Page 49 - Studio International - July August 1971

selves—but translated them into a medium which action could only result in good — let's say in one-man exhibition within that permanent
is something other—but which nevertheless by medicine or in any type of human suffering. space ?
pointing the finger not at a system in its Obviously this would be in itself as desirable as TMM: I think for all the artists who showed in the
anonymous functioning but at individual carriers it is desirable to exercise social critique. But I am Guggenheim International, the building served
of this system, allowed the proximity between art maintaining that the museum is not in a position as a point of departure. It was partly a challenge,
and life to become so great as to be indivisible. to achieve this and it is rendered exceedingly partly a place to render homage to, and the
BR: But a system is like a concept, it has to have vulnerable in the effort of trying to do so. entire exhibition as seen here is not easily
a carrier. One can't show a system of genetic BR: It seems to me that we're actually talking imaginable without the premise that the building
relationships without demonstrating that people around a distinction between art and provided in the first place. I think, apart from
are there. propaganda—propaganda for something good or this, Buren's action was essentially an upstaging
TMM: But you don't have to name the people. If against something bad—or the distinction or an attempted upstaging of everyone else, and
you publish the Kinsey Report and the statistics between art and pornography, or whether or not reaction was predictable.
of various erotic relationships, you don't have something is done in and of itself with no BR: Within the notion of 'upstaging' or forcing
to say that Mr Brown and his mistress are the ulterior motive or being used as a means to institutions and artists participating with them
ones. I felt that in the case of the Haacke thing some non-artistic end. to re-assess their positions, would you associate
this attempt was made. The system, let me TMM : Yes, I'm very much talking about that. `upstaging' with not following the implied rules
repeat, would have been acceptable. BR: Do you think that bringing this as a of the game of the particular event or situation ?
BR: You know, I think I really don't understand question into an art museum would be in some TMM: Well there is a connection between this. An
where you draw the line on the degree of ways, by the obverse of the coin, questioning exhibition is a complicated thing, both in its
particularity of information— the character of a museum as an art-ratifying physical installations, and its balances and
TMM: Well I think that in any such instance, if institution ? relationships between many people. In a group
the museum were to be used as an instrument TMM: Yes I think it would. Because it would, show in particular, the freedom of one becomes
through which to exercise social critique upon a among other things, introduce other criteria, for the coercion of another, so that an inter-
particular party which could be easily instance its usefulness, its potential for good or relationship of freedom has to be set up that
recognized, or that would be named, the decision bad. It would do all of these things with which protects, to a certain extent, everyone's visual
would have been negative. I think we would have I think an art museum cannot deal, as museums stake. And that, I suppose, is the assumption
considered that the Guggenheim Museum does are presently constituted. Another example on and the rule which leaves a great deal of
not at this time exist as an institution set up to the other side of the argument would be the flexibility in its actual execution. But I think in
engage in specific social critique, that is, work ultimate great effectiveness, let us say, of Buren's case, if only because his piece rendered
through political means towards political ends. Mondrian's paintings upon urbanism, upon portions of the exhibition invisible and asserted
BR: But if the form and the media of design, upon clarity of vision, upon all sorts of itself at the cost of others, the limits of what was
communications about the distance are alright, eventually practical aspects of life. Obviously acceptable were exceeded. At that point, if only
and the character of the subject matter or this is all for the best, but Mondrian was merely to protect the balance of freedom among all
content is acceptable, what's the problem ? concerned with an anonymous blueprint which participants, the tacitly existing rules had to be
TMM: Well the medium certainly is neutral. I had vitality and strength from within itself to re-invoked.
would not for one moment wish to argue that radiate various consequences. I believe that the BR: It seems here that what then dominated and
something that is not painting or sculpture is moment you attach functional ends to the what was in question were the tacit rules of the
thereby excluded. What is not neutral is the specific work of art, you would reduce the art institution, in this case co-operation, being
intention on the one hand, in this case a social exemplary force of this object and, ultimately, questioned or opposed by an individual action.
intention—in itself a laudable intention of social far from doing good, you undermine the clarity Do you think that this is new in art ?
reform—and the implications. The effect that this of profile that an art-institution can present. TMM: Well I think that as art itself changes it
has upon a group of people outside of the BR: Do you think that Frank Lloyd Wright, in makes certain demands upon the physical and
museum living in this community is also not building the Guggenheim as it was built, was inner structures of the institution which the
neutral. So that I would say that the objections possibly forcing some questions upon the institution, if it is at all sensitive, will take into
certainly do not direct themselves to either character of what an art museum as an institution consideration. And I think any undue rigidity
medium or form but toward motive and result. could accept or (and therefore) ratify as art ? could only work towards its own detriment. So
BR: In terms of the motive and result, selecting TMM: In some mysterious way, yes. Deliberately, that, let's say, difference in installation tech-
these particular systems rather than selecting no; I think deliberately Frank Lloyd Wright was niques, or the placement of a banner from the
systems of property-holdings in general ? much closer to the mausoleum ideal. I think he dome, its hanging in an unconventional way,
TMM : I don't know that I fully understood you. probably had in mind a highly static situation in did not bother us at all as such. It so happens
But I would say that in the motivation again which a great collection assembled by a that an object of that size and assertiveness
what is acceptable is the general illustration of a particular family would be shown permanently undermines not so much the museum's rules,
system. What is for the purposes of this and with a minimum of movement. But at the but its own capacity to coexist with others. It was
discussion inacceptable is that it is aimed at a same time, having been a genius and a man with a commonsense assumption that certain
specific situation. In other words, it no longer great power of perception, he has left open restraints have to be operative in order to assure
has a self-contained creative objective, but is possibilities of art evolution and development the freedom of action of all those concerned.
something with an ulterior motive. And in terms for the future. BR: In other words, in my words, then what
of result, what is bothersome is simply the harm BR : In relation to the potential questioning of Buren did was to effectively bring forth museum
that this could potentially do to a group of the validity of the art museum as an art- criteria of co-operation amongst artists as
people whether they are right or wrong. ratification by even the proposal of putting in opposed to individual personal acts.
BR: What about the good it could do them ? social systems, polls, Young Lords, etc. into an TMM: Well I think that in his effort to upstage,
I mean, would it have been more acceptable had art exhibition, do you think there was any which may or may not have been deliberate, he
it been systems which could do good ? parallel between that and the activity of Daniel created a crisis that could only be resolved in co-
TMM: No, I'm afraid again the principle is the Buren in putting forth a proposal within a group operation among artists and curatorial staff, or
same. It occurred to me in connection with this exhibition that would effectively assault the by the elimination of the trespassing piece.
conversation that there are any number of physical character of the museum space and the BR: Which is in fact what happened ?
situations that need remedy in which remedial notion of co-operation inherent in a group or TMM: Which is in fact what happened. q
37