NrO-AVANTGARDE AND CULTURE INDUSTRY Essays ON EUROPEAN AND AMERICAN ART FROM 1955 to 1975 Benjamin H. D. Bucutow An OCTOBER Book ‘Tue MIT Pars Cammrince, Massacti HTS Lonpon, ENGLAND© 20 Massachusetts Inet of Technology ‘All ighseeserved. No par ofthis book may be reproduced in any for by any electronic or nechanical mes Ginlaling photocopying, recording, or information rage anal retievl) withoue pers in wring fom the puller. [All works of art by Marcel lroodthacrs © Exate of Mawel Toatthoers/SABAM. Belginnn? AGA, NY, NY. ‘This book was st in Bembo by Graphic Composition Ine. an was rine and bow United State of America Libary of Congres Cataloging: in-Publiation Dats Buchloh, BH. [Neo-avantgarde and culture industry: essays on European aul American at fom 1955 40 1975 / Benjamin H.1D. Buchloh pen. “An October book” Includes bibliographical references snd index ISBN 0-262-02454-3 (alk, paper) 1. Avant-garde (Aesthetis}—Europe—History—2th century 2. Am European, ‘An, Modern —20eh century~Europe. 4. Avantatde (Acsthstc)~ United Stater— History—20th century. 5. Am, American. 6, Ar, Modern--204h century—United Stats 1 Tie, 1N6758 B83 2000 709" 04°5—ae2 99.05 940% N6758 .B83 2000 Buchloh, B. H. D Neo-avantgarde and culture industry : essays on European and American art from 1955 to 1975 Micuact Asner anp THE CONCLUSION OF Mopernist Scutprure ‘cal objects various connections between Weaning and its material body. This connection may be more or less deep and organic. For instance, the meaning of artis completely inseparable from all the details ofits material body. The work of artis meaningful in its en- ry impor- tance in thisinstance. Technically auxiliary and therefore replaceable The with all he uniqueness ofits features, acquires artistic meaning tirety. The very constructing of the body-sign has a prim elements are held 9 a minim je here. dividual reality of the ob A. AL Bakluin, ‘The Formal Method in Literary Scholarship" Firse published in Poe Par nsonpwrin: Rapport ot dscns debs Biennale ae Paris, wo, 3 (aris 19809, Fie F (Montreal Parachute, 1981), pp. 55-64, The ih version in Panes Tests ad Paces, es. Chantal Potbrian resent enlarged version was fist published ‘The Coen Lines othe Ae Isnt of Chia, ed, Sts Rowse (Chieays: Ant tnt ot Chieag, IY), pp. 277-296,Sculpeure traditionally lve trom painting through it semingly unquestion- able thtee-dimetsionaity, its physical and physiological comporelity, defined 36 a itera “embodiment” of subjective plastic concerns. twas determined as much by the historically specific aesthetic conditions of the sculptural discourse as by the peceatons' (of the patro) ability to recognize their own compareal being in the world in the sculptural embodiment. Or, as Rosalind Krauss recently stated The logic of culpere, i would sem, is inseparable from the logic of the monument. By vie ofthis logic a sculpture is eommem= orative representation, It sit it a particular place and speaks in 2 symbotical vangue about the me ngand the use ofthat pace ‘As we will be dealing in the fllowing essay with contemporary sculpeutal orks in general, and in particular with two works By Michael Asher conceived] 01 1979 for two museums in Chicago, it seems appropriate to consider these sorks—while perhaps not immediately recognizable a sculpture—in Krauss rms, as they doin fact “st ina particular place and speak in asymbolical tongue} bout the meaning and the use ofthat place” The complesity ofthese works ne- ‘cessitates, however, closer attention to the material and procedural transforma tions that have ten place inthe evolution of contemporary sculpeure, and we will have to recapitulate some of the erucal paradigmatic changes that define sculpture in the history of Modernism. Looking atthe specific features of Modernist sculpeure (thats, ies materi= tls and ite procedures of production) 2s well a a its changing reception, one could almost come tothe conclusion that sculpeure, because ofits more concrete parare™ than that of any owher art practice, seems to Tend iwelfto a paricuad jobdurate aesthetic: how ean one—under the conditions of a highly industria: ied society continue atvistic modes of production (modeling, carving, ca ing, cutting, welding) and apply them convincingly to semi-precious or so-called ze, marble, wood)? Only ewenty {ifnor more acomiets and Henry Moore coukt wen pitome of the seulperal, when in fet their archaic Keanogeaphy sod plastic steuetures revealed their authors’ (andthe public) convition chat seniprure had Tot fot any OF ie storie credibiity My the Fist evade OF MR centTy EVEN @ practicing sculptor and sculpture historias—commenting on Redin-—seems to acknowledge the specific dilemma of his own discipline, without, hovwey Thus, Rodin mature sculprure follows the effective emengence of ‘modern painting, moreover, in comparison with che direceess,smt= pliciny and objectiviy of the new painting: the statement in sculp- ture seems tentative, half-formed and weighed down by a burden of Romantic and dramatic subject matter of moral and public “fune- sion”, which the Impressionist had been able to jettison from the fire, The reasons forthe late artival and confised intentions of the new sculpeate lie parly in the physical character of sculpture and painting, parly in their relative development in Europe since the enaisance, pady inthe specific conditions of patronage and pub~ fc tite which obtained in nineteenth century France... Seulprare Joccame an aren which the taste and ambition of the public paron became the determining factor, and viruosity and crafsmanship the criteria of artistic achievement? "A more rigorous reading of te hitory of modernist sculpture would have] 0 acknowledge that most of ts sermingly stable paradigms, which had been valid fo some extent until the late nineteenth century (te representation of ind rial, anthropomorphic whole of fragmented bodies in space, modeled of in| rt but lsting, ifnot eternal, matter and imbued with illuionary moments off puriows life), had been—in analogy to the abolition of representation in paint- lng—definitely abolished by 1913, Viadimir Tadliss comer-counter relie6| bd subsequent Monument to dhe Third bemationsl and Matcel Duchamp’Teadynades emerged loprally Rom Sprthene Cuban, and They Pave Coma since then she extremes of culpa efection in Moderns: they recoymize the isletis of sculpture from now on to be operative ether asa mode for the ats tie procuction of reali (eg. sculpture’ transition toward architecture an design) lr as.an epistemic model thar investigates the tans and conditions of aesthetic ob ject production (he readymade, the allegory, he fcsh). Or, more precisely: at- chitecture on the one hsnd andthe episemological model on the exaerare the two poles toward which relevant septure since 1913 hss developed, each implyingthe _venual disolvion of “sculpeure” 35. separate discourse and catego "The precarious condicon of sculpure, ifnoc dhe decline of the akcipline, Ina been sensed as early a 1903 by the poet Rainer Maria Rulke in his study of ch category was indicative for him of the vanishing privileges and esoteric experi~ Rodin, conveyed, not surprisingly, in a cone of lament since the ring of the ences the autonomous art objec seemed to have guaranteed: and which one could look at from all sides. And yee it had t0 dstin= pis itself somehow fiom other things, the ordinary things which everyone could touch.* ‘Sculprural materials, even before their iconic, formal, or procedural definitions have tobe considered a pat of «symbolic system that itself highly determined! For example, the “nobility” ofbronze and marble in the late nineteenth-centory work of Rodin was atleast in parca resul of his dependence on the cas of tour ‘geois amateurs. Symbolic det sinatons of sculptural macerss tesule not only fiom che author's profesionsl idioyyncrasies—whether his or her individual psychosexsl organiation ends more toward modeling soft and palpable masses, (like clay or whether he ors fel lke westone or caving woot —burabo from the audience’ expectations: whether the spevitic material al the prada: tion procedures allow f the viewers physical being i the word. In contradistinction to Rodin, the tray a projective identification ant seem in ict go embody radical modernity of Medasdo Rosso’ sculptures resisted this incorporation ina bronze in most of his works, and the sculpeural production process isell was ested and fragmented at the level of the was and plaster model: materials char bby their very nature quite explicitly reject any heroic or sublime connotations. Rosco often stated that he waned the materials of his sculpeues 10 pass w= 1d with the unity of the world chat noticed because they were meant co bi surrounded them, The acts fragmentation ofthe sculptural production proce- dure—whether deliberate or circusnstanial—correspondsto Roo’ fagiienta- con itself, His reluctance to fulfill ll he steps tion of the sculptural repreven requited by the traditional process of sculptural production, fron modeling ‘casting, indicate an essential extical shift of aiude. Te veveale the Tncreasing doubs about artanally pr namely thatthe completion ofan arganic cycle of production, conceived and ex cuted by one individual, had become obvolete_ The fragmentation ofthe pro ‘duction process coincided wich the phenomenon ofa heterogeneous materiality prefabricated elements alien to the craft of sculpture up to the nineteenth cen- tury, were introduced—or intraded—into the conventionally unified sculpeurat ‘body. The only sculpture by Edgar Degas that was publicly exhibited during his litetime and cast in bronze posthumously his Lite Dancer of Fourteen (181, as the fest to generate this modernist scandal. When ie was exhibited at the Expo- sition des Indépendants in 1881, Joris Haysmans hailed ic as follows: ‘Av once refined and barbaric with her industrious costume and her colored flesh which palpitatesforrowed by the work of the muscles, this statue isthe only truly modern attempt I know in scolprore.* Both phenomena —the fragmentation of representation and dhe produc- ion process and the juxtaporition of heterogeneous materale—-would sooney appeared excep tional a fis, asin che cave of Deja, fe woulTsoon theresfer ia Cubism and Fi jon, become the rule to combine individually crafteel seulpeural structures with mechanically produced objects and Fagments. Ultimately, im Duchamp’ readymades, the aehetie construct would be diplaced altogether by the me chanieally produced object, These phenomena scccive a meticulous description and precise historical analysis in| Georg Lukics’ attempe to define the condiions of reification in 1928: Rationalization in the sense of being able to predict with ever greater precision ll the results to be achieved i only to be acquited by the exact breakdown of every complex int its elements and by the study of che special nes governing production. Accordingly, it must declare war on the organic manufacture of whole products based on the tradicional amalgam of empirical experiences of work. ... The finished article ceases to be the object of the work proces... This destroys the onganic necessity with which inter relied special operations ate unified in the end product, Neither objectively nor in his elation to ht work does man appear a the futhentic master of the process on the contrary, he isa mechanical par incorporated into a mechanical system. He finds it already pre- existent and sel-suficien; it functions independently ofhim and he has to conform tote ave whether he likes of not. Aslabour is pro- resively rationalized aid mechanized, his ack of wills reinforced| oy the way in which his activity becomes less and less active and| Jmore and more contemplative. The contemplative ance adopted| toward a procest mechanically conforming vo fixed laws and enacted independently of mass consciousness and impervious to human in- tervention, ie. a perfectly closed system, must likewise transform the basic categories of mans immediate attitude tothe world Ie re- aces pace nid tie 103 FORTIN THOTT Tee ta the dimension of sce “The intrasion of aie materials in Degas sculprare established a very precarious balance between the conditions of jective aesthetic creation and those ofthe realty of production pointed autby Lukies, Bversince, and most defintely since Duchamp's readyaades, these historical conditions have been forced to cheir tos logical extreme. Duchamp’ work features most prominently the character ‘of sptalized time in the object shat Lukics talks abou, since the arrest of tem poral us and passive contemplation are the modes in which the melancholic perceives the world and his increasing estrangement from i. Thus, paadoxieally, 1 more traditional reading of Duchamp asthe artist who continued the nine= teenth-century tradition of the dandy, refusing participation in the collective production proces, inverting his role 3s procreatorinco that ofthe finer who ition. Inevitably, at cis point, Walter Benjamins observation on the ineraction beeen allegory, commodity, and sculptural form has toe cited: “The deval ation of the world of objec by the allegory is exceeded within the world of ob- "Ths, fom the fis decade ofthe twentieth century onward. this precar ous ambiguity between the appatent autonomy of sculptural constructs and the sacially determined conditions of material production—berween aesthetic ob ject and symbolic space on the one hand and real object and actual space on the rodiuction, howevet docs not always evolve logically according to its own inherent lws, any more than i develops purely in response to the changing conditions of material pro- ction, Quite co che contrary, one ofthe essential features of aesthetic produc- sion-at leas in ewentieth-centuty at history-—seems to have been a reiterated ‘opposition to preciely a all too easy acceptance of those determinations. Butsince the contradictions originating in the organization ofthe means of produe- tion cannor be resolved by aesthstic means alone, every generation producing swith an obsolete paradigm generates inreasingly mythical structures. “The hiory of post-World War 1 sculpture & pardculary ach with Mhexe ayia orn, and only ne should be briefly discusses an example and asa link ro te present: the rype af postwar comsmuetion sculpture in which Construc~ vias and Dads atitades toward the mas-produced object seem to coalesce, 3 or exaupl, in the works of David Smith and Anthony Caro." I anything, the | weling of mel and junk seulpeure in their work seems to resolv in a most com= orving manne the blasne contradiction between individual aesthetic and collee~ ive social production, This contradiction is, however, myrhified by che work's Jpparentsyrhesisof the geseure of construction and the melancholic gesture of de~ ial In the same way, these ass, a public figures and biographical myths, com- bine the image of the proletarian producer, taming the elements and extracting wealth fiom dhe furnace, with that ofthe melancholic soller inthe junkyards of capitalist vechnology—an image that ha persisted into the present in figures lke (Carl Andre and Richard Sera The necesarly feishistic character ofthis work had ‘While the totality of capitalise technology is based on the ighescand latest achievements and represents 2 technique of mass production (industry, radio, anspor, newspaper, scientific laboratory), bout .gevis atin principle ha remained on che level of individual rafts and therefore has been isolated increasingly fiom the collective so- ial practice of mankind, has entered the realm of pure aesthetics. ‘The lonely master—thats the only type in capitalist socery che rype ‘of specialist of pure are” who can work outside ofan immediately ulitarian practice, because Based on machine technology: From here originates the total illsion of a's prposelesness and auton omy, from here arts bourgeois fevshstc nature.” Scrap metal ascinbblage sculpeane and the eeshoique of welding conceetiae the historic dilemma herween oburlete mens of artic production ad the’ fecshization, on che one hand, and the atually existing means of he social pro= duction of representation on the othr. Tie ilre to solve thie ier, inane Thich av We becomes evident ithe Work Heel thew the WorRY storie and aesthetic athe icity. Joli Gonrslee, who had boon tne as» seonecurtes, leamed welding in the French Renanlt car Getoriesdiring World War [and n= from alienated lbor into his artiuie pro- tegrated the experience he acquit duction. Or, froma different point of view, one could anu that he alapted his aesthetic procedures to his experience of collective production. This “modem- ization” of the sculpeural discourse was instantly succesfal because it yeented 60 respond to. deste within artist and public alike to achiewe at lest symbolic rec- onciliation of sculptures increasingly apparent contradictions. Picasa adapted this technique inthe easy 1920s and anew sculptural eatery and production technique was born. When David Smith “discovered” Gonzilez’s and Picasso’ ‘work through the mediation of the art magazine Chios at and inyported the technigue to North sculptural procedure had taken place, nevica, a further crucial step in the mythifiestion of me that had originated i Cubyam’scon= ‘ceptualization and representation of spatial relations. To enhance the myehif ‘ation, Smith, more than Gonzile, propounded the image of the proletarian producer by linking it the mythical Hephsistos/ Vulcan figut." ‘The next phase of mythifcation occurred when this modernized seulp ‘url production procedure was “rediscovered” and “reimporeed” to Europe by Anthony Caro, after his encounter with David Smith in 1960, during his frst, visit to North America, Caro’s overnight shift from figurative bronze casting to nonrepresentational welded assemblage sculptures made of scrap metal, and his subsequent step of investigating the decorative potential of gaudily painted arrangements of metalwork samples, accomplished historically the aesthetic fl- sification and “cultural” inversion of every single aspect that Consictvist seul core had originally intended and achieved within its limited resources and politieal possibiiies.tetook sttsts ofthe Minimal and post-Minimal generation like Ande and Serra inthe mid to ate 1964K to tery “decompose” these mytified construction techniques and production procedures. The aesthetic shock and subsequent elit that their work might have caused originally resulted precisely fom ehe deconstruction of that type of Sculpture, their persistent use of singularized, particular elements, ther clafication of the constituent Forces within the scalp- tural construct, ad the transparency of the production procedures evident in heir work. Ie is symptomatic inthis context that Serr referred tothe technique ‘of welding a “witching” during the 1960s and that he nevertheless readopted that very same technique in is ater work in che 1970s, when he himselfrewened tothe mythification ofthe constructivist legacy in order co pursue a problematic project of seemingly public monumental sculpture Radical sculpture, ever since the first decade ofthis century, has not only increased the fragnientation of sculptural representation and, as we have argued, the fragmentation ofthe production process itself 3s well, but ic has also intensi- Tied the reflection on the conan fictors determining dis proces Tatemaly, the material elements assembling the sculptural phenomenon have become in~ creasingly isolated, singularized, and specific; andthe procedures of is fabrics tion, a6 well asthe physical laws and forces (weight, mas, gravity specific material properties) generating its appearance in space, have become more and more the center ofsculprura investigation. Externally, a 2 result of the discovery of phe~ ‘nomenclogical thoughr, an aralyss of the relations chat connect the sculprural ‘objec with the percepeual acts of che subject was increasingly incorporated into the very conception ofsculptute. A systematic refection ofthe interdependence ‘of the construct and its surrounding spatia/architectural container became again sane that Minimal and pox Minimal works are not be sen in the historical con- «ext of Modernist sculpture, the contrary holds true:too frequent are che references Carl Anite, Cedar De, 1960-1964. Cesar, 72. 36 364 in, Collections cffenliche Kunssamelung. BaselFratements, dat acknowledge the rediscovery ofthe sculpewal pinciples and the- loreccal positions that had been articulated in Declan’ work 25 well asin that of he Constructivists (for example, Andee references to Rodchenko, Donald Judd lpesking on Duchamp and Malevich, Dan Favin paying bute to Tadin, and Robert Mores scholarly intense Duchamp and the adapeaton of Duckman principles in his early work) This was precisely the part ofthe modemis radition thachad been ignored and ejetedby the neoformalise aesthetics of Cl nent Green berg and Michael Fried (de key champions and promoters of Smith and Caro), To reconsider dhese postions—in particular, to wansform the dialogue with the posi- sive legacy of formalism into alone pragmatism—provided another essential eb ‘ement ofthe foundation for the new sculpural work of the mid-1960s. Maurice ‘Marlesu-Poniy’ recently (1965) translated Pranonenlagy of exept added tot] ‘paradoxical synthesis of phiesophical legacies, ranging now fi piro-crtcal skepicsm investigating the epistemology of painetly and seulpearal signs, tothe ants’ discovery of logical positivism and serology. Frank Stella, in many ways the fis artist co integrate al ofthese elements, aculated this conden sation in his now Eious, apidary statement, “What you se is what you see” n Modemisn’sem- v The formalist concept of wl tefercatalty” had been a theoreucal prescuption by evhich art unit around 1965 had wo abide, What asounted to pictorial or seulp- rural asalogy to the semiological understanding ofthe sgn, and the self-reflexivity resulking from that analogy in artistic production, had been achieved by both [Duchamp and Malevich in 1913, a least in principle ifnot in an explicit theoreti- cal project. One of the ft Minimal works to considerably expand the notion of selfreferentality was Morris's Minored Cubes (1964). It was aginst this back- round of a Minimal and post-Minimal aesthetic that Michael Asher’ work was developed in the 1960s, When Asher went ro New York fora year in 1963-1964, the became very interested in Faviis and Judd’s work, and, upon his return to Cal- fornia in 1966, he contracted several tipered wedge pieces that follow a similar logic ofsuspending the sculptural object berween slfreferentalty and contextual Alexander Rodchenko, Spaial Coutcion No 12,1920. Plywood and wite, 83.5 443.3 em, Coase Collection, Athens1. These wedges were insted flush against the wall and painted over With a color identical tothe wall that supported them. As in Morris’ al Larry lls mirrored cules, the most prominent charsetertic of Asher’ early work ‘woud be its analytical approach to the eadie condition of the sculptural plicnon enon to fametion asa autonomous aesthetic /spatal sgn to be constituted with larger architectural context, whieh may or may not purpor its own and dierent ‘ord of sigs and to be activated only through the spectator’ individual actof pe ‘Dan Graham, later to become a close friend of Asher’, underwent a sani lar development his work, Jeading gradually ou of formalist and Minimal acs- thetics. He described his conception ofa sculptural structure as follows There isa “shell” placed between the external “empey” material of place and che interior, empty material of language: ystems of infor- ‘mation exit halfway between material and concept without being cither one." Tn chis critique, the formalist notion of self-referentialay was replaced by an increasingly complex analytical sytem (Gemiological, sociological, systems- analysis) that would make the work operative rather than sef-reffexive. The idea of a“siuational aesthetics” (a term coined by the English anst Victor Burgin) implied that a work would function analytically within all the parameters oft historical determination, not only in its linguistic or formal framework. Three concepts would become crucial forthe definition of “situational aesthetics": fis, the notion of material- and site-specificity; second, the notion of place; third, that of presence. A similar transition had already occurred inthe shift fom Puss sian formalist methodology toward a new materials semiology and productvis theory.” ‘When Judd defined bis undertanding of materal speccny By amor cerlly sranferring 2 key term of Russian formalist criticism to sculpture, his Donald judd, Untied, 1968, Galvanized ion, 10 «27 « 24 in. Collection: Mr-and Mrs. Eugene Schwarez. Courtesy Leo Castelli Gallery, New York Photo: Geoffiey Clements,{etic sill sounded with the impact of Modernism’ positivist pragmatien, He wrote, for example, in his 1965 esay “Specific Objects" "Materials vary greatly and are simply macerials—formica, aeminun, cold-rolled steel, plesi= sss. red and common brass andso forth. They ate specific, Also they ate ually agressive Shortly afterward, Michael Asher and a whole generation of artists tout to prove chat materials are not smiply materials but are procedually snd contextually determined, For example, Karl Beveridge and lan Burn argued al early critique of Judd ready in che Arenityou saying you want the asoriation tobe restricted or localized Alone, ronomous form ofa, you wanted a more autonomous art ar objects ae asociated with other art and art history by way oftheir materials and by being + conventional ¢ype ‘wool, suppose in your words be specific. But this was the ls thing ‘you wanted, The autonomy you developed for your objects had to fanction in respect to your presupposition of an ar (historical) context ‘othe object oritsimmedate(.e. architectural) environ with an object, what you would call more objective. Traditional bs x i at object. Such asaciations and hence you sill needed a means of associating the objec with that context. Since the objectitelf denied ny associations, the physical sit- ‘uarion became a more important vehicle. That isto say, the object had toe circumstanilly associated with ies art comet," ‘The second concep, that of place (as opposed to objector anthropomor-| lphic representation), was developed mainly by Andre and Flavin Pointing to the spatial specificity ofthe sculpeural work (as opposed to the material specifiy that Judd talked about), Andre's definition also originally implied (s did Flavin practice) a subversive assauleon the commodity status of works of a (given that hey were movable objects, contextes, offering themselves to every kind of |ransaction). Seulpeure as place was supposed to integrate into its actual forma-| ‘ion the spatial conditions into which ie inscribed itself a constituent elements, Graham observed with Incdity: Cart Andre, 144 Copper Square, 1969. Copper, X 164% 144 in, Collection: The National Galery of Canada, OxawaDan Flavia, view ofthe installations in the Green Gallery, New York, 1964. Cool white Auocescent light various dimensions Photo: Rudolph Burckhardt 1 ike that asa side effet of Flavin’ oorescens che gallery walls be came a canvas, The lights dramatized the people dike spotlights) in 2 gallery, rhrowing the content ofthe exhibition out to the people in the proces of perceiving; the gallery interior cube itself beca the real famework," Independently reflecting on similar swe, dhe French artist Daniel Buren wrote a perspicacious critique of Duchamp'sreadymade concept in 1970, lrread slong with Grahams description of Fhvinis work, the essay reveals che hitherto vunrefected aud problematic points ofthe minimahst concept of place, in partic= tba its unconscious indebtedness to Duchamp, Furthermore, it identified ex aly those isues on which Asher would focus, and the esay®s almow feral cortespondence to Graham's statement points to the objerive nature ofthese atstic concems ofthe post-Minimtal generation: ‘The Museum/Gallery for lack of being taken into consideration is the framework, the habit... the inescapable “suppor” on which ar hiwory is “painted.” Wishing to eliminate che eableau/support, on ‘he pretext that what i painted can only be ilsion, Puchanyp ‘rorduces into 3 new famewosk/tableau a rel object, which atthe same time becomes artificial, motiveles, ie. artistic." ‘Temporal specifiy is defined as the third condition for 9 situational aesthetics —presence—which ie closely interrelated with ite spatial and mare- sal counterparts. Again, the term refers not only tothe face that an installa tion is determined by the specific temporal circumstances into which itis introduced, but equally, ifmot more, to the fact that i obtains within these c= cumstances a temporally specific, limited function, and that the work might Ddecome disposable after its appearance in time. Again, it was Graham who Doited this out when wating about an exhibition of Flavin work in Chir cago in 1967:‘The componentsofa particular eshibition, upon is germination, are replace in anager situation perhaps pot t0 a non-art use a 2 pate fof a diferent whole in 2 diferent fiture." vw [Asher lter adopted the term “situational aestheries” integrating the concepts oF both spatial and temporal specificity. Ie had become faily clear by 1968 that the Minimalists had abandoned the orginal implications of these aesthetic strategies by adapting their work increasingly co the needs ofthe art market. Iehad also be- come evident that these strategies would have to be radically modified, if they \were to maintain dir critical function of investigating the socal and institutional Framework that determines che production and the reception of at. Thus,on the ‘ceasion of his Fst exhbision, at the San Francisco Av Tsttute 10 1909, Acker applied che Minimalist principles ofsel-refevenility and specificity with a new leraknesand immediacy tothe architectural container ofthe exhibition space ivelé. Thereby he aos only revealed Minimalism’ latent formalise heritage, but ity: also defined a new understanding of sculptural mater ‘The presentation at San Francisco was clearly diceated by every ele- iment which was availble and it suggested a way of working for the future: using just elements which already existed without a great, modification to the space™ Asher work overcomes the Modernist legacy (ie, the neoposiivs for- nals originating inthe Constructivist legacy and embraced by the Minimal faa) then the work of Broodthaers and Buren critically transcends the limitations ‘of Duchamp’ concept of the readymade, which had kept almost all object- oriented atin is spell" Both postions —the constructive andthe allegorical— seem to coalesce and henceforth determine the historically relevant work in ‘contemporary art production, Ie is therefore crucial to comprehend firs ofall Michael Asher, Caloris Tol, Milan, 1972, Sand-blsed gallery walls, Couey of the ais.Institute of Chicago and the Maseum of Contemporary Artin Chicago, and to read hein a¢ the sane tie fio che historical perspective of sulpmure rather har mercly within se contest of “conceprual art” or, worse yet, 60 align then us cen sngrested, with a Dada-envitonment tradition, Asher’ sculptural installations seem eo be constituted solely by concept gestures and directives, deploying “found” objects and materials of, tore cor- rectly, the “given” conéitions of a particular museum/exhibition context, The I or its production process is now totaly speciticixy of sculpere’ mater negated. The consequence of Asher’ contextual orientation surpasses even the ‘most ical conceptial definitions ofseulpural processes outlined in Lawrence Weiner Statements rams 1968, where one can sil detect remnants of traditional sculpcural concenns sin, “A field cratered by structured, simultaneous TNT ex- plosions™ Rigorously denying spatial and eemporl tanscendence, Asher works are constituted first ofall within their own spatial, institational context, the museum; and they become the performative articulation of this actualy iver hiorical dime, the allocated exhibition period itelf™ [Ashers work atthe Art Institute of Chicago bracketed three diferent sit Te first phase of his contribution to the 73rd American Exhibition consisted of the removal ofa bronze cat after Jean-Antoine Houdon's marble representation cof George Washington from 1788), which had been installed at the main en- trance of the Allerton Building—a late nineteenth century neo-Rensissance building—on Michigan Avenue in 1925. The resulting work ruprared the mes- sage of aesthetic authority and national heritage that che sculpture had conveyed ‘san integral par of the museum's Fade, “The second step of the imtalation was to place the bronze within its orig- inal art historical context in a periad room (Gallery 219) featuring European paintings, furnitare, andthe decorative arts ofthe eighteenth century. The cast ‘vas placed in the center of the gallery on wooden base, identical in height and color to che other wooden bases in the gallery, while its “original” marble pedestal was putinto storage. In thissecond display situation, a reconstruction of an imaginary eighteenth-centary interior, che contextualized sculprure caused a ferent rupee: even thos el is bright grccn-Bhoe pati alont mate she urquoise of dhe patted walls and sone of de silk covers of the eighteenth ceneury fare, the patina wade tall he wane biow tha the sculpture ad been pe roa differen use in the pase and Id therefore acquired materia fo tres that conited with ts deinition as. an object of high art in a well warded smuscum interog. Is fmetion asa monument made self felt in a way hae Proust hhad once described “sl the gazes that objects have ever received seem to reaain with them as veils ‘The third clement of the work consited of plexiglas box inside the sallery co tothe 73rd American Exhibition, and they directed the viewer to this show of | comtemporary work inthe Morton Wing ofthe muscu, Dawntairs, at the en les that identified this installation as Asher’: contribution ingle trance to the exhibition, another box contin leaflets (4e appendix A) that {gave a description of the work but directed the viewer upstairs to the eighteenth ‘century period room in Gallery 219. ‘The visitor who had been cincuating nthe survey of contemporary work doplayed in the 73nd American Exhibition, experienced the thd rupeare in Acher’s piece when confronting the sculpure contestuaized in the setting of | Gallery 219 in tandem with the installation method in he Morton Wing, This pa sage through history juxtaposed a more or les stylistically homnogencous group of | concepeval ana painterly work with che equilly homogencous group of artistic ob {ects from the eighteenth century. The confrontation historicized the actuality and ‘dynamic immediacy that con porary works generate in the viewers perception and emphasized, by cones the hioriity of thle present aesthetic experience. A second work by Asher ws coincidentally installed atthe same time at ‘the Muscum of Contemporary Artin Chicago. In their modus operandi, the wo ‘works were clearly simile: both dismantled a given architectural display system ‘embodied within the elements of fade. Ifthe Art Insitute had appropriated an eighteenth-c tury work of sulpeure (or more p bronze replica) for its fcade, then the architects ofthe new Museum ef Con ely atwentieth-century temporary Are had appropriated what they believed to be the stylistic idiom ‘of Minimal sculpture as a reference for cheit design of a modular system ofMichael Asher, 73d Amerian Evin, 1979. Art Insite of Chicago, Michigan [Avene cnrance, showing the 1917 bronze epic of Jean-Antoine Houdon’s Gaoge esaon (1788) ines orignal location. Phoco: sy Culp. Michael Asher, 73 Americ Eston, 1979, Ar stitste of Chi 219, showing the 1917 bronze replica of Jeat-Antoine Houdons Ceame afer is reloeation tothe eghteenth-century period toon, Installation view. Photo: Rusty CulpMichan Acker, Usui af Caenpnany A, Cig, 1979. Facade hfe instalition, Photo: Ton Michael Asher, Miacunn of Contemporary A, Chics, 1979. Facade er emaral of panel ning ew van Bye Iubition. Photo: Tox van Eyndearchitecwral decoration. This appropriation of the serial modular elements of Minimal sculpuve sous 1s (wheter 1 eo convey a technoeratic ion of pt this notion was embeded already the dion of Miia slp sist AAs his work for che Museum of Gowromporsry Ar, Asher stipulated (ee appendix B) panels that were in ne wid the Bergan Galley windows should be rensoved ring the exhibion the te horizontal rows oF alussinun Fons the facade and should be placed on the interior wal of the gallery. The ten pa to be arranged on the inde in the same formation and sequence, placed liom the westside were 1s fim the eat sie of dhe balding and eight pan quently 35a planar relief The ent nents (the svihdrawn parts) and is interior elements (he displayed pars), could be viewed € work, both its exterior ee fiom the street. Once the panes were placed onthe wale within the interior they became subject to dhe sae percep conditions shat determine the reading of material consruct a discursive (sculptural) objects. Again the juxtaposition of the exterior elements (the remaining cladding) and chee semifrnetional chitecrural usage andthe interior elements (heir def ctionslzed sculptural dis- ply) resulted ina double negation ofboth architectural and sculptural discourses ‘Asin the work a the Are Tnsituce, there was a tied element of deconstruction: the Museum of Contemporary Art had agreed-—five months prior to actual in stalltion—to buy the work for its permanent collection. Therefore, aparudox= ical situation occured: once the exhibition was finished and che cladding was reinstalled in ies proper place as architectural decoration, the work seemed t© cease to exist while, in fact, Asher “sculpeure” was simply placed ina different institutional register, generally idensfed 25 “storage” Yet, since it was paced on. the museurn’s facade, it remained accessible to public view a al times, 8 dis from conventionally stored work which remains inaccesble. Moreover, being ‘bound into the specific situation of the given institutional architecture, the \work—acconding to the ati’ ineuctions specified in the acquisition contract \with the museum—would cease to exist spar ofthe collection a8 soon as the instieuion’sarchitectre was altered. (Plans for an expansion were then aleady boeing discussed and have since been executed; the work, therefore, has to be con sidered no longer extant) [Michael Asher, Mascum of Contemporary Art, Cha, 1979, Installation interior ‘ew, showing sami panels fom the museum’ cade isalled in the Begun Gallery. Photo: Tom van EyreConditions of collective retication change gradvlly (or, under the particule ie cumstances of criss rapidly and drastically). Their esthetic representations appear accordingly: no single object—whether individusly crafted or mass-produced — ‘can at is ine reflect appropriately upon the deysee of abstraction within which collective reitietion i operating and institutionalize The production ofa iself hsbbocomse an activi that shares he conditions ofthe culture indueny, on the one hand embellishing conporte public mage and on the other depending on an elab- orate corporate support system amounting (0 2 cultural civil service. Art produc tion chus helps to channel any attempt ac nical negation into a hermetically sealed ideology of culture. During those historical period in which the governing pow= cers want to convey asente of conclusion {more precisely, that story as process and change has been conciuded), the experience of sable oppression and stagnation is xmpolated in monumental public structures. Amnesia, the loss of memory atthe origin of the destuction of historical dialectics, tends to incorporate iselfin fie public commemorative representations. Ther stability and weight seem co balance ‘he insecurity that individuals and society at large experience once they have been coualy deprived of accve participation in the decision-making process of history ‘Atthis point sculptors seem to be tempted to offer their services or monumentat public commissions that embody those tent tendencies they fll the gaps of his- totic identity wth gigansc monuments. The recent increase in public commis- ‘sons for monumental sulprure confirms this hypothesis, and the critics rhapsodize already in 2 new ideology of postmodernist populism: “The root ofthe difficulty would seem to lie back athe ram of the cen- tury with the disappearance ofthe monument. Avant-garde artin gen- cen, wih is oppressive neutrality ofcontent, hasalong history ofbeing, perceived bythe publi at age a imclewane. Ie abeeracenes, however, ‘snot the problem as much a its ilar 10 conduct a public dialogue Bali or conviction on the part ofthe arti, while perhaps the most important single ingredient ofa great work of a, i not, as far asthe public is concerned, a substitute for symbolic content... The atts who succeed thy willbe those who are wing to come ‘with the notion of public commrimtent, who realize dhe sch a anes, ‘eto compromising their Work, cn nse e wih Nowe GON tex which has absent sel rom modernist Michael Asher’ works operate with increasingly analytical precision ow ‘he threshold between symbolic space and actual space, continuously increasing ‘che ambiguity beeween functional object and aesthetic object. as though co prove from within the aalyss of sculpeue itself that it as losis material and histor: ‘al legimary. In his two installations in Chicago, Asher did not adupt co these Jriwtoric tendencies but incomporated them manifestly into his work co make them, transparent The spe ified al the elements thao. ty oF hie intalarions ter the conception, production, and ption ofa sculpeural construc, reslting in a model case of historical analysis. This analytical model dismanles the new hiistoricism of postmodernity, where regressions into a mythical nguage of che transhistorieal validity ofthe monument merely cover up the problematic con- ditions of sculptural production and perceptual experience in the present Handout prepared by Michel Acer fr Ar Inte itlison Michael Asher “The Ar Ineitue of Chicago Jane 9 to Aust, 1979 “The sclprre of Geome Miskin, uc in 1917, pice of the marble supe of 1788 by Jean Antoine Houdon, In 1925 ¢ wa nln roof the Michigan Aven en sronce of he Ar ne ‘Asm work forthe 73rd American Exhibition (June S~AUgUs 8, 1979), have moved the seule of Gee Washington nc he galleries. The sevlpure son the second oor in (Gallery 219. For deesons plese sk one ofthe yrsIw shh Fa irs ne way he atte Raton When ite sgheonth. contr contest seat i is piety to dhe Cade oF she bing, ‘st hs em fr fy yan Dae Calley 218, ee pee ean comes thse if tr Eoropa wos ofthe same pnd Bocangel foe hin ts sine ame aly 219, a plang iin dhe amewerk fa one temporary echitton. dh my aiition chat extion, Arpenoix B Hout propre by Michael Aer for Mass of Contemporary Ar insalaion Michel Ate Awan of Copy, Cie Jno teough Avg 12.1979 “The newly teed bling ofthe Museum of Contemporary Art, designe bythe rchi- tects fi f Booth, Nagel and Hata, ws completed in Mate 1979, The ade ofthe museum plo 4 iecand-onehalfooe-squae i pattern and conuactd wih sand ins. Tw oof shins panel which are atache to and cover an under Tyg bck srt, line op horizontally wath she wo rows of gs windows ofthe Beng nan Gallery. The glase-n Bergman Gly faneions sa showwase so sat aril fom the eet In ihisork have emoed fom he fice the eo hriontl ows of usin pan= latte in ine wit he Herman Gallery snd ave pce hem o the incre wal f the ‘ellen The cen pac fa thee sde ofthe Balding ae she eight fom the wes re range iid 0 that they corespod exzty their previous potions ouside, Aer A= ts 12,1979, the aluminom panel wil berets onthe exter ofthe bulling “This work belong tthe acim pemnen ellen, It isintended oe repented cach yea forapproxinsely wo mts, of the length of = emporary exibition, Nores ‘ [MLM Bakbin an? N Medved, The Form Mata ic try Slaship (1928 Bakimore Johns Hophins University Pes 1978) p12. a Kris, "Soulpaneivhe Epo Fc” One (79), ph itn Tooker. ly Mok Sp Nem York ton: Thani at Hn, 1978, ppt. 1% ote Maria, acd Tucker, ny Moon Se 7.9 Jos K, Hayton, “UEspoton ds nk B88 i Laie P1885, Pp 281-255, quoi, W Mila, eS of Ed as Pn ea ton ersity Pas, 1978). Geog hie. "Reiction andthe Consign of the Poetar roms (Cambie: MIT Des 191). 8 Woke Benen, “Zentapa"in Gone Siow, at 2 (ak: Shan Vera, 1970) 658 1 Higa ad Cl Ci ‘On the sbjet of proceresand materials, see omy aster of ine befne the rete co ‘ean anna techniques (nding Bronze cing and wood caving) ilo 3 ‘tum tothe unsere ditions f super Ie teworihy hat we Fie yea ag ach sit would have been comer, bur at fo Somebody ike Ca ics no hel > ‘erable modus opcran, For more rect examples eth Work of Wary Fan the ake ans Enzo Cucch and Sandro Chis, o the Gennans Gong Bats an! Mths get orcs Arvo, Kiet ad Pdi (1926; Munich: Cat Hanser Vel, 1972), pL (ny ‘easaton). ‘On frequent occ Smith ones tee ipo fcr aber in the development of his work, a panic hi eperence a2 welder 4 World War Ink Geto Hered hit weld eps coraconvon the an itu odrs Teo. To wht eee hs selina ofthe wskingmak-wesingprokurin peer advent Vuln por ‘sed meh traction Sith reve hi wow, who angie hat mow of cline ‘otharingendured exe work pris aba tory welder ween ft eget Tn we rex n Cleve Gry, Das Sait (New York Hal, Rineha abd Wino, 1968)sand his Sith en ma a pot pert dag th his a ematical 4 oA Un his ake fe hive de Kooning aie ‘aid Sth Makes Seu A Nos fo. 5 Sept 931 p37) hte: Al fy ess wonky hae any arf hey ot hous leaks ving ach a he si ores Miss wife, Dorothy Pence Sith nage hi ee of realy and tat oe os vl income oes these Sith blgtion to work a job ws ‘Ducato on thi subject seen coneactory. since we read in Rong Keates cera, ped Dai Si Tein! ow He (Cambri: MT Press, 197) dhe folowing (0 16) tn hehe yea in Schnectady during which he worked sighs hour yin try a2 welder on M7 aks ad locomotives, Smith entid ims renin with his low worker, Not only was be fecely proud hi sats and “lit cl armor pte welder” (ee Archive ‘within the fctory on 1V/280), bu his ultra pu roped off rail 2 hs ime, 5 be Be cone nbn is workin the nntions lant Fron 1420 1944 he made ro att up begining inead to kam sonectting and ering, esti he en span thee yen, e produced only fee pecs, " Mortiss work fr exp to an wnesected projet hy Duchamp, which he had dined nthe Cie Bo, geting he pacenes of tiered gas on the oor faroom, Duchamp totes the Gem Barend a allows Fa conten gasholdng all ons of liquids. Colored piccet af wood, of iron, chemicl eatin, Shake he comainer and look through it Pans 0 lok scone eyed. ke a piece of vered gain which are eft the objects in See Maret Duchamp, The Brit Striped Bae by Her Bako, Bren (London: Percy Land, unpre ad Co 1960). a9, “The poy fund an kp csv pull eho othe Wis Coa the ‘ay rons cb of Lay lm ats ho woe be frase ane ft d= ‘slope of Micha Air tig o Mari se tia ax Gran, "Other Osean DD sn Ls Angeles Ona ste, 16), Sos, for expt, Baa al Mek, anoticr example, the eda lags the wigs af Op Hr, eh an si! Go purl amit pti ton const pdtv peace en ach Ta P= in” sty 0 leisy hat by contr, at tes altri eh econ and ect at cm o repo na define ar comerrtive mnie when confotd wih ach ad ‘sal paraiaticdf in uj podcton, For example, Rosana Kraus, whose book Pas (New York Viking. 1977 can be rightly considered the oro complex and advanced reading of Moderne and post Moser culprre so das, bly excludes of hot apace tha ueion the ser and prodieon races of trains! ulpruce and tha conse “srl enone pre anal ace inaction) within Norcal andso- ily defined set rst of isp oondntes, Kaus does ot once mention the work of far, Robert ay, Dan Gabino Lawrence Weiner—aits who hae al ball dhe ides of he “culpa in dee work ‘Ten eae jck aran’s Bond Moles Salpe(New York: George Baier, ees 1908s considered the ost advanced ers study of moderstculptre at he ne, mt 1 alte nels wth eye of are owe it ase died, Pub liked as ne when ruil psi the defini of Minin supe had bees eke, this Sook didnot mention Andre ance nd nly andonly ea wth the wok of che ober Min Tnecems the, hatin sch satin of radical psec shies and historias place their serio o derivate, secondary, o acme fom fain prodcion, Evenifthey ae conpiuouy oboe, eat thee freeman che way ofr hei atepries andthe corespoding cea concep By analogy sculptors tend o make apoditie sae mens in such situations hat hi he category of rupture fot the hori wo dhe omologil level See, fr example recentthe ain and ras sac by Rian Sos (Ohi 10 (INI, p73). wal Iasi aii of aera odio ay thoiht hat he bas ssi fil cal never be separa in ay way ac ob he maogy Bete whats asm oe supe i scalar ana what case to Be wu in fl snot ally 2 anders ‘the potent wha suger and ways as been 4 Donal ja, “Spee Objects” (1965), 0 Cape Watings (New York and Hatin: The eis ofthe Nova Scora Cbs of Art said Des, 1975). p. 18 rl Beveridge an fan Da, “Donald Jo” Te Fos 2 (1975) 130 16 “The nin ofa in selpare won orignal defined by Barnett Newnan ead his culpa Hie (195) Kane aan both Andre and Flavin, even dices of New nas work, eve hele concep of pace in are Fom him. For Newmar dscsion of his wndemtanding of culprre 2 pice, 2ee Harold Rosenberg, Bane Newnan (New York: Abe, 1978. 9.6 " Dan Gras, ee to the author, July 22,1979 18 Dani Basen, “Stndpoins” in Five Tet (New York: John Weber Galley: Landon: Jack Wenler Galery, 1979, 7-38. Dan Gritam, in ak and Villers Don Fly (Chicago: Museum of Contemporary Ar, 1967), np, 2» Michiel Asher, expublsed notes. Se ao Mia Asi: Wits 1971-1981 oe Wks 1966-196, ed Benjamin Buco Hale The Pre of de Nov Sota Calley of Art and ‘Design: Lot Angles Mincwt of Contemporary Art 1981, Asher did dhe allocated exhi- bikon pice a he San Francine Ar Teste aco ales by contracting wal fom dae criting dnl panels cha orally served» addtional suppow sricet in che gallerys “xhiiion spices One half of the ream concaned a door and was ty dak, because ofthe val cciartion hie it Hoot the thor alae nao hugh ions ad Aylgh, Ther al ofthe soa wae accsile yaa Wg ape bese Ar constructed walls anche pernunent was the ale a4 “The very we yearn Ather San Frac db, Mane rots 3 hither a = ‘a ukown att embarked on. ast sont atte time il eccsealenars he a Pentel a wll desgped ketch tana coments sporty the funtion ofa new mun in Bass: "Musged Are Marne (Seton XINEAne ile. Daren dhs Agen” He appoint mel str af this ‘Uren, werent for ano opeving The ape speech was delivered by the dete ‘of a “resl” enmcuen in Uroochacr’s ore “audio” room Ged wih empty wooden Petree that ue or ty rasp of wore oer of pound pro= ncaa gue nog the Dai ducsions of monty winctvu ceotry ping kilt the wath sal ree ntaliion ‘equipment such aes and aps, rode, pete ewe befre Buren ad ite cen developed aa arenes of champ; heen esi activity eae outa ie the beginning 38 temic naif the myth of hese and ies nfs capaci nthe proces af ae- ‘curation. As early a 196 he hid pointed to dhe avons hide aes hat termine the percepon ofthe ar object “Every ot ita vicina: ee inthe coe if hides the ena ai the molding hides the ane: As much 26 Aker and rao’ neilians seem ob incomparable iil seaepace i= they do reveal upon cloner als he atl hori connection i he cr wen the champ kc. despite the majo: monpholopcl a slic erence that had devel- ‘oped i eh regard Retwcen Earopesnand America at since the 1 Lawrence Wein, Stamens (New York: Lis Keller Feundaton/Seth Sige, 1968, np. as Jock Hersham, while docu Ham Hache works, which were equally concerned withthe nstcun and ie natal practices dest he necessity ofthe mito of inition rique developed by these ss ‘The guesiows had tobe askin the yllre ari the pllery pbc fd to be confronted with espana i that sae enveonment. The wale ofthe5, Soon NIX fa moder, Dipset Maria Gilisen, © Estate of Marcel Brooslthers/ ay fate Mo Scone Eaton. han 18 (Out foe IPI,