sign in sign up
<<
Home , Dance (Matisse), Sally Banes, Simone Forti, Yvonne Rainer

The Minimal Presence of Author(s): Virginia B. Spivey Reviewed work(s): Source: Woman's Art Journal, Vol. 30, No. 1 (SPRING/SUMMER 2009), pp. 11-18 Published by: Old City Publishing, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40605219 . Accessed: 21/01/2013 06:01

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Old City Publishing, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Woman's Art Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Mon, 21 Jan 2013 06:01:22 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions The MinimalPresence of SimoneForti

By VirginiaB. Spivey

May1961, a youngchoreographer named Simone Forti Theseissues converge in a studyof Simone Forti. Scholarly (b. 1935)presented "Five Dance Constructions and Some bias in arthistory has ignoredmany women like Forti.5 Her OtherThings," a concertof experimental dance, at Yoko situationwas compoundedby similarattitudes in the Ono'sChambers Street loft.1 A fewyears later, in November academythat viewed dance as an uncritical(often feminized) 1964,Forti' s ex-husband, Robert Morris, exhibited a group of artform, more rooted in bodilyexpression than intellectual sevensculptures at New York'sGreen Gallery. Commonly activity.6Another factor is that,like many women of the time, calledthe "Plywood Show," this exhibition marked a shiftin Fortichose not to promoteher own career, which she saw as criticalresponse to Morris and signaledan increasinginterest secondaryto herhusband's professional ambitions. Morris's amongart audiences in thereduced aesthetic that would interestin paintingfirst led thenewlywed couple to San becomeknown as .Although some scholars have Franciscoin 1956and laterto New York.After divorcing notedMorris's plywood constructions resembled the props Morrisin 1960,Forti married Happenings artist Robert Fortiused in her dances, her Chambers Street performance is Whitman,who asked that she give up herown work and assist relativelyunknown to art historians.2The dancer and himwhile they tried to start a family.7 filmmakerYvonne Rainer later said: Whenher second marriage ended in 1966 and Forti returned toher theradical in dance tobe aheadof its time.... As career, developments predictedby [Forti'sconcert] proved way her had been established.This was then itwas as a vacuumsealed that choreography already things stood, though due tothe ofthe event. waswritten about it and dancers went on largely groundbreakingperformances Judson Nothing Dance a thatis discussedin art and and wenton Theater, group frequently dancing painters ex-painters making historicaltexts because of its focus.8 and theater It wouldbe interdisciplinary Although painterlyhappenings pieces. Yvonne Trisha andother memberscite anothertwo and half beforethe idea of a Rainer, Brown, Judson years Fortias a the factthat she never constructionto movementor situationwould significantinfluence, generate in the led toher omission. takehold.3 participated group'sperformances Today,Forti is well-knownamong dance scholars; yet, her name Forti'sinnovative choreography has longdeserved closer remainsunfamiliar tomost art historians.9 A closer look at her scrutiny,especially for its conceptual affinity toMinimalism of worknot only demonstrates Forti's importance to arthistory, the1960s. butalso underscoresthe vital exchange between avant-garde Minimalismin arthas typicallybeen discussed as a danceand visual art in the 1960s. movementoriginating in New York,when spare abstract Fortibegan her study of dance soon after she and Morris formsbegan to emergefrom the studios of Morris, Donald arrivedin .By thetime of herfirst public Judd,Dan Flavin,Frank Stella, Carl Andre, and Sol LeWitt. performanceinDecember 1960, at New York's Reuben Gallery, Womenare conspicuously absent in thisnarrative, although shehad developeda distinctivechoreographic approach that femaleartists such as JoBaer, Anne Truitt, and Judy Gerowitz synthesizeda numberof influences.One of the most (betterknown as JudyChicago) were producing similar work importantwas AnnaHalprin, co-founder of San Francisco's atthe same time. In an effort to extendthe movement's narrow Halprin-LathropInstitute and a majorproponent of modern construction,scholars have recently acknowledged the range dance on theWest Coast. Around1956, Halprin became ofminimalist aesthetic practices that developed in theearly concernedabout the direction of contemporary dance, and she 1960s.4This new wave of researchis not art historical startedconducting experimental workshops at herhome in revisionism,but an attemptto restore Minimalism to its place MarinCounty.10 The goal was to exploreher preconceptions withinthe diverse artistic landscape of the period. Such an aboutwhat constituted dance, movement, and composition.11 endeavordemands thatart historyexpand to include Informedby Halprin' s knowledge of anatomy, Forti and other previouslyoverlooked individuals, and it forcesus to re- studentsanalyzed movement to determinewhether their examineMinimalism by recognizing how different disciplines actionswere executed in themost anatomically efficient way, wereintegral to its development. orwhether they were learned motions performed according to

SPRING / SUMMER 2009 A

This content downloaded on Mon, 21 Jan 2013 06:01:22 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Fig. 2. Simone Forti,Slant Board (1981), performanceby Simone Forti, ElinoreRadeff, and unidentifeddancer, Stedelijk Museum, . Photo: courtesySimone Forti.

Forti's frustrationwith modem dance changed when she enteredRobert Dunn's dance workshop at theCunningham Schoolin thefall of 1960. Dunn had workedextensively with Cunninghamas a musicianand composerand had attended JohnCage's class,"Composition of Experimental ," at the New School forSocial Researchfrom 1958-1960. 15 Influencedby the innovative atmosphere of Cage's seminar, Dunn'sinstruction drew from an eclecticrange of material, Fig. 1. Simone Forti,Plan for"Five Dance Constructionsand Some Other includingZen Buddhism,Taoism, and existentialism.16He Things" (1961), performanceat 112 Chambers Street,New YorkCity. introducedhis students to avant-garde music and explained to themJohn Cage's chance-based methods of composition. Forti habit.Improvisation proved Halprin's greatest tool during was impressedwith Cage's approachbecause it allowedfor theseyears, not as a meansof self-expression, butas a wayto indeterminacywhile retaininga sense of organized generateunpredictable actions.12 composition.She realized she could adapt his ideas to Aftermoving to New York, Forti took classes at themodern structureher own dances. danceschools of and Mercé Cunningham. In Anothersource of influence was thegroup of New York contrastto Halprin'sconcern with individual skills and Happeningsartists that included , Allan limitations,Graham and Cunninghambased theirideas on Kaprow,and .17 Forti found the kind of "wild action" rigorousphysical demands of the balletically trained body. Forti thatcharacterized Whitman's theater pieces particularly foundboth choreographers' techniques extremely complicated intriguing.18He oftenimmersed spectators directly in his andfelt she could not keep up withwhat they asked her to do. performances,providing them an immediateexperience that Shedescribed her disappointment with Cunningham in her rangedfrom vaguely threatening to spectacular.Whitman's diary,"Mercé Cunningham was a masterof adult, isolated influenceis most apparent in Rollers, a dance Forti presented in articulation[ofdifferent parts of the body]. And that the thing I herperformance atthe Reuben Gallery in December 1960. Forti hadto offer was stillvery close to the holistic and generalized and PattyOldenburg each sat in a smallwooden box on responseof children."13 Forti, who also taught nursery school in wheelswith strings attached. Audience members were asked NewYork, felt more inspired watching her students at play. The to pull theperformers around the stage area whileboth children'sability to think clearly, to solveproblems directly, and womenwould sing a singlenote, holding it for the duration. tofind joy in simplerepeated actions resonated with her own As theboxes careened and veered dangerously, however, what straightforwardapproach to inquiry.14 began as a musical tone transformedinto a panicked, fi± WOMAN'SART JOURNAL

This content downloaded on Mon, 21 Jan 2013 06:01:22 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions shriekingscream, rising and falling according to the boxes'uncontrollable movements. Fortihad soughta choreographicmethod that wouldstrike a balance between the absolute control of balletchoreographers and the freedomof pure improvisation.Drawing from the influencesof Halprin,Cage, and Whitman as wellas thechildren shetaught, her solution was to assignspecific tasks, use props,and setcertain limits for performers to negotiateaccording to theirparticular physical abilities.As Rollersdemonstrates, this strategy propelledaction in the dance, but remained outside of herimmediate control. Forti's work radically asserted thatdance could derivefrom simple actions and fundamentalmovements of the body. Based on the physicalskills and abilitiesof individuals,her choreographyimplied that anyone could be a dancer, regardlessof body type, specialized training, or technicalskill. Forti'smature work, like Minimalism, signaled a Fig. 3. Simone Forti,Huddle (1981), Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam.Photo courtesy shiftaway fromemotional and Simone Forti. illusionism.Here, the dancer no longerappears transformedinto a dyingswan or nutcracker prince movingeffortlessly across the stage; rather, the viewer sees a Thenext dance was Huddle( 1961;Fig. 3), a workin which realperson, made of flesh and bone, subject to gravity'spull no additional props were employed,but six or seven andlimited by her or his body's particular skills and range of performersused theirbodies to forma circularweb by motion.Forti's reliance on propsand predeterminedrules to bendingforward and weaving their arms around each others' dictatechoreography corresponds to the desire among waistsand shoulders.The dancebegan when one person Minimalistartists for an objective,systemic method of disengagedfrom the group and startedto climbover the production,and her interest in spatialperception and viewer structureusing foot and hand-holds formed by bodies of other experienceanticipates the phenomenological interpretations participants.Once the first dancer had climbedover the other commonlyused to explain Minimalism. bodies,she or he joinedback into the huddle and another A comparisonofForti's "Five Dance Constructions and Some wouldbegin to climb.Forti did notspecify a climbingorder; OtherThings" (1961; Fig. 1) toMorris's "Plywood Show" sheds palpableshifts in balancesignaled the dancers to begin their lighton theseaspects of Forti's practice and brings deserved task.Throughout the dance, the audience moved around attentionto hercontribution to a Minimalistaesthetic. Forti's Huddleto see changesthat occurred in themass of bodies as concertincluded five new dances, Slant Board, Huddle, Platforms, climbersdetached and rejoined the group. Hangers,Accompaniment for La Monte'sTwo Sounds and La Monte's Viewersthen saw Hangers, where five dancers stood passively TwoSounds, and See Saw, which had debuted six months earlier insidelong loops made with ropes hung closely together from in the Reuben Gallery performance.19While a dance theceiling. Four additional performers walked quickly between performancemay initially seem unrelated to theexhibition of them,causing those suspended in the ropes to swing and collide. Morris'sartwork, Forti situated each of her dances, which she Althoughimpossible to control,movement in thedance was called"dance constructions," ina manner akin to sculptures ina affectedby weight and size of the hanging performers as well as gallery.Showing each dance separately throughout Ono's open byhow fast the others walked between them. Next, the audience loft,she apparently intended them to function like objects that watchedPlatforms (1961; Fig. 4), in which Morris and Forti hid viewerswould experience from all sides. undertwo rectangular wooden boxes, whistled for fifteen Visitorsentered the space to findSlant Board (1961; Fig. 2) minutes,then got up andwalked away. directlybefore them. Forti instructed the performers in this The fifthdance, Accompaniment forLa Monte's2 soundsand danceto move simultaneously upward and acrossa wooden La Monte's2 sounds,was actuallymore a musicalperformance ramp,which leaned against a wallat a forty-five-degreeangle withdance serving as theattendant element. Forti hung from a andhad long knotted ropes attached to help the dancers in their longrope loop, similar to those used in Hangers, while another task.Although they could pause to rest, they had to remain on performertwisted the rope tightly before releasing it and theboard for the duration of the ten-minute dance. Forti did not turningon a twelve-minutetape recordingof avant-garde dictatespecific steps for the performers toimitate, rather each composerLa MonteYoung's 2 sounds.20As themusic played, dancer'smovements derived from physical abilities including Fortispun around as therope unwound and thenrewound strength,stamina, and coordination, as well as theircombined fromthe momentum.Once thismotion had completely effortsnot to interfere with the others on the board. stopped,Forti remained hanging until the music ended and

SPRING / SUMMER 2009 A

This content downloaded on Mon, 21 Jan 2013 06:01:22 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions confirmed,a partial list includes Forti, Morris, , StevePaxton, and Carl Lehmann-Haupt.25 When thesepeople were not dancing, they would join the audience andlater shift back into their roles as dancerswhen called on to perform.Obscuring such distinctions extended further throughoutForti's event. Like the performers, Forti forced the entireaudience to interact with her rules and obstacles as they navigatedthe dances shown throughout the loft. In thisway, Forti'sdance constructions functioned as separate "objects" for viewersto encounterand negotiate according to theirbodies' kinestheticand psychological response. Visitorsto Morris's"Plywood Show" (1964; Fig. 5) at the GreenGallery three years later came upon a similarsituation. To enter,they had to walkbeneath a horizontalplinth that spannedtwo walls above the gallery's entrance. Titled Untitled (CornerBeam), this object was like all of Morris's work on view: it was builtwith plywood and nails,hand-painted Merkin Pilgrimgray, and lacked any notable surface texture or detail. Once viewershad to movearound Untitled Fig. 4. Simone Forti,Platforms (1961), Loeb Student Center,New York inside, (Floor University.Photo: Peter Moore © Estate of Peter Moore/VAGA, NYC. Beam),a twenty-six-footrectangular beam with one rounded edge,lying in the center of the floor. To their right was Untitled (Table),a symmetrical L-shaped form that abutted the wall at a Herdingbegan. This was one ofthree short "game pieces," ninety-degreeangle, leaving a largesquare opening, and whichForti structured as a competitionamong participants. behindthem to theleft, a triangularshaped structure Untitled Here,the dancers played with the audience by gathering (CornerPiece) was wedgedinto the corner. Untitled (Cloud) everyonetogether, then forcing them to moveback and forth hungat eyelevel from the ceiling. In anotherarea of the room throughthe loft until they became irritated.21 stoodUntitled (Boiler), a four-by-eight-footcylinder lodged Bythat time, they were in place to view See-Saw. Performed betweenrectangular blocks. The finalpiece in theshow, byRobert Morris and Yvonne Rainer, this dance relied on an Untitled(Wall/Floor Slab) (1964; Fig. 6), was an eight-foot square eight-footplank that sat on topof a sawhorse.22For twenty- formthat leaned at an angleagainst a sidewall. minutes,the couple see-sawed up and down,stood next to Justwalking into the room made visitors more aware of each other,and moved tentativelyacross the board, theirsurroundings. Frank Stella commented, "I'd neverbeen positioningthemselves any way necessary not to fall. Because so consciousof the space betweenthe corners, walls, and ofthe prop's constantly shifting equilibrium, working together floor."26Donald Juddwrote in his reviewof the show: was an essentialaspect of the duet. At one point,their roles "Morris'sworks are minimal visually, but they're powerful deviatedwhile Morris read a monotonediscourse from spatially.It's an unusualasymmetry... The work looks well ArtNewsand Rainerbegan flailingher body about and together,but it isn't an environment."27Such comments shriekingloudly. However, throughout most of the dance, the indicatethat, like Forti'sdance constructions,Morris's performershad to coordinatetheir movements, remaining structuresengaged the viewer in a physicaland psychological awareof how each one's actions would impact the other. Also, encounter.In his 1966essay "Notes on Sculpture,Part 2," duringthe presentation ofSee-Saw, another smaller version of Morrisexplained this effect in phenomenological terms: Huddleoccurred behind the audience. Forti says that she did notintend for viewers to pay closeattention to thissecond Theobject is butone of the terms in the newer esthetic. It performanceofHuddle; she only wanted audience members to is in someway more reflexive, because one's awareness "beaware" of something happening behind them.23 of oneselfexisting in thesame space as thework is Forti's installation ofher dances throughout the open space strongerthan in previouswork, with its many internal effectivelyblurred distinctions between real and performative relationships.One is moreaware than before that he space.None of these dances employed special lighting effects himselfis establishingrelationships as he apprehends orcostumes to provide temporal or visual cues. Predetermined theobject from various positions and undervaried rulesdictated the beginning of a dance,which later ended conditionsof light and spatial context.28 when the performerscompleted their assigned tasks. Furthermore,typical of Forti's choreography,all the Morris's belief that sculpture mightbe understood performancesrelied on a setof rules, often combined with a phenomenologicallynot only called attentionto the centralprop, to generatemovements; however, instead of a anthropomorphicnature of his work; it furtherimplied that seatedproscenium, the audience gathered and milled around bodiesand objectspossess interchangeable characteristics, a eachpiece as itwas presented.24 notionwhich stemmed from ideas Fortiexplored in her While the identityof all the performerscannot be choreography.

¿ft WOMAN'SART JOURNAL

This content downloaded on Mon, 21 Jan 2013 06:01:22 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Fortiviewed the human body as a materialobject definedby its weight, mass, and scale in relationship to theother things surrounding her. She recalls studyingsuch spatial acuity by sitting on thefloor besideordinary household objects like a cerealbox, a rollof toilet paper, or a fingernailbrush. After a while,she would reposition herself in a different placeamong the scattered items. Forti's intent in theseexperiments was toexplore phenomenological perceptionof the space around her. By comparing herown body to inanimateobjects, she hopedto understandbetter how theirshared physical and spatialproperties contribute tohuman perception.29 Forticonceived of dance itselfas sculptural, henceher use ofthe term "dance constructions" to describeher choreographic work. She had first begunto sketchsculptural designs related to her movementinvestigations while in San Francisco.It was beforeher concert at theReuben Gallery that Fortibecame panic-stricken about how to construct herplans. She explained:

5. Robert Morris,"The Show" (1964). © Robert Morris/Artists Rights I was sittingon mybed with a pad,or notebook, Fig. Plywood Society (ARS) New York,New York. of newsprintand crayons,and I drewthese pieces,and I said,"yes, I'll do thesepieces." And thenI rememberone night, being awake in bed and just subjectivedecision-making and expressiveassociation from beingdesperate, thinking, "How am I ... I don'tknow thecreative process. However, in contrastto Stellaor Judd howto buildthis stuff." And talking it overwith Bob whoderived their solutions from problems in painting, Morris andhim saying, "I'll build it for you."30 citesForti' s task-based choreography as the primary influence on his sculpturalmethod. He explained:"To followa rule Evenwhen there were no additional props, Forti viewed dance (ratherthan to consciously 'perform') altered the intentionality as anobject. In Huddle, for example, she intended the viewer to ofdance making. By analogy,I employed'construction' in walkaround the mass of bodies as thoughit werea single makingsculpture. Both provided a differentstructural way of sculpture. working;a priori in both cases."32 Morris's Minimalist structuresreflect a similar AlthoughMorris adamantly resists the idea that Forti's work understandingof thebody as an objectwith measurable suggestedto himdance as a sculpturalequivalent, his work quantitiesof mass, volume, and weight.The obvious clearlyimplies a bodilypresence that was explicitin Forti's resemblanceof Morris'sUntitled (Wall/Floor Slab) to propshe choreography.Morris's earliest abstract sculpture, Column builtfor Forti indicates her impact on his sculpture.Morris (1961) reflectsthis relationship to thebody most clearly. admitshe "lateraltered [Forti' s designs] slightly" for Althoughlater exhibited as sculpture,Column first appeared in readily 33 someof his early works.31 Nevertheless, itis an overstatement a performanceatNew York's Living Theater in 1962. Two-feet to sayhis sculpturederived entirely from her innovations. square,eight-feet high and painted gray, it stood vertically onan Whilethe couple certainly shared their artistic thoughts and otherwiseempty stage for three and a halfminutes before being concerns,the years of their marriage, from 1956 to 1961, were a pulled over by a stringheld offstage. It thenremained timeof experimentation and growthfor both artists. Their horizontalfor another three and half minutes until the lights similarexperiences during this formative period suggest wentdown and the performance ended. Morris had originally stronglythat, together, they developed a commonvocabulary intendedto standinside the hollow structure and fallover, to conveyideas in eachof their chosen media. Morris credits makingColumn appear to move of its own volition; but, a head Fortiwith introducing him to the tenets of experimental dance, injuryfrom the fall in rehearsal forced him to substitute the pull- and thecouple even led theirown movementworkshops stringin the actual performance. whileliving in San Francisco.After moving to New Yorkin Itsmaterials, geometric structure, and scalemake obvious 1960,both Forti and Morris became closely involved with the thatColumn was a directprecursor to theabstract sculptures city'savant-garde dance and theatre community. Morriswould later exhibit in the"Plywood Show." Its origins RecognizingMorris's place within this distinctive milieu is in dancesuggest directions for interpreting these subsequent importanttounderstanding how his work developed outside works.If Morris had been inside Column as planned,its debut ofthe circumstances motivating other Minimalist artists. For wouldhave resembled Forti's Platforms. As the Living Theater example,like his colleagues, Morris sought a wayto eliminate performancetranspired, Morris's removal of a human

SPRING / SUMMER 2009 ^

This content downloaded on Mon, 21 Jan 2013 06:01:22 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions highlightedMinimalism's performativity and consequentlyentered art history as characteris- ticof all Minimalistworks.35 The performativedimension of Minimalist art demandsscholars examine its correspon- denceto danceand experimentalperformance. While recent literatureon Morris usually acknowledgeshis involvementwith perform- ance, the broader relationship between Minimalismand postmoderndance of the period has not been thoroughlyexplored. A notableexception is YvonneRainer 's choreog- raphyof the mid-1960s,which has long been mentionedin this context.36Rainer is distin- guished,however, from other performers and dancecritics of the time by her own theoretical explanationsof her work. Her inclusionin Minimalism'shistory resulted largely from her appropriationof its critical language, as wellas her liminalposition between avant-garde art and dance.37 Fried's essay shows how RobertMorris's phenomenologicaltheories helped shape Minimalism'scritical reception and interpreta- Fig. 6. RobertMorris, Untitled (Wall/Fioor Slab) (1964; 1979), aluminumversion of plywood tionbut overlooks Forti's influence on Morris.38 96" x 96" x 12" © RobertMorris/Artists New New York. original, RightsSociety (ARS) York, "Five Dance Constructionsand Collectionof the AkronArt Museum. Comparing Some OtherThings" to the "PlywoodShow" clearlyreveals the importance of Forti's work to presencefrom stage proved thatan inanimateobject could Morris'saesthetic and conceptualdevelopment, especially his evoke bodily action and assume its own anthropomorphic interestin bodilyexperience and perception.Her choreography effectthrough scale, movement, and temporalexperience. Yet, ofthe early 1960s also revealsan affinitytoMinimalism that chal- differentfrom Platforms and Forti's otherdance constructions, lengestraditional conceptions of themovement. In theirliteral Columndid notinteract directly with Morris's audience since it presentationof and emphasison thebody's sculptural qualities, was presentedin a more traditionaltheatrical context. By Forti'sdance constructions offer a correlativeto objectslater pro- contrast,positioning sculpture throughout the open space of ducedby Morris,Judd and othervisual artists.39 When added to the Green Gallery recalled the conditions of Forti's 1961 theMinimalist lexicon, Forti's work expands our currentdefini- concert.Placed directly on thefloor and attachedto ceilingand tionby acknowledgingthe diversityof artistsand disciplines walls, Morris's objects appeared integrated with the thatcontributed to Minimalism'sdevelopment. The circum- architecturalspace of the gallery.In thisway, the viewer's stancesthat once caused Forti's neglect in arthistory are greatly experiencewas similarto thatof the audience that had moved diminished,and heraccomplishment can no longerbe sealedin throughYoko Ono's loftto watch Forti's next dance. Like a vacuum.Simone Forti must now be includedin thecomplete Forti'sevent, Morris's installation required viewers to engage historyof Minimalism. • witheach objectphysically in a way thatblurred boundaries betweenthe realm of art and reallife. VirginiaB. Spiveyis an independentart historian specializing This aspect of Morris'swork is preciselywhat led critic in late-twentieth-and twenty-first-centuryintersections of MichaelFried to call Minimalism"theatrical" in his influential visual culture,dance and feministperformance, and issues of 1967essay "Art and Objecthood."Fried argued that Minimalist identityand genderexpression. sculpture,which had to be experiencedover time in realspace, obscuredessential characteristics distinguishing visual art from NOTES theater.Bolstered by Morris'sphenomenological explanations, A Mellon Fellowshipsupported portionsof this researchconducted Fried called attentionto Minimalism'stendency to convey for my dissertation "Performing Relationships: Gendered "presence"to theviewer, a termhe used to denotethe object's Subjectivityin the Art of Robert Morris," (Case Western Reserve Whereas University,2002). An earlier version of this paper titled "Another anthropomorphicqualities. representationalsculpture of Simone Minimalismand was achievedthis effect mimesisor allusive the Way Being: Forti, Dance," presented through form, phys- in the "Women's Art, Women's Vision" session at the 2008 ical scaleof Minimalist objects forced the viewer to interactas if Southeastern College Art Conference. I thank the other panelists theywere other persons existing in a sharedspace.34 Although and my colleagues at Longwood Universityand Hampden-Sydney Friedwas criticalof thesefeatures, his observationaccurately Universityfor their comments.

A WOMAN'S ART JOURNAL

This content downloaded on Mon, 21 Jan 2013 06:01:22 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1. Forti'sconcert, presented May 26-27', was part of a series of Proto- For a thoroughdiscussion of Dunn's class and its impacton dance of Fluxusevents, now knownas the Chambers Street Series, organized the 1960s, see , "Robert Dunn's Workshop," in by and presented at Ono's loftbetween December Democracy's Body: ,1-33. 1960 and June 1961. See Owen F. Smith,: the of an History 17. See Haskell, Blam! The Explosion of Pop, Minimalism and Attitude(San San State Univ.Press, 1998), 28-30. Diego: Diego Performance, 1958-1964; and Marter, ed. Off Limits: Rutgers 2. The few art historianswho mentionForti's concert discuss, at most, Universityand the Avant-Garde,1 957- 1963. one or two of the dances without of performed providinganalysis 18. Fortisaw Whitman'sE.G. at the Reuben Galleryon June 11, 1960, the entire event. See Maurice Berger, Labyrinths:Robert Morris, and assisted with his American Moon in December 1960. It was Minimalism,and the 1960s (New York: & Row, 1989), 26; Harper through her connection to Whitman that Forti was invited to Anna Chave, "Minimalismand Art Bulletin,82 (March, Biography," participateon the Christmasprogram of Happenings at the Reuben 2000): 155-56; and Carrie Lambert,"More or Less Minimalism:Six Gallery in 1960. Forti, telephone interview with the author, Notes on Performance and Visual Art in the in Ann 1960s," December 21, 2001. Goldstein, ed., A minimal future?: art as object 1958-1968 (Los 19. No known or filmof the 1961 concert exist. Forti Angeles and Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004), 105. Dance historian photographs the most of her dances. See Forti, SallyBanes providesthe most thoroughdiscussion of Forti'sconcert provides complete descriptions Handbook in Motion,56-67. previously published. See Sally Banes, Terpischore in Sneakers, Post-modernDance (Boston: Houghton Mifflin,1980), 26-28. 20. 2 Sounds was a stereo tape of noises Young had recorded at Anna while he was a student at the 3. Yvonne Rainer,"An imperfectreminiscence of my studies and the Halprin's workshop graduate of , Simone Forti, interview with beginningof a career and contingentevents," in Work: 1961-1973 University Berkeley. Louise Oral Jerome Robbins (Halifax,Nova Scotia: The Press of the Nova Scotia College of Art Sunshine,May 8, 1994, HistoryProject, Dance Research Collection, New YorkPublic of and Design, 1974), 7. Library,transcription Cassette 1,45. 4. See Goldstein,ed., A minimalfuture?: art as object 1958-1968] Lynn 21. The others were Censor, where one shook a of nails Zelevansky,ed. Beyond Geometry:Experiments in Form, 1940s-70s person pan while another a with their mutual to find (: L.A. County Museum of Art,2004); and Pepe Karmel, sang song goal perfect balance between the two; and From Instructions,in whichone man "The Year of LivingMinimally," Art in America 82.11 (December, was told to tie anotherto some on the and the otherwas 2004): 90-149. pipes wall, told to lie on the floor for the duration of the piece. Forti, "Minimalism and Art 82 5. See Anna Chave, Biography," Bulletin, Handbook in Motion,66. (March,2000): 149-63. 22. Fortioriginally intended to performwith Morris, but an injuryforced 6. See Ellen W. and Shea "Introduction: Goellner, Jacqueline Murphy, her to ask Rainerto dance instead. Forti,telephone interviewwith Movement in Bodies of the Text: Dance as Movements," Theory, the author,July 14, 2000. Literatureas Dance, eds. Ellen W. Goellner and Jacqueline Shea 23. Forti,telephone interviewwith the author,November 2, 2000. Murphy(New Brunswick,N.J.: RutgersUniv. Press), 1-37. 24. Forti her treatmentof the dances was, in a to 7. Simone Forti,telephone interviewwith the author,July 14, 2000. says part, response photographs of Japanese Gutai performancesshe had seen in San 8. See Barbara Blam: The of Minimalism,and Haskell, Explosion Pop, Francisco. Althoughthe Gutai distinguishedtheir actions fromthe 1958-1964 York: Museum of Art,1984); Performance, (New Whitney final objects they would exhibit, Forti saw in their work a way to Greenwich 1963: Avant-GardePerformance and Sally Banes, Village engage her audience withoutdemanding direct participation.This the Effervescent Duke Univ. Press, 1993). On the Body (Durham: strategy was an intentionalshift from her use of the audience in Judson Dance see Judson Theater, Sally Banes, Democracy's Body: Rollers,where the action of pullingthe performersaround the stage Dance 1962-1964 Arbor:UMI Research Press, 1983). Theater, (Ann area became potentially hazardous to the participants. Forti, 9. Fortiis satisfiedwith the attentionshe has received. "A lot of my telephone interviewwith the author,July 14, 2000. On the Gutai, invisibilityhas been chosen by me, as a guarantor of freedom to see Alexandra Munroe, "To Challenge the Mid-SummerSun: The proceed throughall my changes. . . . It's not been a tendency as a Gutai Group," in Alexandra Munroe, ed., Japanese ArtAfter 1945: woman; it's been mypath as an artistseeking mymost empowering Scream Against the Sky(New York:Abrams, 1994), 83-124. e-mailto the 2009. position." Simone Forti, author,February 10, 25. Morris,fax to the author,November 9, 2000; Rainer,e-mail to the 10. Halprin'sworkshops eventuallydeveloped into the San Francisco author,February 26, 2001; Fortirecalls that she and Morrisdanced Dancers' Workshop. See , Moving Toward Life: Five together in Platforms,and that in Accompanimentfor LaMonte's 2 Decades of TransformationalDance (Hanover, NH: Wesleyan Univ. Sounds and LaMonte's 2 Sounds, she hung in the rope loop while Press, 1995), 254. Morrisspun her. She also specifies that Morrisand Carl Lehmann- the From Instructions. Forti, 11. Yvonne Rainer, "Yvonne Rainer interviewsAnn Halprin," Tulane Haupt performed game piece telephone interviewwith the author,November 2, 2000. Drama Review{Winter, 1965): 143. 26. Quoted in James S. Minimalism:Art and Polemics 12. Ibid. Meyer, (New Haven: Yale Univ.Press, 2001), 113. 13. Simone Forti,Handbook in Motion (Halifax,Nova Scotia: The Press 27. The exhibition at the Green Gallery opened December 16, 1964, of the Nova Scotia College of Artand Design, 1974), 34. and closed on January 9, 1965. Donald Judd, "In the Galleries: interviewwith the 2000. 14. Forti,telephone author,July 14, Robert Morris,"Arts Magazine 39 (February1965): 39. Reprintedin 15. On the influence of Cage's class, see Joseph Jacobs, "Crashing Donald Judd: Complete Writings1959-1975 (Halifax,Nova Scotia: New Yorkà la ," in Joan Marter,ed., OffLimits: Rutgers The Press of the Nova Scotia College of Artand Design, 1975), 165. Brunswick: Universityand the Avant-Garde, 1957-1963 (New 28. Robert Morris, "Notes on Sculpture, Part 2," Artforum(October 65-99. RutgersUniv. Press, 1999), 1966): 20-23. Reprinted in Continuous Project Altered Daily, The 16. Dunn's workshop evolved into the Judson Dance Theater. The Writingsof Robert Morris(Cambridge: MIT Press, 1993), 15. as an recital group's firstconcert was presented end-of-yearpublic 29. Forti,telephone interviewwith the author,July 14, 2000. of dances made for Dunn's class. After Dunn ended his weekly 30. Ibid. sessions in 1962, the JDT developed into both an experimental forumand a vehicle for promotingavant-garde concepts in dance. 31 . Morris,fax to the author,November 1 1, 2000.

SPRING / SUMMER 2009 A

This content downloaded on Mon, 21 Jan 2013 06:01:22 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 32. Morris,fax to the author,November 9, 2000. TrishaBrown: dance and art in dialogue 1961-2001 (Andover,MA: Addison of AmericanArt, 2002) and Peter 33. Column'sorigins at the LivingTheater are well documented although Gallery PhillipsAcademy, ed. Trisha Brown: so that the audience does not know contradictory dates have been posited for both the original Eleey, whether or not I have Walker Art constructionand performance.See, for example, Rosalind Krauss, stopped dancing (Minneapolis: Center, Passages in Modern Sculpture(New York:Viking Press, 1 977), 201 -03; 2008). MauriceBerger, Labyrinths: Robert Morris, Minimalism, and the 1960s 37. See Yvonne Rainer, "A Quasi-Survey of Some 'Minimalist' (New York:Harper & Row, 1989), 47-48; KimberlyPake, catalogue Tendenciesin the QuantitativelyMinimal Dance ActivityMidst the entry,"Columns, 1961," in Robert Morris:The Mind/BodyProblem Plethora or an Analysisof TrioA," writtenin 1966 and first (New York: Guggenheim Museum Foundation, 1994), 90; Chave, published in Battcock, MinimalArt: A CriticalAnthology, 263-73. "Minimalismand Biography,"fn. 47, 162; Meyer, Minimalismand Rainercredits Robert Morrisand Barbara Rose as major influences Polemics, 51; and Edward Strickland,Minimalism: Origins on her criticalwriting style. Both provided a more analyticalmodel (Bloomington:Indiana Univ. Press, 1993), 263-64. than the more popular "off-the-cuff"dance criticismof JillJohnston and others. Rainer,e-mail to the 2001. 34. Michael Fried, "Art and Objecthood," Artforum5 (June 1967) 12- author,February 26, 23. Reprinted in Gregory Battcock, ed. Minimal Art: A Critical 38. Rosalind Krauss and Annette Michelson also use the example of Anthology(Berkeley: Univ. of CaliforniaPress, 1968), 127-28. Morris's work in their phenomenological readings of Minimalist both authors note Morris's involvement in 35. Fried, who based his essay largely on the writingsof Morris and sculpture. Although dance, do not discuss Forti the mention Donald Judd,conflated the two artists'ideas. Judd's formalistgoals postmodern they beyond of her name. See Rosalind E. Krauss, in Modern were overshadowed, in Fried's mind, by Morris's insistence that Passages Sculpture York: and Annette "An Aestheticsof sculpture involve the viewer. For this reason, Morris's (New Viking,1977) Michelson, in Robert Morris DC: Corcoran phenomenological focus served as a central premise of Fried's Transgression," (Washington Gallery of Art,1969). criticism.See James S. Meyer,Minimalism: Art and Polemics, esp. 229-34. On performativityand Minimalism,see Maurice Berger, 39. See Carrie Lambert, "More or Less Minimalism: Six Notes on MinimalPolitics: Performativity and Minimalismin Recent American Performanceand VisualArt in the 1960s." Art (Baltimore: Fine Arts Gallery, Univ. of Maryland, Baltimore Countv.1997). 36. TrishaBrown's choreography and her workin visual art has been the subject of two recent museum exhibitions.See Hendel Teicher,ed.

Institutefor Women and Art The Institute for Women and Art brings togetherVa leaders in the visual arts to promote interdisciplinary research, EXHIBITIONS AND EDUCATIONALPROGRAMMING ABOUT WOMEN AND ART WORLDWIDE. VISIT THE IWA AT HTTP:// IWA.RUTGERS.EDU

I JOIN US FOR THE IWA GALACELEBRATION TO HONOR FAITH RINGGOLD MAY 17, 2009, AND HER EXHIBIT I | DECLARATIONOF INDEPENDENCE: 5O YEARS OF ART BY FAITH RINGGOLD, MAY 17 - JUNE26, 2009

TheFeministArtProject WAAND MaryH. Dana Series SrS *" DlRECT0R" The Feminist Art Project is a collaborative national The Dana Women Artists Series at Douglass Library tmp^va/o'HE ™°MEN MRTISTST^l NATI°rL CHIVES NATIONAL INITIATIVE PROMOTING AND DOCUMENTING DIVERSE GALLERIES, RUTGERS FOUNDED IN IS UIRECTORY IS AN INNOVATIVEWEB DIRECTORY UNIVERSITY, 1971, FEMINIST ART EVENTS AND PUBLICATIONSCELEBRATING THE QLDESJ CONTINUOUSLyRUNNING VENUE FOR WOMEN T0 Um^m ARCHIVALCOLLECTIONS OF PRIMARY THE FEMINIST ART MOVEMENTAND THE AESTHETIC, VISUM bRTlSTS. 2009 EXHIBITS'.ALIVE AT THE END OF UFE.' SOURCEMATERIALS BY ANDABOUT WOMEN VISUAL INTELLECTUALAND POLITICALIMPACT OF WOMENON THE PHOTOGRAPHSBY CATHYGrENBLATT, DESTINY'. PHOTOGRAPHS VISUAL ART ANDART PASTAND ARTS, HISTORY, PRACTICE, WAAMn ■// / BY Ern^TINE RUBEN, CECILIA VlCUNA. WWW.LIBRARIES. VVMMINUHTTP. //WAAND. RUTGERS.EDU/ PRESENT.HTTP ://FEMINISTARTPROJECT. RUTGERS.EDU RUTGERS.EDU/rUL/eXHIBITS/dANA_WOMENS.SHTML

191 College Avenue,2nd floor, RutgersUniversity, New Brunswick,NJ 08901 http://iwa.rutgers.edu732-932-3726

A WOMAN'SART JOURNAL

This content downloaded on Mon, 21 Jan 2013 06:01:22 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions