After reading the topic of the week I was reminded of several things, as this chapter to me, seemed rather graphic in nature. A reoccurring subject in the chapter was the portrayal of females in art; how it has changed or not. It left me thinking is there a right way to portray a woman in art? If you find artworks that are quite graphic, interesting – is that wrong? Especially if you are female?
The book ‘American Psycho’ by Bret Easton Ellis is a prime example of what I think to be a brilliant piece of literature and yet the feminists hate it. They even tried to shut the filming of it down, but it went ahead due to some say the fact that the director was a female. Yes it contains degrading images of women being ripped to shreds, but the reason why I have an appreciation for it was the whole story. ‘Patrick Bateman’ who is the main character is obsessed with himself, wealthy, intelligent, successful in his career and bored out of his brains. His boredom makes him do very bad things that only people in his situation could get away with.
Yes I am getting to the body with this story! His extreme obsession with the body beautiful is the only thing that he cares about and what he does with women only glorifies and feeds his ego and nobody stops him.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Critical Review
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.
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.
Review : Instillation Art-Essence and Existence
In this chapter Nicholas Zurbrugg describes instillation art as work which is installed in a space and created in "real time" in accordance with the artists reaction of the space. He states that installations use three dimensional space as a medium for interaction and extend beyond the frame of a picture. That use of and reaction to the space helps in defining the work and that the interaction and creation of the work is part of the performance of the piece through the kinesthetic actions of the work.
Zurbrugg touches on a number of movements that inspired and affect the creation and exploration of contemporary instillation practice. and touches on a number of works to explore his opinions such as Monholy-Nagys "light-space modulator", which he describes as a kinetic static work and Kurt schwitter's "merzbau" which continued to grow and expand into spaces.
Zurbrugg's statment that the most sucsessful installations are those which evoke Reaction, ether from the work or the audiences continued movement is able to be applied to all artwork. the was article also useful in gaining interesting points of reference from which i may continue to explore.
Critical Review: Installation Art – Essence and existence – Nicholas Zurbrugg
In his 1991 catalogue article, Installation Art – Essence and Existence, Nicholas Zurbrugg examines the nature of installation art both historically and as it is presented by artists today. Zurbrugg argues that the language of installation can be exploited by artists to produce contemporary works that challenge and extend existing preconceptions of the parameters within which art operates. Zurbrugg asserts that the complexity of installation art’s spatial impact and its site specificity is primarily what separates it from other art mediums. Zurbrugg states that “existence determines essence”, that is, the existence of the work within a particular spatial situation is what determines the essence of a work.
Much of Zurbrugg’s essay examines the origins of contemporary installation as they arise from the historical avant-garde. Kurt Schwitters’ Merzbau (1924-1925) and Marcel Duchamp’s Fountain (1917) are examined as two works that set guidelines for what would become contemporary installation art. Zurbrugg argues that Merzbau, an evolving and interactive architectural installation that was created over several years within the artist’s home, set a precedent for installation art by implying that the accumulation of any pre-existing materials in any space may be argued to be installation if the artist considers them to function with an artistic value. Conversely, Zurbrugg states that Fountain suggested that any object, irrespective of artistic merit, may be legitimised in an art context if it is exhibited within a gallery space or signed by the artist.
Zurbrugg suggests that often it is movement, wether implied or enacted, which may distinguish more effective installation art from less effective static works that may “appear dangerously close to flower-arranging exercises and conjurers tricks”. The movement to which Zurbrugg refers may be kinetic action within the work itself, or as “installation-action” such as performative elements, or some physical or mental movement required of the viewer in experiencing the installation environment. Zurbrugg does not expand dramatically upon this point, rather, it appears almost as if a footnote to the essay. It is an interesting argument that unfortunately appears somewhat truncated in the context of the writing that preceded it.
CRITICAL REVIEW
‘Installation art- essence and existance’ written by Nicholas Zurbrugg does have some compelling ideas and insights. His exploration into the beginnings of installation art and its connections to the artist and spatial dimentions… ‘installation art usually comes into existence as the artist’s attempt to redefine a particular exhibition space. In this respect, every instillation artist is their own curator, and every exhibition space is subject to the requirements of the installaton interfacing with its dimentions.’ This gives the reader the impression and expectation of a review that’s delves into something more concise and perhaps informative. Although the introduction does give space to the remainder of the essay, I personally found it to be somewhat simplistic and uninspirational … ‘perhaps the single- most common feature of all installations is their use of three dimensional space.’
The structure of Zurbrugg’s essay seems to loose much of its direction and flow which makes it difficult to follow and interpret through the sudden variation in lauguage… ‘considered in existentialist jargon, the aesthetic essence and the aesthetic impact of conventional art and sculpture might be said to precede their existence within exhibition space.’ On top of this, the introduction of the essay gives the reader no clear idea of the direction of the piece which once again disrupts the structure of Zurbrugg’s essay.
Having said this, Zurbrugg’s essay is not that at all, but rather, as is stated in the title, an extract from the ‘Australian Perspecta 1991 exhibition catalogue’ from the art gallery of New South Wales, which suggests a more subjective point of view. Therefore the broad statements which seem to have some semblance of substance such as…
…despite the widespread assumption that modernist and postmodernist culture are characterized by oppositional dynamics, it seems evident that postmodern instillation art derives from modernist experimentation in terms of evolutionary dynamics, elaborating, extending and making explicit the implicit potential of these arstists’ differing aspirations towards an art of installation…
become somewhat suspect. The lack of any form of annotated referencing gives the impression that there has been no reputable research to support any of the theories put forward in Zurbrugg’s study. There is no doubt that Zurbrugg’s ‘essay’ is well written, although the language is vague and abstract , which in essence creates a sence of confusion mixed with intrigue, an essential part of marketing. That is the only real substance which, i personally see, can be taken from a piece such as this.
p.s. and yes, i do realise that i haven't referenced any of my subjective opinion, although i've flayed Zurbrugg for doing just that.... !
‘Installation art- essence and existance’ written by Nicholas Zurbrugg does have some compelling ideas and insights. His exploration into the beginnings of installation art and its connections to the artist and spatial dimentions… ‘installation art usually comes into existence as the artist’s attempt to redefine a particular exhibition space. In this respect, every instillation artist is their own curator, and every exhibition space is subject to the requirements of the installaton interfacing with its dimentions.’ This gives the reader the impression and expectation of a review that’s delves into something more concise and perhaps informative. Although the introduction does give space to the remainder of the essay, I personally found it to be somewhat simplistic and uninspirational … ‘perhaps the single- most common feature of all installations is their use of three dimensional space.’
The structure of Zurbrugg’s essay seems to loose much of its direction and flow which makes it difficult to follow and interpret through the sudden variation in lauguage… ‘considered in existentialist jargon, the aesthetic essence and the aesthetic impact of conventional art and sculpture might be said to precede their existence within exhibition space.’ On top of this, the introduction of the essay gives the reader no clear idea of the direction of the piece which once again disrupts the structure of Zurbrugg’s essay.
Having said this, Zurbrugg’s essay is not that at all, but rather, as is stated in the title, an extract from the ‘Australian Perspecta 1991 exhibition catalogue’ from the art gallery of New South Wales, which suggests a more subjective point of view. Therefore the broad statements which seem to have some semblance of substance such as…
…despite the widespread assumption that modernist and postmodernist culture are characterized by oppositional dynamics, it seems evident that postmodern instillation art derives from modernist experimentation in terms of evolutionary dynamics, elaborating, extending and making explicit the implicit potential of these arstists’ differing aspirations towards an art of installation…
become somewhat suspect. The lack of any form of annotated referencing gives the impression that there has been no reputable research to support any of the theories put forward in Zurbrugg’s study. There is no doubt that Zurbrugg’s ‘essay’ is well written, although the language is vague and abstract , which in essence creates a sence of confusion mixed with intrigue, an essential part of marketing. That is the only real substance which, i personally see, can be taken from a piece such as this.
p.s. and yes, i do realise that i haven't referenced any of my subjective opinion, although i've flayed Zurbrugg for doing just that.... !
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Installation Art – Critical review
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.
In this chapter, Zurbrugg starts by explaining what Installation Art is, and that is something that is to be installed, employs time in some form, and utilizes a ‘three-dimensional space’. Zurbrugg expresses that the installation extends itself beyond the restricted parameters of traditional art making such as painting because there are not boarders containing the artwork.
Zurbrugg goes on to mention that even though the use of the term ‘Installation Art’ is relatively new, the type of art is present in many historical forms, such as ‘Stonehenge’. With the contemporary and most influential being the “early twentieth-century avant-garde movements”.
Technology played a large role in the evolution of Installation Art with the main early twentieth-century producers being from the futurists, Bauhaus, and kinetic artists. Dadaists are made mention for their impact on Installation Art through the use of unrestrained theatrics. Zurbrugg also attributes kinetic installation works as being the most accommodating with life today.
In Installation Art – Essence and Existence, Zurbrugg explores the origins of Installation Art, by investigating why it is and what it is. I found the chapter to be quite interesting and informative due to Zurbrugg’s clarification of Installation Art, and how it has transformed and progressed.
Reference:
Zurbrugg, Nicholas, Installation Art – essence and existence, What is installation? An anthology of writings on Australian installation art/ ed by Adam Geczy and Benjamin Genocchio. Sydney: Power Publications, 2001. pp. 25-31.
Critical Review
Nicholas Zurbrugg’s chapter Installation Art- Essence and Existence explores how installation art has developed over time, while discussing what elements are needed to produce a successful installation work. The first paragraph of the chapter reveals Zurbrugg’s opinion of postmodern installation art as being “some of the most interesting of the wider contemporary artistic languages...” as it broadens the audience’s ideas about “art’s material, conceptual, institutional and authorial parameters.”
Zurbrugg gives a rather interesting definition of what Installation Art is; “...most installations extend beyond the picture frame, exploring and asserting a more complex and spatial impact...”This could be “inside, outside or around” and exhibition space, the three-dimensional space, being the most common feature in all installations. Consequently space becomes a major factor to consider in installation art.
Zurbrugg moves onto the history of installations art, attempting to pinpoint its origins, in relation to the twentieth-century. He attempts to draw links between contemporary installation art and various avant-garde movements, such as futurism, dada and surrealism, in order to reveal how installation art has developed over time. I feel that his analysis of John Cage’s work, was quite relevant to the origins of installation art. It reveals how his work is an amalgamation of various avant-garde movements, as it uses technology to allow some sought of movement to the installation. “Cage’s performance installations, and installation performances synthesise both the futurist artists’ and Bauhaus artist’ enthusiasm for technological creativity, and the Dadaist artists’ enthusiasm for chance compositions...” Zurbrugg also points out that some of the most ‘interesting’ installations are “second-hand” installations, which provoke a more ‘figurative’ action, such as Marcel Duchamp’s work, which, according to Zurbrugg, “lay down two of the guidelines of all Installation Art.” By including the artistic opinions of Kurt Schwitter, and comparing them to Duchamp’s installations, I feel that he was successful in drawing this conclusion of second-hand installations. Zurbrugg suggests that the most successful installations are those which evoke some form of movement, whether it be a more literal movement by ‘kinetic structures’ or by evoking actions “within more fugitive circumstances”
Overall, I found the chapter was a rather interesting analysis installation art. I did find the article quite broad, however I thought that some of the points Zurbrugg raised were relevant to the discussion of installation art. By beginning the chapter with a definition of installation art, he moves on to describe the main characteristics which make a successful installation, and also gives us a brief overview of the origins of installation art and how it has developed.
Zurbrugg gives a rather interesting definition of what Installation Art is; “...most installations extend beyond the picture frame, exploring and asserting a more complex and spatial impact...”This could be “inside, outside or around” and exhibition space, the three-dimensional space, being the most common feature in all installations. Consequently space becomes a major factor to consider in installation art.
Zurbrugg moves onto the history of installations art, attempting to pinpoint its origins, in relation to the twentieth-century. He attempts to draw links between contemporary installation art and various avant-garde movements, such as futurism, dada and surrealism, in order to reveal how installation art has developed over time. I feel that his analysis of John Cage’s work, was quite relevant to the origins of installation art. It reveals how his work is an amalgamation of various avant-garde movements, as it uses technology to allow some sought of movement to the installation. “Cage’s performance installations, and installation performances synthesise both the futurist artists’ and Bauhaus artist’ enthusiasm for technological creativity, and the Dadaist artists’ enthusiasm for chance compositions...” Zurbrugg also points out that some of the most ‘interesting’ installations are “second-hand” installations, which provoke a more ‘figurative’ action, such as Marcel Duchamp’s work, which, according to Zurbrugg, “lay down two of the guidelines of all Installation Art.” By including the artistic opinions of Kurt Schwitter, and comparing them to Duchamp’s installations, I feel that he was successful in drawing this conclusion of second-hand installations. Zurbrugg suggests that the most successful installations are those which evoke some form of movement, whether it be a more literal movement by ‘kinetic structures’ or by evoking actions “within more fugitive circumstances”
Overall, I found the chapter was a rather interesting analysis installation art. I did find the article quite broad, however I thought that some of the points Zurbrugg raised were relevant to the discussion of installation art. By beginning the chapter with a definition of installation art, he moves on to describe the main characteristics which make a successful installation, and also gives us a brief overview of the origins of installation art and how it has developed.
Nicholas Zurbrugg- Installation art- essence and existence
Zurbrugg, Nicholas, “Installation art- essence and existence” in What is installation? An anthology of writings on Australian installation art, Edited by Adam Geczy and Benjamin Genocchio, Sydney, Power Publications 2001 (pp.25- 31)
It is essential to regard the practice of installation as “challenging and extending” the development of the artistic language and material constraints in response to preconceived notions of the “institutional and authorial parameters”. Zurbrugg's synopsis provides a succinct acknowledgment of the history of the art and regards the factors, intrinsic to the installation process by its practitioners.
The article offers perspectives on the art form's drives and catalysts and describes the often differing, yet inclusive philosophies. It defines the particularities of the “more complex” spatial relationship and points to how the ideas are transferred across media by actions and augmented by technology. He dedicates a reference to the role the artist must newly perform within the confines of the exhibition space, and makes warning, if not judgment, upon the the necessities of documentation and static, non -interactive installation, making notable exception to the idiosyncrasies of his referenced artists.
The reflection of previous art movements give context to some of the processes and infatuations associated with the installation artist, the initial experimentation and relationship with satire and performance. Zurbrugg cites the ideas of Marcel Duchamp definitively as the source of the “conceptual impact”. Duchamp, provided a freedom for the what the artist can work with in material terms. He divides the major philosophical references between Duchamp and Kurt Schwitters, but also relates its foundation, quite importantly to the practice of John Cage, an artist practicing as musician, whose galleries were music halls and recordings, who produced innovative and influential performance, fifty years after Duchamp and R Mutt. Cage's work seems to exemplify a dadaist “enthusiasm” for the idea of chance in art. The technological advancement of the twentieth century, gave the medium to Cage, who exemplifies characteristics of Futurist imperatives, the mechanical or kinetic is certainly present in terms of modern installation. In the article, modern artists such as Joseph Beuys appear to challenge beliefs held by more historical artists, perceiving restrictions in their aesthetic values and purposes.
The writer is aware of the failings in translation between the often oblique examples of installation art and its audience in terms of relevancy, he makes comment in regard to both the more asinine and acerbic of the artwork. Zurbrugg indicates the importance of an inclusive natured work, equal to the varying responses and discoveries of its audience. A possible factor determining this, could be controlled by the specific qualifying of an exhibits space. Zurbrugg has preferences toward a sense of movement within the artwork. He is aware of the sense of “inauguration” and the “commemoration” an audiences interaction with spaces and contexts can create, and will allow for an installation to develop an aura out of its earlier incarnations. He maintains that in Installation Art a real liberty exists through the freedom of mediums and technologies, and from the construction of the redefinition of the space within a gallery by an artist.
It is essential to regard the practice of installation as “challenging and extending” the development of the artistic language and material constraints in response to preconceived notions of the “institutional and authorial parameters”. Zurbrugg's synopsis provides a succinct acknowledgment of the history of the art and regards the factors, intrinsic to the installation process by its practitioners.
The article offers perspectives on the art form's drives and catalysts and describes the often differing, yet inclusive philosophies. It defines the particularities of the “more complex” spatial relationship and points to how the ideas are transferred across media by actions and augmented by technology. He dedicates a reference to the role the artist must newly perform within the confines of the exhibition space, and makes warning, if not judgment, upon the the necessities of documentation and static, non -interactive installation, making notable exception to the idiosyncrasies of his referenced artists.
The reflection of previous art movements give context to some of the processes and infatuations associated with the installation artist, the initial experimentation and relationship with satire and performance. Zurbrugg cites the ideas of Marcel Duchamp definitively as the source of the “conceptual impact”. Duchamp, provided a freedom for the what the artist can work with in material terms. He divides the major philosophical references between Duchamp and Kurt Schwitters, but also relates its foundation, quite importantly to the practice of John Cage, an artist practicing as musician, whose galleries were music halls and recordings, who produced innovative and influential performance, fifty years after Duchamp and R Mutt. Cage's work seems to exemplify a dadaist “enthusiasm” for the idea of chance in art. The technological advancement of the twentieth century, gave the medium to Cage, who exemplifies characteristics of Futurist imperatives, the mechanical or kinetic is certainly present in terms of modern installation. In the article, modern artists such as Joseph Beuys appear to challenge beliefs held by more historical artists, perceiving restrictions in their aesthetic values and purposes.
The writer is aware of the failings in translation between the often oblique examples of installation art and its audience in terms of relevancy, he makes comment in regard to both the more asinine and acerbic of the artwork. Zurbrugg indicates the importance of an inclusive natured work, equal to the varying responses and discoveries of its audience. A possible factor determining this, could be controlled by the specific qualifying of an exhibits space. Zurbrugg has preferences toward a sense of movement within the artwork. He is aware of the sense of “inauguration” and the “commemoration” an audiences interaction with spaces and contexts can create, and will allow for an installation to develop an aura out of its earlier incarnations. He maintains that in Installation Art a real liberty exists through the freedom of mediums and technologies, and from the construction of the redefinition of the space within a gallery by an artist.
Critical review
Nicolas Zurbrugg in the article entitled “Installation Art – Essence and Existence’, gives a well rounded discussion of installation art. The chapter begins by discussing “what is an installation” and the development of postmodern installation art. Zurbrugg right from the beginning makes interesting statements about postmodern installation art. The writer states that an installation “typifies some of the most interesting of the wider contemporary artistic languages, challenging and extending our preconceptions regarding materials, conceptual, institutional and authorial parameters”(25). This statement is evident in many contemporary pieces as referred to later in the article such as, Jenny Holzer. Which through the use of text on buildings and billboards has revolutionized the gallery as an institution. Zurbrugg continues on to define an installation as something that can be installed “inside, outside or around an exhibition space (25).”
The ideas of existence and essence are mentioned throughout the chapter drawing on enthralling ideas. This being that “ its existence as an installation responding to a particular spatial or environmental context determines its specific aesthetic essence as installation art” (26) therefore, “Existence determines essence”(26) regarding an installation.
This article differs from others due to the fact that the writer has taken a different approach to establishing an understanding of installation art. Rather than looking at “ancient constructions”(26) he attempts to look at the differing periods in the early development of installation art in 20th century avant-garde movement. The writer looks at Duchamp's influential artwork “Fountain” (1917), and the works of Kurt Schwitters. Both were dominate artists within this avant-garde movement. Through the discussion of these works many intriguing ideas are unpacked. The writer states “schwitters implies that any selection of preexisting materials may function as an installation in any place if the artist considers them to have artistic value. Duchamp suggests that any materials, irrespective of artistic merit, must become art when signed by the artist.” (29)
This discussion continues with a few differing perspectives on installation artworks. The writer also makes the point that “installations that simply exploit a kind of second-hand Duchampian shock value”(30) are inadequate.
Overall, the chapter makes a knowledgeable discussion from the early 20th century to contemporary installation art. Making insightful statements about what makes installation art what it is today. This article makes reference to relevant artists, exhibitions, writings and theoretical discussion. From the discussion of defining an installation to the argument of its avant-garde origins Zurbrugg makes a compelling argument. I see many of his ideas having merit. Especially, in his final statements as he states in his opinion that “the most rewarding installations are perhaps 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 metaphysical space”(31). Even through he does make some fascinating points I felt that there could have been a more in depth discussion of views on installation art, looking at this art form from more different perspectives giving his argument more relevant continuity.
Source: Nicholas Zurbrugg chapter: Installation art – essence and existence from What is installation? An anthology of writings on Australian installation art /edited by Adam Geczy and Benjamin Genocchio. Sydney : Power Publications, 2001. pp. 25—31
The ideas of existence and essence are mentioned throughout the chapter drawing on enthralling ideas. This being that “ its existence as an installation responding to a particular spatial or environmental context determines its specific aesthetic essence as installation art” (26) therefore, “Existence determines essence”(26) regarding an installation.
This article differs from others due to the fact that the writer has taken a different approach to establishing an understanding of installation art. Rather than looking at “ancient constructions”(26) he attempts to look at the differing periods in the early development of installation art in 20th century avant-garde movement. The writer looks at Duchamp's influential artwork “Fountain” (1917), and the works of Kurt Schwitters. Both were dominate artists within this avant-garde movement. Through the discussion of these works many intriguing ideas are unpacked. The writer states “schwitters implies that any selection of preexisting materials may function as an installation in any place if the artist considers them to have artistic value. Duchamp suggests that any materials, irrespective of artistic merit, must become art when signed by the artist.” (29)
This discussion continues with a few differing perspectives on installation artworks. The writer also makes the point that “installations that simply exploit a kind of second-hand Duchampian shock value”(30) are inadequate.
Overall, the chapter makes a knowledgeable discussion from the early 20th century to contemporary installation art. Making insightful statements about what makes installation art what it is today. This article makes reference to relevant artists, exhibitions, writings and theoretical discussion. From the discussion of defining an installation to the argument of its avant-garde origins Zurbrugg makes a compelling argument. I see many of his ideas having merit. Especially, in his final statements as he states in his opinion that “the most rewarding installations are perhaps 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 metaphysical space”(31). Even through he does make some fascinating points I felt that there could have been a more in depth discussion of views on installation art, looking at this art form from more different perspectives giving his argument more relevant continuity.
Source: Nicholas Zurbrugg chapter: Installation art – essence and existence from What is installation? An anthology of writings on Australian installation art /edited by Adam Geczy and Benjamin Genocchio. Sydney : Power Publications, 2001. pp. 25—31
Apologies
I didn't realise i'd posted my review 5 or more times, each time, it said it didn't work.. so I kept trying.
I don't know how to delete these posts.
I don't know how to delete these posts.
Critical Literature Review
Reference: Zurbrugg, N. Installation Art – Essence and Existence in What is installation? An anthology of writings of Australian installation art edited by Geczy, A. and Genocchio, B. 25-31. Sydney: Power Publications, 2001.
Zurbrugg’s chapter within What is Installation? … is an academic essay within which he engages the reader in a discussion directed at obtaining a more structured and informed definition of the term “installation” and the subsequent academic and visual consequences arising from such definition. Within the chapter, Zurbrugg argues that
…it seems more helpful to consider the origins of different kinds of contemporary Installation Art in terms of the early twentieth-century avant-garde movements … it seems that post-modern Installation Art derives from modernist experimentation …
Within the first two paragraphs of the text, Zubrugg sets an over-arching, pragmatic definition of installation;
Installation Art might tentatively be defined as that which artists install, inside, outside or around the exhibition space … perhaps the single-most common feature of all installations is their use of three-dimensional space …
By initially utilising a simplified definition of installation; Zurbrugg facilitates an expansive discussion on the topic, comprising of three primary categories; kinetic, performance and environmental installation art. Zurbrugg formulates his own definition of installation via historical comparison; drawing references to schools of thought in art, to art itself, and visual analysis.
Kinetic, or technological installation, referred to early within the essay, encompasses movement in the form of sound, light and heat waves. Zurbrugg argues that the development and initial experiments with this form of installation can be attributed to the Futurists and those involved in the Bauhaus experiments of the 1920s. Within Zurbrugg’s observations of ‘Kinetic Installation’, Moholy-Nagy’s Light Space Modulator, is referred to by the author as functioning “both as a kinetic or static sculpture, as a twofold installation piece”. The artist’s work presents to the author only a minor comparative challenge to those exhibited by artists branching into a number installation ‘fields’ simultaneously.
Considered by the author as multi-media artist, John Cage serves as a transition between two of Zubrugg’s Proxy-Connection: keep-alive
Cache-Control: max-age=0
jor explorations; both kinetic and performance installations. Cage, having recorded a number of his performances, presents a larger problem to Zurbrugg in terms of defining installation;
The co-presence of such detail [the recorded documentation of the work and the live occurrence of the work] typifies the recurrent disparity between Installation Art as some sort of real-time process within a specific location … and Installation Art as documentation.
Posing the most significant problem to Zurbrugg, in his efforts to specify installation, however, is environmental art; the final component of the influences he presents as being precursors to the emergence of installation today. It is here that Zurbrugg struggles with the primary challenge associated with Installation Art- the notion of whether or not “any selection of pre-existing materials may function as an installation in any place if the artists considers them to have artistic value”. Schwitters’ Merzbau is used by Zurbrugg to exemplify this very problem; the combined static, and, at times, banal elements of the work ultimately leads to Zurbrugg’s final conclusion;
…when we ask ourselves which installation works or installation performances and installation-actions seem most substantial, it seems arguable that different kinds of kinetic works seem most attuned to present times …the most rewarding installations are perhaps those which imply or enact some sort of movement …
In light of the objective historical data Zurbrugg has gathered, he has seemingly drawn a somewhat frustrated and subjective conclusion based upon what appears “most rewarding” as opposed to what seemed to be his initial intention; to identify the holistic nature of installation in consideration of the entirety, rather than a selection of it’s influences.
Zurbrugg’s chapter within What is Installation? … is an academic essay within which he engages the reader in a discussion directed at obtaining a more structured and informed definition of the term “installation” and the subsequent academic and visual consequences arising from such definition. Within the chapter, Zurbrugg argues that
…it seems more helpful to consider the origins of different kinds of contemporary Installation Art in terms of the early twentieth-century avant-garde movements … it seems that post-modern Installation Art derives from modernist experimentation …
Within the first two paragraphs of the text, Zubrugg sets an over-arching, pragmatic definition of installation;
Installation Art might tentatively be defined as that which artists install, inside, outside or around the exhibition space … perhaps the single-most common feature of all installations is their use of three-dimensional space …
By initially utilising a simplified definition of installation; Zurbrugg facilitates an expansive discussion on the topic, comprising of three primary categories; kinetic, performance and environmental installation art. Zurbrugg formulates his own definition of installation via historical comparison; drawing references to schools of thought in art, to art itself, and visual analysis.
Kinetic, or technological installation, referred to early within the essay, encompasses movement in the form of sound, light and heat waves. Zurbrugg argues that the development and initial experiments with this form of installation can be attributed to the Futurists and those involved in the Bauhaus experiments of the 1920s. Within Zurbrugg’s observations of ‘Kinetic Installation’, Moholy-Nagy’s Light Space Modulator, is referred to by the author as functioning “both as a kinetic or static sculpture, as a twofold installation piece”. The artist’s work presents to the author only a minor comparative challenge to those exhibited by artists branching into a number installation ‘fields’ simultaneously.
Considered by the author as multi-media artist, John Cage serves as a transition between two of Zubrugg’s Proxy-Connection: keep-alive
Cache-Control: max-age=0
jor explorations; both kinetic and performance installations. Cage, having recorded a number of his performances, presents a larger problem to Zurbrugg in terms of defining installation;
The co-presence of such detail [the recorded documentation of the work and the live occurrence of the work] typifies the recurrent disparity between Installation Art as some sort of real-time process within a specific location … and Installation Art as documentation.
Posing the most significant problem to Zurbrugg, in his efforts to specify installation, however, is environmental art; the final component of the influences he presents as being precursors to the emergence of installation today. It is here that Zurbrugg struggles with the primary challenge associated with Installation Art- the notion of whether or not “any selection of pre-existing materials may function as an installation in any place if the artists considers them to have artistic value”. Schwitters’ Merzbau is used by Zurbrugg to exemplify this very problem; the combined static, and, at times, banal elements of the work ultimately leads to Zurbrugg’s final conclusion;
…when we ask ourselves which installation works or installation performances and installation-actions seem most substantial, it seems arguable that different kinds of kinetic works seem most attuned to present times …the most rewarding installations are perhaps those which imply or enact some sort of movement …
In light of the objective historical data Zurbrugg has gathered, he has seemingly drawn a somewhat frustrated and subjective conclusion based upon what appears “most rewarding” as opposed to what seemed to be his initial intention; to identify the holistic nature of installation in consideration of the entirety, rather than a selection of it’s influences.
Installation Art- Essence & Existence
REVIEW
In this chapter Zurbrugg broadly describes the importance of , the history/origins of and the characteristics of installation art. Zurbrugg writes "the single most common feature of all installations is their use of three-dimensional space". He explains that the artist is often attempting to "redefine a particular exhibition space" which means that "every installation artist is their own curator".
Zurbrugg is very positive about installation art and emphasises the philosophical nature of postmodern installation. He quotes the French surrealist poet Aragon saying when explaining that "the most positive forms of postmodern art realise and revolutionise what the most positive modernists 'dreamed' that art might become, 'after us, beyond us'".
Within his description of the origin of installation art Zurbrugg tells us that "there is something unsatisfactory about installations which simply exploit a kind of second-hand Duchampian shock value". Perhaps an example of this would be YBA artists such as Tracey Emin, Sarah Lucas and Damien Hurst.
Reading his chapter we get the feeling that he believes art reflects the social and political issues of the time. I agree with this. His (subjective) opinion is that "different kinds of kinetic works seem most attuned to present times" and that "the most rewarding installations are perhaps those which imply or enact some sort of movement". Perhaps this reflects our edgy, impatient technology-driven society.
I always enjoy reading about installation art, however, I must say I didn't learn much from the chapter. The broad nature of it implied it should be directed to those who don't know much about contemporary and/or installation art but the language implied assumed knowledge about these things. The reader is bombarded with an introductory sentence which is far too long, confusing and pretentious. This style of writing Zurbrugg uses I believe contradicts one of the key purposes of installation art. An important characteristic of Installation art is its accessibility and interactivity. Zurbrugg makes it seem as though it is something only super-academic types should be able to get their heads around. An example of this is when he says "considered in existentialist jargon". It seems as though through his language but basic information that he is trying to appeal to a very small percentage of the population. How can we be expected to engage the general public in our art when people like this scare them off?
Installation Art- Essence and Existence, What is installation? An anthology of writings on Australian installation art/Ed by Adam Geczy and Benjamin Genocchio. Sydney: Power Publications, 2001. pp. 25-31.
In this chapter Zurbrugg broadly describes the importance of , the history/origins of and the characteristics of installation art. Zurbrugg writes "the single most common feature of all installations is their use of three-dimensional space". He explains that the artist is often attempting to "redefine a particular exhibition space" which means that "every installation artist is their own curator".
Zurbrugg is very positive about installation art and emphasises the philosophical nature of postmodern installation. He quotes the French surrealist poet Aragon saying when explaining that "the most positive forms of postmodern art realise and revolutionise what the most positive modernists 'dreamed' that art might become, 'after us, beyond us'".
Within his description of the origin of installation art Zurbrugg tells us that "there is something unsatisfactory about installations which simply exploit a kind of second-hand Duchampian shock value". Perhaps an example of this would be YBA artists such as Tracey Emin, Sarah Lucas and Damien Hurst.
Reading his chapter we get the feeling that he believes art reflects the social and political issues of the time. I agree with this. His (subjective) opinion is that "different kinds of kinetic works seem most attuned to present times" and that "the most rewarding installations are perhaps those which imply or enact some sort of movement". Perhaps this reflects our edgy, impatient technology-driven society.
I always enjoy reading about installation art, however, I must say I didn't learn much from the chapter. The broad nature of it implied it should be directed to those who don't know much about contemporary and/or installation art but the language implied assumed knowledge about these things. The reader is bombarded with an introductory sentence which is far too long, confusing and pretentious. This style of writing Zurbrugg uses I believe contradicts one of the key purposes of installation art. An important characteristic of Installation art is its accessibility and interactivity. Zurbrugg makes it seem as though it is something only super-academic types should be able to get their heads around. An example of this is when he says "considered in existentialist jargon". It seems as though through his language but basic information that he is trying to appeal to a very small percentage of the population. How can we be expected to engage the general public in our art when people like this scare them off?
Installation Art- Essence and Existence, What is installation? An anthology of writings on Australian installation art/Ed by Adam Geczy and Benjamin Genocchio. Sydney: Power Publications, 2001. pp. 25-31.
YAY TEAM!
Thank you to all who have posted so far - I look forward to reading the other reviews as they come in.
A.
Monday, August 10, 2009
pre-post colonialism and the rise of imperical analysis of critial readings
In the chapter "installation art- essence and existence" zurbrugg attempts to locate the beginnings of installation art as a medium and theory and it's essence. Zurbrugg begins by introducing the influence of installation art on the art world and it's purpose, which is "challenging and extending our preconceptions regarding art's materials, conceptual, institutional and authorial parameters". He then continues to suggest a definition for instillation art "that which artists install, inside, outside or around the exhibition space" with this he introduces the importance of spatiality for an instillation artist and continues to say that it is the artist's intent to redefine the spatial aspects of the exhibition space.
Zurbrugg makes connections between the early twentieth century avant-garde movements and contemporary instillation art. With this he suggests the flow of experimentation in the earlier movements of futurism, Bauhaus and dada into the realisation of "the modernist dreams" of contemporary works. Zurbrugg makes the connections through Mohole Nagy’s light space modulator and the works of john cage. Zurbrugg suggests that Mohole Nagy’s attempt to create a kinetic sculpture that existed as a static piece but could also become an "interactive, site modifying work" was a precursor that paved the way for john cage's "chance animated, musical installation and performances of the mid 1960s".
Zurbrugg continues to explain cage's works and their use of chance and technology. This is then linked to the futurist and Bauhaus' "enthusiasm for technological creativity" and the dadaist' "enthusiasm for chance". Through this zurbrugg successfully roots the beginnings of instillation art in the early movements of the twentieth century.
Zurbrugg then starts to question what makes a successful instillation. Stating that a sense of movement is required in relation to the responder in order to create a successful piece. Be that physically "across the material" or through "mental exertions" across a "metaphysical space".
Zurbrugg’s essay while well written as a whole, it seems somewhat disjointed in its structure and purpose, overall effective in it's conveyance of meaning and concept but lacks total fluidity. I found the reading interesting and insightful.
Source: Zurbrugg, Nicholas, Installation Art- essence and existence, What is installation? An anthology of writings on Australian installation art/ Ed by Adam Gauzy and Benjamin Genocchio. Sydney: Power Publications, 2001. pp. 25-31.
Zurbrugg makes connections between the early twentieth century avant-garde movements and contemporary instillation art. With this he suggests the flow of experimentation in the earlier movements of futurism, Bauhaus and dada into the realisation of "the modernist dreams" of contemporary works. Zurbrugg makes the connections through Mohole Nagy’s light space modulator and the works of john cage. Zurbrugg suggests that Mohole Nagy’s attempt to create a kinetic sculpture that existed as a static piece but could also become an "interactive, site modifying work" was a precursor that paved the way for john cage's "chance animated, musical installation and performances of the mid 1960s".
Zurbrugg continues to explain cage's works and their use of chance and technology. This is then linked to the futurist and Bauhaus' "enthusiasm for technological creativity" and the dadaist' "enthusiasm for chance". Through this zurbrugg successfully roots the beginnings of instillation art in the early movements of the twentieth century.
Zurbrugg then starts to question what makes a successful instillation. Stating that a sense of movement is required in relation to the responder in order to create a successful piece. Be that physically "across the material" or through "mental exertions" across a "metaphysical space".
Zurbrugg’s essay while well written as a whole, it seems somewhat disjointed in its structure and purpose, overall effective in it's conveyance of meaning and concept but lacks total fluidity. I found the reading interesting and insightful.
Source: Zurbrugg, Nicholas, Installation Art- essence and existence, What is installation? An anthology of writings on Australian installation art/ Ed by Adam Gauzy and Benjamin Genocchio. Sydney: Power Publications, 2001. pp. 25-31.
Installation Art - Essence and Existence
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.
During this chapter Nicholas Zurbrugg draws upon traditional and contemporary theories of installation art. He allows the reader to understand and consider the aim of a successful installation and how it differs from other media, with reference to the origins and recent development of installation art.
Zurbrugg begins with a description of what he considers to constitute as installation art. “Artists install, inside, outside or around exhibition space” with use of three dimensions. In this way, Zurbrugg argues that installation art asserts a more “complex spatial impact” than other art forms. Zurbrugg then goes on to discuss the relative connection between the installation and the artist. He mentions that artists are usually attempting to redefine an exhibition space and therefore the “artist is their own curator” which touches on the basis for the intrigue (I believe) in installation art.
Zurbrugg then goes onto discuss the origins of installation explaining that it derives out of “futurism, Bauhaus, dada, surrealism and constructivism” also stating that “modernistic experimentation” defined the evolution and making of installation. He references several theoretical opinions, exhibitions and texts, and compares prominent avant-guard and contemporary artists such as John Cage to Duchamp which indicates the development and progression of installation since the 19th century.
Zurbrugg continues to elaborate on the interactive relationship between the viewer and the artists work. He finishes with mentioning that movement is possibly the “most rewarding type of installation” and as so the viewer mentally and physically becomes involved within the installation.
The chapter, Installation Art - Essence and Existence Zurbrugg successfully comprises a thorough explanation and investigation into the origins and theories of installation art. I found he argues many important elements in installation such as the connection between the artist and the space in which installation is constructed, as well as the connection between the audience and the installation through movement. Overall I found it a very interesting and direct review.
During this chapter Nicholas Zurbrugg draws upon traditional and contemporary theories of installation art. He allows the reader to understand and consider the aim of a successful installation and how it differs from other media, with reference to the origins and recent development of installation art.
Zurbrugg begins with a description of what he considers to constitute as installation art. “Artists install, inside, outside or around exhibition space” with use of three dimensions. In this way, Zurbrugg argues that installation art asserts a more “complex spatial impact” than other art forms. Zurbrugg then goes on to discuss the relative connection between the installation and the artist. He mentions that artists are usually attempting to redefine an exhibition space and therefore the “artist is their own curator” which touches on the basis for the intrigue (I believe) in installation art.
Zurbrugg then goes onto discuss the origins of installation explaining that it derives out of “futurism, Bauhaus, dada, surrealism and constructivism” also stating that “modernistic experimentation” defined the evolution and making of installation. He references several theoretical opinions, exhibitions and texts, and compares prominent avant-guard and contemporary artists such as John Cage to Duchamp which indicates the development and progression of installation since the 19th century.
Zurbrugg continues to elaborate on the interactive relationship between the viewer and the artists work. He finishes with mentioning that movement is possibly the “most rewarding type of installation” and as so the viewer mentally and physically becomes involved within the installation.
The chapter, Installation Art - Essence and Existence Zurbrugg successfully comprises a thorough explanation and investigation into the origins and theories of installation art. I found he argues many important elements in installation such as the connection between the artist and the space in which installation is constructed, as well as the connection between the audience and the installation through movement. Overall I found it a very interesting and direct review.
Critical Literature Review: Installation Art
Nicholas Zurbrugg begins the chapter Installation Art – Essence and Existence by tackling the difficult concept of installation art. He gives a very broad, loose definition of what classifies certain art as installation art. Installation art, by Zurbrugg’s definition tends to “extend beyond the picture frame” therefore “asserting a more complex spatial impact”. Thus installation works are redefined if not formed within the “institutional, commercial, domestic or public.. exhibition space” and the space becomes part of the work’s existence and essence, whereas forms of conventional art may be seen to proceed the exhibition space. Zurbrugg states that the “installation artist is their own curator” as they take control or yield to the exhibition area as they redefine the space.
Zurbrugg resists the common tendency to discuss the origins of installation art by redefining ancient art as examples of “primitive installations”. Instead he takes a refreshingly different view discussing installation art’s origin in terms of contemporary work’s reference to early twentieth- century avant-garde movements. Zurbrugg embarks on detailed comparisons of avant-garde movements and their prominent theorists and artists and the impact these movements had and still have on the development and conceptualisation of contemporary installation works. Interesting points are raised regarding certain art styles and their function. For example John Cage’s installations and performances function, in Zurbrugg’s opinion to widen critical concepts, by incorporating a large selection of sources and materials in specifically, his sound performances. His works are unpredictable and give a “sense of indeterminacy and unrepeatability”. This results in infinite interpretations as audience witness unique performances. Cage employs for example, the dadaist passion for “chance compositions” and the futurist’s “enthusiasm for technological creativity”.
Zurbrugg includes a range of theoretical opinions including artist Kurt Schwitters’s opinions on artistic value and Joseph Beuys ideas relating to “Duchamp’s indifference to aesthetic values”. Zurbrugg comes to the conclusion that a valid form of installation or installation-action relates to it’s relationship with the viewer. He suggests the most rewarding and successful installations “enact some sort of movement” from the viewer, whether it be physically walking around the work or a more “mental exertion”.
Zurbrugg takes a long winding journey through the twentieth century into the present. Not only does his investigation explore what characterises art as installation art in order to define the term, but also what makes an installation successful and engaging to an audience.
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.
Zurbrugg resists the common tendency to discuss the origins of installation art by redefining ancient art as examples of “primitive installations”. Instead he takes a refreshingly different view discussing installation art’s origin in terms of contemporary work’s reference to early twentieth- century avant-garde movements. Zurbrugg embarks on detailed comparisons of avant-garde movements and their prominent theorists and artists and the impact these movements had and still have on the development and conceptualisation of contemporary installation works. Interesting points are raised regarding certain art styles and their function. For example John Cage’s installations and performances function, in Zurbrugg’s opinion to widen critical concepts, by incorporating a large selection of sources and materials in specifically, his sound performances. His works are unpredictable and give a “sense of indeterminacy and unrepeatability”. This results in infinite interpretations as audience witness unique performances. Cage employs for example, the dadaist passion for “chance compositions” and the futurist’s “enthusiasm for technological creativity”.
Zurbrugg includes a range of theoretical opinions including artist Kurt Schwitters’s opinions on artistic value and Joseph Beuys ideas relating to “Duchamp’s indifference to aesthetic values”. Zurbrugg comes to the conclusion that a valid form of installation or installation-action relates to it’s relationship with the viewer. He suggests the most rewarding and successful installations “enact some sort of movement” from the viewer, whether it be physically walking around the work or a more “mental exertion”.
Zurbrugg takes a long winding journey through the twentieth century into the present. Not only does his investigation explore what characterises art as installation art in order to define the term, but also what makes an installation successful and engaging to an audience.
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.
Installation Art- Essence and Existence
The Nicholas Zurbrugg chapter: Installation art- Essence and Existence aims to highlight how installation art has changed and developed over time. Nicholas Zubrugg presents almost a paradoxical look at contemporary and traditional installation . He allows the reader to question what is their perspective of a valid installation and makes suggestions in regards to this. Zubrugg makes it clear though that installations inaugurate an interactive relationship between the viewer and the artists work.
The chapter begins with a focus on installation space and how it is used. I noted there was then a sudden shift in the writers perception of the space dictating art. I found this jump too sudden and became quite confused. It is then closely followed by a letter to Nancy Underhill stating that “If one chose to open the door, the illusion collapsed suddenly into a world of objects”- p 24
I was intrigued by this quote as it brought up a key component in installation, being that the audience has the choice to accept the illusion or to potentially destroy it.
In the chapter, Zubrugg holds a great focus on the space an installation is held. This is made quite clear when he states: “Its existence as an installation responding to a particular spatial or environmental context determines its specific aesthetic essence as installation art. p 26
Zubrugg considers the origins of different kinds of contemporary installation art and shows the evolution of installation. He makes relevant links between avant-guarde and contemporary artists showing the growth of installation and what it has developed into. Prominent artists from both periods are mentioned. The contemporary artist John Cage stands out as Zubrugg uses him to put forward the idea of contemporary installation involving more kinetic movement. This literal action involves the audience not only physically but mentally. This idea is contrasted to traditional artists such as Duchamp, who he rightly names second hand artists, who use the essential incarnation as installation. He makes the point that these installations evoke actions in figurative circumstances.
He also notes that there is something “unsatisfactory about installations which simply exploit a kind of second-hand Duchampian shock value”.- p 30 This quote emphasises the growth of installation since the 19th century.
The chapter, Installation Art- Essence and Existence highlights the importance of not only the installation space but the importance of the viewer. The whole chapter works together well in the respect of contrasting the difference of contemporary installation and traditional. Although the beginning of the article seems to be disjointed, it inevitably enhanced my understanding of the development of installation.
Reference: Zurbrugg, Nicholas, Installation Art- essence and existence, What is insallation? An anthology of writings on Australian installation art/ ed by Adam Geczy and Benjamin Genocchio. Sydney: Power publications, 2001 p 25-31
Installation Art - Nicholas Zurbrugg
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.
In this chapter Zurbrugg discusses the origins and developments of what we now know to be Installation art. It is through this discourse that he attempts to not only define installation art but also discover what constitutes a successful and interesting installation.
Zurbrugg begins by suggesting that Postmodern Installation art is possibly the most interesting form of innovative art, in the sense that not only does it ‘widen the language of creativity’ but also pushes and challenges the preconceptions about art. I feel through his exploration of early installation art and the connections made to the avant-garde movements of futurism, dada, and surrealism that the artists involved in these movements did exactly that. Zurbrugg includes many references to past exhibitions that have made an impact by challenging ones notions of what art is as well as important literature throughout the chapter, enhancing and making his argument more credible.
Zurbrugg references more contemporary artists’ work to highlight the connection with the avant-garde movements of the early twentieth century. One example of how he has done this successfully is in his discussion of the work of John Cage. Zurbrugg not only convinces you that Cage’s work does what he suggests installation art should, ‘widen critical concepts’, but he also concludes that Cage’s performance installations ‘synthesise both the futurist artists’ and Bauhaus artists’ enthusiasm for technological creativity, and the Dadaist artists’ enthusiasm for chance compositions employing any and every kind of material available to the artist.’
One of the most interesting points made by Zurbrugg in this chapter is his suggestion that when considering installation art ‘existence determines essence’. He states ‘ Its existence as an installation responding to a particular spatial or environmental context determines its specific aesthetic essence as Installation Art.’ I feel there is a connection made with this idea when he suggests further on in the chapter that the artist of an installation work is not only an artist, but also a curator. I think it is through this idea that he has addressed one of the most prominent features of Installation Art, and in doing so has begun to develop an outline of what is considered to be Installation Art.
Zurbrugg concludes that the most interesting and successful Installation Art always, in his opinion, involve movement of some sort whether it be physical or across ‘material or metaphysical space’. I think that this is true of any successful piece of art. I feel that through this chapter Zurbrugg has presented his opinions and ideas about Installation art and its origins in a scholarly manner, backing up all of his arguments with references to many important texts, exhibitions and artists to successfully clarify his point of view. I found the article very interesting and it provided me with more of an insight into the origins of Installation Art. I did feel however, that even though he provided some differing opinions in his argument, there could have been more of a discussion of such views.
Zurbrugg and Installation
Zurbrugg begins by explaining what Installation Art is. He says "the most common feature is the use of three-dimensional space”p25. “Its characteristics being to install, outside or around the exhibition space”p25. “ Installation Art materials range from static, dynamic and interactive combinations of organic, graphic, typographic, plastic, sonic, kinetic, photographic, filmic, videomatic, telematic, cybernetic and virtual representation of everything from material, physical, environmental and mechanical realities, to evocation of conceptual, theoretical, spiritual and metaphysical experience” p25. Finishing his introduction with his title’s meaning. “That its physical existence as an Installation responding to a particular spatial or environmental context determines it specific aesthetic essence as Installation Art” p26.
Zurbrugg now suggests where Installation Art derived from and its future movement from there. “ Installation Art in terms of the early twentieth-century avant-garde movement, such as futurism, the Bauhaus experiments, dada, surrealism and constructivism” p26. And Installation Arts development from modernism to postmodernism. Giving evidence of this with example Artists that work with this medium. Zurbrugg finishes with explaining why society enjoys Installation Art and why it is different from the rest. “Postmodernism Installation challenges and extends our preconceptions regarding arts material, conceptual, institutional and authorial parameters” p25. And quotes French Surrealist Poet Arragon, “ The most positive forms of postmodern art realise and revolutionise what the most positive modernists ‘dreamed’ that art might become, ‘after us, beyond us” p26. In his conclusion Zurbrugg says, “The most rewarding installations are perhaps those which imply or enact some sort of movement”p31.
I think Zurbrugg explains clearly what Installation Art is. He goes into great detail of what it entails and how to accomplish it. He includes the basics like materials, characteristics, examples, movements and history of Installation Art. And concludes with the reason why we find it so intriguing. I agree with everything Zurbrugg says, although I thought he could have said more about why Installation art is different from other practices.
Source: Zurbrugg, Nicholas, Installation Art- essence and existence, What is insallation? An anthology of writings on Australian installation art/ ed by Adam Geczy and Benjamin Genocchio. Sydney: Power Publications, 2001. pp. 25-31.
Zurbrugg now suggests where Installation Art derived from and its future movement from there. “ Installation Art in terms of the early twentieth-century avant-garde movement, such as futurism, the Bauhaus experiments, dada, surrealism and constructivism” p26. And Installation Arts development from modernism to postmodernism. Giving evidence of this with example Artists that work with this medium. Zurbrugg finishes with explaining why society enjoys Installation Art and why it is different from the rest. “Postmodernism Installation challenges and extends our preconceptions regarding arts material, conceptual, institutional and authorial parameters” p25. And quotes French Surrealist Poet Arragon, “ The most positive forms of postmodern art realise and revolutionise what the most positive modernists ‘dreamed’ that art might become, ‘after us, beyond us” p26. In his conclusion Zurbrugg says, “The most rewarding installations are perhaps those which imply or enact some sort of movement”p31.
I think Zurbrugg explains clearly what Installation Art is. He goes into great detail of what it entails and how to accomplish it. He includes the basics like materials, characteristics, examples, movements and history of Installation Art. And concludes with the reason why we find it so intriguing. I agree with everything Zurbrugg says, although I thought he could have said more about why Installation art is different from other practices.
Source: Zurbrugg, Nicholas, Installation Art- essence and existence, What is insallation? An anthology of writings on Australian installation art/ ed by Adam Geczy and Benjamin Genocchio. Sydney: Power Publications, 2001. pp. 25-31.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)