FluxusFeminus

KathyO'Dell

There's no denyingit: Fluxus was an inclusiveoperation. The 1993 retro- spectiveexhibition "In the Spiritof Fluxus,"brilliantly organized by Elizabeth Armstrongand JoanRothfuss of the WalkerArt Center, confirmed that there were probablymore women and artistsof color associatedwith Fluxus than with any otherprevious grouping of artistsin Westernart history. This is no insignificantfact, given the originsof Fluxusin the earlyI960s in the wake of the seeminglymonolithic, white, male-dominatedphenomenon of Abstract Expressionism.Charlotte Moorman, Nam June Paik, Alison Knowles, Ben- jamin Patterson,,Kate Millett, Shigeko Kubota, and Yako Ono are onlya few of the artistswho at one timeor anotherwere asso- ciatedwith Fluxus and were representedin the exhibition. Inclusivityis a relativeterm, however, and when it comesto figuringFluxus into the discourseon, say, genderissues, the titleof thisexhibition should be takenvery seriously. For it was, indeed, "in the spiritof Fluxus" thatits prac- tices be inclusive.But the historicalreality was somewhatdifferent-a history impossibleto documentin exhibitionformat due to the amorphousnature of its underpinnings.It is thishistory I wish to explorehere, in an effortto ex- pose those underpinningsand the affectthey had on work by women associ- ated withthe artisticactivities that came to be knownas "Fluxus."'

As is well-documentedin numeroustexts, one of the mostrecent being the substantivecatalog that accompanied the exhibition (see Armstrongand Rothfuss 1993), it was Lithuanian architectand graphic designer George Maciunas who in 1962 bestowed the name "Fluxus" on an arrayof interna- tionalartists who shareda particularsensibility from which theywould work for many years, up to and including the present moment. For the same amount of time,this shared sensibility has defiedfirm definition-a predict- able and no doubt intentionaloutcome of Maciunas's neologizinga name for the groupfrom a rootword signifyingconstant change and transition. The Fluxus retrospective,which in Januaryof 1996 finisheda three-year tour throughthe United States and Europe, revealed certaincharacteristics common in much of the artists'work-wit, love of language games,a pur- posefulchildlikeness. But, veryaccurately, the exhibitionrevealed no unifying sense of style,form, or contentthat might ever allow Fluxus to be pigeon- holed. It was preciselythis lack of stableidentity-a conditionstunningly pre- scient of postmodern art practices-that opened Fluxus up to wide participationbut also, it would appear froma close look at Fluxus history,

The Drama Review 41, 1 (T153), Spring 1997. Copyright ? 1997 New York Universityand theMassachusetts Institute of Technology.

43

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 44 KathyO'Dell closedoff that possibility. Between 1962 and his death in 1978,Maciunas car- riedout frequentacts of excommunicationwhich were paradoxically moti- vated,I believe,by unconsciousfactors-the "amorphous underpinnings" of Fluxushistory-that are part and parcel of acts of destabilization. Fluxusarchivist Harry Ruh6 has documented one ofMaciunas's more con- summatedismissals in hisflamboyantly entitled book Fluxus,the most radical andexperimental artmovement ofthe sixties. He quotesa letterhe receivedfrom GeorgeMaciunas in November1975: "[Charlotte] Moorman is on a Flux- blacklistwhich means that I boycottand do notcooperate with any exhibit, gallery,concert hall or individualthat ever included her in anyprogram or show,past and future" (in Ruh I1979:n.p.).It was notonly work by Fluxus women,however, that suffered from exclusionary practices. Ruh6 quotesan- othersection of the above letter in whichMaciunas categorically brushes aside JosephBeuys, Philip Corner, Toshi Ichiyanagi, Takehisa Kosugi, Jackson Mac Low,Robin Page, Terry Riley, Tomas Schmit, Wim T. Schippers,and Wolf Vostell,claiming they had "nothingto do withFluxus-ever" (1979:n.p.). Despitethe absoluteness of thislast proclamation, excommunications were notnecessarily final. Alison Knowles, for example, has reported that she and Dick Higginswere once excommunicatedbyMaciunas for presenting a con- certin Swedenthat was not in keepingwith a preferredlist of events he had sentthem-sent too late,that is, forthem to changetheir plans (Knowles 1993).The excommunicationwas fleeting,however, as it waswith many of theindividuals on theabove list, a factthat can be witnessedfrom the volume ofthese two artists' works considered by Maciunas to havequalified as Fluxus, severalof which were included in the"In theSpirit of Fluxus" exhibition.

1. & 2. Left:Kate Millett, Stool, 1967.Right: Kate Millettseated on herStool, 1967.(Photos by George Maciunas;courtesy of The Gilbertand Lila Silverman FluxusCollection, Detroit)

Val:::: i~i'''''''''''''::-:j-W

Al,: Iti~

!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii! If :ii iii

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FluxusFeminus 45 Such storiesof excommunication-oftentemporary--of female and male Fluxusartists abound. Nonetheless, even when excommunications were not official,final, or even clearlystated, it was moreoften than not thefemale artistswho took suchresponses seriously.2 It is thelatter stories that are of interestto me,but notin termsof searchingout gossipydetails of who was officiallyexcommunicated from Fluxus when. Rather, I wishto stayfocused on thephenomenon of exclusion,its practice, and itspossible root causes. Given the factthat exclusionary practices have plagued artists throughout history-upto and including,especially, the last several years in theUnited States(Karen Finley, Tim Miller,John Fleck, Holly Hughes, the late ,and Ron Atheyare only a few of the more high-profile namesthat can be cited)-speculatingon causesis not onlywarranted, but imperative. It is mycontention that the root cause of these practices, at leastin part,has to do withthe relationship in thework between body and text.And I mean theseterms to be takenin themost down-to-earth way: body, as theactual physicalentity of the artist;text, as thewords the artist uses or produces. Moreto thepoint, it is,perhaps, the threat this relationship poses to dominant formsof power, when exploited-especially by women-thatprompted dis- missalof certain artists and/or certain of their works from the canon of Fluxus production.(In the case of Fluxus,that power was initiallyembodied by Maciunas,and thenby thosewho followedhis lead.) I say "especiallyby women"since it hasbeen thoughtwithin Western and someEastern tradi- tionsthat concerns related to thebody rest more in thedomain of women, andtextual concerns in thedomain of men. Put the two on a collisioncourse andthere is boundto be a volatileoutcome. "Volatility"is the keyword hereand one thatreadily comes to mind whenone thinksof theinfamous combination of KarenFinley's chocolate- and-tinselcovered body in WeKeep Our VictimsReady (I99o) and herear- splittingtext about the perception of women as nothingbut shit (symbolized by thechocolate) and decorativeobjects (symbolized by thetinsel). In order to getat thesticky issue of exclusionarypractices within Fluxus, it is neces- sarynow to stepback and asksome basic questions: What precisely was the relationshipbetween body and textin Fluxus?What did it look like?What didit suggest? I am goingto concentrateon onlya fewexamples of work, many of them performancepieces, by womenwho at one timeor anotherwere associated withFluxus. Body-text relationships are most obviously explored in thearena of performance,where the activities of boththe artist's body and hertext (whetherthe text be taped,read aloud, or printed)are oftenexperienced si- multaneously.However, as KristineStiles has pointed out in heressay in the catalogfor "In theSpirit of Fluxus,"all Fluxusproduction is "performative" in nature(1993:65). Indeed, whether it be an objectlike Kate Millett's 1967 Stool(plates I & 2), a simpleevent score like GeorgeBrecht's 1962 3 Piano Pieceswhich simply reads "standing/sitting/walking," or an entire evening of liveevents-a "concert," as Fluxusartists would call such an evening-theac- tivationof the body is implicit,if not totally explicit. Manyworks by Kate Millett and Carolee Schneemann serve as examplesof, respectively,implicitly and explicitlyperformative pieces. Both these artists wereat one time"officially" associated with Fluxus. An examinationof the relationshipbetween body and textin a selectionof piecesthey produced bothduring and after their official Fluxus tenure, along with a brieflook at a moresubtle form of prohibitionexperienced by consistentlyofficial Fluxus artistsYiko Ono and ShigekoKubota, will elucidate some of the motivating factorsin exclusionarypractices within Fluxus.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 46 KathyO'Dell In 1975 Schneemannpresented a performanceentitled Interior Scroll for "WomenHere & Now," a programof events held in a churchin EastHamp- ton, Long Island. InteriorScroll brought together elements operative in Schneemann'swork at leastsince her 1962 contribution to an eveningof per- formancesorganized by Dick Higginsand Philip Corner at theLiving Theatre in New York.There, in GlassEnvironment forSound and Motion, she "collaged" thestage with broken mirrors and safety glass, then encouraged performers to movethrough the environment in an effortto "findand develop personal mo- tivationsby immediate contact with materials and eachother" (Schneemann 1979:21).As Philip Corner and Malcolm Goldstein played music, Schneemann shonehigh-powered flashlights on theperformers, producing an effectof "drawingwith light" (21). Fromthis performance through subsequent perfor- mancesat theJudson Church and elsewhere, Schneemann continued to dem- onstratea devotion to processesof drawing and painting. Schneemannalso remainedcommitted to a combinatoryuse ofbody and text.That is, the body, according to herfoundational theory, was to functionas responsivelyas the human eye (9-11I); text was to be incorporatedin the form of audiotapedvoice-overs, text recited aloud, or writtendocumentation that couldserve as inspirationfor subsequent performances, akin to theuse of scores in Fluxus.Interior Scroll brought these features together with Schneemann's feel- ingstoward how she had been received in theart world to date. Schneemannentered the performance space wrapped in a sheet,under whichshe wore a small,decorative apron tied at thewaist. She disrobed, climbedonto a table,and proceeded to outlinethe contours of her body with brushstrokesof darkpaint, intermittently taking up whatshe calls"action poses,"like those implemented in life-drawingclasses. Throughout, she read fromher 1975 book Cezanne,She Was a GreatPainter (Schneemann 1975). At theend of thissegment, she droppedthe book, stood up on thetable, and performedthe most frequently reproduced portion of this piece. Legs apart, kneesslightly bent (plate 3), Schneemannslowly extracted from her vaginal "interior"a long "scroll" of paper from which she read a textthat began:

Carolee ~:xi:a:~- 3. Schneemann, B"i InteriorScroll, performed in "WomenHere & Now" 1~ ,, ?????????- East i'if~S ~iijij~ program, Hampton, j::::::::::: i:~:i:~ diiiiliiiiii~ ~~~iiiiii3~ :2: ::':':' LongIsland, 1975. (Photos ?I;? ~':::-~i:iiiji:iii?i~j?iiii?~t~j''ij':'-':'''''~ z ~iii;~~la ?: "I: i?a :i:j-i.~:l-_:liliii:::::::::::::;::::::r;%'j-.liiiiiil:iriiij'j I:-::il;ii -.-...~~iisisi:iiiii-i ::i'''':''I'E'i:i: byAnthony McCall; cour- :~i::: :ti i~liii;,:-i:riiiiiiiio..:il:..::i:l,~l-::.--- wri8 .~g I:?-* ::~::~:i w :: ;?;? ::.:::::::::ai-i-jiit'::::::::::::' tesyof the artist) :.-::.; z :::: :i:: :.:;i:i:::::::::i:i:i:l;.)R i- 8~33~ ~i~li~ -?-::;~':':::;::::::Xb ~i;i~j~i ::ii~li~-~ir ::s?:?i;::-:-?:1~2?:;:? l:::i I:I-:~ :::::::::::::::-~ ~i~i~B~i:':::::,,::, :j~i::~j:::::::I ;;:cl":;i::i:":::i:i:i:i:ili:i:::::::::::::::i:l;::-:l:l: ~.I; :~~::::::::: ~.~:~~~.:::::::~':::~:~:~:~"~.~i~''~:a:::::::::::::i:-::::::::::l:i:i:i:i:I:i;ji:j~i~ :~:::::::::::::::: i~i~ii~~i~3~:::::::::I:::::::i::=::::::i~:~:::'1 ~i::::::i::k:: ~:iiiiiil::i;i:i~~::::::I:1: iiii-i-i--::? ~ii:~:?:::::i:::::::~::::::::?::j:i::::::i:iii:::.'?:?::':::::::j~:?: ~i :::::r~~ ~::S:::::i::?j:::::::::I :::~J:~~~~:::::::::::..::ii~ :-ii:ii-:~i~i~-~ct~Z~~~~Xi~i~~iiiX:~;'il:'l'i'~' a:~~j :~'''~'~'~~'i~:~i~iii?i~ 8~~ ai:il::a~:~iiiiiiiil,:;:iiliiiiiiiieil:la ~::::::::::::::: ~:r::ii~ biiiiiiil~ji~iii~ i:::::::sa I:r :::::::::::::::::::: :~::n ::::::::2`::I:~i:E"'~:~:::'";;~-::::iiliiiiiliriiii;ii'iii::::::~:::::::::: iiitii~)i~iliis ::::::::::::::::: iiil~i~i~s~- A'li:-:::liiii~iiil::i:iii:i:iiliii'i'iiiii;i ~,,:,,~ii:~!,,.2i~ijijiiiiiij?i:iliii.::::::i:i:::::--?::::i:::::~:::::::::::: ::::::~i:::l:i:::-~::::::::: :::::::::::12~:::L :.I::::I;::::::::j:?::::::::::-:::::::.::-:iiii~t L-i-:?:::i-i:iiii~i"' ::;:::::::i-~ rP~j~3j Iliiiiiiiii'l'i:li:Ililllliilii.:.'i.::5.'i'''''''k..Ci''r~~:.::':::-:::--I-:-:::::::::I" ::::::i:::: ~~i~3i~i :::.::::.:::.:.::::.:.:::.,.::::::::::::::::::::: :~::~::I~:2~:~:: ::::::::::::?::::::i:i:i:i:i:i:l:::::::::?:r:i;:i:i:r:'i:::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::?:?:?::_-,:,:l::,-:iil~:~:~~:: : ::::ii:~ i~i~i:i~iiiiiiili~iiililiiiiiiiiiiiii:ii:;:~:I~;~:~r:-'~:~:::Xr-~iii:i:iliiiiii;c:iliiiii;liiiiiiiiih:i::i:i::'i,::l:i'iil-i?iiiiiiiil:illiiiiliiiiririiili:i:l:i~iii;"3j:::::ii ::~:~:~i~l ii~:IIii~j :?:Ij':::::::::::';~i:l~liii:::::,:,:~,:::-:::::::::?a::-::::::::::i:~j:::::::::- :::: :::::::::i_:----??Iiij ~ i~i~j~~:j~:ij:iz:::?-.~:::::::~~::::?::::::::,::-2:.:;:::.:-::::::?i:::'I:jiii::liii-j:.lijil::iiiiliiill::iiiii'j ::::::::j-.:::::::::::::::j::::::ililiijiililiiiiiiiiIl-:.l-:iiiliiii;iil I~~lilii::iiiiii~i~~::::;:~~ ~:~i'~?Iiiliiiii8i~~iiliiiijijiiiiiii .:iiiii?iiljiil:i..ili?ii;ilZi.i.iil'ii~i~i:jr'iii~ ~ ";;.: ::~~s~::_:I:::_s:::i::::::':':':~::i:: i~I:::::1 i.i~?~l.?.ij:l:,::i:??.???:??.;?i;?i ::~i~::1:::::Z~j:::::::::::::::::;i::::i ?:::i:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::?::: ::::::::::::i:::: ~~i I::""? ':::::':':':':':'':::::~~~i::I:I:i:i~li:i:i:i:l:::i -:_:_j:iiijiji;jjlll-_ijii::jjjiiiiiijijiiiiiii~i ?,: : :::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::: I 5 ::::::::::::_::::_:::::::::::i::::::~:~:~liiiii~i~ ,,: ~i~i.:;?.~.:::;:;:.:.-:.:.:.::::,,~i,..i~~liiiiii~4iiiiil:r:i:ililiiii~i;itiiiiilili;iii::ii:rirri::::::llllil'lli-l-lii: ?_:III::iiiil:i-l:':''ii:i:i~:iii:I::':l iiii~ iliila~ I:;i:i:i':ili-iiiiiiliiiliiiiiil-iijijii)ijli:::::(:::'::: ::~:--:-:-:'::' iiiiiiliii'B':F ~iliQiii~i~ "j~?j~~:iiii~iiiaiiisl??iiiixi:::::,::::.:.::::,:::::::::?:.:::::::.i'::::::::::::::.::::':::::.'1:1:1::::':::::::::::::''''::::::::::::::'?''`' i'l:i:i:l:l:l:l:l.:::::::::':::::::::::iiii~i~i~j~i.. .:::::::::::::::~i~i~i#C~iii~:1:~::::i"~'~~~ r ~~#riix:ii:ii'i'i:i?ijiiiiii?i?ii' ~ ~3~~;. "'''"; :,::,,: liiiiiiiiiiijiiii~l-~:i$i~~~:iiiiijiii ~ -?? ..' :,:,:,:,:,i'j:1'.::':::::::::'::'I:i:i~i~i~ :iiiiiiiiitiiiiiiliri:iiiijiiiiril'.dlliiiiil "~:::::~i~i::~i ~"I :.:::::;:::::,:::::::::::::::: I:i::iiii.~-,:::::::::::::::::::::::::~';:::l:r:i~:r:i':iri::':il:~:iiii-iP:i:i ~'i:;~~:::'~ :t~S ~a~:1 :::::::::::~:_::::r :~::'?:::::~:?::~:~"I:ii::i::i:ii;l?;:~::::::::-;-:-:::::.:l;j::--?:?:?:?:?:?;?::-:::::?:-- :- i-i:j-i''---:lii: -- :? ::::i:i:i:i:i:::::::i:i:i:::i:i:i::-::-: ?? ?????????- :?:::-: ~s~:i~~::l:::::.S:~~?:?:::,:,~~Sliiil~lai;i-i:ir:r:!:: -:li:-i:i:I:_:::: -::: ::'-::-iri-i-::::?:l:I:::i:i:I:i:i:i:::- i.~i~i.~"'"'""e~:?i~s '~'":iiii~i~~~~i'i:3~li~~i~''~'~' 6:i:':::::-:::jj::::::::::?:-?ii-:.I:...... :....:::::::::::'':::: i::::illl:_ ::::::j:::::~ :::::::: :::~i:::::::;::::::::::::i ::~:~:~:::i :~l:i :::::::::::::::?_liiiiiiiili:i:l-l.i::li iliiiijlll:- jiji1:::-:?-::i::::::~ :i: :::::::::::::::::::::::j::::-:':::::i:j:::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::i:ill:ri:-:-::::.;-:iiii~l~jlirir

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FluxusFeminus 47

I met a happyman a structuralistfilmmaker -but don't call me that it'ssomething else I do- he said we are fondof you you are charming butdon't ask us to look at yourfilms we cannot thereare certainfilms we cannotlook at the personalclutter the persistenceof feelings the hand-touchsensibility the diaristicindulgence the painterlymess the dense gestalt the primitive techniques [...] (1979:238)

The complaintsof the filmmakerin thisquasi-narrative are reminiscentof those of Maciunas, who, in his excommunicationof Schneemanna decade earlier,pronounced her, she recalls, "guilty of Baroque tendencies, overt sexuality,and theatricalexcess."' Why thisalleged inability"to look" on the part of the male filmmakerin the narrative,or the inability"to include" on the partof Maciunas? Performancetheorist Jeanie Forte suggests an answerthat builds on French feministthought, namely the theoriesof H6lne Cixous and Luce Irigaraywho claim thatan inextricablebond existsbetween female sexuality and writingor, said more plainly,between woman's body and text (see Forte 1990:259ff). These theorieshave been hotlydebated for over a decade,but Fortemaintains thatany dissent concerning this bond

becomes pointedlyrhetorical with women's performanceart [...]. The veryplacement of the femalebody in the contextof performanceart po- sitionsa woman and her sexualityas speakingsubject, an actionthat cuts acrossnumerous sign-systems [...]. The semiotichavoc createdby such a strategycombines physical presence, real time, and realwomen in disso- nance withtheir representations, threatening the patriarchal structure withthe revolutionarytext of theiractual bodies. (1990:260)

Fortegoes on to addressSchneemann's Interior Scroll specifically, claiming that "it seems as though [Schneemann's] vagina itselfis reporting[...] sexism" (260).4 "Semiotic havoc" is not only the provinceof performanceart, however, as Schneemannproved in her contributionto the book FantasticArchitecture, ed- ited in 1969 by Fluxusartists Dick Higginsand Wolf Vostell-a book thatin- cluded worksby Fluxusand non-Fluxusartists. As partof her essayon "Parts of a Body House," in which enlargedorgans of the body serve as sculptural environmentsfor human activity,Schneemann displayed a nude self-portrait (Schneemann1969). The image of her body appearsacross the middleof the book, with semitransparentpages of textseparating the two partsof the pic- ture(plate 4). The superimpositionof Schneemann'sbody and textconstitutes a send-up of the Playboycenterfold tradition. Unlike Playboycenterfolds, however, which typically feature women in poses configured by men, Schneemann'sself-portrait is in a positionof her own construction,poised as if readyto pounce, eyes assertively,if not warily,trained on the viewer.With

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ijiii l llli .Eii~iiiiiiii~iiiiiiiiiiiliiiiiliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii :::::-:--:i::liilili iiiiiiii"iiiiiiiiiii! iiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii !ii!!iii

::::::::?:??::::::::::::::iiiiiiiliiiililiiiiiili!i!::: I~lii~i! x.j ...... ?P ...... il':iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiilz3"it?~.:::::': !!!!!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~i~i:~i!i~ tiiii:::i %`:?fiii

...... i i~ i -::.l::::::::::::::::::: : : : : : : :::::::::::::::::: : : : : :: : : : : :: : : ...... :-----:---.i.iiiii ...... iiii~ii~ii.ii...... :iiiiiiii.-l~ii----- ala: . ::.iiii:: j ii -i-:-::-::i~~~~: ...... :...... ~?: ...... ~: i .... . x. iiiiiiiiiiiiiii!iiiiiii iiiWii'iil iiiii---- iiiiiiili i-''' l'-::':--::::::- :-:iii- ? ...... li i:Fiii:::-?':::--j ijiijj q...... p XIXiiiii ii :lz ii.ii::'---:::---: ...... iiiii iIi il ...... i ...... :,:~~B.;':~::i~::~:j~j~ ..... axjjj~jjii ...... iiiiii~ilj~,;iiii#ONO~ iiii~ii~iililii~ii~ij~iiiiiiiiiii'::t:gtiiU3.4 of:-:: Wick

l :ii:iij~iril iXi'iiiii!i ":~::I:i:ii:::i!:::ii:i!ii:i :i :....il(._i Bljiilii~Xl~iii...... iii i~i-ii-iiiiiiiiiii~i~iiiiiiiii~iii~i~ '''::"''...... A"'I::: .:i~ ...... :8ii~~i~: 44, :: iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiBiii;.1...... ~i~ i:i:iiiiiiiiiiii! i~ __jiii;:::::::::-iiijri- ?'i::i; ~ ...... :::: .~:O: ...... ??-:: !Zi~i,,, Z:::::::::::?:,,:?:?:::?:-ci:::::::iiii iiiii i:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::i:!:tiiiiiiiiliiiiiiiiii::::::::,i!!i~~~l~ ::?:::::-::::::::::ii M::.:.:::::':~'~:::::~I...... iiilliiii~isiiililiiiiiiiliiii_ :;:;:i!iiii :;i iii:i!i:i~i~i~i~i ?iiwiiiiii X...... ir'~iii...... : ;.; ?~~::??:::::::::j::~ ...... j;l~j::...... ?::?;:a~~~iiir...... ,:: ...... i~ j :j _XX_'i~~iiiii~i~~::::~i: : :: i~:;ji~,.:,__,,~::: : ?~i:'~l'~:'" ~j;:;~ .. i:,::::~ii jj~j:~il::::: :i i i i ;;;?;~nrra8 il::I:::::: ?ail~t~i:_'##:xxx'i::"'i:~'jlikiiiiiiiiiil~iiii : ~iii~~ijiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~iiii~~iii~iiiii :iS-iii tr_ ill: "Hiiiiiiii~i.~i?:::::::::' X~iiiiiiiiiiiiili~S:~~~:~:~~~::::::::: :ii::.~~~~~~ ------...... :::i~i~~i~i i~i~iiiiiLliiiiiiiiik?i~:r4i .;if:Qiti~iii~ii~iiiiiiii-~i .:,.?.??.?..,I~iIQ iiiiiiiiiiiiikiii??.?..?..?..,??;:, 'iililiiii :i~i;-~iii'risiiiiiiiiiiiiiji':ljijjijii~ijaaaiii:i ...... '.0 'jii:''...... ~~~-' : : : : : : : : : :~ i ii i : : i ii mi P l-~::i~jii~iii~ii~i iiii-~';:~)i~:-i~:'~:i'':i'''~9:~~~~::ii~ P4?:,i:l`X~ : : -OEM::::: :

4. & 5. CaroleeSchneemann, from "Parts of a BodyHouse," in FantasticArchitecture, ed. DickHiggins and WolfVostell (1969, Something Else Press). (Photos courtesy ofthe artist)

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FluxusFeminus 49 the semitransparentpages of text cuttingacross the picture, her body, no matterhow you look at it (plate 5), cannotbe seen as a totalizedand thusmore easily controlledentity. Only Schneemann'sbody ...... and text,superimposed and interrelated,can be seen as a totality-one whose agencyrests with the artist herself.But something'swrong with this picture: ...... thatwhich has been leftout...... Besides the written text for "Parts of a Body House," Schneemannhad expectedthat the editors would include the detaileddrawings of the various "body rooms,"such as "GuerillaGut Room" (plate 6. Carolee 6) and "Genitals Play Room" (plate 7). While the Schneemann, ostensiblereason for the work not to be includedwas financial5-understand- "GuerillaGut Room," intended able on a consciouslevel-is it too speculativeto imaginethat on an uncon- 1966,originally with"Parts sciouslevel, the editorsmay have feltthat to include yet anotherform of forpublication a House." "Fluxus Feminus"representation would onlyhave increasedthe excessiveness of Body (Photo the of thebody-text relationship already inherent in the "centerfold"? courtesyof artist) It would appear thatit was a similarexercise of agencyand excessiveness, launchedfrom a provocativerelationship between body and text,that prompted Kate Millett'sdisappearance from the Fluxuscamp. In Millett'scase, however, therewas no formalexclusion carried out, simply the end of herinclusion.6

Millettmet Maciunasin the mid-196osand, as the documentscompiled by archivistJon Hendricksin Fluxus Codex show (1988:4o3-05), between 1967 and 1969 Maciunas consideredmass-producing some of Millett'sobjects, in- cludingStool, which is picturedin the Codex.7 A plain wooden stool with a cushionedseat and each leg stuckinto an everydayshoe, Stooldisplays typical Fluxus principlesof wit and surrealjuxtaposition-here, the juxtaposition of movabilityand stasis.According to Millett,it was the dada fun and surreal transformationinherent in Fluxus thatkept her involvedin the movement.8 She exploredthis quality in her installationwork of the period as well-for 7. CaroleeSchneemann, example,in Trap(1967). "GenitalsPlay Room," Trapis representedin the Codexvia a photograph,taken by Maciunas,of a 1966,originally intended segmentof the installationentitled "City of Saigon" (cf. plate 8). Consisting forpublication with "Parts of high-heeledpapier-machb legs protrudingfrom a stringof wall urinals,the ofa BodyHouse." (Photo of segmentwas meantas a commentaryon America'sperpetuation prostitu- courtesyof theartist) tion in South Vietnam duringthe war. The female body,trapped by an emblemof male bodilyneeds, is reducedto and framed(entrapped) as fetishisticfrag- ment. Anothersegment, not picturedin the Codex,fea- turedthe hauntingtorso of a femalefigure (plate 9). This figuremakes the most directreference to the background narrativefrom which Millett's work from mid-1967 onward grew. The year before, Millett read a newspaper storyabout a young girl named SylviaLikens, who had been brutallytortured over the course of weeks by severalteenagers and a woman with whom she had been boarded in India- ...... i~iiii}...... ~i; napolisby herparents. The girlwas eventuallyfound in a back bedroom of this woman's house-found dead, with an inscriptioncarved into her body. The MI inscriptionread: "I am a prostituteand proudof it."'9 This utterlyshattering relationship between body and text,and the myriadmeanings issuing from that

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 5o KathyO'Dell

....

8. KateMillett standing nextto "Cityof Saigon," a segmentof her installation ...... Trap,307 Bowery,New YorkCity, 1967. This photois similarto the one in FluxusCodex (Hendricks1988). (Photo P iI byGeorge Maciunas; cour- tesyof the artist)

relationship,became the touchstonefor almost all of Millett'ssubsequent ar- tisticand writtenproduction. In SexualPolitics, published in 1970,Millett ana- lyzed patternsof sexual domination in historyand literatureto show the ideologicalhold thosepatterns have on Westernculture. This book, Millett's otherwritings, and her artworkcontributed immensely to Americanradical and culturalfeminist thought and artisticpractice in subsequentdecades.'" Her work also connects,as does Schneemann's,to Frenchfeminist theory, espe- ciallyto the conceptthat "to writefrom the body is to re-createthe world" (see Jones 1985:366). Clearly,the factthat Sylvia Likens' body had been so tragically"written for her," her sexualityfictionalized and inscribedupon her, motivatedMillett to writein an effortto "re-createthe world." And she has done so, in both her artand her writingup throughher 1994 book, The Poli- ticsof Cruelty: An Essayon theLiterature ofPolitical Imprisonment." The Codex, as alreadymentioned, does not include a photographof this segmentof Trap,nor does it indicatein any otherway thatthe SylviaLikens storyis a referencepoint for Millett's work. This absence,as I see it, produces a disturbingdecontextualization of the Trapinstallation, a troublingseparation of body and textthat disallows full cross-referencing between this story of en- trapment,the storyof entrapmentof South Vietnamesewomen in the J96os, and millionsof otherstories of oppression.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FluxusFeminus 5 I In all fairness,the Codex does not profess to providea wide-rangingdocu- mentationof Fluxus. Given that, one canbe gratefulto Hendricksfor having includedTrap at all. For to qualifyas an entryin the Codex,as Hendricks writesin his"Foreword," an artworkhas to havebeen "listed or describedin a Fluxuspublication or [...] mentionedin correspondenceby George Maciunasas beingplanned as a Fluxuswork" (1988:25). Trapdid not qualify. Whatinterests me historicallyabout this system in thecase of Kate Millett is thefact that the last recorded "listing [...] description[...] or mention"of herwork "in Fluxuspublications or byMaciunas in correspondence"(hence, herlast mention in the Codex)is citedas "ca. December1969" (403-05)- preciselythe time frame in whichSexual Politics was being published. Millett hasclaimed that virtually all hersculpture qualifies as Fluxus(and there are manymore examples beyond those already mentioned, ranging from Roller SkateTable, (1965), to "Windowin Clare"from the installation Madhouse, Madhouse(1987; plates 13 & 14),to Psychiatry(1995; plate io), whichwas fea- turedin an entireexhibition she entitled "Flux Sculpture," held at theNoho Galleryin New York,March-April 1995). She hasalso clarified that she did

9. KateMillett, segment of Trap, 1967,referring tothe SylviaLikens story. (Photo byGeorge Maciunas; cour- tesyof the artist)

ii~i~iiiIX

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 52 KathyO'Dell not feelexcluded by Maciunaspersonally. Nonetheless, documentation of Millett'sofficial inclusion in Fluxusstopped just as herwriting started spilling out intothe world, taking the body-"sexualized" and "politicized," to bor- rowfrom the title of her groundbreaking book-with it. Is it too speculative,once again, to suggestthat what could be construedas an excessivebody-text relationship-that is,energetic literary and artistic pro- ductionregarding this relationship-might have had something to do withthe cessationof Millett's official involvement in Fluxus,in thesame way that ex- cessseems to haveprompted Schneemann's excommunication? Ifso, themo- tivationswere no doubt,as in Schneemann'sexperience with the Fantastic Architectureproject, unconscious. But shouldunconscious motivations not be takeninto account when considering the ramifications ofexclusion?

The conceptof women's texts exceeding the body but never leaving it and all its"sexual politics" behind is, I believe,fundamental to the work of many womenwho at one timeor anotherwere associated with Fluxus. Other ex- amples,which attracted an arguablyless serious form of exclusion-harsh cri- tique-canbe foundin certainworks by Shigeko Kubota and .

1o. Kate Millett,Psychia- try,at her"Flux Sculpture" exhibition,Noho Gallery, 1995. (Photoby Kate Millett,courtesy ofthe artist) "X? ;x, ...... Y- ?X. X......

Oxi 22

...... X.,

MA, R:ii i :x. x

i:*.Xxm:, F.X,

,oX X.,", XXME e ".XXX

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FluxusFeminus 53

_Mir

1I. ShigekoKubota, Va- ginaPainting, performed atPerpetual Fluxfest, New YorkCity, 1965. (Photo byGeorge Maciunas; cour- tesyof The Gilbert and ...... LilaSilverman Fluxus ...... Collection,Detroit)

Kubotaenjoyed unbroken participation in Fluxus.But as Stilesreports in hercatalog essay, the artist felt that fellow Fluxus members loathed her 1965 performanceentitled Vagina Painting (plate i ), in which,crouching over whitepaper, she executed a paintingwith a brushattached to herunderwear (1993:77).Kubota "redefined Action Painting according to thecodes of fe- maleanatomy," Stiles argues (1993:82). To be sure,when situated in theart historicalcontext of AbstractExpressionism, Kubota's piece can be seenas wreaking"semiotic havoc" with this mode of production's masculinist con- cernsof mastery over ever-increasing amounts of visual space. Stilesalso quotesYoko Ono, who felther work was oftenrejected by Fluxusparticipants, because it was "too animalistic"(1993:77). Perhaps Ono wasspeaking of works like Cut Piece (plate 12), in whichshe takes on thelook of a creaturein theprocess of being skinned. In thisperformance, first pre- sentedin 1964in Kyoto,Japan, then at CarnegieRecital Hall in New Yorkin 1965,and at theDestruction in ArtSymposium in Londonin 1966,Ono knelt,placed a pairof scissors in frontof her, and invited audience members to comeup on stageand cut the clothing from her body. Throughout most of thepiece she sat completely still, training an icystare on theaudience, past thosewho tookher up on heroffer. By ironicallyreplicating stereotypically malepractices of voyeurism, as well as stereotypicallyfemale states of passivity, shecompeted with traditions of voyeurismand demonstrated another form of masteryover visual space.'

It wouldappear from all theexamples discussed that it is therelationship be- tweenbody and text-especially in thehands of women-that can trigger ex- clusionor, at the very least, harsh critique from those involved with a canonized artpractice such as Fluxus.One aspectof the strategy used by the artists in the

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 54 KathyO'Dell

......

12. YokoOno, Cut Piece, performedat Yamaichi Concert Hall, Kyoto,Japan, 1964. (Courtesyof Lenono Photo Archive. ? 1964Yoko Ono)

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FluxusFeminus 55 worksI havebeen discussingis thatof playing ball, so to speak,in theboy's gym.13As such,the strategy was situated time-wise in theearly days of the sec- ondwave of 20th-century feminist thought and action, where vying with patri- archalconcerns in an effortto claima morefeminized space was plenty to deal with.But there was far more going on in theseworks than a pro-condebate. I believethat it was notonly the implementation of a feisty,oppositional typeof strategy that triggered practices of exclusion within Fluxus. There was yetanother form of "semiotichavoc" in operation-acomplex, ambiguous formthat incorporates aspects of a morepsychoanalytically based feminism that grewin prominencefrom the 1970sonward. This view disallowsan exclu- sivelyresistance/counter-resistance readingof Fluxus works. Such a reading- drivenby a notionof woman's difference from man wherein "difference" can be too easilyconstrued as a simple,biological concept-is inadequate to these worksand to be avoided. In part,my caveat appends that of Ann RosalindJones, who is waryof feministviews that merge body and text in a mannerthat assumes the body to be a whollynatural entity-a "given" represented in or bywomen's texts as a sourceof essentialized self-knowledge. Jones, whose focus is feministliterature butwhose argument applies to anyform of representation, feels that to idealize women'swriting in thismanner-as "an overflowof [...] woman'sunmediated communicationwith her body" (1985:374)-is to forgetthe impact of social realitiesthat intrude in thevery space that certain body-text conflationists (as one mightcall thosewho deducethe power of representation directly from corporeality)would like to shrink. Theorieschallenging conflationists (or "essentialists,"to use morecommon terminology)have come from feminists sometimes known as "construction- ists"because they believe, according to Diana Fuss'sconcise summary of es- sentialismand constructionism,that gender has more to do with "the productionand organization ofdifferences [...rather than...] any essential or natu- ralgivens [that] precede the processes of socialdetermination" (Fuss 1989:2- 3). Constructionismhas been informed by a wide rangeof theory-political, social,and psychoanalytic. In the psychoanalytic realm, the research ofJacques Lacanhas been particularly useful. Lacan's findings also have resonance in the artworksunder discussion. Buildingon Freud'stheories concerning the phallus, Lacan went on to em- phasizeits importance less as a biologicalentity than as a symbolof social powerand, further, to questionthe context of thephallus in thepatriarchal worldof symbolism itself (see esp.Lacan 1985:6iff; Lacan 1977;Grosz 1990). Lacan'stheories are based on clinicalobservations that led himto conclude thatthe male and female unconscious is encodedin thevery first year of life and is shapedby languagethat issues from the phallocentric social patterns into which individualsare born. Differingfrom the theoriesof the conflationists/essentialistswho believe woman can "writethe body," Lacan believesthe body is "alreadywritten." That is, thebody, of whichone be- comesconscious by incrementsthroughout child development, is already writtenby theunconscious mind. By locatingprecise shifts in thisdevelop- ment when verbal language skillscome into being to representthe uncon- scious, Lacan opens the door for individualsto seize control of what these momentsentail, to take command of the powers of representationthrough which the body is alreadyand alwayswill be mediated,to marshallsuch effort towarddoing one's mediatingoneself. What is so compelling,I believe,about the artworksI have been addressing, is thatthere was an oppositionalstrategy at work (at leastpartially reminiscent of essentialistviews) as wellas a strategyinculcated with psychoanalyticprin-

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 56 KathyO'Dell

ciples (prescientof laterdevelopments in constructionism).One strategywas neverprivileged over the other.Both were in operation.For example,for all of Millett's"writing from the body," it shouldnot be forgottenthat her moti- vatingstory was thatof the worstpossible case scenarioof the "body already written."Indeed, Millett has continuallydemarcated woman's differencefrom man in herwork, but it is alwaysin termsof a highlypoliticized and socialized difference.And while workslike Ono's Cut Piece,Schneemann's Interior Scroll, and Kubota's VaginaPainting may all focuson the body as a seeminglypure, whollynatural entity, they simultaneously literalize the activities,respectively, of shaping,writing, and painting.In so doing, the worksrepresent the phe- nomenonof symbolicrepresentation itself. It is preciselythis commingling-this adamant, though never trumpeted, desireto occupy some middleground between what would only laterbe la- beled essentialismand constructionism-thatI feel may just have been the last push needed to triggerexclusion of the artistsand/or aspects of theirwork just examined.For to occupy a middleground was to defythe verykind of binarythinking on which the whole problemof sexismhistorically hinges- the verykind of binarythinking that is, ironically,at the heartof an exclu- sivelybiology-based essentialist strategy or, even more ironically,the debate betweenessentialism and constructionismitself. While these Fluxus examplesmay only make subtleconnections to then- inchoatepsychoanalytic theories of representationlike those I have sketched, the connectionswere crucial. For it was those connections,I believe, that helped facilitate-alongwith a strongelement of social and politicalconcern 13. KateMillett, "Window emanatingfrom what to some mightlook like nature-boundessentialist in Clare,"a segmentof her works-the possibilityof a middle ground. This conclusion may sound installationMadhouse, strange.Isn't psychoanalytictheory generally seen as one of the bolstering Madhouse,Noho Gallery, agentsof constructionismpure and simple?The answeris, no. In fact,as Fuss New YorkCity, 1987. so convincinglyargues, neither constructionism nor essentialismis so pure,so (Photoby Kate Millett; simple,so monolithicin itsdefinition. As muchas Lacan has servedas a touch- courtesyofthe artist) stonefor constructionists, he, too, as Fuss pointsout, veerstoward essentialisnm--specifically, in his"aim to returnthe institution ofpsychoanalysis to its authen- tic Freudianroots. Lacan's mission is to restorepsy- to its essential to whatis most X.Xiiii~~~i'','ii!iiiii!!iiiiil choanalysis truths, 'X VA~ radicaland irreducibleabout it" (1989:Io). Con- :'iiii~iiiiii~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!!M in Fussshows how the :,,ii!i versely, regardto essentialism, :iiiii~ii...... % socialconstruction ofthe very language in whichone has to thinkthrough or talkabout natural essence makesit to frameessentialism as % impossible purely i i~~i~------.. i::%iii% natural(5).14 In morerecent years, Lacanian theory has been putto use bymany feminists and artists who grapple with,among other things, the ambiguities of gender: ...... issuesof . .. genderslippage, masquerade,bisexuality, / ii~iiiiiiiiiiiiii andother complex areas of representation that can- notbe containedby a simple,male-versus-female, oppositionaldebate. Questions of identity-What is themeaning of "she"? Is shea she?Does itmatter?- areburied like land mines in themiddle ground be- tweenessentialism and constructionism."Woman" thenbecomes an unstablecategory, a matter of na- tureas wellas representation,a force that can be ma- nipulated(made explosive, even) through the critical agencyof feminists and artists.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FluxusFeminus 57

Even thoughin today'sart world, as in the earlier daysof Fluxus,exclusion is notgender-specific-to wit, thelist of artistscited earlier (Finley and Hughesas well as Wojnarowicz,Fleck, Miller, and Atheyhave been plaguedby censors)-nonetheless,it is, by and large, the work of women or gay men thathas been under fireduring the pastseveral years. Thus, the speculative questionwith which I wishto concludeis this:Might not theimpulse to excommunicateon thepart of those with the power to do so, thenand now, have some- ?ngwxlm ...... thingto do with theirperception of what could be calledthe "'femme'...in...us"-the"us," of course,in- menand women, and alike? cluding gay straight, 14. KateMillett, detail, Those who and benefitmost fromthe dominant struc- represent power "Windowin Clare,"a seg- white,heterosexual males-tend to the ture-generally stereotype complex, mentof the installation of the "feminine" the of ste- ambiguousqualities and, through phenomenon Madhouse,Madhouse, reduce,circumscribe, and containthose reotyping, qualities,thereby making 1987.(Photo by Kate it easierto exclude the activitiesof so-called "feminized"artists, be fe- they Millett;courtesy ofthe artist) male or male. Thus, thosein positionsof power, presumably,can reduce the riskof discoveringthat complex, ambiguousgender-related qualities reside withinthemselves. What thiswould mean, of course,is thata middleground exists-a middleground of sharedpower. Veryscary for those who thinkin absolute,either/or, black-or-white terms. Maciunas,long pastthe heightof his excommunicationpractices and just a fewmonths before his death,carried out a cross-dressingritual at his own 1978 Flux wedding.'5He exchangedwith his soon-to-be-wife,Billie Hutching,his white tuxedo shirtand bow tie forher short,black, straplessslip and long- hairedwig. One wonders,when imaginingthis scenario, if thoughtsof the "Fluxus 'femme'-in-us"could have been an unconsciousmotivating factor, alongwith all the othermore consciousfactors Maciunas proclaimed (his aver- sion to artistsnot stickingto his preferredlineup of performances,as citedby Knowles, or his dislikefor "overt sexuality" and "theatricalexcess," citedby Schneemann)in at leastsome of his earlierexcommunications? The abilityof all the artistsdiscussed to both writefrom their bodies and acknowledgethat theyhave alreadybeen written,though once (perhaps)threatening, toward the end of Maciunas'slife was (perhaps)a reminderthat the "feminine"is not en- tirelyabout naturenor entirely about societyand, therefore,not a threatto one's own biologicalor socialstatus. That Maciunas titledhis performanceBlack & Whiteis telling.I would like to thinkthat Maciunas discoveredwhat some of the work he and othershad dismissedhad been demonstratingall along-that naturaland social concep- tions of the "feminine,"and the connotationsof power thatattend, are not black-or-white,either/or issues. They can be constantlymixed-exchanged, as Maciunas so provocativelydemonstrates by involvinganother person, a biologicalfemale, in thissymbolic trade of gender-codedprops. The "feminine,"then, is shown to be both natural(the biological body does, afterall, remainafter all is said and done) and somethingwonderfully ar- tificial,something that can be changed(at leastin appearance,like any "text") at will. Akin to the veryfield of languagein which Maciunas loved to play, the idea of "woman" was shown to be somethingthat could be constructed and reconstructed,neologized, put on and takenoff.'6 Maciunas's cross-dressing,then, his fake femininitythrough which the threatof woman was possiblydispelled, stands as an unconsciouslymotivated testimonyto the successfulcontributions of the manywomen artistswho have been, at one timeor another,a partof Fluxus.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 58 KathyO'Dell Notes

I. Versionsof thisarticle were presentedat "FluxForum,"a symposiumheld in conjunc- tion withthe openingof "In the Spiritof Fluxus,"Walker Art Center, Minneapolis, 12-13 February1993, and at the San FranciscoMuseum of ModernArt, 2 June1994, whenthe exhibition was on view there. 2. An exceptionhere maybe Alison Knowles. Knowles' relationshipwith Higgins af- fordedher the opportunityto observefirsthand a male artist's"excommunication" by Maciunasand tojudge it somewhatless than personal or permanent. 3. These are the termsof Schneemann'sexcommunication as she remembersthem. She received notice of her excommunication, originally published as a note in a Fluxnewsletter,in the mail in the mid-196os,but in thosedays, she says,she did not hangon to thingsthat brought her bad news (Schneemann1993). 4. For anothercritical analysis of Schneemann'sInterior Scroll, see AmeliaJones (1994:30- 32). Also see KristineStiles' catalogessay for Schneemann's recent exhibition at the of ContemporaryArt, New York (1996:I5-25). Stiles brilliantly retheorizescanonized views of Schneemann'swork, arguing that it be seen as consti- tuting"breaches of decorum"rather than "transgression," a label Stiles feels is too often and inappropriatelyapplied to thework. 5. Schneemannrecalled in an interviewthat as the book was being put together,eco- nomic reasonsmight have been givenfor editing out her drawings.In the discussion period followingthe February1993 "FluxForum"symposium panel on whichI pre- sentedthe firstversion of thispaper, Dick Higgins,who was in the audience,stated thatif his memoryserved him, the reasonfor the exclusiondid have to do withfinan- cial limitations. 6. Recently,however, Millett was invitedto participatein a "FluxusReunion Program" thatwas partof "SeOUL-NYmAX: A Celebrationof Artswithout Borders" held at the AnthologyFilm Archives in October 1994. (For a criticalreview of thisevent see Chin 1994.) Millett'scontribution was entitledEncounter with the Papal Nuncio,in which she announcedto the audiencethat a papal annunciatewould soon arriveto hold a conversationwith her about abortion, contraception, and AIDS; he would then, accordingto a prioragreement with Millett, telegraph the proceedingsback to the Pope. As she waitedon stagewith a Roman Canonical Missal (a giftfor the alleged visitor),Millett shared her own views on theseissues. After ten minutes,when it be- came clearto the audiencethat Millett's initial announcement was a hoax and thevisi- torwould not be arriving,Millett concluded her monolog, which had been stimulated in largepart by controversiesraised at the UnitedNations Conference on Population heldin Cairo a fewmonths earlier (Millett 1995a). 7. Some of the otherworks listed in the FluxusCodex include "Dinnerware" and "Dis- posableDishes & Cups," whichMillett remembers (Millett 1995a) as herMetaphysical Food, Foodfor Thoughtseries (1965), an example of which is picturedin the Codex (Hendricks1988:403). Hendricksis the curatorof The Gilbertand Lila Silverman FluxusCollection, Detroit. 8. This and otherpreviously unpublished comments by Millettin the upcomingsection are frominterviews with the author held between January 1993 and August1996. 9. For Millett'saccount of theimpact of thisstory on herartwork and writing,see herar- ticle,"From the Basementto the Madhouse" (1988), reprintedin O'Dell (forthcom- ing). Also see Millett'sbook, Basement:Meditations on a HumanSacrifice (1979). 10. One exampleof the high regardin which Millett'sartistic contribution to cultural feminismwas heldis thechoice on thepart of theWoman's Building in Los Angelesto hoistatop the building,in celebrationof the institution'sfifth anniversary, one of the six colossal figuresMillett had made during a residencythere in 1977. The series of fig- ures was entitled Naked Ladies. For discussion of this project, see Woo (1978); Buss (1977). For an excellent summary of the histories of, and distinctionsbetween, radical and culturalfeminisms, see Echols (1989:3-22). I . In Millett's most recent book, (1995b), a memoir of her Aunt she still A.D. Dorothy, attemptsto "re-create a world" that entraps through oppression; but here, oppression was experienced less in terms of physical incarceration and more in termsof a complex form of emotional entrapmentenacted through familialguilt. For more informationon Millett's artwork, see Keating (1995:329-4o6) and. the exhibition catalog for Millett's firstsculpture retrospective(O'Dell, forthcoming).

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FluxusFeminus 59

12. For more informationon Cut Piece,see Stiles (1992:34-37); Stiles (1993:81); and Haskelland Hanhardt(1991:9o-92). 13. Milletthas usedsimilar terminology (1993) to describethe sensation of beinga woman workingwith Fluxus male artists in the 1960s. 14. Fussbases her claimagainst essentialism's purism on JohnLocke's distinctionbetween "real" and "nominal"essence in his 1690 An EssayConcerning Human Understanding (see Fuss 1989:I22 forspecific citations). Following Locke, Fussargues that "real essenceis itselfa nominalessence--that is, a linguistickind, a productof naming"(1989:5). 15. Photographsof thisperformance can be foundon page 84 of the In theSpirit of Fluxus catalog(Armstrong and Rothfuss1993). 16. Stiles'discussion of Black& White("clothes contribute to the social constructionsof gender,despite sexual affinities and attitudessupported by the corporealand psycho- logical body beneath them" [1993:85]) was helpfulto me here, as was Rebecca Schneider'ssuggestion (1995) thatI look at Fuss (1989) to help clarifymy argument that"Fluxus Feminus" works occupy an unusualmiddle ground between construction- ismand essentialism.

References Armstrong,Elizabeth, and Joan Rothfuss, eds. 1993 In theSpirit of Fluxus. Minneapolis: Walker Art Center. Buss,Shirl 1977 "Kate Millett:Omnipotent Nudes and SubterraneanTerrors." Lesbian Tide 6 (May/June):4-5. Chin,Daryl 1994 "SeOUL NYmAX and FLUXFEST, AnthologyFilm Archives." Performing ArtsJournal 48 (September):52-58. Echols,Alice 1989 Daringto Be Bad: RadicalFeminism in America,1967-1975. Minneapolis: Uni- versityof Minnesota Press. Forte,Jeanie 1990 "Women's PerformanceArt: Feminism and Postmodernism."In Performing Feminisms,edited by Sue-EllenCase, 251-69. Baltimore:The JohnsHopkins UniversityPress. Fuss,Diana 1989 EssentiallySpeaking: Feminism, Nature and Diference. London: Routledge. Grosz,Elizabeth I1990 JacquesLacan: A FeministIntroduction. London: Routledge. Haskell,Barbara, and John G. Hanhardt 1991 YokoOno. SaltLake City:Peregrine Smith Books. Hendricks,Jon, ed. 1988 FluxusCodex. New York: HarryN. Abrams. Higgins,Dick, and WolfVostell, eds. 1969 FantasticArchitecture. New York: SomethingElse Press. Jones,Amelia 1994 "Postfeminism,Feminist Pleasures, and EmbodiedTheories of Art."In New FeministCriticisms: Art/Identity/Action, edited by Joanna Frueh, Cassandra Langer,and ArleneRaven, 16-41. New York: HarperCollins. 1996 "InterpretingFeminist Bodies: The Unframeabilityof Desire." In TheRheto- ricof the Frame: Essays Towards a CriticalTheory of the Frame in Art,edited by Paul Duro, 223-41. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. Jones,Ann Rosalind 1985 "Writingthe Body: Toward an Understandingof l'criture feminine."In TheNew FeministCriticism: Essays on Women,Literature, and Theory,edited by ElaineShowalter, 361-77. New York: PantheonBooks.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 6o KathyO'Dell

Keating,Anne B. 1995 "'A World We Have InventedHere': ExploringCommunity, Identity and Artin the Constructionof 'The Farm,'Kate Millett'sFeminist Art Colony, 1978-1994."PhD diss.,University of Maryland, College Park. Knowles,Alison 1993 Interviewwith author. New York,January. Lacan,Jacques 1977 Ecrits,a Selection.Translated by Alan Sheridan.New York: W.W. Norton. 1985 FeminineSexuality. Edited by JulietMitchell and JacquelineRose. New York: W.W. Norton& Co. Millett,Kate 1970 SexualPolitics. New York: Doubleday. 1979 TheBasement: Meditations ona HumanSacrifice. New York: Simon& Schuster. 1988 "From the Basementto the Madhouse." ArtPapers May/June:23-28. Re- printedin O'Dell. 1993 Interviewwith author. New York,January. I1994 ThePolitics of Cruelty: An Essayon theLiterature ofPolitical Imprisonment. New York: W.W. Norton& Co. 1995a Interviewwith author. Poughkeepsie, NY, July. 1995b A.D. New York: W.W. Norton& Co. O'Dell, Kathy forthcomingKate Millett, Sculptor: The First 38 Years.Baltimore: Fine Arts Gallery, Univer- sityof Maryland Baltimore County. Ruh6, Harry I1979 Fluxus,the most radical and experimental artmovement ofthe sixties. Amsterdam: "A." Schneemann,Carolee 1969 "Partsof a Body House." In FantasticArchitecture, edited by Dick Higginsand WolfVostell. New York: SomethingElse Press. 1975 Cezanne,She Wasa GreatPainter. New York: TrespassPress. 1979 MoreThan Meat Joy. New Paltz,NY: Documentext. 1993 Telephoneinterview with author. January. Schneider,Rebecca 1995 Personalcorrespondence with author. Stiles,Kristine 1992 "UnbosomingLennon: The Politicsof Yoko Ono's Experience."Art Criti- cism7, 2:21-54. 1993 "BetweenWater and Stone." In In theSpirit of Fluxus, edited by Elizabeth Armstrongand Joan Rothfuss, 62-99. Minneapolis:Walker Art Center. 1996 "SchlagetAuf The Problemwith Carolee Schneemann'sPainting." In Carolee Schneemann:Up To And IncludingHer Limits,15-25. New York: New Mu- seumof ContemporaryArt. Woo, Elaine 1978 "Kate Millett:Pondering the Limitsof the EternalFeminine." Los Angeles HeraldExaminer 12 December:BI,B4.

Kathy O'Dell is AssistantProfessor of Art History and Theoryin the VisualArts Departmentat the Universityof Maryland Baltimore County. She has published widelyon contemporaryart and performanceand is one of theco-founders/editors of Link: A CriticalJournal on the Artsin Baltimoreand the World. Her book, Contractwith the Skin: Masochism,, and the 1970s isforth- comingfrom University of Minnesota Press. O'Dell is thecurator of Kate Millett, Sculptor:The First38 Years, Millett'sfirst retrospective, at the Fine Arts Gallery of theUniversity ofMaryland Baltimore County, 27 February-3April, 1997.

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.43 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:30:11 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions