Page 24 - Studio International - June 1968

One of the ways in which we recognize art paintings. The question wtiether the Nauman
objects is through the acknowledgement of floor piece was or was not art. whether
the fact that they cannot be put to any it was or was not deliberately constructed,
practical use. Even if a use for a particular would never of course occur to an Eskimo,
piece of sculpture could be imagined (e.g. and, on thinking it over, neither would it
employing it instead of a step ladder), the occur to the majority of the people who form
very fact that it is a work of art would prevent the so-called 'art public'.
most people from even contemplating such One could say that Nauman's works, like
an irreverent and possibly dangerous act. the floor piece, -address themselves princi­
Art trary distinction between art and non-art extremely specialized dialogue between a
Usefulness may seem an irrelevant and arbi­
pally to art; they contribute to an intense and
and usefulness objects, but it is one that is taken completely very small number of people, and the content
for granted. Max Bill, for instance, made a of their communication is likewise limited
special point of stressing that he considers to the narrow and esoteric interests of that
his sculptures and paintings to be works for group. This is not a criticism in itself but a
Jasia Reichardt spiritual use, thereby emphasizing our com­ statement of fact which bears evaluation.
mon assumption that art and usefulness are Many remarkable creative endeavours today
two unrelated entities. The more we consider are directed solely towards a tiny section of
the discrepancy between useful and non­ society-one could make it narrower still by
useful objects, the more it appears to serve describing it as friends and collaborators.
the purpose of telling us whether a given This tiny section can be made to understand
artifact has an art status. or art pretensions. or the reasons why a particular work comes into
not. and indeed we often resort to this very being, or at least it can be relied upon to be
differentiation because much of the time we sympathetic.
are doubtful as to how to place or classify In view of this, there are many good or
the various strange things which cross our understandable reasons why nobody so far
paths. has made any experiments to test the
In the corner of Philip Johnson's private effectiveness of an experimental contem­
gallery in Connecticut. which houses works porary y.,ork on the art public in a scientific
by many of the better-known American manner. It is even difficult to envisage what
contemporary artists. any casual visitor could be tested and what criteria could be
might have been surprised by a largish employed to decide on the results of such a
piece of dirty-looking beige under-felt test. Nevertheless the mere consideration
loosely covering what appeared to be a hefty given to such a project might encourage
wooden plank. I didn't pay any attention to artists to examine some of the very obvious
the object when I saw it. assuming immedi­ problems and effectiveness of their parti­
ately that workmen were either about to lay cular brand of communication. on those
a carpet. or had just finished doing so and outside the immediate circle of acolytes.
left the debris behind. I discovered later Most tests are left to the passing of time and
that the amorphous form was a sculpture by the inevitable changes of fashion which this
Bruce Nauman entitled Felt formed over brings. The very notion that the artist himself
sketch for a metal floor piece, made in should bring his detachment and sense of
1966. Nauman does not specialize in what judgement to bear on the assessment of his
looks like accidental art, but he has in the own work in relation to the public is strange
past made a number of works which might and uncomfortable. To my knowledge. the
consist of heaped-up piles of lino lying in only scheme to employ the notion of testing
the corner of a room. as well as other untidy what could be described as an art product.
objects which look like the residue of some was a course run by Simon Nicholson at the
other activity. What is interesting about the College of Environmental Design at the Uni­
Felt piece is that it looks as if it had been versity of California in 1966-7. The course
lifted from a real-life situation and rendered was designed to fill the gap between study
useless. and that this particular act of dis­ and practice, and Nicholson quite justifiably
placement is not disimilar to a trompe pointed out that 'most students in archi­
f'oeil painting, or rather the intention behind tecture schools never have the experience of
a trompe /'oeil painting, which is there to designing an object, building a complete
deceive. In both instances the artist is edition of it out of actual materials. and
creating an illusion: in the case of Nauman testing it in use·. The scheme was con­
a psychological one, and in the case of a cerned with the simultation of invention,
trompe /'oeil painting a perceptual one. construction and testing of a building. This
Both illusions can be evoked only in people already ambitious aim was complicated
who are familiar with the process of laying further by the fact that the objects the
carpets and substances like felt which are students were asked to design, make and
used for this purpose; and objects like test. were to be self-instructional. They were
feathers, pens, envelopes and old seals which to be structures for use by children who, in
often form the vocabulary of trompe f'oei/ the course of coming into contact or playing
290