OUT OF ACTIONS: between performance and the object, 1949-1979 uth assays by kristine Stes Guy Brott Hubert Klocker Shinichiro Osa Paul Schima ‘Thames and HudsonThis book was published on the acca’son ofthe exibition “Out of Actions: Between Performance and the Object 1949-1979," ‘organized by Paul Schimmel and presented at “The Geifen Contemporary at The Museum of Contemporary Art Los Angeles, February 8- May 10,1998 "Out of Actions ‘Between Perfarmance and tha Object, 1949-1973" ie dedicated ta the memory ‘of Sydney rms. ‘and is made peeable by a genorous git from The Audrey and Sycney mas Charitable Foundation The exhibition has algo received significant syaport from the National Endoweent for the Arts, a federal aganey: ‘The Jepen Foundation: the Japan-United States Frendship Commission: the Austrian Cultural Inttute, New York: the Avetrian Federal Chancellery - Arts: the Austrian Consuiate General n Los Angeles; The British Cour Merril Lynoh; ‘Service Culture du Consulat Général de Frence {Los Angales: and Assecition Frangaise Action Acistique KX EM Ministre des Affaires Erangbres Editor: Russo Ferguson ‘Assistant Editor: Stephanie Emerson Editarial Assetort: Jano Hyun DDasign and production: Lorraine Wild, Aranda Washburn, Yk! Nishinaka Separations: DeskTopPreduction Bucher GmbH, Stltgart Printed at Gantz in Germany Bound in Germany Copyright 1998 The Museum of Contemporary At, Los Angeles All rights easerved. No part af this book maybe reproduced in any form by ary electronic or mechanical means Airctueing photecopying,racoreing, or information storage and retraval without permission in vrting from the pubiisher, First published in the United States of America in paperback in 1898 by Thames and Hudson, ne 500 FiRh Avenue, New Yark. New York 10010, First published in Great Seiten in 1988 by Thames and Hudson Lid, London Exhibition Tour ‘The Museu of Contemporary Art ‘at The Geffen Cantemporary, Los Angeles 8 February - 10 May 1998, MAK. Austrian Mucoum of Applied Arts, Vienna 17 June 6 September 1998 ‘Museu drt Contamporani, Barelons 15 October 1998 - 6 January 1989 Museum of Contemporary Art, Tokyo 11 Febeuary 11 April 1988 Library of Congrass Catalog Card Nurmoer 97-62054 British Liorary Cataloguing in-Publeation data ‘A catalogue record for ths back s valable from the British Library ISBN 0500-28080.ohn Latham, Art ard Culture, 1960-69, The Museum of Moder At, New York Blonchette Rockefaller FundUNGORRUPTED JOY: Kristine Stiles INTERNATIONAL ART ACTIONS It may be some time before the potetil of materil/traneforming art and its implications for art and sockaty have bean worked out (Wen carried into practice, i may be regarded as one ofthe most redial steps in the twentieth century — Gustav Metzger, 1965! 1. Art in Culture jp iste August, 1968, John Latham withdrew Clement Groenborg'scolection of ‘saya, Art and Culture, from the library of London's ‘St. Martin's School of Art where he worked as 2 part: time artinstructor, Together with one of his students, the now wellknown British soulptor Barry Flanagan, Latham erganized a party at his home, mysteriously cettled Sul and Chew. When the guests arrived Latham invitee them to taar and chew up pages from Greenbera's widely influential book on the theory of art. "I necessary" the forty-five year old artist sar: fonicaly instructed, “pit out the product into flask provided.”2 Those assembled complied, expectorat ing about @ thin of the volume in a heap of ‘masticated pulp. Latham then immarsad te wad in 2 solution containing thirty: peroent sulfuric ci, lft it Unf the soidion converte to sugar, neutralized the Femains with sodium bicarbonate and introduced a ‘yeast —en ‘Alen Culture” — into the substance to creates “brew,” Latham allowed his cultured brew to “bubble gently" fr nearly @yeeruntl the end of May, 1967. when he received a postcard loboled: ‘rt and Culture wanted urgently by a student.” Latham decanted the dtiled mass into a suitable glass con tiner labeled the jr “Art ard Cuitue,” and returned It “After the few minutos required to persuade the Nvarian that this was indeed the book which was ‘eked for on the posteard," Latham lft the object {and returned home, The next morning be received a letter fram the Director of St. Martin's who apoo ‘ized for being “unable to invite [him] to do any more teaching.” Latham's teaching career came to an ‘brupt end after his encounter with art and culture, By manifesting the intedapendence of the body and its object n his conceptual end physical relationchip to Greenberg's tent, Latham produced a counterllusanistie work ofan, for hich the object ‘Att and Culture, stands as commissure. Latham's ‘object would have litle mearing without the action Infact, without his action there would te no "brew,” 1. Mezgor Ast Dente ‘rt Mage 9 84 Landon ‘Ceaten/Destruo, 1985, 25. Pubteatona 870) 8 2. srr hae of Latha scar pang (London son 4. Mach ati eneton onthe ntn of eto stn a tha om my ‘vont St ord Chen eretsken om he npubled dasraton, "The fon accout of os je ugut 1967, Dearcton in At Spoon (IAS) ro clash between art and euture, The materials that constitute Stil and Chew now reside in 3 lester briefcase nthe collection of The Museum of Modern ‘Art, New Yer. The cas sfiled wth powders andi. ids, laters, photostats ané the ivitation the artist sent forthe event. It also includes the written di missal Latham recoived fram St. Martins School of ‘Avs, a copy of Greenberg's At and Culture, and other memorabilia fom the action. As objects thelr este gorieal status ie quite mundane Its thee elationalty tosnarte'saction that corstituies them as art. They are entrusted to share thet act with ue, Groenlberg could only metaphorically e-present what Latham ‘could metonymicaly make present by linking action to its object. These tropes comprise a cantral axis ‘along which actions in art have shifted the conven ‘ional subject-object relations instantiated in traditional viewing conditions avray from thair sola ‘depencience on re-presentation (metaphor) to oon= nection (metonyiry) #Latham's action remateriaized Greenberg's book in tarme of the body. wryly sug> ‘gesting that, a8 conceptual "food for thought," the text was mush, unpalatable for artist. The very term — art and culture — exhibits the relatonalty fart to something els, just as such phrases 2s ‘art and politics,” “art and technology, ‘art and lf,” disolose how art cannat be without an ther to which it leaves. To deave to isnt the same fas to bacome one with. The unique aspect of ection artis that, when the body is used in action, it exem- plies the means by which all art i relatoral with the ‘world, Moreover, action in art craves ewes closer to the fact thatit tha body itself hat produces objects ‘and that such an artis # unique vehicle enabling per: ‘ception and contemplation of the truth that the “mage objec ie) a projection ofthe human body"* ‘Action art makes palpable this projection between objecte and eubjecs. By showing the myriad ways, ‘that acton ise caupas the conceptual te the phys: cal, the emationa tothe potcal, the psychological “Te Datucion in At Serpe (O\S) and te Tages! Sanne” Tra Act ew ot 1 (Sg 1987) 4 Flue Scar. The Body Pa “he Naeng ans rong! tee dgemiosircstn stan ester. The deal Pract Even Sred (Oot Ovo Users ess 1955) (ems che Bn we 24 vod 187 UnvartyoCailoms 28 st Bobo Soo eo my "Syres oF 227to the social, the sexual tothe cultura, and 80 on, ‘ction art makes evident the all-to- often forgotton Interdependence of human subjects — of paoale — ‘one to anothar. The body is the medium of the Real, however multfarius thet Real becomes and ie man- fest. By making this interconnection itself materia, action art renders both the relational ofindvidual within the frame of at and culture vse. In this way, ‘ction in at aot fr all Art — for better ar worse — 1 bring the relation between sexing and meaning, ‘aking and being, into view. “The assay that folons consists of an intame- lated set of brief meditations, each of which explores only a fragment of the ifr number of coraspon- deneas that action art traverses, My essay n this ‘regard, is not an historical survey, and is not con: cerned with © pertiular chronology of avente Nonetheless, a chronology exste, however multiple ‘is mappings may be. That chronology begins cer- tainly somewhere in action painting and moves into Happenings that themselves reflat and overlap with the aftemath of World Wer Il. the emergence ofthe Fribakusha (oomé vietims), the Beat generation the ‘Angry Young Men of England, the reconstruction of ‘world econonves and cultures, a5 well as violent car Ficts, especially in Karea, Vietnam, and Algeri During thase volatile decades, the communication between artists creating Happenings around the ‘world, and the loose afilation of artists who com prised Flu, help to make it posible to understand that the individuals who made actions as art were equelly employed in a project that recognized no rational boundaviee, even as the particular conflets and contingencies that indidval artist's work ext ited reflected the exigencies of national identity LUnueval events often reeult in paracigmatic shifts tht happen at eral conjunctions. have long contended thatthe body as material inart after 1950 ‘was doopl tad to the nead to assort the primacy of human subjects over inanimate objects, and was a response to the threatened antologicel condition of Ife ites inthe aftermath of the Holocaust and tho 5 Dane Sues“Snaish Men,“an maybe ovo wen, and aut ‘sen ution oop come psars because. sche saved Coretang rey ofateratng wee as ‘coors ses sour Parsi 968 ‘eset aut communes ten oer te slope amany ef ars 6 Foracicassen athe wien by ‘ren, Soe Fed deesor, Perotong te 6 The eo» Phan, advent ofthe atomic age. To write ties not to su. ‘gest that there were no precedents for such an art “There ware many, and the body as visual medium ‘existed in almast every European avant-garde move mont before Werid Wer |. But the regular, systomati, ard interatianal use of the body over the past Fy yeors defined it as new medium end genre In the weval arts, An art of actions meant that art could be simultaneously representational and pre sentational, simutaneously claiming the primacy of tha body as matapharical content and as concrete presentational form. Such an art has made more concrete the metonymic relationship of exchange that exists botwesn the viewer end the work oF art ‘But it has furthar altered that relationship by pre senting an acting subject in 2 real exchange with ‘anethor acting eubject: in short, action art presents ‘wa human beings who negotiate meaning vith one ‘nother however complicated that mode of commu ‘ation might bo. Indood, communication betwean ‘human beings isthe issue when actions become at. ‘Accion in the real sccialcordition of everyday life is ‘what lost Latham his teaching position. He proved how much is at stake when one wads action to art ‘and culture, | think thatthe proportional sigificarce of the cultura to the poltial became especialy vivid nthe rally associated with "The Sixties’ Primerily because of tha hyper-awarenose In the period that human action in the social realm impacts the political domain. For me, "The Sixties” begin in 1955 with Rose Parks, the black coamstress from Montgomery, Alabama, who refused to give up her seat on a cty bus to a white person (as she was legally required tod); and end soma tima between 1973 and 1975, when the U.S. withdrew tops from Yietnam, and the kgnobe hellopter fights from the roof to of the Arnerican embasey there forever etched on my mind® Watergate, the demise ofthe ‘Naw Left the aftermath of May 1968 in Europe, and the violence of the Chinese Cultural Revolution strayed any remaining shreds of confidence Inthe art actions ger desloge Saye Saye, Arles Stoparcon,Stariey Aroma, ac Fmt Janenon Mremls Unveraty Of Marc Pras cooperation wah ‘Soot Ta, 1906, 176208bbeneficence of gavernment, causing an inward turn- Ing away from the civ. “The exraorcinary degree of interplay between action and poitics which characterizes "The Sx ie paralleled by tho wide range of terme artets used then to daseribe their work: conerete art Happenings, Flunus, action, direct art, ceremonies, demonstration, kinatio theater, arte pavers earth or ecalogical a, process at, interactive at, actual at. activities, queria art, uerrila theater queria art ‘ction, treet theater, Ive at, avont art, eventstruc- ture, consciousness rising, survival research, and ‘many more, This inguiste vary itself dlineates tha ich interface botwoan tha cocial and aosthetic con tant of art. Such afer etyrology displays how vital and how committed artists were te leying bare the ‘very real intersections already extng botwoen 30s- thatie, aetiviem, and culture: conjunctions that depended not only an the example provided by the ‘Ci Fights movernent, but the intemational expat fence of a divided planet in the Cold Wer, the emergence of post-colonial, the space race, the ‘beginning ofthe electronic revolution in eomnuriea tions (especialy television and computers), the naw ‘lobal ecological awareness. the rise of the New Left ‘and feminism followed by the scivation oF other spe ‘al interest groups such as Gays and Lesbians, and thw multiculturalism that began inthe late 1970s. Perhaps the hamogenelty of the ubiquitous term Performance At, which now generealy desig nates, administors, and manages a wide range of cultura actions, and hose widespresd eppaarance marks the end ofthe pariad under investigation by this exhibition, also indeates how conceptually ‘removed culture has become from an awareness of ite own conditions of, and potential for action Perhaps tis homogenization process — manifest in «2 desocition fram actual involvement ae one moves {rom boing engaged to theorizing change — has sub- sumad action into theory. which itself may be ‘overwhelmed by the task of balancing the two in prove H. Commissures: Art Actions as Objects Jackean Pollock's No. 1 (1949) isan excllent place to begin. Although it was painted on the foo, 28 was Pollock's habit, No. 1 algo hung on his studio wall ‘during the summer and fal of 1950, a slent witness to Hans Namuth's camera. In a famous series of photo session, Namuth produced images that form tho bridge from action painting to the fst events of action art” No, 1 5 one picture ina series of pint Ing actions, each coneldored singular and eo titled, yet also connacted and interconnected with others: No. 1 (1848), No. 1 (1949), One (1950), and Lavender Mist (No. 1) (1950). The continuities ‘betvien Pollock's titles might be said to begin and ‘end on a chain of resemblances, Pollock's painting then, is tothe exhibition of cbjects of actors in the museum, vbat Latham's rt and Culture toa text ‘bout the exhisited objects and actions: an integral link in @ chain of meaning that bogins in actions, ‘moves through objects and texts ino institutions and the lives of people imterested in at, in 8 continuous series of nkages and recipi The central issue of this exhibition is the dimensionality between actions and abjects, and sl thet t entails. Latham's Art and Cuiture demon strates this relationship with humor and insight, ‘engaging us atthe level ofthe artistic act (whether textual or visuaD and its reception in culture, Pollock ‘ls0 seemed to have grasped this essence in his ‘eccentlerumbering system. For one painting is also ‘port of an other, poised together ina ttular matrix that identifies Pollock's actions as belonging tothe task af someone making cbjects. There isa symme- ley here between objects and human actions that ie the eritioal aesthetic point to which action art has attended. But this symmetry passes over an inter stioe that is abstract, This desorption i lffeult to tt299 and needs a mare conerate means for thinking ‘bout the spaoe that sets up @ congruence between the object and an action If thie soace ie objected and ite linkage labeled, it may bacome more sub- stantial, | think that the term commissure" may ‘enable us to think abou the apace of connection in a 7, Senthe dram al Poloe's uta faced Azan Rly, on whch EA Caroan deeningy Ua de Polack o 1880 in Hone Namath [ase deJadmen Polack Along wth Mat Ne 1), 1550 ot, 140 eather vara ne eo Potock wae working Ne $2 (150 ‘One ond nan acento, Levene 229‘broater, more theoretical way that utmately entals commitment, the value thet | belive is eminent in performance art ‘Commissure is derved fram the Latin terms commissura, meaning to join together, and commit: tere, masning to connect, entrust, of to give in trust (from which the English word “commit” is derived) ‘Among its many meanings commissure alse refere to ‘the corporeal sit separating the two eyelids and the lips. Thought of as commissures. the objects that coms "out of actions" might gain the rich multipicty and multiple articulation of that term. First ofall object that come out of actions (action-objcts) may signify in the same ways that conventional artoblects| (Paimings, sculptures, assemblages, installations) communicate meaning, as discrete things madetobe viewed formally, But what about the traces of use that many ofthese objects suggest. or the meaning oanected to the actions from which they derive oF in which such objects pertcipsted? In this sense action-cbjects become commissures, announcing ther contingency to sigifying acts. Understood a ‘comrmissures, the objects that come out of actions ‘an clanfy how actions sigify both as works of art themselves (as objects), and as modalties bonding ‘viewers back to actions in @ chain of interdepen dence. Thinking of the cbjects az connected, as ‘commissures, one may grasp that those actions con- stitute artistic behaviors that are made to be viewed in the same way that we look atthe object. As com: rissures, these objects must be understood as inked to behavior that itsalfis made fr viewing. Tus in art ‘actions, objects are entrusted, delegated to act 2s Connections leading back to aesthetic concepts. The objects that come out of actions, seen as cornmis: sures, must be undoretood ae signs of commitment to viewers that are given in @ desire for communica tion about an ertist's oats. Removing art from purely formalist concerns and the commacifestion of objects, artists employing ‘action sought toreengaye both themselves and spec tatorsinan active experience by reconnecting at (as behavior) tothe hehawor of viewers. At actions ard thei elated abyects move through the body of the artist in his/her material cieumstance to the viewer In the social word. Such action objects are caries oF that information enlvened by action. They announce that ite never encugh to simply lock atthe abject oF fan action without entering into a committed relation, a situation in wich the object draws viewers back to actions completa tha cle of relation between act: ing subject, ects, and vowing subjact, ‘The commissural quality of action art invokes ‘oneideration of the phenomenal relations between Intention ond act, 28 well. As Ludwig Wittgenstain ‘ebserved: “Lat us not forget ths. When ‘I aise my arm, my arm goes up. And the problem arises: what is leRover if | eubtact the fact that my arm goes up from the fact that I raised my arm?" In terms of Wittoenstei's example, the action ofthe artist may bbe understoed o-be the moment that provides visual cess ta "hats leftover ven the fat that my arm (085 up Is subtracted from the fact that | raised my arm." Aation art draws ettenton tothe paycho-phys: ical. cogntive-ntuitional mechanism that produces the act and its object inal ther dimensionality, and the abject directs our attention to the intecstioe that Is the space of this diferance. While actions in art ‘anable us to aporeciate, even highly value, objects there is something of much greater sinificaroe to be ‘grasped about action art. Wittganstein's example requires usta pay attention to that which i eft over, iter we subtract the fect that an art abject occurs from the fact that an action produced thet object, the primary aim of action at MM, Bertin sought to understend the "di ‘erence batwaen what is now and vhatsaftenow” ‘and what manner of conection might brig that ai ference. As Michae! Holqust has wnter: Bakhtin (caught the sheer quality of happening In ife before the magms of such experience ‘cols, haening into igneous theories, or ‘accounts of what has happened. And just as lava differs from the rockit wil become, so the two states of lived experience, on the one hard, ‘and systems for registering such experiance on the other, ae fundamentally afferent from each other? Ludi Witprsain, Phicesiesl 9 Mehta Holst Foewa"fo MM, and wie by Mecha Hust ant Invstgnton fans GEM Anscombe Gakhins warn Phienaty ofthe Act Vadim Lpuroy Cus: Unversity (ew Ye sonia, 1959) rex B21 anita rent Vim apunev of Teas rss 1988 230joa Abramovié and Ulay, eleven in Tine, 1677 ‘The objects thet come “out of actions” are other than the action tee, But just as lava may fer from the rock wil become, s0 it lso the ‘same as what it was. In this regerd the objects Used in, or which have become roics of an action, extend the implicit temporality experienced in the row beyond now to the aftr now. In thie manner, George Brecht’ elegant and ‘econamical scores for avents often employ action 185 8 unt af measure connecting citferent physical ‘tates, Three Aqueous Events (1951) water steam ‘The performer of one of Brecht’s “event scores” can enact the score nary way s/he chooses, cormerelyreeive the message conceptually or ignore it Already in tis range of choice. itis possibi to see that the numberof responses and the acts through ‘which one might imagine how to realize loo, water ‘and cteam — whethar ta demorstste ther proper: ties, ta use them, toexchange them, ete. —is infinite In Tiree Aqueous Events, the action of the artis is employed to evince the result of divergence in acts that relate together the simulianeaus existence oF dlference in one element. What | am suggesting ie that the objects which come out of actions deseribe haw what is now Is also connected to what comes alter now, just as the future is comprised of everything contained inthe past thatthe present manifests as the ongoing. yet ‘emultaneous, transitory site between states. The Lnprecedentad value of action artis to articulate this ‘cormectivity, But to suggest tie does nat moan that ‘actions are robbed oftheir own artfactualty Its. after all, the aesthetic dimension to which these ‘objects point. This phenomenon has been clsre garded ragardless of row crefuly the work of art has ‘been interpreted — whether in terms of intentional: iy, teonogrephy, teanology, oF semiotics; or with ragare to the work's socal history and receotion ‘Action isa truth of ent. The processes involved 10. Sxe Mh rood “Corman” cn Hagel nvedtary Lecires en ‘ects Laer Prgun Book, 1859), 55 1b \ ee in the making of things have been naglacred, except, ‘oF course, n the ways we have tiended to questions of conneisseurahip and the matoral constuction of things (how an etching was made, or ow the “ost wax technique was achiaved). This elsion is al the more remarkable sirce Marxist art history has carefuly considered labor both as it relates to the conditions in which artis produced as wel os artistic representations af people st work, However signi cant these ways of looking and interpreting have been, the artifactuelty of artistic action, that iat ing modality from which the entire history of art and sthetics unfolds, has been overlooked and has remained disegarded untl artiste focused attention on action ‘Artiste producing actions as art have taught that arifectuality ie only an index of at, i is not art Itgat In ths regerd, Is Useful to remember thatthe Greek meanings of the term “aesthetios” Include: “aisthonosthe, to perceive’ sisthéss, ‘per: ‘copton, and alsthérikos, ‘capable of perception. Aesthetics was the "science of sensory krowedge' ‘eventhough it "was seen restictad to the'sciance of sangory beauty" Perception itself iS an act. It requires taking possession of something, cbtaining ‘ond roaiving eomething, andit is through this act of possession that sciance of sensory knowledge is achieved, Acton art assists perception noticing the dynamic intersection batween intentionality sctual- ity, and the complex socal context of reception and Interpretation within which art occurs, Action at ug rents perception and sensory knowledge, oF n Allan Kapron’s words: ‘Ag art becomes loss arti takos on philosophy’ carly role as etique of fe. Even its beauty can be refuted, it remains astonishingly thought ful: Pracgely bocouse art can be confused with le, foreas attention upon the aim of ts amb ‘ites, 0 “reveal” experience"? In actions and ther objects, experience iad open in lation, "Relation isthe theme the remark able series of actions Marina Abramovic and Ula did during the paried they lived’ and worked together. (ew Yr: Somat Es Press 1860, 12, Aan apr ‘Manos. anfeien a Crt Bar Pape 2311 Knows (vith Pip Comer and Bl Fertare su vos forthe Ea, 1975, Collection ofthe att Relation io Time, an action thet took place over ‘seventeen hours in October 1977, at Studio G7 in Bologna, shows how deeply objects ean represent otherwise unrotid actions of subjects themselves, In Relation in Time, the couple sat back ta beck with their long hair ted together into a continuous bun, linking the backs of thoir heads together and hold ing thom fast to each other The sequence of photographs from this action showe how with wear ness, eventual l2e af concentration, and the weight of the body, the nantly ropa har gradually pled and tugged untilit began to show signs of strain — even ‘ally slipping out oF the knot that held them together “This igeture ofhairis not an cbject that may be exhib ited, bought, o sold, but it wae, nonetheless, an aril thing created as a point of juncture across ‘hich the artists visualzed a quality oftheir exchange. [nits eventual unraveling, the band of hair exhibited ‘physical propertae of force, movement, tension, the invisible dynamism and magnetism tht drew the cou ple together and eventually set them apart. Relation in ore circumstance becomes some thing altogether different in another. In Gentlo ‘Surprises for the Ear (19751, Alison Knowles, with the composers Philip Corner and Bill Fontana, res cued and related to discarded objects found on the street. Growing out of Knowles’s earlier sound- ‘werke, the three artists began to collect abandoned bis things whose provenance, identity, and char ‘acter were lost or broken, These small bits and pieces, ragrvonts of discarded objects, could beheld inthe hand: atny metal pring witha loop atthe en, ‘.small less oyindey, ater inch 4Srpm record broken in half, part ofa brash or comb, two stick pins with ite bolls at the end, a bent plastic straw, many ‘unidentifiable objets, and g0 on. Such things, howe ver devalued, became for Knowles, Comes, and Fontana sources for producing sound. After carrying ‘ut the business of collecting the objects, the trio affixed “tickets” with hand-written instructions on teach one, explaining how to usa them as musical instruments, This process was not undertaken all ot ‘nee, but from time to time for several years. The tagging system tse required an attentiveness tothe ‘object and demanded close observation ofits qul- ties and cheracter in line with its potential or the production of sound. The instructions for cary lng out the sound took ntudod: “twirl by ear” “0. rolk’*hold open to get shiring sounds” “holding to argent, surprie;" “ern” “Unkle” “hs “brush ‘sratch;” “insert and let rock back and forth ke 4 teetertotter” “pueh In and our.” “rocking at its ‘own thythm,” Such Instructions elicited » sensual response end, themselves, Invoked sensual esspociations Idaed, Knaviles considered the objets the three friends recuperated “intimate because people ‘aren't watching: they become your own discovery." ‘As Theodor Adorno observed ‘Academic philooophy has assignod sesthetes & place in the division of philosophical labour. Tus ‘esthetics reacts to this debaserant by demanding thet phenomena be lifted out of reir mere existence and mad to reflect on them: selves Philosophy i reflection on what has become petrified in the sciences, rot ante: science beside or beyond them, This means ‘het ‘aesthetics must try to articulate what its objct nits immediaoy is driving a."* Sinilary, by lifting cbjacts out of thei “*mere ‘exstence,” Kiowles, Corner and Fontana facitated reflection on objects in thelr immediacy. Minute ‘attention to the ward may be traced back to at least Leonardo da Vinel’s observations of images inthe sve of marble and grin of wood, up through Dads trtots lke Kurt Schwitters whose merebeu and rmerzbild were constructed from commercial debris found on the ety strote, Duchamp's “eadymades,” the Surealists’ “found” and augmented object, to 12-Ausan rowan converter nih 14 Theader Acne, “evens .°In New ok: Routedg & Kegan Pas trocar mugen 1997 New Yor Al AgpendirlotAarthte Ther. ans- 1972. 370 ote tom Kroes on Genie Supees ned by Leck areata by rms fore ar ane ham ths ass (cer ord Fl Tema ron 233 Dick Higgins, Symphony 607 — The Divers, 1068. Block ColtonCage's attention ta. commen forms and ambient ‘sound, and Rauschenbera's combines. It has, of course, boon dificult to see beyond theindvdual artist's body ta the vival, auditory, and haptic concoms of al bodes for which artes! bodios ‘signify nal their ontological, hanomenclogical, and ‘epistemological complexity. in part because the pres ‘ence of 8 body acting before other bodies is 60 powerful and also because the presentational mode itself constitutes such a radical shift inthe normative ‘esthetic context of traditional representational ‘objects. Tha very idea of presenting the self (and the artist's ideas) instead ofan objective substiute for thet self (her or his ideas embodied In an object) as and remains challanging to tractional ideas of fart In Michael Fred's influential article, “Art and ‘Objecthood” (1867), the at historian attacked all art that “includes the beholder... ina situation” as a sion — in the "Prafaca” and "Postface" to her ‘monumental catalogue of conceptuel art actions ‘and objects, Six Years. "Hopes that ‘conceptual at’ ‘would beable to avoid the genera commerciakzation, the destructiely ‘progressive’ approach of mod: femism,” she wrote, ‘were for the most pert unfounded.” Regardless of the voracious appetite of the culture, consciousness, and theory industries, the hope to create ron-commodifiable art continue, 06 gay Pholanroteratod in 1993: Prformance's only life isin the prosent. Performance cannot be saved, recorded, doc: ‘mented, or othernise partcpata in the ‘roulation of representations of representations ‘nee it does 80, it bocomes something other than performance. Te the degree that perfr- mance attempts to enter the economy of reproduction it botrays and lessens the promiso of ts cum ontology. Performances being ‘becomes itself through disappearance,'® Yes, and no. The temporal momant of the act ‘sappears. But the objects that were used in, and ‘area pat ofthat action remain. So toa does the doc: ‘mentation that is saved rotenly by the colactor and the museum, but most significantly by the artists themselves. Even the artists whe have most str dently avoided commocifaction of their events have saved photographic negatives, made catalogues. ‘anists' books, and other kinds of relics that are ‘conneoted tothe work, If any single traniton toward the commodification of actions has occurred it has ‘been aiseursive and then associative, the absorption ‘oF action” into the theatricalied, spectatorial cond! tion of "Performance." But even given that significant ‘Shift inthe discursive conditions of culture, which will revisit below, "performance" does not “become” Pastors, 1972), 25, 1 Sve Poagy Pals mane lige Book Unrate The Paltes Preomens(usndon and New Ye ei, 1850, 146 1866101972 ew Ye Pagar O2A‘through disappearance because the very social ex ‘gercies of communication and memory require ‘odjectne form, Objects are tools of life necessary 10 [ein order to do and to cammunioste. Objects contain the traces ofthe history of action (if) from the oast through the present and Into the future. Objects are rot commedities in and of thomselvas; rather, at tudes about and uses of abject make them so —or ddo not — in relation to the actions that bring them into baing. Action in art would have us respond’ to ‘object of art ae things mad by a maker In action. For example, when one is presented with an object, such 23. gullting, then pin, eufforn, torture, mut= dr. captal punishment —all enacted by someone to someone.else—come to mind. The objec, gulltine, isa vivid exampla ofan action object relating thought back to human institutions and behaviors. But all ‘objects function in this way, which is why we under stand their meaning and use. What is missing from art objects, what anit engaged inaction restore to them, fs that relationalty between making and doing ‘and the ertfectuaity itself What artists dois alter the meaning and use of cbjects though their actions inorder to remake vison and, thereby ouracton (and thought in the word Action artis pedagogicalin the sense tht i ‘netructs visvality back tothe primary condita of making and viewing, and then out to the communica tive experence between the making subject and the veewing subject. IF we thnk ofthe objecte that come cut of actions as commiasures, entrusted todo some- thing thave agency by the mere fact that they ens in relation), then these cbjects retain the enorgy ofthat reletednaes both to the eriginating action and in our reception — however objects may also be ‘estheticized end became coveted and fetishized. F \wetthink oFart actions asthe events preduced by one subjectivity aimad at communicating with another subjectivity, then acts In art may be understood as commigauras as well, commitments by artists to interpersonal connection. Action art and action objects tesch us to remeber the valve oF the indie vidual subject who erastas objects — both in the narrow sense ofthe artistas producer and in the 12. Yshinar, "Ont Ft ‘Guten! Gata 4 (18501:2 lhe Fi Esiaion of Gua at Gu Kazuo Shiraga, Challenging Mud, 1055. Th Ashiya Cty Musaum of Art and Hatory ‘much lager sense a elevating human subjects over ‘objects —as the highest value From Action to Performance Soft | have emphasized the term “action” rather than the more genarte term “performance” to maintain atten tion to the difference between action and objects. ‘and to stiess process atthe foundation of what has bbocome known as Performance Art. Moreover, the ‘term “action” kaops the pressure onthe political re ‘erence inheyent inthe term activi that was, anc romsine, 20 central to the use of the body as @ medium, Action was a term that reflected a highly determined strategy For artistic intervention in xb: le Mfe. Action in ar was imagined as a means to remedy the aesthaticem that transformed art 65 an integra part ofthe predction of mearing in cure into the empty eategory of art for art's sake,” ashft Inthe social role of art that robbed art ofits ea: tural effieacy in favor ofits surface sppeararce prized as a prestigious emblem of satus and taste ‘Such ¢ powerful transition in the media and eons of ar oceurred i an entirely altered planetary concition in the wake of the Holocaust and the advent ofthe nuclaar age. Given these unprecedented con: tions, the use of the body in acton seemed not eny ‘necessary but urgent. Ton years after the bombing of Hiroshima, in 1955 Kazuo Shirage veed his body in Challenging Mud That ama year, Saburo Murakami volently broke through 8 series of large paper soteens by running with his whole body ageinet the structures. Murakam's action wae accomplished “with such @ speed, in almost an instant, that the ‘cameramen failed to catch the moment Importantly the experione lef the artist feeling that, “became 2 ne man.""®The particular type of new rman that Murakami had become most certsinly hac been affected by what Japanese poat Hara Tami