Patrick: Fluxus artists, like everybody else, go through an aging process and long for immortality, so yes, I think narcissism is a big part of it. I too would accept a urinal any time, but mostly for its monetary value. It probably was the only real unadulterated prank Duchamp made. As a creative device I prefer Michael Dibdin's version in his Eco spoof, where the urinal is set so that whatever vandal uses it has his output drip back on his pants. As an artist I am not against selling the physical shell of my work, but consider that the transaction satisfies the buyer's problems, not my own.
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Nov 19, 2007 8:00 PM, Patrick Lichty <<a href="mailto:voyd@voyd.com">voyd@voyd.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Actually, although we can say that the material discourse is a reiteration
of Adorno's "Valery Proust Museum", and its cathedrals of (unrealized)
capital.
While I think that this can be construed as a Marxist/Capitalist agenda, but
I also think that this may be equally romantic/antiquarian, i.e. the desire
for immortality through the durable. Yes, I think that the ancient fetish
discourse is there, but there are many other movements that in a way, are
actually interested in historical endurance, as I know a number of Fluxus
artists are assembling their archives.
What is obvious to me is that it isn't just about object/money, that's
My favorite example of a non-material engagement with posterity is Marina
Abramovic' "Seven Easy Pieces" at the Guggenheim in 2005. In conversation,
she was stating her interest in questioning the "Record/Record of the Time"
(Anderson) in which historical pieces are preserved by re-performance; again
returning to a strange position between fetish and orality.
However, to just decide that interest in durability is merely a function of
material fetish is not as useful to me as other topics, like human
narcissism & art, historical/generational refresh, intergenerational
dialogue, cutlural propagation, etc.
There was one point where Lynn and I were having a public conversation about
the creation of physical objects in context with virtual production, where
it was asked why I was interested in such things; were they for sales?
Anyone who knows me well enough knows that if I make any object, it is often
a problematic that serves as a Duchampian question, although it may be one
that is primarily of interest to me. Are Lynn's any my avatar sculptures
(although they have very different contexts) fetishes of desire? I like the
disclaimer of the experiment and the more or less successful result. Is a
rapid prototype archival, or can it be a fetish, and is it desirable?
These aren't questions that I particularly like, as I think that the
creation of artworks, and especially evergent ones like RP work, highly
problematic, as their subjects are often alien, the process is extremely
durable (plastics) and also open to decay (the starches).
technolgoical objects, even ones from tech processes, are problematic.
That's why I love them. Give me a urinal any day.
</blockquote></div><br>