Joan Jonas and the Object of Performance by Chesli Nicole Lobue A thesis submitted to the School of Art, Kathrine G. McGovern College of the Arts in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts In Art History Chair of Committee: Natilee Harren Committee Member: Sandra Zalman Committee Member: Rex Koontz University of Houston April 2021 Copyright 2021, Chesli Nicole Lobue ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my chair advisor, Dr. Natilee Harren, for helping me navigate the thesis process and for helping me develop my knowledge of history and theory associated with performance art. Without her help, I do not think I would have been able to finish this thesis. I would also like to thank the other members of my committee. Dr. Rex Koontz aided in developing the archeological aspects of this paper. I was also fortunate to be part of the object-based learning class at the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, he and other museum faculty held in 2019, which pushed me towards considering how to view and present works in a museum setting. In addition, Dr. Zalman also contributed towards this conscious critique of the museum setting I had developed. Her class, Museums and Problems of Display, along with various sources she directed me towards, really pushed me to consider the problems and limitations of the traditional museum environment. It was fortunate that all of my committee members' areas of expertise could be threaded seamlessly to aid in developing my thesis. I would also like to thank the rest of the Art History faculty, who have served as invaluable resources to myself and my peers during our time here. Lastly, I would like to thank my fellow graduate students, Ana, Cammie, Sheri, and Lindsey, who have helped each other during this rather unprecedented graduate school experience. iii ABSTRACT Performance art as a medium poses numerous difficulties to scholars and museum professions when trying to both study and preserve the works in question. The work itself is tied closely to a performer’s actions with respect to its setting and audience, which contributes to its ephemeral nature. People have worked to preserve these events, acts, and happenings through various means, including memory, photographic or filmic documentation, and physical remnants or by-products from the event; however, these pieces only provide a fragmented, disjointed image of a complex, multidimensional work. To more closely analyze problems associated with performance art, I refer to Joan Jonas and several of her pieces to serve as a case study for the overarching problems associated with performance studies discussed in the thesis. Her work will enable one to see how the physical remnant connects to the whole act of the past event. After analyzing her works and understanding how Jonas incorporated props and objects into her practice, I will address the residual prop’s potential to be displayed and serve as a reference point or remaining testimony to the artist’s original intent and action. Keywords: Joan Jonas; Performance Art; Preservation; Object; Prop; Ephemerality; Interpretive Archaeology; Display; Time-based Art iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .........................................................................................................iii ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................. iv LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... vi INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 1 CHAPTER 1: JOAN JONAS AND THE OBJECT................................................................. 18 MIRROR PIECE 1 – 1969 ...................................................................................................... 24 MY NEW THEATER 1 - 1997 ................................................................................................ 29 THE SHAPE, THE SCENT, THE FEEL OF THINGS – 2004-2006 ................................... 34 REANIMATION – 2010/2012 ................................................................................................ 44 THEY COME TO US WITHOUT A WORD – 2015 .............................................................. 50 CHAPTER 2: PERFORMANCE ART AND THE OBJECT ................................................. 60 The Terminology and History of Performance Art ............................................................. 60 Relevant Literature and Discourse ....................................................................................... 66 CHAPTER 3: INTERPRETIVE ARCHAEOLOGY .............................................................. 79 CHAPTER 4: MUSEUMS AND POTENTIALS FOR DISPLAY ......................................... 87 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................... 99 REFERENCES......................................................................................................................... 103 v LIST OF FIGURES 1. Joan Jonas, Reanimation, 2012. ............................................................................2 1.1 Joan Jonas, Mirror Piece 1, 1969 .......................................................................25 1.2 Joan Jonas, Mirror Piece 1: Reconfigured (1969/2010), 2010 ...........................28 1.3 Joan Jonas. My New Theater 1: Tap Dancing,1997 ...........................................30 1.4 Joan Jonas, Interior view of My New Theater 1: Tap Dancing, 1997 ................31 1.5 Joan Jonas, The Shape, the Scent, the Feel of Things, 2006 ...............................36 1.6 Joan Jonas, The Shape, the Scent, the Feel of Things, 2005 ...............................39 1.7 Joan Jonas, The Shape, the Scent, the Feel of Things, 2006 ...............................41 1.8 Joan Jonas, Reanimation, In a Meadow, 2012 ....................................................49 1.9 Joan Jonas, Reanimation, In a Meadow, 2012 ....................................................50 1.10 Joan Jonas, They Come to Us Without a Word (Wind), 2015 .............................53 1.11 Joan Jonas, They Come to Us Without a Word (Bees), 2015 ..............................53 1.12 Joan Jonas, They Come to Us Without a Word (Nine Trees), 2015 ....................54 vi INTRODUCTION Imagine that it is 2012, and you find yourself sitting in a black box theater space while attending Documenta 13 in Kassel, Germany. You are sitting waiting for a performance to begin but are not sure what to expect. The stage contains various props and tool-like objects, but it is hard to make out everything clearly. A large white screen serves as a backdrop to the piece adding to the theatrical quality and complicating the viewer’s preparation for seeing the work. Then the performance begins (Fig. 1). A woman clothed completely in white steps onto the stage amidst the props and workspaces as the screen projects a slideshow of self-recorded footage, nature photography, and bits and pieces of what look like past art works. As the slideshow plays, the woman moves, almost dances, across the stage, making sounds with different props, drawing on large swaths of paper on the floor, and sketching underneath a projector that overlays the real-time activities on top of the circulating images projected onto the wall. While this is all happening, the viewer hears a mix of piano, narration, and a person singing in a different language. There is so much going on at once that it is almost hard to take everything in and process it, and, once you finally let yourself go and lose yourself to this eclectic, choreographed collage of different artistic mediums, it is suddenly over. The music stops, the woman bows and leaves the stage, and fellow audience members start shuffling towards the exit. All you can see are pools of her splattered ink projected on the wall and papers with crude sketches of fish on the standing easel and the papers lying on the ground. It looks eerily similar to how it was when the performance began, but the traces of what just happened are visible and impossible to overlook. You want to see more, to know more, but the work is left in pieces. 1 Once the performance is done, and the performers and audience members have left, where does the artwork go? Figure 1. Joan Jonas, Reanimation. 2012. Performance. Kassel, Germany. Photo Credit: Rima Yamazaki, Director of Joan Jonas Reanimation The work previously described was Joan Jonas’s Reanimation (2010/2012) and the description provokes certain questions and problems when dealing with a work that heavily relies on performance. Instead of letting you sit and view the work at your own leisure, there is a limited window in which to view the execution of the choreographed gestures. In respect to this work, how would one be able to relive the series of events previously mentioned without being constrained either to written description or to having to be at the location during the time of execution? When a performance is complete, what remnant has a superior say in representing the past act? How does one begin to approach this herculean task of trying to preserve a moment in time? It is quite difficult to approach this task, especially since preservation is not always necessary or possible in some work, but recording an event for posterity is not an uncommon response to such ephemeral pieces.