Harry Koon

INTRODUCTION: HOST

Good evening and welcome to our studio discussion. We are delighted to have with us three speakers who are all eminent in their respective fields of art practice. First we have Robert Kline, distinguished writer and theorist, Conrad Getz the celebrated New York critic, and Claire Cansino writer and contemporary art historian.

For our subject tonight we shall be looking at the work of contemporary artist Harry Koontz. His work is process based and often embraces distressing and burning materials to create work. Drawing and painting with his body and hands, found materials, photography, video and light, constitute some of his current media.

TALK

Conrad Getz: (Critic)
I think it was De Kooning who once said that, “there’s no way of looking at a work of art by itself; it’s not self evident – it needs a lot of talking about; it’s part of a whole man’s life”. Here we have in front of us just this one image. Because of this I would propose that we will only ever perceive a faint echo of this artist’s life and work and as such it is only a myth.

What is it then that we ‘see’ in this myth? We come to realise half shapes in play of before us? How do we process the flat playfulness of these aesthetic forms? Does what is left of our ancient cognitive senses alert us to darkness?
If we could fully recognize the forms we ‘see’ might we get back an image of our known? In these half realised shades of a grey world, can we detect reflections of ones own life events that speak? In the background, pale tints of grey, textures of memories long past, sadness, visible but beyond reach and time. The periphery accentuates our view akin to that of looking through a magnifying lens and further darkening existing distortions.
Can we start to think of this work in a different way……? (Interruption)

Claire Cansino (Historian)
Whilst you were talking Conrad, questions were coming to me also about the image and how intangible it seems, its dimension almost beyond access. One cant quite appreciate just where it exists in space/time/distance, and as such we seem not meant by the artist to be able to pin it down further. But if we start to talk about the abstract concepts of something called ‘duration, event and extension’ then we might find another way into the image. We take time – past, present and future so literally to day, but in a very real sense we can never pin down the present. As soon as we speak, that moment that is present is now already the past…..where has it in which to experience the work of art?
With the passage of a duration comes past and future, yet the passage leaves nothing between the past and future. In the image the artist has staged shadow half – images which seem to be circulating, crossing, going behind and merging. Yet where is the moment in time where this might be possible to occur? Past and future mingle, what has happened and what is going to happen come to co-exist. Here I am, standing on the ground, but my feet are not standing in a world where there is a present moment that is the outcome of the past and the promise of the future. What is lost is the concept of a moment in time……the instant ….it is deprived of all temporal extension.

But if we call the work created by the artist, not just an object/image but an event, then the frame changes. For an event can be a stone – a chunk of space and time. An event is an accident – a moment in time when a human being is in contact with a car and run over. The Great Pyramid is an event by virtue of natures materials being used to create a moment in space /time. The factor we perceive with all events is that there is something going on there. What?….at any instant of any hour or minute, chunks, stones, a corn field…… relations are in motion-vibrating, resonating, reverberating…with the question of the event. In such a way a work of art is an event. A thousand noises are voicing an event.

In our world we so readily assume that things have traditional locations. A stone in this sense could be on the ground near my feet. A corn field at0 my waist. The work of art before my eyes, but how is all this helping me appreciating the artwork you might say?
Something called extension and relata define the event, the stone doesn’t have a simple relation, it has a temporal and spatial extension or put another way it is a chunk of space and time. Like so, the artwork is also a chunk of space and time but which is taking part in a series of complex relations, a stream of events or relata.

C.G: (Interruption)
This theory might be all fine and dandy, but is it not simply a myth too, are we not simply wanting aesthetic judgements along with the exercise of our feelings and senses, appreciating what taste is…….

C.C: (Interruption)
That is precisely what I am talking about, all of those but more. I am defining the relational associations between these criteria. Opening them up as Alfred North Whitehead did first and much earlier than we. I continue, bodies and flesh, bones or stone are all to be found as relata , which are always in motion and moving on or happening now. For a stone, an apple in a bowl, a photograph, are all events entering into composition with one another; relata making relational entities. Relata is also event and every event is extended over by other events ….even two events form an almost impenetrable maze.

Robert Kline: (Theorist)
So what exactly are you saying? Something like that our getting to know an artwork such as we have before us is always going to be limited using conventional methods of criticism. …….

C.C: (Historian)
I am saying that we need to open up all our senses in art appreciation. We look at things, ‘see’ things, experience them in the way we have been socially conditioned to do from birth. These are ordinary skills. We need to cultivate exceptional ones. We need to question, examine and look for the ‘unbeseen’ in new ways. Art requires us to intimately engage with it there.

R.K: (Theorist)
Do we not talk about the same when we mention relata and events. I would talk about purity of idea. In the work we are deliberating over I would want to talk about the illusion of shadow and its perception and how the essence of the artists idea is being related outside the concept of the frame. It could be seen to be relating to the personal shadow as well as the collective shadow. Perhaps reflecting those aspects of our common personal character that we might want to suppress. Equally the collective shadow nature of our nation; the things we are not so proud about and tend not to speak become symbolised with darkness and greyness of the intertwining images which cannot be separated by us. We can almost see this being suggested in the work as the spectres change tone and shape.

C.G: (Critic)
Yes, the critic lives by his or her aesthetic judgements which are immediate, intuitive and involuntary, they are subliminal otherwise they would be purely subjective. A precious freedom lies in the involuntariness of aesthetic judging. This freedom allows us to be surprised, extended, confounded and inconsistent. In this way we are free to like anything good in art and to let art stay open.

We look for purity and reflection which shows that anything we can talk about or point at in a work of art excludes itself from the ‘content’ of the work, from its meaning, its gist, its tenor. Anything that doesn’t belong to its content has to belong to its form. Content is indefinable, unparaphraseable, undiscussable.
A work of art inheres in its content. You know that a work of art has content because it has effect. Summarising, content is quality and vice-versa.

R.K: (Theorist)
We all have different ways of approaching the issues that Harry Kontz’s work has thrown up. I prefer to believe that art reflects the truth of society. If society is failing, (e.g. if laws are unjust), art will reflect this failure; if society is progressing, art will reflect that too. With the exception of the culture (movie) industry which produces art that collaborates with the untruth of society and as such denies art any truth content.

The notion of art having truth content reflects not only what society is not, but also what it could be , and should be. When truth content becomes the central concept in aesthetics, we can say that the semblance of beauty, that is, beauty lost or as it might someday be restored in society but natural beauty is ‘suspended history’………………..

Siren

By XESKO

I

Walter McCoy was a of middle age man who had two bad habits, to constantly sipping Jack Daniels from a Whiskey Flask he kept in his pocket jacket and smoking a pipe in a way imitating his youth hero, Sherlock Holmes, who was compared to himself considering as an exceptional researcher, but losing himself constantly in melancholy thoughts with a lot of regrets for not having been born in times of epic swashbuckling. Despite its minor flaws, his work as an art historian, made basically in for the National Gallery, had garnered him many laurels and recognition not only nationally but also internationally. It was this recognition and success that made the direction of the British Museum invited to him to prepare the launch of the long-awaited sculpture by Marc Quinn.

For months, British newspapers had been talking about the launch and some of them had photos with parts of the statue, or showing a side view or just the top or bottom, making it impossible that he could get an idea of how it was in fact as a whole. This campaign had been his idea and was getting the desired result; the day of 4 October 2008 would be marked forever in the annals of art history.

He looked nervously at his watch and headed for the lobby of the Museum, it was time to lift the curtain.

II

John said a vague and dispersed “until next week” to is students of art theory, far from his usual aspect of fun and good-natured that was been is normal state to friends and students, his thoughts wandered through other places, was lost in the inauguration of the new work by Marc Quinn. He pick up the books he had on the desk and went to his office, in the wall was his diploma framed properly by standards, “John Robinson – PhD on Art Theory.” He took it from the wall and, unconsciously, polished it with his sleeve, repeating for the millionth time that gesture of boundless pride for his greatest achievement. He sat in his comfortable chair and began to scratch his beard very much like Freud, whom he perfectly identified and, briefly recalled the time of the College, where he became friends with Walter and Davis, when they became completely inseparable, good times… But now the reality was different, had commitments to be made and as a Professor from the Slade School of Art and understood in Art Theory, it should have a duty to go see the event carefully prepared to the British Museum by his old friend Walter McCoy.

He left the Slade and breathed the air of the surrounding garden considering going to the museum by subway, but its belly and unwillingness to walk led him to enter his Porsche 911 roadster coupe (if nothing else, was happy to show is car ). There was still 1:30 hours to get there, is plenty of time despite the heavy traffic normal at that hour.

III

“Davis, Brook Davis”, said him through his teeth in front of the mirror while wearing his suit. It was nice if his life was so exciting as James Bond, but no, Davis was a man of middle age, tall, dark-eyed, manly-looking seductive and athleticism but was merely a vulgar and monotonous art critic of the magazine “Art Monthly” preparing himself to go to the British Museum to attend the inauguration of the long-awaited art work by Marc Quinn a life-size statue of Kate Moss, carved in gold. The only thing that was similar with the British secret agent was the age and her athletic body that held religiously shaped, maybe because of that and his unstable life full of love affairs that he has changed its initial vocation to the priesthood for a life more typical bohemian who is normally connected to the arts.

Davis looked at his watch and put on the coat in haste, had only an hour to get to the museum. Down the stairs of the building and hurriedly rushed to the Piccadilly line. From his home to Holborn tube station was still about an hour.

IV

Davis was at an accelerated pace towards the entrance of the garden of the British Museum, when he saw his old friend John Robinson parking is Porsche.

— Hello John, don’t you think that it’s time you start a diet, your car is running sideways with your weight. – Said, in playful tone.

— Of course…  I know exactly what you want, is staying with my part in our frolics – Replied with a lively laugh. – Then Walter also invited you?

— It did more than his obligation.

The two friends moved in joyous prattle to the museum talking, as always, about his golden moments and of the various games that they shared over the years.

The door of the museum was full of reporters. A string marked the way to the inauguration, the two friends drove quickly to the inside in time to see Marc Quinn unveil the long-awaited statue featuring the 34-year-old Kate Moss in a yoga position, making it less than three feet tall. Could be heard everywhere exclamations of surprise and pleasure while, as if it was a symphony, heard clicks and saw flashes of cameras.

Walter McCoy reached forward and asked for silence.

— Distinguished guests, colleagues, dear friends and reporters, I present you Siren by Marc Quinn, a 50kg solid gold sculpture of Kate Moss, as of today we can say that in fact the Supermodel Kate Moss has officially earned her weight gold.

There was a general laugh, Walter waited a moment and continued.

— Thanks to British artist Marc Quinn, her famous face and figure have been immortalized as a solid-gold statue, now I give you Marc Quinn.

There was a general ovation so Quinn approached the reporters.

— Today, I wrote a new page in the art history, the value of this life-size sculpture is more than US $18 million. I thought the next thing to do would be to make a sculpture of the person who’s the ideal beauty of the moment, the sculpture is really about whether we make images or they make us. It’s about trying to live up to impossible dreams and immortality…

While Quinn continued his speech, Walter went to the friends who watched with a critical look at all that scenario and inquired.

— So… What do you think?

— Not to doubt that it is impressive, but I wonder about the validity of such work of art in a classic museum as the British Museum. – John replied.

— More – Added Davis – all this was merely a parody as it is not the first time that Quinn made a statue using Kate Moss as model.

— You are not seeing the big picture; in fact, this is the largest solid-gold statue since Ancient Egyptian times. – Walter argued.

— I do not refute that argument, but as I said this is not the first time Quinn featured the supermodel in his work. His Sphinx sculptures also is of Moss doing yoga, the only difference is that series was cast using bronze. So this work is neither innovative nor deserving of such honors.

— In fact I even can see the importance given to the subject – John answered – but from a technically and theoretical point of view, Quinn does not present anything innovative, just a repetition of other similar acts of earlier artists.

— What you don’t want to understand – Walter argued – is the historical importance of the moment, you see, we can compare Mark Quinn’s statue of the supermodel holding a complex yoga pose, to the famous golden mask of Tutankhamun, like that mask, Siren is an image that glows and gives out love and light but it also remains completely implacable and silent.

— Oh yes, I see, – Said John ironically – Kate Moss is fashion’s golden girl, literally!

— And above all – Again added Davis – It’s doubtful that she’s able to contort herself so well in real life. However the statue’s thong-clad crotch is tipped up as she grasps her legs and it somehow becomes just as captivating as the statue’s face, like they’re competing for your attention.

A woman standing nearby, of humble and ordinary appearance, who listened quietly to the conversation, cleared his throat and interrupted them with an irritable conversation.

— The biggest problem between you three, is that each one is pulling the rope to his side and are incapable to see and appreciate the beauty of the statue, are trying to assign specific connotations with your profession or perhaps specific interpretations about particular areas of your study and, therefore, are forgetting the most important, enjoying the beauty of the moment. So do a favor to yourselves, emptied your heads of preconceived ideas and just enjoy the statue for what it is, just a beautiful work of art, nothing more than that.

And saying these words turned his back on them, without even showing intent to obtain a reply and went away. The three friends were astounded and look to the woman who was leaving and, as if ashamed, looked at each other and without saying anything, approached the statue and began to observe it closely, enjoying the surroundings and beauty and the way light was reflected and it conveyed a sense of calm and harmony.

After an indeterminate time, Walter looked at his watch and drew the attention of his friends to the hours; it seemed the time had flown without realizing, as had been enraptured by the beauty of the statue. The three friends walked to the exit, said farewell to each other and went away and as night involved them with a tender calm and peace of mind that none of them felt in years.

Want to read more? Writings from my Head

Andrea Fraser

This conversation takes place amongst three friends/acquaintances in a bookshop café in Central London.  Linda is art historian, Jennifer is an art critic and Charlotte is a theorist.

They are discussing the video performance ‘Official Welcome’, by Andrea Fraser.

 

Jennifer:     What I’m interested in in Andrea Fraser’s work is its immediacy and its appeal.  It’s right there (she holds her hand in front of her face).

Linda:          Hang on, isn’t this the woman who slept with a collector for an art piece?  I think you’re confusing the idea of immediacy with cheap shock tactics that are her way of attracting attention to herself.

Charlotte:    Do you really think that, Linda?

Linda:          Do you think I am being deeply unfashionable objecting to this          woman’s persistent use of her body in her work?  I’m sorry, but I just see her work as recapitulating stereotypes.  I think it’s deeply disturbing and deeply damaging to what feminism has tried to achieve in art.  It’s a slap in the face.  I think its deeply psychologically worrying too, I mean, she slept with a stranger for money.  It is literally, not figuratively prostitution, am I alone in thinking she WENT TOO FAR?

Jennifer:     Don’t you just think this is deeply provocative stuff, it gets people talking about these issues again?  Can’t you see a value in that?

Linda:          Why should I have to accept sleazy art? 

Charlotte:    Come off it Linda, are you really shocked?  Can’t you see a continuum between Frida Kahlo, Ana Mendiata and Fraser?  Women use their bodies in their work not as a recapitulation, but as a way of talking about how this (gestures with her hands over her body).  Society already ascribes THE   BODY to women, and women artists pick up this challenge, this ‘gift’, and they have to do so critically. 

Linda:          Don’t bring Kahlo into this, she is a real artist.  She had a skill, she could paint!  That’s why she is important, she produced objects that could be exhibited alongside men, and she was talking about her personal experience of being a woman.  But her skills give her voice a legitimacy that can’t be taken away from her, and that’s what Feminism needs.  It’s important to trace the history of real women artists, to expand the canon to include THEM.  That’s the important work that needs doing.  Look at that exhibition in Manchester at the moment.

Jennifer:     I’d like to go see that, Angels of Anarchy, have you heard of it Charlotte, its about women Surrealists.

Charlotte:    Hang on Jennifer, Linda made some big statements there I’d just like to counter.  Linda, can’t you see that the history of Western painting is a history of men’s objectification of women?  Men have excluded women artists from the studio so that they remain de-skilled and then exclude them from the history of art because they can’t paint!  Frida Kahlo is amongst the handful of anomalies, and I don’t wish to diminish their accomplishments, but the point is that using conceptual strategies like Fraser employs cannot be dismissed as unskilled because the skill is in the intellectual positioning.  Video art, that is, bad video art, documenting gestures in studios essentially allowed women to be as unskilled as their male peers; and for the sexes to develop a relationship to a new medium in tandem.  What I am saying is it is only the new practices of contemporary art that has a level playing field for women artists.

Jennifer:     I was originally talking about Fraser’s video ‘Official Welcome’, not ‘Untitled’, the one you’re talking about.  The ‘Untitled’ work is more difficult to defend, you either instinctively get it or not, I think it’s a Marmite piece.  I do have reservations about ‘Untitled’ but I admire Fraser’s bravery.  She is utterly committed to her work. 

Charlotte:    She comes out of a tradition of institutional critique, after people like Hans Haake and Michael Asher, and I do wonder what they made of ‘Untitled’, I wonder if they think she has cheapened their ideas.  I love the work, myself.  Going back to what I was saying earlier, about the body always ascribed to women, that is a sense a male inscription.  Men have claimed the intellectual and whilst looking at women, they gave the body to them, as their domain of expertise.  I think Fraser claims ascribed positions assertively with such energy, that she destabilies them in the process.  Sleeping with a collector for art reverses power relations that converge on the female body.  She becomes a formalist!  She sleeps with someone based on their complicity with the form she establishes.  Its arbitrary who she slept with and I think that’s what is shocking.

Jennifer:     Do you think she invited men she fancied to bid?! (giggles)

Linda:          Charlotte I totally disagree.  Can’t you see how base she is?  She’s reducing the attempt to elevate the experience of being a woman to something valid in the artworld.  I’m old enough to remember the feminist declaration ‘the personal IS political’!  I think that’s before your time, second wave Feminism and all that.  The artworld needs to expand its parameters of subject matter for good art made by women artists…

Charlotte:    As opposed to Fraser who you think is not making good art because she isn’t using paint. 

Linda:          That’s right, and she’s just presenting her body in ‘Untitled’, she is reducing herself to a sex worker, a sex object!

Jennifer:     So, what about ‘Official Welcome’, then?  She strips and redresses in that, but Linda, don’t you get something out of her monologue?  She’s observing the artworld, she’s revealing the behaviours of artists.  It’s a pastiche.  Don’t you think some egos need deflating?  And can’t you see that a lot of those egos are men, the domineering pompous collectors, directors, the self-grandising…

Linda:          Argh, its so cynical!  She wants to debase herself and debase art!  Am I the only one to be indignant about this?

Charlotte:    It’s well observed and intellectually engaged and critically rigorous.  What’s cynical about that?

Linda:          This isn’t going anywhere, I think we must agree to disagree.