Re: [-empyre-] performance, site and situation

["G.H. Hovagimyan" <ghh@thing.net>]

On Oct 23, 2006, at 6:25 AM, De Geuzen wrote:

> While these explorations carry with them both cliches and  
> conventions, I believe they offer something transformative, if not  
> resistant, in their enactment, meaning "being performed" in a  
> particular time, amongst a specific group and in a given situation

gh responds:


I don't understand what is "transformative" and what you mean by  
that. The discussion of the male gaze is part of Sprinkle's project.  
I find there  is a lot of catch phrases being bandied about without  
much understanding of why any artist approaches or  uses such  
"content."   Tell me what you think happens to an audience seeing one  
of these performances. If they are "transformed." do the men start  
immediately cross dressing?

An analysis of the male gaze in art is actually rather interesting.  
Manet's , "Luncheon on the Grass" immediately comes to mind.

What are the parameters of "performance" as you (and the group)  
define it?  I define performance art as coming from the Beaux-Arts  
procedures that an artist engages in when they create an "object."   
In the case of body art or performance art the material and the site  
of the creative act is the body.

I find that most academics do not understand performance art insofar  
as they are writers and come from a tradition where language is the  
primary vehicle of expression.  Language is the foundation of  
theater.  Performance art comes from fine arts not language. Trying  
to analyze performance art without recognizing it's first impetus  
(prima facie) origins in the Beaux Arts tradition creates a false  
analysis.