Volatility, Liquidity and Malleability: Replicating the Art of the 1960s Bryony Rose Bery UCL Research Degree: History of Art I, Bryony Rose Bery, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. 1 Abstract Reviewing Robert Morris’ 9 at Leo Castelli exhibition of December 1968, Max Kozloff used the terms volatility, liquidity and malleability. These physical characteristics suggest the precarious nature of the objects exhibited and are deployed throughout this thesis to explore the material, theoretical and ethical implications of sculpture replication in the twentieth century. A methodological approach that bridges art history and conservation-based perspectives will allow many of the current concerns surrounding replication to be expanded upon. The 1960s is seen as a key moment for the types of art objects being produced but also reproduced and a shift in practices and attitudes is traced. Issues of authenticity, materiality, authorship, historical narrative, conceptual intention and the various meanings ascribed to the term replica are considered. The purpose and status of the original or replica is scrutinised in the context of a history of replication. As a museum and artistic strategy, there are various motives for creating replicas. Here, a series of carefully selected historical case studies are used as test cases to draw attention to the acute problems posed when works are made from ephemeral or vulnerable materials, works that have to be performed, works that perform a process or behave naturally and works within a replicated exhibition enterprise. Concentrating on artworks produced in America and Europe, the thesis recasts artists and their works to highlight the precariousness of materials and meanings, documentation and actions, performativity and duration. A work’s inherent vice is seen in terms of what will be termed its ‘ephe-materiality’ and its replica as a re-action in the continuous present. The relationship of surface to support, materials that act out or perform their own instability, provides a platform from which to readdress the idea of a single, finished work and its exhibitable life and afterlife within a museum today. 2 Contents Acknowledgements 4 List of Figures 6 Introduction 16 1. Framing Marcel Duchamp: The Case of Richard Hamilton’s Large Glass 38 2. Process and Precariousness: The Ephe-materiality of Richard Serra, 76 Gilberto Zorio and Barry Flanagan 3. With Time Re-Action: The Performative Remakes of Robert Morris and 107 Michelangelo Pistoletto 4. Nature and Second Nature: Barry Flanagan and Rafael Ferrer 136 5. When Attitudes Become All About Attitudes Towards Form: Recasting 167 the latex works of Keith Sonnier and Eva Hesse Conclusion 202 Notes 212 Figures 260 Bibliography 302 3 Acknowledgements Firstly I would like to thank the AHRC for funding this collaborative PhD project. This thesis would not have been possible without the support, knowledge and enthusiasm of my supervisors; Professor Briony Fer at UCL and Dr Matthew Gale at Tate. Throughout my academic career, Briony Fer has been invaluable and I am extremely grateful for her insightful observations and guidance. Matthew Gale has also provided support not only for the Tate-related cases but also to the project as a whole. The collaborative aspect of this PhD has enabled me access and experience that has benefited the project and I would therefore like to take this opportunity to thank both UCL and Tate. Staff and colleagues in the History of Art Department at UCL and the Research, Conservation and Curatorial Departments within Tate have been a constant source for discussion and I feel very fortunate to have been part of the research communities at both institutions. As well as my supervisors then, I would like to give particular thanks to Dr Jennifer Mundy, Head of Collection Research, Tate, who invited me to co-edit the 2007 autumn issue of Tate Papers which was based on Inherent Vice: The Replica and its Implications in Modern Sculpture, a closed workshop held at Tate Modern on 18-19 October 2007. This workshop provided an excellent forum to better understand the field of replication as my project started and I am grateful to have been asked to attend and contribute to the online publication. Dr Emma Richardson has always been available to discuss any material matters and has been extremely helpful since joining the History of Art department at UCL as Lecturer in Material Studies. I would also like to thank Professor Robert Lumley and Libby Sheldon for their feedback at my upgrade. Art historians, conservators, curators, artists, artist studios and estates and various museums worldwide have provided much primary and archival material for the project. I would therefore like to thank, in particular, the following people for giving up their time to assist me: Susan K. Anderson, The Martha Hamilton Morris Archivist, Philadelphia Museum of Art; Sylvia Bandi, Hauser & Wirth; Sebastiano Barassi, Acting Head of Collections and Exhibitions, Perry Green, Much Hadham; Mette Carlsen for sharing her research on the topic; Lynne Cooke, Senior Curator, Special Projects in Modern Art, at the National Gallery of Art, Washington DC: Deborah Cullen, Director & Chief Curator, The Miriam & Ira D. Wallach Art Gallery, Columbia University in the City of New York;Kathleen Dickson, Access Officer, BFI National Archive; Rafael Ferrer; Elizabeth Fisher, Curator for Beyond Measure: Conversations Across Art and Science; Ceri-Anne van de Geer, Arts Administrator, Kettle's Yard; Annika Gunanrsson, Curator, Prints and Drawings, Moderna Museet, Stockholm; Susan Hapgood; Margaret Iverson, Professor of Art History and Theory at the University of Essex; Martin Langer, Conservator; Francesco Manacorda; Trina McKeever, Richard Serra’s Studio; John Naylor; Barry Phipps, Fellow, Tutor & Curator of Works of Art, Churchill College, Cambridge; Christian Scheidemann, Contemporary Conservation Ltd; Barbara Sommermeyer Conservator, Hamburger Kunsthalle; Keith Sonnier, his assistant, Jason Reppert, and Lesley Raeside from his studio; Michael R. Taylor, Deputy Director/Chief Curator, Virginia Museum of Fine Arts; and Thea Winther, Conservator, Moderna Museet, Stockholm, Sweden. 4 At Tate, Dr Mark Godfrey, Senior Curator, International Art, ensured that I was involved in the Tate Modern rehang in 2009; and Catherine Wood, Curator, Contemporary Art and Performance, and Kathy Noble, then Assistant Curator, were extremely helpful in relation to Robert Morris’ Bodyspacemotionthings in 2009. Karl Bush, Sculpture Conservation Technician; Katie Dungate, Conservation Administrator; William Easterling, former Sculpture Conservation Technician; Tim Green, Paintings Conservator; Dr Pip Laurenson, Head of Collection Care Research, Marcella Leith, Photography Manager; Elizabeth McDonald, Sculpture Conservator; Derek Pullen, former Head of Sculpture Conservation; Melanie Rolfe, Sculpture Conservator; Patricia Smithen, former Head of Conservation; Gates Sofer, Sculpture Conservator; and Andrew Wilson, Curator Modern and Contemporary British Art and Archives, have all been incredibly helpful and generous with their time, experience and expertise. Staff at Tate Archives and Library have also assisted greatly. Finally, I would not have been able to complete this PhD without the love and patience of my family both young and old. Thank you Robbie, Ella and Delphi especially. 5 List of Figures Figure 1 Robert Morris Untitled 1965, reconstructed 1971 and 1976 Mirror glass and wood, 914 x 914 x 914 mm Tate, purchased 1972 © ARS, NY and DACS, London 2015 Figure 2 Robert Morris Untitled 1965, made in 2008 Exhibited at Beyond Measure: Conversations Across Art and Science in St Peter’s Church, 5 April 2008 - 1 June 2008 Image courtesy of Ceri-Anne van der Geer, Kettle’s Yard Figure 3 The destruction of Robert Morris’ Untitled 1965 exhibited at Beyond Measure: Conversations Across Art and Science Image courtesy of Ceri-Anne van der Geer, Kettle’s Yard Figure 4 Marcel Duchamp The Bride Stripped Bare by Her Bachelors, Even (The Large Glass) 1915-23 Oil, varnish, lead foil, lead wire, and dust on two glass panels, 2775 x 1778 x 86 mm The Philadelphia Museum of Art, bequest of Katherine S. Dreier, 1952 © 2012 Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York /ADAGP, Paris / Succession Marcel Duchamp Figure 5 Marcel Duchamp The Bride Stripped Bare by her Bachelors, Even (The Large Glass) 1915-23, reconstruction by Richard Hamilton 1965-6, lower panel remade 1985 Oil, lead, dust and varnish on glass, 2775 x 1759 mm Tate, presented by William N. Copley through the American Federation of Arts 1975 © Richard Hamilton and Succession Marcel Duchamp/ADAGP, Paris and DACS, London 2015 Figure 6 Richard Hamilton Large Glass 1965-6 As published in the The Almost Complete Works of Marcel Duchamp (exh. cat., Tate Gallery and the Arts Council), London, 18 June-31 July 1966, unpaginated Figure 7 Richard Hamilton’s screenprint poster for his reconstruction of Marcel Duchamp’s Large Glass, Hatton Gallery, Newcastle upon Tyne, 16-27 May 1966 https://twmuseums.org.uk/ 6 Figure 8a Julian Wasser Duchamp Playing Chess with a Nude (Eve Babitz) Duchamp Retrospective, Pasadena Art Museum 1963 Gelatin silver print, 8 x 10 inches © Craig Krull Gallery, 2012 Figure 8b Yasumasa Morimura A Requiem: Theater of Creativity / Self-portrait as Marcel Duchamp 2010 Photograph, 1500 x 1875 mm Copyright the Artist, Courtesy ShugoArts