0-929701-67-4 $30.00 From about 1965 to 1980, Conceptual Art and Performance Art took center stage throughout the western world, introducing new and complex ideas to the practice of contemporary art, ideas which reverberate globally to this day. The Triumph of Anti-Art not only locates the origins and development of these controversial and compelling art forms, but also uncovers many relatively unrecognized yet indisputably important artists, both American and European. Thomas McEvilley is an expert guide through the thickets of seemingly arcane meanings contained in these nonrepresentational art forms, and brings clarity to the intentions and agendas of the artists, as well as to the real world context. Long-term effects of "anti-art," and the development of the pluralistic situation known as post-Modernism, are described in considerable detail. From the Greek philosopher Diogenes to nineteenth-century German Romantic philosophy, from the modern art critic Clement Greenberg to the influence of Marcel Duchamp, Dr. McEvilley exposes the ideas and political impulses that temporarily led to a toppling of painting and sculpture in the decades right after World War II. General essays on twentieth-century art set the stage for surveys of Conceptual Art and various practitioners, including Yves Klein, Bernar Venet, John Baldessari, Les Levine, William Anastasi, and Francis Alys. McEvilley gives equal focus to Performance Art, with chapters on Andy Warhol and Joseph Beuys, Marina Abramovic and Ulay, James Lee Byars, and Brian O'Doherty. Briefer pieces review the events and exhibitions of such artists as Hermann Nitsch, Robert Rauschenberg, Linda Montano, Pina Bausch and Carolee Schneemann. Finally, McEvilley discusses what the "triumph" of "anti-art" means, and outlines the terms, practices, and politics in global art history. Thomas McEvilley is a professor at the School of Visual Arts in New York City, where he heads the department of Art Criticism and Writing. Previously, he taught at Rice University in Houston, Texas. The author of dozens of books, monographs, and articles on art history, classical philology, and philosophy (including the monumental study, The Shape of Ancient Thought), he lives in New York City. Jacket design © 2005 McPherson & Company. Photographs are courtesy of The Estate of Yves Klein, William Anastasi, Marion Goodman Gallery, Marina Abramovic and Ulay, and Ronald Feldman Fine Arts. All rights reserved. DOCUMENTEXT McPherson & Company Post Office Box 1126 Kingston, New York 12402 www.mcphersonco.com PRINTED IN U.S.A. Skenováno pro studijní účely The Triumph of Anti-Art Skenováno pro studijní účely CONTENTS OTHER BOOKS BY THOMAS McEVILLEY Art and Discontent Art and Otherness Sculpture in the Age of Doubt The Shape of Ancient Thought The Exile's Return: Toward a Re-definition of Painting for the Post-Modern Era Fusion: West African Artists at the Venice Biennale Thornton Dial: Image of the Tiger {with Amiri Baraka) Dennis Oppenheim: And the Mind Grew Fingers Jannis Kounellis Pat Steir PREFACE ; Publisher's Note 7 prelude : Diogenes ofSinope 9 Origins of Anti-Art 1: Kant, Duchamp, and Dada : The Background 15 2 : Out of the Ashes : The Twentieth Century as Syllogism 37 3 : Yves Klein : Messenger of the Age of Space S3 Conceptual Art 4 : Anti-Art as Cognition 77 5 : William Anastasi: Talk About Dumb 105 6 : Francois Morellet: Pythagorean Post-Modernist 137 7 : Bernar Venet: From Breakthrough to Cul-de-sac 147 8 : John Baldessari: The Mythos of Spring 165 9 : Les Levine : Mass Media Campaigns 191 10 : Francis Alys : Calling the Unaccountable to Account 205 Performance Art ax : Anti-Art as Ethics 217 12: Art in the Dark 233 13 : Beuys and Warhol: The Poseur's Mantle 255 14 : Marina Abramovic/Ulay Ulay/Marina Abramovic 273 15 : James Lee Byars : The Atmosphere of Question 285 16 : Brian O'Doherty: An Artist and His Aliases 301 17 : Marina Abramovic : Speaking Silences, Carrying Water 311 18 : Performance Exemplified 319 Joseph Beuys, Robert Rauschenberg, Hermann Nitsch, Stelarc, Tehching Hsieh / Linda Montano, Fiona Templeton, Pina Bausch, Carolee Schneemann, Marshall Weber • 19 : The Triumph of Anti-Art? 335 appendix one : Origin of the Term 'Anti-Art' 355 appendix ] wo : Zen, Dada, Duchamp, and Cage 3S9 appendix three : The End oj Art 362 appendix four : New York or Global? 373 INDEX 3S1 Skenováno pro studijní účely 4338308001 PREFACE Publishers Note It's fair to assume and insist that a book be more than the sum of its parts, but some explanation is in order when its parts are more than at first they appear to be. The essays that form the core of this book—which was itself formulated and constructed over a number of years—date back as early as 1981 and in many instances were vital to reigniting serious discourse about conceptual art and performance art, and are particularly noteworthy for having rediscovered and validated the important careers of artists suffering long-standing critical eclipse. The general reader might be cautioned that The Triumph of Anti-Art is intended neither as a survey nor a definitive history of twentieth-century conceptualism and performance, since many of the "usual suspects" are given leave of absence; but instead as an attempt at providing an historical ontogeny of post-Modernism in the visual arts, as well as a critical grammar for its understanding. Comprehending conceptual art and experiencing performance art both demand that certain assumptions governing aesthetic experience be checked at the door. The mental/emotional toolkit that Thomas McEvilley proposes and provides in this book derives in general from an understanding of the development of aesthetics within a context of philosophy and of world history, and in particular from the terms of conflict and confrontation exemplified by each of the artists figured here. There can hardly be a settled history for art, one which at any and every level constitutes a bedrock of critical assention; but there is almost certainly a buried one. Yves Klein's posthumous reputation by 1980 had reached its nadir in Europe and the U.S. Five years earlier, however, McEvilley had originated the plan for a 1981 retrospective at the Rice Museum in Houston, Texas, producing it with Dominique DeMenil (with some assistance from Walter Hopps), after which it traveled to the Guggenheim Museum in New York City, and to the Centre Pompidou in Paris. Concurrently, McEvilley's 7 Skenováno pro studijní účely 8 I Preface essay on Klein appeared in Artforum, and dramatically altered the appreciation of his art. McEvilley's essay on James Lee Byars was published the year before, in 1981, and established the artist's bona fides, with the result that his reputation spread worldwide. Likewise, his 1983 Artforum essay on the now-classic performance work of Marina Abramovic and Ulay was its first exposure in a major international journal. In 1989 McEvilley's conversation with William Anastasi, published in a gallery exhibition catalogue, brought to light An-astasi's seminal influence upon early conceptual art and artists, and helped restart the artist's career. Another catalogue essay, this time on Francis Alys in 1989, removed the artist from the relative obscurity of Mexico City, and inspired far-flung exhibitions and acclaim. Another essay appearing here should be remarked: 'Art in the Dark" dates from 1983, when the legitimacy of performance was threatened by a resurgence of Romantic canons of expressiveness, primarily in Neo-expres-sionist painting. Still taught widely in art history courses, this essay was the authoritative legitimation of performance from the perspectives of anthropology or the history of religion. Thomas McEvilley's essays on the works of particular artists often bring with them these narrower contexts of art historical advocacy by virtue of having often been the best or first comprehensive readings of their respective subjects' systematic production of meaning. To relocate the essays into the broader context of this volume has required in some cases their slight revision or abridgement, as well as the authoring of major new essays on conceptualism, performance, and modernism (derived to some extent from seminal essays published in the 1980s and '90s), and four appendices. Each of the essays retains its individuality while at the same time contributing to the larger matrix of a continuous book. —Bruce R. McPherson Skenováno pro PRELUDE Diogenes of Sinope Patron Saint of Conceptual and Performance Art Ceetain ancient greeks insisted that philosophy should be an activity coextensive with life. Certain artists in our own time have said the same about art. "Philosophize more often than you breathe" was the advice of one of the ancient exponents of this view. What he meant is that life lived with a certain focus is philosophy, as in our time it has been claimed that life lived with a certain focus is art. The process of expanding a limited category into a universal frame involves a willingness to manipulate language directly. The semantic boundaries of the category-word are broken open and forced, step by step, to the limits of life. Consciousness is violently retextured by imposing a new conceptual overlay on its experiences. Some ancient philosophers pursued this goal through enigmatic and challenging public behavior that was specifically designated as philosophy. "Performance philosophy" would be an appropriate term for this activity. The classroom philosophers of ancient Greece were no happier to confront this radical expansion of their realm than the established art academies of the late twentieth century were to encounter performance artists who insisted that the artistic frame should not separate one experience from another, but should enclose every moment of life. The great hero of this tradition, and arguably the great prototype of much Performance and Conceptual Art, was Diogenes of Sinope, who lived mostly in the fourth century bc.1 Diogenes designated his entire life as a performance of philosophy. Living in the streets and plazas of Athens and Corinth, he exhibited his every action to public inspection, a lifestyle for which he was called simply "the Dog." From that urban stage he devoted himself to the performance of a series of absurdist acts designed to subvert the habitual motivation systems of his viewers. Diogenes' actions always demonstrated the viability of behavioral options opposite to those of the citizens at large. Thrusting at the cracks of Knihovna Kabinetu teorií c-jKuity výtvarných umění VUT Rybářská 13/15 ROS 00 Brno studijní účely_ Prelude communal psychology, his tiny and quiet gestures laid bare a dimension of hidden possibilities which he thought might constitute personal freedom. His general theme was the complete and immediate reversal of all familiar values, on the ground that they are automatizing forces which cloud more than they reveal. A successor who goes nameless in the literature summed up Diogenes' legacy as he felt it, in a piece repeated always the same. Ascending a platform from which philosophers would customarily address the public, he would simply laugh for the duration of a normal speech, then descend. More than any specific linguistic message, the generalized affirmation of a laugh could point to the unbounded openness that Diogenes had articulated in his gestures. In our time the category of art has been opened up and deliberately universalized, as the category of philosophy was in Diogenes' day. Artists have performed bizarre and enigmatic public acts and designated them as art. Artists have put themselves on exhibition, and in extreme cases have designated their entire lives as performances. These gestures have dissolved the traditional boundaries of art activity and set new ones at the limits of the life-field. In many cases the project has both an artistic goal—the discovery of new art forms beyond the old boundaries—and an ethical one: by refo-cusing life as art, it is hoped to purge it of conventional motives and restore it to a fresh and disinterested appreciation. Diogenes of Sinope | 11 I One day Diogenes was seen sitting in the public square gluing shut the pages of a book. When a play had just ended and the crowds were swarming out, Diogenes made his way into the emptying theater against the flow. When asked why, he replied, "This is the kind of thing I practice doing all the time." When a rich man took Diogenes into his house and cautioned him not to spit on the rugs and furnishings since they were very expensive, Diogenes spat in the man's face and explained that it was the only thing there cheap enough to spit on. Diogenes praised people who intended to get married, or go on a journey, or enter a profession and, being just about to do so, decided not to. When he was captured by pirates after a shipwreck and put up for sale at a slave auction, the auctioneer asked him what he could do. "Govern men," he replied, and told the crier to call it out in case anyone wanted to buy a master for himself. Alexander the Great, who had heard his notoriety, came and stood beside Diogenes where he was sunning himself in the gutter, and asked if there was anything he could do for him. "Yes," Diogenes said, "get out of my light." One day Diogenes was seen making the rounds of the ornamented porticoes of Athens, begging alms from the public statues. He would walk backward through the city streets. w Wh One day Diogenes was jerking off in the market place and, when condemned by passersby, remarked that he wished he could satisfy hunger just by rubbing his stomach. en a friend dropped a piece of bread in the street and was embarrassed to pick it up, Diogenes tied a rope around the neck of a huge wine jug and spent the afternoon dragging it around the plaza. Skenováno pro studijní účely 12 | Prelude One day Diogenes shaved half his head bald, then went to a party where he was accosted and beaten up by young toughs. The next day, bruised and battered, he wrote their names on a slate, hung it around his neck, and spent the day walking around town with it. When the rats crept up to his table he said, "See, now even Diogenes keeps pets." Entering a classroom where a professor was lecturing, Diogenes stood in plain sight, holding a fish before him. One student after another began to giggle, till the class was in a tumult. "Look," said Diogenes, "this fellow's lectures are less interesting than a twopenny fish." When Plato, investigating species-genera relationships, defined man as a featherless biped, Diogenes walked into the classroom carrying a plucked chicken and said, "Here is Plato's man." When he was asked how he wanted to be buried, he said, "Upside down. For down will soon be up." One day he sat down and held his breath until he died. 1 Origins of Anti-Art 1. I have translated the Diogenes anecdotes myself. For sources and discussions see: Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, trans. R.D. Hicks, 2 vols. (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 192$) 6:23; Farrand Sayre, Diogenes of Sinope: A Study of Greek Cynicism (Baltimore: J.H. Fürst, 1938); Donald Dudley, A History of Cynicism (London: Reprografischer Nachdruck der Ausg., 1937); A.J. Malherbe, The Cynic Epistles: A Study Edition (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1977); Daniel H. H. Ingalls, "Cynics and Pasupatas: The Seeking of Dishonor," Harvard Theological Review 55 (1962); Herman Diels, 'Aus dem Leben" des Cynikers Diogenes," Archiv fur Geschichte der Philosophie 7 (Berlin, 1894); Kurt von Fritz, "Quellenuntersuchungen zu Leben and Philosophie des Diogenes von Sinope," Philologus supplemental volume 18 (Leipzig, 1926); Gunnar Uudberg, "Zur Diogenes-Tradition," Symbolae Osloenses 14 (Oslo, 1935)- The whole story is reinvestigated in Thomas McEv-illey, Diogenes: Defictions (Berkeley, California: Peter Koch Printer, 1994). Skenováno pro studijní účely Kant, Duchamp, and Dada The Background The prefix anti- multiplies, as if excited, around sites of contention. Before the twentieth century its main arena was theology, as in terms like "anti-Christ" and "anti-Pope." Its meaning is sometimes simple opposition, but sometimes a mysterious kind of interchangeability is implied; the Oxford English Dictionary gives "opposite, against," along with "in exchange, instead." The anti-Christ, in other words, may not be simply opposed to Christ; he may also be Christ's dark alter-ego, Christ turned inside out. In the war-torn twentieth century (when, as the OED observes, the prefix was "extraordinarily productive") the arena of struggle shifted from theology to cultural politics, settling specifically, by about mid-century, on art. This shift began early in the nineteenth century, when art was gradually replacing religion as the primary channel to the beyond, and climaxed in the generation after World War II. During this period the meaning of the word shifted from that of opposition to that of exchange. The anti-thesis, for example, does not merely oppose the thesis but proposes itself as a replacement for it. Simple opposition is illustrated by Samuel Taylor Coleridge's use of the term "anti-philosophy" in 1818 to describe a materialistic view brought about, he felt, by "thorough coldness of the moral feeling." Coleridge was an idealist metaphysician, and to him it seemed that an opposition to metaphysics showed a lack of feeling. More than a century later, when the use of the prefix was being heated up by World War II, R.G. Collingwood coined the term "anti-metaphysics," which he defined as "a kind of thought that regards metaphysics as a delusion and an impediment to the progress of knowledge, and demands its abolition." In Collingood's view the term "anti-metaphysics" indicates a critical philosophy that may have something positive to offer; if successful, critical philosophy will replace metaphysics. The idea of simple opposition has partly given way 15 účely l6 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART Kant, Duchamp, and Dada | 17 to that of exchange, and the value has shifted from a thoroughly negative to an ambiguously positive. Around World War II and immediately after, the use of the powerful and troubling prefix spread through culture. "Anti-literature" was used of Surrealism in 1935, evidently from a feeling like that expressed in Aristotle's Poetics that any narrative must have a beginning, a middle, and an end. Dylan Thomas, in 1939, said, "I like the idea of [Henry] Miller's anti-literature," perhaps referring to Miller's intense mixture of art and life, fiction and journalism. Jean-Paul Sartre, in 1959, referred to "anti-novels" which, while they pretend to be novels, "make use of the novel to challenge the novel." In connection with Ionesco one encounters the term "anti-theatre" in 1958 and "anti-play" in 1963.1 Argentine poet Nicanor Parra used the term "anti-poem" in 1967-2 In the visual arts the prefix came into use early in the twentieth century. Tristan Tzara, an enthusiastic user of the prefix, had "anti-philosophy" and "anti-philosopher" (twice), "anti-human," "anti-psychology," and "anti-Dada-ist" in his Seven Dada Manifestos and Lampisteries, all before 1920.3 In 1921, in New York Dada, he uses the term "anti 'nuance'" ("Dada is an anti 'nuance' cream"*). Elsewhere in writings around 1920 he says "anti-objective," "anti-dogmatism," and "anti-man." His usage seems to merge the oppositional and exchange meanings. In 1918, in the third issue of the magazine Dada, Tzara referred to Picabia as "the anti-painter"5 and in a 1919 text on the same artist he used the adjectival form, "anti-artistic."* In the same year he used the noun form, "anti-art," in a description of a "Dada evening."7 Andre Breton used the noun form, "anti-art," in his Second Surrealist Manifesto of 1930 in a passage where he apparently tries to distance himself from Tzara.8 The term anti-art, finally, was not used by the Dadaists themselves nearly as much as it was used about them a generation later—though the Dadaists did often speak of the death of art, of being against art, disintegrating or destroying art, and so on. ("How often," Berlin Dadaist Richard Huelsenbeck asks, "did we roar: Art is dead, long live Dada!"9) In the term anti-art in the twentieth century both the meanings "opposed to" and "instead of" are at work. To be an anti-pope one does not have to be a pope, one simply has to be against the pope. But "to be an anti-painter...," as one author has observed, "one must first be a painter."10 An anti-painter exists within painting and operates within it in such a way as to counter what has come to seem given or natural about it. "The anti-artists," as an anonymous author wrote in The Listener in 1959, "are those who in their work have attempted to deny or break with every conceivable canon of style, taste, or convention that may have been established by the practice of artists in the past."11 Anti-art is not, in other words, a non-art; it may simply be a case of art that attempts to turn the dominant art of its time upside down and expose its underside-the side that is usually repressed. It is apt to take confrontational and antagonistic positions, turning traditional premises against themselves. "Anti-art is art because it has entered into a dialectical dialogue with art, re-exposing contradictions that art has tried to conceal."12 Marcel Duchamp, of whom the term may have been used more than anyone else,13 was ambivalent about it. In an interview of 1963 he says, "Art or anti-art? That was the question I was asking myself when I returned from Munich in 1912 and had to take decisions: whether to give up painting, the painting one might call pure or painting for painting's sake, and to introduce very different elements totally alien to painting."14 "Art or anti-art" would seem to be the phraseology of 1963 rather than 1912. Clearly Duchamp chose what he here calls anti-art. But in an interview of 1968, when asked if he was an anti-artist, he abjured the term: "The word 'anti,'" he said, "annoys me a little, because whether you are anti or for, it's two sides of the same thing. I would like to be completely-I don't know what you say—nonexistent—in~ stead of being for or against."15 Regardless, the term has come to be closely associated with him. An article of 1945 is entitled, "Marcel Duchamp, Anti-Artist."16 A recent book about him bears the title, Marcel Duchamp: Art as Anti-Art.17 One author refers to "Marcel Duchamp's anti-art halo;"18 another declares that anti-art is "Marcel Duchamp's legacy."19 In the art discourse in general, the term is used of Dada (which lasted officially from 1916-1921) and of certain events a generation or two later which were known at first as Neo-Dada because they revived the anti-art orientation and pursued it farther. As one author wrote in 1974, "Recent events and developments in the art world show that the dada spirit is very much alive."20 In both cases a turning to anti-art was precipitated by a massive war with which the old aesthetic art seemed somehow to have been complicit, and by which it seemed to have been discredited. Huelsenbeck explained, "We had found in the war that Goethe and Schiller and Beauty added up to killing and blood-shed and murder. It was a terrific shock to us."21 As Tristan Tzara put it, "The beginnings of Dada were not the beginnings of an art, but those of a disgust."22 And Hugo Ball on World War I: "It is...the devil himself that has broken loose now. Ideals are only labels that have been stuck on. Everything has been shaken to its very foundations."23 Skenováno pro studijní účely 18 | ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART The relation between the two periods may be described as roots and branches. The anti-art period associated with World War I established the main strategies, but without nuanced focus; the second anti-art period, after World War II, worked out nuanced ramifications of the blunter and cruder practices of the first. In between the two periods—in a world distracted in part by the more rudimentary problems of the Great Depression—the first revolution of anti-art more or less passed from memory. The first period, Dada itself, as Duchamp remarked, had been "like a brushfire, soon forgotten";24 the second period, Neo-Dada and what followed from it, lasted much longer and may have become a semi-permanent part of the way culture deals with art. In the 1960s the term came into its own. Duchamp used it in 1963 in the former, or original way, referring to "Dada anti-art".25 George Maciunas in his FIuxus Manifesto of the same year said, "Promote living art, anti-art..."26 Two years later, in 1965, the term was used in the second, or later way, to refer to events ongoing at the moment, in the catalogue of the XVI Salon de la Jeune Peinture in Paris. In 1966 the Brazilian artist Helio Oiticica began using it in his manifestos.27 It came subsequently to describe the major developments of Conceptual and Performance Art, which may be regarded as its "triumph." though duchamp is associated with dada, he had worked out his anti-art strategies in 1913-14, two years before Dada was declared into existence in Zurich. His first works of what would come to be called anti-art (and perhaps the first absolutely) can be dated to those years. His trajectory from art into anti-art, then, is, as far as the record shows, the original or paradigmatic one. It can be seen as a reversal of course that unfolded in three stages. First, before 1913, Duchamp had been a more or less conventional Modernist artist working in modes like Cubism, Futurism and Fauvism, and involved in the current issues, such as the widespread curiosity among artists at the time about the Golden Section and the fourth dimension. As he himself put it, "Between 1906 and 1910 or 11,1 vacillated between different styles and was influenced by Fauvism, by Cubism, and sometimes I tried more classical things."28 Then in 1912-13 his advance along that line crashed to a stop in preparation to reverse. He renounced all ideas of schools and tastes and aesthetic preferences and, living a retiring life and producing no art for a while, thought it all over. One year later, in 1913-14, his anti-art strategy had articulated its three Kant, Duchamp, and Dada | 19 main pillars, which are (1) chance, (2) the Readymade, and (3) the procedure of creation by designation. Duchamp's work of the next seven years or so laid the foundation for the art—or anti-art—of the 1960s and after throughout the western world and, in time, much of the rest of the globe. In Cleveland, Ohio, there was an Anti-Art Festival in 1999; in Jakarta, Indonesia, in 2000, there was an International Performance Anti Art Festival. All such developments must be traced back to some personal inner decision made by Duchamp in his year of thinking things over. Yet most books on Duchamp fail to offer credible or even sober explanations for his swift and absolute reversal from art to anti-art in 1912-13. A notorious psychoanalytic explanation was offered by Arturo Schwartz and followed by some others.29 Schwartz held that Duchamp was incestu-ously in love with his sister Suzanne and, when she married in 1911, he underwent a psychotic break and thereafter attempted to kill the things he had loved before, such as art. Other authors who tend toward psychoanalytic interpretations of art, such as Donald Kuspit, have hypothesized that inadequate mothering instilled in Duchamp an inability to feel emotions, including aesthetic feeling, a problem that excluded him from real art and left him forlornly holding the snow shovel.30 A second proposed account emphasizes bitterness over professional failure. Duchamp, on this view, lacked talent as an artist, while both his older brothers did have genuine talent, for which he resented them; when the Salon des Independants, in 1912, rejected his Nude Descending a Staircase, No. 2, he reacted with resentment against the art establishment for forcing him to confront his failure as an artist, and proceeded to invent an anti-art practice that would both conceal his lack of talent and enact his revenge on the established art world.31 There are two problems about these "explanations": first, that there is not a shred of evidence for either of them, and second that, contrary to art historical practice in general, these authors have not explained Duchamp's work by the inner sense it makes or fails to make, but by supposed psychological causes of a type that would never be brought up in discussion of, say, Cezanne, though they may be available; so on two counts one has to wonder about the motivations behind these explanations. Nevermind the festivals in Cleveland and Jakarta, there is still intense and troubled feeling about anti-art. Elsewhere I have proposed a different accounting for which there is at least some bolstering evidence in Duchamp's own words, and of which an abbreviated rendition follows.32 Skenováno pro studijní účely 20 | ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART in the second of the three stages outlined above, roughly the year 1913—the turnaround year—Duchamp, confessedly upset by the Salon's rejection of Nude #2 in 1912, retired for a respite from the world of battling art styles and theories and took a part-time job as librarian in the quiet Bibliotheque Sainte-Genevieve in Paris.33 Toward the end of that year, entering the third stage of the transition, he began to make artworks again, but this time as a dedicated and canny anti-artist, ready to make his move. One must pause over that second stage before the third will make sense. Duchamp later said that he took the librarian position at Ste.-Genevieve put of disgust with art and art politics after the Independants' refusal to exhibit Nude Descending a Staircase, No. 2. The Cubist judges had decided the painting was too Futurist: Cubists do not portray sequential glimpses of a moving thing at different moments of its movement, but multiple views of a static thing at the same moment. "Cubism had lasted two or three years," Duchamp objected, "and they already had an absolutely clear, dogmatic line on it... as a reaction against such behavior coming from artists whom I had believed to be free, I got a job."34 It was, according to this account, not resentment over his personal rejection, but disapproval of the judges' eagerness to rigidify around a certain framework of taste, that caused him to withdraw from that milieu to think things over. In the library, Duchamp sat at a desk for four hours a day with no duties but occasionally to give advice about where to locate a book. By his own account he read and thought a good deal and withdrew from social contacts, living quite solitary. He later recalled that during this time he "had had the chance...of going through the works of the Greek philosophers once more, and that the one which he appreciated most and found closest to his own interests was Pyrrho[n]."35 The recollection has been ignored, as if on the assumption that one's preferences in philosophy are no more influential behaviorally than one's preferences in art; but Duchamp seems to have been serious about this preference and to have welcomed its influence on his life.36 As he would later say, "I was thoroughly conscious...of a desire to effect a purgation in myself."37 In this turning-point year, he welcomed an influence which would reinforce his own feelings of intellectual doubt. Duchamp may have been pointed toward Pyrrhon in part by the tradition of Montaigne and 16th century neo-Pyrrhonism, which had somewhat naturalized Pyrrhon's attitude of extreme skepticism in France. Perhaps his mood was affected by his sister's wedding two years before—who knows?— and perhaps his disappointment in the Salon one year before had intensified Kant, Duchamp, and Dada | 21 his already skeptical inclination. But such issues are irrelevant. The point is that he seems to have awakened from a kind of dogmatic slumber during his investigation of Pyrrhonism, and the way of thinking he constructed for himself thereafter, and stuck with for the rest of his life, must stand on its own as a thought-out position. pyrrhon of elis (ca. 365"275 b c) started out as a painter but abandoned art for philosophy. "He had no positive teaching," says an ancient authority, "but a Pyrrhonist is one who in manner and in life resembles Pyrrho[n]."3S Two sayings attributed to him have survived: first, "Nothing really exists, but human life is governed by convention." To exist, in the context of classical ontology, means to have an unchanging essence, so that statements about an existing entity are objectively either true or false. Instead, Pyrrhon suggests that things indefinite in themselves are made to appear this way or that by human conventions and opinions, which may claim to be based on essential truths, but are not. The second saying reinforces this idea: "Nothing is in itself more this than that." The reality that we seek to delimit through our judgments and opinions, then, actually has no limits. According to Pyrrhon's teaching as reported by one of his students, Timon of Phlius,39 things are indistinct from one another, and thus are not to be preferred over one another, but should be regarded with indifference. Without fixed essences, they are nonstable, and hence are nonjudgeable, or unable to be contained by concepts. If nothing is true, the Pyrrhonists felt, then nothing is false either; for the false can only be defined by its contradiction of the true. Therefore, Timon concludes, "Neither our perceptions nor our opinions are either true or false." Language, in other words, is simply irrelevant to claims of truth; the delimiting of reality is not its proper function, which lies at the simpler levels of practical locutions and social intercourse. Accordingly, Timon says, we should remain "without opinions" and "indifferent," beyond the tumult of the fluctuations of yes and no. Thus the Pyrrhonist moves into a posture characterized by "nonspeech" {aphasia). This, presumably, is why Pyrrhon wrote no treatise on his thinking, but taught by example, demonstrating his ideas in his behavior. The "Law of the Excluded Middle," a principle of Aristotelian logic, holds that there is no middle position between A and not-A, true and not-true, and so on. Pyrrhonism confutes this, establishing a position that is neither affirmation nor negation but a kind of attention that attempts to remain neutral and impartial while still alert and vivid. This was the "indifference" Skenováno pro studijní účely 22 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART Kant, Duchamp, and Dada | 23 (apatheia) that would lead to "imperturbability" (ataraxia). The Pyrrhon-ists recommended an attitude of indifference toward not only philosophical questions but also the entanglements of everyday life, which are based on hidden philosophical presuppositions. It seems that Duchamp had a natural sympathy for this stance, and that reading about Pyrrhonism drove it out in the open for him, providing him with an intellectual basis for, and a sense of clarity about, his own skeptical inclination. Duchamp seems, for example, to have focused clearly on the idea of the Excluded Middle (with or without the name). He once explained the famous door in his Paris studio, at 11 rue Larrey, which when it closed one doorway opened another, as "a refutation of the Cartesian proverb: 'A door must be either open or shut"'40—that is, as a refutation of the Law of the Excluded Middle. In a letter of 1929, he wrote, "Anything one does is all right and I refuse to fight for this or that opinion or their contrary"41—again a rejection of Excluded Middle, implying a third position in addition to a proposition and its contrary, A and not-A. After his months of reading in the library, Duchamp began to develop a vocabulary with which to infuse Pyrrhonism into the discourse about art. He would speak often of indifference, and coined phrases such as the "beauty of indifference," the "irony of indifference" and the "liberty of indifference."42 Pyrrhon's recommendation to cultivate a neglect of opinions is reflected frequently in Duchamp's discourse. Once, when asked about his >\ "moral position" at a certain time in the past, for example, he replied, "I ^ had no position."43 Similarly, when discussing some critical notes he had written on various artists, he said, "I didn't take sides."44 To Arturo Schwarz he explained, "You see, I don't want to be pinned down to any position. My position is the lack of a position."45 "To talk about truth and real, absolute judgment," he also remarked, "I don't believe in it at all."46 The following dialogue took place with Pierre Cabanne: Cabanne: One has the impression that every time you commit yourself to a position, you attenuate it by irony or sarcasm. Duchamp: i always do. Because I don't believe in positions, v Cabanne: But what do you_believe in? ^> Duchamp: Nothing, of course! The word "belief" is another error. It's like the word "judgment." They're both horrible ideas, on which the world is based. Cabanne: Nevertheless, you believe in yourself? Duchamp: i don't believe in the word "being." The idea of being is a human ^ I invention.... It's an essential concept which doesn't exist at all in reality.47 Duchamp's position of no-position directly relates to Pyrrhonism, as does much else in the exchange. The critique of the concept of being, with its presumption that being involves essence, is central to Pyrrhonism ("Nothing really exists..."). The being/nonbeing pair are alternatives like A and not-A, and the Pyrrhonist "position" is outside such pairs. It is thus also, as Duchamp saw, outside the concepts of self, which supposedly is, and belief, which either affirms or negates. The Pyrrhonist "position" is an absolute, universal doubt—the position of a "lack of position." A little later this attitude would become basic to Dada, of which Huelsenbeck wrote, "You cannot pinpoint the principles of dada... it opposes any ideology whatsoever."48 And also: "Doubt became our life."*9 This anti-philosophy laid the foundation for key areas of Duchamp's work with which he proposed to articulate doubt in the realm of art; anti-philosophy led, in other words, to anti-art. When he was asked, for example, what determined his choices of Readymades, he replied, "It's very difficult to choose an object, because, at the end of 15 days, you begin to like it or to hate it. You have to approach something with an indifference, as if you had no aesthetic emotion. The choice of Readymades is always based on visual indifference and, at the same time, on the total absence of good or bad taste."50 Two works of 1913-1914 reveal the main lines of the ■strategy. The first Readymade, Bicycle Wheel, 1913, mocked the ideas of aesthetic emotion, touch, craftsmanship, innovation, good taste, and sanctity. Three Standard Stoppages, 1913-14—three strings one meter long dropped from one meter height, the configurations in which they fell to be used as future standards—pushed chance to the center of the artmaking process. These works appeared at the beginning of the third stage of the reversal, when, having been Pyrrhonized in the second, Duchamp returned to art in the third—but as an anti-artist championing "visual indifference" and "the total absence of good or bad taste." In terms of the art theory of the day, the rejection of taste leads to an anti-aesthetic; Duchamp's particular form of anti-art was anti-aesthetic art—which meant particularly, at the time, anti-Cubism.51 His answer to the problem of aesthetic art was the Readymade. "When I discovered Readymades," he wrote in 1962 to Hans Richter, "I thought to discourage aesthetics." But later artists, he continued, "have taken my Readymades and found aesthetic beauty in them. I threw the bottle-rack and the urinal into their faces as a challenge and now they admire them for their aesthetic beauty."52 The Readymades carry Pyrrhonist indifference into the realm of Skenováno pro studijní účely 24 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART art, and with its arrival the judgment of taste went out the window. This is why a devotee of traditional sculptural values such as Rosalind Krauss refers to the Readymades as '"sculptures'" that Duchamp "slipped into the stream of aesthetic discourse."53 The scare-quotes on '"sculptures'" suggest that the claim is charlatanry. The implication is that the lack of the artist's touch, along with the renunciation of imaginative transformation, makes the sculpture of the found object inauthentic. Yet the Readymade has exerted more influence on the sculpture of the last two generations than all other models and influences put together. A negative judgment about it implies a wholesale rejection of the last two generations of art history. For that era, not aesthetic feeling but Pyrrhonist indifference was the touchstone. Duchamp particularly fit this mold. If a true Pyrrhonist is, as the ancient text says, "one who resembles Pyrrhon," Duchamp could well be given that title. The essence of Pyrrhon's teaching, in the words of one ancient author, was that "he would maintain the same composure at all times"54—something frequently said of Duchamp. (One author goes so far as to say that Duchamp had "the sort of absolute indifference that mystics attain or seek to attain."55) Similarly, the report that Pyrrhon "would withdraw from the world and live in solitude" recalls Duchamp's often reclusive life-style. The Pyrrhonists never presented a positive teaching, save a Zenlike admonition to attend to the quality of every present moment without the distracting overlays of opinions or interpretations; and Duchamp never wrote a manifesto, or pontificated on what art should be, except by example. He turned from a so-called "retinal" art to an art with a philosophical function immediately after reading that Pyrrhon had quit painting for philosophy. He had, on the first plateau of the transition, been caught up in the stream of aestheticism that flowed through his family home and the society roundabout. Emerging from the second plateau (the library) onto the third (anti-art), it was as if he had awakened from a childish dream into plain everyday reality, and saw that it was enough. Still, despite his indifference, he evidently still cared to project this realization outside of himself before the eyes of the world. duchamp said he was engaged in "a renunciation of all aesthetics, in the ordinary sense of the word."56 The qualifying phrase "in the ordinary sense of the word" shows that this was not, as it has often been called, an "aesthetic nihilism."57 In European art since the 18th century, aesthetics "in the ordinary sense of the word" means the aesthetic theory briefly adumbrated by the third Earl of Shaftesbury and fully articulated by Kant, Duchamp, and Dada \ 25 Kant in his Critique of Judgment (1790), along with various German metaphysical elaborations by Hegel, Schelling, Schopenhauer, and others. This tradition was inherited by the British, especially Clive Bell and Roger Fry, and subsequently Americanized in a simplified form by Clement Greenberg. Whether Duchamp studied Kant along with the Greeks at his desk in the Bibliotheque Sainte-Genevieve is unknown and unimportant; unlike Pyrrhonism, the ideas in question were pervasively in the air; this was, after all, the prevailing system of aesthetics at that time and had been for more than a century. As cerebral an artist as Duchamp had naturally thought about it. According to Marquis, the collector and patron Walter Arensberg once "thought he discerned a pattern in Duchamp's work. T get an impression,' he wrote, 'when I look at our paintings of yours from the point of view of their chronological sequence, of the successive moves in a game of chess.' Duchamp readily agreed to the analogy."58 It was the prevailing system of aesthetics, roughly Kantian, and its hold on Modern art, that Duchamp's work was devised to checkmate. (No doubt Hugo Ball oversimplified it; still he got Duchamp's point when he wrote, "Kant—he is the archenemy; he started it all.")59 Duchamp focused his critique on two sets of ideas. First was the trichotomy of faculties that is embodied in Kant's distinction among his Critiques: the Critique of Pure Reason, the Critique of Practical Reason, and the Critique of Judgment. The idea behind the distinction is adopted from the Nicomachean Ethics, where Aristotle says that the human is made up of three faculties, the cognitive, the ethical (what Kant calls "practical") and the aesthetic (taste or "judgment") (e.g., NE II, VI 3-12). Kant's basic view seems to be that these three faculties are innately separate and isolated from one another, as each of the senses is isolated from the others. As one cannot use hearing to test a perception of seeing, so the cognitive faculty cannot be used to confirm or refute a judgment of either of the others, and so on. Each faculty is alone in judging its proper domain. This is the root of formalism, the simplified approach that Greenberg derived from Kant's theory: if only the aesthetic faculty can be relevant to judgments of taste, then nothing ethical or cognitive may enter in—only the unmediated response to forms and colors. When Duchamp declared (in an interview with James Johnson Sweeney)60 that he wanted "to put painting once again at the service of the mind" he was directly attacking this doctrine, announcing that art can be based on the cognitive faculty as well as the aesthetic. This was the foundational principle of what would later be called Conceptual Art. The introduction of text into visual works would increase until a situation was reached in which Skenováno pro studijní účely 26 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART text alone could count as a work of Fine Art rather than of literature. A second aspect of Modernist aesthetics that Duchamp wanted to reduce to inconsequentiality goes back to the section of the Critique of Judgment called the "Analytic of the Beautiful." There Kant posits what he calls four "moments," each comprising a related group of propositions. According to the first "moment" the pure aesthetic judgment or sense of taste has nothing to do with cognition or concepts. This, as already remarked, was perhaps the central target of Duchamp's revisions—the basis of his desire not to be "stupid as a painter." Kant's second moment attributes universality to the aesthetic judgment, which is held to be the same in all people, a sensus communis as Kant put it. Some disagreement may of course arise, but only because of subjective distortions of a faculty everywhere constant in itself. In this view, which held centerstage from Kant through Greenberg, an artwork is objectively good or bad, right or wrong, depending on its conformity to the universal judgment of taste. But only the individual whose faculty of taste is not distorted can detect the universal and make the unerring judgment. This is the basis of formalism's emphasis on "quality" and its elevation of the critic, such as Greenberg, to an authority without appeal. The third moment argues that the aesthetic judgment is purposeless or functionless, that it is, in other words, above the tumults and desires of worldliness. This is the basis of formalism's distinction between high and low, or pure and practical, art. It is also related to the idea of art as a higher spiritual realm, above the baser instincts. And the fourth moment, rather like the second, posits the a priori necessity of the aesthetic judgment, which, properly exercised, is held to be necessarily correct, as assumed in the dogmatic authoritarianism displayed in their day by many formalist critics. The four moments collaborate in defining the foundation of the Kantian or formalist doctrine, the notion of a special faculty of taste through which we respond to art. Being like a sense, like seeing or scenting, this quality is noncognitive and nonconceptual; it is innate and identical in everyone; it is a higher faculty, above worldly concerns; it is governed by its own inner necessity. It is, in brief, much like a soul. Duchamp, an anti-transcendentalist, was put off by this concept which posited a higher authority, beyond appeal, in certain aesthetic judgments. "I consider taste," he once remarked in an interview, "-bad or good-the greatest enemy of art."61 "I tried to remain aloof from personal taste," he went on. When asked the motivation behind the Readymades he gave the Pyrrhonist response: "Indifference. Indifference to taste. The common factor is indifference."62 In addition to his vigorous rejection of the centerpiece of Kant's theory, Kant, Duchamp, and Dada | 27 Duchamp evinces in his oeuvre a theoretical framework involving counter-positions, point by point, to the other leading elements of that theory. For example, the "pure" aesthetics implies that literature or language cannot be art, since words are conceptual entities; Duchamp's inclusion of linguistic elements in his work—punning titles and inscriptions, sets of notes—forces the dilemma that either these works are not art or art is conceptual as much as sensual. The Readymades take aim at the idea of the universal sense of taste; calling a urinal "art," for example, resulted in a rift of opinion so intense as to throw into question the idea of a sensus communis; they also deny the idea of art's noble separateness from the world, and the Romantic myth of Genius which demonstrates itself through innovation. The introduction of chance procedures illustrates a mode of artistic decision-making that takes literally Kant's injunction that aesthetics should lie outside human desires and prejudices, and yet is not even conceivably acceptable in Kantian terms. The arbitrary procedure of designation eliminates the function of the faculty of taste, which is fundamentally to recognize art works. At the same time, it lampoons the Kantian notion of the aesthetic judgment as "necessary". And so forth.63 Central to Duchamp's anti-art strategy was the procedure of creation-by-designation. If an artist designates something as art, he felt, that makes it art; nothing more is needed. If it is accepted that a certain person is an artist, and if he says a certain object is his artwork, there is no appeal. Who should know if not the artist? There is an assumption about language involved akin to the primary insight in Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations, that linguistic meaning depends upon usage alone; in other words, whatever is called art is art; there is nothing else that being art could possibly mean.64 In a slightly broader sense, if something is contextualized socially as an art object, then it must be an art object, at least for that society at that time; the context serves as a designation. Duchamp designated his Readymades by signing them, as artworks are signed, and by contextualizing them, sometimes, in art exhibitions. Creation by designation, in a variety of formal modes, became the basic procedure of anti-art in the post-World War II period. Early Conceptual artists devised different methods of designation, the method being in effect a piece in itself, expressing the artist's sense of personal style. Designation and indifference render the faculty of taste obsolescent. And that is the most significant element in Kant's aesthetic—the idea that taste is a universal constant, an unchanging faculty, an essence, something very like the Christian-Platonic soul. This is the element of his thinking that Skenováno pro studijní účely 28 I ORIGIKS OF AKT1-ART Kant, Duchamp, and Dada \ 2,9 most contradicts the Pyrrhonist position, which denies the possibility of essences (including the self) and abstains from all the judgments to which belief in them might give rise. Aesthetics for Duchamp had nothing to do with some transcendentally autonomous and self-validating soul-like faculty. Instead, he proposed a relativistic view of taste as "a habit. The repetition of something already accepted. If you start something over several times, it becomes taste. Good or bad, it's the same thing, it's still taste."65 Taste, then, is simply the shape of one's limitations, the ingrained habitual system of prejudices that is the stumbling block to a generalized appreciation of life. The judgments made by people who believe in a transcendent faculty of taste are simply unwitting projections of their habits. As Duchamp told Cabanne, "One stores up in oneself such a language of tastes, good or bad, that when one looks at something, if that something isn't an echo of yourself, then you do not even look at it. But I try anyway."66 His goal, then, was "to reduce my personal taste to zero."67 If the constrictions of habit, of "taste" and its belief system, could be eliminated, Duchamp felt, life could be a "sort of constant euphoria,"68 a Pyrrhonist realm of beatific imperturbability and generalized openness. Many of the qualities that critics hostile to anti-art have regarded as deficiencies in Duchamp's oeuvre are calculated demonstrations of his point of view. The work's visual unimpressiveness expresses a dismissal of the conventional retinal criteria of taste. Its appearance of internal inconsistency, its shifts of modes, genres, and materials, express a desire not to define or to delimit the space in which art unfolds. The slightness of the oeuvre, which psychoanalytically inclined critics have taken as evidence of emotional problems, seems rather to reflect Duchamp's refusal to repeat himself, on the ground that repetition would establish his work as merely one style among many, competing with others for authority, like the dogmatic Cubism of the 1912 Salon. To create many works on the same principle is to be dominated by a dead habit. Duchamp once remarked, "I've had thirty-three ideas; I've made thirty-three paintings."69 Chance and the Readymade, Duchamp's two great tactics for creating art that neither pleased nor offended his aesthetics of indifference, were his avenues for the discovery of objects that he had not been taught to see by his experience of looking at art. Aware that taste changes from one historical phase to the next, and thus cannot really be either universal or necessary, Duchamp referred to it as "a fleeting infatuation," which momentarily "disappears."70 "Why," he asked, "must we worship principles which in 50 or 100 years will no longer apply?"71 In addition to the Kantian faculty of taste, another major element of "aesthetics in the ordinary sense of the word" was the myth of art's sacred-ness promulgated by Kant's successors. To Hegel, for example, the successful artwork was an embodiment of the absolute or the infinite; it represented, he wrote, the "spirit of beauty...to complete which the history of the world will require its evolution of centuries."72 According to Hegel's contemporary, Schelling, art "opens ... the holy of holies... When a great painting comes into being it is as though the invisible curtain that separates the real from the ideal world is raised."73 For Schopenhauer, similarly, art was "the copy of the [Platonic] Ideas"—that is, the embodiment of eternal and sacred truths.74 The Romantic tradition, which includes late Modernism, deeply incorporated this attitude. For Duchamp, however, art was not a link to the universal and permanent, a channel toward the sublime,75 but a device with which to break mental and emotional habits, and to discourage the projection of one's self and one's opinions, or one's culture's opinions, as absolute. It was a vehicle of Pyrrhonist indifference. Where the Romantic artist was supposedly a kind of priest or mystic adventurer, Duchamp, in connection with quitting art, remarked that he was "defrocked."76 "I'm afraid I'm an agnostic in art." he said. "I just don't believe in it with all the mystical trimmings."77 Duchamp's works were a systematic undermining of the quasi-religious "aura" which Walter Benjamin was to discuss. Mass-produced, manufactured, everyday objects, such as the Readymades, have no "aura," nor are they unique or original. Neither are the photographs and mechanical reproductions that frequently appear in Duchamp's work. The use of chance also takes traditional aesthetic decision-making out of art, emphasizing its embeddedness in nature. The procedure of designation presents the faculty of taste as irrelevant and arbitrary. The technique of mechanical drawing (which Duchamp adopted in 1914) bleaches the emotionality out of images. Even Duchamp's adoption of a female persona, Rrose Selavy, was a negation of art's Romantic-era male-heroic tradition. Duchamp's work, finally, is a precise and mature theoretical critique or a well thought-out chess game; the aim of the chess game was the overthrow of the Kantian aesthetic along with the demonstration of a Pyrrhonist openness as a space for the art of the future to move in. this reading of duchamp's work as a theory expressed with- out words applies even to his vaunted retirement from art-making for chess-playing, which supposedly happened in 1923. There has always been an ambiguity about this "retirement," since Duchamp continued to make^vorks in a desultory way and devoted himself seriously, but in secret, for years to Skenováno pro studijní účely 3D I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART Kant, Duchamp, and Dada \ 31 the Etant Donne, his last work, found in a private room of his apartment in New York after his death. It would seem that Duchamp's "retirement" was a gesture, not quite a reality, in line with his remark that the artist of the future will go underground. Actually, the idea of retiring from art seems to have been common in the milieu of Dada. It was attractive in a negative way as the ultimate anti-art gesture. Huelsenbeck recalls that in those days he and Arp would talk a lot about Rimbaud because "he had abandoned art." "What did it mean," he would wonder, "to leave art behind?"78 "Such an act," he concluded, perhaps along lines that parallel thoughts of Duchamp, "contained the possibility of a re-evauluation of art as such." "These reflections," he notes, "developed into the 'anti-art' sentiments anticipated by Duchamp and Man Ray in New York."751 The idea seems to have been in the air. Ribemont-Dessaignes, in his History of Dada in 1931, remarked that "the case of Rimbaud was on the order of the day, and for a long time did not cease to preoccupy them [the Dadaists]..."80 Hugo Ball's retirement from art and poetry in 1917 caught people's attention in that milieu. "My opinion on art," Huelsenbeck recalls, "was the opinion of those who abandon her like an unfaithful sweetheart."81 In the second wave of anti-art, in the 1960s and '70s, Duchamp's retirement was interpreted as an art gesture, even an artwork in itself, and became a model for various artists (see especially the chapters on Baldessari and Venet below). It seems in his own day also the act had a certain stylistic eclat, and indeed it may have been understood that way by his fellows. historically, duchamp and dada seem to have been summoned into action by disgust at the events that were leading to and then comprising World War I—what Tzara referred to as "Dadaist disgust."82 Not long after that war the European art world moved away from chance and the Readymade and back into the Kantian aesthetic of Picasso and Matisse, Bonnard and Vuillard. The faculty of taste was back in the saddle again for a long generation. When in the early '60s Duchamp's reputation was reborn—especially in the United States, where he was now a citizen and had his first retrospective in '63 (at the age of 75!)—many young artists agreed that the principles of anti-art had not done their job thoroughly enough the first time, that the "brushfire" needed to be revived and continue its work. Beginning in the 1960s and continuing into the 1970s, many artists in both Europe and America investigated how the incorporation of these principles into their own sensibilities and impulses could provide a map of the unknown terrain Skenovano pro of the future of art. "Happenings and Conceptual art..." as Jack Flam notes, "employ and to a certain extent systematize the symbolic and communicative modes invented by the Dadaists."83 After more than forty years of obscurity Duchamp became, overnight, what Krauss called "the artist of postmodernism." As William Camfield observed: "...the burgeoning interest in Duchamp [in the '6os] coincided with exhilarating developments in avant-garde art, virtually all of which exhibited links of some sort to Duchamp."8* The most powerful of these connections was the linkage between the Readymade and the "found object." So overwhelming has the influence of this element been that one author argues that "Duchampian postmodernism" is based primarily on the Readymade, not on the rest of Duchamp's oeuvre.85 This assessment seems accurate—though chance runs a close second. Formalist critics persist in saying the Large Glass is Duchamp's foremost work, because it retains pictorial surface and composition, but Duchamp himself called the Readymade "perhaps the most important single idea to come out of my work,"86 and it has in fact turned out that way historically. "The readymades," Amelia Jones wrote, "break the Greenbergian 'circle of belief; substituting for it the (anti-Greenbergian) ^osfmodern"87; the Readymade is "paradigmatic of the inherently critical object," and, "The readymade gesture is seen to have precipitated the breakdown of modernism and the instigation of the radical other." In a similar spirit Max KozlofF called the Readymade a "radical metaphysical act," and Greenberg, knowing an enemy when he saw one, referred to Readymade art as "sub-art."88 Because of "Duchamp's emergence as the seminal influence on contemporary art since the 1960s,"89 one author wrote that Duchamp "seems to belong to a younger generation—that of the post-1945 artists of Pop Art, Happenings, Op Art, Minimal Art, Fluxus, Conceptual Art, Postmodernism."90 As another critic wrote, "The ghost of Duchamp haunts postmodernism."91 Jones has recently described Duchamp as the "origin of radical postmodern practices," "authoritative source of postmodern art," "father of postmodernism," "source of American postmodernism," "paterfamilias of postmodernism," "authoritative origin of postmodernism," "originating paternal function for postmodernism," and so on.92 In 1963 John Cage wrote about Duchamp, "The danger remains that he'll get out of the valise."93 And so he did. studijní účely 32 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART 1. All the preceding exempla in this paragraph, and those in the preceding one come from the 1987 supplement to the OED, under "anti" 2. Nicanor Parra, Poems and Antipoems (New York: New Directions, 1967). 3. Tristan Tzara, Seven Dada Manifestos and Lampisteries, English translation by Barbara Wright (London: Calder Publications, 1977), pp. 16,19, 27, 38, 87, 104. 4. Robert Motherwell, ed., The Dada Painters and Poets: An Anthology (Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1981), p. 216, 5. Tristan Tzara, in Richard Huelsenbeck, ed., The Dada Almanac, English edition by Malcolm Green and Alastair Brotchie (London: Atlas Press, 1998), p. 28. 6. Ibid., p. 81. 7. Ibid., p. 34. 8. Andre Breton, The Surrealist Manifestos (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1990), p. 124. 9. Richard Huelsenbeck, Memoirs of a Dada Drummer (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), p. 64 10. For source see note 1 above. It has been objected that this situation breaches Aristotle's Principle of Non-contradiction which says that nothing can be both A and not-A (or artist and anti-artist) at the same time. But anti- is not the same as non-. It might be more accurate to say that the anti-painter is anti-traditional painting, but he still paints, looking for a replacement mode. 11. See note 1 above. 12. Stewart Home, Smile, 3,1984. 13. It has even been attributed to him, mistakenly it seems. Ursula Meyer, in "The Eruption of Anti-Art," (in Gregory Battcock, ed., Idea Art: A Critical Anthology [New York: Dutton, 1973], P-117), says, "At the eve of World War I, Duchamp coined the term Anti-Art," without giving a text reference. Simon Anderson, author of the article "Anti-art" for the Oxford Encyclopedia of Aesthetics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), says, "Duchamp...is credited with coining the term," perhaps thinking of Meyer's statement, but again, like her, giving no source. For discussion of the origin of the term see Appendix 1. 14. "Interview with Jean-Marie Drot," 1963, quoted in Marcel Duchamp, exh. cat. Museum Jean Tinguely, Basel (Berlin: Cantz Publishers, 2002), p. 23, n. 22. 15. Francis Roberts, Interview with Marcel Duchamp, "I Propose to Strain the Laws of Physics," Art News (Dec. 1968), p. 62. 16. Harriet and Sidney Jannis, "Marcel Duchamp, Anti-Artist," View V.i, 1945, reprinted in Joseph Masheck, ed., Marcel Duchamp in Perspective (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey; Prentice Hall, Inc., 1975). pp. 30-40. 17. Jannis Mink, Marcel Duchamp (1887-1968): Art As Anti-Art (Cologne: Benedikt Taschen, 1995.) 18. Helene Parmelin, Art Anti-Art (London: Marion Boyars, 1977), p. 29. 19. Hilton Kramer, New Criterion (October, 1995). Kramer goes on to say that anti-art arose from "a failure of spirit, certainly, and very likely a failure of talent as well." 20. Hans J. Kleinschmidt, "The New Man— Armed with the Weapons of Doubt and Defiance—Introduction," in Huelsenbeck, Memoirs of a Dada Drummer, p. I. 21. Quoted, without reference, in Tony Godfrey, Conceptual Art (London: Phaidon Press, 1998), p. 17. 22. Tzara, Seven Dada Manifestos and Lampisteries, p. 122. 23. John Elderfield, ed., Flight Out of Time: A Dada Diary hy Hugo Ball (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1996), p. 11. 24. Otto Hahn, "Marcel Duchamp Interviewed," L'Express (Paris) no. 684 (July, 1964), pp. 22-23. 25. Videotape, Marcel Duchamp: A Game of Chess, dir. Jean-Marie Drot, 1987. 26. Quoted by Paul Wood, Conceptual Art (New York: Delano Greenidge Editions, 2002), p. 23. 27. See, for example, Helio Oiticica, "Position and Program," in Alexander Alberro and Kant, Duchamp, and Dada | 33 Blake Stimson, eds., Conceptual Art, A Critical Anthology (Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1999), pp. 8-10. 28. "Marcel Duchamp," in Ingenieur du Temp Perdu. Enlretiens avec Pierre Cahanne (Paris: Editions Belfont, 1967), p. 34. 29. Arturo Schwarz, The Complete Works of Marcel Duchamp (London: Thames and Hudson, 1969), and Alice Goldfarb Marquis, Marcel Duchamp, Eros, e'est la Vie, A Biography (Troy, New York: The Whitson Publishing Company, 1981). I should remark en passant that it is outrageous that Duchamp's works will go down to the future (since Schwartz's is the catalogue raisonne) with this idiotic and totally fanciful theory as a distracting piece of baggage. 30. Donald Kuspit, "Marcel Duchamp, Imposter Artist," in Idiosyncratic Identities (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996). 31. Less influential accounts have focused on Duchamp's trip to Munich in the summer of 1912, of which he once remarked, "My stay in Munich was the source of my complete liberation" (Calvin Tompkins, Duchamp, A Biography [New York: Henry Holt, 1996], p. 99). Jack Burn-ham ("Unveiling the Consort," Artforum, March and April 1971; "Duchamp's Bride Stripped Bare," Arts, March, April and May 1972) argues that in Munich Duchamp consulted rare manuscripts from which he learned Hermetic and Cabalistic secrets that changed the direction of his life. De Duve sees Duchamp's trip to Munich as a way of distancing himself from the art-values of the School of Paris, freeing himself for the anti-School of Paris new work that would follow. See Thierry de Duve, "Resonances of Duchamp's Visit to Munich," in Rudolf E. Kuenzli and Francis M. Naumann, eds., Marcel Duchamp, Artist of the Century (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1996), pp. 41-63- 32. In Thomas McEvilley, "Empyrrhical Thinking and Why Kant Can't," Artforum (October, 1988); republished, somewhat revised, as "Duchamp, Pyrrhonism, and the Overthrow of the Kantian Tradition," in Sculpture in the Age of Doubt (New York: Allworth Press, 1999). PP- 49-66. 33. Most authorities give 1913 for the commencement of Duchamp's employment at the library (for example, Octavio Paz [Marcel Duchamp: Appearance Stripped Bare, New York: Seaver Books, 1978], p. 185; Pierre Cabanne [Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp, New York: Da Capo Press, 1979, p. 114]; Anne d'Harnoncourt and Kynaston McShine [eds., Marcel Duchamp, New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1973, p. 14]). At least one gives 1912 (Jean-Christophe Bailly, Duchamp, New York: Universe Books, 1986, p. 112). Lebel describes the period of employment as "early in 1913" (Robert Lebel, Marcel Duchamp, London: Trianon Press, 1959, p. 27). Mink (Marcel Duchamp: Art As Anti-Art, p. 43) says the job ended in May, 1914, but Linda Henderson (Duchamp in Context, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1998, p. 31) points to a letter to Walter Pach in 1915 in which Duchamp mentions the job as if it were still ongoing. 34. Cabanne, Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp, p. 17. Duchamp remarked that the Salon's rejection "helped me to totally escape the past.. .1 said to myself,' Well, if that's the way they want it, then there's no question about me joining a group; one can only count on oneself, one must be a loner.'" (Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp, p. 52.) But he did not say it led to his development of anti-art. 35. Schwarz, Complete Works of Marcel Duchamp, p. 38, note 23. For a discussion of Pyrrhon's thought see Thomas McEvilley, "Penelope's Night Work: Negative Thinking in Greek Philosophy," Krisis 2 (1985), PP- 41-59- Reprinted in Thomas McEvilley and Roger Denson, Capacity: History, the World, and the Self in Contemporary Art and Criticism, (Amsterdam: Overseas Publishers Association [G & B Arts International], 1996). 36. In fact it was very rare for Duchamp to speak in such terms of anyone. The only other philosopher he ever singled out in this way was the nineteenth century German anarchist Max Stirner (1806-1856), whose work he encountered in Munich right before taking the librarian job, as part of the "liberation" referred to in n. 28 above. Stirner, like Pyrrhon, was a philosophical skeptic, and in the book that Duchamp saw, The Ego and Its Own, speaks approvingly about Skenováno pro studijní účely 34 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-AST Kant, Duchamp, and Dada | 35 Pyrrhon (English translation of 191s. p. 28). At the time, says George "Woodcock, Stirner was much read by "rebellious autodidacts" [Anarchism [New York: World Publishing Co.], 1962, p. 99). 37. Interview by James Johnson Sweeney in exh. cat. Eleven Europeans in America, reprinted in Lucy Lippard, ed., Dadas on Art (Englewood Cliff, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1971), p. 141, 38. Diogenes Laertius, Lives and Sayings of the Philosophers, English translation by R. D. Hicks (Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press [Loeb Classical Library], 1966), vol. 2, p. 483. 39. Timon's remarks are preserved in a text of Aristocles found in Hermann Diels, ed., Poeta-rum Philosophorum Fragmenta, fascicle 3, part 1, of U. von Wilamowitz, ed., Poetarum Graeco-rum Fragmenta (Berlin, 1901), pp. 175-76. 40. Marquis, Marcel Duchamp, p. 227. 41. Letter to Katherine Dreier, 1929, quoted ibid., p. 236. 42. See, for example, Paz, Marcel Duchamp, Appearance Stripped Bare, p. 48; Schwarz, Complete Works of Marcel Duchamp, p. 39; Marquis, Marcel Duchamp, p. 182; Harriet and Sidney Jannis, "Marcel Duchamp, Anti-Artist," p. 36. 43. Cabanne, Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp, p. 17 44. Ibid., p. 8s. 45. Quoted in Schwarz, Complete Works of Marcel Duchamp, p. 194. 46. Cabanne, Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp, p. 70. 47- Ibid., pp. 89-90. .48. Kleinschmidt, "The New Man," in Huelsen-beck, Memoirs of a Dada Drummer, pp. vi, xviii. 49. Ibid., p. xxxvii. 50. Cabanne, Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp, p. 48. 51. As William Rubin noted, "Anti-art implied primarily anti-Cubism." William Rubin, Dada, Surrealism, and Their Heritage (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1968), p. 15. 52. Quoted in Alexander Keneas, "The Grand Dada," The New York Times, 3 October 1968, pp. 1, 51. 53. Rosalind E. Krauss, Passages in Modern Sculpture (Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1981), pp. 84, 72. 54. Diogenes Laertius, vol. 2, p. 477. 55. David Myers, "The Mystic," 1970, reprinted in Anthony Hill, Duchamp: Passim: A Marcel Duchamp Anthology (New York and Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach [G and B Arts International], 1994), p. 166. 56. Cabanne, Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp, p. 42. 57. As in Keneas, "The Grand Dada." 58. Marquis, Marcel Duchamp, p. 285 59. Elderfield, ed., Flight Out of Time, p. 11. 60. James Johnson Sweeney, "Interview" The Museum of Modern Art Bulletin, vol. 132, nos. 4-5 (New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1946). 61. Katherine Kuh, "Marcel Duchamp," in her The Artist's Voice: Talks with Seventeen Artists (New York: Harper and Row, 1962). 62. Halm, "Marcel Duchamp Interviewed." 63. Thierry de Duve's book Kant After Duchamp (Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1996) is a strangely ambiguous contribution to the discussion. The author attempts to stay on the fence about Modernism and post-Modernism, saying, for example, "the choice between the modern and the postmodern is a false one" (p. 325). Still, it seems clear that his bottom line is a personal commitment to Modernism. At the beginning (p. xiv) he says he will use "the modern when the issue at stake...is the appreciation of art: the postmodern when it is a matter of looking back, 'archeologically,' on modernity..." So the post-Modern relates to the Modern, and the Modern relates to art; the post-Modern does not really relate to art. Despite the author's attraction to the Duchampian position, a devotion to the Kantian tradition seems finally to have priority. 64. See Timothy Binkley, "Piece: Contra Aesthetics," in Joseph Margolis, ed., Philosophy Looks at the Arts: Contemporary Readings in Aesthetics (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1978), pp. 25-45. 65. Cabanne, Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp, p. 48. 66. Ibid., p. 94. 67. Quoted in Paz, Marcel Duchamp, Appearance Stripped Bare, p. 28. 68. Quoted in Marquis, Marcel Duchamp, p. 96. 69. Quoted by Jacquelyne Baas, Smile of the Buddha: Influences in Western Art from Monet to the Present (forthcoming, University of California Press). 70. Cabanne, Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp, p. 71. 71. Quoted in Keneas, "Grand Dada." Carried to the limit, Duchamp's theory—for it is a theory—duplicates some of what it was intended to oppose. Like the Kantian doctrine of taste, it posits something like a free, pure, absolute faculty of mind, beyond habit systems and conditioning. 72. Georg Wilhelm Friedich Hegel, The Philosophy of Fine Art, in Albert Hofstadter and Richard Kuhns. eds., Philosophies of Art and Beauty (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press [Phoenix books], 1976), p. 445- 73. Friedrich Wilhelm Josef von Schelling, System of Transcendental Idealism, in ibid., p. 373. 74. Quoted in ibid., p. 448, 75. Duchamp sometimes fell into the sublimist kind of discourse, which was all-pervasive during his youth, as when he said, "Art opens onto regions that are not bound by time or space." (Quoted in Paz, Marcel Duchamp, Appearance Stripped Bare, p. 88.) But these remarks are contradicted by countless other statements he made. He felt, for example, that the cracks in the Large Glass brought it into the world: "It's a lot better with the breaks. A hundred times better. It's the destiny of things" (Cabanne, Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp, p. 75.) 76. Ibid., p. 67. 77. Quoted in Calvin Tomkins, The Bride and the Bachelors: Five Masters of theAvant Garde (Har-mondsworth, England: Penguin, 1976), pp. 18-19. 78. Richard Huelsenbeck, "The Dada Drummer," in Kleinschmidt, ed., Memoirs of a Dada Drummer, p. 14. 79. Ibid. 80. Georges Ribemont-Dessaignes, "History of Dada" (1931) in Motherwell, ed., The Dada Painters and Poets, p. 105. 81. Huelsenbeck, "The Dada Drummer," p. 15. 82. Tzara, Seven Dada Manifestos and Lampi-steries, p. 13. 83. Foreword to Motherwell, ed., The Dada Painters and Poets, p. xix. 84. William Camfield, Duchamp's Fountain (Houston: The Menil Collection and Fine Arts Press, 1989), p. 88. 85. Amelia Jones, Postmodernism and the Engendering of Marcel Duchamp (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994), p. xv: "...the American postmodern Duchamp has tended to be reduced to his readymades (and as the 'ready-made Duchamp,' he instigates the critique of the institution." 86. Quoted in Schwartz, Complete Works of Marcel Duchamp, p. 39. 87. Jones, Postmodernism, p. 38. 88. Ibid., pp. 38, 39, 37; Max Kozloff, "Duchamp" (1965), in Renderings: Critical Essays on a Century of Modern Art (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1968), p. 121; Greenberg quoted at Jones, Postmodernism, p. 38. 89. Timothy Shipe in Kuenzli and Naumann, eds., Marcel Duchamp: Artist of the Century, p. 231. 90. Rudolf E. Kuenzli, "Introduction," in Kuenzli and Naumann, eds., Marcel Duchamp, Artist of the Century, p. 1. 91. J.G. Merquior, "Spider and Bee: Toward a Critique of the Postmodern Ideology," in Postmodernism/ICA Documents 4/5, ed. Lisa Appignanesi (London: Institute of Contemporary Art, 1986), pp. 16-18. 92. Amelia Jones, Postmodernism, pp. xi-xvi. 93. John Cage, "Statement Re Duchamp," reprinted in Masheck, ed., Marcel Duchamp in Perspective, pp. 66-69. Skenováno pro studijní účely CHAPTER TWO Out of the Ashes The Twentieth Century as Syllogism orld war ii was a terrible disappointment for human hopes. The air seemed to resonate with the Hegelian gong of the End of History. Everything seemed to have con- verged in a cataclysmic reductio ad absurdum of western civilization. Europe lay in smoking ruins, and in a sense it was as if western civilization had never existed—or had committed suicide. There was a despairing cynicism in the air, as of Gandhi's remark, when asked what he thought of western civilization, "I think it would be a good idea." And there was a despairing fear, too, as in Joseph Beuys's work with sleds pouring out of the back of a VW bus {The Pack, 1969), silently crying: "Flee, flee to the wilderness..." Art, like everything else, seemed somehow to have failed. Surely if artists had produced enough beautiful objects these could have buoyed up the raft of civilization, keeping it afloat. In the years immediately following the war movements such as Abstract Expressionism seemed to be trying to make up for this failure. A flood of color poured over western culture as if to heal it. This was color in art, color released by artists who were desperate to find something helpful to do. Such phenomena as Abstract Expressionism and Color Field painting were attempts to redeem history, to see the cataclysm as simply another appearance of the terror-sublime—an experience mankind had survived before and had even used as a subject for pleasing artworks. It's true that the terror of the sublime, as Pseudo-Longinus had put it in the Roman Empire, was the terror of the end of the world—but only as representation. "Longinus" had said that in a sublime image the whole world might be turned upside down and torn apart1—much what had in fact begun to happen just before the Abstract Expressionists commenced their single-minded search for formulaic representations of the sublime. Perhaps (whispered an unspoken implication), by dealing with representations of the End, the real thing could be averted. Transcendentalist art proceeded to 37 Skenováno pro studijní účely 38 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART work out its graphic schemes for an annihilationist metaphysics as a proxy for the real thing—you might call it a form of sympathetic magic. Color began to intensify and expand, covering the canvas with more and more uncompromising thoroughness, first squeezing the figure, then engulfing and eradicating it, like a mushroom cloud. In 1947 Barnett Newman, seeking the sublime, painted the nearly monochrome Onement I, and in the same year Jackson Pollock's breakthrough came with the dripped and poured works Full Fathom Five and Galaxy. The absence of figures in these works was sinister—implying the end of humanity—but no one involved quite realized that yet. In Onement I the figures had already vanished into the ground, leaving only the seam where the surface was closing over them. The Pollocks showed the world in a serene yet frenzied meltdown, like a snapshot catching each thing in the process of becoming something else. These were end-of-the-world paintings. Though they seem to have been intended to heal the world's wounds with ministrations of the spirit through color, it was healing through forgetfulness, through oblivion, through denial, that they somewhat hiddenly proposed. Meanwhile, the colors poured out like bodily fluids from wounds. What fauvism had prophesied but failed to accomplish came about in Abstract Expressionism and Color Field painting: the aesthetic feeling rising from the presence of color at last became truly overwhelming. Newman spoke of wanting to discover how far you could "stretch a red," in a mood that led some time later to Jules Olitski's remark that he sought an effect as of powdered pigment flung into the air, the color saturating the entire space three-dimensionally, like fallout. Art and the viewer of art were drowning together in a swelling sea of sensibility. As the prophet of color, Yves Klein, indicated in the '50s, the individual self could dissolve into color like a particular disappearing into the universal.2 That's what the closing zipper of Onement 1 had portrayed. Such activity became wildly popular among the educated and privileged while the afterecho of Hiroshima still reverberated. The giddiness in the post-war mood was something like Goethe's Werther falling in love with the sublime and killing himself ecstatically. It seemed as if a self-destructive urge in the disguise of an ecstatic invitation had overtaken the culture unawares. Suggestions of death and the afterlife proliferated. In 1953 Ad Reinhardt's paintings became all black, while Robert Motherwell's seemed to show castrated testicles hanging over a ragged field ravaged by gouges and streaked with dark blood. Mark Rothko, at work in his studio on the chapel paintings with which he proposed to show "the infinity of death," inquired of visitors Out of the Ashes | 39 whether they thought the world could last another fifteen years.3 There seemed litde difference between a world that had weltered in its blood and a world that had drowned in beauty. Finally, some survival response set in. Now there must be an attempt to wash the world clean of color for a while. The need for anti-art began to come clear once more. This war more than most had clanged with a doomed finality, a world-ending type of cataclysm such as many mythologies have foretold: the wolf of unknowing coming out to devour the world at the end of the Icelandic cycle, the fire of Siva roaring at the end of a yuga, Berossus's ice thickening over the cries of the dying. But like such so-called endings in general, it didn't really foretell the end of the world—only of a period of the world: it was the end of Modernism that was announced. What ensued was the drama out of which post-Modernism was born. It unfolded in three stages which can be compared to the three limbs of an Hegelian syllogism, in which the first two limbs mutually combust, as it were, to "sublate," rising like a phoenix as the third. The first limb, the thesis, was the aesthetic statement—the affirmation of the redeeming force of abstract art, especially of absolute color. The second, the antithesis, was a terrified reaction away from a redemption that operated through eradicating the sufferer along with the suffering. Finally, the third limb, or synthesis: a resolution of oppositions in a new thesis that compromises the old polarities and becomes the first step of a new syllogism—a way to go on. These three stages can be called Modernism, anti-Modernism, and post-Modernism. in terms of the theory of art, modernism featured the idea that the aesthetic faculty was autonomous of or separate from the rest of the personality. This led (under Clement Greenberg's guidance) to the insistence that only shapes and colors could legitimately enter into a work of visual art, or be invoked in evaluating one. No ideas, words, or representations of things were to be allowed; no references to the world, no extra-aesthetic feelings such as anger or pity—in short, nothing that refers to anything beyond its own presence as a shape or a color. It was believed that shape and color, if successfully divorced from all reference and suggestion, would directly and immediately address the soul, which had been slumbering, and reawaken it. The soul, in this view, was to be known as the faculty of taste (or "judgment"), and was to be considered beyond any intellectual doubts or moral hesitations.. As sterile as it now sounds, this was the formalist position, solidly in favor of the sole legitimacy of abstract art, freed from the world by relinquishing (or, supposedly, rising above) the task of representation. It was Skenováno pro studijní účely 40 | ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART more or less the same as the fascist theory enunciated by Plato in his Republic and Philebus, where representational art, with its references to the world here and now, was to be banned, but abstract art, which supposedly referred to eternal truths in the beyond, would be permitted. In the formalist view also, abstract art was considered ultimately real because it embodied timeless principles, or universals, and tuning in to it could, supposedly, adjust the tuning of one's soul. In its rejection of representation, formalism was also much like the view of both Byzantine and Islamic Iconoclasts, who held that representational art was to be spurned for the triviality of its reference system, but abstract art, because it referred only to the Beyond, should be regarded as sacred. The idea was that only the Beyond is ultimately true, so the really true art can refer only to it. Art's ancient connection with religion grew secretly stronger in the glowing premonition Hiroshima offered of what William Faulkner, in his Nobel Prize address of 1950» called "that last red and dyih sunset"—or what Newman called "stretching a red." But questions remained. There was something wrong with the insistence on colors and shapes. Since the artist was supposedly not representing things, why were there shapes in the picture at all? Already in the nineteenth century, under the impact of Romantic urges, this question had been in the air. The Romantic soul, with its worship of the impulse toward pure freedom, adored the idea of dissolving itself into color, but the linear boundaries of shapes threatened to block its rush toward dissolution. The shapes turned out to be like prisons that kept the spirit from filling up entirely with the intoxication of color presence. It was for the sake of spiritual freedom that Eugene Delacroix announced "The Battle Between Line and Color," which was later mythified by Yves Klein who, seeking the dissolution of individuality, championed color and led the attack on line (and with it, on shape). Indeed, line—as a residue of the banished figure—had been on the run since the First World War triggered the century's first mood of sublime obsession. Kasimir Malevich's Black Square is the signature picture of that war, and it portrays the world erased, annihilated, sunken in the cosmic night of nothingness. Malevich gave the color a shape—but a shape that meant neutrality or nothingness, since its squareness simply echoed the frame, and the white border seemed more like a designer's margin than like the edges of a ground showing around a figure. Or: the black square can be seen as a ground which is sprung loose from the surface, and placed, like a figure, on another ground. The ground has not only sucked the figures down into itself like the world-ending whirlpool; it has become figure, ground, everything. If thejMc-ture is a window on the wall, as the Renaissance picture was said to be, then Out of the Ashes | 41 this was a window into the void. It seemed to declare that there was nothing outside the window to look at. In this way it was not unlike Jannis Kounellis's black-masked windows which, in the wake of World War II, forbade looking on moral grounds: as if the world out there were not fit to be observed. It took several generations to realize that abstract painting would not culminate in the doctrine of shapes-and-colors-alone—that in fact it was heading away from shape, toward a plunge into pure shapeless, infinitely expanding color. The obvious problem was that an expanse of color has to have some shape. So shapes, it seemed, should be dismissed or ignored in themselves and tolerated only as necessary vehicles for color. Still, it was extremely difficult to come up with abstract shapes that did not seem to some degree representational. "If you peep shrewdly," as John Crowe Ransom put it, you can see suggestions of representations (like faces in clouds) hiding amid the ranks of geometry or swirls of gesture. (Isn't there a hint of a horizon line in this Motherwell? Doesn't this Clyfford Still show a landscape ravaged as if by war or endtime? Isn't that Adolph Gottlieb painting a solar burst—maybe a cosmogonic moment or, maybe, a Big Bang end of the universe? Isn't Pollock's The Deep a representation of the Indefinite as a cosmic principle, like primordial Chaos at the beginning of Ovid's Metamorphoses—or at the end of the world, when everything sinks back into the swamp?) Finally, it came to seem that the only effective way to reject representation was by abrogating shape absolutely for color alone. The post-War art that took this direction seemed to have locked itself into a closed room—however seductively colored—rather than deal with the painfully disappointing world out there. As a joke of the Abstract Expressionist era put it: Newman closed the door, Rothko pulled down the shade, and Reinhardt turned out the light. They were immersed in color at the expense of losing the world "out there"—whose work-a-day nature paled in comparison with the purity and fulness of spiritual and absolute cosmic color. After the war, there were artists on both sides of the blood-stained Atlantic Ocean seeking the same total immersion in color, Rothko and Newman no more than Fontana and Klein. As the second half of the twentieth century commenced, color, with its theosophical association with pure spirit, took arms against the limiting rationality of line. Line divides space, as Klein put it; color fills it.4 There was an eschatological analogue underlying the observation: the way color has the ability to expand till it fills all space parallels the way that in many spiritual traditions both east and west the individual soul, upon the death of the body that had contained it, is to expand infinitely till it becomes one with the World Soul, filling all creation. Skenováno pro studijní účely 42 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART Out of the Ashes | 43 Twentieth-century abstract art was linked from its inception not only to Kant but to a very different philosophical tradition, the Neoplatonic foundation that underlay theosophy, Rosicrucianism, Cabalism, the mysticism of the fourth dimension, and so on.5 Most of these approaches reality were monistic, emphasizing the One over the Many, invoking a wholeness beyond fragmentation, and positing a metaphysical continuum which supposedly underlay the plurality of forms, a universal that overshadowed all particulars. Shape came to represent the Many or the realm of the particular (the figure), color the One or the realm of the universal (the ground). Gradually the realization dawned that the urge toward universality in art was embodied in a return to the ground—or what Klein called "the monochrome spirit" Color reigned, as the monochrome spirit spread abroad like an inkwell spilling over. Its intoxicating presence seemed to deny the wasteland of Europe and to point instead to a rosy dawn approaching (or was it a "last red and dyin' sunset"?). Unexpectedly, the two approaches—the Kantian and the Theosophical—turned out to be much the same. At just about the time our abstract painters had us drowning ecstatically in the sense of the purity of color, we found ourselves right back where the Theosophists had been a century earlier. Though the theosophical jargon had been edited out, the purely aesthetic theory was still based on the insistence that "real" art portrayed the mark of universals—putting it in the late Neoplatonic arena of theosophy. Late Modernism had turned out to be very old-fashioned, not to say archaic, indeed. This was roughly the historical and spiritual situation that obtained as the art of the abstract sublime reached its zenith and its end. The second act opened when the Modernist view began to seem discredited. not long after world war ii, the purely aesthetic approach to art came to seem complicit with unhealthy political tendencies. The divorce between art and life—between the museum and the everyday world outside on the streets—had grown to alarming proportions. Meanwhile, the oneness that the monochrome represented came to be understood as a representation of the wholeness that culture was supposed to achieve at the end of history—the oneness that first Hegel then Marx said would prevail when problems like nationalism and class structure had been ironed out. The featureless surface of the monochrome represented the end of history that the West was supposedly leading toward with its arsenal of new weapons, its bloody pageant of wars and conquests. But now the end of history, which had seemed an appetizing prospect to Hegel, appeared to be morph-ing into the end of the world. Malevich had said of his Black Square that it - represents a desert beyond form—the desolate ground of the picture swept free of the triviality of the figure, the sublime bereft of the beautiful—and now the wasteland of the nuclear environment. The claimed superiority of the West, which had bolstered its self-appointed role as leader of history, seemed after World War II to be revealed as consisting largely in its destructiveness. However it's phrased, the claim of western superiority—implicit in a nest of notions including the purely aesthetic theory of art—was discredited by the increasingly apparent inevitability of its destruction of the world through its sheer lack of self-knowledge. Europe, it turned out, was a dangerous leader. Its passion for aggrandizing itself at the expense of the rest of the world had to be drained away; speaking in terms of art, its color had to be drained as a dangerous distraction from the real concerns of the figure, and a dangerous coverup of the steely grayness of reality. Anti-Modernism, the second limb or antithesis of the syllogism, arose as a radical counterstatement to Modernism. In terms of art, it manifested itself as anti-art. The term anti-art did not characterize the discourse of the 1950s, that staid and stolid (or-stunned) era. It had been used sparingly to describe events of the Dada era, and by 1962 would surge into prominence as a term to describe contemporary, rather than Dada, events. In 1962 Pop Art began in the United States and Nouveaux Realisme in Paris; almost at once, both were called Neo-Dada, and the term anti-art soon came into play. But in fact the signs of the reappearance of anti-art were visible in the late 40s and early '50s. While the thesis, the apparent reaffirmation of aesthetic painting, was still in the foreground, the antithesis was already growing, hidden within the thesis, as under the woodwork. Formalist critics and historians feel that, as William Rubin put it, a "hearty reaffirmation of pure painting...followed World War II."6 As another put it, "after World War II, there was little appetite for a radical art that questioned or mocked traditional assumptions... Rather there was an audience eager for...the healing and civilizing powers of the visual arts."7 Both authors are referring primarily to Abstract Expressionism, which took center stage for fifteen years or so after the war with its supposedly healing bath of color. But that is not the whole story. While Abstract Expressionism was acting out the tragic death of Modernism, a surge of anti-art was getting ready to usher in a new, post-Modernist era. It seemed clear to many that something beyond Kant's "four moments" was needed to redirect art's impact on society. On what might seem to a formalist critic the periphery of the stage, a Skenováno pro studijní účely 44 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART Out of the Ashes | 45 variety of new approaches to the project of anti-art were being worked out and implemented alongside the apparent reaffirmation of aesthetics. On January 6, 1946, the anti-art movement known as Lettrism appeared in Paris, ironically when the Lettrist founder Isidore Isou and some colleagues broke up a performance of Tristan Tzara's play Flight; later that year Isou disrupted a lecture on Dada by Michel Leiris; in both cases he proceeded to read his own wordless poems in place of the announced activity. A new anti-art era was displacing the old. The emphasis on sound-poetry soon shifted to Lettrist painting, in which "the letter would be the basic subject of aesthetic contemplation."8 The following year, 1947, the Belgian Surrealist Michel Dotremont founded the Revolutionary Surrealist Group in rebellion against Breton's by-then reactionary view of surrealism. In the following year, in league with Asger Jorn, Constant, Karl Appel, and others, Dotremont founded CoBrA (Copenhagen, Brussels, Amsterdam), an anti-art group featuring text-with-image, the Readymade, and a conception of a new urban environment ("unitary urbanism") which would lead in turn to Situationism. In 1951 Arnulf Rainer exhibited an empty frame. Soon, Klein's Le Vide (an empty gallery) was answered by Arman's LePlein (a gallery full of garbage). Meanwhile in the United States, at the same moment when Abstract Expressionism was getting underway and establishing its signatures in the works of Pollock and Newman, the Black Mountain College art program became the location where John Cage, Merce Cunningham, David Tudor, and a few years later Robert Rauschenberg, Charles Olson and others, added new layers of possibility to the expanding anti-art project. Still under the woodwork, as it were, these were tiny quiet gestures that were overshadowed by the grandiose, ever-expanding canvases of the Abstract-Expressionists, especially Newman. In 1952 Cage presented, at Black Mountain, Theater Piece No. 1, an absurdist event that is regarded as the origin of the Happening. It has been little noticed that four of the white monochromes Rauschenberg had made in 1951 were used as stage sets, hanging from wires roundabout. But Cage noticed, and later in '52 he presented a work which he has said was inspired by the White Paintings, 4'33", in which a pianist sat at the keyboard for four minutes and thirty-three seconds without playing a note, then stood up, bowed, and left the stage. It had to be a real pianist, and he turned pages of sheet music from time to time. This is unmistakably a work of anti-art, with its pointed omission of the music itself and its redirection of attention to sounds which happen to arise in the environment. Among works of the first period of anti-art, 4 33" recalls Hugo Ball's recitation, at the Cabaret Voltaire, of his "Fish's Nightsong"—a .poem with no sounds whatsoever.9 Cage's 4 '33 " served, in turn, as the inspiration for Rauschenberg's Erased DeKooningDrawing of 1953. Rauschenberg took a heavily worked drawing of de Kooning's, 19 x WA", and, working very hard, as he would say, with many different erasers, restored the blank sheet of paper. Again there are predecessors from the Dada-Surrealist era. One was a performance in which Picabia made drawings on the wall which Breton, following behind him, erased. In a work of 1930 Max Ernst and Johannes Baargeld rented a space, filled it with artworks, and invited visitors to destroy them with an axe. The physical destruction of what are recognized as works of art, and hence supposedly of high civilizational value, is the most simplistic and extreme mode of anti-art. It seems to assume the "against" sense of the prefix anti- rather than the "instead of" or "in exchange for" sense. But when it is understood that the work of art is destroyed in the name of art, that the destruction itself is designated a work of art, then the exchange sense comes into play, in which anti-art is the alter ego of traditional art. These tiny but seminal works of the 1950s—in the United states a blank canvas, four minutes of silence, a hand erasing a page; in Europe a wordless poem, an empty gallery, an exhibition of garbage—linked the earlier and later eras of anti-art. On the one hand they are revivals of Dada ("Neo-Dada"), on the other they are the founding works, or prototypes, of the genres which would later be called Conceptual Art and Performance Art. the hidden growth of the antithesis within the thesis —its nourishment by negation—can be seen again in the theme of the monochrome or near-monochrome painting, the sub-genre that became prominent just after World War II as it had been both during and after World War I. The monochrome theme points simultaneously toward art and anti-art, or Modernism and anti-Modernism. On the one hand, the whole evolution of abstract painting away from representation would lead ultimately to the elimination of the figure altogether in favor of the ground. Aesthetic experience would become an analogue of the dissolution of the individual soul into the World Soul, and so on. At the same time, the monochrome seems an anti-art motif, as it rejects much of the traditional equipment of painting, such as color contrast and combination, compositional values, figuration and abstraction. It seems designed, as one author said, "to debunk painting or to demonstrate its end'."10 It has occurred, in other words, both as the culmination of the Modernist painterly investigations and as a polemical tool of the Skenováno pro studijní účely 46 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART Out of the Ashes | 47 anti-Modernist deconstruction of Modernist painterly values. Historically, as the last of the great Modernist motifs to arise, it was positioned to serve as either the culmination of Modernism or the first exploratory negation by anti-Modernism. In nineteenth-century Europe painting increasingly involved a worship of the surface rather than the figures that occupy it. By the late works of Cezanne this was explicit, and the momentum of the onrushing ground in its attempt to overwhelm the figure carried over into the twentieth century. The cult of the activated surface featured the iconicity of touch and the brushstroke. The infusion of the touch with expressiveness involved the evocation of what Kant had called "aesthetic feeling," and as the ground asserted itself more or more strongly it intensified the Late Modernist subject matter of the sublime. The Late Modernist monochrome, in other words, despite the length it has gone in reductiveness, still retains several of the cultic values of the western tradition of painting. It also tends to retain a distinction between the picture and the support, tacitly affirming the traditional idea of the picture plane as a specially separate space, outside the regular world, like a sacred precinct. This applies to Malevich's Black Square, which, viewed from the position of the early twenty-first century, seems like the most iconic of World War I paintings. What might be called the anti- or post-Modern monochrome, in contrast, rejected all the traditional painterly values and became one of the early tools of anti-art. This also goes back to the early twentieth century, as do all aspects of the monochrome thematics. In 1921 Rodchenko exhibited three canvases called Pure Red Color, Pure Yellow Color and Pure Blue Color from which he attempted to exclude all incident and expressiveness, calling them the "last paintings." In this use of monochromy he might be regarded as a proto-post-Modernist or a precursor of post-Modernism. Lucio Fontana's white monochromes of 1946 stand at the boundary between these two approaches, but lean toward the post-Modernist sensibility and its rejection of traditional painterly values. Clyfford Still's black monochromes of 1948 were still Late Modernist in surface treatment. Rauschenberg's white monochromes of 1951 were again poised on the edge. In the catalogue of their first showing he described them as "one white as one god"—an echo or more likely parody of the Abstract Expressionist quasi-theological way of speaking about paintings. But very soon, in 1952, they entered John Cage's world of Neo-Dada and were described as screens for passing shadows, for the world of flux rather than eternality. However visually similar they may be, the Modernist and post-Modern- ist monochromes point in opposite directions. In the work of a Modernist like, say, Rothko, who felt the basic subject of his work was tragedy, the monochrome or near-monochrome painting is a stark yet still sensual premonition of the end of the world. In the work of a developing post-Modernist like Yves Klein, on the other hand, it represents an exhilirating sense of the freedoms that a new age might bring—freedoms from division, from aesthetic habit, and from tradition. Klein, who was influenced by Fontana and influenced him in turn, probably made his first monochrome paintings sometime in the period 1946-48, certainly by 1951. Painted with rollers, his mature 1KB monochromes involved the renunciation of the value of touch; as the paint went all the way around the stretchers, the distinction between picture and support (or painting and sculpture) was eliminated. Though Klein projected different meanings upon them at different times, it seems that his first meaning was basically anti-art; the monochromes were meant—at least in large part—to discredit and mock traditional artistic values by their rejection of drawing, color manipulation, and composition. Residual Modernist themes like the sublime and the end of an age still clung round these paintings, but in a partially mocking way.11 soon the dada model of anti-art, which had primarily been known in the United States through rumor, began to be known more familiarly, as Robert Motherwell, in 1951, published an anthology of Dada texts, the first available in English.12 Immediately thereafter the availability of the Duchampian model unfolded itself in stages right when it was needed—first when the Arensburg collection of Duchampiana was opened at the Philadelphia Museum of Art in 1954, second when the Robert Lebel book on Duchamp appeared in 1959.13 and finally with the Pasadena retrospective of 1963. This was in a sense the beginning of post-Modernism in the visual arts. Many artists who knew they were turning away from traditional artistic models, but did not know exactly what they were turning toward, found powerful hints in Dada and in Duchamp's work in particular, hints that had not yet worked themselves out art historically though they had been there, waiting to be activated, for almost half a century. The three great hints (to repeat) were (1) the Readymade with its de-emphasis of "touch" and innovation, and its return of art to the everyday world; (2) the incorporation of chance procedures into art-making (with the accompanying values of chaos and surprise); and (3) the method of designating a previously non-art object as art. Along with these came Duchamp's emphasis on wit (with its natural involvement of language and in general of the project of returning art to Skenováno pro studijní účely 48 | ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART "the service of the mind"), the tendency toward the interactive (as inhis remark that the artwork is completed by the audience), and the willingness to collapse the category of art completely into the category of life (as in his remark about every breath one takes being an artwork).14 Like puritanical reactions in general, the passion of anti-Modernism was as intense as that of Modernism had been, and it had a similar conquest orientation: it wanted desperately to conquer Modernism. Artistically, its two great tools for this project—the emerging genres of Conceptual Art and Pe-formance Art—were both revivals of Dada. In their first decade or so (roughly 1965-75, the decade of the dominance of anti-Modernism), both Concep-tualism and Performance took aim at specific parts of the Modernist legacy. In response to painting, Conceptual Art introduced various strategies of anti-painting (beginning with the monochrome) which, through critique and parody, reduced the aesthetic legacy to absurdity. In response to Modernist transcendentalism, Performance Art focused on the everyday and the body. ' The ambitions and prejudices of the professional artist—the mist of color in the air—had to be cleared away in order to see that there was a real world out there lying open with heartbreaking vulnerability, and that art, through its obsession with innocence and eternality, had celebrated this vulnerability and sanctified it with the mark of beauty—derived supposedly from the Beyond, in whose shadow the here and now faded from sight. Hypnotizing its devotees with this mark of beauty, art had become an obfuscation which distracted the mind from pressing social issues. It had become clearly and closely allied with a political position traditionally associated with theocratic states and rightly perceived as conservative. The spirit, rapt in ecstatic union with the Beyond, could not be bothered with sordid details such as poverty and class struggle. But the transcendentalism of Late Modernist abstract art would be forced to give way to anti-Modernist immanence, acknowledgement of actual historical situations, affirmation of the here and now. The association of the old aesthetic era with conservatism and the emergence of American capitalist hegemony would be opposed by anarchism, socialist deconstructionism, and a variety of revolutionary sentiments. Artistically, painting had been the emblem of Modernism, and thus indirectly of colonialism. So complicit did it seem in the destructive intrusions of the West into the rest that painting came to be resented like the flag on the mast of a slaveship. Early on it became the site of contention for anti-Modernist artists. Duchamp's feeling of 1913 that "painting is washed up"15 was more widely shared this time around. For a decade or so, painting was banished puritanically. The thesis of Modernism was countered by the Out of the Ashes | 49 antithesis of anti-Modernism, the thesis of art by anti-art, the thesis of painting by anti-painting. Thus, anti-Modernism emerged as a kind of dark alter ego of Modernism. It bore many of the same features but with a reversed hierarchy. As Modernism had been puritanical in its banishment of the figure, anti-Modernism was puritanical in its banishment of transcendental abstraction, and so on. This was an era of uncompromising statements, including the "hard-line" Conceptualism of Joseph Kosuth, Lawrence Weiner, and the Art and Language group, among others, and the confrontational aggressions of Body Art as practiced by Chris Burden, Hermann Nitsch, Gina Pane, and others. Both Conceptualism and Performance, at this early stage of their development, regarded themselves as uncompromisingly puristic, as Late Modernist abstraction had been with an opposite ideology. post-modernism emerged around I98O in the visual arts, as a synthesis of Modernism and anti-Modernism. It was to be, in other words, not just post-Modernism, but also post-anti-Modernism. It was to move beyond both stances of puritanical confrontationalism—both the universalistic assertions of Modernism and the universalistic negations of anti-Modernism—into a more relaxed position that would allow a wider range of options. Thus the synthesis cannot be said to have been in effect until the Return of Painting in the late 1970s. To Modernists this event seemed a triumphant restatement of a truth temporarily forgotten; to anti-Modernists it seemed a shameful submission to a falsehood already debunked. But it was not exactly either. It was the post-Modern compromise, which assumed an impure position that could live with inner contradictions. The quality of inner contradiction was embodied in the two different forms post-Modernism developed in. Both were post-Modern in that they came after Modernism and regarded it as largely discredited—but the degree of claimed discredit varied greatly. The one trend, pre-Modern revivalism or neo-pre-Modernism, was the more radical in its rejection of Modernism. It involved an unhesitating rejection of the western values and traditions of the Modern era along with an attempt to re-establish cultural norms derived from non-western and pre-Modern cultures. It preferred to pretend that Modernism had never existed. This was the tendency of the counterculture in general, the Flower Child movement, and the hippy drop-out commune era. The second trend, which might be called post-Modernism-proper, was not so uncompromising in its rejection of the western tradition. The crucial difference was in the relationship to Enlightenment values. The neo-pre-Modernist rejected the Enlightenment on the grounds that Skenováno pro studijní účely 50 ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART its values covertly promoted the renewal of the problems they ostensibly worked against—Kant's "Was 1st Aufklarung?" culminating in Auschwitz. From this viewpoint, the way Enlightenment values had been used to cow and subjugate non-western cultures in the colonial period served to discredit them—not to mention the threatened destruction of nature by science, and so on. Post-Modernism-proper, on the other hand, clings to Enlightenment values as the essence of the claim of the value of western civilization, while feeling that until this time they had not been put into effect properly. If they could be reapproached with less regional self-interest and less unquestioning reverence for western hegemony, the post-Modernist feeling is, they would still be of critical value. The way things sorted out in the artistic realm, Performance Art became basically neo-pre-Modernist—dedicated to re-establishing contact with earlier forms of civilization—while Conceptual Art became post-Modernist-proper—dedicated to a reform, but not an abandonment, of the ideals that governed western relations with the rest of the world. This distinction relates to a rearrangement of the doctrine of the three faculties. Late Modernism, committed to the aesthetic faculty, had immersed subjectivity—indeed almost drowned it—in a flood of pure color. But after the flood began to recede, two survivors staggered up onto the beach, the outcasts previously excluded from the realm of art, the cognitive and ethical faculties. Now, with the discrediting of the aesthetic faculty, the other two strode into the breach. The cognitive faculty became the basis of Conceptual Art, with its believe in a more rational future, while the ethical faculty, with its yearning for a pre-rational mode of existence, became the basis of Performance Art. Thus the second great era of anti-art got itself into formation and began its advance upon history. Its behests would be the behests of the time, with a communal or historical foundation, but would be carried out by individual artists, each in his or her own way. The first such individual who will wander into the purview of this book (after Duchamp, that is) is Yves Klein (1928-1962). Like other artists of his generation, Klein had a layered sensibility, part Modernist, part anti-Modernist, and part post-Modernist. Those artists had affirmed the aesthetic in the 1950s, the anti-aesthetic in the 1960s, the cognitive and the ethical in the '70s and after. Each ideology created a part of the self. Klein celebrated each of these aspects with passionate affirmation. One of those innovative figures who seem to have "done everything first," he established many nuances of the deconstruction of painting, pioneered strong definitions of the process of designation, and combined in his persona Out of the Ashes | 51 the traditions of the avant-garde theater, the dandy, the comic book, and the opera. Klein linked Dada and neo-Dada, and some of his works had roots in Lettrism, Situationism and the Gutai Group. When Jean Tinguely referred to him as a "messenger," he meant a messenger from the future, summoning culture in a certain direction. Artistically the future he announced was Conceptual and Performance Art, two genres that were still unseparated and inchoate at the time of his death in 1962. 1. T. S. Sorsch, trans., Classical Literary Criticism: Aristotle, On the Art of Poetry; Horace, On the Art of Poetry; Longinus, On the Sublime (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1965), p. 111. 2. Yves Klein, "The War! A Little Personal Mythology of the Monochrome," published in Dimanche, i960. For my translation of selections from it see Yves Klein (1928-1962), A Retrospective, exh. cat. (Houston: Rice University and New York: The Arts Publishers, 1981), pp. 218-19, and see also "Selections from the Monochrome Adventure," ibid., p. 220. 3. From a statement written and signed by filmmaker John Huston in Houston, Texas, April 9, 1977; Rothko Chapel Archives. 4. Klein, "The War." 5. See Thomas McEvilley, "The Opposite of Emptiness," Artforum, March 1987. 6. William Rubin, "Reflexions on Marcel Duchamp," Art International (December i, i960), pp. 49-53, republished in Joseph Masheck, ed., Marcel Duchamp in Perspective (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc., 1975), pp. 41-52- 7. Tony Godfrey, Conceptual Art (London: Phaidon Press, 1998), p. 55- 8 Stewart Home, The Assault on Culture: Utopian Currents from Lettrisme to Class War (Stirling, Scotland: AK Press, 1991), p. 13. 9. See Annabelle Melzer, Latest Rage the Big Drum: Dada and Surrealist Performance (Ann Arbor, Mich.: UMI Research Press, 1980), p. 42. 10. Godfrey, Conceptual Art, p. 427. 11. See Thomas McEvilley, "Yves Klein and Rosi-crucianism" in exh. cat. Yves Klein (1928-1962): A Retrospective, republished as "Yves Klein et les rose-croix," in Yves Klein, exh. cat. (Paris: Centre Pompidou, 1983), pp. 233-144. 12. Robert Motherwell, ed., The Dada Painters and Poets: An Anthology, second edition (Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1981). 13. Robert Lebel, Marcel Duchamp (London: Trianon Press, 1959). 14. Pierre Cabanne, Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp (New York: Da Capo Press, 1979), p. 72. 15. In Michel Sanouillet and Elmer Peterson, eds., Salt Seller—The Writings of Marcel Duchamp (Marchand du Sel) (New York: Oxford University Press, 1973), p. 160. Skenováno pro studijní účely CHAPTER THKEE Yves Klein Messenger of the Age of Space If you come back someday You who dream also Of this marvellous void Of this absolute love I know that together Without a word to one another We will hurl ourselves Into the reality of this void Which awaits our love As I wait for you each day. Come with me into the void! —Yves Klein1 The most famous image of yves klein —the startling photograph of the artist, dressed in business suit and necktie, leaping into flight from a second-floor ledge on a quiet Paris street—is usually seen out of context. Yet with Klein, context is everything. Originally part of a literary document, the photograph contributed to an intricate mingling of visual and verbal signifiers in Klein's most characteristic style. Kleins imitation newspaper, Dimanche 27 Novembre: Le journal d'un seul jour(Sunday November 27th: the Newspaper of a Single Day), his contribution to the Paris Festival d'Art d'Avant-garde in i960, headlined the phrase: "Theatre du vide" (Theater of the Void). Beside the headline was the remarkable photograph, captioned underneath: "Le peintre de l'espace se jette dans le vide!" (The painter of space launches himself into the void!) Characteristically two-edged, Klein's point was not merely self-advertisement, but provocation; it included an invitation to the readers to effect a Leap, or an analogue of the Leap, themselves. The poem excerpted above was found on the second page. Klein's own fate in the United States has been the same: he has been as- Yves Klein, Leap into the Void, i960. Skenováno pro studijní účely 54 | ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART similated out of context. Klein, who is widely regarded in Europe as the most important French artist since the Second World War, has remained, in the North American consciousness, primarily a showman and a clown. When he arrived in New York in April 1961, on his only visit to this country, the New York School was arrayed against the fading hegemony of the School of Paris,2 and Klein, with his fanciful personae and self-ordained titles—Champion of Color, Proprietor of Color, Painter of Space—looked like Paris come slumming again. New York artists virtually boycotted his show of monochrome paintings in "International Klein Blue" (his own patented formula of blue) at Leo Castelli's gallery. The art press, which did not bother to investigate the wider context of his work, found him easy prey. Art News called him "the latest sugar-Dada to jet in from the Parisian common market," and "the George M. Koan of French Neo-Dada." Time called his works "tricks" and his reputation in Europe "a fad." "Have you ever been all blue?" inquired the New York Herald Tribune.3 Six years later, John Canaday, reviewing the Jewish Museum show of his works for The New York Times, called him "a vaudevillian," "full panoplied in cap and bells," whose work is "only stuntmanship." "I Got the Yves Klein Blues," the headline on this story read. In reference to the same exhibition, the World-Journal-Tribune called him, "a Dali-junior grade."4 When, after two months in New York, Klein moved on to Los Angeles for a show of his works at the Virginia Dwan Gallery, he found a somewhat friendlier reception. To this day in Los Angeles Klein is regarded as in some sense a "California" artist: particularly for his use of space and silence as primary materials, for his works in natural phenomena such as fire and water, for his use of his own body as the locus of the art event, for his reckless mixing of artistic codes and roles, and for his deliberate ridicule of his own serious works. But not even in Los Angeles was the labyrinth of Klein's gestures, his poses, his mutually cancelling intentionalities, perceived as a coherent whole. His show was regarded as a one-liner, and so were the fragments of his broader career that floated across from Europe, usually inaccurately. There was little sense of his work overall, either its varied sensual appeal or its deep-structure and swift intellectual interplay; his reputation solidified around a series of Neo-Dada art jokes. Klein had leapt past the American consciousness too quickly, and never had a chance to set it right. A year after his visit to America, he died of a heart attack at the age of 34. In the seven years before his death he produced over a thousand art objects in various media, as well as many prophetic works of nonstatic art, and numerous writings. His oeuvre has a mazelike coherence, with circular corridors and cul-de-sacs deliberately built into it. Skenovano pro Yves Klein: Messenger of the Void | 55 While rooted in Late Modernism, its principal thrust was anti-Modernist. It includes objects and events in all media, interpenetrated, mutually referenced, and carefully layered into a semantic stack. It was Jean Tinguely who called Klein "Messenger of the Age of Space," meaning that he had come from the future to announce a new age. In art historical terms he might be renamed the Messenger of the Age of Anti-Art, who showed it forth in his own body to herald its dawning. Klein was a dedicated craftsman (as well as a despiser of craft as an end in itself), and his works, even when conceptually anti-art, have a vivid and arresting sensual presence, a directness that, as Susan Sontag said in another context, "frees us from the itch to interpret."5 But in this case it was the artist himself who was never freed from the itch to interpret. He overlaid on his physical works a set of semantic dictions and contradictions, in the forms of essays, gestures, symbolic events, and photographs, which interacted with the physical works on many levels. His project was an aggression against the fundamental premises of art as known. Klein personally detested all existing art vocabularies and felt that, if only they could be terminated, far more powerful and elegant ones might be found. He saw himself at the turning point of two epochs—the "Messenger" of the incoming age, as Tinguely put it.6 His ambition was to terminate the existing forms of art by revealing their inner contradictions and breaking down their boundaries; at the same time, he set out to discover, or at least to proclaim, the way toward the new ones. The complexity of such a project was not lost on Klein, who once dedicated an all-blue painting in an Italian miracle-cult shrine with the prayer: "May the Impossible arrive and establish its Kingdom quickly'.'7 In a sense, what happened to Klein's reputation in New York was an appropriate consequence of his challenging and enigmatic style. Though he is known in this country primarily for his blue monochrome paintings, his career as a whole can be described best as a sustained seven-year-long performance, and Joseph Kosuth says rightly that he fits into Conceptual Art "somewhere."8 This indeterminate placement would have pleased the Painter of Space, who specialized in turning up "there" as soon as one had placed him "here." He was an escape artist among critics, the escape system symbolized by the famous Leap—an image of primary hermeneutical value for his career—through which he sought (among other things) to escape from all closed categories. The New York School's descent into the underworld of monochromy, where the issues of Hell are worked out, portrays a voluntary confinement studijní účely S6 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART Yves Klein: Messenger of the Void | 57 in a closed room: "Newman closed the door, Rothko pulled down the shade, and Reinhardt turned out the lights."9 But if Yves the Monochrome (as he called himself) is added to the formula, it acquires a paradoxical dimension of both self-destruction and escape, both the ending of one age and the beginning of another: "Newman closed the door, Rothko pulled down the shade, Reinhardt turned out the lights, and Klein jumped out the window." Lines, bars of a psychological prison...are our chains... They are our heredity, our education, our framework, our vices, our aspirations, our qualities, our wiles... Color, on the other hand, is free; it is instantly dissolved in space... And that is why, in my work, I refuse more and more emphatically the illusion ofpersonality, the transient psychology of the linear, the formal, the structural. Evidently the subject lam traveling toward is space, pure Spirit... By saturating myself with the eternal limitless sensitivity of space, I return to Eden.... —Yves Klein10 klein's work, like botticelli's,11 involves a fully articulated allegorical content arising from a traditional body of metaphysics that the artist systematically translated into plastic terms. This (bottom) level of the semantic stack was based on the Rosicrucianism of Max Heindel, which Klein had studied and practiced during six formative years of membership in the Rosicrucian Society (not the AMORC).12 Klein's commitment to Rosicrucianism was probably strong during his adolescence, but by the early to middle 1950s it had come to function as a somewhat sardonic persona. His membership lapsed, never to be renewed, but meanwhile certain Rosicrucian ideas had entered—again somewhat sardonically—his artwork. In Heindel's version of theosophical cosmology, Spirit (or Life) is identical with Space. It is represented by color (which, as Klein wrote, is "free," because "it is instantly dissolved in space"), but especially by the color blue; it is infinite expansiveness with no internal divisions to affront its wholeness. Space/Spirit/Life permeates and contains all transient forms, thereby negating their apparent differences and boundaries. Human evolution, according to Heindel, is approaching the end of the age of form and solid matter, and soon will reimmerse itself in an age of Space/Spirit/Life that will restore the condition of Eden. This transition will involve the erasure of all boundaries, both outer (political, national, occupational) and inner ("our heredity,..education. .. framework.. .vices... aspirations... qualities.. .wiles"). Accordingly the Age of Space/Spirit will be a return from the entanglements of lines to the openness of color, and especially of the Edenic/spiritual color: Blue. Klein took on the role of Champion of Color. When Klein, in his first major shows, exhibited identical blue mono- Yves Klein's Induction into the Knights of Saint Sebastian; inset: Klein's declaration of himself as Champion of Color; Klein holding an 1KB monochrome in the Saint Sebastian regalia. The text of the declaration: Having been made a knight of the Order of Saint Sebastian, I espouse the cause of Pure Color, which has been invaded and occupied guilefully by the cowardly line and its manifestation, drawing in art. I will defend color, and I will deliver it, and I will lead it to final triumph. chromes in Milan and Paris in 1957 under the title L'epoca blu (The Blue Age, or Period), Pierre Restany wrote that the moment of confronting one of these all-blue paintings was a "moment of truth."13 The systematic Rosicrucianism of the works was one aspect of this "moment": the viewer, in confronting an International Klein Blue monochrome, is staring into the depths of infinite Space/Spirit itself, gazing, as it were, into the coming age of Eden. But this "moment of truth" that Klein offered was more than the confrontation with the Allness-of-Blue; it required, as his later works make clear, the realization of higher levels of contradiction that rise out of the infinite when it is understood dialectically. (The All is made up only of contradiction—like Anaximander's Apeiron or the Avatamsaka Sutra's "Net of Indra.") This dialectical critique was acted out on another semantic level as a critique of art theory. Before this new age can arrive—which Klein hoped to see in his own time—cultural codes must annihilate one another through their semantic and ethical contradictions, dissolving into the wholeness of Space. Klein's deliberate semiological inversions, subversions, and self-refutations are techniques to demonstrate this self-erasure as a meta-hermeneutics of the Leap. (In Zen meditation, which Klein had practiced both in France and in Japan, the Leap into the Void represents the moment of going beyond Skenováno pro studijní účely 58 | ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART all codes and interpretations, into the void where, as the Buddhist Prajna-paramita texts say, "one stands firmly because one stands upon nothing.")1* The Blue Age exhibitions focused his project of destructuring on the premises of painting. [Monochromism is] a sort of modern day alchemy practiced by painters, born of the tension of experiencing...a bath in space vaster than infinity... It is the only physical way of painting which permits access to the spiritual absolute.... My monochrome paintings are landscapes of freedom... —Yves Klein15 klein was among the first to feel up against the wall about up-against-the-wall art. His monochromes, though powerful and alive within themselves, were attempts to destroy "the painting" as known and to pursue its sculptural and environmental transformations. (In this sense, as well, they foreshadow much work of the '60s and after.) Klein never accepted the basic premises that a painting, whether illusionistic, geometric, or tachist, was (1) a more or less passive two-dimensional plane that waits for you to approach it, and (2) a field for personal expression by the artist. He wanted his paintings to come off the wall and invade the viewer's sensibility in the most violent way—and at the same time to eliminate the driving force of personality from the event. It is remarkable that Klein's monochromes, which at first glance seem to be among the simplest paintings ever made, are among the most complex. Deceptively austere at first, their physical presence grows strangely rich. The delicately varied surfaces and textures of one unvaried and vibrating blue (or gold, yellow, red, pink, white, black, green) elicit a subtle range of what Donald Judd called "an unmitigated, pure, but very sensuous beauty."16 But as this first moment of immersion in Klein's blueness fades into memory, the strong sensory impression convolutes into a question mark. Several of the qualities of these paintings are unusual: (1) they are hung on visible vertical supports some distance away from the wall, like sculptures; (2) their corners are rounded to stress their sculptural presence; (3) they are identical, like stamps, prints, or machine-made objects; (4) they are rollered, to remove any quality of personal touch. They seem to seek a zero degree of what was generally recognized as painting. On this level they are anti-paintings, functioning as critical forces as well as sensory immersions and prophetic allegories. Besides alluding to Rosicrucian prophecy, the exhibition title ("The ■ Blue Period") was a parody of art critical categories. Further, the paintings Yves Klein: Messenger of the Void | 59 themselves were designed to confute category distinctions, and successive conceptual overlays (in Klein's writings) sought to remove them from the reach of all such terms as Minimal or Color Field. First was the Rosicrucian overlay. These paintings are Blue as Spirit- that-holds-all-things-dissolved-in-itself. And Blue Spirit does not just lie there. It invites you into it (invites you to Leap), and even more it contains you already. It comes off the wall instantaneously, permeating the surroundings with its atmosphere, and "impregnates" you with itself as a new, undifferentiated sensibility. But, next, the paintings are removed from conceptual allegory or claims of ensorcellment by their return, ironically, to direct representation: they are neither more nor less than portraits of the cloudless sky as seen through Klein's studio window. With this image, the abstract, the figurative, the minimal, and the allegorical are conflated into a single hugeness that opens in all directions behind, above, below, beside, and in front of the picture plane. Through this series of interpretive devices provided by the artist himself, the paintings become environments; more than limited environments, they are the engulfing space in which the earth itself resides. No longer passive on the wall, they invite you, as does a window, to look—or even to Leap— into the question mark of the dark and featureless sky. The "moment of truth," then, is an existential confrontation rife with questions of courage and identity. ("Come with me into the void!") In short, these paintings take a stand upon nothingness. ("International Klein Blue" was later rechristened "International Klein Nothingness.") Exhibiting them, Klein asserted a role (the painter's) that his controlled interpretation at once denied. "My works are only the ashes of my art," he said, in a famous one liner whose reverberations can still be felt in European art.17 Seen in this way (as the artist directed us to see them), the blue paintings are an ethical imperative: it is not the window that is important, but the Leap through it. Not the abyss, but the entering of the abyss. Not the eros of Space/Spirit/Life, but the impregnation by it. [Artists who] wish to save their personality at any cost will kill their spiritual selves and lose their LIFE. [Art] should be like an open channel for penetration by impregnation in the sensibilty of the immaterial space of LIFE itself...-Yves Klein18 the circularity with which klein leads us through various possible interpretations of his work, each of them cancelling one or more of the others, is itself part of the work, giving it cognitive shape. Each series of pieces leads through conceptual circuitry to others, a system closing itself in full circle on one level of the semantic stack only to reopen on another. Skenováno pro studijní účely 60 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART Yves Klein: Messenger of the Void | 61 Yves Klein making Fire Paintings at the Centre d'Essais du Gaz de France, Paris, 1961. A recurring focus of the project was Klein's critique of the artist. On one semantic level all Klein's works are attempts to purify the art object of the "entanglements of lines" that are the artist's personality. The monochromes began it; but the hand on the paint roller was still too close to a signature. Other series seek to distance the artist even farther from his art. The sponge works of 1957 and afterward are explicit mockeries of technique. "Painting is a mode of existence," Klein insisted; art should be made as effortlessly as the sponge absorbs its color, and viewed with the same lack of resistance as the boundaries of the self are invaded by new sensibility. As Klein had identified his blue monochromes as "portraits" of the sky, similarly he regarded his "Sponge Sculptures" as "portraits" of the viewers of those paintings, who, whether they realized it or not, had been "impregnated" by Life/Space/Spirit vibrating off the rippled surfaces. In other works the elimination of direct involvement of the artist was pursued on the analogy of alchemy, in which the magician is seen only as the helper of Nature. The "four elements" must be invited to express themselves directly, with a minimum of interference from the artist. Strapping a canvas to the roof of his car, Klein drove from Paris to Nice and back in the rain, capturing on the prepared surface "the mark of the rain, of the stirring of the atmosphere." At the Haus Lange in Krefeld he exhibited a "Fire Fountain" and "Fire Wall," which have echoes in much later art based on the manipulation of natural phenomena out-of-doors. In the Gaz de France building, with a helmeted fireman on hand, Klein "painted" with a flamethrower, later add- Yves Klein, Anthropometry 96, People Begin To Fly, 1961. 250x400 cm. = 98% x lsyVi". Yves Klein directing Anthropometries of the Blue Age, at the Galerie Internationale d'Art Contemporain, Paris, i960. ing color selectively to some of the partly dematerialized canvases. In these "Fire Paintings" (of which well over a hundred were made) the satire of the artist's "signature" or "touch" was pressed to the limit and fused with the alchemical theme of the pursuit of the natural elements in their pure state. In their rich tattered surfaces one glimpses what Friedrich Nietzsche called the "voluptuousness of hell." Klein's classic works of this type were the "Anthropometries of the Blue Age," first presented to the public in an evening performance before a seated audience in i960. The artist, in formal dress and white gloves, directed the event without touching the materials. At his gesture, a string ensemble began playing his "Monotone-Silence Symphony" (a single D-major triad in second inversion to be played for 20 minutes, then followed by an equal period of silence). As he gestured again, naked girls appeared carrying pails of International Klein Blue paint. With his gestural guidance they applied the paint to their bodies (becoming "living brushes") and pressed themselves against huge sheets of paper. When the performance was over, the "Anthropometries" remained as "ashes" of the process. Klein made nearly two hundred of these "living brush" works, sometimes spraying paint selectively around the models to create negative prints. The "Anthropometries," hovering ambiguously between the media of painting and print, restate Klein's rejection of genre categories. They may also be seen as parodies of the traditional craftsmanly art of the figure. But the anti-art aspect of these works is absorbed in turn by its opposite—an ap- Skenováno pro studijní účely 62 I OKIGINS OF ANTI-ART Yves Klein: Messenger of the Void | 63 parent affirmation of aesthetic value—through the living grace of the works themselves, which unlock the flat surface and drift or fly from the wall with a wispy transparency. The hollow centers and disintegrating edges of the figures invoke the theme of dematerialization, as their postures of flight, foreshadowing the age of levitation, return us to the Leap. The theme of impregnation by Spirit mingles with the critique of art theory in a series of pieces that resist categorization. The International Klein Blue Nike of Samothrace expresses (by simultaneous appropriation and mockery) a rejection of the linear, masterpiece view of art history, and asserts (with blueness) the underlying sameness of all things. Appropriation, by blueness, of the Duchampian "Readymade" and oceanic dissolution of the boundaries between the art and non-art realms are also involved. Klein's most commonly used personal title, "Yves the Monochrome," extends this universal impregnation to the artist and dissolves the boundaries between artist and art work as each is reciprocally absorbed into the other. If seen in terms of Conceptual and Performance Art, the adoption of the title was itself a "piece" or a "work," and as such it is characteristically self-canceling; the artist appropriates all space within himself, and at the same time, by designating himself an art object, takes his place as an object within space. A similar reading applies to the photograph of Klein gazing at an International Klein Blue globe of the world, which seems to float in midair: the world, which contains him, is appropriated by blueness and designated as a gallery object that he will display. The reciprocal appropriations and dissolutions of his works, his personae, and his world, form a shifting Conceptual/Performance piece whose inner life is the driving force of paradox and mutual containment. For Klein all these works had the alchemical associations (rooted in Rosicrucian allegory) that culminated in the "Monogold" paintings, whose solemn and royal radiance suggests completion of the Great Work. Gold, alchemically, is a symbol of Spirit and as such equal to Space and a negation of separate individuality. One such work, The Tomb—Here Lies Space [La Tombe—Ci-git I'espace], was the site of Klein's ritual burial in 1962 (just three months before his actual death). The photographed event—in which, characteristically, art object, Performance, and Conceptual piece are conflated—restates the theme of ego-death and infinite expansion, of the Leap beyond signature; "Here Lies Space," says the title; but it is Klein himself who lies buried there. By rejecting his personality and its role as artist, the artist has opened himself to the fullness of Space. Skenováno Klein, in 1962, beneath The Tomb-Here Lies Space {La Tombe: Ci-git I'espace), i960. In our present materialistic period we have unfortunately lost the idea of all that lies behind that word Space... we have entirely lost the grand and holy significance of the word. ...To the Rosicrucians, as to any occult school... space is Spirit in its attenuated form, while matter is crystallized space or Spirit. —Max Heindel1" I seek above all...to create...this transparence, this void immeasurable in which lives the Spirit permanent and absolute, freed from all dimensions.... The absolute void...is entirely naturally the true pictorial space-Space has given me the right to be its "Proprietor"..and has consented to manifest its presence in my paintings...my documents, my gestures. The Void belongs to me. —Yves Klein20 . the hypothetical environment postulated by KLEIN s con- ceptually expanded monochromes was Space itself. Painting was terminated (hypothetically) by dissolving/expanding it into volumetric ambience. But whereas Blue, according to Heindel, is the filmiest coagulation of Spirit that can be perceived by the senses, transparent space is more direct: it is Spirit itself. The artists of the incoming age, Heindel had said, will create immaterial studijní účely 64 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART works out of transparent space, which they will mold into specific configurations by projecting mental images onto it. These works will possess Life and radiate a more intense spiritual force than any material work has attained. Klein had practiced Heindel's visualizations during his years in the Rosicrucian Society. In 1958, as the artist of the future, he began to act out this aspect of Heindel's prophecy, making, exhibiting, and offering for sale immaterial works in "the true pictorial space" of the Void. As always, the prophetic content was only one strand of his encompassing semantic net, beside a sophisticated critique of art, art history, and the artist as a self. In April 1958, Klein presented the classic exhibition, Specialization of Sensibility from the State of Prime Matter to the State of Stabilized Pictorial Sensibility, known as The Void (Le Vide), in which the Galerie Iris Clert in Paris was emptied of furniture, painted white, and exhibited empty. Neither "exhibition" nor "environment" quite describes this piece, which like all of his work hangs carefully on the interfaces between categories. As his paintings were conceptually expanded into environments, his environment flowed over its boundaries into the zone of the performance, and the performance in turn transgressed the proscenium arch and entered politics. At the same time, the anti-art gesture of exhibiting an empty gallery was tinged with something like the theosophical feeling that underlay Late Modernism. The invitations to The Void were mailed with International Klein Blue stamps, preempting government in the name of the Blue Revolution (and also presaging Mail Art). Two days before the opening, the windows of the Galerie Iris Clert were painted International Klein Blue, and an International Klein Blue canopy appeared before the entrance. Passing beneath it, Klein closed himself into the now-secret space, which no one else would enter until the opening. "Working carefully, as on a large picture," he painted the interior walls white to return the gallery space (through sympathetic magic) to the state of Prime Matter. Then he projected mental images onto the transparent space, creating immaterial paintings that were "stabilized" in mid-air by prolonged concentration. Meanwhile, his own presence filled the space with "an abstract but real palpable density existing and living in the space by and for itself."21 The atmosphere of the place had now been purified, thickened, complexified, and stilled. By prearrangement, Republican Guards in full array flanked the canopied entrance at the hour of the opening, implying the presence of a government in the void space where Klein waited alone. As guests arrived they were served an International Klein Blue cocktail (gin, Cointreau, methylene blue) that would cause them to urinate blue for a week (a sign of their impregna- tes Klein: Messenger of the Void \ 6s tion by Space); then they were allowed inside in groups of ten or fewer. For one night it seemed that the whole Paris art world was eager to Leap into International Klein Nothingness. By 10:00 p.m. the narrow rue des Beaux Arts was jammed with two to three thousand people. Police and fire trucks were called to disperse the crowd. Inside, the Painter of Space bargained over immaterial paintings, concluding two sales. In a speech delivered about 1:00 a.m. at the famous Left Bank cafe La Coupole, he declared "in my modest person... four millennia of civilization have found their exhaustive conclusion."22 Like his gallery objects, Klein's immaterial works radiate meaning through various semantic directions and levels. The Rosicrucian allegory, as always, is obvious: it is an acting out of Heindel's prophecy of the imminent dematerialization of culture. But at the same time the facetious procedure of selling "pieces" of infinity subverts the Rosicrucian seriousness of the event, and the inner contradiction forces a semantic Leap to another level. On this new level also absences are reified. The act of displaying the gallery in which art works are seen rather than the works themselves follows from the Wittgensteinian/Duchampian "contextual" or "usage" definition of art. If placing an object in an art context, or otherwise designating it as art, makes it art, then it is in the context or designation, and not in the object, that the art-essence resides, and it is the context itself that should be exhibited, not an object within it. On this semantic level, The Void was a derisive critique of the art object, the art business, and the role of the artist. (In fact, Klein also reduces the Duchampian example to absurdity, by involving it in an infinite regress: the context is put in a context.) Spiraling down the semantic stack, this critique returns us to Klein's serious Rosicrucian strain: Space/Spirit is everywhere, he explained in an interview with Pierre Restany; it permeates the picture, the viewer, the gallery, the city, the universe. This permeation trivializes distinctions among objects and reveals the conventional art work as a mere entanglement of lines, desecrating both inner and outer space. The Void, like The Leap, points toward the empty center of Klein's labyrinth, where all boundaries and divisions are dissolved. For Klein, the boundaries between art media and genres (abstract/figurative, concept/ object, and so forth), or the wider boundary between art and life, were internal divisions within the stuff of Spirit by which the tangled self is strapped and bound. They were affronts to Life, which should be boundless like the sky through which the Painter of Space leaps into effortless flight. He parodied one boundaried zone after another, while contradictorily laying claim to each in turn. He invited all interpretations, in order to destroy them all. It Skenováno pro studijní účely 66 | ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART is this, finally, that makes the moment of confronting his works a "moment of truth." And it is this (or so the Painter of Space hoped) that makes the attempt to categorize them impossible, because self-contradictory. Ancient mystical images of the knife trying to cut itself apply. By insisting, in his conceptual overlays, that each of his works drives past its own boundaries into the infinite, Klein extended them beyond the reach of differentiation and interpretation. By such strategy he hoped to terminate in his own person the entire preceding age of cultural evolution. At the end of our present Epoch the highest initiate will appear publicly when a sufficient number of ordinary humanity desire and will voluntarily subject themselves to such a leader.... After that time races and nations will cease to exist. Humanity will form one spiritual fellowship.... Before a new Epoch is ushered in... the physicalfeatures of the earth will be changed and its density decreased. —Max HeincleP klein s attempt to wrap all art forms in a nest of mutual containments reaches necessarily beyond art into politics: all boundaries and divisions are affronts to Pure Color and the Monochrome Spirit. (The Void had already inaugurated the age of Space.) In 1958 Klein sent a letter to President Eisenhower (Mail Art again) informing him of the termination of the French national government by the Blue Revolution. In the next year he undertook Heindel's project of decreasing the density of the environment for the age of spaced-out humans, in which levitation would replace gravitation. The "Architecture of the Air"—houses built of compressed air currents in which levitating humans would live in Edenic closeness to nature, passing through boundaries at will—was to be followed by the creation of a controlled climate over all of France. In a commingling of art and politics that prefigures certain of Joseph Beuys's activities, Klein exhibited maquette drawings for these projects at the Musée des Arts Décoratifs; and, in conjunction with the architect Werner Ruhnau, he carried out industrial experiments (which failed to produce the air roof). In 1959 Klein presented at the Sorbonně his plans for a World Center of Sensibility that would make obsolete the archaic educational modes of the age of matter and would prepare humanity for the age of Space. These gestures, or Conceptual Performance pieces, locate themselves, as usual, at a shifting place between art and politics. For Klein, the boundary between art and government, or art and science, was as petty and irksome as that between, say, geometric and figurative painting. Beginning in 1959, he acted out the establishment of the post-governmental age by the systematic Yves Klein: Messenger of the Void | 67 selling of Immaterial Zones of Pictorial Sensibility, that is, blocks of the Void—immaterial real estate of the age of Space, paid for in the timeless currency, gold. Meeting Klein on a bank of the Seine, the buyer paid pure gold (a different weight for each Zone) to the artist, who gave him a signed receipt. Then the buyer burned the receipt while Klein threw half of the gold into the river, to return it to the matrix of potentiality. Only then was the Zone permanently relinquished by the Proprietor of Space and transferred to the buyer, who was left with no visible object or documentation except—in some cases—photographs. The "relinquishments" satirize the business of art and the sanctity of the art object, which is falsely predicated on its alleged separatation from Life. In the same year, as the first citizen of the age of Space, Klein participated immaterially in a group show in Antwerp, projecting a mental vibration into the space reserved for his work, then returning to Paris. And the kaleidoscope of his interacting elements continued to shift. As Klein's paintings flowed over into conceptual environments, and his environments into political strategies, so his political pieces flowed into the zone of revolutionary theater—a theater that attempts to overleap all divisions and establish the "Kingdom of the Impossible quickly" The ritual for a "Relinquishment" of a Zone of Immaterial Pictorial Sensibility, with Dino Buzzati, Paris, January 26,1962. Skenováno pro studijní účely 68 | ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART The theater which I propose is not only the city of Paris, hut is also the countryside, the desert, the mountains, even the sky, in fact, the whole universe. Why not? —Yves Klein24 klein's aspiration to rid the world of art—as of all bound-aried safe-zones—led him to postulate the whole universe as simultaneously his studio, his material, and his stage. The dateline of his personal Newspaper of a Single Day read: "Yves Klein presents Sunday, November 27, i960." It is virtually a Fiat /wx'The artist, through his power to designate-as-art, has become godlike. He transposes entities at will across the perpetually dissolving boundary between art and life. For one day, the lead story read, every person in the world was cast as both actor and spectator in Yves Klein's Theater of the Void. It was "an historic day for the theater," which now included everything. All distinctions between art and life were suspended as their arenas became coextensive. The world was an art work, or theatrical production, because it had been designated as such, the designation then being offered as Klein's "piece" to the Festival d'Art d'Avant-garde. Piero Manzoni's Base of the World and other works of Conceptual Art involving universal appropriation follow from this prototype. The world is, for a "moment of truth," "made strange," "defamiliarized" (in Viktor Shklovsky's terms); a Brechtian alienation device is placed as a framework around the All. Klein correctly wrote on the front page of his newspaper that the Theater of the Void was "the culmination of my theories." Characteristically, this culmination does not assume a fixed form; the rest of the newspaper restates the vision in constantly changing terms. In his theater of Life the actors are "to live a constant art exhibition, to know the permanence of being, to be here, there, everywhere," like the constantly moving, and escaping, artist of the future (who instead of going underground went to the sky). In one of the many unrealized theatrical projects described in these pages, the theater is to remain permanently empty—empty subscribers' chairs facing an empty stage. Each night at eight the lights will go up and the curtain open on the empty stage. Actors hired for the event will be apprised of its nature, then will drift back into the world to portray human beings, with a new sense of the solemnity of this role. As new ones are constantly hired to replace them, the process of reversing art and life will move onward through the world. The world is asked, in effect, to throw itself toward freedom, into the void, like the Painter of Space who, having repealed the law of gravity, Leaps jauntily upward in the front-page photograph. Yves Klein: Messenger of the Void | 69 Today anyone who paints space must actually go into space to paint, but he must go there without any faking, and...by his own means: in a word, he must be capable of levitating... I have opened to the monochrome space... into the immeasurable pictorial sensibility.... I have felt myself, volumetrically impregnated, outside of all proportions and dimensions, in the ALL. I have encountered, or rather been seized by the presence of, the inhabitants of space—and none of them was human: no one had gone there before me. —Yves Klein15 for klein, levitation, or bodily flight, was the most revolu- tionary of all acts. And as such it must deal in paradox and circularity, which were the weapons of Klein's insurrection. Even his famous Leap is tangled, on the front page of his newspaper, in self-referential circularity. The caption above the photograph says: "A Man in Space"; and below, in the only other photograph on the page, one of Klein's blue monochromes is reproduced, in black and white, with the caption: "Space Itself." That is: he Leaps into his own painting, which is the open window leading out of the closed room of art and the self. But leading to where? In the photograph there is nothing but hard pavement beneath him. In Paris in i960 the rumor quickly spread that the Leap made famous by the photograph was performed over a net, the upper half of the scene then being montaged onto a lower half in which the camera, in the same setup, had photographed the empty street. Firsthand inspection of a print made directly from the negative confirms this rumor, and original photographs including the catchers have come to light.26 But the question does not end there and is not, in terms of Klein's career, a trivial one. In a sense, the final definition of Klein's intentions rests on the question of the historicity of this "practical demonstration of levitation" (as he called it). Was he sufficiently detached from his revolutionary theater to create it out of conceptual whole cloth? Or was his dedication to his symbolic gestures so complete as to require the bone-crunching fall after the devil-may-care "moment of truth" in mid-air? Clearly, Klein believed that in some cases it did not matter whether his projects were physically realized. But the Leap, in fact, was not one of those cases. A recent investigation of all evidence, including interviews of all known witnesses, indicates that Klein did indeed make his Leap originally (in January i960) above pavement alone, only later reenacting it over a net for the cameras.27 Here Klein's art stands firmly upon nothingness. The Leap opens vacancies at all levels of his intricate intentionality: the photograph, as a "trace of the immediate" (a term with which Klein described many of his works), indicts the art object as unreal. The locus of art is Life, the untrammeled Skenováno pro studijní účely 70 | ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART expression of the immediate; the objects left behind are as dead as ashes and as distant as a photograph of a reenactment. For Klein, it was "indecent and obscene" to call objects outside oneself art; the artist is the location of the art event. "Painting is a mode of existence," he wrote; "the fact that I exist as a painter will be the foremost pictorial event of our time." In the Leap more plainly than in any other work, we see what he meant by existing as a painter. Aware of his responsibility, the man of the future ushers in the age of Space, demonstrating definitively the overleaping of all limitations. / am proposing to artists that they pass by art itself and work individually on the return to real life, the life in which a man no longer thinks he is the center of the universe, but in which the universe is the center of each man. Klein then utters a prophecy that has something in common with Duchamp's prophecy (of about the same time) that the artist of the future would go underground: The true painter of the future will be a mute poet who will write nothing but recount, without detail and in silence, an immense picture without limit.—Yves Klein28 klein attempted to terminate critical categories by empty- ing them into one another. This approach was in part an attack on Modernism (which seemed old-fashioned to him), specifically on Modernism's attempt to erase content by selective seeing. In his work, form and content are not treated as two entities, of which it is feasible (or even possible) to elevate one above the other, but as a single bipolar continuum where the reality of each pole is continually passing into its opposite. Through selective seeing it is of course possible to focus on one end of the continuum alone (and that practice is at times useful); but it is not possible to rank them since each is equally dependent on the other. The two terms in fact form a dependent pair, like left/right, up/down, inside/outside, yes/no: neither element in such a structure can be real in a universe in which the other is not equally real. Like two sticks leaning on each other, if one is removed, the other falls too. Klein's insistence on content ran counter to the Zeitgeist of his time, which can be represented, for example, by Clement Greenberg's insistence that "a modernist work of art, must try, in principle, to avoid dependence upon any order of experience not given in the most essentially construed nature of its medium."29 Clearly Klein's insistence on the prophetic level of his work violates this "principle." But on the other hand, Klein was very con- Yves Klein: Messenger of the Void | 71 scious of critical attitudes, and his work conspicuously fulfills the Modernist imperative that the artists attention should turn "in upon the medium of his own craft."30 There is, as always, reason to his duplicity. The essentially dialectical nature of his work, in which content not only dissolves into form (as Greenberg and other formalists advised), but form into content as well, combines iconological allegorism with avant-garde criticism of the medium. Like a dedicated reductionist, he erases traditional signifying devices; then, playing the constructionist, he encodes this erasure as itself a signifier—of Prime Matter, or zero-expression—in a traditional metaphysical system. Dialectical balance affirms each limb and thus negates each by affirming the other. As in the ancient "Epimenides" paradox: if yes then no, and if no then yes. Klein empties the work while filling it, and fills it while emptying it. Paradox and circularity emerge as strategies to transcend the given terms, to reject the critical attitude that postulated an antinomy between them in the first place. To a certain extent Klein, like Manzoni and Beuys, belongs in what some critics have called the Other Tradition in modern art—the tradition of artists whose work involves "extra-art [or anti-art] ambitions."31 But this category also is of limited relevance. As always, it is difficult to say where Klein "belongs." He seems to have rendered dialectical the very distinction between formalist Modernism and the Other Tradition, allowing each a place in his work so that each could destroy the other, attempting to point toward an art beyond these and all other critical distinctions. The question of content, slightly contracted, becomes a question of the place of the artist's intentions. Klein attempted to conflate his intentions (expressed through essays, interviews, symbolic photographs, events, and rumors) and his "works," to put them on a single footing as equal and mutually interacting parts of a metastructure. Before the legitimacy of this tactic can be determined, it is necessary to answer a prior question: where does the artwork end (and who is to draw the line)? Is the monochrome painting inside the artwork, and the photograph of Klein, in knight's suit, holding the same monochrome and preparing to do war against Line, outside of it? Is the text that Klein wrote to accompany this photograph inside or outside of the artwork? Are his various essays on the monochrome idea, and the titles of his shows, with their allusions to Heindel, inside or outside of it? It should be remembered that in such questions we are not dealing with essences but merely specifying the rules by which the game is to be played. A few years after Klein's death—after the recognition of Concep- Skenováno pro studijní účely 72 I ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART tual Art and Performance Art as legitimate mediums—gestures, events, and writings could be catalogued or "indexed" into the status of art works.32 Klein's own practice, foreshadowing the conventions of Conceptual and Performance Art, assumed that his photographed gestures and poses, his published writings, and his monochromes and other physical works were all inside the artwork, as interacting parts of it. The work itself was the set of complex interactions among these elements, not any one element to the exclusion of the others. Klein's idea was to fuse concept and sensum so that each would lose autonomy, and the work become a vast shifting structure involving both conceptual and sensory elements in a meta-system. Insofar as his age was undergoing a transition from a sensory to an ideational aesthetic,33 then Klein was indeed, as Tinguely called him, a Messenger of the incoming age. Klein's strategy of placing concept and sensum in interaction was designed to compensate for the weaknesses that he felt were inherent in a purely sensory art. The Zeitgeist had argued that abstract art has only semiotic, and not semantic, ability. It can refer around within itself, in a nonverbal sign system that a so-called faculty of taste then receives, decodes (nonconceptually), and appraises, but it cannot refer outside itself, and it can make no bridge with the world. It is, in short, artificially isolated and as such, to Klein, an affront to the wholeness of Life. Faced with an art that (supposedly) lacked semantic ability, formalists accepted the consequences and focused on morphology, neglecting (or claiming to neglect) all conceptual overlays as outside the work. Klein made the Other Decision: to reject art as presently known and restructure it in a corrective meta-system that would restore its semantic capability. And lest this restructuring become reactionary, he submitted it in turn to a dialectical destructuring through inner contradictions. A fundamental question is raised by these conflicting decisions. Critical insistence that the artist's intentions are separate from, or outside of, his works (and vice versa) may be merely self-indulgence on the part of the critic, who wishes to replace the artist as the creator of content. (For all criticism, no matter how formalist, has contentual implications.) From this point of view, perhaps the soundest critical strategy would be to regard everything that the artist deliberately presents to the public as inside the work. But from the formalist critic's point of view, Klein's attempt to saturate his works with his intentions may also be seen (as it has been in Duchamp's case) as a strategy to distract attention from their possible deficiencies, by clouding the critical gaze with intermediary concepts. Inevitably, the adherents of Yves Klein: Messenger of the Void | 73 this latter view must emphasize, perhaps hopelessly, questions of appraisal (the faculty of taste) rather than of explication. Like Duchamp, Klein despised the faculty of taste because its decisions are so variable. Produced, he reasoned, by cultural conditioning rather than by nature, they will be trivialized, or even rendered absurd, by the passage of time and the ascendancy of different cultural codes. In fact, the problem goes even deeper, since questions of taste are not tactically answerable; they are distanced, perhaps infinitely, by prior questions that they beg (and that in turn beg others). We must first decide, for example, about the place of the artist's intentions, the limits of the art realm, and so forth. And these decisions in turn must fall back upon the faculty of taste—or habit, or entanglements of lines—for these questions also beg others. For example, is the mind only a user of sense-data? Or is it also (as Buddhist psychology teaches) a sense in itself, with its own sense objects (concepts), and its own quite legitimate aesthetic delight in them? And that question in turn begs others. Jean Tinguely called Klein "the greatest provocateur 1 have ever known."34 And surely Klein's work, while answering every question, questions every answer, provocatively. This winding dialectical path leads, through infinite regress, to an unbounded free zone. Inner space opens with the realization that (as an ancient artist of the dialectic proclaimed), "Every opinion is nullified by an equal and opposite opinion."35 Or, as Yves Klein the Provocateur put it: "It is necessary to be like untamed fire; it is necessary to contradict yourself."36 1. Yves Klein, in Dimatiche: The Newspaper of a Single Day, p. 2. There is no definitive edition of Klein's essays. The m.ss., when I visited them, were in the Klein archive, Musee National d'Art Moderne, Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris. I will refer to published versions whenever possible. Unless otherwise noted, translations from Klein's writings are my own. A facsimile of The Newspaper of a Single Day may be consulted in Giuliano Martano, ed., Yves Klein: il Mistero Ostentato (Turin, n.d.), insert, 2. See, e.g., Clement Greenberg, Art and Culture (Boston: Beacon Press, 1967), pp. 12-16. 3. Art News, May 1961; New York Herald Tribune, April 16, 1961; Time, January 27,1961. 4. New York Times, February 5,1967; New York World Journal Tribune, February 5, 1967. The almost worshipful tone adopted by Ronald Hunt in Artforum for January 1967 didn't help: the cul-tic atmosphere was perceived as part of Klein's "vaudeville." 5. Susan Sontag, Against Interpretation and Other Essays (New York: Delta Books, 1981), p. 11. 6. In The inner and the Outer Space, exh. cat. (Stockholm: Moderna Museet, 1965), n.p. 7. Typescript in Klein archive, Musee National dArt Moderne, Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris. 8. Joseph Kosuth, "Art After Philosophy," in Gregory Battcock, ed„ Idea Art: A Critical Anthology (New York: Dutton, 1973), p. 100. 9. Harold Rosenberg, The Anxious Object (New York: MacMillan, 1973), p. 77. Skenováno pro studijní účely ORIGINS OF ANTI-ART 10. Yves Klein, "The Monochrome Adventure," typescript in Klein archive, Musee National d'Art Moderne, Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris. Selections have been published in various exhibition catalogues, including Yves Klein, exh. cat. (New York: The Jewish Museum, 1967) (which I quote). u. See, for example, E.H. Gonibrich, "Botticelli's Mythologies: A Study in the Neo-Platonic Symbolism of His Circle," in Symbolic Images: Studies in the Art of the Renaissance (New York: Dutton, 1972). 12. The Rosicrucian Society (based in Oceans-ide, California) should be distinguished from the Rosicrucian Order, or AMORC; it became a separate organization, under the leadership of Max Heindel, around the beginning of the twentieth century. The relationship between Klein's writings and art works and Heindel's writings is analyzed in detail in my essay "Yves Klein and Rosicrucianism," in the exhibition catalogue, Yves Klein (1928-1062-): A Retrospective (Houston: The Institute for the Arts, and New York: The Arts Publisher, 1982, and, in French translation, Paris: Musee National d'Art Moderne, Centre Georges Pompidou, 1983). 13. Pierre Restany, "L'Epoca blu: il secondo minuto della verita," in Yves Klein, exh. cat. (Milan: Galleria Apollinaire, 1957). 14. For example, in The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines, trans. Edward Conze (Bolinas, California: Four Seasons Foundation, 1973), pp. 97-98. 15. Klein, "The Monochrome Adventure." 16. Donald Judd, Complete Writings, 1959197$ (New York: New York University Press, 1976), p. 68. 17. The sentence appears in several of Klein's writings; for example, Yves Klein, Le Depasse-mentde la Problematique de VArt (La Louvriere, Belgium: Editions de Montbliard, n.d), p.3. Hereafter Depassement. 18. Klein, "Discourse on the Occasion of Tinguely's Exhibition in Düsseldorf, January 1959," in Depassement. 19. Max Heindel, The Rosicrucian Cosmoconcep-tion (Oceanside, Calif.: The Rosicrucian Society, 1937), p. 247. Hereafter Cosmoconception. 20. Yves Klein, "Attendu quej'ai peint...," in Yves Klein, exh. cat. (Paris: Musee des Arts Decora-tifs, Paris, 1969), pp. 38, 40; Depassement, p. 2; letter of Klein to Yamazaki, February 15, i960, Klein archive. 21. The quoted phrases are from Klein's own description of the event in Depassement, pp. 4-13. 22. Klein, Depassement, p. 14. 23. Heindel, Cosmoconception, pp. 305, 311 24. Klein, "Theater of the Void," in Dimanche: The Newspaper of a Single Day. 25. Ibid., p.i; Depassement, p. 2. 26. The author has copies of these photographs, though they are not currently available for public view. 27. This evidence is reviewed in Yves Klein: A Retrospective. 28. Klein, Depassement, p.21; Musee des Arts Decoratifs catalogue, p. 22. 29. Greenberg, Art and Culture, p. 139. 30. Ibid., p. 6. 31. See, for example, Douglas Davis, Artculture (New York: Harper and Row, 1977), pp. 134-138. 32. For "indexing" see Timothy Binkley, "Piece: Contra Aesthetics," in Joseph Margolis, ed., Philosophy Looks at the Arts (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1978), 33. As, for example, Davis puts it, Artculture, p. 49- 34. In Martano, Yves Klein; ilMistero Ostentato, p. 110. 35. Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrrhonism, 1.202, my translation; for the text see Sextus Empiricus, trans, and ed., R. G. Bury, 4 vols. (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press [Loeb Classical Library], 1933), vol. 1, p. 118. 36. "Truth Becomes Reality," in Zero (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 1973), P- 88. 2 Conceptual Art Skenováno pro studijní účely CHAPTER FOUR Anti-Art as Cognition Themes and Strategies hough the modernist or kantian theory held to the belief in three separate but equal faculties, in fact the separation of JL these faculties from one another was not equal. Art's ancient connection with religion kept it secretly affianced with the ethical faculty, as in Wittgenstein's dictum, "Ethics and aesthetics are one and the same thing."1 The art and poetry of the Romantic era were still crypto-religious, and Abstract Expressionism, that last gasp of Romanticism, though it paraded as a secular activity, was (as Harold Rosenberg clearly understood) hiddenly a religious movement.2 So art and religion, in the Late Modernist era, were still complicit. But from the point of view of either art or religion, reason was regarded as the enemy. Early in the twentieth century, the British critic Clive Bell expressed the opinion that religion was arts true ally, while science was its eternal enemy.3 One way of describing the anti-and post-Modernist shift is that art moved away from its old alliance with religion and toward a new alliance with science (especially the social sciences). It was the cognitive faculty, epitomized as science, that the Romantic-tradition had excluded above all from the art context. Yet, an earlier stage of the western tradition had not seen an essential opposition between either science and art or science and religion. Science, as a temple of the order in nature, was itself a kind of religion to the Pythagoreans and Platonists of ancient Greece. It is said that when Pythagoras discovered the Pythagorean theorem he sacrificed an ox to Demeter.4 The mathematical ratios that dwell deep in nature, governing the rules of harmony and astronomy, were also understood to structure the aesthetic principles engraved in the human soul. Art, religion, and science were understood as cooperating in the project of uncovering the universals that governed them all. The aura of each of these channels overflowed into the others. In our time, when the authority of the Modernist paradigm has waned, 77 Skenováno pro studijní účely 78 | CONCEPTUAL ART the aesthetic qualities of mathematics and science have been remarked on by many. According to The New York Times (1/25/2000), physicist Steven Weinberg "received the [1999] Lewis Thomas Prize, awarded to the researcher who best embodies 'the scientist as poet.'" Another Times article noted that In "The Artful Universe" (Oxford, 1995), the astronomer John D. Barrow argues that "the arts and the sciences flow from a single source..." The geneticist Enrico Coen, who has just written "The Art of Genes" (Oxford University Press, 1999), uses painting as a metaphor to describe how organisms generate themselves. Beautiful natural patterns...and their mathematic origins are explored in Philip Ball's "The Self-Made Tapestry: Pattern Formation in Nature" (Oxford, 1998). [Edward Rothstein] chimed in with "Emblems of Mind" (Avon, 1996), examining how music and mathematics create patterns that develop out of similar styles of metaphorical thinking. It is also not hard to see that philosophical ideas exercise an aesthetic appeal, as Rudolf Carnap observed early in the twentieth century.5 Zeno's "Paradoxes" provide an obvious example, embodying the infinite regress aesthetic of Bachian/Escherian labyrinths of orderly thought. There are other, less mathematically ordered areas of philosophy that exercise different but still aesthetic appeal: the down-to-earth still-life effect of an analytic argument based on Ordinary Language philosophy, or the symphonic grandeur of a Hegelian text, or the lyrical spareness of an argument by Wittgenstein. in addition to the aristotelian-kantian trichotomy, which separates the aesthetic from the cognitive, the general neglect of what might be called the aesthetics of thought arises from the tradition of mind-body dualism. From Plato to Descartes it is assumed that sense data and mental operations take place on discretely different metaphysical levels. In this view, which has become the basis of Western common sense, the mind is held to function purely as an organizing faculty sythesizing sense data into a rounded impression of the world. Descartes divided all that exists into two categories, the material {res extensa), that is, the body, including the five senses and the objects they sense; and the immaterial, which is specified as mind {res cogitans). A consequence of Descartes' thought is the idea that mind, being immaterial, can have no intimate connection with the arts that, like painting or music, work through the senses. Earlier, the radical division of the human faculties into material and immaterial components was of central importance to Plato because on it rested the idea of the soul, a non-extended or nonmaterial component of the human self, not subject to the changes of matter and hence inherently eternal. Plato, influenced, it seems, by Egyptian traditions, regarded the soul and its adventures in the afterlife Anti-Art as Cognition | 79 as a central subject of metaphysics. This lineage is the pedigree of formalist art theory, which is constituted primarily out of concealed references to Platonic idealism and, ultimately, to the Egyptian vision of a society beyond change based on a heavenly society that is immaterial. Plato, an aristocrat who saw that a changeless society was in the interests of his class, imported this doctrince into Western thought. Mind-body dualism, in other words, is not the only way of looking at the constitution of the human self; it is a hidden theology with certain social interests, as is the formalist aesthetic theory based in part on it. There are other approaches that do not recognize it at all. The phenomenalist view, for example, rejects mind-body dualism; since sensations are known only as mental impressions, there is no way to distinguish sense events from mind events. As Maurice Merleau-Pont observed, "There are no senses, only consciousness."6 The abhidharma psychology, of Indian and Ceylonese Buddhist origin, recognizes two different aspects of mind. On one hand, it is regarded as an organizing faculty presiding over the synthesizing of sense data; on the other hand, as a sixth sense whose sense objects are concepts in precisely the way that the eye's sense objects are sights. It is the mind's function as a sense that accounts for its pleasures, such as the pleasure of appreciating mathematical formulas, the pleasure of playing chess, the pleasure of wit. Scientists and mathematicians have declared that the pleasure they take in their work is essentially an aesthetic pleasure. Certain modern philosophers, such as Friedrich Nietzsche, Bertrand Russell, and Rudolf Carnap, have suggested that philosophical arguments exercise a subjective aesthetic appeal. This view eliminates the distinction between the cognitive and aesthetic categories, which now appear to have extensive, perhaps complete, overlap. In terms of Conceptual Art, it should be noted that this adjustment in our thinking about the human faculties eliminates the traditional critiques, such as Max Kozloff's complaint in this context that "Conceptual Art['s]... questioning has no form."7 The idea that cognition lacks form is based on the old mind-body dualism which separates the mind from the senses, the channels through which form is sensed. Yet the formal nature of thought can be demonstrated merely by thinking of logic or mathematics. James Collins' distinction between "things and theories"8 is equally a disguised form of mind-body dualism. Theories are things; they are what Edmund Husserl called noematic objects, that is, mental objects. Every thought or concept is an object, and every object has form and aesthetic presence. (What does a centaur look like? An angel?) There is, in other words, an aesthetics of thought with its own styles and its own formalism. Skenováno pro studijní účely 8o | CONCEPTUAL ART those who insist on certainty of knowledge resist recog- nition of the aesthetics of thought, since to accept it would cast doubt on the distinction between truth and beauty (again a disguised form of mind-body dualism) and especially on the category of truth in and by itself. It implies that one adopts an opinion on the basis of an aesthetic decision as well as a truth-related one, and that one's beliefs about reality are in part projections of aesthetic preferences. Tire difference, for example, between a mind that prefers simple accounts of things and a mind that prefers complex accounts may be analogous to different preferences in visual composition. Seen in this way, the history of philosophy becomes a branch of the history of art, with different ages or trends featuring different styles of intellectual formalism. Greek philosophers recognized this aspect of thought much more openly than have Christian-influenced European thinkers, with their special commitment to the concept of truth as the foundation of dogma. A Greek genre of philosophical literature was called the paignion, or "game"; it was a special place for the construction of paradoxes, infinite regresses, circular arguments, both-and-neither arguments, yes-and-no arguments, and other delicacies of an art that isolated the effects of different types of thought for essentially aesthetic appreciation. No less a work than Plato's Parmenides is sometimes put in this class, as is Gorgias' On Truth or On What Is Not. The Megarian school specialized in Conceptual Art objects of this type, and Sextus Empiricus compiled an encyclopedia of them which still exists. (It is one of the most interesting and least-read of ancient Greek books.) The aesthetic of the infinite, though not prominent in the tradition of mind-body dualism from which the modern visual brand of formalism arose, is an example of a particular formalist moment in the history of the aesthetics of thought. It demonstrates an intellectual aesthetic of the sublime rather than the beautiful—for these distinctions apply to thought as much as to painting or music. The beautiful is dependent on explicit self-identity, on the preeminence of the figure over the ground, and hence on implications of the solidity of selfhood; the sublime, however, is based on dissolving the figure into the ground, on a claim of the primacy of the ground over the figure, and of the universal surround of nature over the individual self. In representational painting one thinks of the encounter with the sublime as a tiny human figure lost in the awesome ruggedness of mountains, electrical storms, or oceans. In the aesthetics of thought the sublime is experienced in the way the infinity concept interposes enormous abysses of nonidentity into the world of other concepts, abysses that threaten constantly to spread and absorb every Anti-Art as Cognition \ 61 identity into them. In language, for example, a word derives meaning from the differences between it and all the other words in its language; if that language system were infinite the word would never establish its meaning, since the chain of differences contributing to that meaning would unfold forever. The abysses of the infinite appear inside language as the infinite regress of signi-fiers that prevents the signified from ever being directly confronted. If one attempts to define a word A by saying it means B, when B is also a word or a group of words, then one has slipped from one signifier to another, without really touching the signified. One is involved in an infinite regress or displacement and will never directly confront the signified, slipping from signifier to signifier forever. Thus, the infinity concept opens abysses in thought like those vastnesses of nature which Edmund Burke called the sublime. Thinkers who have featured the infinity concept as a working tool, from Zeno of Elea to Jacques Derrida, bring the mind to a confrontation with the unknown and the unknowable that threatens individual selfhood with dissolution—that is to say, to a confrontation with the sublime. The aesthetic of the finite, on the other hand, emphasizes definition, categorization, and clarity of outline as in the constructivist thought of Aristotle or Leibnitz, and relates to the experience of the beautiful rather than the sublime. Useful parallels may be drawn between preferences in the aesthetics of thought and in visual aesthetics. Philosophers who construct highly articulated models of the universe might be compared to painters of complex land- or cityscapes, or to abstractionists like Mondrian whose works feature order and hierarchy; philosophers who occupy themselves with deconstructing models of the universe show an aesthetic range that extends from the sublime to the minimal, like American painting in the '60s. Conceptual Art involves both the constructing and the deconstructing aspects of the aesthetics of thought, in a mode distinctly its own. duchamp's ambition with regard to these matters may be described as two-fold: he wanted to sever the underground but still effectual connection between art and religion, and conversely to bring the cognitive aspect of aesthetics into the open, as encapsulated in his famous remark about wanting to put art back in the service of the mind.9 In _short, he wanted to divorce art from religion and connect it to philosophy. One problem he j seems to have felt keenly is that if art is only aesthetic—with nothing of the cognitive or ethical involved—then it can only be decoration. (All the signatured styles of Abstract Expressionism can now be seen as fine wallpaper patterns.) "I don't want to be stupid as a painter," he said.10 By wilfully rejecting cognition, the supposed enemy of the aesthetic, the artist, he felt, Skenováno pro studijní účely 82 I CONCEPTUAL AST became stupid by choice. Duchamp chose otherwise. His supposed quitting of art-making for chess signified quitting the service of the aesthetic faculty for that of the cognitive. He saw the Romantic-aesthetic tradition of art as tainted by crypto-religious baggage, as if it were a kind of mystery religion. There were various ways of negating this status. Duchamp's introduction of humor into the artwork, for example, signalled "Conceptual art's desire to dissolve the autonomous status of the aesthetic object."11 In the period of questioning and casting about that followed World War II, classical Conceptual Art arose in association with "the renewed reception of Duchamp in the 1960s,"12 and adopted basic principles from his example: ^reati^nbydesignation. hostility toward painting, substitution of chance for the judgment of taste, and collapsing ofjirtjntqjife by means of the Readymade. Additionally, as part of his return of art to cognition, "Duchamp prefigures ConcepjaaLart's 'linguistic turn."13 The prominence of language in Conceptual Art has led to a confused belief that it may be a kind of philosophy or literature. What is commonly called philosophy is the activity either of stringing concepts together in the hope they will lead to a conclusion, or taking them apart in the hope that false conclusions will be removed. While Conceptual Art does in some cases have actual purposes of a social or political type, it does not usually exhibit those philosophical purposes. It more often holds concepts up as objects to be beheld with an appreciative regard that has the same claim to disinterestedness (and no more) that has traditionally been posited for the act of regarding, say, paintings. What has been called literature, in turn, tends to feature narrative structure or its significant absence, and often demonstrates a concern for the sound of language; Conceptual Art for the most part relates to neither of these values so much as to the values of wit and critical insight, which, though they are not absent from literature, are generally embedded in the complex of literary qualities rather than foregrounded and independently focused. In any case, the presence of language within the frame of the visual artwork does not need justification; it is not a radical break with established art practice but reflects a tendency that has been present for centuries and which it has been the special genius of modern times to confront and force into the open. Before around 1920 the role of the linguistic element in the visual piece was somewhat hidden. An image appeared with a title, but the title was usually outside the frame of the image, like the proclamation of a transcendent god who stands outside his creation and issues statements of metaphysical definition to it. The idea that language, as a cognitive element, stands over and above the perceptions of the senses was thus reflected in the structure of Anti-Art as Cognition | 83 the artwork. In western art in general, when words appeared within the frame they did not exercise the function of wit and criticism, as in Conceptual Art, but either the function of naming, as in Greek vases or in the names "Mater" and "Magadalena" shining in the halos of women in the Avignon Pieta, 1455; or the function of a stage prop, as in the letters "INRI" above the figure of the crucified Christ, the inscription on the pedestal on which the Madonna stands in Andrea del Sarto's Madonna of the Harpies, 1517, or the newspaper being read in a painting by Cezanne. Gauguin placed tides inside the frame, though usually in a corner out of the way of the figures; Van Gogh, Lautrec, and others of the later nineteenth century sometimes did the same. Around 1908 Picasso and Braque began to include fragments of language or even whole passages of newsprint in their paintings as primarily plastic elements, not there to be read but to remind one, as it were, in a gestural way, of the whole presence of the cognitive realm in the texture. This trend picked up momentum in Futurism. In 1912, Gino Severini, for example, included in his paintings words like "valse" and "polka" as comments on the movement of the image. Two years later, Carlo Carra made "free word paintings" of collaged bits of newspaper, music, and advertising. It was in Dada-related contexts that this trend really came to self-awareness. Kurt Schwitters, like the Cubists, used language fragments primarily as plastic elements, to be seen rather than read. But John Heartfield, Duchamp, Magritte, Raoul Hausmann, and others, began, in the 1920s, to use language-within-image in specifically conceptual ways. Duchamp's combination, in L.H.O.O.Q., 1919, of an altered found photographic reproduction with a mysterious but essentially linguistic message, foreshadowed the structure of countless Conceptual artworks to come. Magritte focused on a critique of the relation between linguistic and visual representation. In The Key of Dreams (La Clef des songes), 1930, he shows objects with captions that do not apply to them in any ordinary way. Common-sense attitudes like linguistic reification and image reification are deconstructed in such works. Linguistic reification means the assumption that one's own language, that is, one's conditioned mind-set, is an accurate map of the real; image reification, the belief that one's culture's conceptions of plastic representation accurately portray the outside universe. In Magritte's critical paintings, as the verbal representation is declared to have nothing to do with the visual, or the visual with the verbal, so neither connects with a thing being referred to. Human beings are left alone with their experiences, the grids with which to control them being canceled by mutual contradiction. Magritte's The Treachery of Images (Le Trahison des Images), 1928-29, which shows a picture of a pipe with the statement "This Skenováno pro studijní účely 84 I CONCEPTUAL ART is Not a Pipe," makes this even more explicit: a representation of a pipe, Magritte seems to mean, is not a pipe. The project of relentlessly focusing attention on the language-image relationship, and the related project of critiquing naive acceptance of modes of representation as equivalents of the real, became fundamental and lasting themes of Conceptual Art. The impetus begun with Dada, and lost somewhat in the resurgent formalism, returned with the works of Jasper Johns and others of his generation. Johns' famous Flag, 1955, in which the image extends all the way to the edge of the support, conflates the realms ofreal object (painted flag) and representation (painting of flag). A similar splitting of meaning occurs in such other works of his as Grey Alphabets, 1956, and Numbers in Color, 1958-59. These letters and numbers seem meant not to be read, as in Magritte, but to be looked at, as in Schwitters; yet one cannot help but read them to an extent, as mental focus shifts between the symbolic and plastic orders. The symbolic order began to assert a claim to primacy in the '60s with works like Arakawa's Look At It, 1965, where names of objects are offered in place of images. In 1963, Gene Beery showed word paintings heralding the transition they were involved in, with such messages as "Sorry This Painting Temporarily Out of Style Closed for Updating Watch for Aesthetic Reopening." In that same year Flynt published his essay defining "concept art." The genre had been crystallized in part by the 20th century's long and intense analysis of language. Ferdinand de Saussure's Course in General Linguistics was roughly contemporaneous with Duchamp's early Readymades. This aspect of Conceptual Art has led to a series of events, from Duchamp's puns to Michael Snow's later anagram-matic respellings of his own name. The fact that Conceptual Art was born in part from the tradition of language analysis is one reason why artists' books became an important conceptual genre. The book expresses the desire to reinstate the mind in artistic activity, to focus on the relationship between word and image, and to eliminate the traditional art object. Finally, the project of constructing such an inexpensive and transportable means of communicating concepts visually made these books truly international and translinguistic. in the 1950S and 1960S, a kind of proto-gene ration of con- ceptual Artists extended the boundaries of the art category not by stylistic change but by alteration of the art discourse directly; they forced the usage of the word "art" to expand to include things formerly outside its scope, through the process that Atkinson and Baldwin would later call "declaration." This procedure goes back to the example of Duchamp, and finds its strongest justification in the thought of Ludwig Wittgenstein. In the late '50s and early Anti-Art as Cognition | 85 '60s, the procedures of designation and contextualization were foregrounded inthe works of Yves Klein, Piero Manzoni, Ben Vautier, George Brecht, Dennis Oppenheim, and others. Duchamp had physically signed Readymades; Klein instituted a looser fashion of designation by "signing" the sky in fantasy—a project which Marinus Boezem realized literally with a skywriting airplane in 1969. Manzoni signed human beings and exhibited people on a sculpture stand. Vautier explicitly universalized the procedure, designating everything an artwork. These acts of designation are themselves works of Conceptual Art; their material is the mind-stuff of the art-beholder, specifically the shift between ordinary focus and art focus that takes place. Klein extended Duchamp's rudimentary insights into contextualization by exhibiting an empty gallery in 1958; this gesture implied that if it is the context that makes an object art, rather than any qualities of the object itself, then it is the context that should be exhibited. Analysis of the relationship between an object and the environment in which it is seen became a continuing theme of Conceptual Art. Daniel Bürens early stripe works, for example, combined the idea of painting-as-Readymade with a relentless focusing of different art contexts—the gallery, the museum, the street. Designation and contextualization were the early tools of Conceptual Art. Once the category of art had been opened up to receive whatever an artist might put into it, formalism's aspirations to universality and objectivity were replaced by a forced focus on relativism and the critique of meaning. Formalism's belief in the autonomy of the artwork was answered by the Frankfurt School's emphasis on social conditioning, just as formalism's belief in essence was answered by linguistic analysis and the Saussurean awareness that meaning derives strictly from differences within a bounded system. To clear the air of the archaic forms of thought embodied in formalism, Conceptual Art was rigorously 20th-century, which is to say rigorously critical. Octavio Paz has remarked that in the 20th century there is no thought, only criticism; critical and analytic modes have been characteristic of movements as diverse as Freudianism, linguistic philosophy, Marxism, and semiotics, among others. Jean-Francois Lyotard characterizes this critical-analytical trend of our time as a symptom of the Freudian death wish, which is to be understood not as a self-destructive impulse but as a tendency to dissolve patterns of meaning and personal identity which balances out the tendency to rigidity those things—a tendency that was dominant in the 19th century. in a classic article from 1967 in which the term "conceptual Art" is said to have first appeared, Sol LeWitt stressed the goal of "avoiding Skenováno pro studijní účely 86 I CONCEPTUAL ART subjectivity."14 Conceptual Art in general has focused on eliminating certain kinds of self-expressiveness. This project was of the first importance not because self-expressiveness is the enemy but because western art had come to be locked into certain shades and cliches of self-expression—those of the Romantic transcendentalist—as if they were the necessary essence of art. But artists like LeWitt, Dan Graham, and Carl Andre were in touch with the critical currents of modern culture and wished to exercise responsibility and intelligence in the mode of art. For this reason, Conceptual Art adopted an expressive stance more like that of science and technology. It veered away from the mood of religion, which Clive Bell had said was art's essential zone, to that of science, where Bell had said it could not survive. As art had recendy used analogues of the procedures of religion, now it would use analogues of the procedures of science. This reorientation arose in part from the influence of Minimalism, with its focusing of materials as themselves and of systems of presenting and thinking about them. The investigation of the expressive potential of technological means has brought with it a steadily advancing technological look derived from the camera, which is everywhere; from the photocopying machine, as in the famous Xerox Book put together as an exhibition in 1968 by Seth Siegelaub and John Wendler; from the audiotape and videotape, as in the works of Graham, Nam June Paik, Dara Birnbaum and others; and more recently from the digital light sign, as in the works of Jenny Holzer—and so on. Along with the reorientation of art toward science and technology came a new emphasis on analytic and critical methods. The Duchampian-Magrit-tean tradition had already focused on the question of representation and established a position antagonistic to the processes of linguistic reification and image reification. The question of photography's relationship to convention and reality became a third strand of this project of transcending or at least focusing subjectivity and point of view. These relations were the subject of Joseph Kosuth's formulaic Proto-Investigations, first exhibited in 1972, though dated by the artist to 1965. One and Three Chairs, for example, presented a chair, a life-sized photograph of the chair on its site, and the dictionary definition of the word "chair." Kosuth's subsequent use of the dictionary and thesaurus as materials extended his focus on the naive assumption that one's language has the same shape as reality. Donald Burgy's Name Idea #1, 1969, directs attention to the fact that things and words change in different ways and at different rates. Robert Morris' exhibiton of a card file, The Card File, 1962, pointed to the fact that systems of arranging knowledge are also arbitrary attempts to project patterns of order and Anti-Art as Cognition | 87 Joseph Kosuth, One and Three Chairs, 1965. meaning onto the world. Something similar is conveyed in Bernar Venet's work of the late '60s and early '70s, in which he exhibited a series of technical books on subjects including astrophysics and mathematical logic as objects of nonspecialist regard. In a variety of ways Agnes Denes' works using symbolic logic as a material, Hannah Darboven's permutation drawings, and Lee Lozano's / Ching Charts, 1969, belong in this company. This area of conceptual work presents conventions of vision, language, and knowledge as objects for neutral regard, removing the sense of inevitability from them and ambiguously hinting at an attitude of freedom beyond. This project has been one of undermining the conventions with which our culture orders experience and projects special meanings onto it. The central subject of such analysis is the question of whether artistic canons are objective or relative. Formalism implicitly assumes that aesthetic values are at some root level universal and objective, and would be similarly perceived by all developed faculties of taste. This view ignores 20th-century studies of language and behavior, which suggest that cultural and individual conditioning are factors in all judgments of taste, not just those of the supposedly uncultivated; the claim to an unconditioned exercise of judgment is Skenováno pro studijní účely 88 I CONCEPTUAL ART virtually contradictory, since judgment necessarily involves canons and these, as Saussure's study of language demonstrated, can only define themselves in relation to a finite surrounding system. Duchamp's Readymades were an attempt to break open this sanctum sanctorum by forcing realization of the relativity of aesthetic feelings. The still-repeated cliche that Duchamp's intention in the Readymades was to demonstrate that aesthetic beauty can be found anywhere seems plainly incorrect. He was attempting, as he said in various interviews, to find objects that would be neutral or meaningless in terms of taste. This project was both a critique of formalist theory, with its privileged faculty of taste, and an attempt to transcend the limits of subjectivity in the form of personal habit. Taste, he felt, was not an independent faculty with inborn knowledge but a conditioned habit arising from cultural surroundings. What one is trained to enjoy as art one will enjoy as art. The same force that made Pavlov's dogs salivate at the sound of a bell makes the art enthusiast shiver with ecstasy before a painted cloth. An art tradition, then—like, say, European painting —is an arbitrary communal habit based on hidden social and economic forces as much as on aesthetic inertia. Tradition exists when a whole culture has acquired a communal habit and rewards the indulging of it. Habits arise as ways to tame the unknowability of experience, but to tame unknowability is to flee the sublime—which Burke described as dark, formless, isolate, unapproachable without loss of self-definition. DUCHAMP EVIDENTLY FELT THERE WERE THREE THINGS THAT ONE could do about the fact that one was at the mercy of a habit. First, one could go on reinforcing that habit and indulge the pleasure of satisfying it until it^ came to seem like a given or natural or inevitable part of life. That is how he saw the practice of traditionally aesthetic visual art. Second, one could break the old habit and start a new one which in time would run the same course from acquired habit to apparent absolute truth; this is what he thought the Cubists among others were doing. Third—and this is what the Readymades were about—one could attempt to find ways to a stance beyond aesthetic i habit. This was a genuinely new conception of the art object, which was now to be regarded as an instrument to pry apart the structures of habit without leaving anything newly enchanting in their place. The Readymades were objects designed to be unaccountable in terms of our culture's aesthetic habits. They offered a pocket of freedom from art based on habit, and from a life of believing that one was beholding transcendent forms when in fact one was mechanically acting out a habit one had not even chosen to acquire. This general intention—of deconditioning, deconstructing, creating things Anti-Art as Cognition | 89 unaccountable by any easily available model—permeates the practice of Conceptual Art, at least that of the first generation. Unaccountability is important because it stymies attempts to tame and control the rawness of things by corralling them into manageable categories. It is an openness to freedom and mystery, involving as it does a submission to givenness, a relinquishing of the belief in the effectiveness of one's categories and the fullness of the map of one's language. Recognition of it is a necessary part of the analytic adventure of modern culture. The objets provocateurs which the Futurists and Dadaists featured were transitional devices opening the way to unaccountable objects; they were themselves accountable by their consistent function of provocation. Countless Conceptual Art objects of later date have striven for pure unaccountability. Both Joseph Beuys and Marcel Broodthaers were engaged, in much of their object-making, in the attempt to arrive at truly unaccountable objects that can find no place in the habit-systems of viewers, including the habit of shock. Broodthaers' mussel-shell works, like Panel of mussels [Panneau du monies), 1965, and Mussles in white sauce (Moules sauce blanche), 1966, and his eggshell works, his suitcase full of bricks, and many others, are unaccountable objects that resist aesthetic appreciation from any habituated stance and render foolish most attempts at discursive interpretation. These objects, one feels somewhat eerily, might be meaningful to some unknown aesthetic from some unheard of species or culture. The point is to see reflected there the arbitrariness of one's own object preferences. Beuys's fat works, sausage works, and such, function to separate his work from the vestiges of aesthetic habit and suspend it in a zone of unknowability and unaccountability. So convincing are the works in this respect that the artist's autobiographical accounts and explanations seem both unconvincing and irrelevant. The range of conceptual objects that belong in the category of deliberate unaccountability is large, comprehending also, for example, James Lee Byars's work of 1968 in which a mile of gold thread was sent into outer space on helium balloons; the characteristic Byars-esque invocation of the angelic sphere and attempt to reconnect heaven and earth are recognizable, but after the accounts are given there is something left over that they do not account for. Many of the Flux-Boxes by Brecht and others are designed either to be unaccountable in terms of our usual categories or to imply new half-defined categories whose intentionality we can barely grasp. Unaccountability is found in forms as various as Gordon Matta-Clark's vertically sliced house and Wolf Vostell's Berlin Fever, 1973, in which cars clustered in groups of ten drove as slowly as physically possible alongside the Berlin wall for half an hour. Skenováno pro studijní účely go | CONCEPTUAL ART the assault on the premises of linguistic and visual rep- resentation, conjoined with the presentation of unaccountable conceptual objects, comprised a sweeping program of focusing on the idea that meanings are projected onto the world of raw information, not inherent in it. The other side of this coin is the recognition of the neutrality of information, which has only those meanings that the mind projects upon it. In Christine Kozlov's Information: No Theory, variously dated 1969 to 1970, a tape recorder placed in an otherwise empty gallery recorded the ambient sounds on a two-minute loop; at any moment it preserved the sounds made within the last two minutes. In making no selection by form or content but treating all information as equal, she eliminated the meaning projections by which one ordinarily distinguishes one piece of information from another as more meaningful, relevant, or useful. On Kawara, in / Got Up, 1970, mailed postcards that reported the time he got up every day for a year to a select group of recipients. There was no implication that the knowledge might be useful or even interesting to them; information was purveyed for its own sake, with no particular application of it in mind, parodying the declining tradition of art for art's sake. In Kawara's Today, 1966, the artist made a painting of the day's date each day for a year (subsequently extended), parodying the tradition of painterly expressiveness and of the arbitrary perfection of the art elements in the work. Countless other conceptual pieces have involved expressions of the neutrality of information, including aesthetic information. Vito Acconci, in Step Piece, 1970, stepped onto and off of a stool as many times as he could each morning for a month, recording and later publishing the numbers. Christopher Cook's A Book of Instants, 1970, is filled with a list of apparently unrelated or arbitrary times, such as "November 21,1844, 9:40 a.m." Jan Dibbets' Robin Redbreast's Territory Sculpture, 1969, presents information designated by the movements of a wild bird. Robert Smithson's guided tour of "the monuments of Passaic," 1967, confronted the art audience with the idea that Passaic, New Jersey, had replaced Rome as the Eternal City, and with information about certain monuments there. The presentation of raw or unordered materials is not a meaningless activity; it is the useful promulgation of a view of meaning as imposed arbitrarily on materials from without, for reasons not inherent in the materials themselves but in human plans and ambitions for them. one formalist projection of meaning that came under special attack was the idea that the artwork was autonomous in the sense of being outside social and economic causes and conditions. This view Anti-Art as Cognition | 91 was countered in the '60s and '70s by the widespread dissemination of the so-called Frankfurt criticism in the works of Walter Benjamin, Theodor Adorno, and others. These critics felt that the artwork had been coopted by the processes of the market, which created the myth of autonomy to conceal this fact. The impression of autonomy was maintained as a pious fiction by the use of a special aurifying environment and by the apotropaic utterances of formalist critics; the outside world was identified as secular and the inner temple as sacred, along the lines of Bell's insistence that art belonged in the area of culture with religion, not with science. One strategy for presenting the artwork as embedded in, rather than autonomous of, the ordinary causal networks of human life has been the introduction of chance procedures which leave the work vulnerable to forces outside the artist's intentions. Chance procedures in the art-making process can produce artistic forms that are freed from the tyranny of conditioned habit. As the tradition of introducing chance elements grew, it developed a certain formalism of its own, based on the increasing elegance or expressiveness with which chance was introduced. To incorporate chance into the Three Standard Stoppages, 1913-14, Duchamp created a quasi-scientific procedure like that of an experimenter, dropping a meter-long piece of string three times from a height of one meter, and recording the three curves that it made upon landing; these curves were then incorporated as elements un-contaminated by hand and taste into a variety of later works by Duchamp, including the Large Glass. The quasi-scientific air of the procedure accords with what Duchamp called the precision of the random, and with the fact that here it is not a desire to control that is being acted out but a desire to invite the world to state its own projects, in the manner of a scientific Marcel Duchamp, Three Standard Stoppages (3 Stoppages Etalon), 1913-14. Assemblage: three threads glued to three painted canvas strips 51/4x47i4", each mounted on a glass panel 7!4x49%x%"; three wood slats, 2Vjx43xVJ", 2V4x47xM", 2'/2X43MxS4", shaped along one edge to match the curves of the threads: the whole fitted into a wood box i'/sX5o?4x9". KatherineS. Dreier Bequest. (i49-i9S3-a-i) The Museum of Modern Art, New York. Skenováno pro studijní účely 9 i CONCEPTUAL ART experiment. In Klein's rain paintings, powdered pigment flung into the air was applied to a canvas on the ground by raindrops. In Smithson's Asphalt Rundown, 1969, a dump truck released a load of hot asphalt down a slope, where it cooled and hardened naturally. In Richard Serra's Splashing, 1968, molten lead was splashed along the base of a wall in a gallery, where it cooled and hardened in random shapes. The experiment-like procedure of the Three Standard Stoppages is echoed in the quasi-scientific instructions, as if to a laboratory assistant, in one of Duchamp's texts: "Theory": 10 words found by opening the dictionary at random by A 10 words found by opening the dictionary at random by B These two sets of words have the same difference of "personality" as if they had been written by A and B with an intention. Or else—it matters little—there would be cases where this "personality" may disappear in the neutrality of A and B. That is the best case in terms of Duchamp's fetishization of indifference. Duchamp seems not to be instructing the reader to carry out this work, but the tone is the same. Such laboratory-type instruction becomes a basic element of Conceptual Art in its studied displacement from the realm of pseudo-religion to that of pseudo-science, and in its deliberate shift to a more impersonal mode of expressiveness. It relates to the procedural rules by which John Baldessari made his Conceptual photographs of balls thrown into the air recording their happenstance configurations, to Mel Bochner's measurement pieces, to the technological look of many Conceptual installations, and so on. LeWitt, in the essay of 1967, had prescribed execution according to a completely predetermined plan, with no impulsive alteration in process, as an antidote to the romantic myth of self-expressiveness, which reached its height in Action Painting. LeWitt's principle still holds in, for example, quotational painting. Another way of underlining the fact that the artwork is not autonomous but involved in ordinary causality is to site it directiy in the flux of the changing world. Buren had his stripe paintings carried around the city like advertising signs, and sited them as flags flying over Paris. Maura Sheehan, in her "Urban Alterations" of the late '70s and early '80s, designated public parts of American cities as art, usually by adding monochrome paint to them; these works were meant to deteriorate in observable time with the normal activity of the city. Time, in other words, was used as a material. Robert Janz has sited works in the middle of a flowing stream and at the waves' edge by the ocean. The incor- Anti-Art as Cognition \ 93 Jean Tinguely, Study for an End of the World, 1961. poration of time and change into the work, like sitedness in the world, reveals its contingency. Euan Burnet-Smith has made sculptures held together in a matrix of ice, which deconstruct themselves in about three hours. Bochner structured a piece around the growth rate of a tree, Wolfgang Laib around the seasonal production of pollen. Eleanor Antin had herself photographed naked every day, in full-front and profile, while on a diet. These works feature acceptance of natural scales of time, like the rate of ice melting or of urban decay; time is also used as a material to be shaped or manipulated. Jan Dib-bets preannounced a moment when he would appear on a certain balcony in Amsterdam and make a gesture of greeting. Douglas Huebler offered a reward for the capture of a wanted criminal, presumably accelerating the process. Jean Tinguely made exploding artworks like Study for an End of the World, 1961, and Study for an End of the World, No. 2, 1962. Graham's Yesterday/Today, 1975. presented a video monitor showing activity in a nearby room while an audiotape recorded in the same room exactly 24 hours earlier was played. ephemeral works are in part an attempt to avoid the pro- cesses of commodification and fetishism in which artworks favored by the formalist ideology seemed so deeply implicated. Many sited works also Skenováno pro studijní účely 94 I CONCEPTUAL ART Anti-Art as Cognition | 95 avoid the system of commercial galleries and collectors, as does the use of the public mail as distribution system, a practice pioneered by Klein, Ed Higgins, Ray Johnson and others in the late '50s and still much in use today. The frequent involvement of Conceptual with Performance Art is a related means of enmeshing it in the real time of embodied human activities while simultaneously avoiding the commodifiable object. Richard Long's and Hamish Fulton's photo-documented cross-country walks hover at the interface between concept, performance, sculpture, and photography. Op-penheim contrasted experiential and conceptual time in Time Line, 1968, in which he walked through the snow along the boundary between two time zones, in the gap between two times yet leaving a trail as proof of passage. Linda Montano performed a piece of seven years' duration, in which she immersed herself constantly for one year in the symbolism of each of the centers recognized by Indian occult neurology, listening to its tone, dressing in and visualizing its color, and speaking each year in a different accent intended to embody the sense of the center then in effect. The scale of this piece raises real questions about the relation between art and life. traditional gallery and museum settings are designed to eliminate the sense of embeddedness in a socio-economic world and to create in its place a sense of ethereal-eternal presence like that valued in religious buildings. Yet, even within the gallery or museum setting, ways have been found to breach, if sometimes only gesturally, the traditional separation between art and life. In 1969, Hans Haacke installed a UPI news ticker-tape in the Museum of Modern Art, bringing the entire world, or a manifestation of the entire world in all its political and social problematic, inside. Bochner, in Compass: Orientation, 1969, drew the four cardinal directions on the gallery floor, emphasizing that the gallery was located in a surrounding world and that the work seen in it could not be autonomous and transcendent. In Lawrence Weiner's/l Wall Stained with Water, 1969, the gallery was shown as found but, as the title indicates, with a focus on the inadvertent sign of its vulnerability to external forces that involve it in change and decay. In 1968, Smithson began exhibiting heaps of natural gravel; the material was conceived as, to a degree, bringing its outdoor site with it into the gallery. Mary Kelly located her work, Postpartum Document, 1973-79, in the net of causality by rooting its content in autobiography, specifically in the development of her child. under the influence of both the frankfurt critics and louis Althusser, the impulse arose to make artworks that would not only avoid the traditional channels of commodification and fetishism but reveal them as well—artworks that would pry apart the unidirectionality of the culture industry and turn its own elements and strategies against it. The critique of the culture industry has prominently featured a critique of photography and an appropriation of advertising styles. Les Levine has placed socially oriented works composed of photographs and verbal messages on billboards and in the advertising spaces of subways. Victor Bürgin has made photographs designed to look like advertising, adding texts intended to criticize the culture industry through its own look. Haacke has altered texts on advertising photographs in ways designed to reveal the tacit cooperation of the system of art commodification with the institutions of government and industry. Barbara Kruger's works of the '80s are a looser and somewhat more expressive variant of this mode. Birnbaum, Richard Prince, and others have variously incorporated the semiotics of advertising into their work. Photography in this context is not art photography as such; sometimes it is its antithesis. Chris Burden, Vito Acconci, and others have kept their photo-documentation amateurish in style and quality to avoid aestheticizing and commodifying effects. The use of instant photography has been favored for its emphasis on ephemerality, and the use of self-photography for its relation to images of solipsism and self-consciousness. The camera has had a kind of role as epistemological model; the once widespread belief in its objectivity has been discredited in part by the efforts of artists like Haacke and Bürgin to reveal its uses as an instrument of propaganda and mystification. The wry critical composites of photographs and texts by Gilbert and George, Bill Beckley, and others tend also to reflect photography's involvement in the culture industry and its proliferation of illusions. conceptual art's deconstruction of formalist art theory and practice culminated in what has been called "the dematerialization of the art object." To a degree this was an unrealizable ideal; since the brain is a material thing and its operations have a chemical aspect, even mind-objects or language pieces are kinds of material objects. Nevertheless, there was a real meaning to the project, which was another expression of the fundamental idea of self-consciousness: if consciousness is of itself, then subjectivity is the object—the object, as an other, is eliminated. Klein, who first applied the term "dematerialization" to art, exhibited empty space several times, beginning in 1958; but he did so only after convincing himself that he had projected mental vibrations into it that were actually material, though of a material too fine for ordinary senses to perceive. He conceived Skenováno ■ pro studijní účely 96 | CONCEPTUAL ART of these works in traditional genre terms, calling them invisible paintings and sculptures. In 1967, Buren and others exhibited visible paintings, but in a locked room where no one could see them. In 1968 Robert Barry exhibited his studio space, seemingly empty but actually filled with various electronic waves. In 1969 he stood in front of an audience and attempted to communicate to them telepathically the appearance of a work which they never physically saw. William Anastasi removed parts of gallery walls rather than adding something to the space. As the other side of dematerialization, Conceptual Art has analyzed the context in which the art object had once been contained, focusing on the system of market-related processes that surrounded it like a net. Michael Asher removed the partition wall dividing the gallery's exhibition space from its sales space, revealing, through subtractive means, the market system which surrounds the artwork while concealing itself. Haacke exhibited the market histories of paintings by artists like Ed-ouard Manet and Georges Seurat. Broodthaers, Anastasi, Asher, Buren, and others have made works in which the wall label identifying the piece as art was the piece itself. Related to immateriality and subtraction is the empty or hidden piece, which goes back to Duchamp's With Hidden Noise, 1916, and Picabia's painting presented to a Dada evening audience in its wrappings in the same year. Manzoni produced a line thousands of meters long, rolled it up, canned it, and buried it in the ground. Robin Winters, in 1984, installed his drawings under the bricks of the gallery floor. Douglas Davis, in 1974, buried a functioning video camera that recorded its own burial. A work of Bruce Nauman's was a concrete cubical chamber, with no entrance, buried in the ground, with a video camera operating inside it so the empty and buried interior could be seen in an aboveground monitor. The idea for this piece goes back through several stages to Klein's exhibition of the empty gallery, and forms part of a subgenre including Barry's exhibition of a closed gallery ("For the exhibition the gallery will be closed," read the sign on the door), Byars' Imaginary Museum, and various other pieces by Barry, Ian Wilson, and Tom Marioni in which the invitation to the show was in fact the artwork. In Barry's piece of this type, when one arrived at the Paul Mainz gallery in Cologne a sign on the door said "Paul Mainz gallery invites you to an exhibition by Robert Barry at Art and Progress, Amsterdam" for the following month. Art and Progress similarly would post on the door an invitation to galleria Sperone, Turin, the next month, and so on through seven galleries in different countries. Anti-Art as Cognition | 97 the theme of immateriality, hiddenness, and emptiness im- plied as its corollary the positing of mind-stuff or consciousness as the true art material. Artworks had always been thrown onto the screen of consciousness to be perceived; now the screen itself, and its various processes, were to be made both the subject matter and the material of art attention. The theme of consciousness, and of its reflexive activity as self-consciousness, has been basic to Conceptual Art from the beginning—it has almost been its emblem or logo. Self-consciousness is a concept next door to solipsism, which is the idea that consciousness is only consciousness of one's self, and solipsism in turn is next door to tautology, which is the statement of self-sameness or identity. Conceptual Art has taken the rendering of these concepts as its special province. In 1963, Anastasi exhibited Microphone, a tape recorder that played back an audiotape on which the sound of its own operations had been recorded. The next year he exhibited photographs of gallery walls hung on the walls they represented, filmed a wall and projected the film onto the same wall, and so on. In 1968 Ian Burn photocopied a blank sheet of paper, then photocopied the copy, and so on through a hundred generations, presenting the results as a book; the page's moments of awareness of itself developed into a form and a content. A performative icon of elementary self-consciousness is found in reports of Allan Kaprow's private works of minimal human gesture performed without audience, documentation, reportage, existing only in the medium of immediate self-awareness. In more detailed investigations it was possible to focus and isolate specific emotions, thoughts, or thought processes, such as imagining, relating, comparing, visualizing, or perceiving. When one turns a Huebler dot or line over 45 degrees in one's mind, then 90 degrees, and so on, it is the operations of consciousness that one is made aware of. One watches one's mind perform these simple turning movements as if watching a child learning to perform such movements with its hands. The unfamiliarity of one's own mental processes becomes apparent—how uninspected they are, and yet how susceptible to or available for inspection. The turning of one's own mind-stuff is focused, isolated, and presented to one's attention as an object. Something similar, though with added inner tensions, is produced by Dibbets' "Perspective Corrections," which he first did in 1967-69, in which objects are presented in ways that seem to deny perspectival foreshortening while in fact they are being seen perspectivally but their shape is other than what one had thought. One corrects the corrected perspective and then recorrects it again. Here mental processes are the material or medium. There is a certain formalism to this type of work. Weiner's early word pieces often involved the isolation Skenováno pro studijní účely 98 [ CONCEPTUAL ART Anti-Art as Cognition | 99 of specific mental operations triggered by linguistic directions, such as to the sea, on the sea, from the sea, and bordering the sea, all 1970. Such work investigates parts of speech, in this case prepositions, concentrating on the single mental operation that differs from one prepositional formulation to another. Like turning one of Huebler's imaginary lines around in one's head, one similarly turns Weiner's tiny word pieces, or turns that part of the conceptual stuff which registers distinctions such as those between prepositions. Noematic or imaginary objects become artworks by deliberate impetus of the mind-stuff in a certain direction, the bestowing of the impetus being the art act. Weiner's piece entitled Floatable Objects Thrown into Inland Waterways One Each Month for 7 Years, 1969, is not a performance to be acted out, but a complex image to be constructed and beheld in the mind. Byars has presented the receiver's imagination with less specific suggestive phrases like The Perfect Book, 1981, or The Exhibition of Perfect, 1983; from such hints the viewer obtains a kind of transfer of mental atmosphere. Somewhere between the hidden and the imaginary falls Barry's piece Psychic Series, 1969: "Everything in the unconscious/perceived by the senses but not/noted by the conscious mind/during trips to Baltimore,/during the summer of 1967." Or, "Something which can never be any specific thing," 1969. Or, "It is wholly indeterminate, has no specific traits, is entirely ineffable, is never seen, and is not accessible," 1970. Such encapsulations of indefinite millions of data encompass whole shelf-loads of unwritten novels in their brief suggestiveness. They have something of the evocativeness associated with the fragments of Presocratic philosophy or of early Greek lyric poetry. to a considerable degree the complex of strategies forming Conceptual Art was first defined negatively, as an anti-art, by the complex of strategies it was attempting to replace, those of formalist painting and sculpture. Its early form was to a degree determined, or controlled, by the form of what it was criticizing. This aspect has been acted out in a series of pieces in which the artist claims to retire from the practice of art (that is, from formalist commodity-making) as a demonstration of his or her real seriousness about art in a broader or deeper sense. Again, Duchamp was the great prototype—or anyway the myth that he quit art for chess-playing, thereby apparently laying claim to a superior cultural and intellectual position. In the period of first-generation conceptualism such gestures were a common motif—a material, really. Baldessari gave an exhibition that consisted of the ashes of his paintings in 1970. Venet predicted in 1967 that he would quit artmaking four years thence—that is, the instructions for his Skenováno pro projected series of pieces ended that way. In 1963 Robert Morris issued a "Statement of Aesthetic Withdrawal." In 1981 Ian Burn wrote "Memoirs of an ex-conceptual artist." In 1985 Ben Vautier sent a postcard saying, "No more art," to which Joseph Beuys replied with a postcard saying "I here resign from art." In 1965 a group of painters including Daniel Buren took down their paintings from an exhibition and distributed a flyer saying "We are not painters." And so on. Beuys's piece The Silence of Marcel Duchamp Is Overrated, 1964, is a kind of reverse example of this genre, expressing his frustration at Duchamp for a confused dichotomy that he left for later artists: if nonart has been declared art, then quitting art is not really quitting. What can be the distinction between practicing art by practicing it and practicing art by not practicing it? It was this kind of dichotomized thinking that caused Conceptual Art to be called "anti-art." But the term "anti-art" was never exactly right. Conceptual Art is not innately inimical to formal object art—it may be used that way, but it is not innately so; it is itself a formal means with its own characteristic range of objecthood. The fierceness of this dichotomy was a result of the history of the theory of art more than of the history of art. It was a kind of Manichaean split forced by the repressive practice of formalist theoreticians and critics who artificially attempted to ban language and concept, and with them thought and discourse and in fact culture and phsychology, from the visual arts. The puritanical excesses once performed in the service of Soul were paralleled by the formalistic excesses in the service of aesthetic feeling. The conflict between faith and reason was replayed on a small stage in the realm of art, and reason lost. Reason became the old antagonist again, now called not Anti-Christ but Anti-Art. In a sense the polarization of art over the form/content, or senses/mind, issue was fortunate, because in trying to back away from conceptual aspects of the art experience several things were achieved. Abstract types of representation not formerly prominent in the western tradition were to an extent worked out, and such advocates as Clement Greenberg developed a vocabulary and discourse to describe them with impressive clarity—indeed, with the almost spooky clarity of a discourse that does not see beyond itself. Even more important, a new genre—or rather one that had always existed but had not before been made explicit in discourse —was forced out into the open. Born in the heat of combat, and with the brand of the Anti-Art upon it, the new medium—Conceptual Art—seemed to promise a new future. This future unfolded through two different strategies. studijní účely 10O I CONCEPTUAL ART Anti-Art as Cognition | 101 in the 1960S many artists just emerging from art schools found themselves in the environment of Abstract Expressionism, which seemed foreign to them in many ways. They saw their course as the single-minded deconstruction of the old paradigm. Modernism had to be taken apart plank by plank and abolished without regret. A strategy emerged whereby Conceptual Art would be a kind of epistemology, through which cracks in the cognitive apparatus might be focused and inspected, somewhat like the effects of reflecting on a koan. Out of this impulse arose the classical Conceptual Art, which has been called "strong," "hardline," "analytic," and "exclusive." Alongside this strategy arose another, called variously "weak," "synthetic," and "inclusive."15 Generally the two tendencies appealed to different artists and generated different groups which, aware of an ideological divide between them, became more or less parties. In the hard-line group, artists such as Joseph Kosuth, Robert Barry, Bernar Venet and the Art and Language Group seemed, especially in the anti-Modernist decade, to be working on Duchamp's injunction to put art back in the service of the mind. As the aesthetic faculty had been expressed puritanically by late Modernist abstractionists, so now the cognitive faculty was expresed puritanically. The "complete break from formal aesthetic considerations"16 was underlined by various reversals. Whereas art and science had formerly been in opposition, "the subject of Venet's work is the documentation of science."17 Whereas cognition had been despised in comparison with direct aesthetic apprehension, now "books have become an increasingly important medium for Conceptual Art, often taking the place of exhibitions."18 Whereas art's ideological agenda had been hidden beneath the decoration of its aesthetic surface, artists such as Daniel Buren and Hans Haacke "turned the violence of the mimetic process back onto the ideological apparatus itself."19 What had formerly seemed the metaphysical autonomy of the artwork gave way to "an inquiry... into the ontological status of the art object..." Whereas language, as conceptual and hence cognitive, had formerly been excluded from the artwork, now "a self-reflexive inquiry into art's linguistic structure...could itself be an artwork."20 Such work was anti-Modernist anti-art, meaning that it was primarily concerned with clearing and sterilizing the field rather than with reseeding it with new forms. "Strong" or "exclusive" or "hardline" Conceptualism was based on "restricted, analytically focused and explicitly philosophical definitions."21 It was undiluted by elements of other media, such as painting and sculpture; it tended to be exclusively based on language, or on language in combination with photography ("photo-text"). It tended to reject represen- tation in favor of an insistence on tautology—on each thing being itself and nothing else. Works like Anastasi's Microphone, 1963 (a tape-recorder playing the sound of its own mechanism), reduce art to cognitive directness and simplicity with only residual elements of aesthetic design. Often this work seemed to sense the sublime underlying the mysteries of cognition, as it had once loomed over the aesthetic. This was an aspect of its anti-Modernism, reproducing the traits of its enemy, like drinking its blood. so-called weak, or diluted or inclusive conceptualism embodied a different strategy. It avoided the pitfall of simply reversing the Modernist hierarchy of the faculties but leaving hierarchy itself in place. It acknowledged a "diverse and historically inclusive use of the term Conceptual art"22 and did not feel itself to be polluted by entering into hybrid media with other genres, such as Conceptual painting, Conceptual sculpture and installation art. Basically it accepted all three faculties as necessary to the human being. Strong Conceptualism was formalistic in the sense of Aristotelian logic, which dealt with the forms of argumentation without attending to the contents. The more diverse, hybrid and inclusive Conceptualism was more concerned with content, and spread around the world in the wake of post-colonial issues. In other terms, the distinction is described as between "self-reflexive Conceptual art and the more issue-based global Conceptualism."23 In terms of logic there is a parallelism with the distinction between deduction, which is puristic and formalist, and induction, which is conditioned and bound to content. In most historical overviews, strong Conceptualism seems to have made the original statement which was later diluted by weak Conceptualism. But in fact the two strategies appeared almost simultaneously. In 1961 the American Fluxus artist Henry Flynt had invented the term "concept art," meaning an art whose materials were concepts rather than paint, metal, wood and so on; the term was published in 1963.24 The slightly revised form "conceptual art," used by Sol LeWitt in an Artforum article of 1967,25 was adopted widely, and at about that time hardline Conceptualism such as the Proto-Investigations of Kosuth began to appear. But almost immediately a counterstatement was made by John Baldessari, Bill Beckley, and others who refused to treat cognition with the kind of reverential hush with which the aesthetic faculty had once been treated. Their work, reintroducing humor as a respectable part of cognition, was the first sign that Conceptual Art was not going to be limited to a puristic or hardline mode but could expand its range by allowing in other elements than strictly formalized cognition. Skenováno pro studijní účely ■ CONCEPTUAL ART During this very early phase of hybridization there was an implied reminder that humor had been one of the key parts of the Duchampian legacy, which hard-line Conceptualism, with its quasi-religious veneration of the purity of consciousness, had omitted. Hard-line Conceptualists disliked the mockery of the cognitive sublime by Baldessari, who employed humor, especially in the relationship between photo and text—and whose work Kosuth called "cartoons" of Conceptual Art.26 Nevertheless, it could not be denied that the Duchampian legacy, which presided over it all with a kind of ultimate authority, had foregrounded humor and mockery as a means to disparage the solemn and transcendental, or to put them into a more realistic context. The first loosening of the boundaries also mingled Conceptualism with Performance (as in the many photographic works by Baldessari where the artist plays a part beyond clicking the shutter). James Lee Byars created another early mode of inclusive Conceptualism in the late 1960s, contributing his delicate atmospheric combinations of Conceptualism and Performance, and at the same time introducing a multicultural aspect through the influence which Shintoism had exerted on him in Japan. Inclusive or hybrid Conceptualism has expanded steadily, fusing with other media, forming new genres such as Conceptual sculpture (as with the work of Jannis Kounellis and Rebecca Horn) and Conceptual painting (as in the work of Sherrie Levine and Mike Bidlo). After the self-conscious dawning of post-Modernism in the art discourse in the early '80s, a somewhat younger group of artists began to concentrate on multiculturalism and post-colonial issues in the United States; Renee Greene, Mel Chin, Maura Sheehan, Elaine Reichek and others created installations of Conceptual sculpture dedicated to promoting critical insight into situations from history and the news. "The need for an urgent response to social and political conditions encouraged artists in the Soviet Union, South Korea, China, and parts of Africa to abandon formalist or traditional art practices for conceptual art."27 As Conceptual Art fused with far-flung cultures, sub-genres such as post-colonial installation work have come to be practiced round the world. In recent years hardline or exclusive Conceptual Art has faded somewhat into the ever-expanding presence of the softer and more inclusive modes. To some this seems a weakening of the force of the Conceptual approach, which seems to be dissolving into reformed practices of traditional media such as painting and sculpture. But whether there is a puristically separate, hardline genre of Conceptual Art no longer matters as much as it did forty or fifty years ago, when art was nearly suffocating for want of it. The purpose Anti-Art as Cognition | 103 of it all was to restore the mind to art. Once mind is back in action, every medium that truly exercises it becomes a form of Conceptual Art. But this does not mean that one can let the original principles go now, like things whose purpose is past. The forces and conditions that once attempted, so nearly successfully, to remove art from critical self-consciousness are still alive and active. 1. Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logioc-Philo-sophicus, English translation by D. F. Pears and B. F. McGuiness (London: Routledge and Kegan, Paul, 1972), 6.421, p, 71. 2. Harold Rosenberg, "The American Action Painters," in Henry Geldzahler, ed., New York Painting and Sculpture 1940-1970 (New York: E,P. Dutton in conjunction with The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1969), p. 345. 3. Clive Bell, Art (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons [Capricorn Books], 1958), pp. 63-64. 4. Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, 2 vols., English translation by R. D. Hicks (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press [Loeb Classical Library], 1966) vol. 2, p. 345 (viii.12). 5. For example in The Logical Structure of the World and Pseudoproblems in Metaphysics, English translation by R. George (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969). 6. Maurice Merleau-Ponty, The Phenomenology of Perception (London: Roudedge, 2002). 7. Max KozlofT, "The Trouble with Art-as-ldea," Artforum, Sept. 1977, p. 37. 8. lames Collins, "Things and Theories," Artforum, May 1973, PP 32-36. 9. James Johnson Sweeney, Interview with Marcel Duchamp, in Lucy Lippard, ed., Dadas on Art (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1971), pp. 141-142. 10.Ibid. 11. John Bird and Michael Newman, eds., Rewriting Conceptual Art (London: Reaktion Books, 1999), p. 2 12. Peter Osborne, "Conceptual Art and/as Philosophy," ibid,, p. 48. 13. John Bird and Michael Newman, ibid., p. 2. 14. Sol LeWitt, "Paragraphs on Conceptual Art," Artforum (Summer, 1967), pp. 79-84; republished in Alexander Alberro and Blake Stimson, eds., Conceptual Art: A Critical Anthology (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1999), pp. 12-17 15. For the terms "strong," "exclusive," "weak," and "inclusive" see Osborne, "Conceptual Art and/as Philosophy," pp. 48-49; for "hardline" Conceptualism see Bird and Newman, Rewriting Conceptual Art, p. 10. 16. Ursula Meyer, Conceptual Art (New York: Dutton, 1972), p. xi. 17. Ibid., p. xii. 18. Ibid., p. xiii. 19. Benjamin Bucloh, in exh. cat. Vart conceptuel, une perspective (Paris: Mus£e d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris, 1989), p. 53. 20. Osborne, "Conceptual Art and/as Philosophy," p. s. 21. Ibid. 22. Ibid., pp. 48-49. 23. Bird and Newman, Rewriting Conceptual Art, p. 10. 24. Henry Flynt, "Concept Art," in LaMonte Young and Jackson McLow, eds., An Anthology of Chance Operations (New York: Privately published, 1963). 25. LeWitt, "Paragraphs on Conceptual Art." 26. Joseph Kosuth, "Art after Philosophy, II: 'Conceptual Art' and Recent Art," Studio international (November, 1969), pp. 160-161. 27. Luis Camnitzer, Jane Farver, and Racliel Weiss in exh. cat. Global Conceptualism: Points of Origin, 1950S-1980S (New York: The Queens Museum of Art, 1999), p. vii. Skenováno pro studijní účely ■ MM j BI Mir ■ 1 CHAPTER FIVE BHB EBB EBB K ns m EBB EBB BEI EBB EBB I William Anastasi, Nine Polaroid Photographs of a Mirror, 1967. William Anastasi Talk About Dumb Mce vtlley: How did your connection with Duchamp begin? Anastasi: I remember hitchhiking to the museum in Philadelphia at age thirteen or fourteen. It was the first time I had ever gone to a museum. I don't know why I went. The Arensburg collection was already there. What struck me about it was not only that Duchamp's work was different from everybody else's, but that every Duchamp was so completely different from every other Duchamp. I thought either this guy's completely lost, or I'm completely lost. M: Were you reading books about art in Philadelphia at that time? A: No. But by the mid-sos I was buying Skira books, all of them that I could get my hands on in Philadelphia, everything from Lascaux to Mon-drian. I didn't read them, but I tore them to bits and mounted the color reproductions on museum board. I literally covered almost up to the ceiling all the walls of every room—kitchen, bedroom, living room, dining room—a hundred or more Skira pictures in every room. I had discovered in listening to music that repeated exposure to a piece by, say, Mozart or Beethoven, just increased my love for it; this was a naive attempt to test that experience with pictures. M: What was your exposure to literature like in this period? A: By the time I was twenty I had discovered Finnegans Wake, and I would read that aloud. Learning to read that aloud was quite an important influence. I'm still doing it. I'm on my second time through the book. My word paintings now are divided into three categories: words that are in that book, words that are not, and words that are in it only once. There's a concordance, you know. The words that are not in it at all are interesting, like "degenerate," "self-pity," "athlete." You could make quite a poem, which I'm going to do, using the words that are not in Finnegans Wake. M: What other literary influences are you aware of? 105 Skenováno pro studijní účely ÍOO CONCEPTUAL ART A: Kafka. I don't remember when it was. I was reading either "Description of a Struggle" or "In the Penal Colony," and 1 thought, This guy is really other. Gradually I came to think that we may have had in this century someone who in some respects was the greatest writer who ever lived. He himself said, What I am doing is not literature, and he was right, his work is a special case. I can at any time be brought into another world by reading Kafka, especially if 1 do it aloud. I do all my reading aloud now except newspapers and shopping lists. M: You moved to New York about i960? A: It would have been more like 1962. M: What about yourfirst one-person show? A: That was in 1964, at the Washington Square Gallery, on La Guardia Place. An enormous space. I showed a lot of different things there. There were some big color paintings of Donald Duck on corrugated cardboard. When I was a kid 1 could draw Donald Duck from memory. So I thought it was kind of automatic. It was the closest thing to automatic drawing I could do. I also showed collages made by ripping up and re-folding used cardboard boxes. And Sink, a piece from 1963. Water was poured on a piece of blue steel. It was wonderful how much it wanted to rust. I pour water on it and within an hour I've got blisters of rust. When the water's all evaporated I douse it again. The title Sink has to do with the diminution of the plate of steel as it inevitably rusts away. M: Aside from drawing a familiar icon from childhood, did you attempt in other ways to attain an automatic mode of drawing? A: In 1963 I did drawings in India ink that I called Constellations. I did them blind, closing my eyes and listening to Wanda Landowska's recording of the Well-Tempered Clavier, not following the sound, but just using it as a period of time so I would know when to stop. I did 96, one for each Prelude and one for each Fugue. The drawings were made of dots. I found that if I didn't look where I was putting the dots, it turned out better than if I did look. M: You got better results with your eyes closed? A: A thousand times better. M: Results that your eye liked better? A: Anyone I showed them to liked them better, anyone. Then in 1964 I started doing blind drawings that were scribbles instead of dots. M: What were you aware of in the art of that time? A: I knew Guston's work, and DeKooning, Pollock, Newman, Rothko. M: You knew that these guys were the masters of an age that was kind of ending right? William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb | 107 A: I don't know that 1 knew it was ending. M: But you were already introducing elements of randomness or renunciation of control—the blind technique, for example—that would seem to suggest a sense that an age was ending and things were changing in an unpredictable way. A: I was very dumb then as far as these things are concerned. It might have been intuitive. M: Weren't you already involved in sound pieces at that time, say 1964? A: Yes. In 1963 I did a piece called Microphone. On 8th Street I put a monaural tape recorder in a closet to eliminate as many external sounds as possible and hung a microphone above it and recorded the sound the recording mechanism makes; the empty reel got filled with a recording of the recorder recording the recorder. Then I played it back through the machine at the same volume as the sound the machine makes. You have two versions of the same sound going in and out of phase with one another. Since the electrical cycles which determine the speed are not constant, you get a symphony of constantly changing relationships. M: It's a favorite of mine. The tape recorder recording its own sound is an image reduced to the essentials of perception, to an absolutely basic and irreducible consciousness. It reminds me of Aristotle's idea of the essence of reality as "the thought that thinks itself or "the cognition that cognizes itself.' The idea is that if you strip away all the static that makes the world of form and change, what would be left finally is an absolutely fundamental consciousness that underlies everything yet has no content since all it does is know itself; it goes round and round just being aware of itself all the time. And this self-knowing consciousness is the engine driving the universe. Microphone seems to embody that perfectly in an image. I have the sense that these kinds of resonances are really present in the pieces, though at the time you made them you probably were not conscious of them. A: Not conscious. M: Yet intuitively this piece involves the idea of stripping down to a really fundamental sense of what there is. A: Yes. M: And what is left is this consciousness that is just knowing itself or its own activity or its sound or atmosphere or whatever. A: The tape recorder was a very nice way of doing that. It might be the first technology that very easily did that. If you did it with a record, say, it wouldn't be as compact. Here the head that records it and the head that plays it are the same. So what I did is very dumbly saw that something Skenováno pro studijní účely 108 | CONCEPTUAL ART existed to show something that didn't really exist before. M: Were you consciously influenced by Cage's work yet? A: I knew about Cage when this idea came to me. By 1965 1 already had the recording of the Aria with Fontana Mix. I don't think it would have occurred to me to do this if I hadn't known about him. It was clear that he was absolutely on the edge, maybe more than any visual artist I knew of. M: Cage seems to have showed visual artists ways out of the conventions of the New York School, conventions so strong they might have been almost impossible to get out of by purely visual means. Did you know of Cage's work using silence, 4'33"-? A: I don't think I knew of it yet, though I think I did by the time the wall on the wall came along, two years later. M: In any case, the central element of Microphone—this embodiment of solipsistic consciousness—doesn't seem to derive from Cage's work. It's a very different idea from recording ambient sound and so on. Yet you've said that you think Microphone came in some way, in part at least, from your knowledge of Cage's work. A: It's just as though he gave carte blanche that I and so many people tried to use. M: He gave permission, yes. And also may have directed you toward using the tape recorder. A: I met Cage in 1965, when I was preparing for the Sound Objects show at Virginia Dwan's gallery. That was when I had a studio on Greene Steet. While I was working on these things there, Virginia asked me if 1 would contribute a drawing to a charity exhibition. I agreed, and one day she called and said someone was coming to my studio to pick the drawing up. It turned out that Cage was involved with this charity, and I was incredulous when he himself showed up at my studio. He had heard, probably from Virginia, that I was making sound pieces, and he said that was why he had come himself—he was interested in hearing them. At the moment he came I was trying to devise a way to have the different sounds play in sequence and he gave me very good advice, which I foolishly did not follow, to play them all at once. The gallery was afraid they'd be hard to sell individually if we did that. None of them sold anyway. M: Sound Objects, 1966, was your second one-person show, and the first of your four shows at Dwan's, right? In a picture of the installation it's hard to see what the pieces individually are. A: These were objects exhibited along with the sounds they made. One is an inner tube; the speaker plays the sound of the air coming out of it. William Anastasi, lnnertube, 1964 Skenováno pro studijní účely William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb | 109 Another was the sound of a large glass jug falling and breaking on a cinder block; you see the broken jug and the block, and you hear the sound of the crash. Another one was a barrel that I chopped up, and beside it the axe I used; the tape plays the sound of that action. The breaking glass sound takes just a second or two; the chopping takes a few minutes. Another one was a pulley and the sound it makes. Another was a fan, and a tape of the fan's sound. Another was a power saw, another an inflated tube and the pump that inflated it. Another a pneumatic drill and some asphalt it broke up, and the sound. M: I've always thought of these works of yours, and some other later works, as involving the theme of tautology—the kind of statement where the subject and the predicate are the same, and no information is added to the assertion of identity. Tautology, A is A, is kind of like solipsism, the idea that only oneself exists. Microphone is a masterpiece of tautology and solipsism. The sound objects are right in there too: the tape recorder that records itself, the thing and the sound it makes. Tautology was one of the great themes of classical Conceptual Art as it has occasionally been a great theme for philosophers. It comes and goes in the history of thought, the fascination with tautology. A: Someone said to me once, "Everything is everything." For some reason I'm reminded of that. M: Tautology stresses what logicians call the First Law of Thought, that everything is itself, which is the opposite of everything is everything. Everything is everything is a definition of infinity, and tautology is the opposite of infinity. It's the insistence that each thing is itself and is nothing but itself, and expresses itself only as itself; so each object in the world becomes almost completely isolated by the puristic reduction of cutting away from it everything except its selfhood. I'm wondering where this impulse was comingfrom at that time. It must have something to do with the ultra-expressionist art of the moment that was passing like Action Painting and existentialism. The theme of tautology in early Conceptual Art may come out of the kind of solipsistic self-obsessive-ness, and obsessive introspection, of the expressionist artists of the late '$os, the New York School. A: It could be an intuitive reaction against it. M: Or an intuitive extension of it. A; Yes, in its way. Knihovna Kabinetu teorií Fakulty výtvarných umění VUT Ryoářská 13/15 603 00 Brno HO I CONCEPTUAL ART M: The obsession with tautology in Conceptual Art has something to do with the critique of representation that was really, perhaps, its main theme— that one thing cannot represent another, because each thing is irredeemably and ucompromisedly itself. The Sound Objects show embodied the analytic quality of early Con-ceptual Art. It makes one think of the relationship between image and sound, or between the visual and the auditory modes of perception. Conceptual Art in general approached this topic through language, in a tradition that goes back to Magritte. You know, in the painting that shows the pipe and the words "This is not a pipe"—the most obvious point is that it's a representation of a pipe, which is very different from being a pipe. A major concern of Conceptual Art in its youth so to speak was the critique of representation as somehow lacking reality compared with real presence. And at the same time there was this concern with the incongruency between different modes of representation, such as the visual and the verbal. They're both supposed to represent the same thing, but they're not alike at all. So the whole question of the relationship between modes of representation and between them and the presented thing arises. A: It's dumb. I mean at the time I wrote, as a kind of policy about making art, "One, just one. And simple. As simple as simple. Even dumb." The Sound Objects are like that. It's one and it's dumb. It's the nose on your face. M: That's the tautological part, that dumbness as you call it. It's so basic. It's like you're looking around for something but it's too close to you to see, it's like your own skin. A: I like dumb things. If it's dumb in the right way it's brilliant. I tried to make it as dumb as I could. M: It's very dumb indeed, Bill. A: Thank you, Tom. M: Can you describe your second Dwan show, in 1967? A: Every wall of the Dwan gallery had a silkscreened photomural of itself, slightly smaller than itself, mounted on it. Six walls in all. I called the exhibition Six sites, or, familiarly, the wall on the wall. M: The wall on the wall seems to sum up the preoccupations of classical Conceptual Art: the relationship of the context to the thing; the dichotomy between presence and representation; dematerialization and tautology. A: For me the meaning of the wall on the wall is expressed in a Kafka quote which I discovered when that show was up. I didn't find it in a book of Kafka but in a book of quotes. (I've never yet found it in Kafka.) It goes: "You do not need to leave your room. Remain sitting at your table and listen. William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb | 111 William Anastasi, west wall from Six Sites, 1963 Do not even listen, simply wait. Do not even wait, be quite still and solitary. The world will freely offer itself to you to be unmasked, it has no choice, it will roll in ecstasy at your feet." M: For all its dumbness this work—let's take the wall on the wall as the quintessential example of it—knots together a whole cluster of complicated issues. There's the tradition of the painting as a window into another reality. You hang the painting on the wall and through the painting you see right through the wall. The wall on the wall caricatures that idea. You look at the picture on the wall and you're still looking at the wall. It's interesting what Gregory Battcock wrote in Arts magazine (Dec-Jan. 1971): "William Anastasi offered paintings that seem to acknowledge the obstructive character of painting by making paintings of the walls that the paintings were to be placed upon. Thus the covered up area, the area that traditionally suffers at the expense of the imperialism ofpainting was acknowledged to exist and actually illustrated'.' That's interesting about the covered up area; that's the area that the illusionistic depth of the painting is supposed to almost annihilate, to metaphysically transcend. The wall on the wall is an ultimate parody of Skenoväno pro studijni jjceLy: 112 I CONCEPTUAL ART that denigration of everyday reality. You look at the illusion and it's exactly the same as the reality behind it. It does notfree you from the real place but returns you to it with intensified attention. The wall on the wall is like a translation o/"Microphone into visualform. Another embodiment of solipsism: the thought that thinks itself, the recorder that records itself, the wall that displays itself. A: Brian O'Doherty, in The White Cube, says, "...the show had a peculiar after effect. When the paintings came down the wall became a kind of ready-made mural and so changed every show in that space thereafter." I remember thinking, "How old-fashioned it's going to seem after I do this when I put anything else on this wall." I was saying, "Why skip through the world looking for this corner or that corner to idealize?" Just look at the wall in front of your face. Whenever you put a frame around something you idealize it; that's the way we emotionally respond to the frame. M: In one sense the wall on the wall represents potentiality. As Mallarmé made that great statement that the perfect poem would be a blank sheet of paper, seeming to mean that containing nothing in actuality, it would contain everything in potentiality. The blank wall is like that and the blank canvas on the wall is doubly so. Like the mysticism of the picture plane in the Abstract Expressionist era, that the picture plane was like a metaphysical membrane from which images could emerge or on which they could be born. The wall on the wall is like a questioning of the wall's surface, almost a request that it express its intentions, or intimate its future, the pictures that will hang on it hereafter. So it has a relationship to Rauschenberg's White Paintings and to the monochrome painting in general. A: In a way yes, and in a way no. Didn't Rauschenberg say the White Paintings were to show the viewers' shadows? M: He said that at times; but when they were shown at the Betty Parsons gallery in 1951 he said they were "one white as one god"; he saw them then, or anyway described them, as religious surfaces. A: With that I feel a greater affinity to this—but there's still quite a difference. I think of Cezanne. He was the first in our hemisphere to realize that the artist was leaving out the reality of the flat surface. Before him artists considered the canvas surface as the one thing exempt from their consideration of the world—it was merely a battleground, and in that sense taken for granted—an arena for their three dimensional tricks. Cezanne was saying that that flat surface is a part of nature too, and an extremely important part. Once that was said it was inevitable that an all white painting would sooner or later happen. William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb 113 M: The reductionism of it is meaningful. In terms of the philosophical attitude that this period of art unconsciously expressed, there's the sense, as we've discussed before, that an ideological framework is being erased or dissolved, and that there's a very difficult question of how to find one's way to an open space or to another framework. One possibility is through a solipsistic emphasis on tautology which extends the Abstract Expressionist obsession with introspection—just going inward and inward constantly, always dumber and dumber, until somehow you come out into a new reality. But another possibility is to multiply and complicate everything until everything becomes infinite and everything is everything. Because infinity is an open space, a potential space with things not yet separated out into identity and actuality. In Egyptian mythology they talk about the primal ocean which was there before anything (this is one source of the opening passage of GenesisJ. All the gods were mixed up together in the ocean like a soup. Then separation started and first one form then another popped up out of the surface. Then in time each thing undergoes meltdown and sinks back into the soup. The finitefigure returns into the infinite ground again. So these themes of tautology, which is the remorseless entrapment of your selfhood in itself, and of infinity, which is the opposite, these themes are actually intensely related. A: So the question is which way are you going, buddy—into the surface or out of it? M: Yes, there's a connection with the Abstract Expressionist mysticism of the surface, isn't there? The salvific or redemptionist feeling toward the surface. Barnett Newman's mature work was about this, too. I understand when he first showed the zip paintings at Betty Parsons' in '56 or so there was a joke that went around to the effect that the monochrome with the central stripe looks like an elevator door—but is it closing or opening? A: Which way you going, again. M: Yeah. But let's think about that connection with Abstract Expressionism. It was a very metaphysical mode of aesthetic feeling. And of course this work of yours and certain other work of its time, the classical early Conceptual Art, renounced that mode of aesthetics and that style of metaphysics. Yet still there is a continuity, in the shared idea of the surface as a membrane of potentiality. And in the reductionism of the work, which, like Minimalism, is a continuation of the hidden mysticism of Greenbergian formalism. Greenberg said that each art mode should strip away everything that is unnecessary or non-essential to it. The Minimalists did this with sculpture and painting. This work does it with cognition and conceptualization. Microphone is like a block of stone. Its simplicity is breathtaking. It's like Skenováno pro studijní účely 114 | CONCEPTUAL ART when Lao Tzu says, They want sculpture? Give them the unhewn block—or something like that. Yet the idea of the religious surface is both straightfacedly asserted by the wall on the wall and outrageously parodied by it, because it doesn't posit a beyond. It secularizes the religious or Utopian idea. A: The connection with the site had a religious power too. The big argument between Virginia and me at that time was, is it art if it goes on another wall? I said it was only a souvenir then. I said I don't know if it's art even on your wall; but I do know that on another wall it clearly becomes a souvenir of a piece that no longer exists. That was at the age of thirty-three. At the age of fifty-six it doesn't seem so clear. Another thing that was occuring to me at the time was the Platonic idea that in a truly civilized Utopian situation art would not be necessary. In the '60s it seemed to me that the individual death that we all had to contemplate in the past had now changed so that we had to contemplate collective death as well; now the hardware was in place to effect that. I remember sort of ironically telling people, Oh this is bomb art. M: The wall on the wall you called bomb art? A: Yes. I meant bomb art because the nuclear age had changed everything. I mean, just looking ahead to the morning after, if we ever did it, we would realize instantly how unnecessary decoration is and how wonderful plain reality is if it's accessible. It's like Thornton Wilder's Our Town, when the girl gets to come back, and she realizes how fast everything went, and she wants to slow it down. She just has the privilege of being at the breakfast of her family and she can't believe how beautiful and how rich it is. Like the Kafka passage. The bomb seemed to put this idea in our consciousness in an even clearer way. So I remember thinking maybe it's too late, because of this situation which has never happened in history before, maybe it's too late, as I've said earlier, for artists to keep skipping through reality choosing this corner or that corner to idealize. M: It's what Theodor Adorno meant when he said that after Auschwitz to write poetry is obscene. A: That's exactly it. So it was as though for a moment, as an artist, I had sensed a little bit of the morning, the day after. I thought, you show me a wall and I'll show you a beautiful work of art, you show me a place where you want the art to go and I'll show you the place itself as the art. M: So is the wall on the wall bomb art in the sense of wiping the slate clean? A: Not really. It's as though I had already read that Kafka quote. What William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb | 115 was amazing to me was that I discovered that quote while the wall on the wall show was up. John has said that his favorite piece of his own music is 4'33". M: Did you know about that piece at the time? A; I'm pretty sure I did. M: I think that the whole tradition of the monochrome painting in the 20th century has to do with the theme of the violent end of the world. Wiping the slate clean, melting down all images. There was this first wave of monochrome activity right after World War I, with Malevich and Rodchenko and so forth. Then another wave of it right after World War II with Klein and Manzoni and so on. It seems to me that the monochrome wave of the '50s was about something, namely about the nuclear endgame. Though they talked about them as metaphysically charged icons of the absolute, this absolute involved the end of the world of form. It was all bomb art in a sense. All that reductionism. Art in our century has been preoccupied with the idea of the end of the world—because of the Hegelian idea that history would end soon, which involves the end of the world as we know it. Often this is not very conscious, as in metaphysical paintings of the 'sos, with titles like Newman's Day Before One and Pollock's The Deep. It was really conscious in some works of Tinguely's, those pieces in which he got a lot of stuff together in the desert in Nevada and blew it all up; he called them Studies for an End of the World. That's the purest piece of bomb art I know of. But in many ways, some overt, some hidden, some partially realized, the whole era was preoccupied with the theme. A: I think Marcel had something to do with that. By around 1914 his works were saying, Forget it, you guys. It's over; you're through. He made it the end of a world instantly. Everything everyone else was doing became old fashioned instantly. One thing he did not address, which is the subject of the wall on the wall, is how old-fashioned it is to bring in another reality and hang it in front of this reality. Did I tell you about his visit to the Six Sites exhibition? Virginia introduced me as the artist who had done these paintings. As he was shaking my hand he simply said, "Yes." Then he went to the guest book which people were signing. Half of the left hand page was filled. He didn't sign there, or on the blank right hand page; he turned the page and signed in the middle of the next right hand page of an otherwise blank spread. As soon as he left Virginia closed the book, put it away and put another one out. M: There is another sense in which Duchamp's work can be seen as a part of this end of the world theme. When you put, say, a snow shovel on the wall Skenováno pro studijní účely 116 | CONCEPTUAL ART William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb | 117 and a label next to it, it's like you're showing archeological remnants of a destroyed civilization. This was found there, and this and this—just random ordinary everyday stuff. The place where random everyday stuff is exhibited is in archeological museums. The theme of the void and the theme of entrapment in finiteness have both been keynotes of the last generation or so. Back to Plato, or in a sense even back to ancient Egypt, one has had available the idea of epistemologi-cal entrapment—that we're entrapped within our own minds and within the limitations of our minds, or within our own sets of projections and preconceptions. But in the 20th century the idea of entrapment also got the external meaning of the genuine end of the world. We're evidently trapped within a set of epistemological projections so successful that they have created a physical entrapment that is exactly equivalent. So the trap and the void are two faces of a coin. The trap leaves you facing the void; the void offers a way out of the trap but you're not sure you want it that bad. All of that great art of the '50s—they didn't really see it yet. They thought they were breaking through the epistemological entrapment to the metaphysical beyond. Actually, it was right there in the most material historical way right around them. A: They were breathing it. It was coming out in their work. M: It was coming out in their work, but in this dreamlike metaphysical way, without the raw ugly presence like the smell of burning hair or something. I think that part of the huge change which was happening in the '60s, and which we are seeing so clearly and acutely embodied in your work of the time, is that we were beginning to get the feeling that the joke's on us. We had all this art about the sublime and the absolute and suddenly we realized that all it means is more Hiroshimas; that those great metaphysical paintings are about World War Three. The idea of musing about entrapment was no longer just a philosophical game. A: The Cold War was in full swing. It would be less of an issue now because the guy who has his finger on the button on the other side seems to have other problems. So we're suddenly not—at least temporarily, and I'm sure it's temporarily—at this moment it doesn't seem the issues so hot. Because our madman isn't matched with their madman, which had always been the case, what we were used to. M: And art, ever, somehow, obedient, for all its rebelliousness, moves into the aesthetics of fulness and freedom and away from the void and the trap. But soon it will have to swing back, suspiciously sniffing as it were, not really convinced. Skenováno You see, the wall on the wall is ambiguous to me in this respect. On the one hand it's your idea that paradise is here and now, just look at the wall in front of your face, and on the other hand it's like a gleaming white corridor of escape. A: Which way you going, buddy. M: Well, it's kind of that. But it's more like there are two ideas conflated here, not two directions in the framework of a single idea. There is a view that attributes depth to the wall, and one that attributes flatness. If we think of the surface of the wall on the wall as either a source or an exit, then we are positing a depth to it as was done in old style illusionistic painting. If we regard it as the wall before your face and hence the only possible paradise, then it has no depth but you are just left looking at its post-Cezannean flatness. It's on the edge, as it were, between these two views, feeling both as real. reverberations M: This whole nexus of themes has to do with the fact that in that time ideas of selfhood and free will were changing—I mean the shift from Modernism to post-Modernism. Modernism believed in free will; selfhood felt stronger than the context in which it found itself, so selfhood could supposedly take hold of the context and change it. In recent decades many lost that faith and came to feel that the self might be dominated by the context rather than the other way around. I really think that's what this work, and other works of the time on the themes of solipsism, tautology, context, and so on, are about. A: Which brings us to this piece: Free Will, 1968. M: This is a favorite of mine. It's a video camera looking at the corner behind the monitor, which then shows the image of the corner behind it. Dumb. Really dumb. A: This is as dumb as it gets. M: I also love its companion piece, Transfer, in which the monitor broadcasts a one-to-one scale image of the plugs on the wall that it and the camera are plugged into. In the same way that the wall on the wall is dumber than Kosuth's piece with the chair, this piece is dumber than Paik's version using the Buddha figure. Your versions have a more mute simplicity. A: The Paik piece seems baroque by comparison to Transfer. M: Too smart. A: Yeah, it comes across as dumb, then it outsmarts itself. You want to talk about dumb... M: That'd be a good title for the show. studijní účely 118 | CONCEPTUAL AST William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb | 119 (Laughter.) M:What is Maintenance 1? A: I got two Hasselblad cameras, 1 designated one as model, and the other one shot it head on. Then the photograph is blown up to full scale. It's a one-to-one scale photographic version of a camera like the camera which took the picture. M: So it's like the camera is looking at itself, or its twin anyway, as the tape recorder records itself, the wall hangs itself, and so on. A: Maintenance 2 is a photograph of my camera reflected in my eye. That is, it's a photograph of my eye in which the camera that is taking the picture is clearly reflected. Maintenance 3, finally, is a photograph of my face reflected in my eye. It's done with a mirror. Congress, 1968, is the same thing—both Hasselblads shooting each other simultaneously. Which way you going, buddy. Umbrage is a one to one scale photograph of the shadow of the camera which is taking the photograph. In Nine Polaroid Photographs of a Field of Wall, as in the wall on the wall, a wall is covered with photographs of itself. M: But this time there is even more implication of infinite regress because there are more generations of photography. You put the photograph of the wall on the wall then photographed it again. Nine Polaroid Photographs of a Mirror, 1967, is even more that way. A: My feeling was to cover the mirror with pictures of itself and let the chips fall where they may. William Anastasi, Free Will, 1968 William Anastasi, Untitled, Polaroid photographs, 1967 M: It's also a work with suggestions of infinite regress. But even more so is Untitled, 1967. It's a Polaroid photograph of a hand, beside it a Polaroid photograph of the Polaroid photograph of the hand, being held by the hand. All in one to one scale, I imagine. A: As close as I could get it. Another Untitled, 1967, is similar. It's a composite of Polaroids joined with tape. The first photograph which is taped to the wall is of the wall behind it in one-to-one scale, about two by three inches. Then I take a photograph of the wall beside it, but including the upper left hand corner of the first photograph. Then that's taped over the part of the wall that it reproduces. Then I just move around building it up. M: It has that rough taped look that is currently fashionable. A: It certainly wasn't fashionable then. M: What was your third show at Dwan's? A: That was Continuum, 1970. It was a follow-up of the wall on the wall. Each wall had a silkscreened photomural of the space directly behind the viewer as he or she looks at the photograph. Each wall reflects the one opposite it; since each photograph was mounted before the next one was made, the early ones show a blank wall opposite them; the later ones show the opposite wall with a photograph of the first wall already on it. M: It's a kind of inside out version of the wall on the wall. If you look behind you you see the same thing that is in front of you. It is as if the viewer were rendered invisible or immaterial or transparent. Or as if the camera were pouncing on the viewer from behind. An infinite regress results somewhat like two mirrors facing each other. You might compare Lucas Samarass Skenováno pro studijní účely HO I CONCEPTUAL ART mirror-lined boxes or mirror-lined rooms, where each wall reflects the one opposite. Except that you have slowed the process of this energy bouncing back and forth to the pace of photography. Also, the Samaras work of course shows the viewer in all walls, and Continuum makes the viewer disappear. A: A closely related work is Terminus. I framed two pieces of masonite, since that's a material that photos are commonly mounted on, with glass in front of them, and put them on walls facing one another. The camera is in the middle; the photographer photographs one, then swivells around and photographs the other. Then I blew the photographs up to full scale and mounted them so each masonite now supports the photograph of itself, with the reflection of the camera and, behind it, of the other piece of masonite on the opposite wall. It's an extremely dumb piece, yet people never know what the hell they're looking at. M: Calling it Terminus is interesting. The reflective energy is kind of bouncing back and forth between the two walls endlessly, as if trapped between them. And Terminus as a title suggests something like the end of the line. A: We keep trying to make the very last work of art. M: Hoping. A: That art would just pack up after this piece. M: Untitled, 1966, has a simplicity that ranks with Microphone or the wall on the wall. A silkscreen of a photograph of a sheet of paper, one to one in scale, is mounted on the same sheet of paper. A: There are two versions of that; in one the silkscreen is a 90% reduction of the paper, in the other it's actual scale. M: It's so delicate. Reminds me of Mallarme again—the blank sheet as the perfect poem. Framing of the Period, 1966, must have come right after. A: Yes, it did. M: / like its title very much. It's like capturing the aroma of a moment in an exquisite little bottle. A: I framed a piece of blank paper, photographed the whole situation, including the frame, then made a silkscreen slightly smaller than the framed piece of paper. That silkscreen of the framed paper was printed on the framed paper, then the paper was reframed. M: You have investigated this particular area of thematics with an extraordinary thoroughness. It's like the oeuvre of a philosopher. The wall on the wall just keeps unfolding itself into ever more complicated simplicities. A: Through, 1967, is a photograph mounted on the east wall of the Dwan Gallery, showing the cityscape that you would have seen if there had been William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb \ 111 a window there. We built a steel arm that went out an actual window and extended it to get in position for the shot. M: Still developing possible ramifications of the wall on the wall. A: Right. This, for example, is called Here, Here; it's from 1979 and belongs to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. It's a one-to-one scale photograph of a single empty postcard rack, that is, of one empty slot in a rack, in the bookstore of the Metropolitan. The size of the image, or of the space in the photograph, is equal to the size of a typical postcard. The piece will be finished when the museum makes an edition of postcards of that photograph of the empty rack and then fills the rack with the photographs of itself. I like the thought of people sending them everywhere. M: Untitled, 1979, also seems to be about the wall on the wall theme, the theme of the representation of the thing substituting for the thing, or fronting for the thing. A: Yes, from one position the photograph of the corner of the sculpture pedestal hides the actual corner. M: Interesting how the pedestal becomes the work of art. But the pedestal as artwork is complexified here by the theme of photo-representation. The view from that one standpoint definitely involves illusionism—that you're seeing the corner of the pedestal when you're not; but at the same time it rejects illusionism in the same way the photograph of the wall on the wall did; because there is no other reality brought in by the illusion; it's the same reality, or the ordinary reality, that is made into an illusion, yet an illusion of itself. A: The idea of illusion involves reflection too. In Sink you got a reflection on the surface of the water that was sort of the forerunner of the space behind the viewer. I wanted to do more with that, and in 1967 I asked Marilyn Fishback if I could exhibit a puddle of water on the floor of her gallery, which was on another floor in the same building as Virginia's. Her space had a concrete floor, and Virginia's was carpeted. The piece consists of twelve ounces of tap water, poured. Both reflection and evaporation are involved. After it's evaporated you pour the water again. Each time the puddle evaporates it leaves a ghost trace. These rings build up on the floor like tree rings. M: Didn't you do a piece with pouring paint? A: Yes. In 1966 I poured a gallon of black paint down a wall, pouring it at the top and letting it run down and puddle on the floor. In another piece I threw a gallon of black paint against a wall in one motion. I did it first in my studio on Greene Street in 1966. It was against a brick wall, and that time I liked the thrown gallon better than the poured. When I later did it against a plaster wall my preference went the other way. Skenováno pro studijní účely 122 | CONCEPTUAL ART William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb \ 123 William Anastasi, Untitled, 1966. One gallon industrial high gloss enamel, poured. removals M: Your work now seems to have taken two directions. One, that was realized in Continuum, followed up the ramifications of the wall on the wall, the meditation on tautology and so forth; the other was a direct attack on the wall, in the form of the surface removals and wall removals. Were all the removals done after the wall on the wall? A: Yes, as though to attack the wall itself I first had to do a picture of a wall on that wall. The removals were a response to it. I felt that once you've done a picture of the wall then it becomes retrograde to put anything else on the wall so the next thing that happens is you're taking it down in various ways. M: And the first attack was called Trespass. So first you kind of possessed the wall, or claimed it, then as the possessor you trespassed in despoiling the surface of the wall. A: That might even have been conscious. 1 have a feeling that I really thought, I own that wall now. I remember saying something like that to William Anastasi, Untitled, 1966. One gallon industrial high gloss enamel, thrown. Smithson. Actually, the first removal was in '66 and was untitled. I gave it the title Trespass later. M: How big was Trespass? A: There was a whole series called Trespass. They were usually 17 inches by 14 inches, although I did some larger ones. That was the size of a drawing book I happened to have around, and I thought the proportions looked nice. It happened to be there and I didn't have to make a decision. M: How do you physically remove the surface? A: I find a stone in the area, something that will fit in my pocket. Then I just rub the wall with it with as much strength as I can with one hand, eyes closed. The plaster that wants to come off comes off; the rest stays, and that's the piece. Sometimes almost no plaster comes off; then a discoloration takes place, which I like in some cases more than when the plaster does come off. When the idea came to me I don't recall being that preoccupied with the issues involved. I just thought, I bet that'll look wonderful, no matter what's under there. Skenováno pro studijní účely William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb | 125 It's always a surprise, but every piece I've done I've been happy with. Sometimes there are lots of coats of paint, sometimes not; if not, then it's a much more quiet thing, in no way less beautiful than if there is a lot to see. M: Trespass is a picture-like rectangle. But Issue, also dated 1966, looks like a very different kind of removal. A: Yes. Issue is a four and a half inch vertical strip cut away from ceiling to floor; the rubble that has been freed by the chisel lies on the floor in front of it. I exhibited one example at the Dwan Gallery in 1970. This picture is of a more recent one that I did in the Philadelphia Museum of Art. In some pieces, like this Untitled, '66, the rubble is contained in a little home-made box which resides in the space that's been cut away. M: We're talking about a kind of work that was really in the air at the time. Wiener did a wall removal, I think it's dated 1967, that resembles your Trespass series. Didn't Smithson have the idea too? A: Yes, he wanted to do a piece in the Whitney in which he would take a rectangle of white coat off a wall. He abandoned the idea when he heard from Virginia that I had already done it in a number of places. M: Again it seems to me that these works were a part of a general transition that art was undergoing at that time. Just five years or so before you did these removals, Klein removed all the paintings from a museum gallery and exhibited it empty. His point in that case was not so much the exhibition of empty space as the removal. It's a complete reversal of the tradition of art as a group of portable objects which you carry into the exhibition space. Instead of taking something into a gallery you take something out. Instead of being a thing that you could put under your arm and walk out the door with, the artwork now was to be an integral part of the space, inalienable from its context—or it was nothing at all, a negative object, like the removal of the wall surface. A; It's a much lighter experience than looking at a painting. M: That's an interesting description—because the burden of illusionism isn't on you with all its invitations to feelings and so on. You used to look at a picture on the wall and you saw this illusion of depth, this world. A: You were always bringing something else, bringing another place there. M: Yeah. But when you look at the surface removal you're just looking at stuff that's really there in a material way. A; It's a paean to the here and the now. M: It goes beyond the wall on the wall in that it doesn't involve any representational element at all, such as the silk-screen photograph of the wall. ní účely 126 I CONCEPTUAL ART A: The wall on the wall is downright fussy by comparison. M: So as a paean to the here and now it also implicitly involves a rejection of the idea that art is a channel to a beyond or a vision of another world, rather than art as a way to fix you here, or focus you here. A: No matter how much our intentions are against the idea of idealization, art tends to come across idealized anyway. Even in a piece like Free Will, where you see the corner behind the video monitor, the image of the corner is an idealization of the corner itself. We're so conditioned by looking at art that if you put any kind of a frame around something, especially if it's a rectangle, it does the same thing. That's even true of Marcel's work in the Philadelphia museum; just because of the context the snow shovel becomes idealized. The wall removal is a kind of realization that even the wall on the wall was idealized. M; The surface removals are as much sculpture as painting. That was another element in the art of that time, an attempt to find positions in between these traditional media which represent a rejection of those media and an attempt to crawl out from their system of categories by finding ways in between them. A: Looking for an opening. As they say in football, running for daylight. M: So there's the interesting theme of entrapment or jail again. Like burrowing through a wall to escape from your cell. Yet at the same time it's a paean to the here and now. So your getting out of the trap or the jail is simply going to return you to the here and now, not remove you from it. The trap, then, would seem to be not the here and now but the supposition of an illusory beyond. A: I have often said I doubted this work could have been done by someone who believed in a consciousness after death. thisness A: I think one thing that differentiates art from other endeavours is that art is utterly useless. If you can figure out something that has no use whatever you already have one characteristic of art. Then if you make it useless enough maybe it'll be very useful from some other tangent. M: This has to do again with the idea of tautology. A tautology is the most useless of all things, a statement which conveys no information. I was once talking with a linguist about what might be the most useless verbal entity possible. We thought it would be a completely self-referential locution such as the phrase, "this phrase" just that on a sheet of paper referring to itself William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb \ 127 and referring to nothing else in the world. Like the thought that thinks itself it simply points to itself and says nothing, contains no information, makes no observation. A: My drawing of the word "this" fits in here. M: The word "this" is a root of circularity, because it can be seen as referring to itself rather than to something else, which isn't true of many words. It's Magrittean, too, of course; it's the word "this" that makes "This is not a pipe" so dynamic. So "this" really is like the wall on the wall again, isn't it? I mean it's the word that signifies itself as the wall exhibits itself and so on. Because "this" means just this presentness, a paean to the here and now, as you said earlier. In Buddhism the term "thisness" is used to signify the absolute bedrock reality of the present moment. The drawing of "this" is from 1987? A: Yes, but it's a variant of a much earlier work, the Dymo labels from 1966. They are those little plastic labels that you squeeze out of a plastic gun to label shelves. Dozens of them start with "This," like, "This is what I am doing." I also made a painting of that sentence. M: So that at the time when you were making it it applied to you, and at a later time when someone else is reading it it applies to that person. The "this" moves around and so does the "I." Personal and demonstrative pronouns are called shifters because they do that. You've made a double shifter here. A: A later Dymo label reads, "This now." Reading a line on a wall, 1977, is similar. M; Yes, the reader is reading about his reading. Again its all turned in and circular. A: The advertisement I designed for a German art magazine for my shows there read, "Reading a line on a page." There was nothing else on the page. Not a very good advertisement perhaps, with my name left out, but a nice thing to come across paging through a magazine. It's a clear illustration of Duchamp's idea that the spectator completes the piece, because only when someone is reading it is the whole piece happening. M: / think words become more prominent in your work toward the end of the '70s. A: In general that's right, but actually I've done word paintings all along. In 1966, for example, I did a stencil painting of the word "facsimile." M: That was prophetic, wasn't it? I mean of the Fax machine being the first technology we have that can carry a visual image over a wire and put it down on paper. I take it it's also a caricature of the idea of representation. And of the idea of similarity, or sameness, which representation is based on. Skenováno pro studijní účely 128 I CONCEPTUAL ART William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb | 129 William Anastasi, Label, 1967. Type on paper. One text that might be mentioned is Nelson Goodman's "Seven Strictures on Similarity" He argues that there are infinite ways that one thing is like and unlike another; to pick out one similarity or dissimilarity and take it as a defining meaning is arbitrary; it is a wish-fulfillment fantasy of controlling the world by believing we know what is like what. There's a terrific irony, too, to the fact that such an early word painting was "facsimile" You know, like "in the beginning was the word and the word was facsimile" A: In 1977 1 did this piece in dry transfer type on paper. It occurred to me that words should have captions. A large image of the phrase "a word" is captioned "words"; then a large image of "words" is captioned "a word." M: It goes from plural to singular than back to plural. A: Which way you going. M: Yes. And that's appropriate to this piece also because I think this piece is kind of a turning point; I think that after this piece photography and recording become less prominent in your work and both language and handicrafts become more prominent. A: Another language piece that was in the Kunstmuseum in '79 consisted of every title I could remember of my own works. M: So the titles now become the artwork, as the pedestal has in another piece. This suggests the way language plays a part in constituting things. Label, 1967, is even clearer about that: the label makes the thing. A: This goes back to the year after my idea for the wall on the wall. But the example in the photograph is from the Whitney show of 1981.1 described to them what the idea of the piece was, and I said, What would your label look like for a piece called "Label"? And they said it would look like this. This is not nry signature. William Anastasi iTftTE OF NEW YORK >SS; COUNTY-OF NEW YORK J SUBSCRIBEBJWD SWORN TOJJEFORE MARIA W. VIGO PUBLIC, State o) N»w Y«K No.JiiAiu-972 in Kan York County exp'»«s March 30,197« William Anastasi, This Is Not My Signature, 1978. Then I said, Make another one and the second one is on me. M: So now the label is the artwork. You know another artist who should be mentioned is Marcel Broodthaers. I can't believe how closely your oeu-vres are related, though with very different sensibilities. I mean the physical realization of the ideas is so different, but the ideas or concerns are often related. In one exhibition he showed a lot of objects and every one had a label on it that said, "This is not a work of art" and a number. It's a variation on Magritte's "This is not a pipe" combined with Duchamp's practice of designating something as art by putting it in the art context: making it a work of art by virtue not of what it is but of where it is and what it's called. Broodthaers exhibited works of art and attempted to denature them with this label. A: I've done a piece, look at this, number 51. It's a sheet of paper that has "This is not my signature" typed on it, signed "William Anastasi," and my signature. Then it's notarized. M: It's like you're turning the notary against himself, since the notary's seal is to affirm that this scrawl is your signature. A: Exactly. I did the piece when I realized that the notary testifies only to the identity of the signatory, not to the truth of the statement above the signature. But I couldn't get any male notary to agree. Even though I pointed Skenováno pro studijní účely 130 | CONCEPTUAL ART that out to them. And after a a half dozen or so of them I hit a female notary who just did it without any problem. THEATER? M: You Are is a theater piece, isn't it? A: Yes, but it uses the audience as part of the play. A narrator narrates a description of the audience collectively and also person by person; a court stenographer takes it down, and a speed typist types up the descriptions as quickly as possible. There were many sort of Joycean inventions and unintended puns that emerged randomly. The typed descriptions finally were posted on the wall. So just a few minutes after you arrived and first heard this person's description of yourself, you read it on the wall. M: So these people walk in to see a theater piece and first of all they hear themselves being described publicly by someone they don't know, then they're on the wall. Pinned like butterflies. You really reverse it on them; suddenly they're on exhibition. A: Yes. It was done at the Clocktower in 1978 in three evenings. Each evening had a different narrator—an artist, a composer, and a writer. Les Levine, John Cage, and Carl Kielblock performed as the three narrators. Each narrator of course had a different style which was part of the point of it all. They all did a beautiful job. M: You also involve the audience in Viewing a Film in/of a gallery of the period and audition, 1967. A: My idea was to make a film of an empty gallery then project it onto a wall of that gallery. John Hanhardt read about it in one of Gregory Battcock's books and we did it at the Whitney in 1979. M: It's kind of a film version of the wall on the wall. But what does "and audition" mean? A: That's to include the fact that there will be sounds; the projector's making a lovely sound, and there are the unpredictable sounds that the audience itself makes. It's to include all that in the piece. M: Since the piece is not titled "A film of the period" but "Viewing a film of the period',' and so on, it would seem that the event of the audience viewing it, with their presence and their sounds, is the piece, rather than that the film itself is the piece. A: Right. It's like "reading a line on a wall" in that way. M; Let's talk about Plants and Waiters for a minute. A: Plants and Waiters is a play that I wrote. It was produced at the School of Visual Arts in 1980, then by the Princeton Players in 1983. All the Skenováno William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb | 131 actors are plants in the audience, that is, they are posing as members of the audience, sitting in seats seemingly waiting for the play to begin. The title is derived from the fact that everyone there is either a plant, that is, an actor, or a waiter, that is, someone really waiting for the show to begin. So the set is a red herring. Since it's called Plants and Waiters I have a restaurant scene with large plants. But nothing happens there. No one ever appears on the stage. It seems that the play never begins, but it does begin, in the audience. The four couples in the audience who are the actors get increasingly riled up that it doesn't begin. Some of the real audience does too. M: /'// bet they do. And there's a text? A: Oh yes, the plants all memorized their lines. The eight players are playing, they are doing a play. But the real audience, the waiters, don't know that. They don't know that they're experiencing a play. M: Really the audience is the set for the play. What kind of lines do the eight plants have? A: Different. The four couples relate in different ways. One couple gets involved in a personal conversation. Another couple gets into an argument. M: Do the real audience members, the waiters, realize that the play is occuring? A: It seemed that most people did not. After all, the actors are supposed to be convincing. M: So it's kind of the wall on the wall in yet another incarnation. Waiting for the play which is waiting for the play. The environment of the play is there, but the play is not. A: The play is there all right, it's just a matter of finding it. BLINDNESS M: Your work shifts, in the late '70s, to what might be called handicrafts with built-in subversion. An example is the new version of Framing of the Period, the limestone one from 1980 as opposed to the photographed version 0/1966. A: I got a frame of the period, a metal frame with glass in it, and I made a limestone statue of it. M: / think the project of moving painting into the realm of sculpture is another genre in which Klein marked a turning point. In 1957 he exhibited paintings on free standing supports several inches in front of the wall, like sculpture. Your statue of the frame is a really direct address to this issue: a sculpture of a picture. Another interesting point to me is that here the frame studijní účely 1j2 | CONCEPTUAL ART becomes the artwork, as the pedestal did in another piece we discussed. All the stuff that's usually the accoutrements, or the necessary conditions, of the artwork are converted into the artwork in your oeuvre, the artwork in the traditional sense then possibly being absent: we have the gallery as artwork, the wall as artwork, the label, the title, the price tag, the pedestal, the picture frame. That's the theme of context being more important than the thing contained again; all these things make up the context in which art is usually found. A: Along the same lines, I also made a limestone statue of a tube of paint. In 1974 or so. A large tube of Titanium white. M: Interesting. Again there's a tradition here. Duchamp reduced painting down to canvas and tubes of paint, implying he would prefer to see these materials rather than a painting itself. Klein, again presciently, exhibited his used paint rollers as a sculpture. Then Arman made accumulations of tubes ofpaint on a painting-like surface. Your statue of a tube of paint would seem to me to be a variation on this theme, which again involves rejecting illusionism and returning to materialism. The picture is negated in favor of its material constituents. A: In '63 I compressed a tube of Titanium white in a vise at the top of a vertical canvas. The released paint rolled down the surface as gravity painted the picture. And then in '64 I did a series in which I sandwiched open tubes of paint between plexiglas sheets, then screwed the sheets together to squeeze the paint out. Skenovano pro William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb | 133 William Anastasi, Framing of the Period, 1980. Limestone. sy2 x 11 x 1 inches. M: These predicted the throwing and pouring pieces, in that the paint finally assumes a random shape. A: Yes. M: The limestone frame also involves the theme of blocked vision. Like the wall removals, what you see when you look at it is not a window into another world but real material stuff actually present In this world. Since the limestone is a blank, opaque surface with no actual picture it relates to the idea of blindness, obstruction of vision, and so on, as in your blind drawings and paintings. A: Yes, I started those in 1962 or '63. M: You were doing those dotted Constellations blind then, while listening to "The Well-Tempered Clavier." A: Yes, and during the whole period we've been discussing I continued to do blind drawings and paintings. I was doing the scribbles with black lead pencil and closed eyes by '64. studijní účely 134 I CONCEPTUAL ART William Anastasi : Talk About Dumb | 135 M: They were not exhibited until the '80s? A: Virginia Dwan wanted to show the 96 "well-tempered" Constellations in the '60s, but we never got around to it. M: But I have the impression that blind drawings and paintings really came to the forefront of your work in the '80s. A: In the early '70s I made the first large blind drawings. Then starting in 1977 I would go downtown on the subway a lot to play chess with John Cage. I would fill my pocket with a couple dozen sharpened pencils. Then on the subway I would put on firing range headphones to make it silent. It also makes people less likely to interrupt me. I would sit erect with my back away from the seat, with a pencil in each hand and a sheet of paper on a board on my lap. I would hold the pencils like darts and lightly touch the surface. The train ride is lurching enough so you need an external point to keep your balance; I would use the pencils for that and allow the swaying of my body as the train careened around curves to make the drawing. I bet I've done a thousand of those. I would ride from 137th street to 18th street and after the game back again. M: The results are extraordinary. It's interesting too that you got better at it, though some of the early ones are beautiful in a less knowing more innocent way. This seems to go back to your paradoxical discovery, in 1962 or so, that you got better visual results with your eyes closed. A: You can see what a treasure randomness is. When you, for example, make random collocations of words through clipping or whatever, the results are always heartbreakingly beautiful. M: Yes, that's an amazing thing to contemplate, when we think of all our concern to control, and how it conventionalizes events. Others have done blind drawings—Robert Morris, I think, for example—but you seem to have made a special affirmation of them. A: I seldom do drawings with my eyes open anymore. The large blind drawings of course aren't done on the subway but in my studio. The subway drawings are timed by the ride; in the studio I set a time beforehand, usually between half an hour and four hours, and usually execute them non-stop. M: Like many of your photographic works, this process involves the simultaneous presentation of space and time—the image and its execution in a preconceived time. A: Actually the piece that sums up the simultaneous expression of time and space best is a performance piece that I thought of in the '60s, at about the same time as the wall on the wall or a little later, which never got performed. Two people are on a stage. One of them has a tape measure and is measuring the stage, every dimension of it. The other has a stopwatch. When the measurer of space begins making a measurement, the measurer of time starts the stopwatch and begins making a measurement of the time it takes to measure the space. When the measurer of space obtains a dimension he or she hollers out to the audience "13 feet 6 inches," or whatever. The measurer of time then clicks the stopwatch off and yells, "One minute 13 seconds," or whatever. M: Well, that says it all, Bill. Talk about dumb! Skenováno pro studijní účely chapter six Frangois Morellet Pythagorean Post-Modernist LIKE EVERY OTHER ARTIST IN THE WORLD, FRANCOIS MORELLET was painting in 1952-53- The idea of Conceptual Art had not yet clearly arisen. It had been foreshadowed in the oeuvre of Marcel Duchamp more than a generation earlier, and was already incipient in works such as John Cage's 4 '33", 1952—in which a pianist sits at a piano in front of an audience and remains silent and motionless for 4 minutes and 33 seconds—and Robert Rauschenberg's Erased DeKooningDrawing, 1953, presenting visual blankness as equivalent to auditory silence. Though Duchamp's example is clearly in the background, these works arose not directly from him but from an intimate interplay. Rauschenberg used his White Paintings as props in Cage's Theater Piece, No. 1 at Black Mountain in 1951. Cage derived the idea for 4'33" from the White Paintings in 1952. The next year, 1953, Rauschenberg derived from 4 '33 "the idea of Erased DeKooning Drawing. This was the lineage of American Conceptualism at its birth. Ed Kienholz used the term Concept Tableaux from 1963 on for a while.1 The term "concept art" was published by the American Fluxus artist Henry Flynt in An Anthology, an anti-art volume edited by Jackson MacLow and La Monte Young in 1963, and the term "conceptual art" was used by Sol LeWitt in his article, "Paragraphs on Conceptual Art," in 1967. But Morellet was already sniffing around the hen-house in 1952 and '53, though his work is not internationally known enough for this fact to have been pointed out in the record.2 In a spate of recent books on the art history of Conceptual Art, including one that is specifically dedicated to the origins of Conceptualism in places other than New York City, Morellet is not even mentioned.3 In the five years or so after World War II, Morellet painted in a mostly abstract, yet still somewhat painterly style that bore resemblance to some works of Paul Klee and Arshile Gorky. Then around 1950 the painterly elements disappeared, the edges hardened and became more geometrical, and Francois Morellet, The Ghost of Malevich (Le Fantdme de Malevitch), 1981-82, Musee des Beaux-Arts, Chambery. Skenováno pro studijní účely 138 I CONCEPTUAL ART Francois Morellet : Pythagorean Post-Modernist | 139 the work seemed to be struggling to find where to go. By 1952 it had found its way, and that way was at the forefront of what was happening in art history at the time, as the School of Paris gradually gave way to the emerging School of New York. Morellet bypassed, or overleapt, the gestural period of Abstract Expressionism and went directly into the later-to-emerge world of geometric abstraction which, with its emphasis on cognition, led to Minimalism and through it to Conceptual Art. At least three major American artists who have been firmly implanted in the art history books seem to have been anticipated in their breakthrough achievements by Morellet's work: Ellsworth Kelly, Frank Stella, and Sol LeWitt. Morellet's Painting (Peinture), 1952,* and Painting Red on Blue (Peinture, rouge sur bleu), 1953,5 contain the basic elements that Stella would use in his immensely celebrated Black Paintings of 1958 and after. Morellet's Project {Projet), 1953,6 could be a Kelly from the same period (which of these friends influenced the other?), as could Violet Blue Green Yellow Orange Red {Violet bleu vertjaune orange rouge), 1953, and 5 Different Reds (5 Rouges differents), 19S3- Parallel Lines (Lignesparalleles), 1957, anticipates later works by several historic American artists, including Kenneth Noland and Agnes Martin, as does Parallel Yellows and Blacks (Paralleles jaunes et noires), 1952.4 Double Grids... (4 doubles trames traits minces 0 -22 5-45 67 5), 1958, has already everything that LeWitt's Circles and Grid, 1972, would have. This list could go on. Morellet was there at the beginning of the tendencies that would someday be called Late or post-Modernism and seems to have sensed its directions before they had begun to clearly unfold and reveal themselves. On the other hand, viewing influences on Morellet's works of the early '50s, one finds him continuing a venerable European Modernist tradition that goes back through the art concret of Max Bill to the works of Theo van Doesburg and, ultimately, to Russian Constructivism. He provides, in other words, a link between the tradition of European geometric abstraction and Conceptual Art. Another angle of Morellet's work connects straight back to Marcel Duchamp—especially the tendency of systemic art to generate an aura of rigorous method that drifts in the direction of science rather than religion—or of a scientific and mathematicized form of religion such as the ancient Pythagorean. He was involved in the counter-aesthetic movement for "the avoidance of subjectivity in art,"7 used "random numbers to help him determine the location of identical elements on a picture surface,"8 shared with Bill and other Swiss concretionists "a desire to suppress individuality in favor of a system,"9 and was a founding member of the Groupe de Recherche Skenováno Francois Morellet, Peinture, 195a. Oil on wood, 40 x 70 cm. Francois Morellet, Painting Red on Blue (Peinture, rouge sur bleu), 1953. Oil on wood, 40 x 60 cm. pro studijní účely 02 140 I CONCEPTUAL ART Francois Morellet, Super imposition and Transparency [Superposition et transparence: carré derriére o"-go°, carré devant 20°-no°, 1980) 256 x 310 cm. Francois Morellet, A Single Straight Line Passing Through Two Squares with the Middle of One Side of Each Contacting the Other [Seule droite (corniere metallique) passant dans 2 carres ayant le milieu d'un de leurs cotes en contact), 1978, acrylic on canvas and metal angle-iron, 130 x 140 x 270 cm. Francois Morellet : Pythagorean Post-Modernist | 141 d'Art Visuel in i960. The title suggests a scientific research group and recalls Duchampian details such as the instructions for Three Standard Stoppages, which mimic laboratory research instructions. Clearly, Morellet was a member of what has been called the Other tradition in Modern art—meaning other than both the aesthetic preoccupation of Matisse and the School of Paris, and the metaphysical transcendentalist urges of Malevich, Mondrian and the abstract sublime. This is the same as saying that he was not, ideologically, a Modernist. At the moment in question, the early '50s, he was what might be called a proto-post-Modernist. The Group's i960 statement (written by Victor Vasarely) asserted that "the 'star' artist or the 'solitary genius' is out-of-date" and that the "true creators of the future" will employ the "aid of scientific and technical disciplines."10 At the time when the last heyday of the Romantic movement was working itself out in Abstract Expressionism in New York, the irrelevance of the Romantic ideology was announced in the context of ideas derived ultimately from Duchamp which would be the foundation of post-Modernism twenty years later. Known by its acronym GRAV ("heavy"), the group was one of the first official manifestations of post-Modernism in the post-War period —though something very like it had happened at the beginning of the "other" tradition, in Dada and related anti-civilizational tendencies which were driven out into the open by the shock of World War I. "We would like to withdraw from our vocabulary the word art in its accepted meaning," read a GRAV statement in 1961. This was, in other words, an overt anti-art movement—understanding that anti-art has always meant anti-a-certain-type of art that was recently dominant. Related tendencies had been expressed in the post-War period in the United States; Erased DeKooning Drawing, for example, is a stunningly direct and blunt anti-art gesture. In Japan, also, the War left a need to turn away from the principles that had dominated the flawed civilization that led to defeat; Matsuzawa Yutaka's "Nirvana School" turned anti-art in the early '60s with its "vanish objets\", its "refusal to make," and its Anticivilization Exhibition, 1965. The sense that human hopes and ambitions—both East and West—had been foolishly committed to what Ezra Pound called a "botched civilization," the embarrassment of recognizing the fact so late, the impulse to go into denial—these were moods felt in places deeply affected by the War, including Japan, France, and the United States. In France this mood was characteristically carried off with aplomb, with a refusal to show shame; Gallic pride drifted into the nihilistic cult of the savage god of the Absurd, and Morellet and others in GRAV, as in the proto-Conceptual activities going on věnováno pro studijní účely 142 I CONCEPTUAL ART in the United States and Japan, featured humor and Duchampian indifference. GRAV disbanded in 1968 and since then Morellet has carried out his project on his own, with both analytic intensity and humorous detachment, without cultivating the aura of a "star artist" or "solitary genius". Many of Morellet's works have been connected with architecture, and the nature of the connection is unique. Called architectural "disintegrations," his sculptural additions go against the visual premises of the structure, appearing to undermine its stability and direct it on a crash course into the earth. At the same time the connection disintegrates the architecture, it integrates the artwork into the surrounding world, from which it takes its premises and its form. Both the deconstructivist tendency and the intimate relation with the real world are prominent post-Modernist traits which permeate Morellet's oeuvre. In his works for gallery exhibition Morellet proceeded to an investigation of cognition in visual terms. Many of his works present an analytical breakdown of the vocabulary of art. The breakdown of perspective is celebrated in 4 Centimeter Lines Whose Spacing Increases in Each Row by 4 mm (Tirets 4cm dont I'espacement augmente a chaque rangee de 4mm, 1975); corners are accumulated for analytical breakdown in All Over, 1995, and arcs in Random Distributions of Quarter Circles of Neon with 4 Rhythms of Ignition (Repartition aleatoire de 1/4 de cercles de neon avec 4 rythmes d'allumage, 1994). Many other works follow the same inquisitive analytical path, seeking results beyond painterly sensibility and its whimsical intuitive leaps. The anti-Modernist insistence on bypassing the gallery space in favor of a site in the so-called "real" world of traffic, pedestrians, and commerce also shows itself in many of his outdoor works; but even so the outdoor elements—such as the skewed grid in Trames 3 -87 -93 -183, 1971, or the immense table-like framework that seems to have fallen from the sky onto the FNAC (La Defance, 1991)—identify themselves as art, whether by color combination or material. They are not attempts to disguise the artwork as a part of ordinary life, but gigantic and obvious intrusions from the usually separate and sheltered realm of art which by openly acknowledging their source bring the relation between the two realms into intense focus. In line with its clearly acknowledging itself as art, Morellet's oeuvre, for all its desire to break down old boundaries that seemed too restrictive, still has something precious or elitist about it. This is best seen in the Pythagorean-Platonic aspect of the work. The emphasis on geometry—which is sometimes broken down into semi-atomic elements, as in the works with many corners or many arcs—evokes an ancient pre-Christian resonance Skenováno Francois Morellet : Pythagorean Post-Modernist | 143 which affords a glimpse into Morellet's usually somewhat hidden sensibility. In some works, such as L'angle DRAC, 1987, where the geometry seems to have fallen from on high, there is a hint of the feeling Plato describes as being washed up on a beach after a shipwreck and seeing geometrical diagrams that men had drawn in the sand. The most Pythagorean element in Morellet's work is his pursuit of K—the endless number (or an endless number, as are all so-called irrational numbers). Here Morellet takes his stand in the arena of ancient mathematicians and aestheticians. In a classic essay setting forth the premises of his own recent work ("On the Path of Pi"11) he refers to "my usual tools, the ruler and protractor," evidently invoking and parodying the ancient schools that worshipped geometry, as Plato, supposedly, had engraved over the entrance of his school the phrase, "God geometrizes." The geometrical order of things, like the astronomical order, was regarded in those ancient schools as ordained, revealed, engraved on the soul by god, and so on. It was the karmic assignment of humans to find and decipher and consciously articulate the message that was inscribed in their own soul. The shipwrecked survivor viewing the geometrical diagrams in the sand is seeing that his soul is the same as the souls of the inhabitants of the region where he has washed up. He is among friends, or soul-brothers. In a mood that he compromises with humorous hedgings, Morellet declares himself to be of this brotherhood. He made his works, he says, "using only my ruler and good old protractor."12 What motivated his researches into n, he says, was "my dream of an infinite, unpredictable line that is self-generating."13 The ambition recalls Duchamp's desire to find a line that was not generated by his own taste or sensibility—a pure line, a line that was uncontaminated by the personality, that came from universal or anyway unaccountable principles that overrode and oversaw human life. In Duchamp's case this led to the random experimental procedure of the Three Standard Stoppages, 1913-14, a work that seems to have been formative on Morellet's work as well as much other art of his generation. Morellet's desire for an infinite self-generating line means the desire for an irrational number—a number whose decimal nuances never end, like TT, which supposedly has been worked out to billions of decimal places without coming to anything like an end, or even a loop or an obsessive repetition which might be regarded as a kind of end. The irrational number goes on forever, and the line based on it would thus be self-generating and infinite. The irrational number is one of the mysteries that was worked out in the Pythagorean school in the late sixth century b c. So staggeringly, stupefyingly momentous was this discovery considered to be that the lore studijní účely CONCEPTUAL ART relates that Pythagoras himself pushed one of his major disciples, Hippasus of Metapontum, off of a boat, causing his death by drowning, because he had revealed the secret of irrational numbers to an outsider. The problem with communicating this secret was that it revealed an essential discrepancy between arithmetic and geometry (between the order of numbers and the order of lines) that called into question the whole principle of the rationality of the universe. This was bound up with the so-called Pythagorean theorem: that given a right-angled triangle, the sum of the squares of the two short sides will equal the square of the hypotenuse. The problem is that the hypotenuse, given a triangle in which the two short sides are rational numbers, is an irrational number. That means that one could never measure the hypotenuse; no ruler, no matter how finely calibrated, would ever yield a whole number value for it. So the existence of the irrational number, discovered through the Pythagorean theorem, reveals an inner incomen-surability between mathematics and geometry. The world as measured in numbers and the world as constructed in spatial units do not coincide and in fact will never do so. So the world is really two worlds. There is an eternal incommensurability built into it that is the groaning chasm of nonsense at the heart of sense. It is this incommensurability that Morellet has focused on as the subject matter of his K instantiations. Morellet is of a generation which overlapped Modernism and post-Modernism. His instincts seem always to have been of the deconstructivist anti-metaphysical slant that is now commonly called post-Modernist, governed by a desire to undermine and disintegrate the certainties of Modernism. Yet his Pythagorean geometry-based art has distinct foreshadowings in Modernism—in the work, for example, of Mondrian and other neo-Plas-ticists. Yet Morellet has focused not on the certainties of Pythagoreanism, but on its one glaring uncertainty. The irrational number and the infinity of uncertainty it gave rise to stuck in the craw of Pythagoras, who seems to have been seeking elementary certainties in his work in mathematics and harmony. Morellet, though a residual Modernist through his Pythagoreanism, has focused on the one uncertainty that foiled Pythagoras, and in that decision is a post-Modernist—one who delights in seeing the certainties of Modernism disintegrate, destabilize, and go flailing overboard. Many of Morellet's works are like those geometical diagrams the dazed shipwreck survivor finds between his hands and knees as he crawls ashore gasping for breath. One imagines that Pythagoras himself would have loved a work like 6 Random Distributions {6 repartitions aleatoires), 1958. There are also intimations of immortality here; as Morellet says, "I can joyously Francois Morellet : Pythagorean Post-Modernist 145 and endlessly lose myself on these new paths toward infinity."14 Here for a moment he sounds like another French proto-Conceptualist, Yves Klein, with his path-oriented forays into the infinite. Yet for Morellet—essentially, or instinctively, a post-Modernist—this persona of the transcendental Pythagrean infinitist is a "parody." There may have been, among the Neo-Pythagoreans of the early Roman Empire, some who mixed Cynic elements with the ancient Music of the Spheres and treated it all as a metaphysical joke—but otherwise, Morellet is the first playful Pythagorean on record among the life-or-death devotees bound to their vow of silence. Morellet is not so bound, and proclaims his search for the endless continually changing line based on n to be a "frivolous...adventure."15 "Unless, of course," he says, "one of my sequences should one day reveal..." 1. Michael Newman and Jon Bird, in the introduction to the volume Rewriting Conceptual Art (London: Reaktion Books, 1999), which they edited, state that Ed Kienholz used a term like concept art in the late 1950s; they do not footnote the statement, and 1 have been unable to substantiate it. Walter Hopps, who founded the Ferus Gallery in Los Angeles with Kienholz in 1958 and curated his Whitney Museum retrospective in 1996, does not remember it. It is on record, however, that in 1963 Kienholz began offering for sale what he called "concept tableaux," works which existed only in concept and would be actually built upon being bought. See Walter Hopps, ed., Kienholz; A Retrospective (New York: Whitney Museum of American Art, 1996), pp. 110-111. 2. The catalogue Francois Morellet (Paris: Flammarion, 1996) explains why: it is only in French—testily rejecting the use of the current global second language, English, something which virtually no other nation in the world still does, as if to say, to the rest of the world, We just don't care what you say or what you think or if you can even hear what we are saying—we are sufficient unto ourselves—and so forth. If Morellet's work had not been saddled with this burden of Gallic pride it might have entered the history books by now. 3.The main titles are: Tony Godfrey, Conceptual Art (London: Phaidon, 1998); Newman and Bird, eds., Rewriting Conceptual Art; Alexander Al-berro and Blake Stimson, eds., Conceptual Art: A Critical Anthology (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1999). The work which emphasizes extra-New York developments is Luis Camnitzer, )ane Farver and Rachel Weiss, eds., Global Concep-tualism: Points of Origin 1950S-1980S (New York: Queens Museum of Art, 1999). 4. Francois Morellet, Flammarion cat., p. 117. 5. Ibid,, p. 21 6. Ibid., p. 22. 7. Jan van der Marek, "Francois Morellet or the problem of taking art seriously," in Francois Morellet: Systems, exh. cat. (Buffalo, New York: Albright-Knox Gallery of Art, 1984), P- 12. 8. Ibid., p. 11. 9. Ibid. 10. Quoted ibid., p. 14. 11. This is available in the exhibition catalogue Francois Morellet dans l'atelier du musee Zad-kine (Paris: Les musses de la Ville de Paris, 1999), in both the original French and an English translation. 12. Ibid., n.p.n. 13. Ibid. 14.Ibid. 15. Ibid. Skenováno pro studijní účely chapter seven b Bernar Venet From Breakthrough to Cul-de-sac Bernar Venet, Formula for the Diagonal of a Rectangle (Cakul de la diagonale du rectangle), 1966, acrylic on canvas, 33.7s * 121 cm. BERNAR VENET WAS BORN IN 1942 INTO A WORKING CLASS FAMILY in Saint-Auban, an industrial city of perhaps 5000 in the Alps of Hautes Provence. At age 17, he moved to Nice where he encountered Ben Vautier on the street in 1959 and subsequently met Arman at Ben's house. Soon he met Pierre Restany, at Arman's house. Without realizing it, he was being absorbed into the artistic lineage which would become known as the School of Nice. The world in which Venet was about to emerge as an artist was characterized by Europe's post-War mood of redefining itself through the founding of movements. Lettrism, one of the most radical, had appeared in Paris under the leadership of Isidore Isou in 1946-47. It was a post-Dada attempt to return to infancy through a cultivated incoherence. It was soon followed by Situationisme, which had distinct leftist, Utopian associations, and the Zero Group began ten years later in Cologne. The artistic cult of Nouveaux Realisme, also known as Neo-Dada, would be formed, with Restany as its prophet, in Paris in i960. Venet was about ten years younger than the New Realists and theirs was not exactly his world, but a legacy he would inherit. Yves Klein, Arman, and Martial Raysse (all Nouveaux Realistes) declared the School of Nice into existence in 1961—the year of Venet's compulsory military service. Historically, it was a sub-category of Nouveaux Realisme, but anti-Parisian. These young artists saw the School of Paris as hopelessly immersed in Modernism. That Paris also had emerging anti-art movements did not seem to cancel out the polarity. Though the three founders of the School of Nice may originally have meant the designation as a joke—proclaiming their small-town home to be the real cultural capital, not Paris—it has come to seem, over time, that more than a joke is involved. Seen as a historical force that perhaps went beyond its founders' intentions, the School 147 Skenováno pro studijní účely 148 | CONCEPTUAL ART of Nice includes (in addition to Klein, Arman, and Raysse) Cesar, Ben, Venet, and a number of younger artists drawn to the now-charismatic appellation. There are, in fact, meaningful ways in which these artists belong together; those who were Nouveaux Realistes tended to use found or appropriated objects (though in Venet's case it was more found intellectual objects, like the mathematical formulae he would later work with). They tended to share a desire to narrow the breach between art and life which had become scandalously wide in the age of late Modernist abstraction. And, above all, there was an actual lineage or brotherhood among them, a warmth of feeling that reflected their origins in the sunny South. Rather than trying to paint in some subversive way Venet, like many artists of his generation, chose to renounce the use of paint altogether. Paint seemed complicit with the suspect trickery of representation. Renouncing the illusionism of paint, he began to make "paintings" with tar, seeking "an anti-idealistic art founded exclusively on materialist premises."1 The result, as one critic has put it, is "a form of art that is strongly, deliberately devalued."2 The grisly tar-sticky surfaces were meant to directly counteract the effect of Klein's somewhat gaudy transcendental monochromes. "I took exception," Venet has said, "to the excessive charm of [Klein's] blue, red or gold monochromes, which were the consequence, in my opinion, of an idealist approach."3 He wanted to bring the idea of the monochrome down to earth, into the realm of matter. "I was not trying to create the ultimate painting in the manner of Rodchenko," Venet has remarked.4 Instead, like Carl Andre using ordinary builders' bricks several years later, Venet was attempting to develop a constructive approach which might suggest that art was a socially useful activity. Out walking near Tarascon one day, while he was on military duty, Venet came across a vertical cliff down which a truckload of tar had first flowed then cooled and hardened, much the situation Robert Smithson would create with Asphalt Rundown eight years later. For Smithson, it would involve a parody of a brushstroke. To Venet, also, it seemed like painting, but without touch: the "hand" that had produced it was gravity. Venet began to make "tars" in which he would spread the material on the canvas with a scraper, then set the canvas upright so the tar would slowly flow down the surface, then harden into a dark form. "Tar," he later said, "suited me on account of its plainness."5 Art historically, the Tars belong in the anti-Modernist category of the Attack on Painting, or the Attack on the Pretty Picture, which began with Duchamp and, after a lag, held sway from about 1965-75. Venet's first works outside the bounds of representation, they Bernar Venet : From Breakthrough to Cul-de-sac | 149 developed into a phase in which the dense black substance was applied to folded pieces of discarded cardboard. Torn and walked on pieces of cardboard were like leaves in the urban gutter that anti-art longed to reenter after its long trance of beauty. Venet's concern for what he calls "poor materials" anticipated by several years Germano Celant's phrase "arte povera." For all its simplicity, the "poor material" accomplished several ends. It enabled him, he says, "to produce works from industrial materials, cold and uncraftsmanlike." Unaesthetic, even anti-aesthetic, industrial rather than transcendental, abjuring the quality of touch, they were contributions to the anti-painting movement which was getting underway in Europe, the United States, and elsewhere. TWO MONTHS AFTER THE TARS, AT AGE 21, VENET ARRANGED TO have himself photographed, shirtless and shoeless, lying like a derelict, drunken or otherwise unconscious, in a heap of litter—old boxes and paint tins, empty food and oil packages, scraps of paper, garbage cans. Performance in Garbage (Performance dans les detritus), 1963, was in the ancient tradition of Diogenes, who lay around the streets with the dogs as a rebuke to bourgeois life-styles; more recently, in terms of art history, it hearkened back to iconic performance works of the School of Nice. In 1958, Klein did his famous performance-installation The Void (Le Vide), in which the Gallery Iris Clert in Paris was emptied out and exhibited by itself. In Kleinian fashion, the work was in part a statement of transcendental idealism, positing a higher metaphysical reality that is beyond the world of form and can be approached by bypassing it. In the following year Klein's co-founder of the School of Nice, Arman, produced an installation called, antithetically, The Full (Le Pleiri), 1959, in which the same gallery was filled from floor to ceiling with literal garbage brought by City of Paris garbage trucks. Arman's work involved a counterstatement to Klein's transcendental idealism. He came down on the side of ordinary reality, as The Full asserts the priority of the object over its absence. It formed an antithetical pair with Klein's The Void, redirecting attention downward into the street and the earth below it, rather than to the transcendent purity of The Void. It evoked the rotting level of life in which bodies metabolize substances and turn them into detritus which in turn becomes the seed-bed of new life. Venet's Performance in Garbage clearly takes sides with Arman. It underlines the correction of Klein's proposal. "I opted," Venet has said, "for matter and gravity, not for the void."6 Skenováno pro studijní účely 1S<> I CONCEPTUAL ART There is an even more direct relationship between the Performance in Garbage and Klein's most famous performance work, Leap into the Void, i960. In that definitive and iconic piece, the artist was photographed leaping upward, as if into flight, from a second floor ledge in a Paris street (while a bicycle pedalled by below, in the old mode of locomotion). Klein seems to be launching himself upward into the freedom of space, while Venet lies crumpled below, entrapped in matter. The two photographs are antithetical icons from the moment of the turning of late Modernism into post-Modernism. Venet reveals the Leap's true, not wishful, consequence—the Fall, which Klein had always concealed and prevaricated about. While Klein faked the upward flight, Venet showed its true aftermath, affirming the reality of matter and its laws over spirit and its aspirations to escape. He presented the crumpled and seemingly broken body of the would-be Icarus after he has fallen to earth. But the Performance in Garbage needs to be viewed in a larger context than the School of Nice. As an early crystallization of the anti-art movement its concern was the demystification of art and of the artist's role. Garbage represents the fact that organic things die, decay, and become loam or fertilizer. In the late Modernist period the artwork came to be regarded as transcending this process. Because it, supposedly, participated in Platonic Ideas such as Pure or Eternal Beauty, it was regarded as unaging. In the writings of Romantics such as Schiller the person of the artist (or poet), as well as his work, was described as transcending the world of flux and participating directly in eternity. Venet's Performance in Garbage located the figure of the artist within the reality of bodily life, death and detritus. No longer to be seen as a being above the level of transient things that come and go, no longer a creature almost transformed into an angel, the artist was now seen as a denizen of the underside of things, a part of the underlying process of living and dying, the heaving of the sod beneath it all. It is the death of the old and the (re)birth of the new kind of artist that this seminal work signifies. BACK FROM MILITARY SERVICE IN 1963, VENET NOTICED A PILE OF gravel mixed with tar while walking by the Hotel Ruhl in Nice one day. He had already articulated, in the Performance in Garbage, the idea of a random heap constituting part of an artwork. The random heap of detritus was a possible solution to the over-control of form that had ossified late Modernism. Standing near the Hotel Ruhl, faced with the pile of gravel and tar, Venet experienced a breakthrough in his search. It occurred to him to change the Bernar Venet : From Breakthrough to Cul-de-sac | 151 material in order to increase the ephemerality and indeterminacy of the piece; tar mixed with gravel hardens into a fixed shape, like a traditional sculpture. Instead, Venet erected Heap of Coal (Tas de Charbon), 1963, in the workspace of the decorator's shop at the opera, where he was employed. He photographed it, had himself photographed with it, and brought people to see it as a new type of artwork characterized by indeterminacy and lack of definition. Heap of Coal was the work that freed Venet from the constraints with which he began. A work that has no specified shape or dimensions, it is installed loosely in response to the dimensions of the venue. It never exists twice the same, hence is ephemeral. Lacking dimensions, it is indeterminate. Since it is not precisely arranged but loosely thrown down, it involves randomness and unpredictability. Even more than the Tars, it is created by gravity. In addition to its importance in Venet's career, Heap of Coal was a milestone in art history. Philosophically similar works have been made by other artists who were dedicated to the project of reconceiving art or creating an anti-archetype to its aesthetic mode. It was as if history had assigned this project to a certain generation of artists. In 1964, William Anastasi con- Beenar Venet, Performance in Garbage (Performance dans les detritus, 1961. Skenováno pro studijní účely 152 I CONCEPTUAL ART strutted a stack of plain bricks in his studio and designated it an artwork (never publicly exhibited). In 1966, Carl Andre exhibited several symmetrical stacks of bricks in the Tibor de Nagy gallery. In 1969, Dennis Oppenheim designated as his artwork a shipload of unrefined cement. Starting about 1968, Robert Smithson exhibited various works of this type, from his Non-sites (bins of uncut rocks) to a heap of gravel (Gravel Corner Piece, 1968), and, in 1969, a heap of broken glass. Kounellis presented various exhibitions of heaps of coal beginning in 1967—and so on. But there is something special about Venet's Heap of Coal, something genuinely primordial: it seems to have been the first recorded act of designating an unaltered and unmanipu-lated natural material as a work of art—the first clear gesture of undoing what civilization had done, by revealing the clean slate of nature again. The series of realizations and developments Venet had gone through to this point consisted primarily of removing from the artwork the traits (color, form, etc.) that had long been associated with aesthetic pleasure. "Already," he says of these early years, "I was convinced that art is not made for pleasure but for knowledge,"7 The urge to eliminate the pleasurable elements is a puritanical urge, suggesting a serious, even sombre, point of view. In that period of his life, as Venet later recalled, "Darkness and sobriety surrounded Bernar Venet : From Breakthrough to Cul-de-sac | 153 my universe. The use of stylistic devices, color and the spectacular, seemed childish to me."8 This youthful asceticism would grow, till it had his work, and him, in a kind of stranglehold from which he had to make an escape. IN 1966 (AT AGE 24), BERNAR VENET CAME TO NEW YORK FOR THE first time. Later in the year he moved there for good. What convinced him was a kind of revelation which occurred at the Whitney Museum of American Art. Venet attended an exhibition of contemporary American sculpture, including works by Donald Judd, Dan Flavin, Carl Andre, Sol LeWitt, and others. Venet remembers keenly the "shock" of the work he saw, which forced him to the surprising realization that "my intentions...were closer to those of the American artists than to the Europeans."9 It was specifically the work of Minimal artists he was referring to, with their insistence on industrial inexpressiveness and their focus on the surface rather than the interior, the rejection of implied depths in favor of a perceived and present surface. Later in the same year, during a brief return to Nice, Venet was invited to exhibit at the Musee de Ceret in a show called Impact. Under the influence of Minimal sculpture he had arrived at the concept of the Tube—a sculpture consisting of a length of industrial tubing cut at (usually) different angles at the two ends. The first generation of Tubes was made of cardboard; later that year Venet was able to acquire tubes of polyvinyl chloride. Years later, he would make larger versions in steel. Most of these works were painted industrial yellow (the cadmium yellow with which it is customary to paint cranes and other industrial equipment). "The tubes," he later observed, attracted him because they "...are...objects reduced to the greatest possible simplicity..."10 In order to remove his personality from the process as much as possible, he stated that the length of a tube would be decided by someone else, perhaps a collector or a curator. For the "Impact" exhibition Venet found that he could not afford to buy the tubing and decided to show only the blueprint of a tube, indicating dimensions, color, and material. "In the logic of my thinking," he says, "the presentation of this plan was equal to the object itself."11 A week or so after the opening he began to reconceive the piece so that a physical length of tubing would lie on the floor, while behind it a blue print of it was mounted on the wall. Thereafter, that was the usual structure of the Tubes, with the angles at which the ends were cut arrived at by some random means. The first and classic example, from 1966, is Tube no. 150/30/45/1300 (the two ends Bernar Venet, Black Tars and Heap of Coal {Goudrons noir et Tas de charbon), 1963. Skenováno pro studijní účely 154 | CONCEPTUAL ART are cut at 30° and 45°; the diameter is 150 mm., the length 1300 mm.). It was in the unforeseen relationship between the sculptural and pictorial elements that a new arena for the meaning of art opened up. The significance of this work involves the theory Venet was shaping out of his reading, especially the works of French semiotician Jacques Bertin. (Reading a great deal of analytical literature was another trait of Venet's generation of artists.) Bertin gripped his imagination with a distinction among three types of relationships between signifiers and signifieds. In what Bertin called polysemy, or multi-referentiality, the signifier can be interpreted as referring potentially to a number of different signifieds, but this number is finite; the signifier cannot be pinned down to a single exclusive act of reference, but it also cannot be opened infinitely to any conceivable interpretation. As Venet considered this in terms of art, it seemed to him that this relation applied to representational art, where a single work can cooperate with a finite number of interpretations. Gericault's Raft of the Medusa, for example, can be seen in terms of the allegory of the ship of state, or of the struggle of the soul toward freedom, or as a record of an historical event. Second, Bertin posited the category of pansemy, infinite- or all-reference, for situations in which signifiers can seem to relate to any signified whatever, a category that Roland Barthes and some other semioticians have called empty signifiers. In Venet's view this was a description of works of abstract art which, as Clement Greenberg had argued, were without any subject matter or reference. Malevich's Black Square is a classic example of an image where one can see anything or nothing. The window in the wall had been painted over, ambiguously. A Mondrian, by comparison, might be viewed as occupying a position between polysemy and pansemy, with its references to a mathematically ordered Platonic substructure of the universe. It is monosemy, the third and last category in the trichotomy, that is revolutionary. Monosemy, according to Bertin, means a situation in which there is one and only one possible relationship between signifier and signified. In a monosemic act of signification there is no escape from the object's direct objecthood; it simply is itself and refers only to itself, not to anything else. Monosemy is a semiotic form of tautology and solipsism. "In a sense," as one author has put it, "the monosemic function in art is about denotative significance as opposed to connotative interpetations."12 "Art history" it seemed to Venet, "has evolved up to now within the limits of the first two groups," polysemy and pansemy, or representation and abstraction.13 "What is at stake," he concluded, in the attempt to free Bernar Venet : From Breakthrough to Cul-de-sac | 155 Bernar Venet, Tube no. 150/30/45/1300,1966. art from the whims of subjectivity, "is the introduction of monosemy into a sphere from which it had seemed excluded." In Tube, the locked-in quality of one-meaning-and-one-only—and that simply identical with the actual physical being of the piece—was achieved by the intersection of two vectors, one the physical tube on the floor, the other the blue-print-like plan on the wall. The tube points the viewer to the diagram as a plan of itself, the diagram to the tube as an embodiment of itself. Skenováno pro studijní účely 156 | CONCEPTUAL ART The reference goes back and forth between these two instances of the same mathematics—and points to nothing else. "The plan together with the tube," Venet says, "no longer allowed the latter to be seen as a symbolic object (for example a phallic symbol) submitted to everyone's free interpretation."14 The addition of the blueprint "stops the flow of connotation."15 "The work has no subject" one author has claimed; "the symbolic codes are thwarted... The only possible reading is a denotative one."16 Venet was beginning to realize a principle that would become basic to the rest of his work: that a conception can be realized in various genres or materials and, if the conception is truly maintained, the different forms are equivalents—as the sculptural tube and the blueprint of it are equivalents. The "rule" that was emerging was that "a message can be coded in various forms without being distorted or lost."17 "The media...can be changed on condition that the contents remain identical."18 On the surface, Venet's idea of a work that simply states itself and does not refer to anything else sounds like the formalist theory that underlay late Modernist abstraction. In Greenbergian formalism the artwork was supposed to mean nothing beyond its own form or appearance; no reference of any kind to anything outside itself was acceptable. But this was a somewhat deceptive argument. There was, in fact, another reference involved in the work—a reference to aesthetic universals, or to the quality known in the Kantian tradition as aesthetic feeling. The work was not simply a mirror image of itself. There was a triangulation involved. The object (A) refers to aesthetic universals (B), and as the viewer gazes at it his or her aesthetic feeling (C) picks up the reference and is aroused. Monosemy, if purely realized, supposedly does not involve this triangulation. The monosemic work involves no reference to anything external to itself—not even to anything as indefinite as a feeling. Even that would be an external involvement, a triangulation. There were only two elements involved, the object and its self-identical meaning or self-reference. Even the maker was denied. His aesthetic feeling was declared to be subjective and irrelevant. Venet's approach, as one author has said, was to "deprive the artist of his involvement in the act of creation."19 As Venet himself has put it, "My work is a manifesto against aesthetics, against the expression of the individual's personality."20 VENET WAS EAGER TO EXTEND HIS DEMONSTRATION THAT THE internal conceptual code of a work was more important than its medium, material, or genre. What was needed was to translate the monosemy of Tube into another medium. Following the guidance of the blueprint part Bernar Venet : From Breakthrough to Cul-de-sac 157 of Tube he began making black and white photoenlargements illustrating mathematical-geometrical formulae. These works are visually attractive without trying to be. Many of them look rather like Minimalist paintings. Equal Vectors/Contrary Vectors (Vecteurs egaux/vecteurs opposes), 1966, for example, was simply two parallel lines, of unequal length, running horizontally across the canvas; the title, which is a formal or geometrical description, is written below the image but within the picture plane, still a part of the picture. Formula for the Diagonal of a Rectangle [Calculs de la diagonale d'un rectangle), 1966, shows the figure with the Pythagorean formula on the diagonal. The "title" is actually part of the picture. "It is in the same frame...on the same plane as the graphic representation."21 As in Tube, the viewer's mind is held back from the flow of connotation by the dead-end or endless-loop relationship between the visual and verbal elements. In 1966 Venet became acquainted with astrophysicist Jack Ullman at Columbia University, and through him with other scientists. In 1967, he went with Ullman to the Annual Meeting of the American Physics Society, where he tape-recorded a lecture on theoretical physics. Later he played the tape back to a group of artist-friends in his loft, declaring that the act of presenting it was an artwork of his own. The event bears a certain similarity to the Art and Language group's practice of publishing an essay as an artwork, which began in the same year, 1966-67. Over the next three years Venet made ten recordings of scientific lectures and presented them as his artworks. He would put the tape recorder on a sculpture pedestal beneath a wall-plaque which expressed in mathematical formulae the propositions being discussed on the tape. As with Tube, the two components of the exhibition had the same inner structure and contents, pointing back and forth to one another without making triangulation or external reference. Sometimes the mode of exhibition was more performative, as in an event that occurred at the Judson Church Theater in Manhattan on May 27 and 28,1968. On each night the same three pieces were presented. First, "the physicist Martin Krieger [lectured] on 'Neutron Emissions from Muon Capture in Ca40,' with slide projections." Next, "three physicists...gave three lectures simultaneously in front of blackboards." Finally, "Stanley Taub, a doctor of medicine, helped by an assistant, [spoke] on 'The Speech Mechanism' [and] his discoveries on the possibility of using an artificial larynx... Two films were shown and a video camera employed."22 (It should be mentioned that Dadaists also had presented lectures—sometimes simultaneous lectures—as Performance Art.) Skenováno pro studijní účely Ig8 | CONCEPTUAL ART Bernar Venet, Performance at the Judson Church Theater, 1968. Throughout the series of ten lecture-pieces, which transpired between 1967 and 1969, Venet attempted to eliminate his own sensibility- from the process by delegating matters of choice to others. "The scientific subjects ...were selected principally on the advice of Jack Ullman, but sometimes also on the advice of other physicists at Columbia University." He specifically requested that his consultants not use aesthetic criteria in their selections. "The criterion was the importance of the theory developed, and this...absolves the works from any aesthetic will..."23 PERHAPS THE MOST EXTREME ANTI-ART GESTURE IS FOR AN ARTIST to stop making art on the grounds that he or she no longer believes in its premises. The prototype was Duchamp, who promulgated in the '20s the falsehood that he had quit art for chess, and who in 1957 made the famous assertion that the artist of the future would "go underground"—perhaps meaning that he would make art in secret (like the Etant donnes). Evidently, the connection between the artwork and the artist's ego or subjectivity was repugnant to him; it seemed to rob the art of validity. Duchamp seems to have specially focused his criticism on the cult of craftsmanship and the worship of the pretty object—that is to say, the fetishization of "touch" and aesthetic feeling. The rumor that he had quit artmaking for the pursuit of chess underscored the idea that he was abandoning aesthetic feeling in favor Skenováno Bernar Venet : From Breakthrough to Cul-de-sac | 159 of cognition. The emphasis on cognition matched Venet's uneasy feeling, as early as his military years, that art should strive for knowledge rather than pleasure. Venet's handling of this motif of withdrawal was unusually uncompromising. He made an out and out declaration that he would quit making art absolutely, in any mode whatever, after certain projected pieces were completed. The procedure began with an announcement, early in 1967, that for the following four years Venet would restrict his activity to exhibiting a set of disciplines by various means, including photo-enlargements, performance elements, and tapes of lectures—after which he would quit art-making altogether. In 1967 he would present the disciplines of astrophysics, nuclear physics, and space sciences; in 1968 it would be mathematics by computation, meteorology, and the stock market; in 1969 meta-mathematics, psychophys-ics and psychochronometry, sociology and politics; in 1970 mathematical logic. Art—or anti-art—had come all the way around to science. As in the lecture presentations, Venet removed himself from the decisions involved by relegating the selection of topics and works to be exhibited to experts in the various fields. "For each discipline," he wrote, "an expert will be consulted concerning the subjects to be presented (the standard of choice Bernar Venet, Causal Groups of Space-Time, 1969. pro studijní účely l6o CONCEPT UAL ART being based on their importance). Thus the plastic qualities which some people might notice in [the] work will be independent of my intentions;"24 This programmatic attempt to eliminate subjectivity from the artmaking process implied a belief that cognition or rationality has a special claim to leadership among human faculties. Toward the end of the project Venet featured "book presentations" following a quasi-Minimal form. In Elementary Number Theory, 1970, for example, a book of that title by Underwood Dudley of DePaul University lay on a pedestal, available to be leafed through by the viewers, while its title page and contents page were reproduced on the wall just beside it. In such works Venet relentlessly pursued his project of displacing the self. As one author has put it, he "eliminated all remaining traces of subjectivity... by substituting photographic enlargements for hand-made copies."25 One might say that at last the element of touch was entirely gone. "The direct participation of the artist," Catherine Millet has observed, "was reduced to zero."26 As in Tube, the works are monosemic because the contents of the object on the sculpture pedestal are the same as those of the picture hung on the wall. There is no external reference, no escape from the loop. Venet's withdrawal from the field followed from principles he had articulated in the renunciatory years before 1966:1.) "It's not art if it's not changing the history of art", 2) "The history of art is the history of the evolution of the theory of art."27 In other words, it's not art if it isn't changing the theory of art. So art became uroboric or self-devouring. As Wittgenstein said in the Tractatus that his propositions were a ladder that one should throw away once one has ascended over it, so the practice of art, for Venet, was to be abandoned once one had shaped or reshaped its premises. Since the essence of the activity was to change the theory of the activity, and thus the activity itself, the activity existed only in the state of flux or becoming, always pursuing itself with its theoretical reformulations, a serpent biting its own tail. Venet's feeling that aesthetic delectation was invalidated by its subjectivity and relativity was an attitudinal change characteristic of the generation of artists who matured in the 1960s. Artists proposed various modes of escape from the aesthetic, such as ugliness (Joseph Beuys), antisocial performance (Vito Acconci), critical analysis (Joseph Kosuth), Earth Art (Dennis Oppenheim), and so on. Venet's solution can be seen as going further than those others. While affirming the general attitudinal change, he suggested a more than attitudinal response. His use of the semiotic trichotomy—pansemy, polysemy, monosemy—by prying monosemy out of the Bernar Venet : From Breakthrough to Cul-de-sac | 161 heap of meaning and elevating it to the top, amounts to a structural shift in the theoretical landscape. The youthful mood underlying such changes (Venet was only thirty in 1971) can be called puritanical, but this was not unusual for the time, when aesthetic delectation was widely seen as a socially useless hedonic indulgence. In fact, it was not only seen as socially useless but sometimes as socially destructive, distracting cognition from reality, supposedly by flashing pretty pictures before it. As Venet had said, he felt that art should not be made for pleasure but for knowledge. He still conceived knowledge somewhat in the Modernist way, as a matter of certainties, and certainty, as he saw it, was not to be attained through subjectivity, but through objectivity, the unquestionable facticity that was embodied in monosemy. The fact that monosemy eliminated so much was an austerity one had to live with—an aspect of the darkness that Venet has said surrounded his life and work at this time. It was the darkness imposed by ascesis—the objection to the voluptuous in raw daylight. The early or classical era of Conceptual Art was characterized in general by puritanism; this was an aspect of the anti-aesthetic or anti-sensual mood. The spareness of the works of Joseph Kosuth, Lawrence Weiner, and William Anastasi in this period, for example, results from a similarly puritanical stripping away of the "merely" pleasurable. As Eric Orr, another artist of that generation, declared in about 1970, "We're not concerned with making pretty objects anymore." Venet's resignation from artmaking was earnest, not a joke or an imposture. He was really acting out in his life the implications of all the 1960s theorizing that hoped to enable a more rational world. The resignation seemed inevitable in terms of Venet's analysis of the artistic career into three stages. First is "the learning stage," which in Venet's case included some juvenilia and art-school works. Second is a period "when the object 'art' is subjected to doubt and questioning and the development of an original concept takes place." In Venet's case the second stage begins with the Tars and culminates in the "original concept" of monosemy. "The third stage," he felt, "consists of the production of variations that can only fulfill the artist's pathological urge to make objects."28 This third stage accomplishes nothing, since "the history of art is the history of the evolution of the theory of art"—not the history of objects; it is the history of second, not third, stages. The idea that the urge to make objects was "pathological" restates Venet's underlying puritanism at this stage of his life. Desiring not to add more pointless non-theoretical objects to the world, Venet declared that even if he had not been a Conceptual artist more or less in the tradition of Duchamp, even if he had been Skenováno pro studijní účely 162 CONCEPTUAL ABT ■ Contents Elementary ~™ igasr— 5 Number Theory S Bernar Venet, Elementary Number Theory, 1970. an abstract painter in an aesthetic mode, he would, sooner or later, have stopped practicing in order to avoid repeating himself.29 So Venet's oeuvre, as he saw it at age thirty, was to end with the theoretical breakthroughs of stage two, and omit the tedious third stage with its multitude of redundant objects. His career as an artist was to culminate and end in a retrospective of his specifically conceptualist works {The Five Years of Bernar Venet) at the New York Cultural Center in 1971, featuring photo-enlargement works, book presentations, and lecture presentations. Despite its size (it contained 180 works on two floors), the show unfolded with an austere dignity appropriate to the work. It did, indeed, seem a kind of apogee, with its look of maturity and mastery, yet a strange tomb-like quiet lay over it all. Vitrines and pedestals holding scientific and mathematical books lay in a pristine purity beneath wall-mounted reproductions of their title and contents pages. Black-and-white photo-enlargements of mathematical formulae austerely studded the walls. The sense of sobriety and ascesis seemed to call for an almost pious silence. This was the ultimate statement of Venet's puritanism, his view that art was not about pleasure but knowledge. Cognition reigned as an absolute. There was only the purity Bernar Venet : From Breakthrough to Cul-de-sac | 163 of silent unchanging knowledge speaking back and forth from book to wall, and from work to work. It was the artist's triumphant farewell to art. Venet's solution of what he perceived as the cul-de-sac of an exclusively aesthetic approach seemed to have led him into another cul-de-sac—this time, of an exclusively cognitive approach. When he would return to art making (as he did six years later) his premises would be broadened. 1. Arnauld Pierre, Bernar Venet, Sculptures et Reliefs, preface by Achille Bonito Oliva (Milan: Gianpaolo Prearo Editore, 2000), p. 83. 2. Ibid. 3. Catherine Millet, Bernar Venet, English translation (Milan: Gianpaolo Prearo Editore, 1974), P-13. 4. Ibid. 5. Ibid. 6. Francoise Gaillard, "Interview with Bernar Venet," in Bernar Venet, La Conversion du Regard, Textes et Entretiens, 1975-2000 (Geneve: Musec d'art modern et contemporain, 2000), p. 8 of the unpublished English translation provided by the Bernar Venet studio. 7. Gilbert Perlein, "Conversation with Bernar Venet," in Bernar Venet, New Sculptures and Drawings (New York: Andre Emmerich Gallery', 1993). P- io, 8. Gaillard, Interview with Bernar Venet, p. 8. 9. Millet, Bernar Venet, p. 17. 10. Ibid., p. 15. 11. Ibid., p. 17. 12. Robert C. Morgan, Bernar Venet 1961-1970 (Saint-Etienne: Editions des Cahiers intempes-tifs, 1999), p, 112. 13. Millet, Bernar Venet, p. 25. 14. Ibid., n. 17. 15. Thierry Kuntzel, "Bernar Venet: Logic of the Neutral," in Bernar Venet (La Jolla: Museum of Contemporary Art, 1976), p. 10. 16. Ibid., p. 11. 17. Lawrence Alloway, "Textual Criticism," in ibid., p. 2. 18. Millet, Bernar Venet, p. 22. 19. Ibid., n. 17. 20. Morgan, Bernar Venet, 1961-1970, p. 111. 21. Bernar Venet and Thierry Kuntzel, "Study of Representation Graphique de la Function y = ," La Jolla catalogue, p. 18. 22. Millet, Bernar Venet, p. 23. Of the second piece, Venet has remarked, "This piece, which was the most successful of the three, was certainly the least probative as far I was concerned. I have since regarded it as an error in so far as it had a collage, or happening effect, resulting from the simultaneity of the lectures." 23. Ibid., p. 25. 24. Ibid,, p. 18. 25. Pierre, Bernar Venet: Sculptures et Reliefs, p. 72. 26. Catherine Millet, interview, 1998, "Bernar Venet: dans et hors la logique," in Bernar Venet, Conversion du Regard, p. 117. 27. Millet, Bernar Venet, p. 20. 28. Ibid. 29. Ibid., p.19. Skenováno pro studijní účely. g/», 10. XI (37406) Marl» K. Uoi Preši AFFIDAVIT (GENEBAA) State of California, County of San XKego SB. Beinr First Duly Sworn, depose says: „, Notice 1» hereby given, mat works of art done by t^e undarsi; between May 1953 and Wa.iv» 181 hia possession as of July were cremated on July M.. 19 San Diezo. California. National City, Califc Subscribed and sworn to befoi thi«s-7th dav of August. 19