The Relationship between Text and Performance - Research Paper Example

When Herbert Marcuse first published One-Dimensional Man in 1964, he argued that the repressiveness of both modern capitalist society and the major alternative of the time, Marxist-socialism, represented an exhaustive and self-replicating machinery that – by integrating men fully into a system of production and consumption through such forces as media, advertising, and even conventional modes of thought – made man one dimensional, ultimately incapable of criticism. By providing access, that is, to every form of extremism, including the prostitute, the madman, the artist, and the critic, modern society had stripped man of his ability to approach the society from without, and therefore to critique. Gavin Butt, writing specifically about art and literature criticism more than a half a century later, in 2005, claimed that the position of the critic had not substantially changed. He argued that criticism had suffered a crisis following post-structuralism in which the “space for criticality” had “withered” (p 1). Specifically, he claimed that theorists following Derrida, through declaring a deconstructive stance in regard to text in which the critic lives inside the text rather than outside of it, thereby becoming unmoored from any objective or “anterior” position from which to judge a text’s intent, have lost claim to any constructive ground by which to judge such texts (p 3). Taking, as one must in the postmodern world, the notion of text to its logical conclusion, one comes to the same argument that Marcuse presented. The artist cannot find room to critique society because he lives within the text that society represents. But is this necessarily so? If, that is, Marcuse found it possible to write his book, or Butt found it worthwhile to discuss the role of the critic, there must be some possibility of critical distance still available to the artist. Or else why so much spilled ink? The answer, it is believed here, is found in the continuing argument provided by Butts – and indeed hinted at in the work of both Marcuse and Derrida, as well as others. Through what Butt calls the “performative” act of criticism, the artist as well as the critic, is able to form an act of criticism of “text.” Butt calls for a criticism “after criticism” which rests on the “event-ness” or immanence of an act as the significant factor, rather than any supposed transcendent or theoretical quality concerning the notion of criticism. In other words, the artist, by acting on a text, defined however it may be defined, is able to approach that text in a way that is instructive or altering or controlled or otherwise understood. In this brief paper, the role of the artist in defining the interaction between text and performance will be considered. Using the framework that Butts suggests, as presaged by other theorists working in the same vein, and as applied through the work of select contemporary artists, the paper will consider how text, both literally and figuratively configured, relates to performance, and how the artist may make use of this relationship as a critical function. Brief definition of the notion of “text” will be offered, followed by a critical examination of how the relevant working artists have used actual and figurative text in their art to significant effect. Following this exposition, conclusions will be offered regarding the use of performance and text within my own approach to art as a means of achieving critical distance from the society in which I live and communicative proximity to my viewers, so that my art may be both meaningful and substantive. Text Defined In their film about the French philosopher who defined the deconstruction movement, Jacques Derrida, Kirby Dick and Amy Ziering weigh his influence and theoretical suppositions against the man himself. This is a fitting tribute in many ways, since Derrida believed that the notion of a “text” includes a structurally infinite set of possibilities, a network of associations that spring from any given object or identity. Derrida, claimed, according to the film and his writings, that texts are essentially portals through which one passes to question the world. One must engage the world in a never-ending process of “deconstructing” meanings by continually questioning the objects or identities one finds. Context becomes all important, as one places a given event, object, identity, or person among other meanings and weighs it. Derrida does not argue, as some have supposed, that a text is a merely futile play at language, as David Schalkwyk points out. Rather there is an embedded historicity to any communication that requires one to deconstruct it and reconstruct within one’s own understandings. This applies whether one is viewing a political event, listening to a pop song, reading a short story, or viewing a film. The “text” in this definition is the event occurrence itself. In terms of the artist, a text can be a work of art, a performance, a commentary, or the like. The act of creating a communication stands as the definitive event. Roland Barthes argued that a text is differentiated from the work which creates it by the characteristic of having moved through the categories of the action in the work and come out the other side. It is a moment or, as Barthes calls it a “proposition” that can be viewed as having intersected with the act of the work itself. Further, he likens a text to music played by an amateur and listened to by a bystander. There is a reciprocal relationship between the note being played and being heard. A text therefore is continually reconstituted in the “work” that is undertaken through viewing it, reading it, listening to it, and the like. Butt points out that, because one must view a text from within, creating meanings out of one’s own understanding, a text is bound to be a one-time occurrence both in its creation and in its interpretation. The viewer who approaches a text forms a line of communication that is then presented with whatever intent the artist holds. Once it is viewed by a bystander, the intended meaning becomes irrelevant, and the bystander comes to his own conclusions about meaning through application of his or her own understandings about the text. In this view, then, a text – whether it be a painting, performance, visual image or actual verbal/symbolic signification through words or print – becomes a communicative event that is created when the artist acts, and it is reinterpreted again as a text when the viewer views. The Use of “Text” in Art Of course, there is also the consideration of an actual verbal/symbolic signification through words or print that constitutes “text.” In this sense, text is considered as writing or symbolic representations that are included in a work of art. Because of the performative nature that interpretation itself involves, the act of including text in a work of art involves the viewer in a particular way. Amelia Jones and Andrew Stephenson argue that the condition of negotiation between artist and spectator when text is present in art creates a contingency based on social and personal investments that each brings to their role: By emphasizing the fixity and the shifting, invested nature of any interpretative engagement, we wish to assert that interpretation itself if worked out as a performance between artists (as creators, performers, and spectators of their work) and spectators (whether ‘professional’ or non-specialist). (p 2) The use of text here relies on a less formal conceptualization, therefore, but is still couched in the theoretical foundations discussed above. Language and symbolic representations of text, when found in artwork present a special challenge and opportunity for interpretation that engages both the emotional and the logical functions of spectators, and emphasizes the connection between artist and viewer. It is similar in nature to performance art which emphasizes the use of body and physical presence in artwork, which Jones and Stephenson argue has “exploded beyond the boundaries” set by traditional or conventional art history and criticism in an “attempt to codify a ‘proper’ type of art according to its supposed aesthetic and political value” (p 3). The act of interpreting a visual presentation which includes both text and imagery, or text presented in a visual manner that is directed in some fashion toward meaning prompts the engaged viewer to calculate mentally a perceived intimacy with the artist through a shared understanding of language. However, as Barthes point out, language itself is a form of class distinction that is characterized by propositions shared through ideology. While he argues that it is the most “innocent” form of such ideology, it is nevertheless given to the same kinds of cultural concerns that economics, politics, and other forms of social control are subject to. Therefore, the use of written language in a work of art is subject to class biases. Once words, for examples, are utilized they become problematic and must be dealt with through the performative act. Barthes argues that the use of language in art constitutes a critique but that “the science of the signifier can only shift its place and stop (provisionally) further on – no longer at the (analytic) dissociation of the sign but at its very hesitation” (pp 166-167). In other words, the use of language is intended to deconstruct a cultural event or moment, but the interpretative act requires the deconstruction of the signifier itself. Barthes writes that “In an initial moment, the aim was the destruction of the (ideological) signified: in a second, it is that of the destruction of the sign” (167). Because language both constitutes and situates a class bias, the use of language as text within a work requires that the viewer engage both as an interpreter and as a class-based other. For the artist, the use of language as text in artwork provides an opportunity to reconstitute a speech act. Such acts are close in nature to the body-based performance art that Jones and Stephenson discuss and the music of Barthes. They strive for immediacy, an intimacy that pure visual imagery may not necessarily engage alone. Barthes claims that in performing such speech acts, as in performing music, one must maintain “a certain speed of delivery” in order to continually engage. The key consideration here is that the use of text in artwork must be relevant and accessible in a way that is understood or intuited readily through the communication – or alternately, one supposes allows for a disruption that is felt to be appropriate. The articulation of ideas in such a manner binds the visual to the text to form a more complex form of communication. The use of text in performance art is a final consideration that is relevant here. The use of language to provoke, incite, inspire, illuminate, or otherwise engage, when combined with bodily presences in performance pieces provide an example of a text which adds to the performative act in a way that complicates and enlarges the interpretive relationship between artist and viewer. Jones and Stephenson argue that “by raising fundamental doubts about previous, prescriptive notions of the artwork as reducible to an essential and pure interrelationship of forms and medium” such acts “undermine any claims for universality or the fixed truth value of particular interpretations” (pp 3-4). The uses of text in performance art, that is, are clearly different from the act of speaking communication in everyday exchanges, and therefore require different types of engagement between artist and spectator. Text opens worlds of communication that would otherwise remain unopened, even after accounting for the difficulties and complexities of the performative and interpretive nature of such communications. Selected Artists The number of artists who incorporate text into their artwork is significant. There are particularly a number of women artists who do so that I find especially inspiring. In this section, I will discuss the qualities of some of these artists and the effects they achieve with the inclusion of written text in artworks. Louise Lawler is an artist/photographer who uses text to good effect in the spirit of her artistic voice, which has been characterized by Jerry Salzer as “a saboteur in the house of art and a comedienne in the house of art theory.” She presents text occasionally in the form of magazine or advertising art, or to emphasize the playfulness of her themes. She approaches her installations in the same fashion, sometimes placing artworks with multimillion dollar prices next to refrigerators, for example. Her use of text in her art is intended, like the rest of her art, to make wry commentary on the culture of consumerism and materialism. For example, in an installation in the Los Angeles County Museum of Art’s Broad Contemporary Art Museum, she placed an image of a large sculpted elephant under a white sheet that was had the words “Iraqui Oil” written on it. By forcing the viewer to think about the elephant in the room, she commented on the use of art to both protest war and to support the economic machine which supports and encourages war. Sherrie Levine began as a collage artist and appropriative artist, cutting out found images and gluing them onto mat board. In an interview in Arts magazine from 1985, she described how this approach colored her view of art: Having the feeling of somehow being outside of the mainstream of the art world had a lot to do with my feelings about art. Seeing everything through magazines and books- I got a lot of my sense of what art looked like in terms of surface and finish. Her work has included the use of text based largely on her experiences with text in print form. The fact that early in her career, when she was appropriating almost exclusively, she only copied male artists and used text as copy in her work suggests her critique of the paternalism of both society and the established art world. Jenny Holzer is an artist that, in the words of Benjamin Buchloch “has been wrenching language off the page and into the world since the ’70s” She is perhaps best known for work that consists of text-based presentations that have been called “truisms,” one liners that state trite, clichéd, profound, or mundane sayings such as “Money creates tastes.” For this approach her work has been called “cerebral” by Buchloch and others. However, she has described her own work in a vein that belies its performative aspects, arguing that “I think that screaming can come straight from the body. The person screaming might have been hit courtesy of an ideology” (p 1). In making this statement, and through even those of her works that suppress language, Holzer is primarily concerned as an artist with the communicative functions of art. Expression for her is a form of representing objects as well as making comments on their political and economic contents. She argues, in an interview with Buchloch, “I routinely invite the reader to sort through the offerings and complete the thoughts, and to echo, amplify, or shrink from the feelings the work elicits. I tie the language to the visuals as an assist, and as a take-away gift” (p. 2). Barbara Kruger is a conceptual artist who claims, in an interview with Peiffer, “I work with pictures and words because they have the ability to determine who we are and who we aren’t.” Beginning, as several of these women artists did, as a graphic designer, she utilizes text in art as an idiom designed to comment on such cultural forces as commercialism and advertising. She utilizes spatial relationships between letters in arrangements that emphasize both their communicative function and their symbology as arts objects. Fiona Banner is an artist who the BBC has claimed works to show “the possibilities of language – and its limitations” Her pieces are text-based, often to the point that they consists entirely of text present in different sculpted or cut out forms. The conceptual space that the text dwells in is representative of other mediums such as film and publishing. The use of large scale letter forms, complete with representative forms to symbolize the space between words in spoken communication constitute much of her work, and are intended to make the viewer approach and understand language in a new manner. Vikky Alexander works, as the described by the Luz Gallery, to “situate the viewer within idealized spaces that reflect our aspirations and utopian desires.” She utilizes text as well as other media forms to communicate these “idealized spaces.” Her work reflects an approach to communication that engages the viewer on a number of different levels, each with the purpose of inspiring the viewer to think about and realize a particular space in time within the context of noticing how that space and time is relate to principled ideals. Her works is challenging in this sense, as it compels confrontation with one’s one views. The use of text is included as both representation of those ideals and challenge to them. Relevance to My Own Work In utilizing text in my own work as an artist, I find inspiration in the works of these female artists. Through their use of textual representations, they invite the viewer to participate in the communicative negotiation that constitutes the performance of art. As viewer of their work, I am struck by the incorporation of commercial marketing and political themes to comment on the very cultural forces represented. This is in line with a comment by Butt in reviewing both Derrida and Aristotle that the one-time performative aspect of art means one can enter the communicative negotiation as artist with the viewer and critique society despite the crises of art and criticism mentioned at the beginning of this essay. Likewise, the viewer of art can enter the negotiation and critique the work of art. This implies an intimacy that is shared through the use of language as text that is almost as immediate as physical presence, almost as immediate as speech. While this does not necessarily mean that the communication is any clearer or more accessible than art that does not include the use of text, the presentation possibilities that text affords is interesting to me because of the level of interpretive proximity that it afford both artist and viewer. In presenting my own work, I hope to achieve the kind of immediacy that text in art affords. I realize that limitations are a natural part of the communicative process. However, I find that the communicative potential between artist and viewer through the use of language as text in a work of art affords a level of connection that is both interesting and complex. I expect therefore to make continued use of text as performance in my work. I believe that the process of making and viewing art, constituted as a performative act as described in this essay will provide a platform for reaching viewers and critiquing society in a way that is of interest to me and in ways that will be rewarding and effective. References Barthes, Roland. Image, Music, Text. Translated by Stephen Heath. New York: Hill and Wang, 1977. BBC. “Turner profile: Fiona Banner.” World Edition, 30 May, 2002. 25 May 2011. . Buchloch, Benjamin. “To Whom It May Concern.” Artinfo, November 1, 2008. 25 May 2011. Jones, Amelie, and Stephenson, Andrew, Eds. Performing the Body. Performing the Text. London: Routledge, 1999. Luz Gallery. “Vikky Alexander.” 25 May 2011. . Marcuse, Herbert. One-Dimensional Man. London: Routledge, 1991. Peiffer, Ingrid. “Barbara Kruger: Circus.” 25 May 2011. Salz, Jerry. The Art World’s Space Invader. New York Art, 25 May, 2008. 25 May 2011. . Schalkwyk, David. “What Does Derrida Mean by ‘the Text’?” Language Sciences, Volume 19, Issue 4, October 1997, Pages 381-390. Siegel, Jeanne. “After Sherrie Levine” Arts Magazine, Summer, 1985. 25 May 2011. . Read More