----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
I think it was the work; there was a lot of art based on everyday activites.
There's always what Smylie called the "work of the audience," but there is also audience, for beheading, unfortunately. -
- Alan On Sat, 15 Nov 2014, Erik Ehn wrote:
represented by other means in the sense that the floor didn't need to be swept or if it did that wasn't the point - what was being represented was the labor, above the activity, or specifically spectatorship... so the work of sweeping transferred to the work of watching sweeping? On Saturday, November 15, 2014 9:38 AM, Alan Sondheim <sondh...@panix.com> wrote: Hi Erik, I do want to reply, briefly, to you here. You state (the quote didn't work): a thing, to be art, must represent a thing by other means. so, the life in a flower (a feature of time) is re-presented in arrangement (a feature of space). [barba, dictionary of theatre anthropology] - and it seems to me, that "to be art" - in order to be art - is problematic; certainly there has been a lot of writing on the iconic (in Peirce's sense) to claim otherwise - a thing can represent itself. This was fundamental to a lot of West Coast feminist art from the 60s and 70s - where sweeping a floor for example wasn't representing sweeping "by other means" but was exactly what it seemed - work. Chris Burden played off this a number of times as well. So when you state to represent killing by killing is anti-performance. - for me it's performance, a horrifying one, but performance nonetheless. (I'm always suspicious as well about anti-anything, such as "anti-poems," "anti-art" etc.; these exist within the same fold.) Thanks, Alan
== email archive http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/ web http://www.alansondheim.org / cell 718-813-3285 music: http://www.espdisk.com/alansondheim/ current text http://www.alansondheim.org/sw.txt == _______________________________________________ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://empyre.library.cornell.edu
