Craft in the Expanded Field 138 â 155 Erik Scollon

More documents

Recommendations

Info

the created sociability of the visitors, onecould argue that the event merely allowedthe gallerists, artists, and curators of theart world to pursue the conversations theywould otherwise have had at any art opening.The radicality of Tiravanija’s work hasmore to do with the form that it takes, notthe services it provides. Arguably, it takessomething that was once functional andturns it into not-function. Moreover, theviewer, or audience, is not encouraged toread any part of the food or the conversationas representational, which thereforemakes it not-mimetic.Compare this to Jens Haaning’s SuperDiscount (1998), exhibited at FRI-ART inFribourg, Switzerland. In this work,a shop was established in the exhibitionspace, which offered salami …biscuits, canned food, pasta, cheese,… cakes, and sweets. The goods werepurchased in France [and] importedto Switzerland, [where they wouldbe sold as art objects. This allowedHaaning to take advantage of the differingtax rates levied on the sale offood and the sale of art.]. This made itpossible for the visitors of the exhibitionto shop 35 percent cheaper thanin Swiss supermarkets. 25In terms of use value, this is a morestable and quantifiable functional serviceto the visitors. But this work plays with theidea that we must view those things beingsold as art objects, or asks us to read themas representational of something otherthan themselves. Otherwise it would be illegalfor them to be sold at that price. SuperDiscount plays with the mimetic quality ofthe work. Like craft, Super Discount andworks like it in the realm of relational form,turn on the combination of function andmimetic representation.The last comparison I want to makeis between an earlier work, often identifiedas Social Sculpture, and a newer workbetter identified as Social Practice. I’ll useYoko Ono’s Cut Piece (1964) and MichaelSwaine’s recent project, Sewing for thePeople. Both employ clothing as a materialin order to problematize and “sculpt”a social relationship. Their methods andcommentary clearly differ, but I would liketo highlight their structure through the useof this field as an analytic device.In Cut Piece, Ono invited her audienceto come onstage and cut away her clothingwith scissors. In a sense, she sculpted theaudience and their reactions, by implicatingthe social responsibility of the viewer/spectator in relation to the work of art.What I want to emphasize is the way thework is interpreted. First, we understandit as representational, or mimetic. The actof cutting her clothing makes the audienceaware of their relationship to the artworkand the artist, but we also assign meaningto the act, or read it representationally.Second, we can’t see this as functional either.This is not employed as a logical wayto get one’s clothing off. This work dependson mimesis and the not-functional in orderto generate meaning. In the absence of eithernotion, these same actions could betransformed from a social commentary,into an act that could possibly be illegalor threatening. In dual distinction of mimeticand not-functional, it behaves likea form of “sculpture,” which supports thefact that this kind of work has often beencalled Social Sculpture.Compare Cut Piece with MichaelSwaine’s piece Sewing for the People.Since 2005, on select afternoons, he haspushed a foot-powered sewing machine onwheels and set up shop in Cohen Alley inSan Francisco. While there, he mends, freeof charge, any article of clothing that anyonemay bring to him. Passersby interact, anddiscussion invariably ensues. Although thework is grounded in the form of mending, thephysical process of repair acts as the supportfor the actual form, which is the socialinteraction. What I would like to emphasizeis that this work depends upon being bothfunctional and real. If the mending were notfunctional, then the sociability producedwould be radically different. We are not encouragedto read either the mending or theresulting conversation as representational.This combination of functional and not-mimeticputs work of this type into the samespace as “pottery” in our previous field.This expanded field of social practice,which shares the same defining terms asthe expanded field of craft, highlights howartists practicing in each can be seen toshare a sensibility, and work within thesame aesthetic space. There are instanceswhere the work of craft makers could makesense in either field, depending on whetherone takes as a point of departure the objector the social action. Ehren Tool’s work is anexample that easily bridges the two.In closing, I’d like to once again callupon Krauss to support my meaning bysaying that this expansionoccurs at a specific moment in therecent history of art. It seems to meto be extremely important to map[those] structures, and that is whatI have begun to do here. But clearly,since this is a matter of history, it isalso important to explore a deeper setof questions which pertain to somethingmore than mapping and involveinstead the problem of explanation. 26I can sense a shift in the way that makerscreate and relate to their objects, whichis at this moment finding wider supportfrom audiences and critics. Certain kindsof object-making have suffered from thequestion “Is this art?” Once we move beyondthat, by positioning a work within theexpanded field, we can address more profoundquestions, such as: What do peopleexpect from their aesthetic experiences?What does the kind of work we value tell usabout our society and our culture? And aswe begin to note the relational and socialnature of crafted objects, we can consider:What are the implications of aestheticizingthe social or trying to socialize in thespace of aesthetics? Answering this set ofquestions will help us better understandhow and why these ideas can apply to anengaging art practice.152 Sightlines ⁄ Erik Scollon 153
Notes1 Rosalind Krauss, “Sculpture in the Expanded Field,” October, vol. 8. (Spring,1979): 30.2 Krauss, 30.3 Krauss, 30.4 Krauss, 33.5 Krauss, 41.6 Krauss, 36.7 Krauss, 36.8 Debbie Hagen discusses the perceived identity crisis of craft in an article in ArtBusiness News, 2005. “Identity crisis? Naming craft museums proves difficult;some embrace the word ‘crafts,’ while others have dropped it from their names,”(accessed March 7, 2008); see also Carol Kino, “The Art Form That Dares NotSpeak Its Name,” New York Times, March 30, 2005. G8.9 Krauss, 33.10 http://www.bergpublishers.com/JournalsHomepage/TheJournalofModernCraft/tabid/3254/Default.aspx (accessed March 8, 2008).11 The New Oxford American Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 2001, s.v. “craft.”12 Larry Shiner, “The Fate of Craft,” in NeoCraft: Modernity and the Crafts, ed. SandraAlfoldy, NSCAD Press (2007): 34.13 “The new craft movement encourages people to make things themselves ratherthan buy what thousands of others already own.” Carla Sinclair, “The Craftingof Craft: Welcome to the new magazine for the new craft movement,” Craft:Transforming Traditional Crafts, vol. 1 (October 2006): 7.14 The New Oxford American Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 2001, s.v. “craft.”15 “Craft: refers to the products of artistic production or creation,” Dennis Stevens,“Getting Straight to the Point,” Redefining Craft, http://redefiningcraft.dennisstevens.net/?cat=8&submit=GO(accessed March 12, 2008).16 Krauss, “John Mason and Post-Modernist Sculpture: New Experiences, NewWorlds,” Art in America, vol. 67, no. 3, (May-June, 1978): 120.17 Krauss, “John Mason … ,” 120.18 Garth Clark, “Subversive Majesty: Peter Voulkos’s ‘Rocking Pot’” American Art, vol.6, no. 4. (Autumn, 1992): 110.19 Krauss, “Sculpture … ,” 41.20 Rose Slivka, The Art of Peter Voulkos, with Karen Tsujimoto. New York : KodanshaInternational, in collaboration with the Oakland Museum (1995): 14. Clark, 110.21 Krauss, “Sculpture … ,” 38.22 Glenn Adamson, Thinking Through Craft, Oxford; New York: Berg, (2007), 143.23 Krauss, “John Mason … ,” 120.24 Krauss, “Sculpture … ,” 42.25 http://www.nicolaiwallner.com/artists/jens/superdiscount.html (accessedJanuary 15, 2008).26 Krauss, “Sculpture … ,” 42–43.154 Sightlines ⁄ Erik Scollon 155
Page 1 and 2: Erik ScollonCraft in theExpanded Fi
Page 3: had been “kneaded, stretched, and
Page 6 and 7: Figure 2. Robert Arneson ⁄ Funk J

Craft in the Expanded Field 138 â 155 Erik Scollon

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?

Craft in the Expanded Field 138 â 155 Erik Scollon