The Love Child

I stumbled upon this video a couple days ago and the first thing I thought of was the idea of trees using birds as a means of communication. I simply love thinking about the trees communicating with each other, if not us. A beautiful collaboration between fungi and trees has developed that transcends the roles of us against them. The two species use chemical processes to transfer energy to each other when it's needed. Supposedly, this occurs in any forest. When thought about in the context of necessary conditions for an open practice, the way trees communicate is a great example.

OPENNESS and TRUST

The trees have to be open to receive chemicals from other trees. Each one has to trust in the other to give and receive and trust in the cooperation of the fungi. 

LOVE and ENERGY

The trees must love each other because they are not allowing the other to go wanting; they literally give each other energy.

CHOICE and HABIT

By creating a system of sharing nutrients, over time that action becomes habit. Whether or not the tree chooses to participate consciously may be unanswerable, but the repetitious action is there.

One of the prominent figures of the Fluxus movement was Nam June Paik, whom was mentioned in the previous post. He is one of many who imparts the ideals of Fluxus into their individual work and amazing collaborations. He may be best known for his t.v. Buddha, where a small statue of Buddha sits in front of a recorder watching himself.

Something Pacific, 1986

Many of his works incorporate electronics. The atypical medium of television sets and recordings he used brought him the title of "father of video art". Many of his works transcended visual and temporal definitions. For example, his Positive Egg piece is a simple recording of an egg. Progressively, the egg is enlarged on bigger t.v. sets until it no longer functions as an egg.

Of all his works, however, none seem to exemplify best the ideas of visual and temporal definitions and boundaries than " Good Morning, Mr. Orwell" in 1984. Here, the collaborations to end all collaborations occurs; Cage, Beuys, Dali, Cunningham, Gingsberg, Plimpton, etc. all come together to participate in a global production. Live feeds are established thanks to Paik from New York to Paris, Germany, and South Korea. This piece is a true definition of Fluxus; available to all in any setting, of the moment, and definitely anti-art.

I am amazed to recognize so many pieces from the Fluxus movement, yet the many artists of those pieces never get said. I even took a video art class in college and never once did I hear of Nam June Paik, which is a shame. For being the "father of video art", his name may not be taught in classes, but at least his ideas and innovations are. So, I am glad to finally have a name to go along with the many pieces I recognized. And even though I couldn't see the piece live, at least I found a clip from "Good Morning, Mr. Orwell".

In the 60's, a movement evolved from Dadaism that needed to keep faithful to ideas inherent in it, but wanted to release it from the confines of the institutionalism and elitism of the art world. George Maciunas first defined Fluxus through his Manifesto as a fusion of all things; the antithesis of what art is:

Anti-art is life, is nature, is true reality—it is one and all. 

It was really meant to break the barriers of those making and those observing. It wanted to be accessible to all, and in that spirit, found itself manifesteds in living rooms, mailboxes, and streets. Many artists such as Yoko Ono, Dick Higgins, George Brecht, and John Cage all participated in creating in this vein. Maciunas perceived 

Fluxus as a total state of mind and art, and as such he wasn't so forgiving of those who where considered part of Fluxus but still showcased their work in tradition forms. His opposition of Nam June Paik and his collaboration with Karlheinz Stockhausen's Originale culminated with a picket line outside the premiere of the show. Fluxus was primarily geared to the underserved in the art world, and Maciunas rejected the art housed in traditional settings. 

The note left to Nam June Paik following Originale

It hasn't really been mentioned, but Fluxus has definitely been eluded to recently. I first touched on it after researching the Ai Wei Wei/ Herzog de Meuron collaboration, and ever since then have seen in percolate into other areas of focus; so to get a better idea of the movement, I decided to look into it. 

What I discovered almost made me want to laugh out loud, since our X-lab conversations have all surrounded the idea of a set of mental conditions that foster an open practice. The Fluxus movement establishes itself based on a set of intentions; its manifesto similar in construction as others I've seen before:

This manifesto is the perfect gateway into understanding the broad, encompassing art evolution that is Fluxus. As a lens, I can start to see the connection it has to other movements in art, while at the same time understand how they differ. This proclamation brings to mind Bruce Mau's Incomplete Manifesto. 

During the interview with Laurel, I kept thinking of the list of conditions for growth. As she was talking about her path to where she is now, she kept mentioning how certain places she found herself just didn't jive with her. For instance, the first college she was at; the atmosphere, etc. wasn't conducive to what she felt she wanted. And then the work she was doing in a firm wasn't the venue she was looking for in terms of her own work and ideas. She always seemed to have a general sense to what she was looking for, but didn't know what until she tried things out. 

I think that the condition of awareness needs to be present. Having awareness is being able to tell yourself when a new experience is worthwhile or not. In a way, it's an extension of the condition of trust. Being aware of your tastes and preferences is important in any new endeavor you pursue; trusting yourself that you know yourself. Even when you make the choice to always be open to trying new things, and consistently test your comfort zone, knowing when that experience doesn't suit is key to growth. It is that awareness that keeps you from moving from one new thing to the next just for the sake of trying new things. There is growth in learning your preferences and seeking them out for yourself.

The middle of the 20th century in art was really focused on what art was and meant. Following the emergence of Cubism with its visual questioning, others sought the answers to art in many different ways; and Robert Rauschenberg was definitely one of them.

I had mentioned him previously in one of my posts, and he is someone who really is significant to art today. Nowadays, art can manifest itself in a multitude of ways, and one of those ways include the roles of artist and observer; though I believe "experiencer" is a better word in place of observer.

In 1961, Rauschenberg was invited to submit a portrait of Iris Clert in an exhibition at her gallery. He was but one of many asked to participate. And his submission was a telegram:

From previous posts, a theme starts to emerge unintentionally; and at first I wasn't even aware of it until now. Even from the beginning with Buckminster Fuller to Yves Klein, I've realized that I am drawn to ideas of the definition of space and what that manifests. In regard to architecture, I am fascinated by the process and how that is in turn produced. Not to be confused with the literal sense of "form follows function", but the deeper sense of form.

For example, Fuller's application of numbers to create his geodomes isn't a case of form following function the way Sullivan meant it, but something abstract that reveals itself in space. Even Yves Klein's works were vestiges of what he was truly creating. The action of selling space was indicative of what he wanted to produce.

I must first say how much I'm digging Klein's air architecture, and not only as it pertains to architecture, but the concept of the Void. While it seems impossible to create the situations he poses, in fact, many have been realized. The air bed is one example of his ideas coming to fruition. Another is the dream of an air roof.

His technical Eden

Diagram for his air roof

The concept behind the air roof was to open up the interaction between others despite the climatic conditions, such as rain, snow, etc. I am reminded of an installation a company called Random-International did, that seems to reference Klein's ideas. It is called the Rain Room. From the ceiling water falls like rain (hence the name) and as one passes through it-stays completely dry. All that is felt is a slight dampness due to the water hitting the floor. 

What is art? 

It seems like such a naive question at first, until you start to answer it. And the thing is, the more you try to give it definition, the further you get from the truth. After listening about the collaboration between Claude Parent and Yves Klein, I find myself startlingly drawn to Yves Klein and his ideas. 

I wanted to understand better his work and philosophy, and one of his most influential and popular pieces involve his International Klein Blue (IKB). Many excerpts comment on his invention of the color, and initially I want to contradict that statement. No one can invent a color. 

But the way Klein breathes life into the pigment through suspension makes me begin to believe. Later in his works he introduces the Void into his art, but I believe that his color embodied it too. He, as many artists of his time, felt art was about experience; and IKB is an example of that. Instead of looking at color on a canvas to determine its picture, the color was the subject. And going even further, the moments between the pigment is what's important. The spaces between the particles were meant as passages to the void:

 I want to further examine the Cubism movement. Many of the art classes I've experienced seem to only skim the surface of the intent and impact of the movement. The art itself, made by the pioneers of it (Pablo Picasso, Georges Braque, Juan Gris), are significant in aesthetics; but more importantly, the action of reflecting form and reality in multiple perspectives at the same time. It strives to present the greater dimensionality and context. Such a radical approach to painting and art caused a reverberation that morphed into diverse, yet tangential, approaches to art-making. Its influence focused the question of the purpose of art, as is evident in its offshoots such as dadaism, purism, futurism, etc. Even artists such as Duchamp and Raushenberg is reflective of Cubism's pursuit of capturing the experience of objects. 

Picasso's Les Demoiselles d'Avignon. Considered to be a start in the definition of Cubism.

As an artist who exemplified the pursuit inherent of Cubism, Duchamp broke the bounds of the canvas and what art can be. The pioneering of Dadaism-the anit-art- involved painting, visual arts, poetry, etc. It was meant to be experienced as opposed to simply seen. His piece, "Fountain", was controversial in whether it was art or not. In an editorial in The Blind Man, Dadaism and its purpose is beautifully recognized:

"Whether Mr Mutt made the fountain with his own hands or not has no importance. He CHOSE it. He took an article of life, placed it so that its useful significance disappeared under the new title and point of view – created a new thought for that object."

(1917, p.5)

Fountain, 1916

That quote sums up the inquiry of art as influenced by Cubism. It seems such a departure from the images we think of when we think of Pablo Picasso. That quote reminds me of Raushenberg talking about his combines and using trash. He

"...wanted something other than what I could make myself and I wanted to use the surprise and the collectiveness and the generosity of finding surprises. And if it wasn't a surprise at first, by the time I got through with it, it was. So the object itself was changed by its context and therefore it became a new thing."

Just as Cubism started from breaking down the object and assembling it into abstraction; and, therefore, created a multitude of perspectives to represent the subject in greater context; the evolved movements of it concerned themselves with context of subject as well.

Rauschenberg's Dry Cell, 1963 (Craig F. Starr Associates)

Le Corbusier's Bull III

Purism is meant to be Cubism in its essence. By working with a set of principles (Corbu seems to like rules of engagement), he and Ozenfant created pieces that depicted the conception clearly. Where Cubism attempts to break apart its object and reassemble it after analyzing it, Purism stands on the conception is art. Cubism was seen as a decorative art, and in the hierarchy of the arts, the base is decorative and the human figure the apex. The human figure was central to all facets of art and architecture to Le Corbusier.

His style is very much a philosophy, and Ozenfant and he were dedicated to placing Cubism on a higher, purer post. 

Ozenfant's Composition II

Further division of the box based on da Vinci's Vituvian Man, Fibonacci's numbers, and the golden ratio leads to Le Corbu's method. 

Image of various positions that correlate directly with the Modulor.

It's interesting to note that he didn't publish The Modulor until 1948, which is after many of his more intellectually-based works previously. He gets a lot of flack for his concepts being unsympathetic to the human body (think Radiant City). He was criticized for a lack of genus loci and its subsequent feeling of detachment. However, many of his works around the time he published The Modulor is very concerned with the body.

By using the scale of proportions, he built many acclaimed structures; for example, the Carpenter Center for the Visual Arts at Harvard.

Strictly using the Modulor, his building is intrinsically balanced. Especially in the bay windows, the structure has a peaceful, evenness to it. I think the use of numbers in realizing something solid and visual is an interesting approach. Numbers are an abstraction of reality; mathematical solutions are truly understood when a visual analogy is used. It reminds me of Plato's allegory of the cave. The only question is: are the numbers or the buildings the shadows?

" Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas."

- Albert Einstein

Numbers are the language of the universe, and never more than now do I believe it. I have always been a supporter of the Golden Ration and the pervasive power it has in aesthetics. I was reading about Le Corbusier's use of it in his architecture and how much it influenced his design process. He even conceived a philosophy of thought which he titled, The Modulor.

Le Corbu's Modulor Man

Further in my reading, I discovered the extent the Ratio has on music and scales. I've seen architecture and paintings defined by this Ratio, but never in music, though it seems logical. Even instruments and speaker wire use the Golden Ratio ( phi) in creating the best composed output.

Although my musical knowledge of scales is limited to singing them, it is said that:

"There are 13 notes in the span of any note through its octave. A scale is comprised of 8 notes, of which the 5th and 3rd notes create the basic foundation of all chords, and are based on whole tone which is 2 steps from the root tone, that is the 1st note of the scale. Note too how the piano keyboard of C to C above of 13 keys has 8 white keys and 5 black keys, split into groups of 3 and 2."

( Nikhat Parveen, UGA)

I came across a video on Facebook that reminded me of my last post. It was a montage of stunts and free running commonly called Parkour. Its setting is typically the urbanscape and the movement can be described as a mix of dance, acrobatics, athletics, and martial arts. 

It's interesting because it relates the ideas that Daylight (for Minneapolis) wanted to convey. In removing the boundaries of the performance space, the separation of performer and spectator become inter-changeable. The guys in the example video do not have any formal training with respect to their movement. It is an amalgamation of many skills and training in different disciplines. 

Extending beyond Daylight (for Minneapolis) and the dance stage, where Sarah Michelson placed her dance within the space of the architecture, Parkour transforms architecture into objects as opposed to spaces. It ties back to Cunningham's dance, "Objects". He talked of his dancers performing around certain objects, yet the dance still existed within the confines of the stage (which is one of the reasons the dance wasn't widely performed).