Angle of Repose
Jean Luc Mylayne
Parkett No. 85 Summer 2009
Openings: Josh Brand
Artforum June 2009
Syntax for Minor Mishaps
Christopher Wool
Parkett No. 83 Fall 2008
Oh Inverted World
Fillip Fall 2008
Phillipe Decrauzat
Artforum May 2009
Modernism as a Ruin Preview
Artforum May 2009
Dirk Stewen
Artforum April 2009
Elad Lassry
Bidoun Spring 2009
Jan Mancuska
Artforum March 2009
Joseph Kosuth
Artforum February 2009
Stan VanDerBeek
Artforum January 2009
Graham Farocki Preview
Artforum January 2009
Cosima von Bonin
Artforum December 2008
George Maciunas
Artforum November 2008
Fia Backström
Artforum October 2008
Bela Tarr Interview
BOMB Summer 2007
time.” With the irony of the piece all but sealed up by this comment, a third layer makes the triangulation of the work even more explicit as brief “on-set” depictions of the interview itself (and the film crew behind) are slipped into the highly produced side of the installation toward the end of its twelve-minute running time. This unnecessary step undoes any potential uncertainty in the piece through doubling the casting metaphor. And yet, perhaps Fast has done a service not just for his own future works but other artists’ in exposing the too-evasive nature of the multi-channel gambit and its tendency toward attempting a comprehensive self-reflexivity. Nevertheless, as with the work of Meltzer and Thorne and Yael Bartana, Fast does move productively between the perils of testimonial and allegory. All three of these projects risk enacting and even re-enacting their own position within a hotly debated discourse of specific historical representation while also opening up noteworthy formal approaches to narrative and the increasingly pliable |
notion of documentary. And yet, the exhibition context for much new documentary film and video works made by artists too often betrays an art world preference for easily consumed moments of contestation—short in duration, abstracted in scope—leaving open the question of whether such experiments in collaborative agency suffer from being grouped under catch-all rubrics like the “documentary turn.” Emphasizing a generational shift away from appropriation techniques centred largely around the photograph, these works elaborate a re-imagined “making strange” that plays at telling history in circles far more inclusive and varied in point of view and place of production than a generation prior. As the tropes of documentary film and video—eyewitness, re-enactment, interview, travelogue, etc.—are overturned and evacuated by such delinquent manoeuvres, it is all too clear that terms beyond the documentary are needed for discussing the increased mobility between fact and fiction, document and imagination. |
|
<< |
||
1. [back] “Baroque and Truth,” in Danilo Kiš, Homo Poeticus: Essays and Interviews (New York: Farrar, Srauss and Giroux, 1995), 265–66. Kiš once termed his own approach “ironic lyricism”—informed as it was by a literary tradition that extends back to Franz Kafka, Jorge Luis Borges, and Isaac Babel. He was hounded by politically motivated claims of plagiarism due in part to the innovative forms taken in his short story collections A Tomb for Boris Davidovich (1976) and The Encyclopedia of the Dead (1983), where reference to and alteration of existing documents are enfolded into narratives that embrace a hybrid form between the short story and essay.2. [back] The influence of Russian formalists Viktor Shklovsky and Roman Jakobson’s conceptualizing of ostranenie extends not only to Mikhail Bakhtin’s theory of the “dialogic imagination” but directly to Bertolt Brecht’s verfremdungseffekt, or “distancing effect,” which, in various guises, plays a significant role in the increasingly theatrical exploration of the documentary in contemporary art.3. [back] Benjamin’s example of a story “that does not expend itself” but “preserves and concentrates its energy and is capable of releasing it even after a long time” is taken from the proto-historiography of Herodotus’ Histories and the author’s tale of the vanquished Psammenitus, who stoically watches as his family and subjects are marched into servitude (he is made to stand along the road leaving the city by the victor, Cambyses) and loses his composure only upon catching sight of an old man who was one of his servants. Walter Benjamin: Selected Writings, Volume 3, 1935–1938 (Boston: Belknap Press, 2002), 148.4. [back] Michel de Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984), 123.5. [back] Ibid., 130.6. [back] Eisenstein’s first film, Strike (1924), followed his published manifesto “Montage of Attractions” in the influential review Lef (1923), edited by Vladimir Mayakovsky. Borrowing from photo-montage techniques of Alexander Rodchenko and recent stage experiments by Vsevolod Meyerhold, Eisenstein proposed a new form of sequencing: “The free montage of arbitrarily selected, independent (within the given composition and subject links that hold the influencing actions together), attractions.” See “Montage of Attractions,” translated by Daniel Geroud, in Re: Direction, A Theoretical and Practical Guide, eds. Rebecca Schneider and Gabrielle H. Cody (London: Routledge, 2002), 3047. [back] As stated in the following quote: “Now I’m working on the sequel in which the Jews return to Poland and what happens then,” attributed to Yael Bartana in Aviva Lori, “Breaking the Walls of Indifference,” Haaretz, 24 April 2008, http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/977770.html.8. [back] Toward the beginning of his address to the Institute for the Study of Fascism (in 1934), Benjamin argued for a more directly implicated form of authorship: “Rather than ask, ‘what is the attitude of a work to the relations of production of its time?’ I should like to ask, ‘what is its position in them?’” Reflections: Essays, Aphorisms, Autobiographical Writings, (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1978), 220.9. [back] Hayden White’s The Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1988) tracks the relationship between narrative and historiography from medieval distinctions between “annal” and “chronicle” through to the pseudo-scientific nineteenth-century construction of the “real” in the newly founded field of historiography, and on through post-structural arguments in the work of Michel Foucault, Frederic Jameson, and others.10. [back] Leon Battista Alberti, On Painting, introduction and translation by John R. Spencer (New Haven: Yale University, 1966), 26. |
||