Meat

David Lynch did paintings that incorporated nature in an odd way.. he put meat in the middle of a painting and allowed it to decay and be eaten. As ants attacked the meat, they affected the paint and the aesthetic of the piece.

"That roast beef has gone through a strange metamorphosis. It was bigger when I started, but one day a squirrel came by and took a big hunk out of it. I'm kinda workin' with it." -David Lynch


Rat Meat Bird
(detail, in the process of creation)
1996, 127 x 152,4 cm


Rat Meat Bird
1996, 127 x 152,4 cm


Abject artist Carolee Schneemann did a performance piece in 1964 called Meat Joy, featuring eight partially nude figures dancing and playing with various objects and substances including wet paint, sausage, raw fish, scraps of paper, and raw chickens. It was first performed in Paris and was later filmed and photographed as performed by her Kinetic Theater group at Judson Memorial Church. She described the piece as an "erotic rite" and an indulgent Dionysian "celebration of flesh as material. (wikipedia)


For the third project Bran and I initially wanted to make the buildings look like they were wounded with fake blood and the impression of flesh. Then we decided against it, and hung little packages of fake blood and raw meat from lines of string. They hung from the cafeteria balcony and under the Kudzu Valley bridge. Within the hour, someone had called the cops and the cafeteria meat was taken down. Allegedly a janitor was waving a broom at them exclaiming, "that's some meat, that's some bloody meat," so there certainly was a response. What I hoped would happen was that people would see the packages and question what they were, why they were there, and even consider whether the installation was art or just a gross prank. However, I have no way of knowing what people thought when they saw the installation or what kinds of conversation they inspired.
A system is a whole composed of parts, so this system was composed of pieces of meat that were installed publicly to confront people and evoke reaction. Whether they were considered threatening, were a health code violation, could have attracted and upset the neighboring wild dogs or other animals, etc. .. the cops decided they needed to come down. I think it was sort of proof of the effectiveness of the system- it was removed to prevent further reaction and response. The cops taking the meat down was supposed to stop the system from being in motion, but was in fact contributing to the motion.

Authority and Art

In class Tuesday we discussed authority and artwork. In a gallery, it is clear that the artist (and the gallery) has authority- you are not to touch the artwork, you are not to look at things that are not art (such as fire alarms or cameras), you are even to maintain a slow walking pace (as Bob brought up - otherwise the guards will scrutinize you). There is a sense that viewers' involvement is limited to pausing and looking. This year for Sculpture I carved a piece of alabaster stone in order for it to be touched and held by viewers. In my statement I did not instruct people to touch it, rather gave subtle permission. When I realized that people were too cautious of the stigma of the gallery to actually touch it, I began telling people directly that they could and should touch it, as it was made for its tactile experience. If I was not in the gallery, many of my friends were still nervous to touch it or hold it because of the judgments of other viewers. Now I keep the piece in my room and allow people to hold it there, where they are generally more liberal in their handling of it. This basically proved to me the stiffness of the gallery experience and the authority of the space.

At the commons, there was a sign on one of the doors instructing "Please do not use this door" and a recycling bin was put in front of the door for good measure while the door was being fixed. After the bin was moved, some people still followed the sign's instruction and did not use the door. Others pushed through the door with no regard to the sign, either having failed to read it or ignoring it with the belief that it was now kosher to use. I saw a student warn a friend not to use the door because of the sign to which he replied "this door has been fixed for like a week" and tore the sign off of the door. He took authority.
Robert put caution tape across one of the entrances to a school building and people trusted the tape's authority and walked around the building. No one took authority to rip through the tape or duck under it to use the door anyway. Robert wanted people to take that authority and challenge the (apparently extremely accessible) tape.
When is it appropriate to take authority over someone's artwork?







"Two city construction road signs near the University of Texas were hacked Monday morning warning the residents of Austin that a zombie attack was imminent." (Ganked this from woostercollective.com)

We also talked about the artist's authority over art. In generative art, when the artist allows external forces to take part in the process, does the artist still have authority? Where does authority go? If an artist creates a machine in order for the machine to produce the art, does the artist still own the work? They may not have absolute control over the process, but they set that organism or machine in motion, right? How much chance has to be involved in an artist's system before it is no longer their work?
When I was hanging the paint drawings from the marble machine Alex and I made, Berta pointed and said, "You?" I wasn't sure how to answer. Are Alex and I the artists? We are artists of the machine, but does that make the art ours? That indirect connection gets blurry to me.