Nov. 22, 2010
I just wanted to say thank you for writing that letter on the topic of Yves Klein's most significant achievements. I think that you were right about Karmel's opinion of the monochromatic canvases--it needed to be challenged, and your response was wonderfully put. It was amusing to see, in his reply, that Mr. Karmel did not understand the meaning of your phrases on the "conceptual objections to ownership." I am researching for a paper currently on the topic of performance art and copyright/notions of ownership, and I wholeheartedly empathize with Klein's experimentation with the purpose of art itself, and with your letter. Thanks again!
New Orleans, LA
Nov. 23, 2010
Dear Ms. Ritz,
Many thanks for your kind words. It is good to know someone is reading a "Letters" column, given that we seem to have our focus mostly on digital text nowadays. Over the years I've written a handful of letters to "AiA" and a few have made print. For instance, I took issue with Eleanor Heartney's misinterpretation of Richard Prince, and also posted my letter as this essay on my blog: Prince of Thieves.
Later, after it was published, along with Ms. Heartney's response, I replied to her reply, again on my blog: Ms. Heartney's Riposte.
My hope, then as now, is always that discourse on a topic of disagreement might be further engaged other than The Publishing World's rote pattern: reader disagrees with points of view or "judgments of taste," writes letter, author retorts, end of story.
To date, no "AiA" writer has deigned to appear on my blog, though they undoubtedly have been alerted, given the ubiquity of ‘Net-heads. Still, it's saying something that they bother to reply to letters at all; they probably are not paid for it so their response may issue from a respect for opposing views. Or maybe it’s just self-preservation. Either way, the putative "conversation" is shut down in finality in the standard way, with the "author" having the last word.
I do think Mr. Karmel understood the gist of my argument but he decided not to go down that path; to belittle my position with regard to "ownership" and conceptual practice might have exposed Karmel's lack of expertise on the subject. And that might lead to future conversations at NYC openings, with his journalist peers and/or artists button-holing him to lecture on the finer points of ownership vis-à-vis conceptual practice.
In any case, I trust you read the rather timely essay about Yves Klein by a student of mine that I chose to post as a remarkably apropos "stand-in" for my position: It's Immaterial, Mr. Karmel
It was a pleasure to receive your email today. Please keep in touch regarding your future research on performance art and copyright/ownership; perhaps we might discuss a preview posting of it on Theory Now.
November 18, 2010
On November 11, a panel discussion was held during the opening of "A Postmodern Meditation on the Five Proofs of God" with Mark Cameron Boyd and Catholic University of America PhD Candidate in Religion and Culture, Patrick Beldio. The panel was moderated by exhibition curator, Dr. Lisa Lipinksi, and an audiofile of the discussion can be found HERE; digital recording/formatting courtesy of Scott Boyd.
Image: "Quinque viae: Proof 4" after one week; © Copyright 2010 by Mark Cameron Boyd.
November 14, 2010
In his ‘Summa Theologica,’ Aquinas introduced the ‘quinque viae,’ or ‘Five Ways,’ that he felt offered rational proof of the existence of God. Aquinas’s medieval theories on God’s existence extended the Aristotelian tradition of ‘rational philosophical truths’ and issue forth from Aquinas’s application of reason, thus they do not rely on ‘faith’ alone to prove there is a God.
Since 2003, Mark Cameron Boyd has been creating paintings with words, which were initially based on his own writings. Since then he has appropriated texts from a variety of sources, includ-ing Derrida, Nana Last, Rosalind Krauss, and most recently, Thomas Aquinas. On a variety of surfaces, usually wood or wood painted to resemble a black-board, or even glass, he writes sentences across horizontal pieces of tape laid on the surface. He then peels the tape away, leaving half of the words, and sentences floating in a field. These ‘text bisection’ paintings are original and fascinating works of art. Their surfaces are covered with lines of writing comprised of pieces of letters, which, at first glance, are indecipherable.
As viewers we are compelled to complete the words and sentences of the text-bisection works, to make meaning out of the ghostly textual images. Actually, viewing is a two-step process, of first determining what the words are, or could be, some are too fragmentary, and second, putting those words into sentences, and then making meaningful statements. One can always bypass reading or opt out of the conceptual demands and enjoy the beauty of the fragmented words.
His text bisections subvert the process and idea of language as signification. Although viewers are invited to participate in completing the words, there is always room for error and creativity. In fact, the paintings depend upon the creative input of the audience. The meanings of his state-ments are suspended and incomplete, left open to play and to change. The irony of some of his titles, which derive from the text written on the surface, also plays a role in this process.
Boyd’s art making process is informed by his reading and teaching of theoretical texts. The idea of obscuring half of the written text is derived from Jacques Derrida’s idea of ‘sous rature,’ placing words under erasure, to signify that meaning is always deferred and words carry the traces of other meanings. His interest in semiotics, the interrelation of word and image, and the process of making meaning in art and language, falls within the tradition of conceptual art and the ‘linguistic turn’ in American art criticism and art history of the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s. However, what began as a simple transcription of random thoughts ex-perienced during art-making has evolved into actions upon the text, in particular the text bisec-tion, which undermine the conventional meanings of the words at same time that his writings have become more complex and theoretical meditations on the nature of art, subjectivity, and the process of signification.”
Gallery statement by Dr. Lisa Lipinski, exhibition curator, Associate Faculty at Corcoran College of Art + Design, and Adjunct Assistant Professor at The Catholic University of America. © Copyright 2010.
Image: Visitors decipher “Quinque viae: Proof 3” on Nov. 11; exhibition runs thru Dec. 17, 2010.
Photograph by Scott Boyd; © Copyright 2010.