Tuesday, October 25, 2016

Days nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, and fourteen:

Damn! I knew this would happen. Somewhat diligent tracking of the class till time runs short and its DAYS to account for. The Happening material actually propelled us into the next section of the course dedicated to body and narrative material. This section was designed to provide students with examples and inspiration for the third project. Since Chris Burden and Vito Acconci were first up we started that day with an Exercise in which the students split into groups to come up with a game, movement, process, etc designed to make others uncomfortable. Wow! This one worked out well. Totally different from what I had expected. Lots of touching and whispering, closeness and some invasions of privacy. A nice balance. The point being that we can discuss how an uncomfortable experience can also be a memorable and interesting one. After that we chatted a bit about the work of the two artists. The next class it was Carolee Schneemann and Karen Finley – both shocking in their own right – but also gave us an opportunity to discuss gender expectations. Tim Miller and Marina Abramovic rounded out the pack. Great discussion of Tim’s work, some of which we watched on video, and a nice interview with Abramovic.

These three days lead to fall break and then, upon return, we dove into project number three. I have really tried to structure these project courses so they build toward something and setting aside three days in class to shape and develop the projects seemed to work as a bridge form the earlier material. This project really scared me, especially after the examples of Burden, Acconci and Finley. I had nightmares of students getting shot, masturbating, or parading around naked. So, yea, I deliberately placed the development of these projects within eyesight. We started with the ideogram idea that the SITI folks assigned in the summer workshop – take a specific idea, distill it to its simplest essence, and find a way to have it embodied by members of your group. The presentation of these were interesting, but really just a sketch to move to the next step – which was writing down ideas that cycled around the images. The next class was devoted to fusing images and text with the following class set aside for presentation.


Many of the pieces were richer and more fleshed out than I had thought would happen. Some great overlaps in ideas and techniques – particularly in how much the body was used as an object to be manipulated. This was the first time I have ever given that kind of space in class to developing projects – well – with me checking in on them and prompting to the next steps anyway. Because of the subject matter – I encouraged them to pick something they were passionate about or genuinely interested in exploring – many of the pieces were quite personal. Which as set up kind of a quandary for me. The project-based courses were designed to explore ideas within the context of an art school, but not to produce works of art. The performance art stuff is really starting to lean that way, particularly for certain students. I explained today that if this were an arts class we would break each piece down and discuss what ideas were clear and what we thought worked and what could use some shaping. But, this isn’t an arts class. Students execute these projects to understand more about the artists and ideas we have been discussing. I’m not sure how to find my way out of this at this point, but we will see what the next project holds. Social Action – the first shot across the bow was the Situationists and Joseph Beuys.

No comments:

Post a Comment