Notes on Unmonumental: The object of the 21st Century
This paper seems to reduce sculpture and its history entirely to the realm of the monument without considering the function of the monument outside of material terms, and without considering the function of sculpture historically in non-material terms. In these conditions, all sculptures become monuments, and all monuments become sculptures. I fail to recognize how this is true and especially in a contemporary context. I understand that this is my personal opinion and that it ultimately comes down to definitions of art.
I would argue that the statues, especially the ones that have been recently torn down all around the world, are not inherently art. I can understand that technically, their materiality utilizes sculptural processes, and I understand they may have been considered a work of art when they were first erected, however, I believe they have outlasted their artistic lifespan and have now transitioned into the realm of artifact. It is my opinion that all art eventually goes through this process at varying degrees and that most monuments are created as a kind of artifact, to begin with.
Reducing all large-scale sculpture as monumental is equivalent to saying that all foam-carved theater props are considered art. I am resistant to the idea that all things that utilize sculptural techniques are considered within the artistic field of sculpture because implying this seriously undermines the value and function of art generally, and sculpture as an artistic field is and has always been more than the technical application of materials.
In a world where we are constantly being bombarded by garbage of every kind, from all directions, it makes sense that art would also reflect this, however, I would like to argue that the amount of trash in the world right now is a kind of monument of our time, and the impermanent nature of the work in the text reflects a troubling material relationship we have with the world. I am always happy to witness a contemporary sculptural work with great care and consideration taken both technically and conceptually. I not only believe there is still space for this kind of sculptural work in our contemporary context, but I also consider building something to last in our current cultural climate itself as an act of resistance.
Notes on Awkwardness By Amy Sillman
The term awkwardness implies a sort of friction, and when experienced, it emphasizes the nature of our assumptions and what is considered appropriate and comfortable. Awkwardness is a tension that acts against dominant modes of perception which can surface in various forms, and has the ability to outline and expose these dominant tendencies. In this article, Awkwardness is used as a term to describe ideas about art that goes beyond the usual clumsiness experienced in daily life. It points towards a larger investigation of the process of creating work and a questioning of what it is we are actually looking for, both formally and conceptually. I relate more to the conceptual process.
There are several metaphors used in this article that reference the digestive processes of the body, the distribution of nutrients, and the transfer of energy, which all correspond metaphorically to the practice of art-making. I believe that the most sincere artists who produce work, do so because they are possessed by an inherent curiosity about the world, and art-making becomes an essential tool of exploration. This practice of curiosity is in itself, from my experience, at most times, an extremely awkward situation.
To exist in a reality necessarily founded on basic and collective assumptions, there is comfort in the ability to anticipate the future. There is a required trust that your leg will support your body with every step you take if you are to walk freely and without hesitation. My artistic practice, when it is at its best wanders into these uncomfortable spaces where it becomes impossible to anticipate outcomes, and on a day to day, when immersed in a project, it is unlikely that I will have a clear sense of what kind of work is required. This state of being is incredibly stressful, unpredictable, and awkward in the classical sense, but it is also incredibly exhilarating, generative, highly intuitive, and requires a great degree of attentiveness.
The article describes a zone that is conventionally uncomfortable, yet “feels right” creating a place for art. This is an interesting place because it suggests a realm of infinite possibility, yet it is still intrinsically bound to our psychological and material world. A state of awkwardness can only be awkward if it stands in contrast to the dominant perspective. It is this combination of the potential limitlessness situated within limitations that for me characterizes the work of art.
The work of Timothy Morton is related to the field of object-oriented ontology (O.O.O), which suggests that the material world exists in ways that we can’t possibly account for or understand. It acknowledges the function of human perspectives, language, and means of classifying objects and materials as a force that is enacted onto the world which fails to recognize that objects in themselves also have an undeniable agency that is also enacted onto the world.
O.O.O questions the ways in which objects are identified from an exclusively human perspective, and how this impacts the transformation of the material world through human-related activities and the treatment of our material environments. Many objects are classified by the function they serve, or the traits they possess that are transferable to the human world. There is a difference between a book and a table, and when a book is on a table, they functionally remain as two separate objects, however interacting. Triple O aims to question and challenge the notion of how and why these objects are separated through this classification and the implications of this on the material realm. I believe it even goes so far as to suggest that it’s possible to consider the book and the table together as a kind of object.
“Hyper-objects” is a term coined by Timothy Moton that defines a kind of object that is too big to be seen, and influences our environment in profound and devastating ways. Some examples they give include plastic and oil. It is suggested that these objects came into being to fulfill practical human uses, with a failure on our part to understand the effects of the materials and consequences of these objects outside of the realm of their practical characteristics to serve specific functions.
When considering materials in my sculptural practice, I often find myself thinking about material capacities outside of the realm of industrial uses to serve a practical function within the context of my work, often in unusual ways. I find it useful and interesting to talk to manufacturers and professional tradespeople about various material applications for specific functions as industrial material uses are streamlined to fit within the context of material applications in our built world. In this environment, materials become defined within the context of their abilities to perform in industrial spaces.
This default classification and categorization of materials serve an efficiency in the production of our built world that is deeply tied to resource extraction, capital, and standardized modes of production. This trajectory has implications for our daily experience in the world in every way. I believe understanding objects from this perspective limits our creative capacity, as the materials that function within this arena assume characteristics driven by established modes of production. Taking into account the perspective of OOO, the material possesses characteristics that we will never be able to understand, and I believe this also suggests that there is a depth of possibilities that we still have yet to understand which would have profound creative implications regarding our perception of the world and ways of living, as we are required to imagine alternative futures.
In the chapter Learning the Grammer of Animacy, from the book Braiding Sweetgrass, Robin Wall Kimmerer touches on the idea of the capacity of language to embody a worldview, and influence the relationships we have with the world that surrounds us. Kimmerer draws attention to the relationship between indigenous languages and the philosophical worldviews they reflect as a means of being in the world. The Anishinaabemowen word Puhpowee, “the force which causes mushrooms to push up from the earth overnight”, is used as an example of a word that gives attention to the characteristics of a specific being, and in this case, that of a mushroom.
English in particular has a tendency to objectify and position the natural world in terms of human use and consumption – as inanimate. This is reflected in the ways language is used in everyday activities, and it become a default method for relating to the world. This objectification of our animate surroundings is not inherent, and it is something that is taught as a way of seeing and rationalizing. The world exists outside of us, and it is becoming increasingly important that we learn to see the natural world as a holder of knowledge that we can glean from.
I recognize that language functions as a framing mechanism for thought that has tangible implications for the material world, and I find it very interesting that structures in language seem to both reflect and perpetuate cultural perspectives simultaneously. In Learning the Grammer of Animacy there is a recognition that something is missing about life through the lens of scientific language, and English in general, which, however, seems to translate through Indigenous cultures and languages such as Anishnaabemowen or Potawatomi.
In my studio practice, I am interested in the possibility of art to exist outside of the function of language, which in my case is outside of the realm of English specifically. I have also recently developed an interest in magic as a perspective and a worldview that allows for the world to exist in ways outside of scientific explanations. It is a perspective that does not deny science but allows for the possibility of anomalies to exist and acknowledges limitations in scientific thought. In this spirit, I see the practice of art-making as a magical act in it itself, which I believe also holds a place in the realm of animacy.
Hi Anna,
Can you try to post these into your post, instead of in the comments? That would be preferable, and easier later for all of us. Let me know if you need another blog invite to log in and edit your page. Images are welcome too,
thanks!
Diane
Hi Anna, I look forward (can’t wait!) to be in your studio and see your works in light of these ideas around animacy, and magic… I’m glad if some of these concepts/language has been useful in your thinking about materials and practice. Consider adding a few images to your notes moving forward, reflecting on artworks that may be connected to ideas at play, even including your own – and I hope this will be useful to your research. Thank you for your always insightful and critical comments in class too – and your informative presentation, it was generous and useful for all of us to see works referred to in the video interview with Rebecca Belmore. Best to you and your ongoing work!
Hi Anna,
Reading your first post about your process and work style was eye-opening for me to understand. As someone who rarely works with three-dimensional materials, I previously had an understanding that there must always be a certain level of planning and foresight involved, especially in the design process. I’m sure many artists do this, but I like how you described the awkward process of doing work that manifests when we approach things a bit differently.
Asking for what we are looking for, and being curious, is an awkward place to be in. For me, it is because I rarely have the answers. And, usually, people ask many questions that I haven’t figured out yet. I’ll be working on something in the studio and I typically am not sure exactly what it’s doing until I think it’s doing something I like. Often this “thing” is not what I planned.
But, as you’ve hinted at, this is a type of research. It is discovery. Being curious about the world is a mind frame, and I think it’s a really important one.
I also agree with the philosophy that some of the most sincere art comes from an inherent, nosy, bothering, pace-around-the-room-at-night curiosity. I harness my curiosity to do work, and I look forward to seeing how it manifests in your practice!
Thanks for sharing, Anna!
“In a world where we are constantly being bombarded by garbage of every kind, from all directions, it makes sense that art would also reflect this, however, I would like to argue that the amount of trash in the world right now is a kind of monument of our time, and the impermanent nature of the work in the text reflects a troubling material relationship we have with the world. I am always happy to witness a contemporary sculptural work with great care and consideration taken both technically and conceptually. I not only believe there is still space for this kind of sculptural work in our contemporary context, but I also consider building something to last in our current cultural climate itself as an act of resistance.”
I agree with this wholeheartedly Anna!!!!!! Making things with natural materials, or that are long-lasting and therefore have less of a negative imprint on the earth makes way more sense to me than assembling a bunch of trash into a blob and throwing it in a white cube gallery. That work to me, will go out of fashion and end up back in the landfill that it was destined to in the first place. Our attention spans are too short! And I don’t think that the work really has the effect of truly stopping the viewer in their steps; these things are materially too ubiquitous that it becomes visually meaningless to most people, and as a viewer I am mostly lazy and figure I’m not alone in that. A bit more “craft” does a better job of catching the eye of the looker, a bit more “design”…If the idea is that people should think about the environment and their impact on it, we need a better designed propaganda poster than a piece of cardboard ripped from the hands of a hungry raccoon with the writing of the message done in puddle slime with an old popsicle stick!!!! Or maybe it’s just really nihilistic to me? heheheh I need to sleep more I think ….