1 Leo Steinberg “from other criteria”.   (Charles Harrison, 1992)                                                                                                Steinberg talks about a shift in the picture plane from the “old Masters practice of using of devises to draw attention to the art.  Steinberg talks about development in this practice using the term flatbed picture plane which started in the 1960’s it changes the way a picture is represented in relation to the vertical nature of the human view point, which Steinberg calls world space. He cites Richard Rauschenberg as the first proponent of this style of seeing. A clear example of this would be 1955 when Rauschenberg smeared paint on his own bed and up righted it against a wall.   Steinberg says, “The flatbed picture lends itself to any content that does not evoke a prior optical event`” this development refers to the difference in context between now and in the middle ages.    A picture can now be conceived as an image of an image no longer an image of worldview.

2 Richard Serra from “The Yale Lectures” (Charles Harrison, 1992)                                         This lecture was in response to a ruling made against Serra where he cited that a removal of a piece of work from its site-specific place was an unjustifiable suppression of the right to freedom of speech – an act of censorship.

Serra stated that the specificity of the site oriented works is depended on and inseparable from their location. (Charles Harrison, 1992) therefore, removing the piece was tantamount to destroying it as it could not be recited.    The specificity  of site –oriented works implies that they are conceived for dependent on and inseparable from their location (Charles Harrison 1992). In 1989 the piece tilted arc was removed from the federal Plaza in NYC. Serra talks of the difference between sculpture being the development of a piece by using material brought together to create a work where the difference between site specific is that the material should be interdependent to the location not separate from it this was new thinking in that time in 1990.

Steinberg explains that as Rauschenberg subverts the picture planes he also is shaking up the “art connoisseurs” position as the proponent of good taste and aesthetics, the self-appointed keepers of commercial success for artists therefore a representation of authority. This links to Serra who talks about commerce as meeting consumerist needs.  He says that an artist can stand outside the submission to authority by making work that is not sponsored by corporate, or political manipulation by making work that is not commercial. Serra suggests that site specific works that are made for a specific location and don’t lend themselves to be sold onto another location suffer from lack of commercial value.Therefore, is not submitting to the authority of commerce.

If artefacts do not accord with the consumerist needs of people if they don’t submit to exploitation and marketing strategies they can be voted ad hoc into oblivion.   In Rauschenberg’s case, he was able to move the thinking forward which made way for a wider range of artefacts to enter into the commercial art world.

Charles Harrison, P. W., 1992. Art in Theory An anthology of Changing Ideas. 2nd Edition ed. Oxford: Blackwell.

Anslem Kiefer Fur Paul Celan Aschenblume

The digital reproduction of Anslem Kiefer’s work cannot prepare anyone for the experience of seeing these paintings in the flesh.

I first saw the work of Anslem Kiefer at the French Pompidou Centre, Paris, 2016, I was awestruck by the emotion generated by the pieces, particularly, Für Paul Celan: Aschenblume, 2006.   I felt the scope and magnitude of the emotion in the work instantly .

The sheer size of the work is the first thing that I found thrilling, I could stand at a distance from the painting and view it as a real view into a bleak and devastated world as if I had seen everything happen from a window.   I moved toward the painting and felt like I was going to step inside, be immersed in the snow and ash coated soil, the cold bleakness of a post war, post holocaust world. Kiefer says “Art is difficult….,” “It’s not entertainment.”.

I was totally absorbed by the materials used,  mud, ash and  books.  The fact that material was coming away from the work falling onto the pristine gallery floor. This piece of work was  a reflection on Paul Celan’s post Holocaust poetry. When standing in front of this magnificent work, the sense of the pain the suffering screams at you. Up close to the painting I became focused on individual brush strokes the placing of the burnt books, the enormity of the task became real in terms of the actual work that went into the piece.

Task 4

Frieze London

This Year I went to the Frieze Fair Exhibition.  it was exciting to encounter contemporary art in one place.  It really helped me understand the depth and breadth of the art being produced.  Seeing these works first hand and not on the internet or other digital representation made me see that there is no way you can really reproduce a work digitally and expect a viewer to experience it in the way it was made to be seen – to examine the mark making, and appreciate the reality of scale and colour.

I  looked at  varied ways in which artists are making art.  All the exhibitions I had previously viewed were of historic art.  At institutions such as the Tate and the Royal academy.   My eyes were opened to the new possibilitie
s and artists I hadn’t previously come into contact with.

I was overwhelmed by the sheer size and number of exhibits on show, I couldn’t possibly give the pieces I engaged with as much time as I would have liked.  However, it highlighted those galleries I might visit that held the kind of art I would like to see more of. 

This image is from a project called Part (14) which is made up of a series of self-portraits with a companion. The companion has been cropped out of most of the images, just leaving a trace of the person a suggestion that she is not alone.  This picture evokes a feeling of sadness and acceptance, as if there is nowhere else for the subject to go, that the she would rather be anywhere than where she is.   Nikki S Lee is portraying the subject with a faraway stare, gazing out of the frame, as if she has no care or love for the person who has their arm tentatively around her.   Nikki S Lee can persuade you into believing something that may or may not be true (Hamilton, 2001)  There is a tense aspect to the body language as she looks uptight, she has positioned herself far away from the person in the cab.

When Nikki was interviewed by Phil Lee for a piece in Chicago Art Journal, he questioned the apparent detachment of her gaze asked if it was intentional, she replied that it wasn’t.  “I am easily detached from things around me and maybe that inclination was what was revealed.” Lee, 2008)

Nikki S Lee

Hamilton, W. (2001). SHOPPING WITH — Nikki S. Lee; Dressing the Part Is Her Art. [online] Nytimes.com. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/02/style/shopping-with-nikki-s-lee-dressing-the-part-is-her-art.html [Accessed 20 Oct. 2017].

Lee, P. (2008). Indefinite “Nikkis” in a World of Hyperreality: An Interview with Nikki S. Lee. Chicago Art J 18 2008, [online] 18(Fall 2008), p.76. Available at: https://kuvisualculture.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/2f7.pdf [Accessed 20 Oct. 2017].