[-empyre-] conceptuopoly

[ryan griffis <grifray@yahoo.com>]

On Apr 28, 2005, at 7:00 PM, Eduardo wrote:
> The key concept to keep in mind in relation to Conceptual art is that  
> it
> developed in reaction to Greenbergian modernism. <snip> If anyone  
> wants to consider this any
> further check the book Conceptual Art, a critical anthology:

i'm glad that eduardo brings up Alberro and Stimson's anthology as it  
brings up some connections that, for me anyway, seem relevant to all  
the threads discussed so far. the greenbergian modernism that Eduardo  
positions capital C conceptual art against holds only if you stick to  
NYC, which thankfully the anthology doesn't (completely). but that's  
neither here nor there. what's useful is the introduction of the  
development of conceptualisms/modernisms by artists like Oiticica,  
Clark, Meireles, Camnitzer - all of whom are included in the anthology  
and supply an extremely different orientation to the relationship  
between materialism, language and aesthetics when compared to weiner,  
bochner, kosuth, etc and even the euro conceptualists art & language,  
buren, etc.
and i wouldn't even say that all the artists in the US shared the same  
framework (we can't forget Rosler, Acconci, Sekula, Lonidier,  
Beveridge/Conde). Oiticica claimed, contrary to the dematerialization  
of art, that the work of avant garde Brazilian artists was "a move  
towards the object" while being equally oriented toward a "concept of  
anti-art."
http://mitpress2.mit.edu/e-journals/Leonardo/isast/spec.projects/ 
osthoff/osthoff.html
http://ca80.lehman.cuny.edu/gallery/luis_camnitzer/mosquera_essay.htm
http://www.brazilnetwork.org/statics/media/visualarts/works/cildo.htm
i think the discussion of new media's relationship to capital C  
conceptual art is a moot point in terms of style, as eduardo suggests,  
even though there are some connections to be found in the context of a  
continuum of political economy - Alberro's analysis of publicity in  
relation to certain conceptual art practices and the growth of data  
production/replication/distribution systems can point to a relationship  
beyond the allegorical. but i'm interested in the continuation of a  
political economy, not the intention of a critique or lack thereof.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0268/is_6_41/ai_98123121/pg_1
i'm wondering if the work of Oiticica, Clark and the others mentioned  
above provide a space to discuss both the geocultural fissures that  
have come up as well as the notion of matrixial space - as their work  
(in my crude understanding of it) functions through a simultaneously  
critical and generative manner (not either-or).
maybe... maybe not.
best,
ryan