his head and asking us to visualize for ourselves the things he's saying.
The seed Acconci produces during Seedbed and the joint fantasy that is created during Undertones both seem to be products of Acconci's performances that rely fully on audience participation. So this leaves me wondering: Can there be performance art without audience? And is this the same for other art forms? I'm pretty sure theater productions can (and probably have) been performed in the absence of audience. If nobody bought tickets to a broadway show it would still go on and still be considered a broadway show. The same for concerts, operas, paintings, sculptures... they can exist in the absence of an audience. This, I think, is where performance art differs.
If Acconci was laying beneath the floorboards in a closed gallery masturbating would this be a work of art or just self gratification? If Acconci had recorded Undertones and chosen not to make it available to audiences or had spoken to himself rather than the viewer during the video would it still be art or would it constitute a home movie? If Acconci had recorded Undertones and distributed but it was never watched by somebody is it still art? Or does, in the case of performance art, the art necessitate audience participation? Can we ever just look at performance art or just think about it, or are we forced (knowingly or not, willingly or not) to become part of the art itself?
I would argue that in order for both Seedbed and Undertones to "work" the audience has to be engaged and forced to take part. Any other thoughts??
I have nothing constructive to say except--ooohh interesting! I really enjoy your perspective.
ReplyDeleteI am quite intrigued by this post as I think you have hit on something important with regard to the audience. I am not an expert by any means on any type or art, yet I would argue that all art needs an audience. Inherent in what makes art art must be that it is experienced by others. Maybe this is not true, but it seems to be. The difference with performance art may be more tied to a 'live audience' so to speak, or audience participation. Any thoughts?
ReplyDeleteI think I might agree with you that art has to be experienced by others. But, I think perhaps the difference is that performance art is completely reliant on audience interaction and participation. A painting looks the same whether or not anybody looks at it, and a song sounds the same if nobody listens. But in Seedbed for instance the performance would have looked and sounded nothing like it did were it not for the audience. I think Acconci probably would say that the art could not have existed if it weren't for the audience. Other artists make completely private art and would probably say that it doesn't matter if nobody sees it... it's still art. Maybe not though...
ReplyDelete