Have they aroused the sort of universal interest generated by Marina’s new performance piece, enacted daily by the artist since the show opened on March 14. All these are conceptually as well as aesthetically exciting, but in no respect The live performers share the MoMA exhibition space with other more conventional works of art - photographs, videos and various props. And as MoMA and other museums seek to go beyond exhibiting and actually acquire such performances, they willĪlso have to deal with a number of imponderable issues that do not normally arise with works of art like paintings and sculptures. Is underwritten by considerations of privacy that go with works consisting of living, breathing bodies. (A few steps away, there is an alternate way into the next room in the original performance, visitors to the Galleria Comunaleĭ’Arte Moderna in Bologna were required to pass through Marina and Ulay to enter.) At the MoMA show, visitors must be aware that in this case “ don’t touch the art” The show may pass through to the next room by working their way through this living gate. One of those pieces, “Imponderabilia” - originally performed in 1977 by Marina and her former partner, Ulay - consists of two nude performers facing one another in a doorway. Museum of Modern Art, now in its final week. She did both at the Guggenheim Museum in November 2005, in a one week show called “ Seven Easy Pieces.”īut knowing that she will not always be around, she has also trained other artists to re-perform some of her work.įive of these re-performances are included in “ The Artist Is Present,” the retrospective of Marina’s work currently on view at the ![]() The work of other artists, when they have granted her permission, and of course has re-performed her own. ![]() In recent years, she has not adhered to the purist approach she has re-performed Marina Abramovic is one of the early performance artists whose works have the deep originality that justifies their inclusion in great museums. With performance art, museums face a number of imponderable issues that do not arise with works like paintings and sculptures. No one else, they argue, can do this, for reasons both moral and metaphysical. In the purist’s conception of performance art, there can be no such distinction the artist and the performer are one, and must In theater, the distinction between character and actor is widely accepted. ![]() For them, a performance is a one-time event, unlike a play, which is made to be re-performed One method would be to allow the pieces to be re-performed, which purists naturally disallow. Before it can be translated and presented in a museum, a number of problems, both practical and philosophical, must be worked out. Pictures of nude bodies doing dangerous things raise no such obstacles in a museum space,īut performance art itself is real in all dimensions. Spaces to the more institutional environment of the museum.įor one thing, the medium of the artist is his or her own body, sometimes nude or engaged in highly dangerous circumstances. Performance art, as currently practiced, emerged as an avant garde movement in the 1960s and ’70s, and some of its features made it difficult to visualize how it might make the transition from galleries and public
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |