Page 17 - Studio International - July August 1971
P. 17

May bees                                  relation with organization and institution—the   that she prefers dead artists—that way one is so
           Art for All?                              commercially evaluating world being the   much freer.
           How nice that Charles Harrison's article was   particular target or complementary entity   (2)  Perhaps Mrs Waldman is worried about
           clear, thought-through, and logical. (`Virgin   adopted in the specific case of APG.   temperamental artists wanting to change the
           Soils and Old Land.') It can lead to (or betray ?)                                  exhibits around, but what has this to do with our
                                                       The introduction piece by Charles Harrison
           a good critical sensibility. Too bad that the ART   carries the sentence: 'I would like (though I   particular 'problem' ? It was in October 1970
           he chose and more importantly, his        cannot hope) to see a situation in which one   that I explained how I wanted my work displayed
           presentation of it (in the context of the pages of   could supplant a notion like "post-object art"   in the Museum; I changed nothing and nobody
           a magazine, a context which he should be the   with the notion of a "post-Marxist" art'. On the   asked to use that same space.
           first to realize as relevant) is so incredibly   previous page he has 'summed up' modes of   (3)  What is all this about a drawing that I am
           mediocre. Most of the works are baroque   behaviour open to the artist when faced with the   supposed to have been asked for and that I did
           picturesque junk (indoor and outdoor, visual   disaffiliation with the rest of society. For his   not supply ? Ridiculous. Certainly I described
           and literal). Only Gilbert and George's piece   exemplary nominees of the analytical approach   the work I anticipated, doing in sufficient detail
           worked, and was probably designed totally by   he instances the authors of the piece already   to obtain the exact measurements of the interior
           them, I would imagine. The few interesting   referred to. It must be that he is either   of the museum, unless they thought I needed
           pieces are so badly presented that it seems to   uncomprehending of, or for some reason   the measurements in order to ascertain that
           make a joke of Harrison's insistence on context   indifferent to, the principles that underlie the   there was room to play at yoyo! Mrs Waldman
           and on 'How one does one's singling out   APG's position. It is, even if not yet seen to be,   even told me the maximum size of canvas I
           determines what he singles out'. Even so, much   well through these particular difficulties, which   could use (35 feet). A size that I adhered to.
           of what was presented is what is best in English   amount to a reaction to (art) history.   (4)  And what is this about an advance project ?
           art. Beggars, I guess, can't be choosers.
                                                     APG                                       This was doubtless destined for the 'Censure
           There'll always be an England ?           London WII                                Committee'. I never do advance projects. The
           Freak a little!
                                                                                               one I did do for the VI Guggenheim
           PETER GIDAL                               Maurice de Sausmarez                      International is the exception that proves the
           London W14
                                                     In your paragraph about the exhibition put on   rule, and in any case being verbal as well as
           Your May issue has certainly been effective as a   as a tribute to Maurice de Sausmarez, who was   written it was not adhered to.
           provocation. The piece'concerning `Leges   Principal of the Byam Shaw School before his   (5)  A petition calling for the reinstallation of my
           Naturae' was read first as a satire on the   death in 1969, the impression may      painting in the Museum was signed by fourteen
           proliferation of intellectual properties, then as   inadvertently be given that the school was of   people. I made no use of this whatsoever.
           a hilarious invention in literary syntax. But then   little consequence before de Sausmarez took it   Consequently, those who are meant to have
           it seemed to reinforce the property notion   over. May I try to set the record straight over   signed it under pressure from me (according to
           without the satire, until it was realized that   this, as a friend of de Sausmarez as well as   Mrs Waldman) may easily go back on it. As for
           given its inherent initial premise, i.e. that there is   someone who has been connected with the   those who signed willingly and in full knowledge
           such a thing as an object, that there is such a   school from considerably before the de   of what they were doing, they now know that
           thing as art, as ethics, and so on, this work does   Sausmarez period right up to the present ?   Mrs Waldman nevertheless considers them
           achieve much. The question is : why is it still   It is no disparagement of the tremendous   weaklings and cowards. And Carl Andre should
           thought necessary to become so heavily engaged   contribution that he made to say that before he   know that Mrs Waldman has discovered that he
           on this particular set of ideas ?         took the school over its record, and the quality   withdrew his work because he was not satisfied
             On a different basis, an analysis of the   of the work it produced, were high. Charles   with it. I wonder if Mrs Waldman realizes that
           relation between the (apparent) object and   Mahoney, who taught at the Byam Shaw for   this is defamation ?
           Time showed up an element very different from   some years before he went on to the R.A.   (6)  Sol LeWitt has offered me a one-man show ?
           naturalistic 'flow' as continuum, and it led to a   Schools, saw to it that standards were kept high.   Since when has he been either curator or
           realization that 'object' is absolutely a function   I would say from my own experience that the   director of the Guggenheim ? It is you and Mr
           of 'event' and time-base; and therefore that the   standard of drawing there was a good deal better   Messer who wanted the whole business
           discussion of 'the object' was a discussion of an   than it was in many more famous and larger art   suppressed and I was very nearly taken in.
           illusory effect and not worth further mental   schools. Certainly the Byam Shaw had   Luckily I soon saw what your game was and
           gymnastics. The confident mention of      part-time students —but the same could be said,   shortly afterwards Hans Haacke found out what
           `solipsism' at the beginning needs qualification   at that period, of Chelsea or Camberwell equally.   kind of liberty reigns in your noble
           as do so many other assertive words.      BERNARD DUNSTAN                           establishment.
             Adoption of the term 'event' as a primitive   Richmond, Surrey                    (7)  Mrs Waldman, why do you not mention the
           unit is not claimed as in any way original but its                                  catalogue ? You were meant to explain the
           purpose was that as such it may be thought of as   The Guggenheim affair            `incident' in it. Instead, no sooner had I left
           structured in the four co-ordinates of sensory   Reply to Diane Waldman             New York, not content with excluding my
           information. It is possible also to conceive of a   Mrs Waldman, supposedly victimized, makes   work from the exhibition you had the
           minimal event whereas an 'object' could not be   her own case worse [June issue, pp. 247-8].   spitefulness to leave me out of the catalogue,
           minimal with respect to Time.             (1) The responsibility of a curator is to choose   with no explanation. Is that nice ?
             The realisation has a dynamic effect on all   the exhibitors, and to prepare his catalogue, his   (8)  Mrs Waldman, why do you not say that you
           conceptual considerations, including language,   advertising and his opening. The exhibitor is   like to submit censored work to 'tests' ? This is
           and leads naturally to a strategical position that   responsible for his work, and the curator for its   the explanation I was given when I saw, with
           could be adopted by people as individuals   presentation, according to Mrs Waldman. What   stupefaction, my work on public view for two
           (`artists' for the present convenience) when   a profession of faith! Is it not possible that the   whole days, a week after the opening, without
           confronted with the mass habit which is the   exhibitor might be responsible for his work and   anyone asking my permission first. (The work
           established world of 'everything', permanently   also for its presentation ? Since when and by   was put back at my request, during the time the
           as a pole function. There was seen to be a role   what right has the curator decided how the work   Museum was closed, for photographing.) This
           for the articulate individual as a kind of   should be presented ? Of course he has to once   no doubt in accordance with the profession of
           representative, who had to be a good 'engineer'   the artist is dead; in this way he can play at being   faith of paragraph I ? Fortunately( !) Donald
           of conceptual material, to take associative    an artist. Mrs Waldman does not hide the fact    Judd was passing, as you said, spoiled your test,

   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22