Zurbrugg, Nicholas. “Installation Art – Essence and Existence”. In what is Installation Art? An Anthology of writings on Australian Installation art, edited by Adam Geczy and Benjamin Genocchio, 25-31. Sydney: Power Publications, 2001.
Nicholas Zurburgg’s chapter “Installation, Art – Essence and Existence” is an academic essay which defines and explores the development of installation art from conventional to contemporary times, as a structured yet somewhat fragmented view is presented on what makes installation art and what makes a true installation artist.
Zurburgg’s introduction is straight to the point as he defines installation as “something that can be stored inside, outside, or round the exhibition space (25)” stating that installations are three dimensional and the art works expand creating a spatial impact in the place it inhibits. The basic features of installation art and its context are identified as a detailed analogy is made in terms of exhibition spaces, as the installations existence “responding to a particular spatial or environmental context determines its specific aesthetic essence as installation art.”(26)
The essay goes on to identify the origin of different contemporary styles of installation art which can be connected to early twentieth-century avant-garde movements including constructivism, surrealism, dada, futurism and Bauhaus experiments, these “derive from modernist experimentation in terms of evolutionary dynamics, elaborating, extending and making explicit the implicit potential”( 26)of installation artists differing aspirations.
Technological, or kinetic futurist experiments in terms of technological performance and mediated modes of instillation is discussed throughout a large proportion of the essay in regards to artists such as John Cage whose work broadens concepts and could be categorized as multi-media, his performance and kinetic installation works with movement using sound, light and heat waves whilst recording a lot of his work creates a perplexed spin in the installation artworks. Through addressing the space of the artist as a ‘curator’ Zurburgg has kept the subject matter flowing.
By the conclusion of the essay Zurbrugg has strayed from his objective in identifying installation in its entirety, opting for a more subjective view in which Duchamp’s ‘shock’ factor could be seen as influential when Zurbrugg states “the most rewarding installations are those which imply or enact some sort of movement, be this their own literal movement as kinetic structure or as installation-action, or be this the viewer’s physical or mental exertions, across material or space.” (31)
The flow of the essay is splintered and at times hard to follow, however the objective was well addressed if somewhat detached by the conclusion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment