Jeannene Przyblyski, want to look at the questions of
novelty and newness and their relationship to contemporary art practice very
selectively, from two different perspectives.
From that of China and that of Cuba. And, even more
selectively, looking at a very narrow range of work. So, I'm not going to
encompass the whole of contemporary practice in either China or Cuba.
What is interesting to me is to look very carefully,
within a broader discourse about contemporary art, within a broader sense that
contemporary art has become a global practice that there is no longer one, that
it's no longer possible to argue for one capitol city of contemporary art in
the way that it could be argued, at one point, that Paris was the capitol city
of Modernism, and then that capitol city shifted to New York.
That's certainly one of the dominant narratives of
Modern art. But, instead, that contemporary art in a global economy is a
distributed practice with many networked nodes that are linked, in fact, by the
practice of large biennial and other sorts of regular international exhibitions
that bring the work of artists from many different countries together. And that
not only have artists become international, but also many, many nations have recognized
engagement with contemporary art as a part of a larger practice of advertising
and claiming a cultural position in contemporary times.
So, both Havana, in Cuba, and Shanghai, in China,
sponsor major biennials. And that's an effort, quite consciously, on the part
of governments, to claim culture as a part of their contemporary national standing
in a global economy.
The Huang Yong Ping's, The History of Chinese Painting
and the History of Modern Western Art Washed in the Washing Machine for, 2
Minutes. And we looked at this work very briefly, and in one way, it could be taken
as a kind of parable on what it is like to simply mash up two distinctive and
distinguished art histories into one sort of undifferentiated mass.
So, the artist has placed a survey book of Chinese art
and a survey book of Western art into a washing machine for two minutes, and
displays the results heaped on top of a glass plate that is supported by a tea crate.
So, almost as if the ensuing sculptural, pulpy mass is
ready to be packed up and shipped around in this global art economy, at the
same time that the tendency of paper history is to be both authoritative and also
to disintegrate, and the tendency of language to be impenetrable, sometimes, across
cultural differences, I think is also dramatized by this piece.
So, I think that the artist's work is meant to a
little bit ironic, and to mobilize its criticality through a kind of irony
about the kind of, both the legibility and the illegibility of language, the
authority and the lack of authority and insufficiency of histories, and both
the kind of potentials and also the pitfalls of understanding art in a global
context.
So, it's a pretty economical piece that's doing a lot
of critical work at the same time.
Certainly, for artists of Huang Yong Ping's
generation, the transformation from a closed country, to increasing contact
with the West was very much a part of the formation of their identity as
artists.
We're looking, now, at a painting by a contemporary
Chinese oil painter, Ma Gang, of a meeting between Deng Xiaoping and Nixon. The
painting dates from 2009. We see a Chinese oil painter, trained in the academic
tradition, taking on the techniques of major historical portraiture to document
the contact between China and the United States. And to do it in a Western format
so, a format that isn't really mixing languages, but is instead displaying a
great investment in and a great fluency in the techniques of Western oil
painting. And choosing them, in this case, to sort of do the work of history
painting from a Chinese perspective.
What is it like to witness some of the great
encounters of the history of the 20th century and to memorialize them in a way that
great encounters throughout the history of the Modern and contemporary periods
have been memorialized.
So Ma Gang might be said to be on the side of
representing international and cross-cultural encounter in a seamless way, in a
formal, diplomatic mode. It is, indeed, in that way, work that is very much done
at the service of the state, and in honor of and as a part of official culture,
much in the same way as David would have painted the coronation of Emperor
Napoleon, for example.
And interesting, as well, in that regard. But let's
move from that to another take on cross-cultural encounter. This is one of Ai
Weiwei's notorious urns painted with the Coca-Cola logo, this one from 2010.
And they're works in which he takes examples of Chinese antiquities of these
large pottery urns and he emblazens them with the immediately recognizable as
both American and pervasive logo of Coca-Cola, and Coca-Cola, I think, has a
particular fascination for international artists as an emblem of the United
States, precisely because so much of the marketing of Coca-Cola throughout the
'70s and '80s and '90s, for those of you who can remember it, was about it
being a mechanism that united the world.
And Ai Weiwei takes that ideology and myth of
unification through the mass consumption of commodities straight on, as a very
pointed component of the process of the opening up of the boarders between
China and the West.
It was not only a function of diplomatic missions and
major occurrences of state, but equally significant, perhaps, was the moment
when McDonald's, for example, first appeared outside of the Tiananmen Gates of Beijing,
and that sort of sense that a change was really in the air, because Western
commodities were to be available and the most stereotypical of Western
commodities were to be available in the East.
So, what is it like to take an example of the great
and long cultural history of China and deface it, in fact, with an American,
imported trademark. It is meant to be a provocative gesture, much in the same
way that Duchamp's marking of the Mona Lisa, with a mustache and goatee, was a provocative
gesture. And, in fact, I think Ai Weiwei is very much an artist in the Duchampian
mode. And there's a lot that's been written about these works, not only in terms
of Ai Weiwei's defacement of Chinese antiquities, but also in terms of his
willful destruction of some of these antiquities as a part of his art practice,
as well. Let's place Ai Weiwei's Duchampian gesture against the work of another
artist, Pan Gongkai, who is actually the president of the China Academy of Fine
Arts in Beijing.
And this is important to think about, not only because
Pan Gongkai was born during a time when China was effectively cut off from much
of the West and turning inwards on itself, and its own government, and its own building
of a new society, but because he came of age during the Cultural Revolution, which
was a part of the rule of Mao in which the broad learning of intellectual history,
various cultural traditions, being an artist and an intellectual in general was
fiercely proscribed by the state. And in which a very repressive culture of
social sort of retraining was imposed, especially on those people who were
children of intellectuals and academics who came from academic and intellectual
backgrounds.
In fact, Pan was not able to finish his schooling
because he was sent out in the countryside to work in agriculture instead. And much
of his return to culture was bound up in access to the West, and in puzzling
out the differences, for himself, and the points of contact between Chinese aesthetics
and Chinese philosophy of art, and Modern aesthetics and Modern philosophies of
art in the Western mode.
So, in this very large-scale installation work, we see
him thinking through those things. The work is a very, very large-scale
installation piece that begins with a mural covered with gestural brush strokes
in the mode of Chinese brush painting. And onto that mural is projected a
stream of melting English language that processes through the philosophy of
Modern art.
So, it has this marvelous time-based experience, in
this installation, of watching English language dissolve almost into snow across
the surface of a painting that evokes Chinese tradition, and an almost elegiac
and sort of contemplative sense of both the sufficiencies and insufficiencies
of that cultural contact, and the process of putting a new
contemporary-artistic language back together, in the face of both.
We are looking at a work by another artist who is
actually at the Central Academy of Fine Arts in Beijing, Xu Bing who also spent
a great deal of time in the United States and, in fact, was recognized with a MacArthur
fellowship for his work. This is one of his most important major works, Book
from the Sky, a work that he did between 1987 and 1991.
Again, it's a large-scale, installation-based work, a
work that takes language head on in the production of an installation space. In
this case, Xu Bing has made up his own language of invented characters, and
uses them to fill books and scrolls and panels that fill the installation space,
and cause the viewer to contemplate the sort of muteness that results, really,
from being in the presence of so much language and so much illegibility, at one
time.
Xu Bing certainly felt this, this sort of tension and
frustration of the relationship between the modes of expression he had available
to him, his travels between the East and West, the difficulties of learning the
new language of English to operate in American society for the time that he was
here, the process of going back to China and finding the radical transformations
of Chinese society and Chinese cities that were a part of its globalization in
the late 20th and early 21st centuries.
So that the relationship between traditional culture,
the culture of Mao and the Cultural Revolution, and the culture of globalized
China, were experienced in a kind of, again, kind of chaotic and jumbled way.
And that's an exact quote from Xu Bing.
He talks about "our lives and cultural background"
as a "jumbled knot of socialism, the Cultural Revolution, the Reform
Period, Westernization" and modernism. "All of these complexities are
reflected quite naturally in my work." So that the work of art becomes the
work of figuring out one's place and one's possible modes of expression in a
radically transformed culture and society.
The international politics of Cuba and the United
States present a different set of challenges for contemporary artists, because
this sort of porousness of the relationship between the United States and Cuba was
regulated not only on the American side, with the U.S. embargo, but also on the
Cuban side, as well, with a great deal of concern that, in order for the revolution
to take hold, Cubans needed to stay close to home, to concentrate on what was going
on in their own country. And hence, travel is greatly restricted, on the part
of the Cuban government, as well, and has only recently, in fact, begun to be those
restrictions have only recently begun to be relaxed.
So, one finds contemporary artists understanding, in a
way, that their marketplace is international and global, and yet their own
situation may be either restricted, or provisionally allowed, or nomadic, or
exiled, certainly a complex relationship to the country of their birth.
So, here we see this work, again, José Angel Toirac's,
Marlboro, from his series, Tiempos Nuevos, New Times, from 1996. This sort of
ironic trying on of Fidel as the Marlboro Man.
And in both cases-- in both the case of China and of
Cuba, in terms of contemporary practice one does see, in a kind of pop-ish
mode, a kind of processing of the iconic identities and iconic brands, if you
will. For those two countries, those brands seem are oftentimes organized around
the dominant political figures. So, a kind of processing and reprocessing of
images of Mao is very much a part of one sort of trajectory of contemporary
Chinese art, and a processing of reprocessing of images of Fidel Castro is very
much a trajectory of one aspect of Cuban contemporary art, as well.
And this, again, places us in that kind of pop-ish
Duchampian realm of questioning the identity of brands and the contact between
nations as a matter of appropriation and re-positioning imagining Fidel Castro
as the Marlboro man, but the horse being the horse of the conquistador and not
the horse of the American cowboy.
That's not such a different strategy, in some ways,
than we saw with Ai Weiwei. And so I want to complicate that version of
contemporaneity with the work of another Cuban-born artist who lives in the
United States, Tony Labat, who moved from Miami to San Francisco and has
taught, for many years, at the San Francisco Art Institute. And is actually a
dear colleague and friend.
And so, I know quite a lot about Tony's background and,
you know, I'm going to call him Tony rather than Labat.
He was born in Cuba. And when he was in his early
teens, he and his mother left his father and moved to the United States, as
part of the great sort of exiling and flight of Cuban nationals to the United
States, in the early 1960s. And much of his work has been, then, about the sort
of interrogation of the political iconography of the U.S. and Cuba about the
sensations of displacement across language and across cultures.
So, we're looking at this work from his, Frankenstein
Series, of Karl Marx, from 2007, in which he has taken on these silkscreen images
of Marx, as a preeminent figure of communist political ideology intervened in
those silk screened images, with both hands masking the figures, and also these
kind of cross-cutting monochromatic bars, which parse Marx into quadrants and suggest
that he could almost be seen as a kind of composite figure, an exquisite
corpse, if you will, in the surrealist mode, and under willful construction.
That is, taken apart and put back together, if you will,
according to political whim, until it becomes a version of itself very far from
its original. In a very different way, that perhaps has its relationship to
Duchamp and the notions of novelty, reproduction and appropriation that Duchamp
was so interested in, but also takes its distance, as well, is Tony's recent
work for the Havana Biennial in 2012. It's called, Irregular Encounter:
Leveling the Field, and it was an installation-based, participatory, social,
interactive work in which Tony had a pool table, a billiards table, made in the
shape of the island of Cuba, so, in the shape of the Cuban nation, and invited
people to play pick-up games of pool in a kind of a combination viewing stand, somewhat
café setting where you could you could get a beer and buy some cigarettes and
play pool, or watch people play pool, as the installation.
It's a very interesting work on a number of levels. As
I said, it kind of references Duchamp, Duchamp famously played chess as a form
of art making, or as an alternative to formalized art practice, and here we
have the game of billiards substituted.
We have the sort of illogic of playing a mathematical
game, which is all about calculating angles, on an irregular playing field, a field
that maps the borders of Cuba, and also talks about all the various sort of sub
rosa and underground economical ways that Cubans have organized their everyday
life so as to work with, and work around the prescriptions of both the U.S. embargo
and the culture of regulation and rationing that has been so much a part of Cuban
economic life.
So, how to get people to play with the dilemmas of
their own relationship to nation, state, politics, migration, immigration,
displacement, and nomadism, that's all bound up in this particular irregular
encounter.
No comments:
Post a Comment