Public EngagementMachine Artist Project in Hammer ResidenceMuseum

Contents

INTRODUCTIONS Needlepoint Therapy Foreword, by Ann Philbin 5 Machine Project in Residence in Ann Philbin’s Office Getting Started: Public Engagement A.I.R. at the Hammer, Soundings: Bells at the Hammer by Allison Agsten 7 Intaglio Printmaking Workshop Working with Museums, by Mark Allen 11 Houseplant Vacation Level5 PROJECTS 17–22 Giant Hand Fanfare/No Fanfare Annie Okay FungiFest Enormous Microscopic Evening Paleolithic Skills Workshop Table Tennis on Lindbrook Terrace Little William Theater: Micro-Concerts Hammer Staff Birthday Poetry Readings and Personal Concerts Little William Theater: Festival of New Music Hammer Staff in Residence at Machine Project Live Personal Soundtrack

Giant Guestbooks and Tiny Guestbook A ROAD MAP Valentine’s Day Songs of Triumph or Heartbreak Record of Our Experience, Subtle Bodies Series by Allison Agsten and Elizabeth Cline 24 Tablacentric Dream-In INTERVIEWS

Nap-In BIG PICTURE Singing by Numbers Allison Agsten 33 Hammer Staff Pet Portraits Chris Kallmyer 42

Machine Project Hammer Report 3 Contents

REEVALUATIONS AND COLLABORATIONS Elizabeth Cline 49 Liz Glynn 121 Maria Mortati 56 Brody Condon 127 STRATEGIES OF ENGAGEMENT Adam Overton 132 Joshua Beckman 61

Emily Lacy 65 INFRASTRUCTURAL IMPACT Cat Lamb and Laura Steenberge 69 Ali Subotnick 138 Anthony McCann 73 Andrew Werner 143 Eric Klerks with Chris Kallmyer 78 Julia Luke 147 Joshua Greene 84 Morgan Kroll 150 Eric Avery 89 Portland McCormick 154 Luke Storm and Ashley Walters 93 Jenni Kim and Margot Stokol 158 Nick Didkovsky 96 Jim Fetterley 163

REIMAGINING THE MUSEUM APPENDIXES Philip Ross 99 The Hammer Museum: Mission, Vision, and Values 171 Corey Fogel 104 Machine Project: Vision and Values 172 Asher Hartman with Haruko Tanaka and Jasmine Orpilla 107 The Experiential Record, or How To Do Things with Matt Jones 111 Documentation, by Andrew J Lau 174 Chandler McWilliams 114 Acknowledgments 182 Nate Page 118

Machine Project Hammer Report 4 When the Hammer Museum embarked upon its Public Engagement program, thanks to a generous grant from the Irvine Foundation, we were afforded the opportunity to consider the roles of art, of artists, and even of visitors from a fresh perspective. It was a unique chance to put aside long-held notions of what guests often expect a museum experience to be—static and monologic at worst—and to enact what it can be at best—dynamic, with visitor and institution in conversation. Through Public Engagement, visitors have been able to step outside of their traditional roles as observers and to become participants. Similarly, we have been able to open up our process for working with artists and to collaborate on creating a new sphere, one that often exists beyond standard exhibitions and performances. Public Engagement has been one of our greatest experiments to date at the Hammer, coming at a pivotal moment in the history of the institution. The Hammer is entering its twenty-first year, and when we take stock of our accomplishments so far, it seems clear that we have reached adulthood. I am pleased that the institution has become known for its adventurous programming and proclivity for risk-taking, evidenced by the initiation of Public Engagement and other endeavors. As time has passed and we have grown to accommodate such programs, we have also developed systems and processes to support our larger size. In this moment, as our systems are ossifying, it is vital that the structures that we Foreword have set up to support our burgeoning institution do not weigh too heavily on our natural tendency toward advancement and experimentation. Public Engagement revealed to us a sometimes difficult by-product of maturity: our own bureaucracy. So while the programs have dramatically enhanced the museum experience for our audience, Public Engagement has also illuminated internal issues that had not so directly challenged us before. In other words, since the initiation of Public Engagement, we not only have looked outward but have taken a hard look inward as well. Coming to terms with our internal workings is just one illuminating aspect of supporting and growing a program like

Machine Project Hammer Report 5 Public Engagement. As with any good experiment, we have already learned so much more than we set out to learn. Through Public Engagement and our first artist residency with Machine Project, we came to a greater understanding of what our visitors respond to, of how to bring our secondary spaces to life, of new ways to charge our existing programs, and even of what our shortcomings might be. We have embraced what Machine Project taught us, carrying on the most successful ideas to the second year of the program, and we have tested our own tolerance for risk. The Hammer’s evolution continues, and around us, other institutions are also beginning to look toward the future of museum practice and audience engagement. As we collectively begin to reconceptualize the role of visitors and, in our case, the role of artists as well, we present to you the first chapter of our investigation into this emerging area of work. Of course, none of this would be possible without the generosity of the James Irvine Foundation. The grant we were awarded has allowed us to do the work we otherwise could only have dreamed of. Our deepest gratitude goes to Machine Project as well. Director Mark Allen and his collaborators have been true partners throughout, and we have all benefited as much from the collective’s thoughtful work as we have from its lively spirit.

Ann Philbin Director Hammer Museum

Machine Project Hammer Report Foreword 6 Getting Started: Public Engagement A.I.R. at the Hammer, GETTING STARTED by Allison Agsten Over the past year and a half, I’ve had the pleasure of speaking with many colleagues at other institutions about Public Engagement at the Hammer. While each museum has its own impetus for asking about and potentially pursuing this work, the inquiries themselves have been mostly aligned. Typically, the first question I receive is about the premise: what do we mean by public engagement? This is followed by a number of practical questions regarding the genesis of the program and its execution to date. As we learned in our first year, manifesting a new program like this requires substantial legwork: infrastructure must be configured and processes put into place to support projects that are outside the boundaries of the Museum’s regular curatorial operation. I offer here a basic road map that should be of practical value to other institutions that choose to pursue similar initiatives. The answer to the broader question about the nature of public engagement depends on who you ask. The differing interpretations of the newly developed initiative are central to the development of the program, as well as evident in many of the tensions that emerged along the way. I will further address this issue later in the report, but first, some background. In 2009, the Hammer Museum’s Artist Council, a group of artists who advise the Museum on wide-ranging topics, began discussing a new way to address many of the ongoing visitor services issues the Museum had been grappling with. For example, the Museum’s lobby still felt corporate and hollow, ticketing occurred upstairs in a counterintuitive space, and there wasn’t staff in place dedicated to guest experience. What would happen, the Council wondered, if the Hammer collaborated with Introduction, AA artists to consider these concerns through their lens? Not long after this conversation occurred and with the Council’s idea in mind, the Museum applied for a James Irvine Foundation Arts Innovation Fund grant (http://irvine.org/evaluation/program- evaluations/artsinnovationfund). That same year the Museum was awarded a substantial grant to be used in part to create of a new model for visitor engagement. At the core of this grant is the Public Engagement Artist In Residence (A.I.R.) program, which encourages contact between visitors, artists, and Museum

Machine Project Hammer Report 7 staff, and activates the Museum in unexpected ways. Museum staff, the Hammer and Machine Project coexplored This new endeavor felt like a logical next step for the hundreds of ideas for the first year of the program. Over the Hammer, which strives to be an artist-driven institution and, course of the Residency, 26 projects were executed, ranging under director Ann Philbin, has developed a certain level of from intimate musical performances for one to a microscopy comfort with—and even an aspiration toward—risk-taking. festival for hundreds. In total, more than 300 artists participated Further, the Museum had just wrapped up its first Irvine in Machine Project’s Residency. Later in the report, Elizabeth Foundation grant, which was used, in part, to create the very and I will outline the processes we developed, provide a sample council that conceptualized what would become the basis of the production schedule, and explain the other ins and outs critical second Irvine grant. Both the council and Public Engagement to the realization of Public Engagement from an institutional are concerned with problem solving, and both emerged from perspective. the same core commitment to involving artists in the institution in a substantial way, certainly beyond the galleries. With the DEFINING PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT new Irvine grants in place and a solid foundation of institutional From the beginnings of Public Engagement and continuing experience with experimentation, the Museum was ready to up to this moment, even Museum staff had differing opinions move forward. Philbin selected Echo Park collective Machine about the precise role of Public Engagement and various ideas Project to be the Museum’s first A.I.R. Machine Project’s director, about what it might look like. For some, operational problem Mark Allen, was a member of the Artist Council and had been solving should be the basis for the program. Others feel that part of the earliest discussions about the program’s potential. the program is intended to draw connections with existing Ann knew Mark’s storefront gallery and was interested in the Museum programs, taking the form of interpretive projects for work he had done at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art exhibitions. Still others believe that Public Engagement is not (LACMA) the year before. Among the areas on the table to be about a specific output but an opportunity for the Museum to investigated and reimagined were the Museum’s wayfinding continue its exploration of the roles artists can serve within design, visitor tours, and the lobby’s then vacant front desk. the Museum. Ultimately, in year one, most projects referenced With these and other ideas in mind, Machine Project explored operational concerns or issues, but problems were not the Museum in a research phase over the summer. necessarily solved by the projects themselves. What we learned The first project, Fanfare/No Fanfare, was initiated in as a result of the projects did, however, lead us to consider December 2009 with Hammer curator Ali Subotnick, who ran the solutions. For example, the Table Tennis on Lindbrook Terrace program until a separate position was created, curator of public transformed the space of Lindbrook terrace, which prior to engagement, for which I was hired in March 2010. I worked Machine Project’s Residency was simply a pass-through from closely, as Ali had, with Elizabeth Cline, who managed the one side of the Museum to the other, identifying the location as production of projects and was appointed curatorial associate of a valuable area for programming. public engagement. I split my time between Public Engagement Outside of the Hammer, Public Engagement has often and serving as director of the new visitor services department. In been discussed in the broader contexts of museum education the latter capacity, I implement visitor experience fundamentals or social practice. Though some of the hallmarks of museum that are not covered by the Public Engagement program, education (workshops, music programming) are woven into which have included an activated front desk in the lobby and much of the work of Public Engagement, the program was not the establishment of a Museum volunteer program. With our intended as an antidote to a traditional pedagogical approach. small Public Engagement team, alongside a broad swath of Similarly, while much of the work and many of the artists we

Machine Project Hammer Report Intro, AA 8 have collaborated with align themselves with social practice, which was at times in conflict with ideas proposed by the emphasizing participation and interaction between performer artist. This played out, for example, in the development of and audience, we did not set out to focus specifically on this the Giant Hand, a wayfinding project conceptually aligned mode of engagement. Lacking a real precedent for the Public with the Museum’s problem-solving goals. While the Hammer Engagement program, these established directions serve was very comfortable acknowledging its shortcomings with as touchstones in the much wider and less defined field of directional signage, it wasn’t comfortable heightening existing strategies we have pursued and pioneered. confusion by providing potentially misleading directions via If myriad expectations and notions of what Public the installation. In this case and with other proposals, Machine Engagement might mean exist among Hammer staff and was at ease introducing an element of confusion, whereas the among our colleagues outside of the Museum, perhaps it’s Hammer found that approach to be antagonistic toward visitors no surprise that the Hammer’s version and Machine Project’s already grappling with a difficult space. version diverged on some occasions. Typically this occurred On a practical level, we were also struggling with how to in situations where the Hammer adopted a stricter problem- sustain the program internally. While we are fortunate to have solving approach and expected solutions to predetermined our Irvine Foundation grant, we learned that infrastructure is public engagement problems, whereas Machine was more also pivotal when it comes to making A.I.R. a success. Mark interested in questioning and investigating the problems and his collaborators generated dozens of ideas, and much themselves, creating pieces that articulated the underlying of the production labor involved in executing them fell to the concerns for public reflection. If this was where the core of the Museum’s staff, affecting a number of departments outside conflict resided, it was also the gray area that propelled some curatorial and even events. These very real production strains of our most productive conversations and projects. Over the reveal themselves in the road map that follows and also in course of the first year, however, our understanding of Public the interviews that Mark and I conducted. In spite of the Engagement grew more complex rather than clearer: as we many hurdles, we enjoyed a rich collaboration that extended wrapped up our last projects together, we were still sorting beyond troubleshooting and into the domain of conceptual through differing interpretations of what Public Engagement development. For example, the proposal for Level5—a had been; we continue to discuss internally the directions it closed performance piece that referenced the EST seminars might take in the future. of the 1970s—spoke to the Museum’s interest in exploring underrepresented art practices, yet it was not envisioned REFLECTION by the artist as publicly accessible. We talked about ways to You will see evidence of conflict in some of the interviews that advance the piece itself while also aligning it with the broader follow, but, to a certain extent, the process of editing and mission of Public Engagement, to create a unique experience especially the six months we have all had to reflect on, have for our audience. The Museum suggested a live video feed into inevitably tempered some of the friction of the collaboration the theater, an element so beautifully choreographed by the itself and made Machine’s aesthetic and the Hammer’s Hammer’s technical director that it became a pivotal feature of aesthetic appear more congruent than they actually were. the piece. In another case, Machine’s collaborative generosity The integration that may look natural in this context didn’t allowed the enactment of an entire project introduced by a always feel so in the moment. Though the Hammer invited Hammer staff member, Hammer Staff Pet Portraits. Within this Machine to delve deep into the institution and its practices, dialogical expanse, less evident in our report and hidden from the Museum wasn’t always ready to deny its own expertise, public view, some of the most open and unfettered moments of

Machine Project Hammer Report Intro, AA 9 the Residency occurred. Our collaboration comes to an end with this report, a final project that in many ways mirrored our time working together on site. There was substantial back-and-forth, questions about direction, and curiosity on each of our parts as to how best to execute a new form. We all remain deeply grateful to Mark and his collaborators. I’ve often said that in one year, we learned many years’ worth of lessons because of his infectious, prolific practice. The variety and density of the work allowed us to make a quantum leap forward in a way that I can’t imagine we could have otherwise. Machine delighted our visitors, made all of us think harder, and helped us transform the idea of an inventive new initiative into an actual program. Just paging through this report, you’ll see evidence of the excitement—and frustrations as well—involved in bringing a dynamic new public program into being.

Machine Project Hammer Report Intro, AA 10 Working with Museums, When I founded Machine Project in 2003, I thought of it as both by Mark Allen a discrete endeavor and a model for a different way of engaging people in cultural and intellectual life than that provided in formal spaces like museums and universities. Museums as institutions tend to reinforce a strong division between cultural producers and spectators. At Machine I facilitate collaborative and participatory approaches to art-making and foster an environment that is welcoming to amateurs and enthusiasts. In 2008, I was invited to inject the sensibility I had cultivated at Machine into the Los Angeles County Museum of Art for a single-day multiartist festival, Machine Project’s Field Guide to LACMA; at the same time, I was developing related events with several other museums. Working with larger institutions was becoming an important component of my practice when Hammer director Ann Philbin approached me in 2009 to ask if Machine Project would be the first Artist in Residence for a multiyear commitment the Museum had made to exploring public engagement strategies with artists. Establishing a casual, comfortable environment is key to attracting participants for Machine’s often technical or esoteric workshops and activities, putting public engagement at the very center of Machine’s work. Given this shared priority, I was intrigued by the Hammer’s proposal and by the opportunity to explore in depth, over the course of a year, the way the Museum functions as a site of cultural valuation and framing. This was a new undertaking for both the Hammer and Machine. As Machine Project’s first long-term residency in another institution, it would entail figuring out how to generate the open, convivial quality that Machine Project was known Introduction, MA for in a way that would complement the Hammer’s regular programming and mode of spectatorship. Machine Project brought our sensibility to the projects we developed, and you will see some of our core themes and preferred modes—such as intimacy, participation, and sound—recur throughout. The idea of the Residency was, however, not to utilize the Hammer as a venue for Machine Project’s regular practice or to make the Hammer feel like a museum-sized Machine Project. In order to effectively explore how Machine’s values might map onto a

Machine Project Hammer Report 11 larger cultural institution with its own history and established values statements for both the Hammer Museum and Machine manner of addressing the public, I approached the Residency Project can be found in the appendices at the back of this as a coinvestigation with the Hammer. Together we looked into report for further information about the distinct institutional ideas and strategies of public engagement and institutional perspectives involved. change. The focus for the Irvine grant was on the development As this was a collaborative undertaking between two of creative strategies that the Museum could reuse, and institutions, dozens of people participated in the Residency, over the course of the year we hit upon several successful and the making of this document reflects that. The body of methods of public engagement that could be comfortably the report is composed of interviews that I conducted with integrated into the existing structure of the Museum, as well as many of the artists who produced work for the Residency, promising avenues for further exploration. To me the process and with Allison Agsten and Elizabeth Cline, with whom I of investigating public engagement opened up a more exciting worked most closely at the Hammer, developing projects and and fundamental challenge: to rethink the way museums communicating several times a week. It also contains a set of operate and to propose changes that would make the museum interviews conducted by Allison Agsten with other members as an institution better attuned to contemporary art practices. of the Hammer staff whose labor and oversight were crucial to It also seemed like an important opportunity to consider the making the Residency happen. What is perhaps backgrounded role of museums in the context of larger shifts in how people by the split focus of the two major sets of interviews is the conceptualize their relationship to institutions and their extent of the Hammer’s creative involvement. In my interview engagement with culture. To this end, and with the hope that with musician Emily Lacy, she succinctly articulates that, in the Hammer would continue to publicly explore various modes collaborative endeavors such as these, the host institution really of encountering art, the projects Machine produced were a is the coauthor of the work. For our Residency, that was true series of experimental exercises. Their value lay in the flexibility both in terms of Allison’s and Elizabeth’s direct creative input and responsiveness they required of the institution as much as in into a number of the projects and in terms of the institutional the specific directions they charted. priorities and friction that pushed projects in directions they As the Residency unfolded, I think everyone involved would have never gone otherwise. developed a more nuanced understanding of the complexity of As an artist who works only collaboratively, I take for both public engagement and institutional change. Unearthing granted that the most exciting and original ideas come out of our implicit assumptions—mine and those of my colleagues at conversations with other people. It was hard to capture those the Hammer, as well as those embedded in the grant—about generative moments, as they occurred both during and outside what public engagement means, and how much institutional our brainstorming sessions, propelling the entire collaboration. change is desirable, was the most challenging aspect of the The productive chaos of the ideation process is perhaps best collaboration. This report attempts to present and contextualize captured in Allison’s interview with Ali Subotnick, who was what we learned about those initial ideas and looks at the involved only at the beginning of the Residency and whose different approaches we tested. We hope this will benefit other recollection is less affected by the subsequent pressures of museums and arts institutions seeking to undertake similar production and evaluation. In the process of reflection, each initiatives. A comprehensive overview of the planning and individual’s perspective tends to gravitate back to his or her implementation of the Residency, written by the Hammer’s own distinct subject position, whereas the truth of any creative public engagement curator Allison Agsten and curatorial materialization is to be found in a more complicated intertwining associate Elizabeth Cline, follows in the next section. Vision and and exchange. I think the projects themselves testify to the

Machine Project Hammer Report Intro, MA 12 multivocality of the considerations brought to bear on them— APPROACH TO PIECES as do a handful of the projects that didn’t happen, referred to PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT occasionally throughout. You can read interviews with three artists whose proposals were ultimately not realized but whose Pieces that added a more personal Live Personal Soundtrack, Dream-In, dimension to visitors’ engagement Nap-In, Needlepoint Therapy thinking was crucial to the development of my ideas about the with work in the Hammer’s special Residency. As a result, the document includes a wide range exhibitions and collections of perspectives, from people involved at the highest levels of curation and management to people more intimately involved Ambient pieces that used sound or Soundings: Bells at the Hammer, participation to alter the atmosphere Table Tennis on Lindbrook Terrace, with a particular art piece or institutional process. of the Museum Subtle Bodies Series, Singing I compiled this document with senior editor Kirsty Singer, by Numbers, Tablacentric, who shaped the interview transcripts and helped conceptualize Houseplant Vacation the overall structure of the Report. Rebecca Lofchie, Johanna Intimate performances for one Little William Theater: Micro- Reed, and Stephen Allen provided additional editorial or two people at a time Concerts & Festival of New Music, assistance, and Alex Cerrilla designed the final document. The Valentine’s Day Songs of Triumph or transcripts were edited to foreground and clarify the most useful Heartbreak and interesting portions of each discussion while maintaining Hands-on workshops that brought Enormous Microscopic Evening, their conversational flow. They contain reflections on the artists’ Machine’s participatory and FungiFest, Paleolithic Skills creative process and initial expectations, the challenges that interdisciplinary mode into the Workshop, Intaglio Printmaking arose during implementation, visitors’ reception of the pieces, Museum Workshop and the larger concerns about art, public engagement, and Large-scale live action or Level5, Annie Okay institutional identity that were illuminated by the content of performance pieces each piece and the complications surrounding its production. In addition to the interviews, you will find brief descriptions Projects that promoted interaction Hammer Staff Birthday Poetry of the 26 pieces we did over the course of the year, which between Machine Project’s artists Readings & Personal Concerts, and the Hammer’s staff Hammer Staff Pet Portraits, Machine together chart several different lines of inquiry into what public Project in Residence in Ann Philbin’s engagement means and how it might be approached. The Office, Hammer Staff in Residence following categorization is only one of many, but it should orient at Machine Project you to the range of strategies we tried. Pieces that directly addressed the Fanfare/No Fanfare, Giant Hammer’s visitor services concerns, Guestbook & Tiny Guestbook, including hospitality and wayfinding Giant Hand

Machine Project Hammer Report Intro, MA 13 In retrospect, Machine’s Residency sought to integrate the task of developing new public engagement strategies as an some of the major qualities that distinguish contemporary investigation that would involve trying out multiple directions—and thinking about art—specifically its process-based orientation, doing so publicly. The Museum’s visitors are its core constituents; self-reflexivity, and valuation of discourse—into the structure it was important to me that we resist foreclosing possibilities and curatorial practice of the Hammer. This called for a shift on the basis of our assumptions about what they would or in the institutional culture and identity of the Museum, from would not find engaging, and actually try the various tactics we its traditional function as a container for the display of art thought of. In retrospect, had we more fully discussed upfront to an artist-driven model of the museum as an active site of that such experimentation inevitably carries with it the likelihood production and discussion. For the remainder of this piece, I will that some efforts will fail to produce expected results, a better elaborate on what I mean by the proposed shift—from museum- communications strategy might have been developed—both to as-container to museum-as-site—in the context of the theoretical inform visitors of the goal and nature of the Residency and to concerns and points of tension that arose during the Residency. make the Hammer more comfortable embracing the inherent risk. The situation was further complicated by the fact that we were EXPERIMENTATION AS A PRACTICE VS. experimenting with business-related facets of the institution that EXPERIMENTAL WORK are not usually part of the Museum’s public presence. For the One of the most important considerations that emerged during Hammer, bringing the Museum’s operational concerns out of the the Residency was the distinction between the museum as a place offices and into the galleries unavoidably introduced vulnerability where experimental work is preserved and displayed, and the and confusion into the central and successfully established museum as a site for experimentation. Perhaps due to the external curatorial arena. The Hammer displayed a remarkable combination nature of the grant’s focus on public engagement, the distinct of openness and resilience in the face of this risk, a risk that implications for the institution of applying Machine Project’s attended the very premise of the grant: applying an available experimental practice to the Hammer’s concerns versus displaying asset—the artist’s creativity—to an operational concern made the the best of Machine’s experimental work in the Museum and Museum itself a site for artistic intervention. expecting it to attract people were never fully articulated. The latter approach is in keeping with the traditional curatorial ARTIST AS PROBLEM SOLVER model and fits more easily with the notion of connoisseurship The idea of the artist as problem solver, which lay at the core of on which museums are historically based: museums acquire the Arts Innovation Fund proposal—a compelling if somewhat select pieces of work that were experimental in their moment radical notion based on intertwining impetuses to find an economic to represent a particular practice or mode of making art; with use-value for the artist and to give the artist-as-stakeholder more contemporary work, they gravitate toward artists who have creative input into the museum—likewise proved more complicated established a reputation for themselves and who can be counted than had been anticipated at the outset. When people at an on for a known quality. A notable thing about the Hammer institution speak of a problem, it is often to indicate something inviting Machine Project to be its first Public Engagement Artist in that interferes with their operation. From the artist’s perspective, Residence is that, in a sense, what we’re known for is a degree a problem is a provocation or a site to which the artwork responds of unpredictability: I facilitate collaborative and interdisciplinary by creating something that engages the problem and makes it work on the basis of its potential to generate unexpected ideas visible in a different light. The problem is aestheticized, framed, or and experiences. reconfigured; it is seldom erased or resolved. With Machine Project as Artist in Residence, I approached During the Residency, the difference between these two

Machine Project Hammer Report Intro, MA 14 perspectives asserted itself most clearly over the proposals we ARTISTS AND INSTITUTIONS: made to address the navigational challenge of the Hammer’s FROM CRITIQUE TO COLLABORATION layout—a visitor services concern they had identified. The The art historical context of the Hammer’s Public Engagement Giant Hand, an animatronic sculpture that pointed people Artist in Residence program is the aftermath of Institutional toward different parts of the Museum depending on the Critique, and the initiative speaks to the challenge of responding button they selected, was originally intended to be displayed to that legacy. A set of discursive and deconstructive practices, for the remaining several months of the Residency. Through Institutional Critique has sought to make visible the social the development of the piece, however, issues and questions and historical construction of art institutions since the 1960s, about the balance between conceptual thrust and utility arose. often doing so in oppositional ways. Museums have responded The Giant Hand helped visitors figure out how to get around by including such work in their exhibitions and permanent the space, but it did so in a manner that highlighted the collections, demonstrating a significant commitment to freedom difficulty of the Hammer’s layout and generated conversation of content, but at the same time effectively incorporating about its signage. The Museum had concerns about whether critique as another product and leaving traditional modes of calling excessive attention to the problem would eclipse the operation and viewership largely untouched. The Hammer’s practical value of the solution. Because of this tension, Machine decision to invite artists to grapple with the Museum’s proposed installing it for the shorter duration of a month in the administrative and infrastructural concerns marks the advent of Hammer’s internal courtyard. In practice, I think everyone was a significant departure and an important step toward actively a little surprised by the Giant Hand’s efficacy and popularity. reinventing the way the institution functions. Nonetheless, a pragmatic solution would have made the As a new initiative, the Hammer’s Public Engagement problem invisible such that it functionally ceased to exist. Artist in Residence program is only beginning to explore What I find valuable in thinking about these conflicting and articulate that potential, and will continue to do so over approaches is that they point to different potential identities for the next several years. The Hammer’s decision to make this the Museum. Understood as a container, the Museum, along with report available should enable other museums to have a better its infrastructure and operations, is ideally unobtrusive. Machine’s sense of the terrain as they pursue similar endeavors. We wayfinding proposals, on the other hand, made the Hammer’s have chosen not to make specific recommendations: Machine infrastructural concerns part of the art that it displayed. The value Project is deeply committed to an understanding of process of this, from a public engagement perspective, is that the Museum as something that emerges out of conversation and in a local becomes a more dynamic and approachable entity—and one that context; any substantive guidance necessarily depends on includes the public in discussions about the nature and function of the particular cultures and capacities of the institutions and the Museum. The invitation to think critically about the Museum individual artists involved, as well as on the desired level of itself is a gambit that implicitly extends to the art: it sends visitors collaboration and outcome. That said, our experience suggests a clear message that the Museum is a space in which art serves as that, at the conservative end of the spectrum, bringing in artists the basis for a conversation about values in which they are welcome as consultants to fix glitches in the institution’s established to participate. operation is probably not the most effective solution. Collaborations between artists and museums are, however, an excellent way to reconsider and change how we make contemporary art available and engaging to the public. To that end, Machine Project’s Residency at the Hammer proposed a

Machine Project Hammer Report Intro, MA 15 shift in curatorial practice from an approach that is product- based to one that is committed to process—a shift that entails inviting in the messy contingency inherent to art.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS During the year Machine spent at the Hammer, both institutions traversed a great distance from our visions for the Museum’s future to a far more concrete understanding of the practical challenges involved in reconciling and implementing those visions. As an artist who works entirely collaboratively, getting to spend a year deeply and intimately involved with all aspects of the Hammer’s operations was a phenomenal opportunity for me to develop my nascent ideas about institutional practice. I am immensely grateful to Ann Philbin for the invitation, and to Allison Agsten, Elizabeth Cline, Douglas Fogle, and Ali Subotnick for their perspectives and insights, without which I couldn’t have developed my own ideas, as well as for their investment in the Residency, which was essential to making these dozens of artists’ pieces and projects happen. I continue to reflect on the Residency as I pursue collaborative undertakings with other institutions; producing this document has been an integral part of that learning process. The negotiations and conflicts you will encounter, alongside moments of remarkable cooperation, testify to the fact that, even with the best intentions, change is a slow and sometimes painful process. As I believe this document also makes tangible, the result is well worth the effort: embracing a more experimental practice gives rise to porous and dynamic interactions between the visitors, artists, and museum employees who together activate the museum as a space for art.

Machine Project Hammer Report Intro, MA 16 Project Descriptions stairs in the Hammer Museum lobby. Performances were primarily of live music, but there was also a pup- pet show, a cheese tasting, a bilin- gual poetry reading, and other sundry events. Pieces were typically one to two minutes in duration and were per- formed for two guests at a time. The series was conceived and curated by PALEOLITHIC SKILLS WORKSHOP Chris Kallmyer and Mark Allen. Westwood and surrounding areas; http://vimeo.com/9813718 Museum Courtyard and http://www.youtube.com/ Saturday, February 6, 2010, noon–4pm user/machineproject#grid/ user/150A4EFB75B0F0E4 Workshop participants foraged for food in Westwood with paleolithic skills instructor Mike Metzger. Each hunter-gatherer adopted a spirit name, FANFARE/NO FANFARE FUNGIFEST and several made the trek without Museum Lobby (Wilshire Blvd. Museum Lobby shoes. On their journey, participants Entrance) January 21, 2010, 6–9pm collected wild edible plants, and, upon December 19, 2009, 11am–4pm returning to the Museum, a salad was Dressed from head to toe in a red made and eaten. Visitors to the Museum were given mushroom-cap costume, filmmaker and http://vimeo.com/9367767 the choice between a fanfare event organizer David Fenster greeted announcement of their arrival provided visitors at the front desk, while a LITTLE WILLIAM THEATER: FESTIVAL by the trumpet trio Scribble, or mushroom-themed film that he created OF NEW MUSIC silence. The choice was indicated by for the occasion screened behind Museum Lobby Coatroom a sign with two arrows—one arrow him. Throughout the lobby and on Saturdays, August through November pointing to the left and marked the main staircase, a group of dancers 2010 “Fanfare” and one arrow pointing to performed an interpretation of the life the right and marked “No Fanfare”— of a spore, choreographed by Hana The Little William Theater performances which was placed at the bottom of Van der Kolk and Phil Lord. Mycologist culminated in a final concert series the main lobby staircase. Visitors who Dr. Bob Cummings provided visitors called the Festival of New Music. chose “Fanfare” were treated to with detailed facts and stories about Ninety-five composers created new a brief unique improvisation. The piece everything fungus-related and LITTLE WILLIAM THEATER: works for each of four resident was conceived by Mark Allen and answered questions about a selection MICRO-CONCERTS ensembles: tuba, clarinet, violin, and Chris Kallmyer. of fungi that had been picked on an Museum Lobby Coatroom accordion duos. Each piece was under earlier mushroom-hunting expedition Saturdays, January through November two minutes in length, and the 400- through Machine. 2010 odd concerts all took place inside the http://vimeo.com/11663908 coatroom. All works were commissioned Throughout Machine’s one-year resi- for the festival by Machine Project and dency, weekly micro-concerts and curated by Chris Kallmyer. other brief performances took place http://www.youtube.com/ in the small coatroom closet—dubbed user/machineproject#grid/ the Little William Theater—under the user/150A4EFB75B0F0E4

Machine Project Hammer Report 17 a single song of either heartbreak or triumph by musician Emily Lacy. Hammer curator Ali Subotnick and usher Henry Crouch were stationed at a table in front of the theater, checking people in and obtaining their choice of song type. Henry led guests into the theater, showed them to their seat, and signaled the guest’s choice to Emily. Participants did not LIVE PERSONAL SOUNDTRACK GIANT GUESTBOOKS & communicate with Emily before, TABLACENTRIC Gallery 4 (Luisa Lambri exhibition), TINY GUESTBOOK during, or, in most cases, after Museum Lobby Gallery 5 (R. Crumb exhibition), and Museum Lobby the performance. April 6–17, 2010, 2–5pm Permanent Collection Galleries (Parking Garage Entrance) http://vimeo.com/9970755 February 6, March 13, April 8, February 13–June 30, 2010 Musician Robin Sukhadia presented April 29, and May 13, 2010 two weeks of tabla (north Indian A giant-sized guestbook, designed classical drum) workshops and events. Musicians Eric Klerks and Dylan and handmade by book binder and People were able to preregister for McKenzie sat in the Gallery 4 foyer conservator Kristen St. John, was use of a tabla or simply to drop by and with their electric guitars and installed in the Museum lobby just pick up any available drums. Players small amps hooked up to a set of to the right of the parking garage ran the gamut from small children to headphones, underneath a sign that entrance. Visitors were invited to use older adults. Visitors and passersby read “Museum Soundtrack Available.” it to express their impressions and watched the drum sessions from the Visitors could check out either of experience of the Hammer, or to make Museum stairs and balcony. them for a private audio tour of the any other commentary or drawing. Hammer’s permanent collection Two giant guestbooks were filled over SUBTLE BODIES SERIES and the R. Crumb and Luisa Lambri the course of four months. A tiny Museum-wide exhibitions. Participants could choose guestbook was also created but was Wednesdays, February 24, March 3, to make musical requests while not implemented. March 10, and March 17, 2010 viewing the exhibitions, or to have the guitarist improvise an original As part of an ongoing series curated personal soundtrack for them. When by artist Adam Overton in various both guitarists were out on tour, they public places, artist Johanna Reed changed the signage from “Museum asked the occasional passerby to Soundtrack Available” to “Museum smell her and then write down their Soundtrack UNavailable.” This project observations. How they “gathered DREAM-IN was conceived by Mark Allen and their information” was left up to them. Museum-wide Chris Kallmyer. May 1–2 (overnight), 2010 http://vimeo.com/12841248 A total of 170 people signed up VALENTINE’S DAY SONGS OF to spend the night in the Hammer TRIUMPH OR HEARTBREAK courtyard and collect any dreams Billy Wilder Theater that occurred during their stay. The Sunday, February 14, 2010, 1–4pm evening, organized by artist Adam Overton and facilitated by a group Visitors to the Museum were invited of 25 local artist-psychonauts, was to request a private performance of offered in conjunction with the

Machine Project Hammer Report Projects 18 Hammer’s special exhibition of Carl Musicians Laura Steenberge and Cat Jung’s Red Book. Participants chose Lamb and their experimental women’s from a selection of experimental choir, Singing by Numbers, sang dreaming workshops on guided minimalist harmonic improvisations in meditation, lucid dreaming, dream the Luisa Lambri gallery. After their acrobatics, and Yoga Nidra first performance, Cat and Laura (a form of sleep yoga), among others. invited visitors to attend a singing The workshops were followed by workshop on Lindbrook terrace that musical performances from b.y.o.f.f., explored the physics of sound waves a local all-female acoustic indie-folk NAP-IN through voice and experimented NEEDLEPOINT THERAPY band, and the experimental ambient Lindbrook Terrace with new methods of teaching non- Billy Wilder Theater Green Room music group Moon. Around midnight, May 2, 2010, 12–5pm musicians and musicians alike how to Eight Thursdays, May 20– July 8, 2010, writers Amanda Yates and Joshua sing in harmony. 2–3:30pm Beckman read bedtime stories and The day after the Dream-In, Machine http://vimeo.com/12865696 poetry to small groups of people Project hosted a Nap-In for people who In a piece conceived by artist Joshua gathered around campsites in the had been unable to attend or commit Greene and led by his mother, West courtyard. The following morning, to the Dream-In, as well as for other Los Angeles-based psychoanalyst and participants were gently woken at Museum visitors. The curtains were needlepointing enthusiast Dr. Ellen dawn and asked to describe their drawn and 320 square feet of mats with Medway, seven people convened for dreams. The dream interviews were cozy blankets were laid down on the private, confidential weekly 90-minute video recorded and edited into floor of Lindbrook terrace. Music to nap group therapy sessions during a loop that played the next day in by was provided in hourlong intervals which they explored relationship the main lobby of the Hammer. by Jaeger Smith, Emily Lacy, Ambient concerns alongside needlepoint Artist and songwriter Claire Cronin Force 3000, and Yvette Holzwarth, craft and art history. Dr. Medway serenaded campers with songs that Daniel Corral, and Ryan Tanaka. At chose a selection of works that she told of her psychic encounters with the same time in the courtyard, the HAMMER STAFF PET PORTRAITS deemed conducive and relevant to spiritual vibrations in the Hammer. Gawdawful Theater troupe silently Gallery 6 the therapeutic process. Images On their way out, campers returned reenacted dreams of Dream-In Saturday, June 19, 2010, 9am–noon of these paintings were made into the dream pads they had been given participants from the night before. needlepoint patterns that participants for dream (re)collection to Adam http://vimeo.com/12246992 As part of a project conceived by worked on throughout the sessions. Overton, who translated their contents Hammer designer Margo Graxeda, Needlepointing kits made from into performance scores for that staff members were invited to bring the same patterns were sold in the day’s Nap-In. their pets to the Museum to have their Hammer bookstore. http://hammer.ucla.edu/watchlisten/ pictures taken in the courtyard by watchlisten/show_id/303227 photographer Marianne Williams. The final stage of the proposed project—the production of life- size laminated cardboard cutouts of people’s pets to be positioned throughout the Museum—never happened, but the eight participating SINGING BY NUMBERS staff members did receive professional Gallery 4 (Luisa Lambri exhibition) photos of their pets. 4–7pm on Sunday, May 15 and Saturday, June 4, 2010; 6–9pm on Fridays, May 20 and 27, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report Projects 19 readings, performances, and musical events, designed to give the plants a well-rounded vacation experience. Readings included short stories by Janet Sarbanes and plant-themed poetry by Anthony McCann and Kirsty Singer. Musical and other performances were provided by Krystal Krunch, Laura Steenberge, MACHINE PROJECT IN RESIDENCE SOUNDINGS: BELLS AT INTAGLIO PRINTMAKING ing, Mary Frances Spencer, Carmina IN ANN PHILBIN’S OFFICE THE HAMMER WORKSHOP Escobar, Robert Crouch, and Sublamp. Ann Philbin’s Office Museum-wide Lindbrook Terrace When performances were in progress, July 15, 2010, 10am–6pm Saturday, July 17, 2010, 10am–6pm July 24 and 25, 2010, 1–4pm the plants’ section was roped off with a stanchion that read “Plants Only Machine Project director Mark Allen, Hammer visitors were invited to In conjunction with the Hammer’s Beyond This Point.” In addition to five Machine staff members and participate in a daylong sound summer exhibition Outside the Box: the weekly programming, the plants interns, and one visiting artist spent installation by Chris Kallmyer Edition Jacob Samuel, printmaker had their tarot cards read by Kristina a full workday in residence in Hammer composed of the sounds made by Maggie White Lomeli offered Faragher, were treated to private late- Museum director Ann Philbin’s bells that were issued upon arrival two drypoint etching workshops night plant pornography by Jonathan office. The mini-residency within and worn by participating guests to familiarize visitors with one of the Keats, and had poets from around Machine’s Residency served as as they perambulated the Museum simplest forms of intaglio printmaking. the country, including and invited a collaborative planning session for in usual fashion. The wind chime- Preregistered participants of all ages by Joshua Beckman, calling at all Mark and Ann to conceptualize future like tinkling emanating from visitors created their own etchings made hours to read them poems through plans for Machine and the Museum. was supplemented by computer- by drawing into a plate surface and a loudspeaker answering machine The original concept for this project programmed toy animatronic Santa running it through the etching press. hidden in a fake boulder. Plant owners was a cultural exchange between Clauses let loose in the Museum’s were given a reader of plant-themed institutions, with each director coatroom by composer Beth McMullin, poems selected by Joshua Beckman assuming control of operations at an African bell ensemble that in case they missed their plants. Each the other’s office for one day. Ann circulated throughout the Museum, plant wrote a “Welcome to Westwood” Philbin did not take the helm at and an amplified cymbal performance postcard home designed by Hammer Machine Project; instead, a number by Colin Woodford on Lindbrook designer Margo Graxeda and had its of Hammer staff members created terrace that provided an ambient portrait taken by photographer Lisa events at Machine through Hammer backdrop. Admission to the Museum Anne Auerbach. Staff in Residence at Machine Project, was free of charge to participants http://vimeo.com/14492141 a project conceived later in the willing to wear a bell; only two visitors Residency. opted out and bought tickets. There were a higher number of children in HOUSEPLANT VACATION attendance than usual. Lindbrook Terrace http://vimeo.com/13632625 July 31–August 28, 2010

Visitors were invited to bring their houseplants to the Museum for a monthlong cultural retreat in August on light-flooded Lindbrook terrace. Every Saturday, the 77 participating plants were treated to a series of

Machine Project Hammer Report Projects 20 Annie Okay was an original the relationships between culture and performance theater work written the environment. The evening included and directed by Asher Hartman and demonstrations and workshops inspired by the unintentional colonialist from 12 individuals or collectives, subtext in two of America’s well-loved ranging from experts to amateurs and musicals, Annie Get Your Gun and hobbyists. Visitors were serenaded by The King and I. The piece revisited three musicians playing John Cage’s the musical form and combined it with Suite for Toy Piano down the hall and elements of abstract theater, comedy, into the dark gallery space where they LEVEL5 GIANT HAND and participatory components to learned how to build and manipulate Gallery 6 and Billy Wilder Theater Museum Courtyard Foyer look at how American entertainment microscopes made from disposable Performance: Saturday, September 5, September 2010 responds to and portrays struggles camera lenses, cell phones, and IMAX through Sunday, September 6 with race, identity, colonialist politics, cameras. Live material samples were (72 continuous hours) The Giant Hand was one of three and violence. The performance moved taken from the Museum’s courtyard projects proposed at the beginning throughout the Museum, with the and examined under the different Artist Brody Condon’s live-action of the Residency to address the audience following the actors for scopes by visitors of all ages. role-playing (LARP) performance Museum’s wayfinding concerns. short scenes in the Museum lobby and http://vimeo.com/22781774 piece Level5 was a 72-hour critical Conceived by museum exhibition courtyard foyer to Lindbrook terrace. exploration of self-actualization designer Maria Mortati and Mark Allen Annie Okay was assistant directed seminars of the 1970s. The 50 and fabricated by artist Matt Jones, by Haruko Tanaka and featured a score participants created and assumed the Giant Hand pointed visitors toward by Devin McNulty and Max Markowitz, characters who then went through select locations in the Museum—Stairs choreography by Prumsodun a transformative experience together. to Galleries, Admission and Bookstore, Ok and Carol McDowell, costumes While the performance itself was Elevator to Galleries, Billy Wilder by Curt LeMieux, and makeup by closed to the public, Hammer visitors Theater, Restrooms, Cafe Hammer, Maritza Mazariego. It was performed could watch live-streaming video in and at “you”—by means of a simple by a cast of Los Angeles-based the Billy Wilder Theater. On November push-button control panel located on performance artists and actors. 18, 2010, the Hammer hosted the its base, which was modeled on the http://vimeo.com/26084011 premiere of select footage from the Hammer and neighboring Occidental TABLE TENNIS ON LINDBROOK piece in the Billy Wilder Theater. A Petroleum building. TERRACE discussion with Brody Condon and http://vimeo.com/15612336 Lindbrook Terrace Mark Allen followed the screening. March through November 2010 http://lvl5.org/ Two table tennis tables were installed on Lindbrook terrace for visitors and museum staff to play on. As the tables were used, the sound of people hitting balls back and forth activated spaces in the Museum that had previously ENORMOUS MICROSCOPIC EVENING been relatively vacant. At the same Gallery 6 time, they created a psychoacoustic November 6, 2010 4–7pm sculpture that altered the perceptual ANNIE OKAY experience and social atmosphere of Museum-wide Enormous Microscopic Evening was the institution. October 15 and 16, 2010, 8:30–10pm hosted by Critter, a San Francisco- each night based salon dedicated to expanding

Machine Project Hammer Report Projects 21 exchange between institutions, this project offered the reciprocal opportunity to anyone who worked at the Hammer. Staff members were issued an open invitation to take over Machine Project’s gallery space on Thursdays throughout the last three months of our Residency. Several staff members participated: Morgan HAMMER STAFF BIRTHDAY POETRY Kroll put on a concert in Machine’s READINGS & PERSONAL CONCERTS shipwreck installation; Julia Luke and Hammer Museum offices Sara Williams transformed Machine Throughout the Residency into a pop-up pie shop for the holidays; Elizabeth Cline filmed an Hammer staff members were invited opera starring and made for dogs; to sign up for special one-on-one Marisa Lemorande hosted a formal performances for their birthdays. dinner and reunion between friends; These ranged from receiving a phone Camille Thoma and a few friends used call at work from Joshua Beckman, the space as an art studio for a day. who read the staff member a poem, to http://vimeo.com/24497415 individual folk music concerts by Emily Lacy and drum solo performances from percussionist Corey Fogel, who brought his entire drum set into the staff member’s office for the occasion. http://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=eAaZOCUibZc

HAMMER STAFF IN RESIDENCE AT MACHINE PROJECT Machine Project Thursdays, September through November 2010

Looking at Machine’s Residency at the Hammer Museum as a cultural

Machine Project Hammer Report Projects 22 Machine Project Hammer Report Author’sProjects Name 23 A Road RoadMap

MapRecord of Our Experience

Machine Project Hammer Report Author’sA Road NameMap 24 A Road Map/ Record of Our Experience

HAMMER MUSEUM GOALS HOW WE DID IT • To develop new pathways for integrating artists within FUNDING the artistic, programmatic, public, and institutional facets of The 2010 program was made possible entirely by the Irvine an art museum. grant, which is funded over the course of four years. In the • To conceive and implement a new paradigm for the inter- first year, Irvine distributed its largest sum, with the funds active museum: an artist-driven visitor engagement program decreasing over time so that the Museum would gradually adapt that privileges daily contact among visitors, artists, and by supplementing the grant dollars to create a self-sustaining Museum staff. program. Machine Project received $95,000, the majority of the • To enrich the visitor’s experience of the Hammer through year one Public Engagement program funds. The remainder was dialogue, direction, and interpretation, increasing visibility of allotted for visitor services needs such as the creation of collections and exhibitions and offering new frameworks for a functioning lobby front desk. Additionally, Machine received engaging with the Museum. a $20,000 stipend for its work. • To enable the Hammer to be a site for non-object-based artistic practice, creative explorations, and productive and BUDGET DISTRIBUTION sustained institutional critique. • To enhance the Hammer’s awareness of, and responsiveness A/V $17,000

to, its visitors’ expectations and needs. Machine Project staff (graphic design, sound curator, $14,000 • To increase formal and informal interactions among visitors, administration, bookkeeping) artists, UCLA students and faculty, and Museum staff. Additional staff hired for construction or A/V projects $2,500

Parking $1,200

Signage $1,300

Projects $50,000

This report $5,000

Contingency $4,000

Machine Project Hammer Report 25 PROCESS B) APPROVAL TO EXECUTION A process emerged whereby the Hammer’s Public Engagement team, comprising Allison Agsten and Elizabeth Cline, regularly Continued Event forms In production, Project Event takes troubleshooting submitted and typically from presented place! met with Machine Project’s Mark Allen to vet and advance event put on one to four at museum- calendar (any- months (see wide events project ideas. where from two expanded meetings weeks to two description and two to three months before an example weeks prior A) CONCEPTION TO APPROVAL production below) to scheduled started) start date for Initial concept Ideation, Developed Intake form Approved additional shared with troubleshooting concept generated concept troubleshooting PE group within PE group presented presented and scheduling (weekly or (weekly) to Hammer to key of A/V and electronically) leadership constituents facilities needs (biweekly) and staff for discussion, preemptive problem solving, and, PROCESS: PROJECT/EVENT PRODUCTION finally, approval There were three sets of concerns we addressed for every sign off project or event produced: Allen, Agsten, Aspects Allen, Agsten, Intake forms Key constitu- and Cline met discussed and and Cline that clearly ents and con- on a weekly potentially met biweekly described every cerns included: 1. ARTISTS’, CONSULTANTS’, AND PERFORMERS’ NEEDS basis to field modified with Hammer component Administration/ Who are the artists, consultants, and performers involved project ideas. included scale, Director Ann of the project Legal (con- Between duration, Philbin and were developed tracts, waiv- with this project? (For any individual project a range of 1–75 meetings, ideas number of Chief Curator in order to ers); Operations collaborators could be involved.) were sometimes consultants, Douglas Fogle discern which Manager (build- shared via email artists, to obtain their departments ing regulations, How much will they be paid? or iChat. performers, go-ahead for would be occupation, fire Will they be on site? When, how, and where? and audience promising directly marshal issues); involved. projects. impacted and if Registrar (art- Are they bringing anything to the Museum (equipment, other types of work safety); administrative Development materials)? forms, and Public contracts, Programs waivers, sign- (scheduling 2. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT COMPONENTS ins, or releases conflicts). How will the public be participating? were needed. When appli- cable, event Does the program require waivers, sign-in sheets, check-out proposals were sheets, etc.? brought to exhibition cura- Is it a participatory piece? If so, how are we indicating that to tors and artists visitors (in advance, on-site)? whose work was on view. How are we creating an environment conducive to engagement? This includes seating, signage, staffing, etc.

3. INTERNAL ADMINISTRATION PRODUCTION What is the look and feel of the event or project (as conveyed by signage, furniture, etc.)?

Machine Project Hammer Report A Road Map 26 What are the documentation goals, needs, and schedule performative elements (see Houseplant Vacation production (including A/V equipment and staff requests)? What are the example below). As thoroughly as we sought to plan and material production needs (including construction labor and anticipate, the approved project typically served as a general supplies)? outline, with the shape of the work ultimately contingent upon What are the staffing needs? Do we need volunteers, interns, visitor attendance and participation. or help from other departments? After each event or project was completed, internal event What are the marketing needs (website calendar, A.I.R. blog, reports were sent to the staff describing the experience of Facebook, Twitter)? the event, the response from visitors, the problems, and the successes. The event reports fit within an established system in In most cases we would try to meet with artists and collaborators place for public programs and also served as a helpful wrap-up for as soon as the event was approved to answer these questions those unable to observe or participate in the program. together. These meetings were extremely helpful to manage expectations and to orient artists and collaborators to the PROCESS: EVENT PRODUCTION EXAMPLE internal processes of the Museum. Beyond the initial meeting, we HOUSEPLANT VACATION maintained regular communication with artists and collaborators July 31–August 28, 2010 during the months and weeks leading up to the event, with weekly check-in and follow-up emails. For larger projects APRIL (Dream-In, Level5, and Enormous Microscopic Evening, to give Machine Project concept: the Hammer invites the public to a few examples), it was necessary to meet in person with the bring houseplants to the Museum for a cultural retreat over the artists at least three times. summer. Up to 400 plants would be displayed in the lobby on Each project had a different timeline, depending on its custom plant stands commissioned by an artist. scale and the number of collaborators and components, outlined The proposal was presented to director Philbin and chief above, involved. For larger projects (with budgets over $2,500, curator Fogle, who flagged concerns about the protection of significant A/V needs, and five or more collaborators), it took four the artwork in the lobby from organic material (i.e. bugs, plant months to problem-solve production concerns and solidify details. dust) and the aesthetic compatibility of the plant stands with the Smaller projects required about a month to produce from their Museum’s architecture, but nonetheless approved the project to approval. Ongoing projects, such as the weekly programming in proceed for further evaluation by Museum staff. the Little William Theater, required little to no production work The proposal was then presented to key constituents, from the Museum’s staff to maintain them once they were under who reasserted concerns about the protection of the artwork, way. raised the question of who would manage and care for the For the 26 projects, we produced over 70 events of various plants, and offered a number of concrete recommendations and scale over the course of the year. This meant that any given week conditions for the project’s implementation. Specifically: Legal we were simultaneously managing several events in different Affairs suggested waivers for the plant owners and caretakers phases of production. Additionally, due to the nature of the work to release the Hammer of responsibility for the health and and our collaboration, most proposed projects were modified or safety of their plants; the registrar, Portland McCormick (whose had components added after the initial idea had been approved, perspective on this topic is elaborated in her interview, pages and up to two weeks prior to execution. Often this meant 145–48), would allow the plants in the lobby only if every lender expanding the project to include additional collaborators and of artwork in the lobby space agreed to sign a waiver allowing

Machine Project Hammer Report A Road Map 27 the work to be shown in proximity to live plant material. unannounced. This additional programming was introduced to In order to avoid these problems and associated delay, the key constituents at a weekly internal meeting and approved. Hammer suggested moving the project to Lindbrook terrace. Machine Project invited Lisa Anne Auerbach to photograph Machine Project remained invested in the greater visibility portraits of the plants. This add-on developed into a distinct afforded by the lobby and suggested placing only a few plants event, with a separate ideation process, schedule, and budget. It there to announce the project. The registrar held firmly to the was introduced to key constituents at a weekly internal meeting necessity of waivers to permit even a couple of plants, at which and approved. The photography element’s original idea was point Lindbrook terrace was agreed upon by all parties. to create a diorama and shoot the plants on vacation in an By the end of April, the project was cleared to move into imagined locale; in the end, they were shot in situ on Lindbrook production, contingent on final approval of the plant stands by terrace. the director. Weekly documentation of events for plants was scheduled.

MAY JULY Machine Project introduced the idea of adding additional Machine Project and Hammer developed additional ideas that programming to the Houseplant Vacation, specifically, poetry were easily accommodated: the Hammer designed “Welcome to readings and music for the plants. Westwood” postcards to send to plant owners; Jonathan Keats Machine Project submitted a visualization of the commissioned was scheduled for an artist talk for the plants during Museum plant stands, which were approved by director Philbin, and Machine hours, and to screen his plant pornography after-hours for the Project searched for someone to fabricate them. plants only. At the end of May, the intake form was sent to key A promotional photo shoot of the plants was organized. constituents for their final approval and the project budget was Waivers were developed for plant owners and caretakers. submitted and approved. Notices about the project, issuing the call for visitors to bring their plants to the Museum, were distributed via emails to press, JUNE on Facebook, Twitter, and via Machine Project’s mailing list. A performance schedule designed to give the plants a well- On July 31 from 11am to 7pm, Elizabeth Cline, Allison rounded vacation experience was set. This entailed one hour of Agsten, Mark Allen, and two interns received plants at the reading, one hour of New Age practice, and one hour of music Hammer. Visitors who dropped off their plants for the vacation per week. filled out an intake form that detailed the specifics of their plant, After several problems with plant-stand fabrication, including physical description and directions for care, and also including budget concerns, Machine and the Hammer agreed to served as a waiver that released the Hammer of responsibility rent scaffolding instead. for the plant. Machine Project proposed additional programming— specifically, a phone-in kiosk so that plant owners could call AUGUST a phone number and talk to their plants on the terrace. Allen The Museum sent plant owners postcards and the results of their and collaborators developed a system in which a cell phone plants’ psychic readings and tarot card readings. was attached to and fed directly into a speaker, which was On August 28 from 11am to 7pm, Cline, Allen, and two embedded in a fake rock. In addition to the plant owners, poets interns returned the plants to their owners. were invited to call and read poetry to the plants at all hours, In the end, 77 plants were treated to a vacation at the

Machine Project Hammer Report A Road Map 28 Hammer. Five plant owners did not retrieve their plants, four ELECTRONIC MEDIA plants died and were replaced by Machine Project, and 73 plants E-blasts were sent to member and nonmember lists. Public experienced new growth. Engagement updated a blog on the Hammer website with A.I.R. events on a weekly basis. Key events were also featured on COMMUNICATIONS: the Museum’s website home page. In late summer 2010, web HAMMER INTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS reorganization gave A.I.R. a greater, more navigable presence on the website. Finally, projects were pitched on Facebook and MEETINGS Twitter. Machine Project did a considerable amount of online The Public Engagement group—Allison Agsten, Elizabeth Cline, marketing via its own website, social media, and e-blasts. and Mark Allen—met weekly with each other and biweekly Machine announced events in weekly emails they sent to with director Philbin and chief curator Fogle. Weekly (and a mailing list of about 7,000 people. later biweekly) meetings with Agsten, Cline and staff from the administration, legal, operations, registrar, and curatorial COVERAGE departments were also initiated. “Brody Condon,” Art in America, www.artinamericamagazine. com/features/brody-condon/ EMAIL Public Engagement instituted Museum-wide weekly email updates “Character Development: Brody Condon’s Level5 and to keep staff apprised of upcoming events, and to let staff know the Avant-LARP of Becoming Self,” East of Borneo, www. what to expect when there was a period of heavy activity ahead. eastofborneo.org/articles/27

EVENT REPORTS “Houseplants Get Rockstar Treatment in L.A.’s Hammer Museum,” Event reports were compiled after each activity. The initial impetus California Home + Design, www.californiahomedesign.com/blog/ was to share project outcomes with our colleagues, but the reports houseplants-get-rockstar-treatment-las-hammer-museum were also invaluable to sustaining morale: many staff members who often worked on or were directly affected by A.I.R. events were “Machine Project Sounds Out the Boundaries of the Museum not able to experience them because many events occurred on the Experience at the Hammer with Bells, Guitars and Houseplants,” weekends or after hours when staff were not on-site. The Daily Bruin, dailybruin.detroitsoftworks.com/index.php/ article/2010/07/machine_project_sounds_out_the_boundaries_ EXTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS of_the_museum_experience_at_the_hammer_with_bells_guitars_

PRESS “Plant Pornography at Hammer Museum: Machine Gallery’s When the grant was awarded, the Museum issued a press Amusements for Plants on Vacation,” LA Weekly, blogs.laweekly. release in June 2009 and LA Times coverage (see below) com/stylecouncil/2010/08/plant_pornography_at_hammer_mu.php followed. Additionally, a midterm press release was issued outlining upcoming programming, and the Hammer’s “Plants Take Vacation at UCLA’s Hammer Museum,” NBC LA, communications team pitched a few of the larger events to the www.nbclosangeles.com/the-scene/events/Hammer-Plants- press throughout the course of the Residency. Machine-Project-100638159.html

Machine Project Hammer Report A Road Map 29 “Revenge of the Ferns,” LA Weekly, www.laweekly. Therapy—an eight-week program in which guests met with com/2010-07-29/calendar/revenge-of-the-ferns/ a clinical therapist while creating needlepoints of images from the Museum’s permanent collection—seven responded that the “Soundings: ‘Everyone in a Place’ at the Hammer,” experience had significantly deepened their connection to the The Huffington Post, www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/14/ Hammer. Sample responses to our open-ended prompt, “Did soundings-everyone-in-a-p_n_646690.html this experience deepen your relationship to the Museum?” included: “It was wonderful to be supported by the Hammer in this project. I feel an intimacy and appreciation for the Hammer MEASUREMENT on a personal level as part of my community,” and “This was With a spreadsheet, the Museum kept a tally of the number a good experience and a unique introduction to the collection.” of visitors who came to each event, with comments on why A great deal was gleaned from open-ended prompts about attendance might have been particularly high or low, as well as what worked and what didn’t for a number of events. For the other observations that may have been helpful. For example, Paleolithic Skills Workshop in the lobby, we learned through an artist with a large following or an offer of free admission may survey comments that one of the most appealing aspects of have contributed to an event’s high attendance. Additionally, the program was unrelated to the program; participants liked questions about the visibility and success of the program were listening to an oud player who was improvising in the same included in a professionally administered survey about visitor space that the workshop was being held. That information, experience that was conducted on behalf of the Museum in paired with experiences of the substantial music programming June 2010. The survey revealed, among other things, that throughout the residency, taught us early on the impact awareness of the Public Engagement program was low, though that music has throughout the spaces. The Hammer applied satisfaction was significantly higher. Out of the 274 people that knowledge to the 2011 program by setting aside funds surveyed, 13% were aware of the program, 14% participated specifically for music programming. in programs. Of those who participated, 54% rated overall satisfaction with the A.I.R. program as excellent and 39% as OBSERVATIONS OF VISITOR EXPERIENCE good; 57% rated the educational experience the A.I.R. program Because of the density of programming, visitors were able to as excellent and 39% as good; 62% rated the entertainment experience Machine Project’s work throughout the year, whether experience of the A.I.R. program as excellent and 31% as good. they planned to or came upon it unexpectedly. In 2010, there This information will be used as a baseline for future programs were 36 Saturdays where visitors had the opportunity to attend and a follow-up survey is planned for fall 2012. Occasionally, a concert in the Little William Theater, and on six of those individual participants were surveyed to monitor the A.I.R. Saturdays there was another A.I.R. project offered concurrently program’s appeal to guests and shifts in perceptions of the that visitors could drop in on. After sustained observations it Museum, and to help understand general patterns of use. Both was evident that visitors were most interested in dropping in on anonymous survey handouts and scheduled observation periods events and observing in a noncommittal manner similar to that were implemented in which staff members recorded visitor with which most museum visitors view the artwork. For example, interaction with specific projects. during the Tablacentric performances and workshops that were From our handout surveys, we learned that programs with held over a two-week period, on average 10–15 people would limited audiences often had very high impact. For example, participate in learning/playing tabla, another 5–10 would watch when we surveyed the eight participants in Needlepoint the workshops, 50 people would attend the final performances,

Machine Project Hammer Report A Road Map 30 and additional others would pass by while still listening. We RESPONDING TO 2010 PROGRAM often refer back to the Tablacentric program as an excellent WITH 2011 PROGRAM example of a project that provides multiple layers of participation, simultaneously offering active, indirect, and passive opportunities A new position (senior manager of events in development) was for experience and thereby accommodating a wide range of created to oversee the museum-wide calendar, ensuring visitors. a manageable number of events per day and overseeing content Due to the intimacy of many programs, the Museum and to minimize conflict and maximize productive correspondences Machine Project came to recognize participants, especially repeat between the various programming threads. participants, as regular museum-goers or people interested in Contract templates were revamped by Legal Affairs to Machine Project. The only major event that generated attendance make them less daunting and friendlier to artists, performers, from people who are not regular museum-goers was Soundings: and collaborators, and to ensure that responsibilities and Bells at the Hammer. This could be attributed to several factors, expectations are clear. including expanded marketing, the inclusion and promotion of Work continues on the development of a more free admission, and the fact that it was a family-friendly event. sophisticated measurement system that will enable the Museum Many events had low attendance in general and the projects to capture the qualitative and quantitative data on programs. existed largely as “folklore”—meaning that many more people The front desk in the lobby, staffed by the new visitor service heard about the project and/or viewed documentation after team, was inaugurated in September 2010 and now serves as a the event than participated in or witnessed the work in person. primary point of data capture on Public Engagement and other These low numbers could be attributed to internal difficulties programs. with event promotion, which was complicated by program details crystallizing at a late stage, by the highly conceptual nature 2011 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT A.I.R. of some of the programs, and also because promotion often In planning for our 2011 Public Engagement A.I.R., the Hammer became an afterthought as the production of events was so time staff considered what was learned from Machine Project’s consuming. Residency. As the group mostly enjoyed the opportunity to Based on attendance observations, about halfway into the engage so many artists on-site, the 2011 program was designed Residency, required registration was implemented for events that to comprise several different artist’s projects that would be were contingent on participation or had limited capacities (i.e. selected by the curatorial team. This eliminates the additional workshops or large-scale performances). Preregistered events level of curation introduced by Machine’s collaborative often filled up immediately after the Hammer Facebook invite was practice, while retaining some of the variety it had afforded and posted and Machine Project sent an email to their mailing list. On maintaining greater institutional control. We invited a handful of average, 75% people registered attended their event. There were artists to submit specific Public Engagement proposals, taking some exceptions, for example the Paleolithic Skills Workshop: a much more prescriptive approach to the program, which in the first workshop none of ten people who had registered enabled us to ask for projects that were directly and consistently attended; in the second workshop five of ten people who had aligned with the goals of the grant. Five artists’ projects were registered attended. In the case of Annie Okay, of the 100 people chosen for production. The projects were immediately placed preregistered each night, 98 and 96 attended, respectively. on the calendar and budgeted so that capacity issues could be addressed more specifically upfront. It was important for us to moderate project flow so that we could manage workflow and

Machine Project Hammer Report A Road Map 31 build in time for reflection. Overall, the Hammer has moved from an event-based model to one in which events are occasionally a component but not a driver. Our musical programming will be expanded upon, drawing on the experiments with sound that Machine Project’s Residency introduced.

Allison Agsten Elizabeth Cline

Machine Project Hammer Report Author’sA Road NameMap 32 Allison In- Agsten ter- view:February 14, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AAEC 33 Interview with Allison Agsten, February 14, 2011 Mark: You and I were just having another museum, the big thing that lunch and talking about the other I would have done differently is that | } public engagement projects that I’d spend a couple of months having MA AA you’re doing here at the Hammer lunch with everybody that was going now that Machine’s Residency is to be involved before anything started. over. How do you feel the Museum’s I would talk to them about their approach to doing this kind of work capacity, their limitations, their staffing has changed as a result of the work situation, if it is easy to get temporary you and I did together last year? Are work—kind of get a feel for all of Machine Project director Mark Allen and Hammer you approaching projects differently that and do some troubleshooting public engagement curator Allison Agsten structurally, conceptually? beforehand. reflect on the impact of the Residency on the Allison: One of the greatest take- Mark: Yeah, I think evaluating the infrastructural capacities of both Machine Project aways of public engagement and the capacity and building consensus is Irvine grant is that, over time, we are something I would have worked on and the Hammer, as well as on the shifting developing processes—not just for more in retrospect. Although in understandings of central concepts—including project production but for how we a certain way it’s hard to know, before handle things legally, what the order you start doing things, what you are public engagement, success, and problemsolving— of operations is with our events group, assessing capacity for. over the course of the collaboration. They also talk etc. I learned what things are difficult for the Museum so that now, moving Allison: That’s true. But I just mean about how some of their favorite pieces affected forward, I feel like I’ve got some capacity in terms of knowing what the what it felt like to be in the Museum. parameters. It’s a lot easier to tell institution can logistically bear. people specifically what we want them I don’t think you’re ever going to to work on and what they just have consensus with this kind of work, shouldn’t touch. because it’s new and it’s different Projects discussed: and you’re not always going to be • Live Personal Soundtrack Mark: Yeah, as the Hammer’s first able to get everybody on board. I public engagement artist, trying to think you mostly just want people to • Soundings: Bells at the Hammer investigate how the Museum works feel comfortable that you have the • Little William Theater and what it might do differently, I Museum’s best interest at play and sometimes felt like a doctor, like: to embrace all of it as an experiment. • Level5 “Does it hurt here? Does it hurt here? That’s something that’s really stuck • Houseplant Vacation Does it hurt if I do this? OK, I’m not with me and that I’ve really thought going to do that—it hurt.” Do you about: if there’s anything I want to think those lessons are institution build consensus about, it’s not a specific, or do you think there’s specific project, it’s just really getting anything that can generalize toward people to deeply believe that this is other institutions who might be an experiment. I’m always thinking in interested in doing work like this? advance about what the end point can look like—and I don’t mean the final Allison: I think there’s a lot of minutes of the project, but afterward, interchangeability. You can probably like what happens three months down plug in the name of any institution the line—to try to prepare everybody and they could follow our process in advance for the life cycle of the and get similar results. If I were in thing. It seems to help a little when

Machine Project Hammer Report 34 Live Personal Soundtrack

people can envision that it will be over that balance between telling people that didn’t happen or that we had the Chandler’s response was so much and that we’ll all be alive and intact. how this is probably going to look and most difficulty producing were those more interesting: he asked, “What’s making sure that they know that it’s that could be perceived as confusing wrong with confusing the audience?” Mark: [laughs] Right. And we talked only probably. visitors. The good news is that, for His point was that, architecturally, the about articulating the temporary example, the Giant Hand was really Hammer is a loop, so if people don’t nature of projects as a useful tool Mark: Yes. I’m really interested in successful and our visitors loved it, so know where to go, they’ll walk around, for doing stuff. It’s like, if I tell my a process-oriented way of working, now we have a precedent for projects see some stuff, and eventually find the girlfriend we’re having houseguests where you’re not attached to a that could potentially confuse a visitor right place. and she asks how long they are particular outcome. That way an event actually not confusing visitors and, in staying, it’s awkward if the answer is might be awkward or unsuccessful fact, delighting them. Maybe down the Allison: I thought that was a really “I don’t know.” or unpopular, but it is still valuable line, approaching these things will be a good point, too. Our visitors are smart because it’s part of a knowledge- little easier. enough people. They can resolve Allison: Totally. I think that touches generating process. whatever little issue we present to on something that we talked about a Mark: During the interview I did with them. It’s probably not going to ruin lot along the way: that you want to be Allison: There are only a couple of Chandler McWilliams, that issue of their day. able to have space to change gears, things I look back on and think, well, confusing the audience came up in if needed, to evolve the project, so that didn’t go quite how I thought it a really interesting way. My argument Mark: What was interesting for me you don’t want to have to be stuck would—but I still took something away had always been that the Giant about that question was that it goes to with that initial vision. It’s like finding from that. I think most of the projects Hand wasn’t actually confusing. the very idea of service. I come from

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AA 35 a sensibility where I want people to the space, addressing senses that Allison: We are planning on it. piece, Level5. I feel such a sense of feel welcomed and oriented. It’s very are normally neglected within the That was a major realization for pride that this Museum was able to important for the kind of work that I Museum. Anytime we did that there the Museum. help make that happen. But that piece do. But it is worth thinking about how was a sense of enchantment and was maybe least connected to public serious the problem is: How many discovery that blew my mind. The Mark: I also think the sound stuff was engagement, whereas Live Personal people actually just leave in frustration day we did Soundings, I just loved interesting. One of the issues we are Soundtrack is definitely related to the and don’t buy tickets? Does being a seeing this amazing mix of people and still working through is: how do you public engagement goal. With Brody’s little confused really damage people’s hearing the bells all over the Museum. make additional layers of content in piece, there are ways in which it was, experience, or the mission of the It was a multigenerational day here in a way that doesn’t do violence to the since he allowed us to screen it for Museum? a way that I don’t often see. I don’t function of the Museum? So, when we people and that screening experience think you can overestimate what did the one-day Field Guide to LACMA turned out to be really remarkable. Allison: We just had a research firm a big deal that was—to see whole in 2008, it was super fun but to a So in a way that piece also helped surveying onsite this summer, and the families enjoying this together. certain degree it turns the museum us think more broadly about what researcher told us that people actually Speaking also as a parent, it was nice into a circus, and there’s artwork that public engagement can be—that it can seem to find their way around here just to see people want to bring their kids doesn’t want to be looked at in that mean just supporting really new and fine. They don’t seem uncomfortable here, and not to a children’s activity. context. So, thinking about how to innovative work. with it. But also, the largest Then the intimacy of Live Personal do interactive or sound-based things contingency of visitors are repeat Soundtrack was a big deal: the sense without hurting the experience of the Mark: I think one of the things that visitors, so…I’m always trying to work of connection you have to this other work, Live Personal Soundtrack stands was useful about it being a residency out the worst-case scenario: people person that you don’t know but who out in that it’s both a completely is that we are able to do enough are going to walk out, for example, is creating a musical composition just different experience of the Museum different projects that you get a sense because not everyone has the patience for you. It was pretty luxurious, and I and it’s relatively constrained because of the range of possibilities. to invest time in figuring out how to really saw the work differently. It was of the headphones. I was also navigate our relatively confusing site. subtle but profound. interested in Singing by Numbers, Allison: Yes. Your Residency gave us Is that one of the reasons the majority the microtonal choir piece that a good jumping-off point for thinking of our visitors are repeat visitors? But Mark: Yeah, I think Live Personal Laura Steenberge and Cat Lamb about public engagement. I see what you’re saying, and I think Soundtrack was really special. Let’s did, and how much it seemed to be it connects to experimenting again. be frank, it’s a goofy idea: to have in resonance with the work in the Mark: Yeah. A lot of my interest is still If you confuse visitors for a few days some dude with a guitar follow you collection. focused on what it means to do a very with this thing you’re doing, it’s not around the Museum. I have a real engaged project with a few people. the end of the world. It’s long-term weakness for projects that are really Allison: Yes, I think everybody was And this was a thread through a lot of confusion that creates this sense of goofy, instantly understandable, and incredibly interested in and impressed them: Live Personal Soundtrack was massive discomfort. I think that that’s a yet somehow also manage to be this by that. one person at a time; the Valentine’s big difference between an installation deeper thing. Day show with Emily was one person and an event. The events were a lot Mark: We did an early piece where at a time; Brody’s piece was 25 people easier for us to make happen because Allison: What was your favorite? Chris Kallmyer and a couple of other for three days… I’m still trying to of their brief temporality. people were playing trumpet in the figure out the best way to articulate Mark: I thought the Dream-In was vault room, and it was just so loud. It the value of that to institutions. *** really special. And the Live Personal sounded amazing, but people wouldn’t Soundtrack. I like the way we kind of go in the room. It was helpful for me Allison: Yeah. You’ve taught me a lot Mark: What was your favorite project? discovered Lindbrook terrace. to see the problems with that piece in about that. Almost every day now I order to develop an idea of thinking think about the power that intimacy Allison: Let’s see: Live Personal Allison: You did. additively, if that makes sense. can have, and that we don’t need to Soundtrack; Soundings: Bells at the serve a thousand people with each Hammer; the Ping-Pong tables…I Mark: It’s such a gorgeous space. Allison: Yeah. For me, also, one of the project. We’ve talked often about how loved the new ways sound inhabited I hope they’ll do more projects there. projects that I loved most was Brody’s you measure success: it’s not just the

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AA 36 number of people that come through; packed and it was hot and it was quiet. quality is part of it. The door made an immense racket Almost every day and I felt like an interloper coming Mark: I noticed something the other in. It’s hushed and these people are day as I was rewatching the video of trying to have their nice experience. now I think about the Soundings: Bells at the Hammer. So from the beginning it was really The first person you see, this young juxtaposed to coming into my place of power that intimacy woman putting on one of the bells, work and waving hello to the security was one of the participants in Brody’s guards on the way in and saying hi to piece. In Brody’s piece her character everybody. It was a clear sign to me can have, and that we was very hostile. Then I met her in that this had moved on to something person at the screening and she’s a else. This didn’t just belong to the don’t need to serve super nice middle school art teacher. Hammer anymore. It was over. I took a She said for that piece, she tried to few pictures on my phone of the Little create a personality who was the William sign… There was something a thousand people opposite of her in every way, and she really tender and sweet about seeing said it was so powerful that during that little paper sign strung up. with each project. the lunch break she would walk down the streets of Westwood and crowds Mark: We still have it up at the gallery. would part before her because her Isn’t it funny to think that survived the We’ve talked often energy was so negative [laughs]. whole year? I barely recognized her in the Soundings video because her affect Allison: It really is. It looks so delicate. about how you was so different. I sat in so many of the concerts over the course of the year, and yet I measure success: it’s Allison: Yeah, there are definitely didn’t recognize one single piece that people that you start to recognize. was played at Machine that day. I’m I think some of those were Machine wondering if that’s because I didn’t not just the number people that started coming here. hear these pieces. Sometimes I think I felt like people began to think of the being in that room, alone, took so of people that come Residency as their program because much sensory energy that you almost some of the experiences were so couldn’t quite grasp how interesting intimate, and they just kept coming. the music was. Going into Machine and through; quality is We’ve started to all get to know them knowing that space, I was able to just in a way that you don’t when you have listen. I heard it more clearly than I had five projects in a year. It was nice to in the past. part of it. have that experience even for a few moments. Mark: Yeah, the Little William Theater –Allison Agsten was about so many things in addition Mark: I also wanted to ask you what to the music. It was an interesting it was like going to the Little William piece for us, because our style would Theater wrap-up at Machine Project normally be more like the wrap-up: after seeing so many of those concerts we would do it for one day. At the in the coatroom at the Hammer. Hammer, it just kept going for the whole Residency, kind of by accident Allison: I walked in late and it was [laughs].

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AA 37 Allison: Which was great—everybody this tiny coatroom, and you go in and and disadvantages of working in just in production mode. And I actually on both sides developed such a close the door. that way? think the feeling of it changed for comfort level with the concerts. It me working on it because now we’re quickly evolved to Chris Kallmyer *** Allison: One thing, last year, that just making it happen. Some of the practically being a staff member, became difficult internally was tensions were definitely dissipated, but coming and going, setting up his thing. Mark: If you look at the Residency the number of programs we were a lot of the creative energy also It ended up kind of running itself. in its totality, it doesn’t feel like producing. It became really clear for tapered at that point. I also think that there’s something a consistent statement or a vision. It’s this year that we needed to consider interesting about doing projects on more like: “Let’s try out this, let’s try ways we could moderate flow. We Mark: Right, and my involvement in the weekend. out this, let’s try out this.” As an artist had the period from August to projects decreases greatly once the it’s exciting to do that, and normally September—do you remember?—it ideation stage is over. My job is to Mark: Yeah, and you and I talked that’s what an artist’s residency is was madness: we had Soundings: Bells put these things forward and help about that during this project—how about—but it’s not something you at the Hammer, we had Houseplant people. The actual execution was it was both to its detriment and to usually do entirely in public. To me, the Vacation, and then we had Brody’s done very well by all of you. It didn’t its advantage that nobody was really work we did over the year doesn’t feel Level5 over Labor Day weekend. By require me in there messing it up. paying attention. It was under less like a product that I put out there so the end of that, people were beat. So, Something that was really productive surveillance, but it also means nobody much as a bunch of experiments. In the nice thing about the proposals is but also challenging about it being has any idea that you’re actually doing a way, it ended up feeling more like being able to look at the calendar for a residency is the degree to which an incredible amount of programming. a residency than one would think. a year ahead and see that there’s a that development process involved a month or two between each project, constant negotiation between me and Allison: Right. And along the same Allison: It’s funny you say that about so periodically we can take a breath. you and everyone in the institution. lines as what we were talking about a residency, because when I look back But there are different challenges: The proposal model is really different: earlier with the way it was easier on it now I think of it differently than I was talking to somebody really the power relationship shifts toward for the Museum to experiment with when it was happening. Now that I interesting the other day and I’d love the institution, so you have more events, the weekend kind of fits into think of it, it really felt like a residency to do something with him, but we’ve control—which I think is important for that category of things that “can’t be to me. It felt like you had a real kind of mapped it out for the year. So making things happen, especially more that bad.” It’s just lower risk. presence here, partly because of the how do you leave yourself open for ambitious things—but it’s harder to Little William program—there was at a brilliant idea that comes when you get under the skin of the institution if Mark: That’s one reason I think least something going on every week. don’t expect it? the thing is blocked more powerfully it is important to have good You had a parking pass. Everybody at the gate. documentation. There were a number knew you. I felt like your presence was Mark: Something that was kind of really magical events that, because imbued here. of comical about our process is Allison: It’s interesting that you say they happened outside normal that Machine is like a hydra: every that, because you would think that it Museum hours, most of the people Mark: Even today, I just walked in. collaborator has ten collaborators would play out that way, but it hasn’t who work at the Hammer weren’t who has ten more collaborators. Once so far. There have definitely been there for: the Dream-In, Soundings: Allison: Yeah, it’s great. It’s like now you get working, it starts to generate situations where an artist has said, Bells at the Hammer, Enormous it’s official, you’re part of the family, more ideas. At a certain point, it was “No, that’s not what I envisioned,” Microscopic Evening, for example. you can just go and do whatever you like a firehose of ideas. I remember and we’ve had to step back and think want. distinctly this moment of shift that you, about it again. That still very much Allison: Absolutely. Something like the Elizabeth, and I felt in the Residency happens. Little William Theater is really hard to Mark: Yeah. But for this next year where we decided it was time to stop capture, though, because a lot of it of the Public Engagement Irvine Grant generating ideas and figure out what Mark: That’s interesting. Maybe it’s the is about imagination and the tension you have switched to a model which we were prepared to do well. exact opposite of what I was saying— and excitement and curiosity of the is more project based, or proposal that, in fact, during the Residency, I moment: when you figure out that you based. It’s sort of like post-residency. Allison: Yeah, that was a big shift. got to the point where I would feel are actually going to hear a concert in What do you think are the advantages From that moment forward we were like, “OK, fine, that idea is too hard.

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AA 38 we’re going to do their thing. It’s not *** like there are 20 other ideas if it gets difficult. So the artist has a really major Mark: I’ve talked to a lot of the people commitment from us, from go. I worked with about artists as problem solvers—this idea, which really came Mark: Right. It’s interesting to talk that out of the Artist Council’s proposal out because that makes more sense. and was written into the Irvine Grant, What do you think were the other that artists are good at solving major characteristics of this Residency problems and the Museum should that were surprising to the institution? leverage that toward working on its Having done this for a year, what visitor engagement problem. would you say other institutions embarking on projects like this might Allison: Right. In my mind, I’m trying not be considering that were either to evolve what problem solver means really productive or difficult or would throughout the duration of the work better if you’d known about it Residency. Maybe in the beginning, ahead of time? problem solver literally meant: someone needs to come in here and Allison: I mean this as an empow- figure out a better way for ticketing. Top: Machine Project erment, not a discouragement, but Down the line, I hope problem solver in Residence it would be a mistake to expect that can mean that somebody comes in and in Ann Philbin’s doing something like this is going to wants to do a project, and there are Office be a piece of cake. You have to steel three things that need to be in place Left: yourself a little bit when you’re doing in order to make that project happen, Soundings: Bells new kinds of work. You can’t think that and we’re forced to look at areas that at the Hammer because you have a couple of projects have been neglected in the past. We’re that go well that every issue has been solving problems, certainly, but maybe resolved, because it hasn’t. the project itself isn’t the solution. Does that make sense? Mark: Right. I think every exhibition has its own challenges, whether Mark: It does—the idea that, as it is that the artist has brought in a side effect, some problems would be Forget it. We’ll do something else.” If, on how to make it happen, but that we something that weighs 20 tons, the solved. I think that’s something that instead, you have this proposal model kind of grew ideas together. Maybe artist has made something out of we figured out during our Residency. where the artist is doing one project, that can happen in a proposal model antimatter, the artist has done X, Y, When we came in, I think there was maybe it becomes more of a struggle too, but I think something about and Z… There are always challenges more of an expectation that we would for the idea to be concretized toward seeing you guys and talking to you like that, but they are typically within be able to fix some problems, and their vision. every day facilitated that a little more. a specified realm, and this was about we did, but they often got fixed in going outside of that. ways that were really ridiculous. The Allison: Right, exactly. Allison: Yeah, the dialogue is very Giant Hand, which I thought was such different now because it’s not an Allison: Yes. And, not knowing exactly an interesting project, is maybe the Mark: But I think what is different is open-ended conversation really. We’re what we wanted, we were just not clearest example of this: it answered that with our Residency, at its best, talking about how to get from point going to get to the bottom of it in six the question of “where do you go?” there was a real collaborative design A to point B; we’re not just talking. months. These are big complicated but it did it in a way that called an of the ideas. It wasn’t always that I had In a way though, we’ve committed questions that we are addressing. insane amount of attention to the fact a clever idea and then we collaborated to each of these artists up front that It’s hard to do. that you had to find your way. I like

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AA 39 a project that both does something solvers in the way they were thinking? conversations with artists. to Houseplant Vacation, figuring out and, at the same time, creates a how the scaffolding was going to look conversation or a discourse around Allison: No, I don’t. But maybe there is Mark: Well, yeah, because there’s and how the aesthetic was going to that thing. Whereas I think the idea of a better understanding of what kind of this uncomfortable myth that the represent the Museum was tricky, but a more design-based solution is that problem solving an artist can do. museum exists to serve the unfettered I liked that in a moment you could get you solve the problem and you make creativity of the artist. And it does the feeling that this was a different the problem invisible. *** on a certain level, but in order to do kind of place—one that’s willing to that mission, you have to raise money, try different things, and outside the Allison: Exactly. The Giant Hand sign Allison: I would be curious to know you have to not set the place on galleries too. That, to me, is where we is really visually invasive in a really what you found challenging that you fire, you have to please these weird made big strides. positive way. You cannot escape the didn’t expect to be challenging. This constituents and trustees, you have fact that the Giant Hand is there. You was set up for you to go do what you to make this person and that person Mark: I’m glad you said that because can’t have a party in the courtyard and wanted to do, but obviously it wasn’t happy…. The other thing which I think I think one of the exciting things not know the Giant Hand is there. You always smooth sailing. we realized together about halfway about our project was that we started can’t walk into this Museum and not through, which was very important to apply the idea that creative work make contact with it. Mark: I think the hardest thing for my work moving forward, was the can be done at any aspect in the was that I never did and still don’t difference between creating moments institution. We used to think that this Mark: And you have to ask yourself understand what people wanted, that demonstrate possibility and enormous institution provides all these if you want every single person who what they were expecting to get, and complete transformations. I think functions to facilitate just one site of comes to the Museum thinking about whether they got it or not. I think it our work worked best when it was creativity—or maybe two sites, like signage, which is sort of what that was a little unclear what the mandate propositions. For example, when we public events and things that happen piece does. was. To a certain degree, I’m happy to had people playing music for the in the gallery. One of the things do my own projects and it was amazing plants on Lindbrook terrace it was a I thought about a lot is the idea of the Allison: I don’t want to put words into to work with you guys and I learned window onto another alternate reality container: that the Museum creates the Artist Council’s mouth, but I think a lot, but any situation where you’re of what the Hammer could feel like. containers for things to happen in— they thought that it would be natural invited to do something and you don’t The day we did Soundings, with the the galleries—but what happens when for artists to think about solutions know if you’re fulfilling expectations bells, was like that too. When I started you start doing things outside the in a really literal way. But that’s not is emotionally challenging. I think if I the project, I thought I was going to container? I think our work was the natural. It turns out that artists think did it over, it would help for everyone make the Hammer feel like that every most interesting when it was really about solutions as artists and within to be more comfortable with the idea day for a year. It took me over half a confusing to the public: like, is this the realm of their practice, so maybe that it’s a residency and that not all of year to realize that just wasn’t realistic. an artist project or is this what the we have to expect that the project will it has to be successful or public. I’d Museum is doing? I think the plants look and feel like a part of that artist’s like to be able to more aggressively do Allison: Actually, looking back at it were that way. The Little William was practice. I think it’s hard for anybody just the experimentation part. now, I think that happened. It felt a bit like that because the way the to step out of their role completely. like there was something going on signage was constructed just didn’t Allison: Yeah, It was a hybrid. I think all the time. I can’t meet somebody feel like an official artist project; it felt Mark: Or you could say artists are often about how great it would have who hasn’t seen a concert in the like some people had just showed up solution makers to the really eccentric been to have a conversation where Little William Theater. I can’t say how and started doing this. problems they’re interested in and everybody sits in the room and really often people say to me, “Oh my God! they find the whole world to be that hashes out what the Museum’s goals You did the Houseplant Vacation,” Allison: Right. There’s a huge comfort problem. are and what the artists’ goals are and or whatever. I liked that reach that level with radical experimentation realizes where the discrepancies are, the installations had. Paired with the inside the gallery doors, but once Allison: [laughs] Totally. and what this thing actually means. density of the event-based programs, you open the doors, there’s a lot I think it feels crass in some ways a huge swath of visitors had the of discomfort. That’s why, I think, a Mark: Do you think the Hammer now because we’re not really comfortable opportunity, intended or not, to project like Houseplant Vacation is feels that artists are not good problem with museums having those experience your work. But going back a big deal. I wanted to ask you: now

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AA 40 that you’ve had time to think about Mark: In terms of it being a of things that didn’t go so well. But we’d be if you weren’t our first Artist it—we’ve done it, we know what the collaboration between two institutions, it is a challenge to figure out how to In Residence because you’re one of struggles are—is there a different another thing that I wasn’t expecting, speak about that, how to be really the most conceptually prolific people project that you would do now that that turned out to be super productive productively frank and transparent and I’ve met. To be in a position where we you know these things about the for Machine as an institution, was still be respectful to the institutions had to sort through so much was really Museum? how much infrastructure we had to that you are working with. good, accelerated learning. It showed develop: we had to do documentation, us what our limits were, what we could Mark: That’s a really interesting we had to figure out a lot of things Allison: I’m also curious, since you’ve handle here, what we couldn’t handle question. Well, this thing about the that we never thought we would done projects with a number of other here—again, the capacity thing. I voice of the museum and the voice of have to figure out…. I think I came museums, both before and since the think it would be interesting if we did the artist and the confusion between in a little naively thinking this was Hammer Residency: what do other something radically different next year the two, which wasn’t necessarily going to be an opportunity for the museums do to make this kind of thing from what we are doing this year or something I came in here wanting to Museum to build infrastructure. But easier for you? the year before. This way that we’re investigate but I got really interested not realizing that Machine would also trying now has its imperfections too. in it. So much of the institution’s labor have to go through that process. Mark: Well, I haven’t worked with I think the thing for everybody to goes into making a singular voice— Something that I’ve started doing with that many museums to be able to realize is there probably is no panacea. the font, the text, the way it speaks, other institutions is asking a lot more generalize, and I certainly have It’s always going to be difficult for the way it steps back. I got really explicitly about capacities and goals never been as up in their business somebody. But I feel that just by intrigued by what happens when the upfront: what they are prepared to as I was here. With other museums doing it, we succeeded. You test the voice of the museum gets all messed do and especially what they want us since the Residency, we have had institution in really important ways. up. If I were to do another project, I to do. I’ll say like, “Really, before we conversations about goals specifically, You learn a great deal about tolerance would think more about that and try do this, go back and think about your which is helpful. I think there is a level and your capacity and your strengths and push that as far as possible, but goals. I can’t necessarily achieve all of compartmentalization at other and your weaknesses. Just that alone with the cooperation of the institution. your goals, but if you tell me what they museums that makes the work easier, is constructive. The other thing I got really interested are, I can say, ‘Yes, I can do this,’ ‘No, I but I think the nature of this Residency in was really thinking about what it definitely can’t do this,’ or, ‘Maybe we was an invitation to break out of Mark: It’s that idea of mapping it. means to be in residence—the idea can kind of hash this one out.’” Then that. So, it’s a little bit of an apples that one person at this Museum, in you can both enter into things having and oranges thing. This was a special this case the director, Ann Philbin, a better idea of what to expect. The experience in that it was just a kind of invited me and my group to do this other lesson that I’ve learned is that insane thing for a museum to do. It’s thing, and now all of a sudden every now, when I go to museums, I say, like I moved into your house for a year employee has to deal with all this “Just to be clear, we do lots of stuff or something. nonsense of what I want to do, and that flops. You are probably seeing the they may like it or they may not like it, projects that got written about or that Allison: It is. In fact, I use that analogy but to a certain degree their job is to we’ve chosen to put forward in our often. Imagine you invite somebody to make this happen. With the Hammer documentation, but we also do things your house for a year. This person is Staff in Residence at Machine Project, which are embarrassing, which we are going to blow your mind by surprising I wanted to try and run that operation not particularly proud of, which people you and cooking you dinner one night, backward—so instead of us coming don’t especially like.” but they also might leave clothes into the Hammer’s house, the Hammer on the floor. When any two entities staff was coming into Machine’s house, Allison: Do you think people believe live together for a while, there’s this and we would do whatever they that? remarkable, beautiful intimacy that wanted to do there. you have and there’s also this like, OK, Mark: I don’t know, but I feel that at you need to lay off of that annoying Allison: Right. Cultural exchange. least putting that out there is useful. habit of yours. But I don’t know…I I need to go back and make a dossier can’t imagine how much further behind

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AA 41 Chris In- Kallmyer ter- view:November 30, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report 42 Interview with Chris Kallmyer, November 30, 2010 Mark: Chris, you were a big part of for a delay in getting their coat. A lot Machine’s presence at the Hammer. of times they would get interested and | } Can you talk about your involvement in go in. They’d get their bag and then sit MA CK the Residency? there with it and watch a concert. That was really nice. Chris: Sure. My primary involvement with the Residency was running a small Mark: So in the beginning it was diffi- coatroom theater in the lobby under cult because the guards had this space the stairs of the Hammer Museum. and it served a certain function. It Chris Kallmyer, who curated the sound We started programming brief con- seems like maybe we could have done programming for Machine Project’s yearlong certs in there for two people at a a better job building some consensus time. From February to the end of with the guards about what was going Residency at the Hammer, talks with Mark Allen November, I was there every Saturday to happen? about different engagement strategies employed and some Thursdays—about 50 days altogether. It’s hard to sum up the Chris: Yeah. I feel like we did a lot of for the Little William Theater and Fanfare/No whole experience. At the beginning of work with the administration and with Fanfare. As they consider relative failures and the Residency it was really tense. the head of security to create con- sensus about what we wanted to do successes, their conversation is peppered with food Mark: Why was that? and how they could accommodate us. metaphors and anecdotes of visitors’ encounters However, when I showed up for our Chris: The first week we showed up, we first month, and continuing through with the work. Topics covered range from the weren’t allowed to perform anything in our first three months, the guards had importance of working with multiple levels of staff the Little William Theater, so we per- a very different understanding of the formed behind the lobby desk [laughs]. situation. Part of that is an issue in the at an institution to how to make work that engages Then the second week somebody clarity of communication within the people both conceptually and experientially. wanted a coat and one of the guards Hammer from the top down. I would got really angry that they couldn’t get have liked to have seen us—as a third into the coatroom because there was party, as artists—interact with the a concert happening. guards more, because they’re the front Projects discussed: line. Conflicts arose partially because • Little William Theater Mark: So the coatroom, which you did we were also aiming to be the front these concerts in, stayed functional as line, so we were competing with them • Fanfare/No Fanfare a coatroom? How did that work? in a way.

Chris: Well, every concert was two Mark: Right. At the time when you minutes long and, in between con- entered the lobby at the Hammer, the certs, if folks wanted to check a bag only person there to talk to was the they could. guard. Since then, they’ve added a front desk with people whose job it is Mark: Did people get annoyed about to greet you, which is great. We added having to wait? a different layer, this random guy who’s like, “Do you want to see a con- Chris: The only people that got cert in this coatroom?” annoyed, as far as I could tell, were the guards. Patrons seemed fine with it Chris: That’s exactly it. I think some because it was such a ridiculous reason of the guards saw us as superfluous,

Machine Project Hammer Report 43 Above and right: Little William Theater

or a bother. Certainly the guards that over time, and how the guards were Mark: How did that go? looking at the Little William Theater I got to know better, that came to involved? sign and I’d say, “Excuse me, would understand what we were doing, really Chris: Very badly [laughs]. Usually you like to see a concert?” They’d ask, learned to work with us as a team: Chris: At the beginning the guards they’d say “No thank you” or “We’re “Oh, well, when is it?” and I’d say, “It’s they’d say to guests, “This is cool. were not very involved. They were very busy.” I was approaching it with right now, and I think we have seating You should check it out.” It would confused and some were kind of put the idea that this was going to be for two,” and they’d say, “Oh, honey, have been useful to interface with off by us being there. They were busy great for people, and all I had to do honey, he’s got seating for two. This them more from the beginning. doing their job. was get their attention. is so convenient! Yes, where’s the the- ater?” And I’d say, “It’s right in here.” Mark: I know when we started the Mark: Checking people’s bags, validat- Mark: Like you’re trying to give out Then I’d lead them in. Often it was Little William Theater you tried a vari- ing parking tickets—that first line of free movie tickets on Third Street older couples and they would be con- ety of techniques for how we would public service. Promenade in Santa Monica. fused. They’d say, “This is a coatroom!” tell people things were happening and I’d say, “Welcome to the Little there. Sometimes the guards would Chris: Exactly. I was hanging out with Chris: Exactly. It was such a tacky way William Theater,” and close the door. flag people down, and then we started a clipboard and would approach visi- to go about doing it, but it was the And they’d be locked in there with to feel that was awkward. Can you talk tors to the Museum and say, “Hi, way I was thinking about it at the time. whoever was performing that week. about the strategies you used to alert would you like to see a two-minute We tried that for a few weeks. My It was not the most genuine way of and introduce the public to these per- concert?” next approach was a little more subtle. doing it, but it was interesting—their formances, how that process evolved I’d see folks wandering through and shocked realization of the space and

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } CK 44 the cognitive dissonance of what their wondering, what do these people think? expectations were and what they actu- I heard one of them say through the A really traditional score ally got. Without any reservations I wall, “Well, that’s not music.” I opened can say that they were happy when the door and I asked them, “How was says play these notes, at they came out, because it was such the concert?”—I’m pretending I didn’t a unique experience. It was whimsical hear anything and just trying to be really this time, for this length of and fantastical to see a trained lutist positive. They said, “I think that’s just and a soprano sing Monteverdi in sound. That’s just not music.” I found time, in this time signature, a coatroom. out from one of the violinists that they had actually come back later and asked in this attitude and this Mark: And you’re targeting people to hear another piece. The violinists who look interested, so you’re leverag- had played one that was very quiet and dynamic—but it doesn’t say ing that natural curiosity. subtle, and they left very positive. The performers said it was great that they Chris: Exactly. So that mode of engag- had been so honest about it, because what the relationship with ing people stuck around: if folks it enabled them to have an impromptu showed some interest, and if they conversation about the sound they had the audience is: which way seemed like the type of people who just heard. That was part of the hope might respond positively to the atten- of doing this project—to generate this you should be facing, what tion, then I would approach them. really frank, honest discussion about contemporary music. I wanted to try to kind of pants you should Mark: And you were saying the demo- figure out how we could come out of it graphic tended to be older couples? with a group of people who might be wear, if you should be interested in experiencing this kind of Chris: It tended to be older couples, music again in another context, in wearing pants at all. yeah. I think like 50- or 60-plus. a larger concert hall or an art space. —Chris Kallmyer Mark: They’re a great audience. Mark: I think when it functions well, People tend to get more curious and a museum does provide a space that is open, I think, as they get a little older. comfortable for people to feel secure They’re often not as busy so they’re having a different experience, even if less concerned about concluding their their response is like, “What the hell museum business. And they may not was that?” The next step is to figure necessarily like the music, but I think out how to create some infrastructure they are much more comfortable think- for them to have a conversation about ing “Well, that was an interesting it afterward. I think that’s a real advan- experience,” or “That was different.” tage that live music has, in that you have the producer of the sound right Chris: I had one group in there that was there, so whether you want to talk to two daughters who were about 50 and them or not, that potential is there. their mother who was 70 or 80. They all came in. They were really loud, really Chris: But it also shuts people down great. I’ll never forget. So, they sit down sometimes. They’ll say, “Thank you, and it’s a two-violin concert and the that was very nice,” and then they’ll violinists rip into the noisiest, screechi- walk away and think, “What was that? est piece…. I was outside cringing and I’m never going to do that again. That

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } CK 45 was awful.” I always really appreciate it saying, “…and today we have this con- Residency, people had to be willing to can actually sense the sound waves when people are interested in engag- cert going on in the coatroom: it’s two step up to this guy who’s sitting under- slapping back and forth between those ing in a conversation. tubas.” A few of the guards were really neath the sign and ask him to follow distant walls. great about that. Even the head of them around. Do you feel like that’s Mark: Do you think there are tech- security, who at the beginning of our true? Did you think about it in those *** niques of socially constructing an envi- time there was less enthusiastic about terms? ronment where people are more likely our work, by the end wanted to come Mark: Let’s talk a little bit about the to be frank and less likely to just be down every week and see what was Chris: That’s an excellent question. Fanfare/No Fanfare project. I loved polite and leave without actually artic- going on. I didn’t do it on purpose. I don’t think that piece. How did that come about? ulating their questions about any of us did it on purpose, push and the experience? Mark: Oh that’s nice. So, method num- pull. But I do agree that our push proj- Chris: It came out of you having me ber one and method number three are ects were all at the beginning. play fanfares for Machine Project’s Chris: My intuition is distance. I think on the surface very similar, but in fact membership event. I and the other two that’s the beautiful thing about the they’re very different. The third model Mark: That’s one of the things that members of SCRIBBLE would impro- concert hall, as opposed to our coat- is more informative. It’s sort of like was really such a privilege about work- vise a brief welcome for members as room. People can see something and the difference in a restaurant between ing at the Hammer for a year: you get they arrived. The idea of a fanfare is talk about it while it’s going on. “What do you want for dessert?” ver- to iterate through all that and, even if that it’s directed at somebody. I feel sus “If you want dessert, we’ve got we weren’t explicitly thinking or talk- like a lot of the work that we did at the Mark: Something that’s nice about chocolate cake.” You want to maximize ing about it, we were able to develop Hammer fit into this idea of functional the Little William Theater, though, is the giving of information and mini- different techniques over time. Were music: music that has a direction and that it’s not for one person at a time. mize the feeling that it’s a social obli- there any other strategies you used purpose, other than the pure aesthet- So maybe this conversation about the gation to participate. In the Internet to get people interested in the Little ics of it. experience doesn’t happen with the world, we talk about push technology William Theater concerts? musicians, but by having two people and pull technology. So, for example, Mark: That’s interesting. I’ve been have a two-minute experience, I guar- TV is a push technology: once you turn Chris: Early on we would have the per- talking with a lot of people about antee that afterward most people are it on, there’s a steady stream of pro- formers play in the larger public spaces the idea of the artist working as going to talk about that experience gramming coming out at you. With pull at the Hammer as well. They would do a designer, or as a problem solver, they just had. technologies, you have to go and get an hour in the coatroom, an hour in the which is something I’ve been think- what you want. You have a lot more courtyard and lobby, and then an hour ing about in relation to the Residency. Chris: That’s true. It is a shared experi- control. back in the coatroom. Part of that was With a sound project like Fanfare/No ence. So when they’re walking around to get people’s attention, and part of Fanfare, it’s almost like you’re being the Museum later, they can talk about Chris: Yeah, you do. it was just to give them another way to asked to design sound—in a way that’s it, think about it, and potentially come play with the space. different from how you might normally back for more—which is what hap- Mark: I feel like the more work we did work. pened with that family of ladies. at the Hammer, the more we moved Mark: Yes. Mapping the acoustic archi- from push to pull. So for the Little tecture of the Museum was a big part Chris: I totally agree with that. I don’t Mark: OK, so we’ve talked about two William, at first it was like, “Hey, you of that project. Nobody, as far as I think we often consider design when models: one is flagging people down; random person coming in. Get in this know, has done that before at the we do music, because usually the focus two is flagging down people who look closet.” And later it was like, “If you Hammer with sound. There’s so much is on creating a piece that harmoni- curious and shoving them in the room happen to be interested, we also range between the coatroom and ously works. Composers don’t tradi- before they know what’s going on. have a concert in the coatroom.” And Lindbrook terrace, which is such an tionally design the interaction between What’s technique number three? with the Fanfare/No Fanfare project, oddly reverberant space. It’s not rich audience and performer. Those inter- which was one of the earliest, people like a cathedral, but… actions are already set. When we Chris: Number three—and this hap- were kind of thrown into the experi- change the purpose of the music and pened pretty early, within the first two ence, whereas with the Live Personal Chris: It is one of the most oddly the interaction between musician and months—was when the guards started Soundtrack, which came later in the reverberant spaces I’ve been in. You audience, the music is taken out of the

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } CK 46 Tubas in the parking garage

Machine Project A.I.R. at the Hammer Museum, photo by Marianne Williams.

Machine Project Hammer Report 2011 MA | } CK 47 concert hall experience in a very real Mark: Totally. If you give a small group surprising, really overt, over the top— Chris: Really loud. At you. That’s true. way and turned into something else. It of musicians a directive—“Your job is it’s above and beyond what most peo- In a way, that’s the main focus of my all goes back to Brahms and Strauss. to play music for people when they ple get when they walk into a room. work—especially in the context of a enter and give them a welcome”—it At Machine Project’s member bene- museum—to focus people’s time and Mark: How so? lets them work within this very small fit, people really embraced it because energy more when they’re in a space. box that is completely different than they understand our aesthetic. A lot of I think the greatest crime that we have Chris: There are these two groups a concert hall. the Hammer visitors definitely appreci- right now in LA, when you go to a of composers in the late 1900s in ated it, but a number of people really museum or you go to a new space, is Europe—and I’m kind of oversimplify- Chris: Yeah. A really traditional score avoided it as well. not really being present. That’s very ing it, but—essentially, there’s a group says play these notes, at this time, common today, with cell phones and that believes in “absolute music” and for this length of time, in this time Mark: Why do you think that is? stuff like that. So I’m always looking a group that writes “program music.” signature, in this attitude and this for ways to create a more collective You notice when Brahms wrote dynamic—but it doesn’t say what the Chris: Maybe there’s something about sense of place. I constantly ask myself: his symphonies, they were titled relationship with the audience is: which being in a museum that makes people how can we be more here than we Symphony One, Symphony Two, way you should be facing, what kind of want to remain under the radar. It’s an were before? One of my original pro- Symphony Three, and Symphony Four. pants you should wear, if you should opportunity for them to be in a state posals for the lobby space was a very This is considered absolute music, or be wearing pants at all. of reflection: people are there on their low hum, embedded in a sub-speaker tunes that are not explicitly about any- day off with the expectation of having that would be encased in a bench or thing. That is really the norm in classi- Mark: Something that I’m starting to a quiet afternoon. That’s something I something, so you wouldn’t be able cal music. Then with Strauss, you have notice as a trend in so much of our personally find really comforting about to find it. I wanted to pick out the fre- what’s called program music, which is work at the Hammer was this tension being in a museum space, so I can quencies of the buses going by so that music with a story or narrative arc. between a prompt and a problem to imagine why they might not want that would come in and bring the space A good example is his Alpine be solved. With Fanfare/No Fanfare interrupted. to life with vibration. That was how I Symphony with movements titled for example, we want to welcome peo- was looking to solve that problem at “From the Summit” and “Crossing ple to the museum, so we provide Mark: It’s kind of like going to a corny the beginning, but we ended up solv- over a Brook.” That sort of sets the a solution that goes just a little too far. Japanese restaurant where all the staff ing it in this wonderful, sociable way. precedent for something like Brian It uses the problem as a jumping-off shout a welcome at you when you Our Fanfare/No Fanfare piece, though Eno’s “Music for Airports”—functional point. come in. I think it’s kind of nice in very loud and boisterous and obtru- music that has an embedded purpose, a way, though. It focuses your atten- sive, can really focus your attention in often linked to an architectural space. Chris: Right. If we were to be very tion, on your feeling of entering a the space. Our experiments with music at the practical, we’d just say, “You need space, or even just on that moment of Hammer played with those distinc- Visitor Services people in this entering. One can enter a space or a Mark: I think Fanfare/No Fanfare was tions. We put what would otherwise Museum.” museum and you might feel comfort- also more conceptual. It didn’t just be considered absolute music in the able, you might feel uncomfortable, make you more aware of your sur- space of the coatroom, which really Mark: But in the interim, we’ll hang you might feel welcome, you might roundings; it also made you think changes the audience/performer rela- out and play trumpets for you while feel unwelcome. And you might not explicitly about that moment of enter- tionship. All our other musical pieces visitors come in. You were talking even be conscious that you’re hav- ing. I think a lot of our work oper- had a functional purpose: whether that about Fanfare/No Fanfare as some- ing that feeling: instead you’re think- ates in both those frames at the same was to explore architecture, serenade thing that was constructed func- ing about where to get the tickets or time: it speaks conceptually, while a plant, welcome folks to a space, or tionally, even if it’s a little bit of an where to go to lunch afterward. You’re at the same time doing something accompany and enrich the time spent absurdist way to welcome people to not always present to how you feel experiential. looking at artwork in a gallery. I’m the Museum. emotionally in spaces. But it’s hard not really interested in how experimental to notice you’re entering a space when music can toy with context and archi- Chris: Yes. I thought the most interest- you’ve got three dudes with saxo- tecture, treating the composer as ing part about that project was that phones playing. a designer. it’s welcoming in a way that is really

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } CK 48 Elizabeth In- Cline ter- view:February 18, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report 49 InterviewMA with Elizabeth Cline, February | 18, 2011 } EC

Mark Allen and Hammer public engagement curatorial associate Elizabeth Cline reflect on their shared and divergent experiences of Machine Project’s Residency. Their conversation revolves around the importance of space and the question of how and when something is defined as art. The practical ramifications of these concerns are made palpable in Mark and Elizabeth’s discussion about Table Tennis on Lindbrook Terrace, a piece that inadvertently challenged a number of the Museum’s basic institutional assumptions. The Hammer has since acquired the piece and will again have Ping- Mark: A really nice thing about work- charged with making your things hap- Above: ing with you is that we slowly devel- pen, and the best way to make your Tragedy on the Pong tables in the future. The discussion has Sea Nymph, been left here unresolved, as it was at the time, oped a more collaborative relation- things happen was to work collabora- Elizabeth Cline, ship that culminated with your Dog tively with you. Hammer Staff Opera piece that we were able to do in Residence at because the process of grappling with different Machine Project here at Machine, and now I want to Mark: Right. understandings of terms and values was central to help you tour it. So that’s an interest- Photo by ing by-product of this process: now Elizabeth: And I think one of the goals Marianne the collaboration and productive for both parties. Williams that we’re not working together at the of having Hammer Staff in Residence Ultimately, Elizabeth and Mark articulate an Hammer, our roles can shift and I can at Machine Project was that you were approach to the Residency that makes more room do what I do for other artists for you. interested in highlighting the talents I felt like that happened really organi- of everyone at the Hammer. When I for experimentation in the Museum by leveraging cally, and it was not something I had started the Dog Opera though, I defi- the process of art-making to engage the public. thought would be part of this under- nitely wasn’t thinking of it as a collabo- taking. Could you talk about that a lit- ration; I was thinking of you as a venue tle bit from your perspective? for this project that I wanted to do. Projects discussed: Instead, I became a part of Machine Elizabeth: Sure. I agree that the way Project in a way—which makes sense, • Hammer Staff in Residence at Machine Project our relationship became collaborative because I’m personally interested • Table Tennis on Lindbrook Terrace felt like a natural progression. I was in the kinds of things that Machine

Machine Project Hammer Report 50 Project is interested in. I think the con- I definitely think we both had this very tion. I felt like a lot of early communi- bag chairs; Ping-Pong tables were just tent of the Dog Opera is in keeping idealistic vision of what would happen, cation between Machine and Hammer expedient. Once they were installed with the Machine Project portfolio. that we would really integrate some of was about articulating that we’re a on Lindbrook Terrace, I got really inter- the Hammer’s voice into Machine, and group: it wasn’t Mark Allen, Artist in ested in the sound they made and the Mark: Absolutely. it would be this real exchange. I’m still Residence. And we did all these proj- way that it, along with many other wondering why that didn’t pan out. ects at the Hammer, but just this one sound pieces, was really transforming Elizabeth: So it wasn’t surprising to project back at Machine. Maybe I can how it felt being in the Museum. me that you were able to accommo- Mark: Yeah. I think some of it is that it find another museum to be in resi- I started looking at the Ping-Pong date so many of my needs with all of was one project among many. For it to dence here at the storefront. tables as an art piece and, at that your collaborators, but it is not some- really take off, it might have needed point, it felt appropriate for the thing that I really thought about until more work or a larger institutional con- *** Museum to view it that way as well. I actually made the piece, because versation. Normally that ambiguity or that kind originally Machine was just a venue. Elizabeth: Can we talk a little bit of shift isn’t a problem, and it’s part Elizabeth: Right. I also wonder if it about the question of who owns the of what makes contemporary art Mark: That’s interesting because the would have been more useful for you space, who owns the ideas, who owns interesting. It becomes a problem Hammer Staff in Residence at Machine to have had more intimate conversa- this work—which became complicated around Acquisitions, where the piece Project totally didn’t work the way tions with the Hammer staff. Maybe around the Ping-Pong tables—and also is interpolated, and the question of I expected it to. You were saying that that would have made more people about what makes something art? its status as art all of a sudden has it was an opportunity to highlight feel comfortable. to be answered. In terms of what the people’s talents; I really wasn’t think- Mark: Well, I realized something about Museum does as an institution—which ing about it that way. It was more Mark: Yeah, I think so. I think people myself: I don’t deliberately make is to say things are art, invest cultural about just providing a space for the who work in museums—or people who things confusing but I like ambigu- capital in them, collect them, histori- Hammer’s multiple subjectivities work anywhere, but I think this hap- ous spaces, whether they are physi- cize them, and study them—it became to inhabit. pens a lot in museums because of the cal spaces or conceptual spaces. One important to claim that space for the legacy of institutional critique and art- of the things that is central to how project. In the end, the moment some- Elizabeth: Right, and I think you tried ists doing interventions—are justifiably Machine operates is our resistance to thing becomes an art piece is not to make that as clear as possible by wary about being instrumentalized. really defining what we do. If, in order defined by what it’s made out of or by saying that the event could be public It’s hard. And sometimes I would come to make a project happen, it helped to the practice—it’s really about how you or private, that it could just be turning up with ideas that weren’t particularly say, “It’s not an art piece, don’t stress look at it. What was your perception? off the lights and taking a nap. Having well thought out around those ques- out about it. It’s just some Ping-Pong insider knowledge of Hammer staff, tions. To give a hypothetical example, table,” I would say that, because the Elizabeth: My perception of the Ping- I knew there were going to be peo- let’s say we asked the Hammer guards kinds of questions I am interested in Pong tables was that it was a social ple who really wanted to participate. to wear costumes and to act in certain don’t require the activity to be defined experiment, another of your propo- There are several who have really ways. At Machine, we do stuff like that as art. I like to let people think about sitions of engagement: it developed strong voices outside of the Hammer; all the time, so we would be surprised it however they want; it doesn’t matter things that you’re interested in, it gave they do their own art practice or col- when it wasn’t popular—“Why don’t to me if visitors viewed the Ping-Pong people per-mission to use that space, laborate with other people on different they want to dress like clowns? tables, or any of the projects we did, it warmed up the space, it made a things. So I knew no one was going to It’s fun!” as an art piece or not. I just want to more intimate sound—all of those come take a nap. It was fascinating, see what people do in certain spaces things. It was really kind of the land- though, the way people were totally Elizabeth: Exactly. and how that affects the feeling. Over scape of your Residency. And it was frazzled and canceling. Collectively, we the course of the Residency, though, what the grant asked you to do as a only did half of what we said we would Mark: The core of the idea that I’m how I thought about the ping-pong consultant. It was observing a problem do, and it made me realize that I’m not really interested in is: what does it tables really shifted. When we first did and making a suggestion: very literally, the only one who is really overworked mean for an institution to be a guest in it, it was mainly about trying to create “This space needs a Ping-Pong table.” at the Hammer. People were dropping residence at another institution? And I a more convivial space: we could have Some of what the grant was asking you like flies because they were too busy. think we understood half of that equa- used a Foosball table or a ton of bean- to do was to develop projects that, in

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } EC 51 the end, the Museum could have used, the sticking point in everyone’s mind I don’t think ideas or to generate ideas that we could is that what you proposed was not have implemented in some way again an artwork. The tables were situated in the future. So I feel like the Museum in an unusual space in the Museum— are very valuable in should have inherited the Ping-Pong Lindbrook terrace—that you hoped tables as part of your Residency, with to transform over the course of your themselves. It’s only a plaque describing the work we did Residency into a social space. together during the Residency. Mark: To me that shows a really in the doing of the Mark: See, that’s interesting, because strange idea of what art is—that art is I don’t think the Museum would do completely determined by its instan- idea that you learn a regular artist residency and expect tiating moment. If I were a painter to keep the work. How is it different? and you came to my studio and saw me working on a canvas, that mate- anything, or anything Elizabeth: It’s different because there rial is transformed into an artwork were expectations for what your at the moment I say it is an artwork. interesting happens. Residency was going to do or be Similarly, we can think of the Ping- because it was set forth in the grant. In Pong tables as a social canvas that was other institutional residency programs, transformed into an artwork by people –Mark Allen certainly in the Hammer’s existing using it. Artist in Residence program, there is no expectation for work to be gener- Elizabeth: That is a great way to frame ated because the residencies are spe- it in retrospect. cifically oriented toward research and development. Mark: I think that’s where curato- rial and I really differ. My practice is Mark: Do you think that as an artist always about flow, and process, and agreeing to participate in the Public transformation, things shifting from Engagement Artist in Residence pro- one thing to another. I’m really a social gram, one is implicitly agreeing with process-based artist. With the work the underlying expectations of that? I do at Machine Project, there isn’t this moment where we’re like, “Okay, Elizabeth: I think it’s something that now it’s finished.” Whereas, for the should have been discussed more in museum, dealing primarily with con- depth—the expectations the Museum cretized art objects, there’s this defini- had as conveyed in the grant. tive moment before it gets to them. No art object enters the museum in its Mark: It actually was discussed at the pre-art form and is transformed inside time of the contract, which covered of it; it is known to be an art object not only art objects but any ideas gen- before it comes through the door. erated. The contract is the moment I like the idea that you could bring where both parties clarify their expec- your piece to the museum and just tations and articulate what they’re keep working on it. going into. Elizabeth: Right. Which is kind of the Elizabeth: Right. You know, I think opposite of what a museum wants.

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } EC 52 It’s unfamiliar territory for us. But, Museum. The Dream-In, in a lot of the you know, if the Hammer were dedi- same ways, provided this extremely cated in earnest to more process- unique, intimate experience of the based artwork, there may not even be Museum. It’s a piece that I don’t think these ephemera or objects remain- got any press, but there has been a lot ing that the Museum would want to of interest in it from other institutions. acquire and use. It’s just so different. Right: And actually that’s interesting because Mark: Yeah. We’ve actually had muse- Table Tennis on Lindbrook in what you just described, the idea of ums call and do their own Dream-Ins Terrace a residency, of the work being devel- after talking to Adam Overton. oped on-site, really Below: Soundings: Bells came through. Elizabeth: It seems like that piece in at the Hammer particular—just the idea of having peo- Mark: Yeah, in the end it really was like ple spend the night in a museum—was a research residency. so cutting edge to other institutions. Another thing I really loved about the Elizabeth: And I do think the Ping- Dream-In is that we engaged so many Pong tables were successful as different collaborators and artists. And a piece. They transformed everyone’s then Brody’s piece, Level5, got abso- experience. Even now, when we hear lutely the most press—I mean, that a Ping-Pong ball drop, everyone kind East of Borneo piece, the interest that of smiles. it generated without ever mentioning the Hammer. *** Mark: Or Machine Project—which is Elizabeth: I’m wondering, for a public fine. Those are three really interesting engagement event to be successful for examples, and those are pieces that I the Museum, what you think the crite- love, but they are not the most inter- ria for success are—for you and for the esting to me in terms of the Residency. Museum. Let’s talk about it in terms Brody’s piece is an amazing work of art of the three projects that, in my mind, by a contemporary artist who I think is generated the most outside interest: fascinating, but in a way, it’s successful the Dream-In, Soundings: Bells at the because it’s doing what the Museum Hammer, and Brody Condon’s Level5. already does and does well. These are three pieces that are really, really different. Soundings: Bells at the Elizabeth: Exactly. Yes. Hammer was really successful in terms of attendance and participation. It got Mark: And it was perceived as a suc- so many people to the Museum—who cess by the Museum because it was aren’t our typical visitors, who aren’t doing what the Museum does. So if even necessarily museumgoers—to our goal was to experiment with what interact with the Museum and to have a museum does, that piece was the far- this experience in the Museum. It defi- thest from the intentions. nitely got press, it was talked about, it has the best documentation. It really Elizabeth: Farthest from the goals of felt like it transformed the entire your Residency, yeah. I’m not even

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } EC 53 sure how the Museum perceives it. that are outside those containers at I can completely figure out how some- of my favorites in that it was instantly I know that it’s just something that the Hammer, in areas that are gener- thing is going to work, I’m kind of understandable and embarrassingly sticks out as successful on the exterior. ally perceived as being where the insti- over it; the purpose for doing it is to silly, but infinitely discussable con- tution communicates directly with its discover what happens. For example, ceptually. It became a way to think Mark: It’s hard to use that as a control visitors. So what we did got confused the work you guys did plan-ning Level5 about a lot of ideas I’d been working because it is an extraordinary work with what the Museum did, and that was unbelievable from an organiza- on by making them so concrete. We of art. made the Museum freak out, justifi- tional, logistical standpoint, but that go through life trying to imagine other ably. And it’s not a moral failing of the piece still did all kinds of crazy things people’s subjectivities, and I actu- Elizabeth: Yes. Museum; a museum is not a machine we had no idea it was going to do— ally have no idea what it’s like to be for constantly messing up in public. for him, for you, for me, for the Elizabeth Cline, no matter how much Mark: I think both the Dream-In and But the confusion of the voice and public. It just mutated in a way that I know you and care about you, but Soundings came closest to the emo- the brand was where I was most fas- I’m still trying to figure out. It’s excit- I still imagine that I do. Whereas with tional tone that I wanted for the cinated, and those projects are the ing to be present for those moments. a plant, it really takes a strong imagi- Museum. The Dream-In, in particular— least externally successful because, I think that’s what’s addictive about nation to believe that I understand it’s just so sweet. But the reason it was to a certain degree, their goal was to this kind of work. But you may not be what this plant is experiencing. able to do that is because everybody investigate this ambiguity and to prob- able to define whether it was success- was gone: aside from the participants, lematize how a museum compresses ful for years. Elizabeth: [laughs] Yeah. And it’s inter- there were no other visitors to be subjectivity into a brand. So in some esting how much we got away with for embarrassed or confused by it; there ways, the things that didn’t work are Elizabeth: Mmhm, yeah. And then that project. We got away with doing were no people working there to won- the most interesting for me. there’s the question of how many these things that maybe would have der what was going on; the Museum people really even experience these been questioned, or it would have wasn’t watching. And then Soundings Elizabeth: Yeah. Do you still think the things? Very few. That puts more been more difficult or challenging, and is just a really smart, elegant public things that we didn’t do are interest- emphasis on how it gets talked certainly discussed a lot more in our engagement piece. There’s not a lot of ing? about—the folklore aspect. internal meetings, had they been for friction in it. people—like, “We want to do tarot Mark: Well, yeah—though as a cre- Mark: Yeah. Joshua and I talked card readings for visitors.” Instead, we Elizabeth: Right, of course. ative person who works with a ton of about that at length in relation to the wanted to do tarot card readings for people who generate a ton of ideas, Houseplant Vacation: that’s a piece plants. Everyone was like, “It’s just for Mark: But I’m interested in that fric- I don’t think ideas are very valuable that uses the Museum as its physi- the plants? Okay.” tion: in what happens when the in themselves. It’s only in the doing cal point to create imaginary space. Museum is trying to communicate to of the idea that you learn anything, It starts the minute you get the email *** its public one way, and the resident is or anything interesting happens. And that says, “Houseplant Vacation.” doing it another way, and it’s confus- that requires embracing a certain level What is going to be inside that email? Mark: You worked with many of my ing to the audience. I think one of the of uncertainty: you don’t necessar- Joshua said he imagined going over collaborators over the course of the things that was hardest and that gen- ily know what you’re going to get, to somebody’s house and their giant Residency. Did the process of working erated a lot of anxiety for people, is which is a challenge for the Museum, plant would be missing and he’d be with Asher Hartman or Brody Condon that we did very little in the galleries, again in terms of how it represents the like, “Where’s your plant?” “Oh, it’s on their large-scale productions feel so what we did kind of represented institution to the public. I definitely on vacation.” different than projects like Houseplant the Museum. The bargain that the noticed that the more we could create Vacation or Soundings: Bells at the institution makes is that it offers con- an imaginary picture of what the thing Elizabeth: Right. Yeah. That was defi- Hammer where I was more involved? tained spaces, the galleries, in which would be like, the more people were nitely a piece where you saw the artists have considerable freedom, and comfortable with it happening. And wonder and joy when people turned Elizabeth: It felt different. Once the visitors understand that what is pre- when I make projects, I do really try that corner onto Lindbrook terrace. line of communication was established, sented in there is the artists’ expres- to create a simulation in my head and It was immediate. Asher’s Annie Okay and Brody’s Level5 sion, not the Museum’s expression. imagine what it is going to feel like for went like any other curatorial proj- We explicitly worked in all the spaces the audience. On the other hand, if Mark: Houseplant Vacation was one ect at the Hammer. I mainly thought

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } EC 54 about how to promote the pieces, to half of the Residency trying to figure ents are concerned about what goes thing for a certain amount of time in get people to see them. Producing out how to make the lobby into that. on the wall never achieves the same a physical space—may be a more use- a public engagement project like I don’t think I realized how contested personality. ful way to start. It may give the art- Soundings: Bells at the Hammer or the lobby was as a space, because it is In the end, the space that ist more room for experimentation the Little William Theater, definitely the face of the Museum. probably came closest to feeling like and provide visitors with a context involved more strategizing about it was ours was Lindbrook terrace, so they understand that this is some- engagement and measurement. So the Elizabeth: I actually had no idea it and I think that was possible because thing we’re trying, instead of not really concerns were different. Measurement would be so problematic either. It’s it was farthest away from public view; knowing what’s happening. I think that was an interesting challenge with this too bad because I do think it would it’s a space for staff. It was perceived might have changed the course of the Residency. I had a hard time figuring have made it feel more like you were as having little value by the institu- Residency a little bit. it out. in residence. I think allowing you to tion, so there wasn’t that feeling of take over a very public space would it being observed. The lobby, on the Mark: Yeah. I think the difficulty with Mark: It is a hard thing to figure out. have more clearly demonstrated that other hand, feels more like a space some of our projects hinged on what The kind of deeply sustained engage- we had committed to a year of your of surveillance, power, and control. it means for the Museum to be doing ment with an individual that I’m inter- projects, and made you feel like you Transforming the coatroom there into public engagement projects that peo- ested in is hard to measure because had a space that was yours. the Little William Theater was ple don’t like. If you do a signage proj- it’s so subjective. I think in general, the a way of claiming a small piece of ect where half the people can’t find harder something is to measure, the Mark: Yeah. It is strange doing a resi- the lobby space and commenting on anything and they’re confused and more interested I am in producing it. dency but not owning any space. it at the same time. It felt like creat- annoyed, you’re not necessarily happy That’s really what art is. Everything you do feels very contin- ing a behind-the-scenes or hidden to be pushing the boundaries of public gent. Before I started the project, space precisely where power by secu- engagement; whereas if you do an art Elizabeth: That totally makes sense. I really had this idea that I could have rity is articulated most directly: they exhibit and half your audience is totally a transformational effect on the vibe of take your stuff away from you and confounded by it, we would generally Mark: It points to something we’ve the Museum, and I don’t think that put it in an area that you can’t enter. say it’s challenging our audience. By talked about over and over again, and I did. I think there were moments It was interesting to me to seize that shifting the framing to be more like that I’ve talked to the artists about: if which felt really different: the day we and make it a place that you invite a regular artist’s residency, I think you the purpose is really to develop the did Soundings: Bells at the Hammer people into. In the end, the two sites could make the experimental process Museum’s public engagement, what felt really different, the Dream-In felt we took over articulated two modali- visible to your audience at lower risk exactly is the role of the artist? I don’t really different, and there were small ties of how we relate to power—the to the institution, and let the public know if I was necessarily the right per- spots where you would encounter Little William Theater hidden in the engagement happen as a side effect son to directly produce public engage- something, but I wasn’t really able to center and Lindbrook terrace orbit- of the work. ment. I think I was the right person to transform the whole space. Some of ing the periphery. I feel like a lot of the produce a lot of work that might com- it had to do with the scale of what it Residency was more about pointing Elizabeth: Because it will happen ment on, or contextualize, or propose would involve to do that, but I think to some aspect of public engagement anyway. things for public engagement—but all it also has to do with the framing: than actually doing it. in a sort of nonpractical way, I guess. because everything was so contingent on what the institution was comfort- Elizabeth: I agree, and I think it all Elizabeth: Yes. That’s interesting. able having happen, we lacked the tumbles back to what an artist does The most obvious approach to public ability to really make it our own. Just versus what a consultant does, and engagement would have been to really like if a kid is allowed to decorate their how you negotiate this idea of the art- transform and actually develop a social bedroom, their personality pervades ist as consultant, that is central to the space—somewhere very public but it—and it’s not about them having public engagement program. In ret- intimate and cozy—which you never access to an on-staff decorator or a lot rospect, I think framing it as a more got to have. of money, it’s that ownership allows traditional residency and defining you to transform emotional spaces— it in a really simple, straightforward Mark: Right. I think we spent the first whereas a bedroom where the par- way—that the artist is here doing their

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } EC 55 Maria In- Mortati ter- view:November 7, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report 56 Interview with Maria Mortati, November 7, 2010 Mark: You’re a museum exhibition Maria: Well, in that context, you designer for a living, so what would have total control because it’s just | } motivate you to do something like this, you. Working for an institution, I’m MA MM basically for fun, given the amount of so accustomed to seeing things fall work that it is? through because a city doesn’t get the funding or the ballot measure Maria: After I left the Exploratorium didn’t pass, so I come into it with and went back to doing professional low expectations. I don’t expect stuff consultancy work, I found myself being to be completed. I am just doing it Mark Allen talks to museum consultant and paid to advise people on projects but because it’s what I love to do. If this exhibition designer Maria Mortati about the Giant not doing them myself. I wanted to be one doesn’t work, then I’ll do another experimenting again, as opposed to one. If that one works, great, maybe Hand signage piece she worked on with Matt just writing and talking and presenting. I’ll learn from it and spin it off into Jones. Maria provides a balanced perspective That was my motivation. And with my something else. I just want to be day job, everything is very planned doing stuff, so I’m happy to go with on the challenges and importance of integrating out: it’s huge projects that involve whatever works. experimentation into a museum’s regular operation. enormous teams of people, and going to meet with the board and the Mark: Something that I learned doing community and looking years into the this Residency is that the thinking and Projects discussed: future, trying to craft a vision of what the results happen in multiple stages. the museum should be like. I wanted I learned a lot from the projects that • Giant Hand to be able not to have a business plan, didn’t happen, in terms of where they to just do what I thought would be fun ended or what happened to them. and engaging in the moment—then, That said, the project we did make— in a couple of years, sit down and the Giant Hand—was difficult. I would evaluate. say it was one of the more difficult projects for the Hammer, and I thought Mark: I was thinking about our process it might be useful to consider why that of working at the Hammer. You and is. I have my own ideas, but I’d be I generated a ton of projects, out of interested to hear yours. which we did only one. You seem to not find that super frustrating, whereas Maria: Well, you had much more for the people I work with who are direct, day-to-day contact with the from a studio-artist background, Museum, especially when things got there’s often the expectation that contentious or difficult or confusing. a project that starts will be a project We waded into very murky territory, that finishes. both for the project and for us.

Maria: [laughs] Oh, how wrong they Mark: Murky in what way? are when it comes to museums! Maria: Well, we chose the lowest- Mark: I know, but when you’re working hanging fruit, which was wayfinding. in your studio and you start a project, It was just an obvious problem. But if you think it’s a good idea, you we’re not really problem solvers, so we usually follow through. had to change our tack a little. That was an interesting point for me in our

Machine Project Hammer Report 57 Giant Hand

process, when we decided, OK, we’re to me. We started with something of artists as problem solvers. The grant an additive process rather than a not doing design, we’re doing art— very mundane and took it to the most the Hammer had from Irvine is part of reductive process. To the institution it’s and what does that mean? We were playful conclusion—which became this a broader idea that artists are good a problem; to the artist it’s a catalyst. basically saying that we wanted to do Giant Hand on top of the building. For at solving problems because they’re something additive, as opposed to the Museum it was politically tougher creative—and that you can then apply Mark: Yeah, I think of it as a site. resolving something. because it was their problem and they that creativity to any set of problems. were probably a little embarrassed I’m curious what you think about Maria: If you are really going to solve Mark: Right. So rather than coming about it and just wanted it solved. that idea. the problem, it’s an analytical exercise. in and saying, “This sign has this For us, it was a question of whether There are very capable people who problem, and we’re going to fix it,” it we were going to be like the hands of Maria: There’s a fundamental flaw in can come in and resolve it in a specific becomes something that attempts to the Museum [laughs], just fixing their that philosophy for me, and I think way to fit other people’s requirements. talk about how wayfinding works at the problems, or whether we were going what came up for you and me with When you are an artist, you are doing Museum. Rather than disappearing, to do something more interesting that the Giant Hand is a great example. it according to your own vision and the way signage is supposed to, the we wanted to do. I think it’s very ironic Designers are problem solvers. They your own philosophy. They have Giant Hand calls attention to that we came up with a giant hand as are brought in to analyze, focus, and different driving motivations at the the issue. a response. to solve a problem to fit the needs end of the day: museums are hard- of the individual institution, whereas wired for showcasing things; they’re Maria: We wanted to play with it, Mark: That gets at a tension at the artists are brought in to engage not hardwired for creative production. literally. That’s what was appealing core of this project, which is this idea and create around a problem. It’s

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } MM 58 Mark: Right. There are different values Mark: Yeah, I think we all came to the work and influence other people in the Mark: Informality is a very powerful floating around between the institution realization that there needed to be field, it wasn’t a waste. I think there tool, but on the other hand, we don’t and the artists. They overlap, but a lot more consensus-building up front. is enormous power in building stuff, do exhibits at Machine Project because they don’t completely coincide. So making it, getting it out there, and not stuff looks like crap here. do you think using artists to improve Maria: Well, you were the first child feeling like it’s got to live forever, that public engagement is something that [laughs]. it’s got to be precious. Maria: [laughs] museums can do? Or do you think that they’re institutionally set up in such Mark: One strategy I figured out Mark: Absolutely. One of the things Mark: Historically, museums are a way that it’s always going to be an for dealing with anxiety or concerns that is great about working here at as formal as possible because it awkward fit? on the part of the Museum, was Machine is we prototype all these articulates the value of what they articulating a kind of temporality. ideas. Everything gets recycled. But I hold. But a museum can contrast Maria: I think museums can and When we would do a project, we’d think that’s a little bit of a challenge informality and formality and I think should do it. Museums are always say things like, “We’ll just try this for a for museums because their very core needs to have both those modalities. chasing audiences. They want eyeballs, week.” It’s really different than saying purpose is to collect, preserve, and They each construct viewership a bodies. And the demographic of the we’re going to keep it for the whole educate visitors about things that are little differently. That’s something that future museum visitor is shifting. time. That happened with the Giant precious and live forever. Something museums understand for exhibitions, Visitors will be largely Hispanic, for Hand, too. A lot of the final anxieties that was interesting about being at where they function very well as a one thing. As the culture changes, the were overcome by saying, “It’s just the Hammer for a year was that it site for conversation about aesthetic programming and the engagement going to be up from this date to this allowed things to cycle in and out. value, cultural value, ethical value. strategies have to change too. I see date.” We went into that assuming And it took some of the pressure It’s just when you try and do that to working with artists as a great way to they would love it so much they would off each individual thing. If you can’t the infrastructure of the institution, it do that, because they’re experts at keep it, and in fact, at the end of that acknowledge that what you’re trying becomes a much more sophisticated engagement, experience, creativity, date they were like, “Great, now take to do might fail and still value what conversation with your public. wonder, all these things. You want to it away” [laughs]. you learn from the attempt, then you have a way, as an institution, to be have to succeed. Maria: It’s a really big leap for most continuously staying relevant, and that Maria: Right. It would have been institutions to make. requires you to have a certain amount nice if it went on past that date, but Maria: And that’s so much pressure, of flexibility. It was funny to me, when it was not essential. It was totally it’s no fun for anybody. Mark: A take-away I got from our Matt Jones and I were doing the in the “could be nice” category. So Giant Hand project is that it is installation of the Giant Hand we found everybody got to have a success. I Mark: Whereas being transparent important to have the institution that just basic, physical production was thought it was a brilliant solution. about the fact that you’re ask themselves to what degree tough. Everything had been divided experimenting gives you so much they are comfortable with the artist into different departments. I think it’s Mark: It was a simple one that we more authority. working with their basic forms of self- important to create a little bit of a didn’t think of until we really had to representation. It seems like museums physical space for visiting artists—even come up with a solution. It was hard Maria: And it makes the audience try to be really careful about having a if it’s just an office or supply closet— for me to think about that piece as more forgiving because they feel like unified institutional voice and style. In to serve as an everyday reminder temporary, though, because most of they get to be a part of something. retrospect, what’s interesting about to the museum to leave room for my work is performative, so it was like I think that Machine Project is the Giant Hand is that it’s in a signage experimentation. The whole key to it is the most solid, sculptural thing we did. particularly well suited for just trying vernacular which would be completely to move away from being the referee things out like that because you have at home in a science museum or a and establishing a new department of Maria: When I worked on the outdoor such a warm, social atmosphere. That children’s museum but looks super creative production, so the approach Exploratorium, all I did was build informalizes things so much. It doesn’t weird in an art museum. It’s really can be more like, “How can we all prototypes that people used once or feel super insider, like you’ve got to out of place. I’m always interested in come together to make it happen?”— twice and then threw away. But seeing know the secret handshake or “Am I making things that are invisible about as opposed to, “Could I please have the impact on those people who used cool enough?” It removes all of that, an institution visible, just by doing permission to…[laughs]?” it, and being able to talk about that so you get a lot further with the public. something in a way you wouldn’t

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } MM 59 normally do it. I didn’t think about lot of institutions that aren’t that how much it drew on another museum self-aware. vernacular until afterwards. Was that something you were thinking of when Mark: Well, and it took me interfacing you were designing it? with artists on a daily basis to figure it out in relation to Machine. Maria: To me, from the very beginning it was such a formal space that I knew Maria: But you also want to steer it wasn’t going to be hard to make away from having an institution over- something look playful or out of place articulate their boundaries, because [laughs]. The fact that people can that heightens their vigilance even touch it and interact with it sets it further. apart. You can’t touch anything else there. I thought it was really fantastic Mark: It’s less about saying, “You that the Museum went ahead and did can’t do anything here,” than “Here it. It showed a willingness to take a are some things that we’re sensitive chance on their part. It’s easier for us about.” All kinds of concerns came to say, “This will be really cool.” I think up with the Giant Hand that I hadn’t it was a tougher thing for them. anticipated.

Mark: Yeah. And we were the first Maria: Right. With the Giant Hand, Artist in Residence, so we found every I think wayfinding was such a sore sore spot because we just started spot for the Hammer already, poking at everything. The Museum experimenting meant risking the should really sit down with the artist at possibility of falling even farther down the beginning and look at all the areas the well. They just wanted the problem where artists could possibly intervene. solved. You know, it’s like: you can go The same thing applies to Machine down the well or get out of the well; Project. I try to be very flexible and you don’t play in the well [laughs]. to do what the artists want to do, but when we had the Hammer Staff Mark: We wanted to play in the well. in Residence at Machine Project and Maybe that’s something for institutions one of the artists wanted to use our to think about: whether they see these pnuematic cash machine for donations areas where artists can intervene as Wayfinding on the Giant Hand for another organization, I realized that sites or as problems to be solved. the way we raise money is not an area that I am comfortable having artists interface with.

Maria: It’s all about boundaries. Some institutions are really very boundary specific, and some are not. What you’re suggesting is that people be aware of what the boundaries might be. The donation box is a very clear boundary for you, but there are a

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } MM 60 Joshua In- Beckman ter- view:November 30, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report 61 Interview with Joshua Beckman, November 30, 2010 Joshua: Hello. experience at the Museum. They’re like the stunt doubles for the visitors: | } Mark: Hello. So Joshua, most of the they can stay at the Museum every MA JB people that I collaborated with on day, and they have the patience this project were in LA, whereas you to have people call and read them were in Seattle or New York, so most poems 24 hours a day and do all these of your participation involved phoning performances for them. But it was also in—calling people at the Museum on about trying to spill the life of that their birthdays and calling the plants. project out from the Museum and into Mark Allen and poet Joshua Beckman discuss the I’m curious what your experience was people’s consciousness. The piece public imagination as a secondary performance like, working on projects about people starts in people’s imagination when relating to other people but doing it they’re in their house gathering their space for intimate pieces with as few as one or two from a remote location. plants and driving them over to the audience members. They also consider the shifting Museum. Ideally a good title does that: Joshua: It’s funny because I still think Houseplant Vacation at the Hammer roles of performer and audience through discussion of phones like they’re two cups and Museum. Maybe I didn’t know what of specific pieces in which those boundaries some string, as if there’s still a line that meant when I first said it, and there, like it’s physical. And being maybe people didn’t know when they were blurred. a poet, you are used to simultaneously read it, but you start imagining what it having a ton of intimacy and then that means. The piece begins right there. big remove—in the creation of a poem Projects discussed: and the space between that and its Joshua: Oh yeah, and it’s not just the reception by the reader. So much of people who brought their plants. I’m • Houseplant Vacation how we relate has distance within it. also interested in the people who • Little William Theater When we did the Dream-In and I got decided not to bring their plants. It’s people to read a poem in rounds to like, “I heard about it. I thought I’d • Dream-In each other—actually it was a little bit bring my plant. I looked at my plant. • Hammer Staff Birthday Poetry Readings like the game telephone [laughs] My plant’s sitting in my living room. —eventually they fell asleep. They I thought either: a) I can’t part with my were in physical proximity to each plant right now; b) the museum’s going other, some of them thinking about to totally mess up my plant…”—any this poem, but when you close your of a number of different things. It eyes, you are essentially alone [laughs]: starts all of those ripples and they’re individual personhood appears or all different sizes and have different disappears…. Actually, a lot of the effects on the viewer. And it’s not projects we did together were about just the plants; the Museum spills people thinking about being there out into people’s imaginations too. before they’re there, and thinking The Museum has certain hours, and about being there after they’re there. when it goes to sleep it’s like the art inside it is gone, it doesn’t even Mark: I think the Houseplant Vacation exist. Putting a bunch of plants in piece addressed that the most directly. there gives the Museum an imaginary That piece had an extended presence 24-hour presence, which of course at the Museum, but it was also created all physical objects actually have. It to exist in people’s minds. The plants makes you think about the fact that it’s become a stand-in for the humans’ housing not only these plants, but that

Machine Project Hammer Report 62 the art is there at night when people project onto any audience to varying aren’t viewing it. When you read the degrees. Being explicitly aware of that plants poems, you have to imagine process was very interesting for me. the Museum. Are there people there? You start to understand more about Are they walking by? What time is communicating with other people, and it? You have to imagine yourself as about what it is to be in that space of a speaker trying to perform for an the Museum—because there’s a lot of individual. It’s not that a plant is less work in the Museum that just sits there than an individual exactly, but to some and waits for someone to come up and extent [laughs] it’s a smaller audience feel something in relation to it. than one person, no matter how many plants you have. Mark: I want the people I collaborate with to have a new way of working Mark: [laughs] Yeah. Well, it is. You’re or new ways of thinking about their not going to get a lot of feedback work. But I also think that it changes it from a plant. A lot of the work that you for the audience as well. It’s as much and I have done together is modeling about the audience imagining the different forms of one-to-one reading experience of the performer as it is the experiences, whether it’s on a phone performer imagining the experience of or walking to somebody’s house, or the audience. going around and reading people things before they go to sleep. You’ve Joshua: I think one of the big things— probably read to a larger audience in and it’s very hard to get museums to one sitting than you have your entire understand it—but I think the more career of doing things in Machine these very small, intimate, mysterious Project. We’ll never catch up [laughs]. things happen, the more likely people This brings to mind a related topic: are to talk about it—even if only ten a lot of the things that we do over at people get to experience it directly. the storefront are for the public, but Most of the people I know didn’t they’re also directed toward our own get to go to the Hammer, but they entertainment, or curiosity. all heard about the sleepover, they just say, “Imagine we put a bunch of quiet. Now, because of the ability Joshua Beckman all heard about the plants, and that plants in the Museum.” I’m interested to manipulate images, we encounter (right) and Anthony McCann Joshua: Yes. A big part of Machine means they’re part of this audience in that tension between operating in so many things that don’t actually reading Carlos Project is the experience of performing because they create and imagine that space of imagination, and also happen: you can have a picture of Oquendo de and how it alters the artist. As an it. I think that’s something a lot of really doing it in real space. I think a tiger running around inside a Amats in the Little William individual who read almost exclusively Machine’s projects really brought that comes from growing up with the museum eating the paintings, which Theater at night to the plants, I have to say out at the Hammer: this experience legacy of ’60s and ’70s performance of course we would never really let that having a discussion with a plant of being moved by the artwork, art—Chris Burden’s work, for happen. The other thing that’s funny alters the performer. I was reading and responding to the artwork and example—which I know about purely about the plants is that there is this very short poems, haiku, I think. I thinking about artwork, period. anecdotally. other audience, which is the guards. would call late at night, during the off I assume they must have heard poems, hours, and read some poems and then Mark: The audience’s imagination is a Joshua: Right. It’s not like Chris but we haven’t heard back from talk to the plants about what I was space I’ve tried to colonize so that the Burden just considered nailing himself them. I loved the idea of a guard— reading and why it made me think of work functions as a kind of folkloric to a VW. I love it when you tell people someone who’s trained to make sure them. The plants have qualities, as any experience. The thing is, you have about some of these projects: their that nothing strange is going on in the audience has qualities. And you can to actually do the projects. You can’t jaw drops a little bit and they get museum at night—listening in on the

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } JB 63 person and the plant talking. of the performative act. Sometimes were all shut in together, so we were gift of reading them a poem. In all I would try and make eye contact instantly on an equal plane. Everyone likelihood, they haven’t heard a poem *** with one of them when Anthony was was involved in some way or another. read by a poet; they probably haven’t reading, and I would realize that, yes, If you signed up and did a movement even read a poem to themselves in a Mark: I want to ask you about this idea I’m giving a poetry reading, but what’s class, someone saw you doing that long time. So there’s this excitement of working with the shifts between actually happening at that moment is movement more than anyone saw me and openness to hear it. And I always what I would call the public or social that I’m looking at some dude who’s read poems. give them a choice. They get to persona, and the performative sitting next to me, and we’re holding a decide if they want to hear one about persona. What happens when you book together while Anthony reads to Mark: Even the act of showing up monkeys or one that has sort of a shift from being Joshua Beckman, us in Spanish. at the Museum that day with your sad longing, for example. I read it to this guy who’s hanging out before the sleeping bag and your pillow. As them and then they get off the phone reading, to all of a sudden becoming Mark: So you’re shifting between regular Museum visitors were leaving, and they can’t even show anyone the Joshua Beckman reading poems? being the audience and the performer people were standing around wearing poem. It’s gone. Was it good? Was it I’m interested in that shift between there. You’re moving between those footy pajamas and inflating their bad? All that’s left is like, “Some dude the person as person and the person two spaces. mattresses. In a way, everyone was in called me, don’t remember his name. as a vehicle for something else. In some kind of performative mode. We He read me a poem. I think this and our society we consume enormous Joshua: That particular reading was also had you call the Hammer staff to that happened. He sounded sad.” It’s quantities of culture all the time, but really different because it was two read them poems for their birthday or this strange total alteration of their we have very little access to that shift. people reading in two languages half-birthday: when you call someone day. You go see KISS, but you don’t hang from the same book, and we only had there’s the initial moment in which out with KISS with their makeup off two listeners. All four people were they’re expecting to have a phone Mark: I think your poems are really before the show, right? participating, and the distinction conversation, and then you shift to well suited for this kind of thing too between the readers and the listeners this performative mode. Can you talk because they are formally inventive in Joshua: Not unless you’re really lucky. was broken down by the fact that a little bit about that experience? I a way people probably aren’t familiar both of the readers spent half of their know that you call and read poems with, but they also have a narrative Mark: It’s like the backstage pass. time listening. So everyone was very to friends on the phone all the time. I legibility to them. The process of That’s the space that Machine likes intimate, very involved. suspect Anthony McCann’s voicemail trying to describe them to somebody to operate in. Some of the events is full of nothing but your poems at is kind of like trying to describe a try to completely collapse that space Mark: Right. I think a parallel I can this point. Can you talk about how that dream you had. It’s very hard to make between the official performer and the draw to that is when I’ve done public experience is similar or different to any kind of representation of what unofficial performer. interviews on stage. I did a public calling and reading poems to people at that experience was like to somebody conversation on stage at the Hammer the Hammer? else at your office: “Well, there was a Joshua: I think you can blur that with Brody Condon about his piece. baby and it was in some bananas…” It distinction in a bunch of different What I found interesting about it is Joshua: Calling someone at the doesn’t make any sense unless you’re ways. When Anthony and I were in the that I would ask him questions, he Museum is so different. I don’t know actually reading the poem itself. It’s Little William Theater, we sat across would answer, and I would be listening if you know this, but I have a whole like you’re inducing a dream in the from each other and next to the two and trying to process what I wanted shtick, which is like, “Hello so and so, middle of the day for someone while listeners. The book we were reading to ask him next. But I was also, to a I’m calling on behalf of the Machine they’re conscious. from is bound sort of like an accordion certain degree, performing the role Project to wish you a happy birthday so it had to keep unfolding, and part of listener. It was almost as if I had to and/or half-birthday”—the half- of the performance was the physical act as the image of a listener for the birthday is so great because my sense act of unfolding the book. Each time audience. is that most people don’t recognize we flipped a page, we each handed it that there is a half-birthday. So I’ve the audience person next to us—just Joshua: And with the Dream-In, that given them two gifts. I’ve given them something that simple. They weren’t distinction between audience and the gift of telling them that it’s their reading aloud, but they became part performer totally broke down. We half-birthday, and I’ve given them the

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } JB 64 Emily In- Lacy ter- view:November 28, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report 65 InterviewMA with Emily Lacy, November | 28, 2010 } EL

Mark Allen and Machine’s longtime collaborator, folk musician Emily Lacy, consider different ways of engaging with the architectural and labor structures of the Museum. They also meditate on the transition from pedestrian to performative identity and the particular kind of intimacy it creates with an audience.

Projects discussed: • Valentine’s Day Songs of Triumph or Heartbreak • Hammer Staff Birthday Personal Concerts

Mark: On a really practical level, how Mark: Yeah. With the Hammer project, Valentine’s much do you think we learned from we spent an enormous amount of the Day Songs of Triumph or the year at the Hammer that might be budget on support—whether it was Heartbreak in applicable to other institutions? Or on documentation or hiring people to the Billy Wilder do you think everything is completely deal with logistics or bookkeeping. We Theater site-specific? wrote checks to 300 people. That is a lot of work! [laughs] Emily: Well, every physical space is different, so there is something to be Emily: Something else that comes learned from every single situation to mind is that, when a museum asks that you engage in. But I think that you to do something like this, even something that could apply to projects if they don’t realize it, they really are across the board is the understanding the cowriters of the project—in the that with this kind of work, because directives that they introduce from it usually involves a participatory time to time and the specific projects component, there is a need for labor they approve and don’t approve. support and infrastructure that is They may not see themselves as different from what normal exhibitions authors. They may see themselves need. as administrators, as just the people who sign the checks or whatever.

Machine Project Hammer Report 66 But at the end of the day, it is really made: whether they wanted a song interested in what it means when you after, whereas the performances that a collaborative effort between the of heartbreak or of triumph. That was take the one-to-many performance happen at Machine are much more institution and the artist or the interesting too, to allow for this loaded model and make it one-to-one or few- fluid. They get their energy from the organization. And collaboration can question on such a loaded holiday. to-few. How does that change what shift—the fact that, all of a sudden, be really, really hard—especially with information goes from the performer the performative moment erupts out the kind of work that we do because Mark: Did you to talk to the to the audience and how does it of this social space when the person we work within the realm of ideas. participants? change what information comes back starts singing. It’s really watery, that content. from the audience to the performer? Emily: It varied. I tried to play off I think one of the reasons people Emily: Yeah, for the Valentine’s Day Mark: Yeah, very fluid. Can you talk the energy of the participant. Some find that those experiences can be piece, it did feel like this particular a little about the Valentine’s Day Songs people wanted to talk. Other people difficult is that you don’t know what psychological space was being of Triumph or Heartbreak piece we found the whole thing very bizarre to say afterward. The audience goes invoked. It was almost like role- did? We’ve done similar things in other and I sensed that they didn’t want through this shift from perceiving the playing—audience and performer— places—performances for one person to engage on a verbal level. It was performer as a fellow human being to and then pushing past that into this at a time. Can you talk about what funny. Each performance was this something else: when the performance dreamlike space. that experience was like and how it short spurt of engagement, one or is happening, when you are singing, was different doing it at the Hammer two minutes with one person, so it was I am no longer engaging with you. It Mark: You know, an artist who works than, say, if we had done it at Machine like an espresso shot of intimacy and may be more intimate or it may be with that a lot is Tino Sehgal: I was in Project? connection, a little window of intensity. less intimate, but no matter what, your New York at the New Museum and And it went both ways: whatever I humanness shifts in a way. You’re a they have one piece installed where Emily: I felt like what was new about was giving them with the musical very different kind of human than I am you walk into the space and the the project was the opportunity to performance, whether they chose in the moment that you are singing to guard turns around and sings to you, be in the background and become an heartbreak or triumph; at the same me. You become a performer. “This is propaganda, you know, you element of the museum experience— time, I got a strong energy input from know,” and then she announces the to embed oneself and engage on whatever the participant’s vibe was. Emily: You become a conductor of this name and date of the piece and turns almost an architectural level. So one Those types of things can range from moment. away again. And you can talk to the of the things that was really special completely awkward—where you really guard, but you have to actively make about doing the Valentine’s Day have to fight back intense laughter just Mark: And then you shift back when that shift. And, in the case of guards, project at the Hammer was being able to overcome the nervous tension— it is over. I think that produces some it is interesting because they’re still to engage with that level and scale. to just feeling complete bliss. I love of the awkwardness around how to performing another nonpeer role. Usually with one-on-one performances that range. relate to the performer afterward. They’re performing the institutional we work in small spaces. In this case, In our culture, often the model is security of the museum. So there is we had access to the entire Billy Mark: So, say that you do a that you don’t. We only experience this shift between two modes—an Wilder Theater, and to be able to use performance for an audience of the performer as the performer: we institutional mode and a performing that space with all its theatricality 20 people, to a certain degree are not constantly shifting gears mode—neither of which is really a peer was really a unique opportunity. It you’re getting an average of their between Kanye West my neighbor mode. We also did the Hammer Staff allowed me to think about the whole experiences. If everyone syncs up and Kanye West the performer; it is Birthday Personal Concerts, where you experience differently. I developed and projects the same experience always Kanye West the performer. came and sang for people who work at a directive choreography for the you may feel like, “Well, that was What I think is interesting about doing the Hammer on their birthdays. How experience in a way that I haven’t been really a disaster,” or “That was really the Valentine’s Day piece in the Billy would you compare that experience able to before. I had my friend acting amazing,” but more often it’s balanced Wilder Theater is that we built up all with the Valentine’s Day pieces? as an usher, we both had corsages, and somewhere in between. Whereas, of the performance infrastructure for we had it worked out so that when he you’re saying, with the one-to-one a single audience member. It becomes Emily: What I really liked about the brought down a participant, he would performance you get the undiluted a focused individual encounter with birthday pieces—as well as having give me a nonverbal hand signal so individual experience. With these the performative mode of being, with the Hammer staff in residence here at I would know which choice they had more intimate performances, I’m really this unexpected proximity before and Machine—is that they expanded the

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } EL 67 Mark: Yeah. I think some of that comes communication is constantly traveling out of the model that we have here in both directions; whereas in a more at Machine Project, where it is a small hierarchical institution, the top talks workplace. The people who work here downward whenever it wishes to, but are really involved with what happens you only talk upward when you are for the public and sometimes the given clearance to do so. things we do are as much to amuse ourselves as the public. At Machine, Emily: Like the military or large-scale the walls between the different film productions. [laughs] roles—the people who work here, the volunteers, the artists we work with, Mark: Yeah. And it does palpably the members, the public—are thin change how relationships develop and permeable. There’s not a strong between people. delineation. With a larger institution it’s hard to do that. The museum has Emily: And it affects the way the a distinctive division of labor: it shows performance feels. One thing I work that is made off-site by people remember about the birthday pieces who don’t work for the museum; there is all the material—the desks and the are people in the museum whose job chairs and the paper and the folders it is to think culturally and people and the fluorescent lights and the desk whose job it is to think in other ways; lamps—made that office space a really Top and left: communication is pretty hierarchical thick environment. As a performer Hammer and controlled. And these things are in that space, you really notice that Staff Birthday Personal necessary for large art institutions, but your guitar is a foreign object to the Concerts it’s very different from Machine’s more environment. I feel it a lot less here integrated model. Although I think at Machine because you can find any as we grow, we are also seeing the number of things in our basement or in division of labor start to erupt. the gallery. In the office environment at the Hammer, you feel how your Emily: Right. clothes are different than those of the people around you and how your Mark: I thought about trying to do materials are of a different fiber. You things that would expose the private become this infused body of different museum to the public, but I became material carrying different objects more interested in the opposite: into their space with intent to create moving programming into the private another emotional climate. It’s really cultivation of social space to include Emily: And I really felt a sense of part of the institution. Were you there interesting, physically, to experience the employees of the Museum. I feel empathy when I performed the pieces. the day we all went and worked in Ann that shift. It was very powerful, and like it is pretty rare for an awareness to Recognizing that there are all these Philbin’s office at the Hammer? it felt satisfying to really make these exist within the exhibited work, and in people who live off pay and benefits people’s days. the emotional and physical space, of from the Museum, I was able to relate Emily: No. the people who actually work there. to the economy of it in a different way. I like that we were able to engage the There was something special about Mark: That was an interesting Museum as a workplace. infusing our work into that human day because the modalities of layer of the institution. conversation at the two institutions Mark: Right. are really different: at Machine,

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } EL 68 Cat In- Lamb & Laura ter- Steenberge view:December 20, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report Author’s Name 69 Interview with Cat Lamb and Laura Steenberge, December 20, 2010 Mark: Can you tell me a little bit in the space, and pieces that were made about the choral singing group in the space with multiple people. | } you developed that did Singing by MA Numbers at the Hammer—how it came Laura: I’d actually like to add that about and what it was? being in that space was a real challenge at first. We were scheduled Cat: Laura and I have been developing for about 12 to 13 hours inside a language for how to hear certain the gallery over the course of the tonal relationships of sound. Residency and we had three weeks CL & LS to prepare for that. So we really had Laura: Yes, a theory of harmony. Every to rise to that occasion, to figure out pitch has what’s called a harmonic series: how we could gracefully produce the sound that you hear has a certain that amount of music in a mentally frequency; all these other tones above it reasonable fashion. Fortunately, have simple mathematical relationships because we’d been doing these As they reflect on their experience of singing in the to that fundamental frequency, so experiments for several months, we galleries, musicians Cat Lamb and Laura Steenberge multiplying a number by two or three found that there were three or four or four will give you a different pitch. little improvisatory pieces with simple consider how the pressure of formal spectatorship I’m interested in what it means, rules that could be written around can inhibit engagement with performance work. quantitatively, to be in tune. That’s half each little angle we had explored. So the equation. I’m also really interested in much material came out of that time. They begin to outline a passive engagement things that are out of tune. If you know strategy that uses behavioral modeling to invite what you’re aiming for in the first place, Cat: A cool thing too—just having all you can stray from it and play with it that time altered the dynamic of the visitors to linger and move on at their leisure. artistically. When Cat and I started doing group so that everyone felt like they these experiments, we didn’t know were part of the experimentation. what we were capable of doing, but And people were starting to feel Projects discussed: after doing it for the last year and a half, more confident with the numbers, so • Singing by Numbers there are more and more pieces being they were able to use it as their own actually written. language.

Cat: Right, and we asked a number Mark: So far you’ve talked about this of singers who are our friends to try out project primarily as a language and different experiments with us. a system for working with musicians. We started meeting regularly with I’m curious how it manifests in terms a small group and trying, together, to of performance. And there are a find an intuitive interactive experience number of ways you can structure for musicians to be able to hear the a performance—as an experiment, differences—as opposed to a more an improvisation, a score, a academic or composerly approach. piece…. Cat, you were saying the Some of the things we tried were just performances at the Hammer were games, but then suddenly a piece would kind of a combination. How would you emerge based on a feeling of the group. distinguish between those different For Singing by Numbers at the Hammer, modes of composition? it was a conglomeration of pieces that were prepared beforehand, experiments Cat: It’s a tricky subject. With this

Machine Project Hammer Report 70 project, the dynamic of the group that affected the way you thought really breaks down the barriers about the sound, or the way people between composer and performer. I’ve perceived the sound? written a lot of scores for performers, but with this group, the pieces I have Cat: It seemed congruent. Lambri found myself working on are more has a lot of repetition, so there’d open to the group’s interpretation. be branches that were repeated in It seemed natural for it to have their different muted tones. I felt like that voices in there—literally and also was similar to what we were trying creatively. to do, because we would have these repetitious guidelines but they would Laura: One thing I’d say is that most be muted by the kinds of harmony that of the performances we’ve done so we decided to play around with—how far have been experiments—or what many voices were layered on top of I would call an etude, which is each other and that sort of thing. a traditional term for a study of a musical concept. To the listener it Mark: Do you think that the listeners may not make a difference if a piece is in the space were sensing that? Or, an etude or an improvisation or to put it in broader terms: How does a composition, but there are formal the audience figure into the piece? differences. I think of an etude as Would you be performing the piece a kind of prompt, like “do this,” and differently if there were no audience, if when we feel it’s time to stop or get you guys were rehearsing? bored, we’ll stop and that’s the end. Singing by In a composition there is more Cat: Well, since we were in a gallery Numbers structure imposed on the process— space and people were looking at the a kind of hand guiding it. But I artwork, we tried out many different think the main difference between ways to be in the space: all standing dispersed and we looked more random, Laura: Yeah, because our friends Mike experiment and performance is in the at opposite corners of the room, or people would feel free to break our and Abby were there to be spectators. level of confidence of the performers. standing in a line, or in a circle close spaces. The other thing that happened They changed the dynamic for together, or far apart, or moving is that the audience would elect itself everyone else. Mark: I think the visitor or the viewer around. One time, a couple of us to be an audience. It requires a certain or the listener does have a sense walked up to each painting and sang density of people in the gallery. If the Cat: That’s true. Everyone walking that there’s a certain structure you to the painting! We were also kind of first three people in the gallery are really in suddenly stopped, as if they were guys are enacting. It’s not like sitting spectators in the space. watching the performance, as other watching a performance. down and watching a chorus where people come in they’ll also watch, and there’s a conductor conducting, but Laura: And we were very aware of the they’ll all become an audience until that Mark: That’s something we found with there are a lot of hand gestures and kind of content we should be creating. piece ends. Then they’ll kind of disperse. all performances in the Museum—that this sense that you are exploring the I think having the improvisatory sound That wasn’t so much our doing; it was people’s behavior is modeled on other acoustic characteristics of the space. was advantageous in this case. If the something behavioral about people. people’s behavior. Anytime you’re I also wanted to ask: Did you feel music sounds more wandering, then designing things where the terms like there was a relationship between people intuitively understand that their Cat: I remember there was one time of spectatorship are unclear or non- the work and your performance? It focused attention isn’t required. When when suddenly everyone was sitting on traditional, it’s really useful to model was the Luisa Lambri show, right? we were all in a line, people would the cushions in the middle of the room… that. It’s the same with participatory She does very quiet, contemplative, not come into the gallery; they just work. You want to have somebody minimal photographs. Did you feel hovered on the edge. But when we were almost seeding a tip jar.

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } CL & LS 71 It’s very important not I think all people, when you to make deliberate eye first greet them and make contact with people when eye contact with them, you’re in a setting like this… hide behind their parent’s pant leg. The pant leg just becomes invisible. —Laura Steenberge

Laura: Yeah, and I think part of it is happens in a shopping context. It’s very distance, that echo-y sound, very much what I’m supposed to look at. These about the gaze too. It’s very important different here at the storefront too, like overhearing a choir rehearse in a wonderful, insightful people will look not to make deliberate eye contact because the space is so informal: you’re cathedral or something. Museums are at a painting for 20 minutes and be with people when you’re in a setting really entering somebody else’s space always really echo-y. I think sometimes transformed, and I’m not doing that, like this. As soon as people feel that when you come in to Machine Project. it can be a little daunting to be the and they can tell.” you need their attention, they are I try and deal with that by quickly only person in a gallery somewhere more likely to rebel. It’s just too much communicating that I know the person is like the Hammer, where there isn’t Mark: [laughs] I think it is a thing of responsibility. I feel that, even when there and being casually welcoming, in always a huge crowd of people. I can LA museums, because LA museums I’m on the audience side of people such a way that they don’t feel like they actually become a little self-conscious in general are relatively solitary doing really similar things to what I necessarily have to respond. of my own sound. experiences. In New York you never do—making people sing along and feel that, because there are so many stuff—I immediately rebel, and then Laura: I’ve actually often wondered Mark: Laura, what is so interesting other people there. It’s not like, “Oh, I have to overcome the rebellion to about your performance strategies. about what you’re saying is that if you is anybody looking at how long I participate. From working with kids, I think of you as a very skilled were there completely by yourself, looked at this painting?” Instead it’s, I think all people, when you first greet performer, but what you are if there was no guard and no other “How do I get these people out of the them and make eye contact with them, performing is a version of yourself. But people, you would not necessarily feel way?” and, “I don’t want to take up hide behind their parent’s pant leg. thinking back to what it felt like being self-conscious. But if you’re there with too much time in front of a painting.” The pant leg just becomes invisible. in the gallery space at the Hammer, just a guard or one other person, you in this open room that had this lovely are then performing. You’re performing Cat: One of the things I noticed Mark: That’s one of the things that resonance, it was almost like a chapel. the sound of your footsteps and your doing these performances is that, makes visiting a museum so different There was a sort of reverence when physical energy, and it’s like, “I didn’t because we created this event in the from visiting an art gallery: part of you stepped into the space. I think come here to perform, I came here to space, people would wander around the pleasure of a museum is that it everyone that was performing felt look at some art.” like they normally do but they would constructs this anonymous space of that. And I really liked the moments linger longer. I would catch people viewership; whereas in a gallery—for a when I would step out of the group Laura: Yeah, when I was younger I just staring at a painting for a long variety of reasons but largely because and go listen over in the adjacent would think, “Oh, they can hear that time. You don’t see that very much at they’re commercial ventures—there’s gallery, because of course you can hear I’m not spending very much time in museums. It was nice. always the acknowledgment that the music there too, but it had that front of the paintings—I don’t know

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } CL & LS 72 Anthony In- McCann ter- view:February 13, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report 73 InterviewMA with Anthony McCann, February| 13, } 2011 AM

Poet Anthony McCann and Mark Allen discuss the poetic concept of the “overheard utterance” as it relates to questions of audience for participatory and intimate performance pieces.

Projects discussed: • Houseplant Vacation • Needlepoint Therapy • Level5

Mark: So Anthony, I want to talk to Anthony: Yeah. And I know Matthew Janet Sarbanes you about the Houseplant Vacation. Zapruder wrote at least one poem for reading at Houseplant You and Joshua Beckman got a bunch the plants. The poets were all really Vacation of poets to call in and read poems to into it. the plants over the phone. Mark: Why do you think that was an Anthony: Yeah, I think there were five appealing scenario for people? or six people calling regularly. Mary Ruefle and Noelle Kocot called like Anthony: I think for a particular kind every day—Noelle specifically called of poet, a lyric poet—and I’m going to during nonmuseum hours when there conceptualize this perhaps excessively, wouldn’t be anybody there but the but—there’s something in it that security guard. mirrors a basic scenario in the poem, which is the “overheard utterance.” Mark: Oh, that’s funny—so she’s The lyric poem is spoken to a “you,” either reading to an empty space but there’s a triangle in which the or to a person whose job is to make reader is listening in, so the poem is sure nothing anomalous is happening a performance for the “you” with the [laughs]. knowledge that it’s being overheard. The Houseplant Vacation set up that

Machine Project Hammer Report 74 triangle for the poet with the plants, in the position of the eavesdropper, Mark: The first thought I have when what it did to him; participants talking who we may or may not believe can the position of the speaker, and you say that is that this idea of a about it sincerely changing their lives hear, and an imaginary listener who the position of the person being participatory piece, in which all the and reconstituting them as people… was also probably not there. addressed in the poem. So on the one conscious humans in the space are especially in a piece that was phrasing hand, you identify as yourself listening absorbed in the production of it, kind of itself, at least initially, as having this Mark: I hadn’t heard of that in; at the same time, if the poem is has no audience. I’m not sure what it is. very historical and critical component. construction of the lyric poem, but it’s calling out to a “you,” sometimes you What it highlighted for me is that the very close to one of the ways that I are put in the position of that “you”; Anthony: Well, it can be documented. true audience of that piece was the was conceptualizing the plant piece, then you’re also going to naturally people most involved in it—the people which came out of thinking about these identify with the speaker at points and Mark: Right. I think that often who also are the piece. multiple audiences that you get with a the “you” in the poem will become happens with participatory work: lot of participatory work. With the Live whatever “yous”you’re thinking of. it’s being produced for an external Mark: Yeah, one of the discourses Personal Soundtrack, for example, I This all happens seamlessly, I think, in audience through another audience, or about that piece in the beginning, noticed that there was this weird split the experience of hearing or reading through documentation, or even just when we were promoting it, was that between the experiences of the primary a poem. through description of the piece. For it was a way of deconstructing how the and secondary audiences: when you’re example, for the Needlepoint Therapy self-actualization process works in our doing it, you kind of forget there’s a Mark: Oh that’s great. That’s piece that artist Joshua Greene did culture. But afterward, when we talked guitarist behind you because you’re a really useful way to conceptualize with his mother—who’s a licensed to the participants they were genuinely used to walking around listening to experience for participatory pieces psychotherapist in Westwood and a like, “I feel so self-actualized.” It music on headphones; for the people where you have the participants and needlepoint enthusiast—we selected speaks to a perennial concern in watching, however, it looks like it might the people watching the participants— eight people to be in group therapy participatory work, which is: to what be very awkward and uncomfortable whom we might think of as potential working on their relationship issues degree are you instrumentalizing your to participate. With the plant piece, participants. You want the participants once a week while needlepointing participants as unpaid performers, I wanted to make something very to model the experience to the people pieces from the Hammer’s permanent or as subject matter, or as a kind funny, easy, gentle, but at the same watching. So a really common trick, collection that the therapist felt would of raw material for the artist to use time something that would talk about if you are doing a participatory piece resonate with whatever issues they to make a meta-statement or to the unknowability of somebody else’s in public, is to get your friends to do were trying to deal with. That’s a piece construct a conversation? When you experience. When we see someone it first. where it’s not only private in that it is actually do these things, you realize listening to something, we don’t know happening behind closed doors, but the relationships are always much what they are thinking, but because Anthony: “You, young sir, come the nature of the activity is explicitly more complicated than that question they’re also human we imagine we have down.” private: the things that are discussed implies. We’re always instrumentalizing at least some idea of how they feel. A are not for the consumption of an each other in different ways, but it plant, on the other hand, isn’t thinking Mark: Yeah, exactly, confederates in audience. Who’s the audience for is more of an open exchange than a anything, so it becomes a great symbol the audience. It doesn’t always work that piece? It’s a type of conceptual straightforward transaction. for the unknowable aspect of another that way, though. piece, which replicates through the subjectivity. But you were saying with description of it. Another example, Anthony: I think with that piece Brody the poem, the main audience is always Anthony: I actually have some but actually using documentation, is had a driving personal fascination and kind of secondary to this other primary questions about audience in relation Brody’s piece, Level5. all the different ways he was framing imagined recipient. to participatory pieces. Where is it conceptually were secondary to the the audience supposed to be in Anthony: Right. I had trouble with need for that thing to happen. What Anthony: Right—with the lyric poem, participatory work? Is the audience the documentation of Brody’s piece. happened is what’s important, and the listener or reader is in the position ideally absorbed, so that there is no I could tell I was watching mediated what makes the piece exciting is that of an eavesdropper. Also, though, distance between the piece and the documentation with this particular people were surprised about what because of the way reading works, audience, or so that the audience is stylization. Whereas hearing about happened. Clearly the piece exceeded you don’t just occupy a single position. the piece? Or not? How do you think it from people, so many interesting any conceptual frame that came before You blur back and forth between being about that? things came out: Brody’s reaction and or can come after.

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AM 75 Mark: That’s what you want a work What was that experience like? to do, right? You want to have some kind of surprise from it. One of the Anthony: Yes I did, with Kirsty Singer. challenges of doing process-based We had both picked out poems that work with institutions is that people we wanted to read to the plants, and often want to know what’s going we tried to read them to the plants, to happen so they can promote the but you can’t ignore the fact that piece, deal with any safety concerns, there were people there listening, etc. Whereas with the best work, you especially because there were only don’t know. And that uncertainty is like five of them. It did create a very fundamental to the excitement and different dynamic than facing the power of the experience for the people though. It was fun to be able to audience—the sense that anything walk around in the space, sometimes could happen, and you are there as reading to particular plants. It’s very it is happening. I think that’s why the pretty there with the light coming most interesting aspect of Brody’s down. piece—for an external audience, for people who weren’t participants—was Mark: It is. the live streaming documentation at the Hammer during those three days. Anthony: Structurally the performance Were you there for any of that? of reading to the plants mirrored what already goes on in the poem, so it felt Anthony: I was not. good to be doing that. I think that construction—where the performance Mark: It was fascinating. Brody and enacts what is already implicit in the I had been thinking about the piece thing—has been true of most of the as this intense experience for the things I’ve done with Machine that I’ve participants. The documentation came really enjoyed. And I think figuring out out of us trying to add a stronger what works for your practice and what public engagement component to doesn’t is a struggle that everyone pitch the piece to the Hammer as part has at different points when they’re of the Residency. I had no idea how working with Machine. In terms of into watching it people would be. It poetry, I’ve had to figure out when was totally riveting. I watched it myself the setup of Machine allows me to do Houseplant Vacation for like three hours. things that I want to do, and where it creates scenarios I don’t want to Anthony: Hmm. Yeah, I imagine that put my poems in—just in terms of would feel different. the kind of attention that you can get from a listener. I want it to always be Mark: It was great to watch the thing a scenario where people are actively unfold knowing that it was actually engaged and listening to the poems. I happening right there, in another never want poems to be background. part of the museum. Getting back to What Machine has allowed for is really Houseplant Vacation though, you also interesting experimentation with went to the Hammer and read poetry to intimacy and distance. the plants there on Lindbrook terrace.

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AM 76 Mark: Right. As you know, we’ve tried the plants or over the phone or from a variety of different ways of reading a boat—in those situations you’re not poetry and relating to people, whether getting any body language or psychic it’s the Poetry Delivery Service where cues back from the audience at all. you’re walking to somebody’s house, or the piece where we put you and Anthony: It just becomes a matter Joshua and Noelle on a boat in Santa of picking a few poems you want to Monica Harbor. One of the things that read, and then those poems determine has been really nice about working which ones have to come before with you and Joshua on these poetry and after them. If you pay attention, The Houseplant pieces is that there’s always something they’re very assertive about who wants unexpected that we’ve learned about to be read where. audience. We already know the poems Vacation set up [a] are going to be great, so it’s fairly low Mark: Yeah. It makes me think of risk. We get a great reading plus some making a mix tape [laughs]. triangle for the poet interesting side effects. Anthony: Well, what’s analogous to Anthony: Well, it’s not that different making a mix tape is that you have with the plants, from a normal poetry reading. At any that excited feeling of discovering all poetry reading the same poems can these new relations—and it’s a surprise who we may or may induce somber attention or hilarity, from your own poems. Like, “I never so that unknowability is a familiar one. thought these two poems would be such good friends.” It is musical too. not believe can hear, Mark: Right. You’ve been reading There’s a cadence that demands that poems out loud to people for 20 years the next one be that one. Certain now. What’s your relationship to that correspondences suddenly appear. and an imaginary uncertainty? listener who was also Anthony: In the moment of choosing the poems, I try to think about what kind of audience I imagine it will be, probably not there. but once I have a reading set up I don’t vary from that. I just go with the —Anthony McCann energy thread that I’ve pulled through in assembling the order of the poems. I mean, based on the feeling of people in the room, I might pull a poem or something, but I find it doesn’t help to try to—

Mark: Put a little more chuckle in the reading if they’re not laughing enough.

Anthony: Yeah.

Mark: So when you read poems to

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AM 77 Eric In- Klerks with Chris ter- Kallmyer view:December 7, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report MA & CK | } EK 78 Interview with Eric Klerks and Chris Kallmyer, December 7, 2010

Mark: Something I find fascinating ways that’s the more interesting piece, about this piece is that, for me at and it happens almost inadvertently. MA & CK least, the experience of doing it is completely different from the way it Eric: The funny thing for me was that appears to an outside observer. part of that split goes on in my brain. I found—and I’m used to listening to I’ve got my set of headphones, but | } music with headphones while looking they are really just for monitoring EK at stuff, but—it was very easy to forget purposes, to keep control of the there was a human being behind me volume and to make sure things are playing a guitar. Whereas, when not going terribly, terribly wrong I watched someone else do it, it [laughs]. A big part of my brain is seemed super awkward. engaged with being aware of my surroundings. I did a couple of runs Guitarist Eric Klerks talks with Mark Allen and Eric: What you are talking about through the permanent collection with also touches on something that the head of security before we actually sound curator Chris Kallmyer about the sometimes happened with the advent of recording started, just to make sure it was awkward and often richly rewarding experience technology, which is that sounds feasible to be walking around all these became detached from the things that masterpieces with the guitar, with all of improvising music for Hammer visitors as they create them. It used to be that if you these pointy metallic things sticking toured the galleries. Their conversation touches on heard a rock thud, there was a rock. out. Once I got familiar with the space, Now we can hear a rock fall all day it took some of the danger away, so I the difference between the way the Live Personal long, and there are no rocks around us. could also really start to pay attention Soundtrack piece appeared to outside observers The pleasure of live music is making to the other people around me. As I that indexical connection again, was making a round with one person, and how it felt to participants. sewing it back together. This piece I could see interest pique in certain plays with that because I’m right other people, and I could kind of guess there playing the music, but, in this who was going to be waiting for me Projects discussed: case, the person listening is looking at back at the stage. something else. The other people in • Live Personal Soundtrack the Museum constitute the other half: Mark: Chris and I were talking about they see me play the music, but they the Fanfare/No Fanfare piece and the can’t hear it. So a lot of that piece is metaphor we used was that it’s like about articulating that split. a “push” piece—you come into the Museum and it’s pushed in your face— Chris: Yeah, there are almost two whereas with your piece, people really pieces going on at once: one piece is had to want it. We had this sign, but this very direct connection between people had to come up and talk to the performer and the participant— you. Can you talk about how people which is the piece that I imagined approached you? What was that when we originally talked about it; experience like for you as a performer? then there is this second piece that happens when the people standing Eric: It was a little awkward but the around who aren’t participating start more I did it the more I liked it. to wonder what’s going on. In some It was interesting: I got a wide range

Machine Project Hammer Report 79 of reactions from people, and I think it came up to a desk and I was sitting you’re with. It is mostly a matter of have a really great reaction from really said a lot about people’s comfort there saying, “Oh, yes, we have this reading their reactions to the art, kind a single person, you get this feedback level. With a piece like that where it’s slot open and this slot open,” I think of playing to that, and letting them between the two of you and it’s up to the audience or the participant some of that intimacy would have been feel comfortable. possible to create and really build a lot to engage, as friendly as I can be, lost. It would have been more like those of energy that way. If the other person people have their own hang-ups about audio tours, and it’s not about that. Mark: I was doing an interview with is not quite as responsive, there is still engaging a total stranger, which is Emily Lacy, and we were talking about feedback, but the balance of power totally valid. It’s a very intimate kind Mark: Right. This piece is a critique of how, as a performer—whether you’re starts to change. I’ll maybe feel a little of association—to have somebody at those pieces: those pieces are a sad a poet or a musician—you’re always more compelled to push a bit, to try to arm’s length, following you through simulacrum of a human interaction in getting some feedback from the get a reaction. this gallery. There’s a certain amount the museum; this piece is about real audience. In more typical situations of comfort that’s required to be able engagement. there might be 20 people, or 100 or Chris: I have a question for you: to engage in an activity like that 2,000, whereas in this case you just generally, during this kind of with someone that you’ve never met Eric: Absolutely. And it had as much have one person’s reactions. Does it improvised music, I’ve heard people before. For me, the toughest part of to do with my evolution as with the feel the same to you whether there’s say—and I have even said it myself— the whole experience was getting the audience. I think there’s really an art to one person or 2,000 people, or are “Forget the audience. Play what you first couple of people to take the walk being able to put somebody at ease. those experiences different? feel like playing.” The idea that you with me. I had to be a little bit more It got easier for me, getting that can’t expect the musician to control forward and a little bit more inviting comfort level and the confidence to Eric: I was thinking about that before people’s reactions—and that it is the first couple of times. say, “Here I am. I’m part of the space. I left, actually. About a year ago I not our job to create a sense of total People can engage me just like they’d played for about 4,000 people at satisfaction. With the Live Personal Mark: Was that each day, or just the engage that painting.” this huge festival in England with the Soundtrack, you are very concerned first time you did it? Magic Band for their reunion project. with this one-on-one relationship, so Mark: Right. I felt like it was possible to make in a sense, it is the opposite of what I Eric: To a point, each day. At first it a connection with a large group of am saying. It’s more about music as a was a little bit intimidating—all these Eric: One thing that really helped people, which was something that I service industry. looks that you get from patrons, was that I made a lot of friends at the hadn’t really felt before—and a lot of especially the regulars. You can tell Hammer because you see the same that had to do with getting over my Eric: It’s funny, because I think this they are wondering why you are here faces every time. I would take some own nerves. In a big crowd you get a idea of creating the best music that but they don’t necessarily want to of the staff people through, and just collective averaging of energy: there you can, regardless of the reaction of articulate it, so you just get this weird showing the event to the patrons who are people who are way, way into it, the audience, and this idea of playing vibe. You know, I’m standing there and were wandering around in the gallery and people who aren’t, so it’s possible to them and giving them what they I’ve got my sign-in sheet, but it looks a helped; they were able to see what it to find that middle point and work want—I don’t know if those things are little bit trivial. was and put aside some of their fears through that. When you have a one- totally disconnected. But you have to about engaging a total stranger. There on-one situation, you have to find that be a performer in the sense that the Mark: Right, like you apparently have would be a lot of smiles, and I would average of energy between the two quality of your performance can’t be permission to be there, but you are come back to the station and see a line of you. entirely dependent on the audience. not quite part of the Museum. of people waiting. I had a couple of situations where the Mark: I’ve been talking to people people were polite, but you could tell Eric: Exactly. But I think there’s Mark: What was it like actually walking about this idea of the performer as that they weren’t totally sold on it; a difference between something around with someone? You were someone who’s channeling—not to they weren’t jumping up and down being difficult and something being saying your attention was kind of split. use an overly dramatic word—but you in enthusiasm. Then it was a matter a problem. The difficulty is almost as have a different relationship to people of not just being professional, but much a part of the event as walking Eric: Yeah, you pay some attention to than, for example, you and I on the being true to the project and being through the gallery. If it had been a the art, but the most important focus bus together. true to the music and the art, and not more clinical situation, where people of your attention is the patron that Eric: Absolutely. Obviously, when you worrying about totally satisfying the

Machine Project Hammer Report MA & CK | } EK 80 Live Personal Soundtrack

audience. I made a point of trying not boundaries and an escape clause. or 70s, and she wanted to hear jazz— that work with the art start to come to show too much of an emotional And the more I did it, the more I and not just any jazz, she wanted to out. The intention is not only to connection with people, just to kind of was able to tailor the language to hear something that sounded like create something that the patron’s keep it as a performance, and to keep the participant. Sometimes it was Pat Metheny: a little smooth, a little going to like, but something that a distance between the audience and as simple as saying, “Whenever you relaxed, a very calming, centering kind feels appropriate for the situation. myself. Which is something I think you feel like you’re done, just take the of thing. The way I approached it is, I think people tended to resonate need to do as a musician anyway—not headphones off.” It really came down well, this is where we’ll start. One of with that more than if I had been the to put up a wall, but to keep things at to establishing a trust relationship with the good things about having gone to hotshot session guy who goes, “Oh arm’s length. this stranger—just making them feel school for music and studying the craft yeah, I’ll play country music for you, like they’re in control of the situation. and the art, is that you know these no problem.” Then it just becomes Mark: Something I thought about things—and you can get your foot in like putting the headphones on and when we were first developing the Mark: Yeah. the door with people that way. It was pressing “play.” project was that we needed some the same with the guy who wanted way for people to get out of the Eric: And I found that once you start surf rock, and the guy who wanted Mark: You may as well be a jukebox. experience. I remember we developed breaking down those barriers, you get metal, and the guy who wanted some language. more trust: they would spend more country music. You give them Eric: Yes, exactly—and I’m not. time; musically, I felt like I could get a little bit, just as a starting point to Jukeboxes make a lot more money Eric: Yeah, the language was actually away with a little bit more. There was get your foot in the door and, once than I do [laughs]. So I took requests, super important because it established an older woman, probably in her 60s you’re in, really great, bizarre things but a lot of the time the patrons just

Machine Project Hammer Report MA & CK | } EK 81 wanted me to play what I felt like course—the piece has a certain kind of With recording technology, playing, which I thought was really arc. Here, not only are you improvising cool. It becomes less of a transaction but you don’t know when it’s going to sounds became detached and more of a conversation that way. end. It’s like you’re telling a story to a kid and they’re still awake, so you have from the things that create Mark: Did you actually have to start adding more and more giants conversations with people? Did they and elves [laughs]. them. It used to be that give you verbal feedback afterward? Eric: Exactly. Off they go into the if you heard a rock thud, Eric: It really depended on the person permanent collection, and of course that I was with, but even if there was my first reaction to this new space there was a rock. Now we a big line of people, I made a point of is, “Oh, shit. What do I do now?” My making myself available afterward, just first instinct is, well, I can just start to gauge their reaction. Often it was a from scratch and create a totally new can hear a rock fall all day very guttural reaction [laughs]. And it musical environment—and that worked really ranged. Some people would take fine. The patrons didn’t really have a long, and there are no rocks off the headphones, hand them back, problem with the disconnect because and say, “Oh thank you, that was really there’s an archway between the two around us. The pleasure of fun,” and then go on their way—that galleries, and it’s a transition that was a reasonably successful trip. But feels very physical. But the challenge live music is making that then you would get people who would that I gave myself was: How can I take the headphones off and just hold connect these two totally different indexical connection again, them for a minute and kind of look at experiences?—and it was fun [laughs]. you… Another part of the challenge was to sewing it back together. keep the musical interpretation fresh, Mark: [laughs] to keep from falling into the same —Eric Klerks patterns and becoming a victim of my Eric: …like you had just shared own clichés. something really personal and intimate—which it kind of was. Mark: Do you feel like it changed your relationship to the work? Mark: How long did people typically listen to you? Eric: Absolutely. Every time I go through the permanent collection, it Eric: Well, really anywhere from brings out something that I didn’t see one minute to 15 minutes—and it before. A lot of the time it has to do depended on the level of engagement with piggybacking on the observations that I had with the patron and their of the person that I am with. If I see engagement with the artwork. A lot them focusing on something, it will of times we would go through the bring something out that maybe I entire permanent collection. It became hadn’t noticed. a challenge to keep the musical development happening. Mark: You mentioned before that you had played for the guards? Chris: I think often when you’re composing—not always, of Eric: Yeah, they were really interested

Machine Project Hammer Report MA & CK | } EK 82 in the project. They’d have a ten- and your “vibe,” it really changes because normally you go into minute or a 20-minute break and the context—in the same way that if a museum and you’re like, “Gauguin, I would take them around. you’re listening to music on your iPod check. Van Gogh, check. Monet, as you walk down the street, that check.” If you sit for like 25 minutes Mark: That’s so cool. I didn’t know you audio information is informing your every day for a week in front of did that. observations of the world around you, a painting, you’ve experienced it in and vice versa. In fact, I had a lot of a totally different way. The remarkable Eric: Oh yeah, it was really great. people who commented on that—the thing is that with you playing music They would tell their friends and the guards especially, and even people in my ear, Eric, within 30 seconds other people working on staff. It was a like UCLA students who were regular of looking at a painting, I had an really nice relationship that developed visitors to the galleries. They would experience with it that otherwise over time. It was cool just talking tell me, “You know I saw things in would have taken me a long time to about music with them in a way that the painting that I hadn’t really seen have on was very down to earth. They’re all before.” my own. educated people who have worked in galleries and have a kind of art Chris: I remember when I went Mark: So the benefit of Eric’s piece is background, but they come from a through with you playing for me, the that it’s time saving. different place and have a different paintings really changed as the music perspective than the patrons who changed. You were playing this very Chris: That’s what I am saying [laughs]! come through. broad stuff and I was looking at the Maybe you want to have a really Luisa Lambri paintings and I noticed all engaged experience with a work of Chris: Do you think, for them, because the lines and the way all the branches art, but you don’t have 45 minutes. they know the collection so well— went. Then you changed to a pointillist Eric can play for three minutes and I mean, the Hammer doesn’t have harmonics, a very plucky kind of blow your mind. a gigantic collection… thing, and all the dots came out. It was really nice because I hadn’t really Mark: A couple of weeks on the job appreciated her work before. I had and you’ve memorized the collection. tried. I spent an hour in front of five of them. Chris: Yeah, I know I felt like that. I would go back every week and visit Mark: You are a model museum-goer my favorite paintings. I loved certain [laughs]! ones and I noticed when certain ones were missing [laughs]. Chris: I can’t look at a lot of art, though. I like looking at one thing. Mark: Do you think that this was a An old professor of mine who taught way for the staff to reexperience the aesthetic philosophy gave me the best galleries for the first time, or just to piece of advice ever: he said, “You have a different interaction with their have to spend as much time with own museum? the painting as the painter spent creating it.” Live Personal Eric: Absolutely. When you introduce Soundtrack these variables, when you have Eric: That’s really good. someone who’s playing music in real time, not only improvising but also Chris: And it’s completely ridiculous. paying attention to your reactions But I really thought about that,

Machine Project Hammer Report MA & CK | } EK 83 Joshua In- Greene ter- view:February 12, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report 84 Interview with Joshua Greene, February 12, 2011

Mark: So Josh, you’ve worked with Is Your Dog a Thespian… | } other museums on projects. Can MA JG you talk about how the process of Joshua: This is getting embarrassing working at the Hammer with Machine [laughs]. was similar to or different from other projects that you’ve done? Mark: …[laughs], Cross-Generational Bridge, Erotica Reading Group. Your Joshua: I think because I was aware mom lives in Westwood, so you had Mark Allen and artist Joshua Greene discuss that the purpose of the Residency a more local knowledge of the Joshua’s experience of working with his mother, was to experiment, I felt comfortable Hammer than I did or than a lot of spouting off all the ideas I had, the people I was working with. As who was the inspiration and pivotal facilitator knowing that most of them would not I understood it, a lot of your ideas for his Needlepoint Therapy piece, as well as the make it, and I came up with more ideas came out of thinking about retirement than I usually do as a result. I’d like to communities around Westwood. challenge of reconciling a small private project replicate that [laughs]. with the Museum’s expectations for public Joshua: Yeah. Having grown up near Mark: Let’s talk a little bit about your there, I was trying to think about who engagement. They also talk about another of process—how you come up with ideas is around. Joshua’s ideas, Nudist Day at the Hammer, which and how you adjust—in terms of the Nudist Day proposal, which we didn’t Mark: One question that you and did not take place. end up doing. Can you explain your I talked about, which I think is important idea for that, how that idea worked when you’re developing projects for and what your plan was? specific groups is: how do you do this Projects discussed: in a way that articulates and celebrates Joshua: Starting from the public a certain kind of otherness without • Needlepoint Therapy engagement aspect, I thought one way instrumentalizing these groups as the • Nudist Day at the Hammer Proposal to engage different audiences would subject matter? It’s a question that be to identify different constituencies comes up in a lot of social art practices. I or groups, figure out how they organize remember you saying for the Nudist Day themselves around something they like that you didn’t want it to be publicized to do, and then create a situation in as a bunch of naked people at the the Museum that would lure them in. Museum, but that it would be more just Nudists were one really specific group a day where it would be okay for people I thought of. Then I started to think to be there naked and the other visitors about other layers of the project, like would just encounter them as part of the prevalence of nudes in museums the Museum. Can you talk about that a and wanting to complicate this notion little bit? of the subject—who’s the viewer and who’s the subject? Joshua: Yeah. I thought that if we used the language of an event, where Mark: Thinking about that strategy it becomes like, “It’s nudist day at the of identifying specific audiences, museum!” it seems more like a joke. It and some of the other ideas you may be easier to get people to come generated, I’m looking back here at out and to get publicity, but it would the list: there was Figure Skating Club, become a one-liner.

Machine Project Hammer Report 85 Mark: Yeah. Well, and I think it’s people normally have in a museum— stages of negotiation. I thought we the future. Is the Nudist Day a project Needlepoint a question of whether you are not just the nudists, but the other were going to get it to work. that you would want to revisit with Therapy proposing an alternative use for people who also happen to be there. another museum? a museum or a way of being in Joshua: Yeah. I was somewhat the museum, or whether you are Mark: I remember you articulated surprised by all the contractual, legal Joshua: I haven’t really thought marshaling the forces of the naturalists these various levels of looking: people wrangling—for both projects. I guess it about it a lot, just because I get into to put on a public performance. looking at paintings, nude people goes with the territory, but it seemed whatever I’m doing. To me, so much of looking at paintings, people looking like a lot of extra work. making work is just coming up with the Joshua: It’s kind of a fine line. It’s not at nude people looking at paintings… idea. That’s the really exciting part. necessarily one or the other. That seemed like a chain that could Mark: I think part of it is that this And it’s all hypothetical because it continue to spin outward. I thought it was a direction the Museum wanted *** didn’t happen. On the one hand, of was interesting how that articulates to go, but it was new, they’d never course they’re going to be looked the Museum as this space that you’re done things like this, so a lot of it Mark: I also want to talk a little bit at so it gets a little confusing and in with other people, rather than a was breaking new ground. Although about the Needlepoint project, which a little away from the original idea space that you’re in by yourself that it was arduous to work through some did happen. Can you describe how of identifying different groups and happens to have other people in it. of those things, I felt like that’s what that piece came about for you? coming up with projects geared our role was: to push through that toward them, in service of diversifying Joshua: Yeah. That’s how I grew to and present opportunities for them to Joshua: If I recall correctly, the idea an audience and bringing people into think about it, particularly when I had practice doing things they hadn’t done kind of came out of taking a look at the Museum who may not otherwise to explain it. before, so they could see that it turned people’s experiences in a museum, go there. It becomes more about out okay. So that maybe the Museum and thinking about how you could a different type of experience than Mark: There were a couple different is more comfortable trying new stuff in give someone a really different type

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } JG 86 Mark: ...people looking Joshua: To be honest, the at paintings, nude people deal was that my mom looking at paintings, and I got to keep the people looking at nude needlepoint canvases, and people looking I had fantasies that at paintings… someday these could be in a show or I could sell them to the Museum.

of experience. Whether or not my feelings, but with this one my mom with artist Nate Page. It was going to Joshua: Yeah. I think she had a good project was an artwork, I don’t know. was very emphatic about the need for involve his grandfather coming to do experience. It was really different from But, certainly, those people had a confidentiality. this signage-painting project. We were her normal practice, because of the really different type of meaningful concerned that the fact that it was the context and the fact that it had a more experience in a museum. Mark: Right. Your mother was the artist’s grandfather, and that he’s this public aspect to it. In the beginning, it licensed therapist and needlepoint really colorful character, would have took us having a lot of conversations Mark: Something that I found so expert for the piece. Can you talk overdetermined the meaning of the for her to fully understand the project interesting about that project is about why or why not you would want piece. I think one way you deal with and what was important to me—the that it is more about the qualitative to identify your mother as your mother that is exactly the way you dealt with fact that they didn’t need to finish than about having as many people for this project? it: that it’s not the major PR hook or their canvases—whatever they had as possible doing it. I liked that the the first thing you hear, but it doesn’t done by the end of the eight sessions piece would be for eight people on Joshua: It’s funny, because when I talk have to be a secret. Had you worked was a record of that time—and that an ongoing basis, something that about the project I usually mention with your mother before on projects? the needlepointing was a tool, and could be life-changing, that involved my mom, but in the announcement we something that ties it to the Museum deep introspection. I also liked made it wasn’t mentioned. Joshua: Not on this level. She’s beyond just the location of the that the experience was not only participated in projects where she’s therapy, but that it was not the most metaphorically private but very literally Mark: That way the official narrative of mostly just done some writing. Usually important thing. She said she felt like private, in that what happened in the piece isn’t about your relationship I’m asking her a question and she’s the group made some progress in their those sessions remained confidential. to your mother. The narrative of responding. In this instance, she kind work but that it could have gone on the piece is about these people’s of was the project. longer. Eight sessions is kind of just Joshua: I have something of a history relationships to each other and to the scratching the surface. of doing therapy projects and projects paintings. Another project that we Mark: Have you talked to her about involving people talking about their didn’t do but that we talked about was how it went? Mark: You didn’t have any contact with

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } JG 87 any of the people who were in Joshua: Yeah, exactly. I don’t think I the group? would have done it otherwise, but I’m happy I did. Joshua: No, I didn’t. My mom would give me really general reports: for Mark: It is a nice-looking kit. example, that one person totally reinterpreted their canvas. It was an Joshua: I think with museums, agrarian couple and a landscape and sometimes it feels like they’re ticking the person turned it into an urban off boxes. I’ve had that experience Needlepoint couple and an urban landscape. It still with some other museums, where all Therapy has the gesture of the original. When they want is a public program and I she first told me that, I was kind of don’t know what they mean by that. pissed off. Mark: As many people as possible. Mark: [laughs] Joshua: I guess that’s what they mean. Joshua: To be honest, the deal was I liked the idea of a few people having that my mom and I got to keep the a really intense experience. Like you needlepoint canvases, and I had said, it’s sort of qualitative rather than fantasies that someday these could be quantitative. I think it’s good for in a show or I could sell them to the a museum to think about that. I know Museum. I was really uptight in my it’s probably challenging, given that thinking about it. After a little time, they have to apply for things, and I came around. numbers are a part of it.

Mark: Are you interested in working Mark: That came up a lot with our with your mother again in a fashion Residency. We had a lot of discussions like this? about whether these smaller projects were really public programs. I would Joshua: Oh, yeah. I’ve done a bunch ask how many human beings it takes of projects with my family. They’re a to constitute a public. Where is that great source of material for me. I’m line drawn between the public and close with my family, but we rarely the private? But I think having the have in-depth conversations about my kit ended up being a way for the work or their work. This was a nice Needlepoint Therapy project to better opportunity to explain the conceptual fit the expectations of the Museum background of this project to my mom and to serve both conceptions of because she was on the front lines of public engagement. And I think it’s having to explain it herself. good to do that.

Mark: You also made a souvenir version of the needlepoint kit. Did that idea come from the Museum’s desire, or maybe concern that this wasn’t as public a public engagement project as they were hoping for?

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } JG 88 Eric In- Avery ter- view:December 5, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report 89 Interview with Eric Avery, December 5, 2010 Mark: So you saw almost all of the someone was concentrating a certain Little William concerts. piece on timbre or structure…I went | } basically every Saturday that I could. MA EA Eric: Yes. I missed maybe three or four. I feel like I got to recognize a few pieces, but in general, because the Mark: I guess my first question is, instrumentation was changing, I don’t why? feel like it was repetitive. I was always getting an interesting new thing to hear. Eric: Well, I’m a musician myself, and Eric Avery talks with Mark Allen about his in the last five or ten years I’ve really Mark: Did you talk to the musicians experience of attending nearly all of the 300 become a student of what I do. about the pieces after you had started I grew up as a rock musician and made coming a fair amount? micro-concerts that were held in the Little William a living at it playing bass for Jane’s Theater over the course of Machine Project’s Addiction, but I never really examined Eric: Yes, definitely, and especially music in any formal way. I just sort when something would seem Residency. As they discuss the challenge that 20th- of played by ear and it went well: improvisatory. I would ask if they had century classical music presents to the uninitiated, I was making mortgage payments; been given specific notes and they everything was OK. But I found myself would tell me something like, “Actually they describe specific pieces, people’s reactions, sort of bored, so I started getting the composer only said, ‘Make some and the bodily effects of listening to low-tone more into the technical side. And I sort of noise with your instrument for actually grew up in a household that a duration.’” instruments in small spaces. was into classical music. As I got older, I got more interested in the Mark: Have you seen the scores for avant-garde 20th-century stuff: Cage the pieces? Projects discussed: and Schoenberg and Stockhausen, especially Ligeti. Twentieth-century Eric: Some of them. For one of the • Little William Theater: Festival of New Music music is, in my opinion, basically a pieces, one of the musicians spun it deconstruction of music and of sound. around because the score was these So when I heard about what was going beautiful photographs of a Midwest on at the Hammer, I went to see it. housing development area—Andrew Bucksbarg’s “Music for Mansions.” Mark: I know Chris Kallmyer wanted One person was playing the first floor the Festival of New Music to be a bit and the other person was playing the of a survey of how musicians were second floor. From that point forward thinking about that avant-garde I would always ask if I saw something tradition at this moment. The idea was elaborate being set up. that there were a hundred composers who would each write a piece for Mark: I know some other people came each of the four sets of instruments: a lot, but I assume a lot of the people pairs of tubas, clarinets, violins, and were just passing by. Were there accordions. people you recognized from other days? Eric: It was great. I found the varied instrumentation and the varied Eric: Not really. There was occasionally approaches from different composers somebody. I remember a woman, and continually fascinating—whether a few people who I think were other

Machine Project Hammer Report 90 Little William Theater: Festival of New Music

composers. I had been talking to Chris CalArts kind of way, and therefore of having these very short duration well, when it started to be weird and and sort of developed a friendship, find it fascinating. You can hear weird pieces? not what you’d expect. If you know so he would introduce me. It was a sounds and find it funny and laugh. you’re in for another 45 minutes of it, fascinating study. I think it also spoke I think even super sophisticated Eric: Well, Chris could probably speak you’re going to get up immediately to the 20th-century music problem. musicologists felt uncomfortable when to this better, but just hearing the little when it gets weird. Whereas if you When you had random people, they it started to get weird. They didn’t interactions, it seemed like people know you’ve only got to sit there a were like, “Oh, violins. I’ll go for a know how to react at all, you know? were much more willing to enter the minute and a half, maybe something little duet of pretty violin music.” They And they’re in a museum, which has its weird situation, get in a small box: changes. would sit in the theater and it would own expectation of piety… “Wait, I’m going to sit in a closet start up, and you could see them sort and there’s only going to be me and Mark: When we were first developing of looking around like, am I the only Mark: Yes, and whether you feel like one other person.” You’re forced to this project, Chris and I talked a lot one going, “This is really weird”? I you belong in that context or not. participate in an intimate way, but about how much preamble we wanted don’t know if they were at the museum because it was only two minutes, to give people about where the music for something else and just saw it and Eric: Yes. So it was interesting to see. people would involve themselves in a was coming from. You’re a different poked in, but I think it really speaks Some people really warmed to it when way that I don’t think they would have kind of viewer than most people, to one of the things that I tried to let they got that it was all right not to be if it was even ten minutes long. In that because you know the history that the people know, which is you can have having a specific reaction. way, I think making it really short was work was coming out of and you were any reaction to this music. You don’t effective. And I think people were there explicitly to engage with that. have to conceptually get it in some Mark: What do you think is the effect probably more willing to stay with it as Having seen people’s reactions, would

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } EA 91 you give people more context or distance. You’re sort of forewarning Eric: Wow, that’s cool. Being a bass Eric: Yes, same thing for me. My wife a different kind of context, or do them: what you’re about to hear player, I found the tubas the most has a BMW X5, and it just has the most you think there’s something useful or is going to be unexpected and it’s interesting, because of the challenge amazing sound system. I’ll work on effective about just being dropped intentionally this way; it’s not because that I have in my own work: it’s really stuff at home, and then I pop it in her into that situation? he’s a really terrible violinist. difficult to do challenging intervals car and go, “Oh my God! There’s with low instruments because it a rumble that I have to…“ Eric: That’s such a tough call. I really Mark: Right [laughs]. doesn’t sound interesting or weird; feel like you would definitely gain it just sounds bad. So I was really Mark: The closet and the car, they’re something and lose something. I’m Eric: Because sometimes there would surprised by how fascinating the about the equivalent amount of thinking of my wife, who came a be this awful… aural experience was of the two interior space. couple of times. She’s a designer low instruments—two super long and creative person, but she’s not Mark: It’s like, “Am I on Candid wavelengths in close proximity. a musician. We’ve actually talked Camera? This guy’s never played the about times when I’ve taken her to violin before.” Mark: I think those pieces are the LA Philharmonic and we’ve seen probably hardest to capture with any afternoons of challenging stuff. We’ve Eric: Right. kind of recording, because it’s such a talked about how one of the things bodily experience when you get into that is challenging about this kind of Mark: I think I agree that if your mission the lower frequencies. You’re in this music—and I even find this myself is to expand people’s relationship to little space, listening with your whole as I listen to it at home—is that it’s new music in a more reliable way, you body, in a sense. tough to stay with it, which makes it might want to contextualize it more. tough to get anything out of it. You People come to a museum to have a Eric: I wrestle with that every day know, you can put on Beethoven in the different kind of aesthetic experience, because I work out of my house. background and it still sounds nice. but often they know the bounds of It’s like a perfectly square 10’ x 10’ It doesn’t need your full attention to what that’s going to be. When we room with hardwood floors, so it’s a get something out of it. Whereas a developed the piece, we wanted to try nightmare of standing waves. You can lot of this stuff, if it doesn’t get your and have something which was both listen with headphones but then it’s full attention, its only noise, it’s a completely outside the bounds of what entirely different. distraction, it doesn’t enhance. My they might be expecting, but done in wife and I talked about how when this safe way in that it’s only going to Mark: And in the end, somebody’s she’s forced to sit for 15 minutes, she be two minutes long. going to listen to it on their crappy really has a different experience and laptop speakers anyway [laughs]. enjoys it much more than when I’m Eric: Right. Interesting. playing it at home and she just wishes Eric: [laughs] Right, yes, and the bass that I would turn it down. Mark: Did you see the one with the will entirely disappear. tubas with the feedback? It might have Mark: I find that I only listen to this been on the last day. It was a Mark Mark: Man, I had an experience of kind of music live because I have to Trayle piece. He had two tubas, and that. I drove the crappiest car for a engage with it on a different level. each one had a studio monitor facing long time and I just got a slightly less into it with a microphone, so it was crappy car, and it has a much better Eric: Yes, it’s interesting. I’m almost feeding back the resonant frequencies sound system. I listened to a piece of the same way. But to answer your inside the tuba. Then the performers music that I had only listened to on question, if you’re trying to bring could play it by hitting the keys and my computer. It was like, oh my God, the music to people, I think giving shifting the shape of the inside of it, there’s a whole universe of this that I it a context definitely helps because so it would change the pitch. had never heard before! you remove that initial reaction and

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } EA 92 Luke In- Storm & Ashley ter- Walters view:

Machine Project Hammer Report 93 Interview with Luke Storm and Ashley Walters Mark: Chris and I are interested in so to have a hundred new pieces making experiences not only for come in is really great. This project | } audiences but also for performers and was probably the single biggest MA composers in a lot of the things that addition to the tuba repertoire ever. we curate. Can you talk about the They could have easily done all those experience of playing those shows? violin concerts with the repertoire that already existed; they probably Luke: In terms of performing, I’ve could have found two-minute violin never done anything like it, these tiny duets. For tubas the list runs out so LS & AW performances. Usually with tuba, you quickly, so to have serious composers want the biggest room possible for all writing for tubas was something that that sound. Tuba players usually hate I wanted to be part of. There were practice rooms because they’re small. some people that had never written In a bigger room the sound develops, tuba pieces. There were a lot of pieces gets warmed up a little bit. The Little that required unusual approaches and As tubist Luke Storm and cellist Ashley Walters William Theater is probably the exact that had a lot of instructions to follow, recount their involvement with the Little William opposite of the acoustic you would which is what made them different normally try to find for tubas because and unique, but made the preparation Theater performances, they talk about the it’s small. Tubas are designed to play a lot harder than I thought it would impact that the unusual space of the coat closet in big orchestras in giant concert be. Some composers wanted to be halls, so to be that close is an intense involved in the preparation process, had on composition, performance, and audience experience. I think it worked well, and some really didn’t. For a lot of the reception—particularly the way it emphasized the though, from the comments we got. I pieces it wasn’t about learning notes, heard from the audience over and over it was more about learning what each physicality of sound. that the acoustics in that room, to be piece was supposed to do. Some of that close and have the sound be that the composers wrote more intonation- big, was the coolest thing. oriented pieces—which is usually Projects discussed: avoided in music—because in a smaller • Little William Theater Mark: Yeah, it’s really a bodily room you’re going to get stronger experience. resultant tones and stronger effects from the acoustics. Luke: On the preparation side, it was interesting that we had so many Ashley: Yeah, actually I was a little pieces. Usually for a program there nervous at first about tubas in the are maybe six pieces. We tried to do coatroom. I just thought it was going about 25 each time, so I think we did to be too much. around 90 total. Mark: Too circus-y or too loud? Mark: Wow, that is a lot of pieces. What was your motivation for Ashley: Loud—but I thought that the submitting to such a sustained effort? composers really understood and took into account what they were writing for. Luke: Tubists especially have some motivation, because we don’t get a Mark: So there were no pieces that lot of repertoire written for us. Tuba said, “Play as loud as possible for two literature is lacking in a lot of ways, minutes”?

Machine Project Hammer Report 94 Luke: There were—and that was the say that they really disliked certain reverb coming back, which is a totally Mark: Musicians who are interested in point: loud sounds in a small space. It things. It was fun to have that kind of different sound. the resonant frequencies of space and had quite an impact. We had people interaction. Mark: Have you done pieces that architecture often work electronically. who covered their ears, which is fun. involve architecture in that way Is there a tradition of those kinds of Mark: Ashley, you went to some of the before? experiments with tubas or other brass Mark: The physicality of it is something shows. What was your experience? Did instruments? I enjoy myself. I think the tubas were you have any observations about how Luke: Not really. I did Chris’ [Kallmyer] the most approachable, because the other people perceived the concerts? piece at LACMA, the residency with Luke: Probably not with tubas—not concept of that kind of sound in that the elevator music. Of course when that I can think of. It’s something that space is instantly understandable, even Ashley: People were very vocal, which I was at CalArts we did little things, should be explored. Nothing can fill if you don’t follow experimental music. is the exact opposite of the concert- outdoor music, or we’d play in the up a space quite like brass in terms For some of the other instruments, it going tradition. We are used to having main gallery. In those places you can’t of volume. might have been more challenging. the performer onstage never make really escape the architecture. contact with the audience. It was Luke: Yeah, it’s funny, because usually really nice to break that down. I’m the focus of experimental music, or not sure they would have spoken up new music in general, is not to make if it had been 20 people in a small a huge impact in two minutes. Often space, but because when someone people already know a lot about it walked in you acknowledged them, beforehand and have a lot of time to there was immediate connection. Then listen to a piece of music. This was the audience felt like they could ask very opposite of that. anything.

Mark: What kind of experiences did Luke: The kids had interesting your audience have? The audiences reactions. It was not always predictable were kind of divided into people who which pieces they would like and which knew what was there and people that ones they wouldn’t. Some of the ones were just wandering by. Did you have that I thought would be really boring— an idea of what the balance between not boring, but appealing to a more them was? informed audience—they responded really strongly to. There was one Luke: Yeah. A lot of the audience piece that we made into an audience that were more informed about new participation piece—John Hastings’ music would talk to us. There were piece. His entire score is just two lines plenty of composers that came, and of text: “Fill the space with sound. other performers would come. Often Let the sound out.” He didn’t want to we chose pieces based on who the tell us if he meant anything literal by Little William audience was. If they were looking that, so we would improvise and get Theater for a certain thing or enjoyed one gradually louder, filling the space with piece, we’d find a similar one. Of the sound. Then we would ask the kids to, people that just wandered in, some at the right moment, “Let the sound people stayed for one piece, didn’t out,” which was opening the door. say anything and left again, and some We would stop, and you would hear were more open-minded about it. A ringing back from that huge staircase. lot of people said they really loved That was another way we used the stuff, and some people would actually architecture. You had this super long

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } LS & AW 95 Nick In- Didkovsky ter- view:December 7, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report 96 InterviewMA with Nick Didkovsky, December | 7, } 2010 ND

Mark Allen talks with composer Nick Didkovsky about his process of composing pieces for the Little William Theater. Their conversation revolves around the use and value of technology for musical composition and documentation and concludes with a comparison between working with software and collaborating with other humans.

Projects discussed: • Little William Theater: Festival of New Music

Mark: So Nick, I wanted to talk to space these notes are ricocheting back Little William you about the experience of writing and forth between the two violinists. Theater pieces for the Little William Theater It’s a very different experience to hear because I know you’ve worked a lot that on YouTube. Having that left/ with constraint-based composition. right field of hearing is an experience And you’ve put work on YouTube privileged to the people that are before, which we are using to share actually in that room. When I see it on documentation of some of the pieces, YouTube, I experience the ricocheting so maybe you could also speak to that less with my ears than I do with my as an environment for distributing eyes. It’s actually very spectacular to recordings of live music. But what was watch the bows shooting back and it like creating pieces for this very forth as the bow stroking is echoed specific space? between the two players. You draw on a different sense to experience Nick: I didn’t have an image of the one of the driving elements of the space in my mind when I wrote these piece. The other pieces—the clarinet, pieces. I was thinking more in terms the accordion—are maybe more of simple ideas like intimacy. The transportable. But I would have loved violin duo, for example, really takes to be in that little room, to have advantage of that, because in the experienced the accordion in that

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } ND 97 them at all, are already a reflection this way. I feel like I’m retuning some You have, metaphorically, of your compositional sense. Even if fundamental assumptions about what I hadn’t written the software, even makes a form interesting, or what’s two minds in your head: if it didn’t reflect anything about the acceptable and unacceptable. way I think about music, the fact that there’s the effervescent I am making a selection is already a Mark: That process is similar to how compositional act. I love working in I feel about my collaborative practice. mind that nonjudgmentally this way, because every time I run At its core, it’s about trying to push the software, it is as if there is this up against another consciousness generates ideas; then you unwrapped gift before me. Once you to be able to see your own editorial open the gift, there’s a whole other prejudices in a new light. When it really have a judgmental mind, level of joy or disappointment, but works, it’s an expansion of both parties’ that anticipation is spectacular. If practices because they’re being forced there is one moment that drives my to think of ideas they would have the one that filters… use of software, emotionally, it’s that dismissed outright if they’d come up moment. It hits some pleasure center in their own brains. Do you collaborate —Nick Didkovsky in my brain that lights up every time with other people often? [laughs]. Nick: In general, composing is a The mathematician and computer pretty solitary process for me. I can scientist A. K. Dewdney has described get very involved in the practicalities small space. It’s site-specific in the is very good at generating rich ideas the creative process as being a two- of making the software work and general sense that it’s going to sound and interactions between instruments, minded one. You have, metaphorically, generate behaviors that are going different in whatever space you play— but it doesn’t have any real memory two minds in your head: there’s to be musically interesting, both it’s all about overtones, texture, and built into it. You could let it run for the effervescent mind that non- formally and programmatically. But richness. You’re saturating the room 30 minutes, but it’s going to write judgmentally generates ideas; then then when I put the music in front of itself with sound, and the space is a piece that rambles. If you focus in you have a judgmental mind, the live players, they bring out stuff that going to reflect the sounds back to on the short term, it generates these one that filters and says we’ll accept I never thought of. I just did a piece the listener. YouTube is certainly not beautiful little constructions—eight that one or we don’t like that one. In for Dither Guitar Quartet that I would a substitute for that. It’s a completely seconds, 20 seconds, 45 seconds—that this case you’re using the software check with my kids, especially my older different experience. really grab you. I’ve done a number as an extension of the effervescent kid who’s a real metal head, and he’d of suites composed of very short mind. I think a lot of compositional give me no-holds-barred feedback on Mark: Can you talk about your movements that were generated by prejudices and habits find their home the way the piece was going. I totally process? Had you written very short the software. The duo that I wrote for in the second mind, in the filter. trusted him, and I took some advice pieces before? the Little William Theater on tuba and When you start to really crank up the that changed the direction of the marimba is one example of that. effervescent half of the process, you piece significantly. Whether that was Nick: When the invitation came to fatigue your ability to make decisions collaborative or just asking advice is a do short forms, it was like they were Mark: It’s interesting that you are after a while. Habits come under gray area, but it’s extremely valuable thinking of me. It’s something I do using software to generate pieces. attack and break down, and certain to check in with other entities, whether quite a lot of, in fact, and it’s exactly Do you feel more like an editor than a things get through that may not have they’re software entities or living what I am interested in doing right traditional composer? Or does it feel gotten through before. You start to entities, during a creative process. now. And given the exigencies of life, similar to you? toy with the creative process itself Everyone thinks they’re open-minded short forms are also very practical. and chip away at some fundamental until they really start to challenge Recently, I’ve been writing short pieces Nick: Well, a big part of composition aesthetics that drive the process. their assumptions. It’s interesting what using software. I wrote a version of is always selection. The ones that you There’s this intangible, really rich happens at those boundaries. automatic composition software that decide to keep, even if you don’t edit interaction that I get out of working

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } ND 98 Philip In- Ross ter- view:November 9, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report 99 Interview with Philip Ross, November 9, 2010 Mark: I’d like to talk about what you more on the Critter website [http:// see the role of museums being, and crittersalon.blogspot.com/]. We | } what it means to do your project in weren’t pushing a bunch of information MA PR a museum as opposed to a library or at people. But part of it was that it an educational space. Do you think the was a singular event; I think it would museum was a logical location for your be very difficult to institutionalize that project? without suddenly entering into all the expectations, outcomes, didactics, etc. Philip: Absolutely. It was a great place Artist and curator Philip Ross discusses the to have it. I talked to the curators who Mark: Yeah. Something I also really Enormous Microscopic Evening event with came to the event, and they all agreed liked about the project is that the that this couldn’t happen in a strictly information was conveyed to people Mark Allen. They reflect on how the museum educational forum because people in a very personal way. Each station context affected the way people approached the would have come with a different set had a person who would explain it to of expectations: there would have you. I think that’s actually unique for microscopic images and consider the benefits of had to be more thorough didactics, an educational framework and for different modes of engaging with objects. outcomes, objectives—all those kinds a museum. Typically in a museum you of things. Also, it would be primarily don’t have an artist hanging out with child oriented. In this case, the location each painting answering questions. In Projects discussed: gave people permission to look at the my work with the Hammer, one of the microscopes’ images with the idea things I was really interested in was • Enormous Microscopic Evening of art. There are all these colorful, thinking about how you personalize beautiful things to look at, and because communication. they were in a museum, visitors tended to look at the aesthetics first, and Philip: Yes—and giving a face to the then to pull out more educational or museum as well. People are impressed scientific things—like, why does that by the Hammer and they want to particular layer look like this? Or, how is connect with it—even just with a this machine working? particular painting. But with a casual visitor, there is a lot of alienation that Mark: I think another thing that can happen in modern art. I think that works very nicely about museums having an individual there—even just as a context for this work is that to say, we have this here for x, y, or z people feel comfortable just kind of reason—offers something people can wandering in and looking around a relate to. A big part of the curatorial museum. aspect of this project was finding scientists who could do the public Philip: Exactly. At the Exploratorium, relations aspect as well as be excited in the Life Sciences section, where and knowledgeable about the content. I have shown work, I have to make sure that there’s some type of logical Mark: How familiar were the people connection between the stations. At presenting with the idea of the the Hammer people just wandered in. museum as context? Do you think It was nice to be able to just present that affected how they presented people with an interesting thing, and things? Or were they just dropped to let them follow up if they wanted into the space?

Machine Project Hammer Report 100 Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } PR 101 Philip: They were just dropped into the It feels like something small got really space. Most of those folks are used to huge [laughs]—like it’s to your scale! If you’ve got some weird giving demonstrations, but at some type of conference for others in their Philip: It’s in your world. You see it mold growing in your field. Occasionally they do educational eating, moving, breathing… things, but usually the presentations bathroom you can actually have to fit in with K–12 education Mark: You see this little guy struggling or, if they’re working with graduate to get through this area, and he could look at it...and determine, students, it’s very serious. These folks have just gone around but he’s trying don’t often have contact with a wider to get through…and then he gets “Yes, that’s a killer mold” or range of people who might really through! appreciate their work. “No, it isn’t.” Philip: There’s so much drama. Mark: I’m always interested in trying It becomes a theater space. I just —Philip Ross to make a more direct experience thought, the technology’s available between the content provider and to show this whole other world to the content consumer. It’s such a people in a form they can really great thing to see people discover connect to and enjoy. And they did. It something. That’s one of the things was beautiful because it worked. I thought was really successful about your event—it had this dual level *** of discovery built in. The sense of discovery you get from looking at Mark: What do you think is the role of each individual display was pre-staged museums at this cultural moment? Do when you walked down the hallway you think this project works in contrast and through the door, which had very to the normal operation of a museum, little signage, into this space with or do you think it’s a mutualistic or these enormous, strange images… parasitical relationship? you immediately felt like you were in a completely different world. Philip: I really don’t know. I think you should be able to see and interact Philip: And you were. This project with cultural artifacts. The Huntington originally came out of a similar Library has this awesome collection experience I had ten years ago with of microscopes, but they’re locked microscopes at the Exploratorium, behind glass cabinets. Nobody is where I saw these enormous blown-up using them and they always seem like nematodes. They looked like they are in some state of removal. sandworms from Dune, or like whales. There isn’t a real sense of connection I’d never seen a microscopic image like to your life. If you go for a biopsy, that. Before that I couldn’t have cared someone’s going to look at it under less about microscopes. Then I saw a microscope—it’s the same type of that thing and it was like, I can relate instrument you’re looking at in to that thing. a museum. People don’t usually think about that. Mark: Yeah, exactly! It doesn’t feel like you’re looking down at something small. Mark: Yeah, it becomes disembodied

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } PR 102 in a way. We don’t think about the Philip: Yes. Absolutely. process. That’s what was so powerful about the workshop you did at Mark: Despite our general cultural Machine on turning webcams into interest in informality and friendliness, USB microscopes, too. It made the I don’t think you want to get rid of relationship between the image and that, because that’s such a powerful the thing being imaged so visceral. lens for looking at things. With the microscopes at the Huntington, they’re Philip: Yeah. The idea was that making put in this formal place and it allows your own scope enables you to start you to see them as aesthetic objects, looking at things and identifying but it does also create this tension or them for yourself. So, if you’ve got disconnect between functionality and some weird mold growing in your aesthetics. What I loved about your bathroom you can actually look at it piece is that it allowed for both to be and immediately go to a database and articulated at once. It’s hard to determine, “Yes, that’s a killer mold” or do that. “No, it isn’t.” It’s the same mystery of the world that’s always around us with Philip: I was thinking about that in experts interpreting it, but suddenly Düsseldorf last year. There’s a very you get to do the interpreting yourself. formal museum right smack in the You don’t have to be fearful of these middle of the city. It has funded a lot of technologies if you’re involved with very important shows and whole bodies them. I think this is the ethos of a lot of of artwork, so it’s put Düsseldorf on things at Machine. the map culturally. There’s a huge amount of local pride in what that Mark: Yes, it is. We try to facilitate institution has done, and the museum a kind of relationship to technology is responding to that in this very social, and knowledge that people don’t welcoming way. They’ll have wiener usually experience on a daily basis. As roasts outside, and things like that. a consumer, you are alienated from the People don’t just think of it as the process of production and the object place where you go to look at fancy is somewhat mysterious, but typically awesomeness; they also think of it as you don’t think about that because this place where they had a great lunch. Enormous your relationship is organized around And because people feel incredibly Microscope Evening need. But there are actually multiple comfortable, when a difficult art show ways of engaging with an object: you comes they will give it a chance. Photograph have an informal DIY lens; you have a by Marianne Williams participatory lens, which is related to that but maybe a little more transient; then you have a formal aesthetic lens. The thing that’s really powerful about the architecture of a museum is that the intense formality of it prepares you for a specific, focused relationship to an object that allows you to appreciate its mystery.

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } PR 103 Corey In- Fogel ter- view:April 11, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report 104 Interview with Corey Fogel, April 11, 2011 Mark: Can you talk about some of duration of the experience is defined your experiences playing in different by the viewer. You wouldn’t go to | } spaces in terms of your relationship to a museum, sit down in front of a MA CF architecture? painting, and say, “I’m going to watch this painting until it’s done.” Is there Corey: Yeah. I think that at LACMA something about having the viewer and the Hammer I put a lot of pressure define how long they want to watch on myself to find a spot where I felt you doing something that is appealing comfortable, and I never really felt that to you? Experimental percussionist Corey Fogel talks comfortable. I did the best I could and with Mark Allen about the way the Museum’s I found a kind of spatial buffer around Corey: Yeah. It challenges me to my personal performance radius— make a different work: endurance- architecture, mode of spectatorship, and primarily where I was going to be extending based, more recursive, less linear, visual modality highlighted different dimensions my limbs to, what kind of a stage more vertical. It’s a challenge to the I felt I needed. I felt like I was horizontality of performance. of his sound-based work and motivated less linear interfacing with the general mode of approaches to performance. presentation in a museum—and Mark: By horizontality, do you mean I don’t want to reimagine the space— things which unfold in a linear forward I want to be exactly like the sculptures narrative? And by verticality, do you Projects discussed: in the space. I’ve always wanted that mean things where one could enter when I go into museums. When you go at different moments? • Little William Theater: Festival of New Music into those places, the most original or authentic experience you’re having is Corey: Correct. I like that in the the work in a gallery space, between museum context those are both four walls. It’s developed that way available. I’d be really honored if for a reason. It’s a really good way someone stayed and got a lot out of it. to see work. And it’s inspiring. When you’re in there and you think about Mark: Right, the potential is there making work, it’s the way that you for that. want people to see your work. I think the trend in these museum shows is Corey: The potential is there, but to re-imagine the spaces, which is because it’s a museum, it’s defined by okay but not really that exciting to me the viewer and they’re usually going to unless there’s a really strong sense of take that opportunity to stay for equilibrium with the architecture. a shorter amount of time. They’re open to being distracted by the next Mark: So what you’re proposing is thing so they have less focus. When that a museum has a certain mode something catches and people choose of viewership, or a mechanism for to stay, it’s very rewarding. But if I’m focusing people’s attention. In a way, a performing at a museum for three to stage is similar to a museum in that it five hours or something, I’m never focuses everybody’s attention on going to try to do a linear thing for a certain spot. The difference is that anyone because I know it’s not going in the case of a stage the duration to happen. I know no one is going to of the experience is defined by the watch it for that long. That would be performance, whereas in a museum the strange and awkward.

Machine Project Hammer Report 105 I want to be exactly like the sculptures in the space. I’ve always wanted that when I go into museums. —Corey Fogel

Mark: So you are putting yourself, as a Mark: The other challenge with doing maybe implies sound. But when I’m Corey Fogel performer, in a position where even if work in museums that I want to ask coming up with ideas, my starting plays in the Little William Theater people stay for a long time, they’re not you about is that they are designed point is usually sound based. My whole going to be able to see the whole thing, for the visual and not the audio. goal of transcending the sonic to the or there is no whole thing to be seen. Do you feel like that is a significant visual is based on acoustics: all the disadvantage to your work in terms of gestural information that comes with Corey: Yeah, and it’s exciting to the acoustics? making certain sounds and playing me to do that, to sustain being in a drums, this very physical way of using performance zone for an indefinite Corey: I’m trying to make what I feel my limbs. I think it has the potential to amount of time, to keep searching is very visual music. Of course, it’s really come alive in a museum. and finding. I don’t think I’m going to going to be a lot more successful in find two hours of exciting discoveries a quiet environment. That’s why I don’t for somebody. But I think that I could really want to do things in the cracks find— of a museum, where the hustle and bustle is happening—carts driving by, Mark: —two hours in which anybody people walking around, patrons talking could have an exciting discovery? to security. I’d be happy to try to come up with work that is appropriate Corey: Yeah. to that—work that is only visual and

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } CF 106 Asher In- Hartman with Haruko Tanaka & Jasmine ter- Orpilla view:March 18, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report 107 Interview with Asher Hartman, Haruko Tanaka, and Jasmine Orpilla March 18, 2011 Mark: What was different about doing involved with the structure. And in a project like this in a museum versus a visual art environment, I feel like | } doing it in a theater? people are more likely to understand MA that I’m using entertainment, not Asher: Well, I think the first thing— being entertaining—and that’s a big besides the space itself, which was so difference. It was really liberating beautiful—is access to a public. It’s for me. really difficult in an alternative space to get large numbers of people to come, Mark: Jasmine, you’ve worked in AH, HT and it’s even more difficult to get a variety of contexts too. How did you people there who might write about it. feel about it? In relation to theater, it’s just very different doing something for an art Jasmine: Oh, I loved it. I am from the audience versus a theater audience. musical world and the theater world, & JO With an art audience, there isn’t the and everything you just said, Asher, same burden of entertainment, and was pretty much right on. Doing Annie there’s a lot more freedom in terms Okay in the Museum was awesome of constructing the piece. Not to because it took the theater-in-the- disparage theater, but I was somewhat round to a whole new level: we were involved in it for a while and one of surrounded by the audience like you my disappointments with the kind would be in a traditional theater-in- of theater that I was involved in the-round; at the same time, we were Mark Allen and Annie Okay’s writer and director was that there was this sense that a also surrounding the audience. It was Asher Hartman, along with assistant director theater piece has to have a certain almost like a circus environment. It’s kind of structure—almost Aristotelian like, “Screw the fourth wall, we’re Haruko Tanaka and actor Jasmine Orpilla, consider with beginning, middle, and end— stage-diving!” Because it was in a the differences between the ways visual art and if you don’t dovetail all your museum and you don’t normally do points to a moral, or at least a place those things in a museum, there was and theater audiences respond to experimental where the audience understands this really great surprise element. I performance. They also talk about the piece’s what the play is about, then it’s not a remember watching the audience’s successful play and people get very faces and they had this look that content as it relates to the Museum as a historical frustrated. Because I work between was like, “Wow, we need to absorb and cultural site and to the shifting demographic genres, people often have a difficult triple time.” time figuring out what it is that I’m museums seek to engage. actually doing, and a very difficult Asher: But they can do it because, time critiquing it or understanding with art, they are used to it and they it. Annie Okay is kind of sprawling, expect that. Projects discussed: there’s this interweaving of characters • Annie Okay and themes and ideas, and it’s not Jasmine: Oh yes. They’re actively structured like a three-act play or involved—there’s something about even a one-act play. So putting it in theater where you sit back in your an architectural environment that chair, you kind of relax, and the show identifies it as visual art is, to me, the is elsewhere. best possible thing that could have happened, because then people are Haruko: Asher, I remember you saying more involved with the ideas and less after the first night, “God, I love

Machine Project Hammer Report 108 Above and right: Annie Okay

art audiences because they notice Asher: I like the open-endedness anything that’s rehearsed is not and were like, “Wow. How long did everything.” Everything counts, even of durational performance, where performance art. And we rehearsed: you guys rehearse this?” the marble floor. something can happen repeatedly we had two choreographers; you know, and the audience doesn’t necessarily we practiced. So it’s theater in that Mark: I think it’s also that a lot of Mark: I think some of it depends expect there to be a denouement; sense. But I think with performance art the work that comes out of Machine on your observer position too, because rather, the performance opens up as and experimental theater, they come Project is not—I mean it’s great in its for me it was very much a theater it goes along and it is the audience’s together, they go apart. In the ‘80s, own way, but—it’s not always at that piece. There are people singing and responsibility to make meaning, to theater and performance art were level of finish. So I think that people dancing, and there’s a story—whether have associations, to experience. more closely connected, but at other weren’t necessarily coming with that it ties together or it’s more episodic— But when I think of performance times they seem to have nothing to expectation. I mean, look at the space from my perspective, it’s coming out art proper, I tend to think of it as do with one another—never the two here at Machine Project: it’s kind of of that narrative theatrical tradition. aesthetically connected to particular shall meet. And then it starts again. a crappy storefront, and that’s sort Can you talk about how you might political movements like feminism, It’s very interesting. But I think the of the vibe. distinguish between this piece that you and as something that develops over level of polish we had for Annie Okay might call performance theater and a period of time with a group of was refreshing for a lot of people Asher: Maybe partly for that reason more traditional performance art? Or, artists who share certain philosophical because they’re not necessarily used it was fun to be able to offer people how you see your work in relation to underpinnings. And that may not to seeing that in performance art. A lot this really tight, rehearsed piece. Not performance art? be what we’re doing. But some of people came up to us afterward that it’s the only way or the best way. performance artists would say that I just don’t think we could have done

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AH, HT, & JO 109 anything without rehearsing; it would Mark: The Hammer is such an place. You have the predominantly have been a jumble of weirdness. It interesting place. It’s a site that has upper-middle-class to upper-class felt good to have actors—people who been transformed by several different white presence in art museums know how to act—in an art space, strong energies and moments, so and…I think the idea of addressing it because it’s unusual. And people really I think, to a certain degree, the somewhat directly in a museum, with a enjoyed the performances. narratives of Annie Okay have a really play about racism, is a really fortunate resonant relationship to the power thing to be able to do because *** structures that are materialized in museums have to change. the architecture. Do you think that Mark: We’ve been talking about all the influences the work? Mark: Right. And kind of a brave thing benefits of museums. What were the for the Hammer to do in the context of most challenging things about working Asher: Oh yes, totally. We thought public engagement. there in the Museum? about it as this kind of court piece because it’s—the marble of the Haruko: Remember the guard, the Haruko: [laughs] Ingress. building is the same kind of marble woman upstairs, who was so jazzed to that Michelangelo used for his see Jasmine and Frank—fellow Pinoys Mark: Getting in? sculptures, if I’m not mistaken…. in the production at the Museum? The way everything is structured, it She couldn’t believe there were Asher: Yes. really was like we were performing for Filipino artists. royalty. And the idea was to almost Mark: Do you think that your directly speak to that energy, because Jasmine: Oh, yes. She whipped out relationship to the Museum has the piece is about nationalism and a camera and it was like she became changed because of the work that colonialism and, you know, what better my mother for a good five minutes you’ve done there? topic can we bring to this space? [laughs]. She was like, “Good, good, good. I’m going to send this to Asher: Yes. As an outsider, when Jasmine: And the happy musical everybody I know.” I could just feel I used to go to the Hammer, it was like quality on top of it brings out a that photo being sent all the way back a no-man’s-land with this empty white paradoxical tension. It’s very upbeat, to the mainland. lobby. You’d have to figure out where but then right below the surface it’s to go, then you go up the stairs and pretty deeply gnarly [laughs]. The Haruko: That was a great moment. look at this whole world of stuff, but whole show had that MGM, Panasonic you’re not really involved in it. And gloss and then, right below, it has Jasmine: It was genuine too. She there are certain special people who all this borderline psychosis and was just struck that we were actually are there, and other kinds of people undigested historical stuff. performing and not holding something who are explicitly not there. I think up on the side. She was really moved. that’s a lot of people’s experience Mark: Working with museums, I’m of a museum. Now my experience interested in interfacing with all these Asher: Yes, that was really amazing, is that it’s a very warm place. The layers: there’s this power history actually. It was just a great opportunity curators are thoughtful, and kind, and of the museum, and there’s a cultural to bring something complicated to accommodating, and respectful, and history of the museum; then there are a museum that’s not that easy to they really clearly want a public that’s the artworks and the visitors, who swallow but to put it in a nice sugar- engaged with the Museum. I think that have various different relationships coated envelope. the Machine Project Residency really to the work. did make the Hammer a friendly place without patronizing anyone. Asher: Yes, and the art world in general is a very easily critique-able

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AH, HT, & JO 110 Matt In- Jones ter- view:November 9, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report 111 Interview with Matt Jones, November 9, 2010 Mark: You and I worked on the Giant it might be like really flood in—usually in Hand. the form of concern about things going | } wrong. In that situation, description isn’t MA MJ Matt: Yes. And Maria Mortati necessarily going to be enough. I think if helped with the design and handled we’d made a 3D animated visualization interfacing with the Museum. of the Giant Hand working, there wouldn’t have been so much confusion Mark: How did you view that piece? and ambivalence about it. Do you see that as a piece of museum Mark Allen talks with Matt Jones about the Giant signage? Is it a sculpture? Did you *** Hand he constructed to help visitors navigate the think about that while we were building it? Mark: Do you feel like the Giant Hand Hammer. Their conversation touches on the piece’s has changed your relationship to the ambiguous status between art and signage and the Matt: There were all sorts of thoughts Hammer? Do you feel like you perceive I had as I was going along. Whether it differently after working on this conflicts that it surfaced in the Museum’s identity. this would be considered art or project? They also discuss some of the more practical safety sculpture, or whether this would be considered museum signage and part Matt: Well, I worked in a children’s concerns involved in the Giant Hand’s fabrication. of the facility. In the contract, in the museum in Albuquerque and got legal declarations, what they came a sense of the bureaucracy there: up with was to call it a prop for an the way everything takes so much Projects discussed: installation, a prop piece. longer than you would expect it • Giant Hand to, because it’s got to go through Mark: That’s my excuse for everything: proper channels rather than in a more it’s a prop. streamlined commercial structure. That experience also gave me more Matt: Yeah. That way it skirts the insight into how hard it can be to get curatorial committee. But it did show interesting things done. It’s weird to gaps in their workflow because they think that an art institution would be were not exactly sure who had to so resistant to innovation, though. approve the piece. That’s something I hadn’t really thought about before I worked on Mark: A lot of projects we did were the Giant Hand. There’s this crazy in between the normal workflows. We tension that exists between the idea were trying to open up space in the of museums as spaces of innovation, Museum that didn’t exist before. When which is what they try to be and what you do that, it creates a weird vacuum. they are, and this whole other side of There’s this vortex of energy that both archiving and preserving. attracts and repels everyone’s attempts to control the process. It got to the Mark: That’s interesting. For me, it point where we were discussing with was the piece that most embodied this the Museum which way the Giant Hand other tension between the artist as was going to point. It made me realize problem solver and the artist as artist that if you are doing something that is in the Museum. new and sort of an unknown, people’s ideas about what might happen or what Matt: Yeah. It’s like another version of

Machine Project Hammer Report 112 the difference between an artist and the Giant Hand? Did you think about a craftsman in that the craftsman has its placement in relation to people at a client. the Hammer? I know we talked about the speed of motion, and there were Mark: You’ve built things for other some issues around designing how museums as well. What kinds of high the hand was so it wouldn’t poke museums do you normally work with? people in the face.

Matt: I’ve done a fair amount of Matt: I thought it did a pretty good children’s science museums, and some job of staying out of people’s head stuff for LACMA. range. I was afraid that with the rotating or pointing down it would Mark: Do you think that piece will smack people, but it really didn’t pose work differently in the Children’s a threat. Museum if we bring it there? Do you think it’s in a more natural habitat Mark: Is that a topic that comes up there? Do you think there’s something a lot when you’re building things for that’s lost by the recontextualization in museums? Do you think about how not that context? to injure people?

Matt: Yeah. I think it will be more Matt: I do—especially for children’s expected in a children’s museum to museums. You need to keep all the have things that you’re allowed to gaps between moving parts smaller touch. There will be machines that than a kid’s fingers so they can’t get Giant Hand move and point and do crazy things anything caught. during assembly at Matt Jones’ like that—which I thought was great studio to see in an art museum environment. Mark: Did you get a chance to observe I am kind of nervous about my machine people at the Hammer using the Giant surviving the abuse of children. Hand after we installed it?

Mark: Those buttons are made for Matt: For a couple of days, yeah. some abuse, though. Mark: What were your observations? that people maybe don’t think about Matt: Well, the buttons are, but I’d explicitly, but that nonetheless impact have to think about how high we need Matt: I thought it was amazingly their experience. The message in an to put it so they don’t treat it like effective. I was really happy. People art museum when you go into the a jungle gym. were delighted and surprised to see it, empty lobby is that you should already and without too much coaching either. know where to go because you’re part Mark: You’re talking about people of the intelligentsia that are educated actually hanging on the Giant Hand? Mark: What I like about is that it is in the use and organization of really welcoming in this weird way— museums. The message of having that Matt: Yeah. “Watch it pull me up.” because it is so absurd and out of Giant Hand there is that the Museum That would be no good. place. As one of the primary modes is interested in more than just this one of addressing visitors, signage kind of audience. Mark: How much of a concern were constructs authority in subtle ways things like that when you were building that are specific to the institution and

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } MJ 113 Chandler In- McWilliams ter- view:November 23, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report 114 InterviewMA with Chandler McWilliams, | November } 23,CM 2010

Chandler McWilliams talks with Mark Allen about his proposed navigation piece for the Hammer, which would have tracked people’s movements through the Museum and used the results to suggest optimum routes to subsequent visitors. Chandler and Mark take signage as the starting point for a broader conversation about the intersection of art and design, in which they consider the potential efficacy and value of solving a problem simply by acknowledging it.

Mark: Chandler, your project was one decisions; they just do what everyone Above: of three that we worked on developing else did. It should make the flows a Hammer courtyard for navigation. Can you talk about the little more optimized. general idea of it? Mark: One of the ways I was thinking Chandler: The idea was that we would about it was that signage is all put these signs throughout the space about putting information on top of and we’d keep a history of how people architecture. I thought what was so had walked in front of those signs. interesting about your proposal was When someone would walk up to a that it removes the information, in a sign and, say, take off to the right, it way, and just leaves the ideal path. would record that motion. The signs would aggregate this information Chandler: Another thing with signs is over time, and then as new people that they’re often trying to be as clear approached the sign, it would suggest as possible. This was purposefully a direction based on where everyone trying to be ambiguous. But at the else had gone. The idea was to same time, that ambiguity lets it be emulate something like an elephant dynamic. trail. You take all the smarts out of people so they don’t make conscious Mark: Something that I thought about

Machine Project Hammer Report 115 Hammer Museum lobby a lot when I was working there with confusing to navigate, but at the same the signage was how, in terms of time, it’s a circle, so if you go too far typography or style or design, the in one direction, you’ve just come signs are one of the forms in which the back around. Really, you could just institution speaks to you. I thought keep walking in one direction, and you this project was really interesting would see everything. So it seemed because the institution was still telling that the consequence of the confusion you where to go, but you removed was pretty low. And even if someone all the identifying characteristics in was getting frustrated, just having a terms of visual aesthetics. How do you sign that says, “Just keep going this think your project affects the way the way,” would probably be enough. It Museum constructs authority? would be this reassuring prompt— “You’re on the right path. Don’t give Chandler: Well, the Hammer seemed up now”—like a pat on the back. So very concerned with telling people even if they don’t get where they want specifically where they needed to to go, it would lessen the frustration. go, and this was trying to just say, “You can go somewhere”—trying to Mark: You know, it’s interesting, when erode that authority. The idea would we did the Field Guide to LACMA, be that the visitors are constructing LACMA’s so huge that it’s impossible their own paths. But the Museum to find anything you want, but it’s would still have a certain authority also so huge that it really brings out in terms of where decision points the pleasure of randomly wandering exist—the top of the stairs, outside of through the museum. The Hammer’s galleries, things like that. a smaller museum, so there isn’t necessarily that sense of wandering Mark: One of the things that I found through an endless expanse of cultural working with the Hammer is that, objects. Maybe there’s more of an because it is a challenging space to expectation among visitors that you navigate, there was a lot of anxiety should eventually find everything. that generated for the institution. They Maybe we should have proposed a were concerned that visitors were sign that said, “Just keep walking. confused, so any project had to work You’ll find it.” toward making people less confused. I remember when we were talking Chandler: [laughs] Yeah. Exactly. You about it you said, “What’s wrong with want to just have a list of galleries confusing the visitors?” and cross them off as you go through, which would be another intervention: Chandler: When they brought that “Here’s a check box. Have you done up, I guess my questions were: Do it all?” they know that visitors are confused now? Do they have some kind of Mark: We’re coming up with a whole measure or feedback that people get list of new projects. I guess there are so frustrated that they leave? What other museums to torment. is the consequence of the confusion? On the one hand, yes, the space is

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } CM 116 Chandler: The possibly least artful but were competing with a computer to I need to fix. It’s, “How can I tweak the most impactful wayfinding intervention complete an algorithmic drawing. problem so that it’s a better problem would be to move the ticket desk. and then propose a solution to that?” Chandler: Yeah, exactly. We think Mark: They did. This was something of algorithms and procedures as Mark: It makes me think that, maybe, that we’d been advocating for a long something a machine does. One thing when dealing with signs in the museum time and finally, now that we’re done, I’ve come to really believe through we’re mistaking one problem for there’s a welcome desk in the lobby learning to program is that when another problem. The perceived where you can buy a ticket. you’re programming, you’re already problem is people don’t know where doing what a machine does; you’re to go and are frustrated. Maybe the Chandler: [laughs] It really could be already becoming a machine, in a way, real problem is that people don’t a vending machine—it just spits out meeting it halfway. With the navigation know where to go and it makes them a sticker. piece, I was trying to explode that to feel stupid. It’s not that people dislike a larger scale by suggesting walking an extra 50 feet. It’s that they Mark: I was just reading about algorithmic behavior for people. probably feel like everybody else a vending machine in Japan that knows where to go. Then they feel bad distributes live crabs. Mark: All three of the signage projects about themselves and transfer that tried to walk this line between helping bad feeling to the Museum. I wonder if Chandler: Oh my god. I’ve got to the situation and commenting on you could solve the problem by having find that. the problem at the same time. This a sign that says, “It is hard to figure revealed for me an interesting tension out where to go here.” Mark: So was this project informed between artists as artists and artists by other kinds of work that you’re as problem solvers, or maybe it’s the Chandler: [laughs] Exactly. making, or was this something you tension between being an artist and developed specifically thinking about being a designer. You teach in the Mark: With museums, you’re dealing the needs of the Hammer? design program at UCLA, so that’s with people at different levels of probably a tension or a dialogue that cultural comfort and belonging in the Chandler: A lot of it was for the needs comes up a lot in your work. Was that institution. Because these institutions of the Museum. I hadn’t really thought something you were thinking about are authoritative, it tends to be about the problems of wayfinding with this wayfinding proposal? alienating if you don’t feel like you’re necessarily. I had looked into ways already part of that discourse. A lot creatures move and biomimicry and Chandler: Yeah, I think so. All three of times, I ended up feeling like the things like that. I think that emergent signage projects had this meta level solution to every problem was just for systems are fascinating. So it was an where they’re drawing attention to the the institution to acknowledge it and interesting opportunity to apply one problem, but they also had a sense not feel bad about it. Like, “Hey, we’re of those little narratives—of how ants of levity about the problem. So you confusing. It’s the building. What can find their way, for example—to people, would notice that it’s hard to find your we do? You’ll still like it.” and instead of making something way around the Museum but also find formal that used those systems, trying it funny. It’s just another way to solve to make something behavioral. the problem: instead of velvet ropes and arrows on the floor, notice it’s Mark: There’s often an element in there and get over it. Definitely, art is your work about what happens when trying to articulate the problem, not humans try to act like computers, just solve it—it involves this doubling. and vice versa. I remember you did But I think design does that as well. It’s a project at Machine where you not that there’s this rigid problem

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } CM 117 Nate In- Page ter- view:December 5, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report 118 Interview with Nate Page, December 5, 2010 Mark: So Nate, we didn’t end up often wants to be a more discrete, doing a project, but we did talk a lot privileged, sort of esoteric institution, | } about it. Our idea was to have your but at the same time there are very MA NP grandfather come in for a month and real business issues—they need people teach people how to paint signs. to be coming through the doors to pay bills—but they are a little too proud to Nate: Yeah. The general idea was to totally advertise and do the things that reestablish a hand-painted process would get people through. for signage within the Museum. My Nate Page and Mark Allen discuss the ideas grandfather, who was a sign painter Mark: One of the challenges for and limitations that arose in relation to Nate’s most of his life, was a major influence museums with signage is that they on me deciding to become an artist. have multiple constituents who have unrealized signage project for the Hammer. The So initially I was thinking to redo the conflicting aesthetics. You mentioned question of labor and authorship recurs throughout signs in the window display by hand. that the Hammer signs seemed to be Approaching the Hammer from the trying to identify it as a museum. as they consider the way the Museum’s traditional street, I remember seeing that corner Do you think that Hammer’s primary identity and institutional voice may be challenged window display at the stoplight. They signage issues are that the very had these billboard signs hanging existence of the Museum is almost by efforts to engage a wider public. They also there advertising what was going invisible in Westwood? recount the Hammer’s unique architectural history. on inside the building, but they also seemed like they were just trying Nate: I think the identity conflict to identify that it was a museum. It museums have is definitely amplified Projects discussed: made me start to think about the when you don’t have a rock star architecture and the identity of the architect designing your building, • Giant Hand Museum and the space, and how like the Guggenheim. The Hammer there was this disconnect with the is almost the exact opposite of that: building not being designed for a it was designed for an oil company, museum, but the Museum coming into which just wants to be discrete and this corporate structure and trying to powerful, to fit into the landscape and establish its own identity. not really advertise itself. The other thing I was thinking about with the Mark: In LA, spaces get repurposed project was the physical presence of a lot—former bank buildings have the laborers creating the signs, and been turned into clubs—but you very how that’s invisible too. I was curious seldom see that with museums. That’s about what kind of public attention something fascinating and unique it would draw if you looked in from about the Hammer: it has this history the street and saw people inside the of being a corporate building, then Museum painting signs. a corporate building with a private museum, and then a public museum. Mark: That’s interesting to me because It’s a building that is continually I have thought a lot about how the rearticulating the tension of its signage is the way the Museum founding energies. communicates as a corporate person. Even though we all know, we forget Nate: Yeah, and it points to a that this one museum voice speaking real conflict, because a museum to us is actually a weird amalgam of

Machine Project Hammer Report 119 90 people. The Museum is speaking the point that they are almost invisible. Mark: With that piece, the display to you as an entity and by necessity it Have you ever been to a museum space isn’t really the physical space has to erase a bunch of subjectivities where the draw was the signs? It the banner is in. You’re attempting to for that to happen. Each sign is going happens all the time in architecture— create a piece inside people’s audio to be the same typeface and the this thing that is functional in some experience. That’s something I was same kind of language. If you have way but instigates a metaconversation interested in activating as a side effect somebody there painting the sign, you about its use. It’s not really equivalent in a lot of pieces we did at the Hammer: see that corporate voice literally being for signage—like, “Oh my God, you trying to also make the piece happen manufactured before your eyes, and have to see this signage. It’s the most in the heads of everybody who heard you see how individual subjectivities innovative signage you’ve ever seen.” about the piece after the fact, even if are marshaled toward the construction We tried to do something like that there was only one physical person in of that impersonal voice of the with the Giant Hand. the audience for the actual event. institution on a day-to-day basis. Nate: Right—to become the Frank Nate: With the Hammer there was Nate: There’s a time when I was Gehry of signage. It’s interesting some buzz leading up to Machine’s thinking about this project where thinking about how these iconic Residency, and then it was like: is it I played with ideas of more of a direct experiences work symbolically. happening? It was a really subtle and subjective communication from the Something like the Giant Hand almost quiet thing. It got me interested in the people in the Museum instead of just benefits the space more than a idea of bringing a ton of attention an institutional voice. I think seeing subtle solution by creating a buzz or to smaller performances. the hand in something—the materiality association with the place. of the hand-paintedness—brings out Mark: I remember one of the ideas the subjectivity. But in the end, I was Mark: I think the work that Machine you and I talked about was doing a afraid the content of the project would does that’s most successful identifies billboard for something really modest, have been secondary to the attention and colonizes new sites for activities like a poetry reading. But the question placed on my grandfather. to take place: elevators are a of scale is complicated, and we were site, hallways are a site, people’s occasionally at odds with the institution, *** imaginations are a site…. If you do where they have needs for things to be something about signage that is a Hammer big in a traditional way, in terms of how Mark: You also did a piece at Machine, meta conversation about the nature of Museum and many people go to a performance. I’m Occidental Subject/Object/Project, where you signage, you’ve created a virtual space Petroleum more interested in how large something spent a lot of time observing our daily for work to happen that didn’t really Building as seen is in the public imagination, which isn’t operation as a workplace. Can you talk exist before. from Wilshire necessarily the same. One of the things and Westwood a little more about how the question Boulevards. that is challenging about working in of labor, or of process, manifests in Nate: Totally. I recently did another visitor services with museums is that your work? signage piece that was a banner there’s a desire that we somehow designed to compete with a cover simultaneously make an interesting art Nate: I guess I enjoy calling attention band at a bar. The band was going piece about the problem but also solve to something that’s not always looked to be playing pop songs from the it in a very frictionless way. To me, the at within the operation. ‘80s and ‘90s. The banner was really compromises or negotiations you have bold, just a telephone number with to go through are the really interesting Mark: That’s something that our work no space, 8675309—you know that sites. If the museum were a frictionless has in common: an interest in revealing song—I wanted to try to get that stuck environment, it would just be a giant how something functions by doing it in the heads of people while this other warehouse with people working for you. differently. You can call attention to band was playing their music. things that have been naturalized to

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } NP 120 Liz In- Glynn ter- view:February 12, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report 121 Interview with Liz Glynn, February 12, 2011 Mark: You’ve been doing so many Mark: Yes. There are always specific shows in various institutional contexts expectations. As I do more and more | } over the last couple of years. I was projects with museums, I’m starting to MA LG wondering how much difference you really see the value of the education notice in the kinds of reasons you’re department as a rogue space. The less brought in to do things, and whether high-art economic and cultural value you feel like there’s a problem-solving also creates a space of more freedom. aspect to it. Liz: I’ve found that to be the case Artist Liz Glynn and Mark Allen talk about the Liz: I notice it in terms of whether with temporary programming expectations, assumptions, and opportunities I’m being asked to do something through events at institutions too. It’s through the education department, analogous to the way it’s impossible to that come along with different artist-museum through events programming, get permission to do things in public relationships, art practices, and points of entry or through curatorial. I think—whether spaces in LA unless you say you’re it necessarily produces the most shooting a film—then suddenly you into the institution. Their conversation provides a interesting projects or not—there’s can do whatever you want. Often you framework for thinking about a number of practical a way in which work that comes in definitely can’t do what you want to through curatorial gets privileged over do at a big institution for a month, but considerations concerning audience, publicity, the other departments. So even if I’ve they’ll let you do anything for a day. experimentation, and collaboration. It also explores done workshops that are similar in quality or substance, when I’ve been Mark: We used that technique of the strategic value, for both institutions and artists, asked to do them as an educational limited temporality a lot at the of ephemeral, process-oriented work as a starting workshop, it almost devalues them in Hammer—and certainly with the Field a way. When I tell someone else about Guide to LACMA, we couldn’t have point for collaboration. them, I feel like I have to qualify it. It’s done that for more than a day. At the not really an art piece, in a way. Hammer, we kept running into barriers with the Giant Hand. We had initially Projects discussed: Mark: Yeah, in a way it’s baggage that proposed having it for the whole • Giant Hand we carry. yearlong Residency and there were all these complications; when we finally Liz: Totally. I think the devaluing of the asked to just do it for a month, it was utilitarian goes back to the art school no problem. mentality. At CalArts, for example, the graphics design department is Liz: Right. I wonder how that relates really separate because it’s functional. to the issue of your use value to There’s this weird value judgment: as the institution. if because it’s serving a function, they only want you to serve that function; Mark: Well, institutions ask artists they don’t just want what you do. to do things for all kinds of reasons, It brings up this other hidden, very but if—to a certain degree—coming romantic idea of the artist-curator in through events, part of your use is relationship—that if you’re the artist to provide publicity; and coming in invited to do something, you can do through education, part of your use is whatever you want, which isn’t true to provide access to other audiences either. There’s actually always a reason or to explicate the art; maybe coming someone wants you to do something. in through curatorial, your primary use

Machine Project Hammer Report 122 value is that you represent the idea Mark: You wouldn’t have the artist that the museum serves the artist’s solve the bookkeeping problems or total freedom. It’s more abstract, but it the fundraising problems—at least comes with real institutional pressures not directly. It’s interesting trying related to maintaining cultural capital. to redefine the space that the artist operates in in terms of what they are Liz: It’s a form of branding—for the good at and how the institution uses institution as well as the individual. that kind of creativity to reinvent itself. Actually, when you’re working with another department, you’re linked Liz: I think that artists have been more directly to the public service most successful at changing the mission of museums. No one in way museums work in event-based curatorial will talk about audience very contexts. specifically, but when you’re doing a But I’m hesitant in some of those workshop it’s like, “We’re doing this situations, because although the for this many people. It’s this kind of museum is more willing to take risks or demographic…” They’re very clear push boundaries—having wet media in about that. a space or minor matters like that— many of these practices have been Mark: Yeah, it’s more transparent. taken from a context where they’ve The thing that’s challenging about worked because of the circumstantial curatorial is that, because its fabric of that context. As the artist, traditional purpose is to serve the you can’t change everything about the freedom and expression of the artist, social environment of the institution. I it’s difficult for the institution to be think sometimes there is the desire for transparent about its needs. It’s in an entity like Machine Project to come this uncomfortable position where in and be able to totally transform the it’s almost not supposed to have any feeling of the space. And there are needs. But of course in the end, it has some ways that happens, but… to get people to come, it has to raise money—and it has to do all of those Mark: Well, the analogy I would use things while maintaining the image of would be looking at artifacts from having no need other than to preserve traditional cultures in a museum. space for the artist. Part of the idea In the culture that they come from, Above: Liz Glynn’s with the Hammer public engagement they might be magical or ritualistic or 24-Hour Roman grant was to explicitly engage artists ceremonial or religious or functional Reconstruction in some of those concerns—which is objects. You cannot lift the religiosity Project at Machine Project a great idea, but it gets complicated. of another culture and embed it into Just because artists can think of an institution. When the work is being interesting cultural solutions, they looked at in a different context, some become the ultimate problem solvers. kinds of meaning disappear and some The institution thinks they can solve new kinds of meaning are generated. the visitor service problems, the It works the same way with these education problems… social practices that are embedded in a community. You can’t actually Liz: Right. lift that entire thing and bring it into

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } LG 123 the institution. We can see these Mark: Yeah! Exactly! I’ve been getting of “We don’t want this on the wall.” site-based projects really require context-based pieces differently in really down on decontextualized That doesn’t really happen so much a commitment to the process, museums—we can appreciate their representations of change. It’s really anymore. Now you can just put your regardless of the results. I think aesthetic properties and the ideas they depressing to work solely in the realm of critical thing up, but it’s not really institutions get themselves into generate—but it performs a kind of the symbolic in practices that are social. supposed to implicate the museum trouble when they are keeping an violence on the practice. The social- or For me the Residency became a real because they are supporting it. And eye on the results while the process site-based artist always has to think challenge to find that space between I don’t think artists are so willing to is still unfolding. That causes them about what it means for their work changing things permanently, on one fight anymore either. So how do you to make premature decisions to be taken out of its context. But end of the spectrum, and making some find a new fight or a new conversation? about whether the artist should be the other question you raise is what kind of useless symbolic gesture toward It’s a big open question. allowed to do something or not. It’s it does to the institutional context change, on the other end. almost analogous to public school to bring this kind of work into the Mark: With Machine’s institutional standardized testing—so instead of museum. I went into the Hammer Liz: I’ve also been thinking a lot collaborations, I am trying to figure teaching to the test, just teaching. Residency hubristically thinking I was about how you generate an authentic out how to get those results using going to change the Hammer. I left experience. It’s a very difficult thing a different mechanism. Between the Mark: Yes. That’s how you get new thinking that what one can do in a to do. work that we did at the Hammer results: if you haven’t defined what circumstance like that is to create and at LACMA and that we’ve been success is, you can redefine your a moment that shows what it might Mark: Another issue that I’ve been starting to do other places, I think failures and successes. You’re always look like if you wanted to really change thinking about that relates to this is Machine is sometimes successful in generating something. So in a way, the museum. the legacy of institutional critique. shifting understandings of museums, if we agree that we’re in a cultural Museums are increasingly interested in even if it’s in gentle ways or minor moment where oppositional or critical Liz: It’s trying to do something in the way artists’ practices can redefine ways or subtle ways. If you agree that practices don’t work in the same a very temporal way, to activate visitors’ relationship to museums. we’ve done that, what do you think way anymore because they’ve been the space as best you can—in the But a lot of the change in visitors’ that mechanism is? incorporated—it’s like “Commodify given situation, with the audience understanding of institutions initially Your Dissent,” right?—the other you have—and to say that this is one came out of institutional critique, Liz: I think from what I’ve seen, it strategy you’re positing is about a attempt among myriad possibilities. which was essentially an oppositional has involved a combination of trust, present-ness to process. Taking a more practice. experimentation, and a willingness neutral position on what success is Mark: It’s a proposition for how things to fail. A willingness to not know if and what failure is becomes a way of could be. Liz: Yes. We’re in this sort of post- a piece is going to work, and to do resisting commodification. institutional critique moment where enough things that if some of them Liz: But you can’t make permanent there’s a certain amount of critique don’t work it’s okay. The times that it’s Liz: Yes. It’s a resistance to change that way. That’s very different already built into things. Now, museum worked the best are the times when institutionalization too, in a certain way. from changing an institution. visitors have an intuitive understanding there’s almost a black-hole openness of interventionist practices. It isn’t to it, where you don’t necessarily Mark: When I first started Machine Mark: Yeah. I also realized that it’s not unexpected to see something critical know what’s going to come out of Project, people were always asking enough just to make a proposition. It’s in the space anymore. It’s almost the engagement. Given that amount me if Machine was my art practice or important to actually do something like the museum needs to represent of trust but also that amount of not, and whether I was an artist or the different for one day. It doesn’t have that but doesn’t actually want to uncertainty, artists feel responsible and director of a nonprofit—and I used to to be permanent, but it has to be real. have the struggle that produced it feel the need to fill the space in a big get really stressed out about those in the first place. They just want to way, rather than feeling like they’ve questions. I started to realize that the Liz: There’s also a difference between have the product. Some of those been exhausted through particulars. answer is yes, I am all of those things trying to do the thing in a real way pieces that produced the ground for When you feel like you’re getting and Machine is all of those things, versus doing the thing that looks like all the relational work were actually stopped at the door too many times, and that it’s okay to just let that float the thing. very contested. They couldn’t have the project can’t develop organically. out there. There’s value in sustaining happened without a lot of fights, a lot These kinds of experimental, ambiguity.

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } LG 124 Liz: Yeah. I think if you don’t let the In terms of being strategic, I think thing become fixed, these practices finding a way to promote something can really be ephemeral and moving. like the Field Guide to LACMA or the In some ways the critique that’s built Hammer Residency such that whatever into the projects is about resisting the press release is out there has enough impulse to self-historicize, or to brand information about each project, that if thyself and go to 20 institutions. That’s someone wants to write about one of the things that’s been most a specific one of them, they can. exciting and valuable to me about working with Machine Project. Most Mark: It’s interesting: with the institutions only want the thing that Hammer Residency, there was no you’re known for doing. The stuff I do mention of Machine Project at all in at Machine doesn’t look like anything the press coverage of some of the less else I’m doing. It gives me room to collaborative, larger pieces—like Brody experiment and develop artistically. Condon’s Level5. I actually like feeling that we are having some influence on *** a cultural discourse without having to leverage our brand to do it. The Mark: Something I try to think about challenge for me is figuring out when when Machine Project goes to work in to leverage the brand to help the a larger institution is how to balance artist, and when to pull the brand back visibility for Machine with visibility for so it doesn’t obscure the artist. Liz Glynn. Liz: Often if I’m doing something in Liz: I feel like the way I am sensitive a public school, I’ll say I’m involved to that changes over time, and it with Machine Project, or I work changes depending on what else I’m collectively in an ongoing way with doing in a totally subjective way. I’m Machine Project. It’s less of a résumé actually really interested in the loss line, and more of this entity that I of individual authorship with some do stuff with that’s important to my of the more collaborative things practice. that happen here. At the same time, if I feel particularly attached to a Mark: Right, it’s more of a project, it bothers me if someone contextualizer than a moment of who knows my name is describing cultural capital. Like this wasn’t your my piece back to me and has no big moment you achieved by having idea that I did it. Sometimes people a show at Machine Project; it’s more talk about Machine stuff as though like where it’s coming out of. Above: Liz Glynn, it were literally a machine. I think Destruction the problem comes in when you’re Liz: Exactly. My process is involved Karaoke— doing a lot of programming on top with this process, or intermeshed, or Spaces, Cleveland of itself. It becomes this flurry of part of my practice is this practice. activity. And for someone writing Photograph by about it, it’s a journalistic problem: Mark: Related to that, I think you were Kevin Coyne it becomes like, “There was all this the first person to point out to me stuff happening, and this and that.” the difficulty of managing the shift in

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } LG 125 publicity that happens when you move experimental Japanese film the Mark: Yeah, that’s what I loved about work from a smaller community space ordinary cinema-going public will come living in Texas. like Machine to an institution that and become experimental film fans. has more cultural capital. The artist Liz: In Austin, people emailed me to feels they should be going up a level Liz: Further, it’s like the participatory apologize for having to leave for an in cultural prominence, but because artist is suddenly responsible for hour to pick their kids up at soccer they’re going to a larger place with making the general public love the or something, and to assure me that more cultural prominence, they have abstract-painting show [laughs]. It they would be there for the other 23 much smaller prominence inside that just doesn’t work that way at all. hours—which has never happened institution. Which isn’t to say that participatory before. In New York, I would have to work doesn’t draw a different say five times, “You’re coming to do Liz: Coming in as a less established and interesting audience, but it’s the thing. No, it’s not the opening person, you feel so grateful for very situation-specific and it’s very where you drink and spill wine on the anything the institution is going to localized. thing. You actually have to come and do for you that you don’t realize do it.” that sometimes they have very Mark: I was very struck by how many standardized ways of promoting people came when we did your Rome Mark: Right [laughs]. It’s more like things, and that you won’t have any in a Day project here at Machine, getting volunteers than an audience. control over where or how they’re which was the first thing that we did publicizing something. Whereas when together. That seemed to happen very Liz: In New York, though, some of you’re working with a small place it’s serendipitously. You’ve since done that the people that wanted to participate easier to ask. It’s important to be piece in a number of different places. were young art students that really really clear with people about whether When you did it at the New Museum cared about the art context of the you expect them to bring their own in New York, did you feel it generated piece. And it’s not only about them audience or not. That reminds me a participatory audience in the same showing up. It’s about them showing of another thing: the audience for way? up and staying for much longer than participatory work is specific. I think they thought they would, because they some institutions have this idea that Liz: In New York, it didn’t. In Austin, just got into doing something. participatory work appeals to a more it completely did—in part, though, general public and that they will just because we worked with several automatically come—and that’s so professors at the University of Texas. wrong. As a participatory artist, you I visited several classes, I lectured in get put in this position where you feel the art department. And I did it at this like you’re disappointing the institution cool, sort of young, artist-run space, so if you don’t produce that intercultural they brought all their friends. On top audience. of that, it was a smaller media market, so the piece got prepress that brought Mark: I didn’t think about it until a lot of people. There is also just a you said that, but I think there is this big cultural difference between those perception out there that what a cities: in Austin it was like, “Great! participatory piece does is transform Here’s this thing that you can come to an ordinary audience into an and spend all this time at”; whereas in emancipated participatory New York, people are like, “I have no audience—in a way that artists time” [laughs]. who do participatory work would never expect. As if by showing an

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } LG 126 Brody In- Condon ter- view:November 14, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report 127 Interview with Brody Condon, November 14, 2010 Mark: The first thing I want to ask you of someone else’s agenda—whether about is the fact that—more than a lot it’s a curatorial agenda or an agenda | } of the people I work with—your work at a higher level of the museum MA BC primarily takes place in museums now, that I don’t particularly understand so it was a more familiar environment because it functions at a cultural or for you and for your work than for social echelon that I don’t have access some of the other artists. And I think to. I can see why there’s so much it was easier for the Hammer to institutional critique work that tries to understand your piece because of that. approach that subject, but that’s just Mark Allen and artist Brody Condon discuss how I was wondering what you see the role not the kind of work I’m interested in. Brody thinks about museums as a context for his of museums as being in your work. Mark: Does that power dynamic affect work. They also talk about the surprising and Brody: I have spent a fair amount of how you think about documentation? successful public engagement component that time just trying to figure out what I’ve realized that I’m kind of laissez- museums are and their relationship to faire about documentation of events emerged as part of Brody’s piece, Level5, the focus the culture at large, and then trying to that happen at Machine Project, but of which was an intense immersive experience for a understand my relationship with them. I’ve become more particular about I didn’t grow up around museums, documentation of our work that closed group of participants. This anchors a larger so to me they’re confusing entities. happens at other institutions, because consideration of the way curation can add layers of They are cultural institutions that otherwise I have less control over how sell a set of ideas to an intellectual that work is contextualized. meaning to a work. entertainment demographic. I think that’s the best articulation that I can Brody: I don’t really differentiate give. Does that sound somewhat between shooting in my studio and Projects discussed: accurate? shooting in the museum. Each one is just a different set. I’m just using • Level5 Mark: Sure. I mean, traditionally, those the museum to get the work done— ideas are embedded in objects, and whether it’s in terms of resources or one of the museum’s functions is space. I like those big clean spaces. It’s to take care of and aggregate cultural like it’s a funding or producing body, capital into those objects. plus a movie set, especially in this most recent case with Level5. Brody: Yes, but even more so since the ‘60s: since art has shifted away from Mark: So you’re saying that you see objects, the real power of museums the museum as a site for producing seems to lie in the articulation and a piece that will exist outside the dissemination of particular ideas via museum and circulate without the curated shows. People literally buy museum’s oversight? into those ideas, and that keeps that institution afloat and allows it to Brody: Yeah. That way a lot of the profit or at least to grow. My second museum’s contextual weight is shed. question has always been: Who For instance, the Hammer has already decides that idea agenda? And is it taken down the room that was set an agenda that I agree with? Because, up for Level5. There are very few as an artist, my relationship with people that are going to know that museums revolves around being a part it was at the Hammer Museum when

Machine Project Hammer Report 128 they see the video, unless they look pieces together, and I don’t think at my résumé or the press release or Machine is strongly inflecting something. your work, but it is part of the contextualizing process. So with Mark: It will be interesting to see Level5, it’s not just Brody Condon at how the piece about Level5 is the Hammer; it’s Brody Condon at the written in East of Borneo—whether Hammer as part of Machine Project’s it contextualizes it in the Hammer or Residency. Do you think that affects not—because it will be about the live the piece? experience and not about the video. Brody: Yes, it does. Some of the pieces Brody: Right, but the entire that we’ve done could only happen experience was a video installation. because of Machine Project—and Sure, there was the added presence of not just because of the support but traditional art viewers, and the because of the particular ideas that fact that they were walking in and the Machine community is interested seeing the piece in the Museum’s in and the particular conversations that environment—which is why I had to we’ve had. It’s like falling onto manipulate the viewership in the same a bed of—conceptual support isn’t way I manipulated the players. It was quite the right word, but something just an extra element to take into beyond social support and beyond account as part of the interactivity of production support. the piece. Mark: I feel like one of my roles Mark: Do you feel like you have a lot in your practice is to provide a of agency in how your work is talked generative space. A lot of projects about? You’ve moved through you’ve developed have started here in a number of different niche genres; the some way and have grown from there. shift you’ve made from the game work I like the idea of Machine being a kind to the current work is pretty profound of art lab. in terms of the material nature of the practice. Brody: Is that something that you’re trying to impart to museums? Level5 Brody: For me it’s all part of one seamless trajectory. Do I have control? Mark: Yeah, with the Hammer Yeah, by whittling down the sound Residency I tried to use the space bites to what I think is important and to experiment. But I think it’s very repeating the same story over and challenging for museums to do that. over again. Rather than saying, “Here’s some stuff that may or may not be interesting, Mark: I’m curious also—to the extent but we’re experimenting with it and that you worry about your work you, as the public, can be part of that being at the mercy of other cultural conversation,” their process is more contextualizers like museums—how you about offering the most important or feel about working in relationship to interesting things to the culture. Machine Project. We’ve done four or five I believe that determining what work is

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } BC 129 important is something that should realized, once you get down to the be happening in real time and not level of the kind of experience people I didn’t grow up around something that is predigested for the at the Museum had. Especially when audience to consume. the people in the LARP [live-action museums, so to me they’re role-playing] broke into the Billy Brody: That’s interesting. Earlier you Wilder Theater, where the video was confusing entities. They are said something to the effect that I streaming, and started interacting was one of the artists who created with the Hammer visitors who had cultural institutions that a piece that was more tolerable wandered in there—and who may not or digestible to the Museum, but I even have known anything about the sell a set of ideas to an don’t necessarily think that’s true. I project. It starts to get very strange don’t think this project would have in terms of the piece’s role in public intellectual entertainment happened outside of the context of engagement. the Machine Residency at the Hammer. Do you know what I mean? Imagine me Brody: Yeah, I didn’t like that. I’m demographic. I think that’s coming to them, completely outside of not sure I can elaborate on it much the Residency and pitching it. [laughs]. It would have been nice if the best articulation that more people had been there to see Mark: I don’t think that would have the video though. I think that piece I can give. worked. could have drawn an audience that was different from their usual art viewers. —Brody Condon Brody: It wouldn’t happen. They were in an experimental mood because of Mark: We never quite figured out how your Residency. to promote the Residency. And part of my intention for it was just to focus on Mark: I think that your piece was the daily life of the Museum and not easier for the Hammer to understand try to make it like as an artist’s project—and some of that a festival where everybody comes. has to do with the fact that you’re an established artist and you’ve worked Brody: Right. in other museums. Whereas with a lot of the pieces that we did, I was Mark: Also, part of what I found so interested in intervening in the voice of interesting about your piece was the Museum, in becoming part of that or the idea that we were not making modifying how it works. Those projects something for a million people to look felt less like discrete entities in a way. at for one minute; we were making a very intensive experience for a Brody: At the same time, Level5 did limited group of people over the play with those structures of viewership course of two or three days. What and communication. So maybe it was emerged was that it could be both this a more traditional project, but with incredible spectacle for the public and somewhat experimental dissemination this really intense personal experience within the Museum. for the participants. In the beginning we were thinking about it much more Mark: And I think the actual thing privately. that happened was weirder than they Brody: Oh for sure. I didn’t realize

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } BC 130 that small a group of people having experimental and positive? figure out how to make it more an intense experience would be so successful for public engagement. visually interesting for outside viewers. Mark: I had never thought about it She was unbelievably supportive, that way, but this year that is how I’m but it was like: “This is a great piece, Mark: I spent three hours watching it. starting to think about it. But yeah, it’s but part of our job is to connect with I remember when we were pitching less critical and more experiential or the public and it’s not doing that” the piece to the Hammer, the fact exploratory. [laughs]. So I’ve been drawn into that there needed to be a public that conversation a number of times component to it was never the Brody: Sort of like, OK, let’s build because of the nature of my work. focus for me. It was just something a new space together. we needed to articulate to get the Mark: What’s interesting about that Museum to do the piece. The really Mark: My position is less about making is that it allows your work to operate powerful public component that a statement that museums should do X on multiple levels: you are pursuing emerged in the Billy Wilder Theater or Y. I’m more interested in unearthing a certain set of questions; then, by was surprising to me. the ways museums operate that might virtue of being a particular context, be normally hidden. your work also engages with these Brody: Yeah, me too. other questions about the Museum Brody: Going back to the beginning that are more interesting to me. These Mark: I had no idea how incredibly of our conversation, to my relationship things can happen simultaneously. engaging that was going to be. And with museums, I guess instead of Machine kind of adds an overlay on it wasn’t something you tried to getting involved in the daily life of the top of the work. engineer, but it has really transformed museum, I build my own conspiracy how you’re thinking about presenting theories about why and how the Brody: Yeah, for sure. It highlights the piece now. Jim Fetterley was a big museum functions. I just try to get an aspect of the work—its relationship part of that. as much out of it as I can and get to the public—that for me is just out [laughs]. a by-product, a practical problem Brody: Yeah absolutely. Jim Fetterley I have to work through. is an artist in his own right, and he Mark: As my friend Fritz says, “You became a part of that piece. He was an make the museum work for you. You Mark: Does the success of the public artist that I would have collaborated don’t work for the museum.” component—the live-streaming happily with anyway, so it was really footage in the Billy Wilder Theater— wonderful to have him there, making Brody: Exactly [laughs]. affect your thinking on future projects? suggestions. Museums often have artists working on staff that they don’t Mark: I think that’s how most artists Brody: Yes, for sure. It’s hard to say take full advantage of. interact with museums, and that makes how that will manifest, but I have it a lot of sense for your work because as a working strategy in my quiver that Mark: It’s funny. I think the individual your concerns as an artist are not I’ll definitely use again if given people who work in museums are about how people relate to museums. the chance. extremely thoughtful about what they do, but on the level of the institution Brody: But my work is putting me itself, things can be a little less in that conversation whether I like it conscious. or not. I spent hours talking with a curator about Without Sun [a Brody: Do you consider what you’re 2008 video compilation of “found doing to be in the trajectory of insti- performances” of people on tutional critique—except maybe more psychedelic substances] trying to

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } BC 131 Adam In- Overton ter- view:December 21, 2010

Machine Project Hammer Report 132 InterviewMA with Adam Overton, December | 21, } 2010 AO

Adam Overton and Mark Allen reflect on the value of sincere amateur engagement and the challenges of negotiating trust in collaborative partnerships. They also discuss the intimate video that was made of Dream-In participants as they were woken up and asked to describe their dreams.

Projects discussed: • Dream-In

Mark: So Adam, let’s talk about the a year earlier, to this Conscious Life Above: Dream-In. Can you tell me a little about Expo, which is basically a trade show Dream-In that project—the origins of it, how it for New Age stuff. They had a dozen went down, how you organized it? rooms with workshops, people talking and leading meditations and doing Adam: It was in a list of things I had different things. We would go from proposed. The magical part of coming one to the next, and if one was kind up with the idea was that it just of lame, we would just go to another happened to coincide with the Hammer one. I loved the format. The idea having the exhibit of Jung’s dream for the Dream-In was initially based book—which I had heard of a year on that. I wanted to have a bunch earlier and totally forgotten about. of artist-led experimental dreaming workshops so people could choose Mark: Very serendipitous. Jung might from different options. say there are no accidents like that. Mark: What kinds of workshops? Adam: [laughs] So, yeah. That was the first good omen about that project. As Adam: We had some very for where it came from…I had gone straightforward ones, like the basics with Asher Hartman, maybe of lucid dreaming. We had Yoga Nidra,

Machine Project Hammer Report 133 which is a form of sleeping yoga where seriously enough and some perform it they have transcendent experiences, Mark: Right. As an organizer, you’re you don’t actually go to sleep, but just right.” I’m interested in that happy they are simultaneously looking around always a little bit on the outside. you go into a meditative state close to medium, where that cynicism stays and noticing all the weird characters. sleep. We had dream acrobatics where behind and people act and think So I think it’s a healthy skepticism. I’m Adam: Even as a performer, you have people were forming human pyramids and propose projects genuinely. And also not interested in working with a little bit more adrenaline in your and reciting dreams they have for the I don’t know a lot about Jung but people who are hook-line-and-sinker bloodstream than other people. I future or past. We had ecstatic energy I’ve read a little, and it seems like a complete believers. I like being able to used to do performances at CalArts consultants leading people in circle big part of the difference between appropriate those materials and play where I would sit and meditate and dances, chanting antiwar dreams, him and Freud was that Freud would with them in a way that’s not just formal: hook myself up to the computer, and and this fabulous workshop by Laura tell you what your problems were, there’s something inside of it too. I am those were the most nerve-racking Steenberge about a linguistic process whereas Jung would ask you what interested in making work that creates a performances I’ve done. I was just for remembering and trying to speak your problems were. It was this temporary belief system where you can sitting there wondering when my about dreams. So there were a lot of collaboration that put more power into suspend your disbelief for a little bit and computer program was going to crash. really different approaches. And we the hands of the person. So actually, just go for it, and then afterward be like, Actually, my one critique of how the had two musical acts—campfire music it’s a very amateur spirit: here are the “Oh that was ridiculous.” Hammer worked is related to that. and more electronic dreamy textures. tools for you to engage in this on your When we brainstorm stuff at Machine Then we had bedtime stories. own and not have to just wait until the *** we imagine all the wonderful things next session. that can happen. They were imagining Mark: A big part of your idea was Mark: Was the Dream-In what you all of the horrible things. the embrace of the amateur spiritual Mark: It’s less paternal. Oops. Uh-oh! were expecting? Did it feel how you practitioner. So the artists you were Hold on. Sorry. thought it was going to feel? Mark: Yeah, it’s a more protective working with were all relating to these approach. kinds of practices in a somewhat Adam: Mark is running to the Adam: In some ways, yes. I mean, it amateurish fashion, right? refrigerator with milk. was so overly determined, which was Adam: I was definitely pretty burnt out kind of a requirement of working with afterward. The level of work that went Adam: Yeah. All of them took it very Mark: Sorry about that. Go on. the Hammer. But at the same time, into that was a lot more than what I’m seriously and really did their research actually going to the workshops was used to with my projects. I’m kind of in whatever vein they needed to, Adam: I’m not interested at all in very unexpected and wonderful. a proponent of easy things. After but my sort of hidden fear was that cynical, ironic approaches. I think a lot three or four months of meetings and all these Jungians would come and of the people I work with harbor some Mark: Something that I found really emailing about all the possible things then be really disappointed with the level of cynicism, but for me… amazing was that there were all these that could go wrong, it got to me. So, workshops, even though it’s totally in workshops and performances, and I did go to sleep, but it was an anxious the spirit, I think, of Jungian play. Mark: More like skepticism, maybe? then at a little after midnight, it was kind of nondreamy sleep. lights out and 20 minutes later every Mark: I think it is very important that Adam: A skepticism that we battle single person was asleep. What was Mark: I have had to train myself to be these are people who are relating to against turning cynical. One thing that that experience like for you? Did you less of a worrywart. I do a lot of events spiritual practices with the idea of skepticism leans up against is criticism, get to sleep, or were you one of and I almost think my interest in doing approaching them as amateurs and which can go the cynical route and can the three people wandering around events is exposure therapy: by doing not ironically. Can you talk a little bit also go a productive route. I think the all night? things over and over again and having about what your interest is in amateur people I work with handle the critical them work out—even if they don’t go spiritualists? element really well. They’re quite aware Adam: Well, I tried to sleep, but, you exactly the way you expected—you of the hokey place that a lot of this know, I do a lot of projects involving start to learn that everything’s going Adam: Yeah, totally! There’s that spiritual stuff lives in our culture; a lot meditation and, in their actual to be OK. But the Museum just has Cage quote where he says, “Some of them are familiar with the history of implementation, they’re not very really different stakes. It’s a public people who perform music take it it, especially the ‘60s, ‘70s, and ‘80s. meditative for me. institution, and if somebody destroys too seriously and some don’t take it They go to these meditations and, while a painting they’re out a lot of money,

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AO 134 Dream-In

and they don’t want to ruin their Mark: Yeah, you have to insulate. stresses; they just show up and do there’s a lot of talk about currency: reputation, so it’s harder for them. their thing. But you also don’t want a what’s being exchanged for this sort of Adam: And as artists we were also situation where there are 12 levels of stuff? You may not be putting in a lot Adam: The level of worry was really figuring out whether we were working communication: where the curator has of physical effort or maybe not even intense. And I think it was more directly with the Museum or through to talk to the fire marshal, who has to a lot of time, but there was a lot of intense because it was the first big Machine. So there were all these talk to the building manager, who has emotional currency expended on project the Hammer was doing with different levels of negotiation. to talk to the curator, who has to talk trying to take care of things. That’s us and they were still figuring out to me, who has to talk to you…. I think something that I’m a little more how to make that work. So it was an Mark: I think you’re bringing up it’s about finding a balance between guarded about now. This might be a experiment and there were points something that is really important. having clear, efficient communication great project, but is it going to destroy where it was very uncomfortable. When you’re brokering projects with and also trying to set up these me emotionally? There were moments when I was institutions, there are two values firewalls so that the inevitable stresses brought in on things that really that you try and add: one is clear and complications don’t pollute the Mark: Right. Organizing is primarily an didn’t have to do with me, and it communication, so in that case you psyches of the people who aren’t in emotional labor because you’re trying just raised the adrenaline level. On want fewer intermediaries; but the charge of dealing with them. to create an environment and you the institutional side there may be other half is that you want to protect have to negotiate your communication crises going on, but the artists don’t people from what they don’t need to Adam: Yes. You know, in the art differently for different people. I find necessarily need to know about that. know. Ideally the artists are completely community, especially around these you tend to work more and more insulated from the institutional sorts of projects with institutions, with people who are less emotionally

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AO 135 difficult. Sometimes you might say, and sometimes it’s not as good. You sometimes, too, because institutions the right things. I think Elizabeth Cline “Okay, this person is hard to work collaborate with a ton of people, both are hierarchical, is that the person who did a great job at finessing all that with, but I know how to manage as an organizer and as a performer, understands your project the best and and, I imagine, should the Hammer the particular ways they’re hard to so you’re on both sides of those is the person who’s actually making it want to do another dream-in they’d be work with, and it’s worth it because equations. How do you deal with happen may not have total authority. like, “Oh yeah, no problem. We know I value their work.” But my closest people having different ideas of So they are in this position of having exactly how to do that.” collaborators are all people that I what will work or not work? When to negotiate on both sides, to their can communicate with very directly somebody you’re working with doesn’t bosses and to you. Adam: Yes, they totally figured it out without feeling like I have to take care like your idea, when do you let it go by the end. They were so organized of their emotions. Speaking of which, and when do you keep pushing? Adam: Yeah. That was another with their interns who volunteered— you and I initially disagreed about the frustrating thing at the beginning. which was great, because I was very dream video we made for this piece. Adam: I don’t know. I mostly work There were these moments where clear that I wasn’t going to emcee and Can you talk a little bit about that? with a lot of the same people where we’d get 11 Yeses, and then all of a run things once it started, that I was we’re comfortable with each other, so sudden we’d get a big No. People going to be a participant. My idea Adam: Sure. I remember I proposed it’s not really a problem. I only throw were already starting to work on was that I would go from workshop that to you and… in new people every once in a while. things. And in the beginning the No to workshop, just kind of keeping Often it comes after having witnessed was a very inflexible No. When security an eye out to see how things were Mark: I said it’s a terrible idea? something they’ve already done, so I would freak out about something, going. As soon as I went to one of kind of have a feel for their vibe and the people who were working with us the meditations, all of my worries just Adam: You did. I was like, I have this whether I trust them or not. were doing so many other things, they spilled out of my feet. idea: we do dream interviews where were too busy to say, “Oh, no, no, no. we wake people up and have them Mark: It’s very hard to build up that Don’t worry. What you’re imagining is Mark: I think that the Museum as an just talk about their dreams. I believe extended relationship of trust. You not actually what’s going to happen,” organism also relaxed, kind of breathed you said you didn’t think there was and I have worked together tons of or “We can make this happen another a sigh of relief. It was like, okay, there anything more underwhelming than times so there’s both safety for you to way.” It was just No. were all these people here all night and someone just telling you what they suggest whatever idea you want, and it wasn’t a disaster. Nothing caught fire. had dreamed about. And I was like, there’s also safety for me to say I don’t Mark: The chains of communication It was a very orderly bunch, and people “Exactly! I want to get people with think that’s going to work. Whereas weren’t fully built up at that stage. had a good time. The thing that was so their sleeping-bag-zipper impressions the first time you work with someone, funny is that it didn’t seem that unusual still on their faces.” you don’t want to poison the well. You Adam: Yeah. But I think that started to be sleeping in a museum—although have to be much more diplomatic. And to develop better as they got to know of course we never do that—it was more Mark: [laughs] You were totally right. I think this happens with institutions Machine’s practice. Instead of just the fact of sleeping next to 140 people. That video’s one of my favorite things, too. They want to be able to bring saying no, they could be like, “These It’s just not an experience that you have so thank you for pushing through my up their anxieties about what might are the problems that security sees that often. And it felt very comfortable. skepticism. I think what made it work work or might not work or all these with this.” And we could work from It didn’t feel like you were in other was not removing people from the site potential problems, without feeling there. At least, I imagine that’s what people’s spaces. I had a great balance of of dreaming. It made it so soft and like they’re shutting you down. ended up happening. feeling public and private. really intimate. I think the question of how much input to give or not to give Adam: You also really have to have Mark: Yeah. I think it’s just hard Adam: Yeah. It was great walking as an organizer is interesting. On one that critical component where they can for everybody the first time you around in the morning and seeing hand I feel that a real value to your brainstorm with you and it’s more of do something. There is a lot of people all cuddled up and them being position is just to find the people you a conversation. Sometimes you run organizational work in figuring out fine with that. I think you said this was want to work with and let them do into administrators who are just Yes- how you actually make room for 140 the cutest event you’d ever been to. their thing. On the other hand I often and No-ers. people to sleep, how you lay out the can’t help myself but to meddle and campsites, how you invite all these Mark: I remember that same night choreograph. Sometimes it’s good, Mark: I think what happens people, how you make sure they bring there was this screening at the Billy

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AO 136 I believe you said you didn’t think there was anything more underwhelming than someone just telling you what they had dreamed about. And I was like, “Exactly! I want to get people with their sleeping- bag-zipper impressions still on their faces.” —Adam Overton

Wilder Theater from the UCLA film real experience working with a major archive. It was an amazing scene as institution. It was a very humanizing people were coming to register: in thing. It was great to go in and see the lobby there’s 70 people in their the inner workings of the Hammer and pajamas carrying sleeping bags and to kind of see why those things are pillows and blow-up mattresses; the way they are. It’s really changed as they are coming in, all these my way of thinking about that kind other people are streaming out of collaboration. At the same time, of the theater. It was such a great there’s so much that we’re capable intersection of these two different of doing outside of that framework, communities using the Museum in so it’s really a big choice to make— Waking up after really different ways. whether you want to do something the Dream-In that’s negotiated or something that Adam: It was great too, because the doesn’t need to be negotiated. I’m still level of excitement of the Hammer very interested in not engaging with staff was very palpable. Everybody institutions, even though now I know was on board with it and wanted I can do it and I’m not going to run it to happen. So it was a good from it. experience. Actually, this was my first

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } AO 137 Ali In- Subotnick ter- view:March 8, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report 138 InterviewAA with Ali Subotnick, March | 8, 2011 } AS

Hammer public engagement curator Allison Agsten talks to Hammer curator Ali Subotnick about the beginnings of Machine Project’s Residency. They reflect on the ideation process, considering ideas that didn’t make it or were incorporated into others, in addition to those that were realized over the course of the year. They also discuss some of the major communication and coordination challenges, and the protocols and systems that had to be developed.

Projects discussed: Allison: At what point in the process person to work with. At that point, FungiFest • Dream-In did you start working on the Artist In Annie and Douglas asked me to work Residence program? with him until we hired someone—until • Level5 we hired you. • Fanfare/No Fanfare Ali: It was over the summer—I think from June to August of 2009—Mark Allison: So when you started there was • Little William Theater: Micro-Concerts Allen and Liz Glynn came in together no infrastructure in place for this. • Valentine’s Day Songs of Triumph or Heartbreak to meet with people in different departments. They were on-site quite Ali: No. Basically during November– • Subtle Bodies Series a lot. They brought artists in to look December, we were busy just trying • Houseplant Vacation around the Museum and come up with to put things on the calendar and ideas that later became proposals figure out how they were going to be • FungiFest for public engagement. It was sort implemented. Mark, Elizabeth, and I • Live Personal Soundtrack of a research and development time. started meeting about once a week Then, I think maybe around October to discuss different ideas, to decide • Nudist Day at the Hammer Proposal or November, we were sort of at a how to go forward with the specific • Tobacco Maze Proposal standstill. I hadn’t been given the projects, and to figure out what authority to start doing things, and departments we needed to talk to. • Art Spa Proposal Mark basically said he wasn’t going Mark came up with the Wiki page as to do anything more until he had a an organizational tool, and we used

Machine Project Hammer Report 139 that to share updates on the progress Overton’s projects. It did happen. the same amount of energy and effort there. Lots of people came and were being made. Many of the ideas that into everything. really into it. It was funny because at actually ended up happening later in Ali: It was so subtle that you didn’t the end of the night, I had to throw the Residency started as seeds during even know something was happening. Allison: That must have been kind of out the mushrooms and I didn’t know those few months. The Dream-In, There were some things like that that unusual for you as a curator, because where the garbage went [laughs]. which was directly related to the didn’t really require much on our you’re used to choosing the projects exhibition of Carl Jung’s Red Book, part. We just warned security that that you’re really passionate about. Allison: With these projects there were and Brody Condon’s Level5 came up this person was going to be around always these weird by-products or pretty early. One of the earliest things doing these things. It happened more Ali: There were some fun moments, discussions. In the corner of my office discussed was Soundings: Bells at guerrilla style, I guess. The Tobacco though, and it was actually really I’ve got an amplified cactus that we the Hammer and that also eventually Maze was one that Mark really wanted interesting for me to be on the front never used for a project, the curtain happened. The first project we actually to do that didn’t happen. line, because I never am. FungiFest for the Little William Theater, and did was the Fanfare/No Fanfare in was really successful. I remember that a guestbook all wrapped up in an December. The Micro-Concerts in the Allison: Right. I started when the one. It was the first time we realized enormous plastic bag. What do we do Little William Theater started pretty Tobacco Maze conversation was on. that people just immediately go to with this stuff? soon after, and the Valentine’s Day The installation of that Greg Lynn a person standing at a desk. People Songs of Triumph or Heartbreak— sculpture was happening at that time. would come straight to the desk and *** that was when we started doing RSVPs There was just too much going on I would ask them if they were here online, which made people showing in the courtyard. We couldn’t have for the Gary Panter talk, which was Allison: What was the hardest part for up more reliable. We made that giant one work encroaching on the space happening at the same time, or for you about producing these projects information booth which of another. Actually, some of the FungiFest. They’d be like, “I’m here within the Museum? I’m wondering was never used… tobacco plants ended up showing up for Gary Panter, but I’m really into how that aligns with what was difficult for Houseplant Vacation, so they made mycology.” for me later on down the line— Allison: Right! it on-site anyway, just not how they whether the concerns in the beginning originally wanted to be there. Allison: [laughs] I had no idea you were the same as the difficulties in the Ali: …and the sandwich board. It was actually stood at the desk yourself. end, or not. also in those early days that we were Ali: That’s nice, so it wasn’t com- talking about having a Nudist Day, pletely lost. Ali: Yeah. And I hate mushrooms. Ali: It depends on the project. A lot of which didn’t happen. There were a lot times there were things that, if we had of things that we talked about that Allison: Yeah, it’s funny. Until you Allison: [laughs] I thought you were been in a different situation, we could never happened, like poetry phone, started talking about it, I hadn’t going to say, “And I hate visitor have just done them; whereas doing library card… realized how many lost ideas ended up services.” them at the Museum required so many as part of another project. people to sign off and was much more Allison: We actually ended up doing Ali: No. Really, though, being down labor intensive than you would think. poetry phone for Houseplant Vacation. Ali: They morphed into others. It also at the desk on a weekend was just an Also, just not having the staff’s bodies You could call into this thing that seemed like Mark would lose interest interesting way to see the Museum, here on nights and weekends was looked like… in some of the ideas quickly. and to see how visitors interact with it. really tricky. One of the most obvious The desk is absolutely crucial. People things that I totally goofed on was for Ali: Oh, the rock! Allison: Right. We would get started love to have someone approachable the Live Personal Soundtrack: I had planning and at the same time Mark to just ask a question. And that was Annie Philbin and Cindy Burlingham Allison: …a big rock, yeah. would have many other ideas, so then a fun event: there were the mushroom come and listen to the musician, Eric we’d end up following those paths. dancers doing their interpretation of Klerks, when he did his test run, and Ali: I don’t remember what the Subtle the life of a spore; a guy with a whole I completely forgot to bring Portland Bodies Series was… Ali: There were many ambitious ideas. mushroom costume on; a mycologist McCormick, our registrar, in on that. Some of the projects weren’t as from Santa Barbara who brought down It seems obvious in retrospect, but I Allison: That was one of Adam compelling as others, but I tried to put the death cap that killed some guy up just didn’t think about it because there

Machine Project Hammer Report AA | } AS 140 FungiFest

wasn’t a system in place where that Allison: Were you involved with the ideas and we decide how the money’s for. It was an interesting experiment was on the checklist. That became creation of the contract at all? spent. His honorarium is a separate as far as figuring out how to get a problem. We figured it out thing. these different projects implemented, eventually, but it was a good lesson Ali: I sat in on several meetings, but at but I think the new formula— learned. a certain point, Jenni and Jessica really Allison: Right, which is standard for more exhibition-style, working with took over. I helped at the beginning any residency. individual artists on specific projects— Allison: Were there other missing in forming it, and then it was back is much more in the spirit of the grant protocols that you could have used in and forth between the lawyers. It was Ali: I don’t know why we did that. and in the spirit of the Hammer. the beginning? a long, grueling process. At least we learned from it. Allison: For me, it’s also just much more Ali: Well, we had to make a new intake Allison: What do you think held it up? Allison: Now that the year is over, and doable, frankly. It felt almost impossible form for the projects. We used the Obviously it’s complicated, but can you we’re well into the second year, what to have someone here every weekend, one we have for public programs as think of any particular issues that really do you feel like you learned personally, and to have two or three public a template and adapted it to fit more took extra time to think through? or what might the institution have engagement programs some weeks. specifically with public engagement learned from all of it? Ali: Yeah. Not only could Elizabeth and and with Mark’s work. It all sort of Ali: I think one of the problems was I not sustain it, but the rest of our staff happened as needed, or as it came up. that we shouldn’t have shown Mark Ali: It’s tricky, because with this whole was frazzled. Before the Residency At the same time, Mark and Jessica the entire budget because he started Machine Project Residency, they were started, no one really thought about Hough were working on the main thinking about how he was going to doing their usual stuff, only here at the fact that we were basically contract between Machine and the spend that money; whereas it should the Hammer. It wasn’t really about the bringing in another outside curator, Hammer. have been that he tells us the project grant and what we wrote the grant who was then bringing in all of these

Machine Project Hammer Report AA | } AS 141 Ali: I don’t remember Allison: That was one of what the Subtle Bodies Adam Overton’s projects. Series was. It did happen.

Ali: It was so subtle that you didn’t even know something was happening.

artists. It became unclear what our role a complicated project for the Museum. kicker for all the tension later on. It just Allison: I agree. Sometimes when I even was. It was as if we just became never went away. look back on it, I feel like it was boot a platform for them to do their Ali: One problem with that was that camp, but we had to go through this unusual, quirky projects. I didn’t ask enough questions. I ab- Allison: Again, it goes back to us just intensive training to be able to have solutely take responsibility for that. not knowing what to ask. I got myself any idea how to move forward. I Allison: Right. Because Mark’s I remember Mark telling me about Adam into difficult situations too, again and cannot imagine trying to do this year, practice is very curatorial, there were Overton’s Art Spa, and I remember again, because I just didn’t realize having not done last year. If it had so many layers. It never felt like we showing the ghost hunters and the I should be consulting with certain been easy, and everybody felt really were having a direct conversation: I’d energy psychics and all these different people, or I had no idea the direction comfortable and it was no problem, be consulting with and speaking on groups around the Museum. I assumed the project was ultimately going to then in a way we wouldn’t have been behalf of Annie and Douglas, and Mark that, like any of the other artists he go. At the end of the day, we made living up to the grant, which was would be speaking on behalf of his was bringing in, they were just doing all those projects happen without asking us to innovate. When you collaborators. research for future project proposals. dissolving that tension. In some ways, innovate you’re inevitably creating I did not realize they were taking notes it actually escalated at certain points. friction because you’re carving out Ali: There were a lot of people for these reports that were going new paths. involved that didn’t sit down at the to be made public. That was never Ali: I think that’s natural for so much table. It was really awkward for me and communicated to me because I never activity and so many people involved Elizabeth and I’m sure for you, because asked. Then all of a sudden everything and so much compromise that’s we ended up being the middlemen, was online. We read them and it was not required. It was inevitable. A lot of trying to be Mark’s advocates and OK for all this information to be out in great projects did come out of this really get things done for him. public, so we had to ask them to keep and we brought a new public into the it private and to explain the delicate Museum, because a lot of Machine Allison: Let’s talk about Art Spa for situation between us and Occidental Project’s audience doesn’t normally a second, as that turned out to be Petroleum. I think that became the come here.

Machine Project Hammer Report AA | } AS 142 Andrew In- Werner ter- view:March 8, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report 143 Interview with Andrew Werner, March 8, 2011 Allison: What did you think the Public Andrew: Day by day. Engagement Artist in Residence | } program at the Hammer would be like? Allison: From a really practical AA AW standpoint, did it mean adding more Andrew: It seems so long ago already! hours for people, or…? I am trying to recall whether Machine came first or the program came first, Andrew: For the bigger projects, and I really can’t separate the two. yes, it did mean adding hours. The But, having experience with Machine sleepover event for the Dream-In Allison Agsten talks with the Hammer’s operations in the past and being aware of their probably had the largest security director, Andrew Werner, about the impact prior work at LACMA and in their impact. Things that took place during own space, I thought it would be fun, the day just required heightened Machine’s Residency had on security and facilities interesting—at times possibly less awareness, but also the ability—since staff members. Andrew shares his impressions interesting—but always experimental security personnel are the Museum’s and pushing boundaries. As far as front line—to talk to visitors about of some of the projects and recounts the guards’ public engagement specifically, I what was going on. Facilities was initial reactions and eventual acclimation to the don’t think it was clear exactly how impacted in terms of cleanup after the artists would be brought into events and just juggling things for the Little William Theater’s ongoing presence in the that process. There was talk of artists various activities. So there was staffing lobby coat closet. helping us with things like signage and financial impact to both security and very pragmatic museum issues. and facilities. Obviously it was new territory and my expectation was that I was going to Allison: It seems like the event-based Projects discussed: hear a lot more about it and then form projects drew more on your resources • Little William Theater real expectations. than the installations, like the Giant Hand or Houseplant Vacation. Is that • Dream-In Allison: For me, I learned different accurate? • Needlepoint Therapy things than I set out to learn. Each project revealed something different Andrew: Probably. Although I think the • Houseplant Vacation to me than I thought it would reveal. installations probably took more of my • Tablacentric Are there any overarching things that own time—just having discussions with you were surprised came out of this? my staff, trying to figure out what we • Subtle Bodies Series weren’t thinking of and what we should Andrew: I think the projects that were bring to the table, and getting feedback. successful were successful beyond my Once the installations were executed, expectations. The ones that weren’t so they seem to have been managed by successful, or didn’t contribute much your department or by Machine without as far as I could tell, were in some ways too much of our assistance. irrelevant because they weren’t that noticeable, so they didn’t do any harm. Allison: Chris Kallmyer, who was in the coatroom, said that over time Allison: When I started, I didn’t quite he developed a relationship with the realize the impact that the projects guards, where they really knew the would have on your department. How program for the Little William Theater did you guys cope with that? and could encourage people to go and sit in for an experience. Did you hear

Machine Project Hammer Report 144 any anecdotes from the guards about and we found ourselves scrambling that? to get the facts straight so we could explain it to visitors. So yeah, it might Andrew: The initial response, from be helpful to have a brief overview both management within security and from the facilitators and artists shortly more of the rank and file, was primarily before the activity is to begin—just resistance, confusion, annoyance, and a quick heads-up and an opportunity generally not supporting it. I think, to ask questions—rather than it as with all unusual activities that just being passed down through interfere with one’s routine, that was the hierarchy. Within the security a reasonable response. Once those department, I found it was important activities become the routine, and with to emphasize that the value of the the right personalities involved, things event was not really a discussion topic start to smooth out. Chris, I think, and that it was not their role to decide was exceptional in his approachability, whether this project was worthwhile and in his willingness to explain and for the institution, but rather to engage, so he made it easier for the respond to the issues as they come up. guards to eventually accept, respond, You might personally think something’s and enjoy. not worth doing but you still have to ask the standard questions: Is this Allison: I have given a lot of thought safe? Do I have the right resources in to the difficulty of getting everybody place? Are there challenges or issues on board with these projects. You that aren’t being thought of? It’s hard Above: can’t give everybody a vote on to separate your feelings from your Little William everything you do, but you also responsibilities, and I think particularly Theater don’t want people to feel like you’re with this kind of work, since the whole Right: adding another layer of work that they staff is involved in the production of Amused Museum can’t really object to either. In many it, it almost makes people think that security guard respects, though, that did happen: they’re involved in the conceptual busy people were given tasks, and I shaping of it. Whereas when we have could feel the strain on the institution. an exhibition coming up, nobody says, Looking forward, I’ve tried to schedule “I don’t know how I feel about this lunches where the artist comes in work” or “I don’t know if I want to get and helps everyone get to know the involved with this.” So that was kind of projects better. But I’m wondering, interesting to me, and I guess it’s just from your perspective, what do you about the nature of the work and the think would have helped make it easier level of involvement we all have. on the staff? Allison: Yes, and it’s a challenge to the Andrew: It might have been helpful inertia of the institution. It’s different to have the artists meet and greet, from what we have been doing for the especially because there were so many past ten years, and it requires people subcontractors. There were times to think beyond their routine. It was when we had surprises, where we difficult because no one else was doing didn’t anticipate the size or the scale this, so I couldn’t come to your team or there was a last-minute change and say here are examples of four other

Machine Project Hammer Report AA | } AW 145 The initial response, and generally not from both management supporting it. I think, as within security and more with all unusual activities of the rank and file, was that interfere with one’s primarily resistance, routine, that was a confusion, annoyance, reasonable response. —Andrew Werner

museums that did something like this Dream-In. That were a decent amount Then there was the Subtle Bodies Allison: Yeah, there are times when and no one got hurt or sued or anything of people, but it didn’t seem as full as Series. That was lost on me, but a staff you throw something against a wall like that. Maybe this report will help I was expecting. I was disappointed member videotaped it and wanted to and see if it sticks—something that is somebody else use us as an example. at the absence of Hammer staff show me what was going on because thoughtful and has a solid idea behind participation. he found it completely inappropriate it, but—with the idea that if we do this *** for our environment. many programs they’re not all going to Allison: Yeah, that’s an interesting be perfect, especially because we don’t Allison: I am curious what your point you bring up. There was a group Allison: In what way? have precedent. Do you feel like the personal favorites were, and what Elizabeth Cline calls the “Hammer Museum was ready for this program? maybe wasn’t as exciting. 12,” who would get involved for Andrew: He felt it could potentially any of the projects. Getting the rest really disturb people—not just Andrew: Sure. Yeah. It was a lot of Andrew: I think the Needlepoint of the people there was difficult. I challenge their sensibilities—to see work to produce and to coordinate, Therapy project was too discreet to understand people not wanting to somebody lying down with another but in terms of being intellectually really be engaging with the public. I spend the night at the Museum when person’s hand in their mouth, without ready—absolutely yes, no problem. think it’s important in a postmortem they spend five days a week there, but any kind of context. cost-benefit analysis to ask what you if I could have gotten the staff more Allison: Does it seem harder or easier got for the investment. Some of the involved, they would have been the Allison: How do you let people know to you, looking back on it? things that I personally enjoyed but best ambassadors for the program. that something is a public engagement that may not make that final cut, were I think part of why Tablacentric was project? We worked with an amazing Andrew: I think it’s worth continuing to Houseplant Vacation and Tablacentric. really great is because it happened designer that Mark brought in to engage with artists to do these kinds They were pleasant, discreet, quiet, during Museum hours, so staff could create the sign that we put up on of nontraditional projects. It’s hard to and peaceful. get a feel of it. Saturdays, but you can’t put a big sign paint it with a broad brush, though, next to every single thing you do. because each one is going to bring Allison: I liked those too. I liked the Andrew: I stuck around for some. I something totally different—hopefully projects that weren’t necessarily big wanted to meet the caveman guy. I Andrew: Nor should you need to. But they will. Each will have its own relative splashy events but more like gestures. thought he was going to be spending like I said, not all of them are going to successes and weaknesses. some quality time with us and I think be equally successful—at least from Andrew: I also slept great during the he was just here for a day or two. where I sit.

Machine Project Hammer Report AA | } AW 146 Julia In- Luke ter- view:March 8, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report 147 InterviewAA with Julia Luke, March 8, 2011 | } JL

Allison Agsten talks with Hammer senior graphic designer Julia Luke about her impressions of Machine Project’s Residency and her participation in the Hammer Staff in Residence at Machine Project. Their conversation reveals some of the frustrated expectations and assumptions that can surface in new collaborations and concludes with a brief reflection on publicity challenges and successes.

Projects discussed:

• Hammer Staff in Residence at Machine Project: Allison: I am curious what you thought better to the public as a program. It Pop-Up Pie Shop Pop-Up Pie Shop Machine Project’s Residency at the almost seemed as if the Machine Project Hammer would be like, versus what Residency, outside of a few key projects, it was like—because I think everybody was just a different venue for Machine had a different idea of what it would Project, and that they were inhabiting be. Did you have any expectations the space as if it were an extension for it? of their own space. So far, this year’s projects seem to be more integral to the Julia: I actually had no idea. I had no Museum itself, and collaborative with expectations because we hadn’t done the staff as well as the public. anything like that. Now, following Machine Project’s Residency, I have a Allison: One reason I wanted to talk to clearer idea of what I would expect you is that you participated in a number from the A.I.R. program. of the projects that Machine did here. What was the impact for you for having Allison: Which is what? Machine on-site? What did it require from you as our lead graphic designer? Julia: I think what we’re embarking on in this second year is a little more Julia: Absolutely nothing. There could structured, in a way that can translate have been more opportunities for

Machine Project Hammer Report 148 Machine’s designers to work with me, Julia: Yeah, I guess it’s similar. We and vice versa. couldn’t use Machine’s pneumatic tube for Food Bank donations. Everyone Allison: Can you talk about your has their limitations, I suppose. project for the Hammer Staff in Residence at Machine Project and what Allison: Did you get any feedback it was like working with Machine as a from Mark afterwards? collaborator? Julia: When we got there in the Julia: The project was a one-night-only morning, Mark asked me if I was Pop-Up Pie Shop. I worked with prepared for a thousand people to a close friend who made all the come. I got the feeling he was really pies and I did the graphics and art apprehensive about crowd control direction. I contacted Machine for and maybe a bit upset by how much specifics like the floor plan, but other publicity we had gotten. He came in than that there really wasn’t much at the very end, after his event, but collaboration. Mark’s assistants made at that point I was exhausted. I don’t themselves available before our remember what we talked about. I think Pop-Up Pie Shop project during the day, but we did not he remarked that it was a success. work directly with Mark at all; in fact, he had a project the same night at the Allison: How many people came in the Hammer, so he wasn’t in attendance, end? which was a little strange to me. Most of his involvement was related to the Julia: I think we had about 200 people fact that we had gotten a lot of blog throughout the night. The space on-site can get more attention. It institution to communicate to the public attention and he seemed concerned always had people in it. was hard for each and every one of what was happening well in advance. with the amount of people that would those things to get that recognition It’s difficult then to plan ahead and get come. In the end it was very contained Allison: That’s a really significant or even a huge audience because we the press out if you’re collaborating and successful. It didn’t really feel turnout. were asking people to come basically with someone who has a very fluid like a strong partnership, though. I’d every weekend. In a way we were freestyle way of doing things. almost say I felt a bit of friction, as if Julia: It was great for us and it competing with ourselves. It was great we were an intrusion in their space. was great for Machine. They were for people who weren’t expecting this Allison: That was definitely mentioned in everything. They were and stumbled into it. It’s hard to meet challenging. Sometimes the fully Allison: Did you feel that you had in Brand X, Culture Monster, all sorts somebody in our world who didn’t realized concept and description for liberty to do what you wanted there? of stuff. experience at least one of Mark’s the event wasn’t completed until projects last year, even if they didn’t shortly before the project itself was Julia: For the most part, yeah, though I Allison: That’s awesome. That press plan to. ready. When we look back at a piece was a little uncomfortable. is really hard to get, now more than like Table Tennis on Lindbrook Terrace, ever. I know it was a real concern of Julia: There were certain events like which Mark thinks of now as a sound Allison: I think that was one of the his, for his collaborators, that the the Dream-In, Soundings: Bells at the sculpture and a piece but which tricky things for Mark here: we wanted Machine projects at the Hammer Hammer, and the Houseplant Vacation started out as a social experiment, to give him and his collaborators as didn’t get the kind of publicity that that really engaged the Museum the idea of what these things mean, much freedom as possible, but at the they’re used to getting. One of space, staff, and visitors. I think maybe or what they even were, has really end of the day we had our structure Mark’s recommendations for the their energy would have been better evolved over time. I do think that and limitations. Museum, moving forward, is to think used focusing on fewer events. That impacted press. about how everything that happens may have made it easier for us as an

Machine Project Hammer Report AA | } JL 149 Morgan In- Kroll ter- view:March 8, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report 150 Interview with Morgan Kroll, March 8, 2011 Allison: Morgan, you’ve been here Allison: Mark and I talked a lot about since we got the Irvine grant. Do you expectations for artists participating | } remember what the first things were in the program. He told me that when AA MK that you heard about the program? they participate in things at Machine, they get tons of blog interest, and Morgan: I think the first meeting I then when they come here, to this sat in on was about how we would institution with significant cultural brand it. Everyone liked A.I.R.—it was capital, they might imagine that, recognizable, snappy, and simple. in turn, they’re going to get more Allison Agsten talks with Hammer public relations Everyone was very excited. I had a interest. In fact, the inverse may associate Morgan Kroll about the publicity sense that this endeavor was a huge be true, because of the number of thing that we didn’t really have a programs we have here, and the scale challenges posed by the Public Engagement A.I.R. handle on yet [laughs]. Visitor services and recognition of our exhibitions. program in general and by Machine Project’s was something we really needed, and How would you set expectations for an we needed to implement something artist in advance? What would you tell Residency in particular. Topics include managing quickly, but there wasn’t a clear plan, them to expect in terms of response artists’ expectations and balancing strategic or even a plan for how we were going from press? to plan. planning with spontaneity. They also identify which Morgan: It kind of depends on the projects best captured the press’s attention and Allison: In terms of communications, artist and the project. Lisa Anne how do you guys deal with the Auerbach from Nine Lives is a the public’s imagination. fact that the Hammer now has two great example. She was in almost different artists’ residencies, both every article we had because she’s of which are residencies for artists accessible, she’s interesting, she kept Projects discussed: but which are otherwise dramatically a blog while she was here, and she different in every possible way? is open to being interviewed. It’s a • Soundings: Bells at the Hammer very PR thing to say, but if artists can • Houseplant Vacation Morgan: It’s been very challenging, communicate to us what groups they because until A.I.R. was implemented, want to reach out to and what they • Dream-In our visitors would never really expect, that can help. It’s difficult • Hammer Staff in Residence at Machine Project encounter the work of an artist in though, because there are so many residence, so we had to shift the public exhibitions and programs here, so perception of the term to even seem there’s a lot of competition. Moving like something that is for them. It was forward, I think it would be better especially hard to explain Machine to have earlier and more regular Project, because it introduces so many discussions with the artists to develop layers. It’s like we have this Artist in a plan. With this project it seemed Residence program, and that can be like programs would continually a single artist or group of artists, and pop up here and there—and that’s then they can bring in other guest part of what made it exciting, but I collaborators…. It just goes on and wanted to do a better job of planning on and gets really complicated to ahead of time how we’re going to describe. For a lot of the outreach that approach things. It became a little bit we did, we focused on trying to keep reactionary and almost impossible to it as simple as possible, while getting do justice to each of the programs. the right people credited. I wanted to get more press for the

Machine Project Hammer Report 151 Left and right: Signage

programs, but at a certain point it was be great if I could plan for these A.I.R. we’re done with this year. programs would be appropriate for just like we were inundating people programs along with this exhibition, what audiences, or who might be with information all the time. and consider how they relate and how Morgan: Also, this is a new program, interested in something. It really we can connect them if possible. The so it will take some time for expanded my PR horizons—just Allison: What would have been the ability to have that sort of coordination momentum to build. And it’s hard to having to think about who would be ideal timeline for these sorts of would be helpful for PR. But I know predict sometimes what will resonate interested in a Houseplant Vacation, projects? that’s not always possible, and maybe with the public or the press, despite for example [laughs]. It turns out, who doing it that way would not be as our best efforts. wouldn’t? Morgan: In an ideal fantasy world, say: dynamic. Maybe the spontaneous six months out, just kind of an initial, nature of the program is part of what Allison: Were you surprised at the Allison: [laughs] That’s interesting, here’s what’s coming up; then at three was so great. kinds of outlets that were or weren’t because it didn’t get that many plants. months, just a casual meeting, but interested in certain programs? I know I brought a couple of plants. a more concrete idea of what’s going Allison: That’s something I’m definitely Other people brought a few. If you to be happening; then, as it gets thinking about. This year there is Morgan: Yeah. I think some of the look at the number of people and closer, we’ll be able to just roll it out. the organization, but there isn’t the more popular ones press-wise were the number of plants in total, there I know that that’s not always possible, spontaneity. The challenge is figuring probably Soundings: Bells at the wasn’t a huge amount of participation. but just to have the programs and a out how to ensure that we keep the Hammer and the Houseplant Vacation. But it occupied the space beautifully plan on the radar would be fantastic. program lively, while also planning. It’s I was a little surprised at that. Now and I think it still felt like a robust Things here are so cyclical, it would hard. I feel like we’ll only know once I have a better idea of what sort of experience. In a way, Houseplant

Machine Project Hammer Report AA | } MK 152 here in Los Angeles. It was challenging programs going on or difficult …there wasn’t a clear for me to go there and organize a protocols that we’d have to surmount. show. It was very nepotistic too, because I invited musicians that are Morgan: Well, it worked, and plan, or even a plan all my friends. What I found most everything is better for it. interesting—and I think this was for how we were probably the point behind it—was that Allison: Looking back on the program it put me in the shoes of the organizer, over the course of the past year, what how Machine Project felt here in a resonated with you the most? going to plan. sense. It was this idea of seeing it from their perspective, seeing what it’s like Morgan: Almost everyone who went —Morgan Kroll to go to someone else’s organization to my Hammer Staff in Residence at and deal with their protocols and Machine Project show asked me if we procedures. The one complication I were doing more things with Machine. had was with my event date. What I think they really liked the idea of happened was I had signed up for a collaboration and bridging that gap date when there wasn’t going to be between the east and west sides. The a shipwreck installation in the space, idea of the Museum being a cultural because I thought there wouldn’t be center where people can actually enough room, and then it turned out participate, and not just a static the shipwreck was still going to be experience where they come and look there. I had already confirmed the at something, is really powerful. I don’t date with the musicians, and I was think anyone is doing it quite the same Vacation was asking the most of museum. I think people like things that worried that they might have turned way we are. It kind of set us apart as visitors. When you’re asking people to humanize the museum, and all of these down other gigs to commit to me. I’m an institution. Now we’re scaling back do something they wouldn’t ordinarily projects really did that. They made just not a flexible person by nature, a bit, but it’s almost better that we do, you have to expect some difficulty coming here a more personal, inviting, so I was concerned. I felt this terrible started with something huge, because with participation. People aren’t going and fun experience. Maybe I wouldn’t anxiety that I would let down the then you can kind of tame it a little to naturally bring their houseplants to want to do quite so many, but just artists in some way. I decided to just and shape it. Although I do think we’re the Museum. In fact, on Houseplant seeing all of the crazy things that went do it. Instead of telling the musicians all a little addicted to that chaos. Vacation day, I forgot my plants at on, it was something I think we’re all that there would be a shipwreck, I just home and had to turn around halfway pretty proud of. let them happen upon it. I thought if down the street to go back and get I tell them, it’s going to sound strange them. Whereas if you’re asking people Allison: I also wanted to ask you what and make them nervous. Instead, they to do something that they might it was like going from working here all loved it and I really think it actually already do…With Soundings, it was at the Hammer on Machine Project added so much to the night that it easy to get hundreds of participants communications to being a participant wouldn’t have been as great without it. because they were already coming to in the Hammer Staff in Residence So it was kind of one of those making- the Museum and we were just asking at Machine Project. What was that the-best-of situations that really did them to wear a bell and get in for free. experience like? turn out better. That was the only real snafu, I think. Morgan: The Dream-In was also huge. Morgan: It was a really great People loved that idea, and I think learning experience. I wanted to do Allison: Making the best of the it went along with the movement in it because it seemed uncomfortable situation kind of epitomizes what some museums to change visitors’ and awkward, and because I’m not the Residency here was like in many perceptions of what one does in a an eastsider—which is such a divide respects, because we’d have other

Machine Project Hammer Report AA | } MK 153 Portland In- McCormick ter- view:March 8, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report 154 Interview with Portland McCormick, March 8, 2011 Allison: What would you tell somebody be a lot of support for a project from who works in your capacity at another other departments—and Mark would | } museum if their museum was thinking be very excited about a project and AA PM about embarking on this sort of thing? feel like it was really going to happen, and understandably so—then it would Portland: You just have to voice trickle down to me at the very last your concerns and hope that they’re minute and I would be the one who heard. It would depend where they voiced a concern. The week before were working too. I think the fact that it was supposed to happen, it might Allison Agsten and Portland McCormick, the it was the Hammer meant that we had not be such good news [laughs]. Hammer’s director of registrations and collections a lot more flexibility. It’s part of our For instance, with the Live Personal institutional personality. Some place Soundtrack, I think I was told a couple management, discuss the safety concerns that like the Getty, it would be virtually of days before it was happening arose around some of Machine’s pieces for the impossible to be that flexible. about the guitarist coming into the galleries, and I had to rush and try Residency. Portland provides a clear articulation of Allison: That’s a good point. What to make it work, at the same time the rules and reasons for the protection of artwork, would you tell an artist that you were expressing my concerns about the meeting for the first time who was artwork. This also happened with and talks about the solutions they came up with for considering doing this kind of work? the Houseplant Vacation and the specific projects. Table Tennis on Lindbrook Terrace. Portland: I think I would just explain I didn’t want to put any boundaries up, my role—that it’s not to say no, and but working in a museum, with artwork it’s not personal. It’s really to protect that is borrowed from other people, Projects discussed: these cultural objects we have in our I must always have the safety of the • Live Personal Soundtrack care, some of which belong to us and work in the forefront of my mind. If some of which don’t. Museums have I had been brought in earlier, it • Houseplant Vacation certain obligations to the owners and wouldn’t have seemed so much like • Table Tennis on Lindbrook Terrace to the public and certain standards to a singular voice, because, actually, uphold. It’s all really for the good of when the other people heard my the artwork, for the longevity of it. concerns, they agreed and understood. My role is to express any concerns I think one of the problems was that I might have regarding the safety of we didn’t discuss it enough internally the artwork on view and to find before going forward, so that if there a balance that can work for everyone— was an issue, we could try to find so they don’t feel like I am someone a different way of making the project who is just saying no all the time, happen earlier on. I think if we want because that isn’t really what we do. to “break the rules” of being We actually say yes a lot [laughs]. a museum, we have to make the decision collectively, and we have Allison: Did you feel like you were put to let the lenders know of our plans for in that position where you ended up their approval. having to say no a lot? Allison: Can you explain a little bit Portland: That first year, yes, because about restrictions that come into play there wasn’t a lot of structure around when a work has been lent? I feel the project proposals. So there could that’s something you don’t understand

Machine Project Hammer Report 155 unless you’re really embedded in the a lender is expecting us to do. We just museum world. have to be transparent about these things. It’s not impossible, but it does Portland: When we borrow work from become more complicated when you anyone—collectors, galleries, artists, have to involve more people. museums—we have a contract with them. It’s quite lengthy, and often there Allison: I feel like we did end up are very specific restrictions about light coming up with solutions for many levels and guard coverage, security things where initially it felt like it of the artwork on the wall, installation would be insurmountable. instructions. It’s our fundamental obligation to uphold that contract, as Portland: Even the guitarist walking well as to treat any work that’s in our around the galleries turned out okay. care with the same standard that we My concern was just making sure would our own permanent collection. that he was very careful about how That means not endangering it in any he moved around the space with way, such as with exposure to pests or his equipment and also that he was direct sunlight or allowing visitors too very aware of the visitor that he was close to the artwork. If we are going accompanying. to push the boundaries of Museum standards and create any risk to the Allison: Right, because they were artwork, however small, we have an tethered together. What about the obligation to contact the owners of the Table Tennis? Of all the projects work to obtain their permission. we worked on, that one seemed so simple—in a sentence, we’re going to Allison: So, for Houseplant Vacation, put a Ping-Pong table on Lindbrook for example, you had to make the terrace—but it turned out to be more decision whether we were going complicated for a variety of reasons. to have plants in the lobby of the Mark and I went back and forth about Museum, which is used as a gallery whether we needed to have some space, and seek out approval from sort of disclaimer. Can you talk about every one of the lenders who had what the Table Tennis project meant works in there, or whether we were for you? going to do it someplace else. Obviously we ended up doing it Portland: From my perspective, when someplace else. That was another we had it in the lobby, the concern was really good learning experience for us, just the adjacent artwork in the area, because I feel like it just didn’t cross since a Ping-Pong ball could ricochet Houseplant portrait our minds before that maybe it’s not off various walls and hit an artwork. the best idea to have plants that could When we moved it to Lindbrook harbor bugs in the lobby. terrace—we still have outdoor installations there, but—we just had Portland: Yes. Even if they are to find a good balance, where it was houseplants, they still have bugs. far enough away that anything getting Installing plants in a gallery space is hit would be unlikely. It’s impossible not Museum practice and isn’t what to remove all risk, but you just have to

Machine Project Hammer Report AA | } PM 156 be thoughtful and careful about where Allison: Yes, it is. That was certainly you put things. the intention of it. It’s good to hear you say that, because it’s added Allison: Absolutely. When you look another layer of work for so many back at the projects, which ones stand people. out to you? Portland: We’re experimenting, which Portland: Everyone really enjoyed is great. It’s sort of our role. the Table Tennis. I think that would be everyone’s first. I liked the Fanfare/ No Fanfare. It was nice having the plants here as well, changing the Museum environment visually like that. Personally, I thought the Needlepoint Therapy was great. I loved that. I thought that was a really nice way of making parts of the permanent collection more accessible to Even if they are a different group of people. houseplants they still Allison: You know we sold the needlepoint kits in the store: we sold out of them. have bugs. Portland: Did you? I bought one for —Portland McCormick my mom. She is going to try to finish the Sarah Bernhardt because she knows how to stitch petit point. Her face is so beautiful. You really need to be able to have a smaller stitch so you can get more detail.

Allison: Yeah, they’re really cool. Do you have anything else you’d like to add about the experience?

Portland: I think it was a great thing for us to try. A lot of great things came out of the first year, sort of trial by fire. Then this year is so much more well planned, and at a better pace, and I think that the artists are very cognizant of all our different roles as well. That’s been nice, because we all want to be able to have a voice. It’s a collaboration.

Machine Project Hammer Report AA | } PM 157 Jenni In- Kim & Margot ter- Stokol view:March 8, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report 158 Interview with Jenni Kim and Margot Stokol, March 8, 2011 Allison: Jenni, you were here from the Maybe that was one of the difficulties beginning, when the grant was being for us internally: trying to maintain | } written. Obviously there have been that spirit, but also to be sure that AA some changes and transitions. Did every single one of these things was you have a certain idea of what you done aboveboard and that nothing thought the program would be? How happened that was outside of what we did what actually happened match up had discussed. to or differ from that? Jenni: I think it was really ambitious of JK & MS Jenni: I had only a general idea of us to start right out of the gate with what we were proposing to the Irvine the first public engagement residency Foundation. I knew the Artist Council being a full year with a single entity— was proposing an artist-driven visitor and the volume of projects that entity services initiative, and that we had was expected to come up with. When been talking about the need for a you’re working with one artist for a Allison Agsten talks with Hammer director of visitor services department here for whole year’s worth of projects, you’re administration Jenni Kim and associate director many years. I didn’t know what to thinking about getting some systems expect, and when I heard it described down, so it becomes a little harder to of legal affairs Margot Stokol about the amount in words I couldn’t really envision how have the guerrilla feel that we might of work put into developing contracts for the that was going to manifest itself. I have wanted. Maybe if we had started think we got the first glimpses of it with a few one-off projects with six or Residency. They also discuss the advantages and during the R&D phase with Machine seven artists in the first year, they might disadvantages of doing a large number of smaller Project, where they started to have actually had more flexibility. brainstorm; various ideas raised a lot projects versus a few more sustained interventions of questions and seemed to require a Allison: I agree. That’s a very good in terms of public engagement impact and lot of troubleshooting. It wasn’t clear point. There was so much money how much was going to be “guerrilla” allotted to the production of these institutional risk. in nature, and how much was going to projects that we could produce 75 be “aboveboard,” so to speak. It really events in a year, so we did. But then didn’t become clearer until we actually we were lacking other resources Projects discussed: started implementing some of the because those funds weren’t going • Table Tennis on Lindbrook Terrace ideas. I think Machine Project’s ideas towards staffing or many of the other were more ephemeral and whimsical costs that were incurred. When I talk • Needlepoint Therapy and temporary than I thought they about the different ways that the would be. They offered these intimate Museum staff really stepped up to experiences for one or two people, make this program happen, I often which were really great, but I thought mention your role, Margot. One they might impact more people in a wouldn’t necessarily expect that a more traditional visitor services sense, person in an administrative/legal so I think that was something that I role would have to do so much for a didn’t expect. project like this, but you spent a great deal of time on the program. In the Allison: A lot of these projects did kind last year, how much time would you of have a guerrilla feel to them—like say you devoted, percentage-wise, to something that happens spontaneously public engagement? and outside the traditional parameters.

Machine Project Hammer Report 159 Margot: It’s hard to quantify, but it did who ask us to carefully manage our risk take up a lot of time. There was and exposure, which had an impact on a heavy contracts emphasis, and the forms and releases. I don’t think we really realized this at the beginning, but in addition to Margot: I also think the nature of the primary contract with Machine Machine Project was somewhat Project, separate contracts had to difficult to grasp. I spent a lot of time be developed with the artists, with figuring out how to deal with different the performers, and sometimes with issues that arose as the Residency participants. went along. As soon as we had gotten something that we thought would Jenni: In the ramp-up phase, where work for everybody, something new we didn’t have any of the forms and would come up and we would have we had to develop all of them, I think to go in and revise, or add a couple it took up at least 25 to 30 percent of of sentences to try to head off the Margot’s time. new issue that wasn’t even in our consciousness until the new project. Margot: That sounds right, partly because we weren’t quite prepared Jenni: I agree that the unique nature to spell out what we expected, and of Machine Project added another also because we didn’t have the staff dimension to this first Residency, in place yet who were dedicated particularly with respect to legal specifically to the Residency, so there issues. During the R&D phase, I kept was fractured responsibility for it asking if the Museum would want to and people ended up with different own the work produced during the information. I think that if someone Residency so we would be able to in my position at another museum re-create it, because it seemed to me were dealing with the same type of that a fundamental aspect of public residency, with a guest curator or a engagement was for us to create Above and right: collective artist group, they could something sustainable. Houseplant expect to spend a lot of time on Vacation paperwork. This could be reduced Allison: Right. That’s something by reducing the length of time of the that we are adjusting to this time residency, or the number of planned around, to try to avoid things like programs, or the number of people what happened with the Ping-Pong that you’re working with. tables, which sort of started out as a social experiment—and it was hugely Jenni: We do also have a pretty successful on many levels—but by complex governing structure. We are a the end of the Residency, things had tenant in a building that has rules about shifted conceptually for Mark and he how things are done. That’s something considered it to be a piece, which that we always think about on the he offered to sell the Museum. The legal side that not every museum will Museum decided not to buy it. [The necessarily have to deal with. And we Museum has since acquired the are managed by UCLA. So we have Table Tennis installation piece from really big entities on either side of us Machine Project.]

Machine Project Hammer Report AA | } JK & MS 160 Jenni: The conversation that came Jenni: I also think that going into the between four and six on Saturday, or more intimate experience or impact a out of that—about more ephemeral Machine Project deal in particular, something like that. large number of people. art, social experiment, and where to there were just different ideas on draw the line between a traditionally both sides, and maybe both sides Margot: Yes. I also think that we didn’t Allison: I know Mark thought a lot thought-of art piece and what we’re weren’t all that clear themselves on take much risk in terms of choosing about how to create that kind of doing here in public engagement—was what they wanted out of it. That made one concept and developing it deeply. experience for every single person really valuable and, moving forward, it hard to come together initially and In a sense, it was less risky to try many that comes here. That’s where the we can apply our experience with to put something in a contract that different concepts for short amounts density of programming came in: if the ramifications of that to the other was going to satisfy both sides. And of time than to gamble on one concept we do 75 amazing projects, there are artists we work with. Table Tennis was then both sides’ needs evolved as the and devote a month to it or a couple higher odds of more people being a piece that we thought we might be project evolved. Both sides realized of months, and see how it worked with touched by it. able to re-create or restage after the they wanted something or needed the public and how that developed as Residency, and I understand Mark had something that they didn’t even know more people interacted with it. Margot: That’s an interesting way to a different view of that. We’re trying they wanted in the beginning, or approach the public engagement goal. to more clearly address both our rights that they wouldn’t have been able to Jenni: It would have been interesting Another lesson we learned, though, and the artist’s rights in our contracts articulate in the beginning. to fundamentally change what the is that sometimes it took the same now in a way that is friendly to the Museum experience was. I think some amount of staff time or effort to deal artist. Allison: Yeah, definitely. Mark and I projects did that more than others. with a minor project that would only have talked about how you have to do Walking through the galleries with a affect a couple visitors—Needlepoint Margot: Yes. I think that because it to know what the parameters are. personal guitar concert, for example, Therapy is a good example—as it does we’re a museum and we work with For me, I think the greatest success or having a micro-concert in the to deal with a large-scale public event. artists all the time, the words artist of the program is just that we did it. coatroom may have fundamentally When I think about whether something and ownership mean certain things We have created our own protocols changed the experience for those one was successful or not, I’m also thinking to us, and we often distinguish how internally for how to vet projects or two people. about the amount of time and energy we, as an institution, contract with and we have produced this core of the staff had to put in, and balancing artists as opposed to consultants. materials that could be valuable for Allison: We surveyed the Needlepoint that against the outcome or the success In the past, we have drawn those other museums. Obviously many Therapy participants anonymously in terms of engaging the public. categories very broadly and in museums have residencies and they’re to try to gauge whether or not this relatively black-and-white terms, and interested in this kind of work, but in experience really had an impact on Jenni: Some of the projects also one of the things we learned from terms of specifically focusing on the them, and the majority of them said raised questions about how they tie last year is that sometimes it’s not visitor experience, we set out to do it had a deep impact and that it in to the mission of the Museum or so clear. Because a lot of the art was something that no other museum had absolutely changed their relationship the mission of public engagement, or conceptual or ephemeral or something really done. I’m wondering if you guys not only to the Museum but to these whether we are taking a risk just for that we expected to incorporate into think that we pushed it far enough. particular works in the permanent risk’s sake. And maybe in that way ongoing practice, we found that the collection. It becomes a question of Machine Project and this high volume implications of calling something “art” Jenni: I think if we had started smaller, how you measure success, qualitative of projects was the perfect way to didn’t always reflect our expectations we might have been able to take versus quantitative: if we have, let’s start, because it gave us a little bit of for the specific project or for who more risk content-wise. I also feel that say, six out of nine people who say a taste of everything, and it helped owned the work. But, given the length because of the intimate scale of so that this dramatically changed their us to discover what we like and don’t of the first Residency and the many much of what Machine did, if there was view of the Hammer, does that mean like. It gave us an opportunity to really different people and projects involved, a risk, it may not have been felt very less than 100 people walked away experiment. I think it would have been hard to broadly. feeling like they had a nice day? imagine at the beginning how we Allison: I feel like it was accelerated could draft language to provide for all Allison: So more along the lines of Margot: That’s something that another learning. It was really hard, but we the possibilities. work that was more permanent and institution would want to be clear kind of got the equivalent of four that didn’t rely on you being here about upfront: if they want to create a years’ experience. In retrospect, when

Machine Project Hammer Report AA | } JK & MS 161 we look back on this and what value Jenni: Internal disagreement is fine it has added to the Museum, do you and is par for the course, but I think Because we’re a museum guys think that this kind of work is the pain that you’re talking about important to carry out at museums? was when internally we felt we were and we work with artists all working towards different goals. Margot: Yes. I think about our Once the public engagement staff the time, the words “artist” strategic plan and our mission, had a streamlined way of meeting believing in the ability of art and regularly and conversing and sharing and “ownership” mean artists to illuminate our lives, and I information, there was more comfort feel like we really want to change the all around. It just takes a while to certain things to us… one way the viewer thinks about the world build a team when you’re talking for a little while. I really appreciate about people working together of the things we learned that some of the events that Mark across departments. It takes time for organized forced us to think critically everybody to trust one another and about what we wanted visitors to to believe that everybody has the from last year is that get out of our Museum and how we Museum’s best interests at heart and wanted to challenge our visitors. There that we are all working towards the sometimes it’s not so clear. were substantial front-end costs in same goal. Now there’s a lot more terms of time and energy, and there trust amongst all of us that we’re —Margot Stokol were projects that I don’t think were all going to work together, and that very successful, but we learned so makes it a lot easier. And I do think it’s much about what would make things really important to continue this kind easier to do in the future. of work; its potential to fundamentally change the way visitors experience Allison: I agree. Maybe some of the the Museum is not yet fully developed. projects were less interesting to I think we’ve just touched the surface. some of us than to others, but the results were sometimes dramatically compelling. It reminds me of childbirth: you know, there’s some sort of chemical release that happens that allows a mother to forget the pain of childbirth and then she’s able to have more babies. It all seems less painful and really beautiful in hindsight!

Margot: I thought the Residency was a really brave and good thing for us to do. On the staff end, it was really exciting, even when it was frustrating or kind of scary or made me very nervous from the traditional risk management perspective. I think it was most painful when we had disagreements internally on how to approach things.

Machine Project Hammer Report AA | } JK & MS 162 Jim In- Fetterley ter- view:March 25, 2011

Machine Project Hammer Report 163 Interview with Jim Fetterley, March 25, 2011 Mark: Jim, you are someone that Jim: I did. I didn’t know... I’ve known as a friend for a while. | } We’ve done some projects together, Mark: Will you have a chicken wing? MA JF you were super involved in how the LACMA show was documented, and Jim: I’ll have a chicken wing. you know Machine Project’s work— but you’re also an employee of the Mark: So you were saying… Hammer. I want to open up by asking if you have any observations about the Jim: A lot of people who do A/V Mark Allen and Jim Fetterley, technical director of Residency, coming from that position. work come to it from the world the Hammer and an old friend of Machine Project’s, of facilitating music. They’re not Jim: Coming from a previous history necessarily that familiar with discuss the challenges that documenting Machine’s with Machine, I knew the type of contemporary art practice, so it was A.I.R. events presented to the Hammer’s A/V process-based performance that was interesting explaining to a technical going to be filling in gaps at the edges staff what makes documenting staff. Jim also talks about the live footage that he of the Museum. My first thought, in Machine different. It isn’t always as produced for Brody Condon’s Level 5. Concepts terms of documenting it, was that I clear where the action is. They had wanted to set up little systems that all these questions about where they that emerge include the use of documentation as a could catch ambient interaction. should be and what they should be form of artistic security and costuming the camera Recording the security feeds was off- doing. limits of course, but I wanted there to incorporate the act of documenting into the to be a space where people could Mark: Yeah, and often we wouldn’t performance. Their conversation is continuously come get in front of the camera. I know either. talked to Allison Agsten and she also interrupted by deliveries, edible and otherwise, wanted something subtle and at a Jim: Right. So they had to assume and thus provides a good sense of daily life at distance—not to have this overbearing the role of knowing what was technological presence where anytime possible, and, if there was a rule to be Machine. something happens there’s a crew questioned or challenged, they would there. That interrupts these kinds of do it. It was kind of a hunt-and-search performances and affects how the for what you want, because often Projects discussed: public experiences them and how the there were multiple things going on performers behave. I came up with at once. I remember, during the public • Subtle Bodies Series the idea of using my iPhone for events programming after the Dream-In, • Level5 and having a camera mounted on turning around and seeing Asher the wall in Little William Theater. So [Hartman] through the courtyard, • Dream-In we just used the A/V staff for bigger sitting around a table with a couple of performances… the actors from his Gawdawful Theater troupe. It was a weird scene: the Mark: Hi Michelle. Do we have enough actors had their eyes closed and eyes chicken for Jim? painted on their eyelids. I remember looking at that and wondering what Jim: Oh, I ate lunch just before I came. the visitors, who were at the Hammer Thank you, though. for this Red Book dialogue, would think—that it might be jarring or Mark: Oh, no! disruptive—and then thinking about how a person with a camera suddenly

Machine Project Hammer Report 164 signifies that it’s okay, it’s an allowed the ambient sense of experimental top of it, like a weird layer of frosting. Mark: So Jim, you were talking occurrence in the space. Especially possibility that museum architecture about Machine adding this organic with something like Adam Overton’s creates, but it is also kind of a weird Jim: [laughs] Yeah. In terms of element to the Museum. Do you think Subtle Bodies Series: I remember I open public space. A/V, I think Machine’s stuff was that became more comfortable for was in the Billy Wilder Theater waiting more demanding strategically than the Hammer toward the end of the for an executive from Sony to come Jim: Yeah, it’s funny. People will often anything else; most of the projects Residency? check a tape for a show coming up on walk in there and be like, “It’s chilly. really didn’t need much equipment. the weekend, and I looked out and Oh wait, we’re in a courtyard.” At The problem is that maintenance Jim: Oh, definitely. They’re very proud saw somebody with their head on night, if it’s lit up, they won’t even operations are all about this timed of the results. The process was difficult someone’s lap, and rubber gloves—I know— clockwork choreography, so anything administratively, but in the end that’s thought a medical crisis had happened. that’s added has to be integrated into just a working-style conflict. Ideally, So I ran over there and realized it was Mark: That they’re outside. whatever flowchart. Machine brought the work environment should be more just Adam doing the sacral cranial a more organic approach, which I think cooperative, but it’s so busy that massage. Jim: Because it’s marble and there was horrifying to them at times. It’s everyone gets into these tunnel silos are only a few planted trees and interesting: they put so much effort of: “Don’t interrupt my workflow! Mark: [laughter] That’s right. Was bamboo that you think are fake or into meeting the needs and demands I swear I need that cable you are he massaging the inside of some- something. It feels very blank—which of the artist—and they are equally taking from me and now I can’t get body’s mouth? makes it a good theatrical stage guest-centric. It’s almost too much. I my goal done…” Sometimes there because it can be lit a number of ways guess that’s probably the hardest part just needs to be a blood-pressure Jim: Yeah, he had these rubber gloves and art-directed to do a number of with visitor services: trying to identify release. And you know, they have inside the mouth, right on that corner things. But those are things that the when people want to be fully engaged their established areas: people think where someone—a Sony exec for Hammer still needs to define. Having and when they want to be left alone. about art theft; they think about example—may walk in. I’m thinking Machine’s wandering performances earthquakes; they think about people’s I can’t expect the audience to and ambient exercises happening Mark: Excuse me, I’m going to grab safety. Those are the types of things understand what’s going on here, so there was a challenge for the staff, a piece of chicken. Oh, by the way, that they are trained for and that get I videotaped it, just to indicate that I think, because they didn’t entirely Michele, somebody dropped off ingrained. If something sprouts up that it was a performance. I would always understand that they don’t have to go cupcakes for you. shows their gaps, it may not be the try to personally document those around this type of stuff. most welcome thing at the moment, to moments with my iPhone. In a way, Michele: Yes, my friend Caroline. It’s have to sit and talk about that. it was like an ethical artistic use of Mark: Right. I remember there was weird because yesterday she messed security or surveillance. some kind of scheduling crisis. It up the delivery time and brought me Mark: Right. was like it hadn’t occurred to them a pizza when I wasn’t here. And today Mark: That brings up something that they could still have a book I come in and there are Sprinkles Jim: And it’s hard to make last- about the Hammer, which is that signing while someone was doing cupcakes also delivered when I minute changes when everything the courtyard is this really strange their performance. Not to be a hippie wasn’t here. has to come from the top down. interstitial space. When you go to a about it, but I really am a believer in The Hammer has to be systematic museum, whatever is happening there economies of abundance. To me, it’s Mark: Somebody loves you. Was it and almost to have a flowchart for in the galleries is automatically part an alternative to the model of scarcity your birthday? everything. Machine kind of shook up of the art. You could see somebody that galleries and museums operate and questioned everything, like why it having on, where they’re here to show you Michele: Yesterday. has to be prep and not facilities that a heart attack and, at least initially, you the best of the best. Machine explicitly touches the Ping-Pong tables—when, would assume it was a performance; does not exist to show you the best Jim: Oh, happy birthday. actually, it could be anybody. Those whereas out on the street, you would of the best; it exists to show you the are the kinds of rules that Machine’s be immediately concerned. The most that we can think of. I think Michele: Thank you. projects challenged. courtyard is this interesting space Machine works best as an additive: between the two. It has a little bit of whatever you’ve got, we’ll just be on Jim: You’re welcome. Mark: I think that comes from being

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } JF 165 Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } JF 166 smaller, from doing things for years Mark: I also wanted to ask you about footage from the self-help movement that’s the case” [laughs]. here in the storefront. Even though we Brody’s piece, Level 5, which I’m still in Adam Curtis’ documentary, are all kind of specialized, when we trying to understand. Originally, the The Century of the Self—these Jim: [laughs] That’s hilarious. But produce stuff everybody tries to keep idea was that it would just be for degraded clips of ‘70s and ‘80s video. yeah, once the show started, it was the whole picture in mind. the participants, roughly 25 people So I knew what Brody meant when he pretty much just a matter of having who were going to spend three days said there needed to be a flower and someone from A/V listening to the Jim: But the continued performances together at the Museum, immersed a book on the table; it was like, right, three cameras and doing a live mix. really gained people’s trust. In the in their roles for this self-actualization there is always a flower and a book in We didn’t have to create the action— beginning, it was more like, “I don’t seminar. You and I talked a lot about these presentations. That gave me the just to follow it. know how we can institutionally deal making it accessible to the public in first sense of the aesthetic we were with this”—and my response was some way, and you ended up doing going for. The equipment Mark: It’s interesting that there kind of like, just let me take care of this really incredible live-streaming I recommended, and that we ended were so many people involved in it because I can thrive on this chaos footage in the Billy Wilder Theater that up renting, were these little hand-held choreographing that piece, but a little bit better. It took them some random people at the Museum that cameras that the director would use on without a real hierarchy. Brody, of time to get used to the idea of it being day could wander in and watch. It was a reality TV show. With these low- course, choreographed the whole more like having the Museum open really riveting. Can you talk about how resolution cameras, we were able to thing, but beyond that, he had during construction: that everything that aspect of the piece came about? match that VHS quality—and with the game designers walking around and doesn’t have to be a coordinated fluorescent lights and everything, whispering in participants’ ears; super-efficient success; people will still Jim: Well, I had worked with Brody it looked horrible. there were the camera people, who get around. The ironic thing is that before and I had some familiarity with were also embedded in the role-play, some of the most taxing projects— LARPs [live-action role-playing], but Mark: [laughs]. deciding what to record; and then you like the Subtle Bodies stuff—were very this really kind of announced itself as guys constructing this representation straightforward and simple and, if they a performance at the first meeting we Jim: Also, with those hand-helds, we in real time. It’s almost like the whole hadn’t been announced, may not even had at the Hammer, with Liz Glynn could have the camera operators in piece was this weird ball of energy have been noticed. But they got the and Brody presenting the piece to the room, where they took on roles with everyone subtly nudging it around hang of it. By the time Annie Okay was Elizabeth Cline and myself and the as performers at the same time. It and keeping it up. executed, it was kind of institutional other A/V person. They were dressed was great. We didn’t have to do therapy. I don’t think anybody on crew very formally and came into it very any camera work because this raw, Jim: Well, we weren’t able to there had ever had the experience of serious. embedded footage was essentially the manipulate the footage, so it was more working in technical theater, and it look we wanted the audience to peer like having a filter on reality. But you was taxing, but by the end you feel Mark: So you felt like the LARP started in on. We just had to mix the feeds could think of all documentation as like you’re part of the cast and you get even in that planning stage. so the audience could make sense of choreographed performance. to join in the after-party…so that was what was going on. really fun. Jim: Yeah. And part of it was the Mark: Yeah. I think part of what made formality of being at the Museum: Mark: Right, so when the audience the footage so fascinating is that not Mark: Jim, do you want another piece just sitting down at a table, we were was in Billy Wilder Theater watching only were there all these different of chicken? already playing roles. It definitely this live feed, it really felt like you just mediations, but each of them was felt different than it would have at found a videotape from 1987. ambiguous. So as a viewer, you’re Jim: I’ll have one more. I know I said Machine. really destabilized. You can’t quite just one, but… Jim: Yeah, it looked like video signal. locate what you are looking at. Mark: Right. Mark: Jim’s plate has 14 pieces of Mark: Have you talked to Brody about Jim: And the piece itself was so chicken on it. Jim: From that point on, we knew to this? When I’ve talked to him about it, intense that wherever the cameras just start documenting whatever was he seems to think you did all this really were shooting, it was gold. There *** going on, to try to capture it all. As intense processing to make it look wasn’t a dull moment. Even when far as the visual style, I had seen early like video—and I’m like, “I’m not sure there was video signal disturbance,

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } JF 167 it just added to the drama. The video Mark: Great, thank you. role of documenter at the Hammer and became a character. It made me having my own history with Machine want to document more LARPs and Elizabeth: A little spring cleaning. allowed me to really reflect on what really explore that idea of performing my role was, and how it was different as a camera. For the Dream-In, I Mark: Great. as a Hammer employee than it would wanted to set the cameras up as big be as an artist working with Machine dreamcatchers—you know, with the Elizabeth: So happy to see you at the Hammer. ring around the front of the lens—and outside of work. have people talk into them. It never Mark: Yeah, I think figuring out the got to the point of actually costuming Jim: Yeah, it’s good to see you. role of the documenter in Machine’s the cameras that way; just giving the family has been one of the big things camera people that idea was enough Mark: Do you want to sit down for for us this year too—to the point of of a nod. a minute and have some tea? having events filmed to represent other events that have happened in Mark: Oh, hi Elizabeth! Elizabeth: Sure. I’m not interrupting, the past, like we did for the MOCA am I? Artists’ Museum show. Elizabeth: Surprise. Mark: No. I’m interviewing Jim, but Jim: It’s like photo ops that you open Mark: How’s it going? our interview has continually had to the public. external elements. Elizabeth: Hi Jim. What are you doing Mark: I love that concept! As someone here? Jim: And chicken wings. who worries about documentation potentially disrupting the circle of Jim: Cesar Chavez—day off. Mark: Which is interesting because trust that we build with the audience, we’re kind of talking about how it’s great to think about that from Elizabeth: Happy birthday, Michele. everything is part of the thing—just the opposite angle, like Machine occupying different roles—so in a way Project is now only doing photo ops. Michele: Thank you. our interview— Then over time the audience would start taking possession of the photo Elizabeth: I wish I had brought you Jim: It allows for interruption. op and messing with it… I’m really a birthday present. interested in trying to eliminate the Mark: So where were we? outside position at Machine—and not Mark: What’s in the bag, Elizabeth? in a way that erases difference. There Jim: I was talking about documentary is still a performer, an audience, and Jim: Bells. as performance, and dressing up a documenter, but everyone is inside cameras in costumes. I think it’s part of the bubble of the moment. That feels Elizabeth: Something that’s been a larger transition that is happening really important to me in the work going around in the back of my car for with everyone having personal that we do. Maybe part of being a couple weeks—along with the Ping- videocams: if there’s a protest, I’m atthe Hammer was about seeing what Pong paddles. not going to just sit back and try to happens when you try to eliminate the objectively document it; I’m going to outside of a big institution. Mark: Oh, the Ping-Pong paddles. join the protest and keep the camera rolling. The way we capture reality is Elizabeth: This is all the stuff that really what subjectivity comes down belongs to you that was under my to—and then how conscious someone desk. is of how they’re doing it. Being in the

Machine Project Hammer Report MA | } JF 168

Ap-

pen-Mission, Vision, dixes:and Values Hammer Museum and Machine Project

Machine Project Hammer Report Author’s Name 170 The Hammer Museum MISSION Mission, Vision, and Values The Hammer explores the capacity of art and artists to impact and illuminate our lives. Through its collections, exhibitions, and programs, the Hammer examines the depth and diversity of artistic expression through the centuries, with a special emphasis on the art of our time. The museum advances UCLA’s mission by contributing to the intellectual life of the university and the world beyond.

VISION To continually evolve the role of the museum in order to facilitate new ways for art, artists, and audiences to engage with the world.

VALUES • We believe that art can be a powerful positive force in the world. • We encourage an enthusiastic and passionate engagement with art and ideas. • We integrate the voice and vision of artists in everything we do. • We embrace change and know that innovation and risk taking are critical to our success. • We question authority and the established canons of art and culture, and we do not shy away from controversy. We are committed to a generosity of spirit that fosters a welcome, accessible, and fun atmosphere. • We are international in scope, while placing the Los Angeles artistic community at the core of our program. • We support new approaches to the history of art, from the Renaissance to the present, through rigorous scholarship and Hammer Museum innovative thinking. • We champion the work of emerging and overlooked artists. • We investigate the realm of ideas in all disciplines through an active public forum. • We recognize that our greatest assets are our talented and dedicated staff and our generous and supportive donors, large and small. • We love artists.

Machine Project Hammer Report 171 Machine Project WHAT IS MACHINE PROJECT? Vision and Values Machine Project is both a storefront space and an energetic and constantly shifting constellation of particular interests and subjectivities. Through Machine Project, a loose collective of Los Angeles-based artists, musicians, performers, designers, poets, and others collaborate to produce engaged experi- mental artwork.

WHY DO WE DO WHAT WE DO? We believe that most exciting and original ideas come out of conversations and processes of making or doing that are exploratory rather than goal-oriented in nature. Machine Project exists to make art that injects a sense of genuine and invested curiosity, intellectual engagement, and permissibility into daily social life.

HOW DO WE DO IT? Machine Project temporarily transforms and repurposes our storefront gallery and other public spaces for creative use and civic discourse. In these spaces we foster cross-disciplinary collaborative exploration and support experimental forms of cultural production that don’t fit within established structures.

OUR VALUES

OPENNESS An open mind is necessary and sufficient for anyone to create or consider art, to relate to people with different interests and experiences, or to participate in discussions on the nature of Machine Project reality and the purpose of human existence. By using art to temporarily materialize non-commercial public spaces, we make room for the kind of unfettered engagement, exchange, and possibility that we want to see more of in the world.

ACTIVE ENGAGEMENT We believe in the value of active engagement with the people, objects, and processes around us. This may mean participation in a workshop or a performance piece. It can also mean the

Machine Project Hammer Report 172 imaginative work of recreating a piece in one’s head or in the occasionally don’t have the impact we had hoped. We aim to heads of others after it has happened. We believe that for an provide opportunities for the artists we work with to try things artwork to truly engage people it must actually have taken place they don’t have the freedom to try elsewhere. We bring this in the world. Propositions only really get interesting when they experimental approach to all our projects, whether we are enter different subjectivities and become experiences. working at Machine’s storefront, with a larger institution, or in another public place. SPECIFICITY Our programming dives into specific and often unusual or obscure topics. We have found that focusing on particular interests and passions allows people from widely divergent backgrounds and life experiences to connect across these broader differences in a meaningful way. As evidenced by the popularity of our most esoteric events, energy and enthusiasm are deeply contagious: who doesn’t want a sneak peek into someone else’s abiding fascination with fungi or the history of conspiracy theories in Los Angeles?

RELATIONAL LEARNING AND GROWTH Machine Project’s collaborative mode of working and our organizational growth model are both non-hierarchical and based on the formation of mutually beneficial relationships with artists and other institutions. As we continue to expand, we approach each geographic location as a site to co-explore with local artists and community members.

EMERGENT FORMS Machine Project supports the production of work that proceeds from a “what if…?” spirit of curiosity. Often interdisciplinary in nature and making use of materials in novel ways, such work can be hard to pre-conceptualize or commodify. Institutions and markets that are invested in maintaining their cultural capital or in making a profit are often unwilling to risk investing in unknown qualities. Machine Project wants to take that risk.

EXPERIMENTATION We value true experimentation, unlimited by pre-determined goals, needs, or ideological pressures. We want to be surprised by a performance or work, and it is okay with us if things

Machine Project Hammer Report MP—Vision and Values 173 The Experiential Record, or How to Do Es- Things with sayDocumentation Andrew J. Lau

Machine Project Hammer Report 174 Contemporary art has long been interested in the concept of the “document” and practices of collecting and saving. High- profile exhibitions like the Haus der Kunst and Siemens Cultural Program’s Deep Storage (1998–1999) and Okwui Enwezor’s Archive Fever: Uses of the Document in Contemporary Art (January 18–May 4, 2008), as well as the apparent archival turn in the 1980s–1990s, illustrate the fascination with the notion of traces and detritus supplying the materials to create art. Art historian Sven Spieker, in utilizing frameworks culled from the theories and practices of archival science, reviews a wide variety of modern artists and their documentation practices while also highlighting parallels between contemporary artists, database aesthetics and structures, and key texts on the Archive (notably, Freud’s reading of the mystic writing pad and his topologies of the psyche and Jacques Derrida’s Archive Fever).1 Spieker’s text Abstract: This essay describes the The Big Archive: Art from Bureaucracy impressively engages with processes and products of Machine archival theory and principles (i.e., the Principle of Provenance Project’s documentation practices and the Sanctity of Original Order) in order to analyze specific for its participation in the Hammer cases of modern and contemporary art. Whereas other critical Museum’s Artist in Residence (A.I.R.) program. Drawing on an interview works draw primarily on Derrida and/or Foucault’s ideas on the that Mark Allen* conducted with Archive, The Big Archive foregrounds the long history of theory documenters Emily Lacy and Jimmy underpinning the discourse of archival practice, rather than Fusil and archivists Sam Meister relying on the Archive as an interpretive trope. and Andrew J. Lau, this essay Aside from the metaphor of the Archive, archivists as considers Machine Project’s shifts a professional group often attempt to apply strict definitions to in approaches to documentation of its events and programs. These documentary objects. Consequently, we understand documents, shifts include a movement from records, and documentation to all occupy different spaces documentation that seeks to of categorization, to frequently exercise a certain level of objectively capture the activity of control over archival materials with investments in preserving Machine Project’s events to exploring the authenticity of documents and records. These definitions ways in which the documentation are often highly contested and varied, depending on the might provide a visual record of experience. This essay draws upon organizations and institutions from which the documents arise. literature from archival studies (in As is true for any field of inquiry, some strains of the discourse particular, the concept of the record) fall under more conservative positions that construe records to elucidate these documentation to be strictly documents that emerge as by-products in the practices and to extrapolate course of bureaucratic activity or transaction, selected for the some functions of documenting express purpose of preservation.2 However, recent ideas in contemporary art. archival science have moved toward understanding records as

Machine Project Hammer Report Andrew J. Lau 175 Nate Page, Subject/Object/ Project, Feb. 2010, a site-specific installation in Machine Project’s store- front gallery

interpretive objects, either in terms of how they are created illustrating how communities’ practices of self-documentation (whether automatically generated, as in the case of receipts) or constitute interventions into the field of cultural and collective explicitly constructed with the intention of collecting documents memory. To create records from the space of the self is to create where few exist. The latter position is especially present in the “evidence of me,” to become a speaking subject in the Archive.4 discourses on community-based initiatives (which may or may These stakes are present in Machine Project’s not identify with the term “archives”; often, they appear in documentation practices of itself. In documenting Machine the literature as “community heritage projects,” oral history, Project’s participation in the Hammer Museum’s Artist in or community-based documentation).³ These initiatives are Residence program, Mark Allen employed the method of frequently built on the assumption that archival institutions and interviewing participating artists, musicians, composers, the records they house only capture a minute fraction of cultural and curators in order to inject into the archival record the memory, and that in order to fill the gaps of the historical experiences of their involvement. The interview method is record, professional and non-professional archivists might seek significant for its premise on the notion that, in planning and to document what is left outside of the archives. Furthermore, executing an event for the Residency, there are multiple views these initiatives also underscore the politics of memory by that emanate from the multiple roles that participants play. For

Machine Project Hammer Report Andrew J. Lau 176 a collaborative endeavor like Machine Project’s participation in of a record in a traditional sense: the notion that the record is the Hammer Residency, the interview process acts as a means any document that is created or received and set aside for to extend the collaborations between Machine Project as an action or reference, created by a physical or juridical person in entity and its constituents into the documents that emerge out the course of some practical activity and as an instrument and as of those relationships. In other words, the interview method, a by-product of such activity.7 as a documentation practice, aims to commit to recorded form Clearly, this definition of the record can only describe a semblance of the experience of participation on the part a sliver of the totality of Machine Project’s documentary residue, of the artists, curators, designers, and musicians who were and would primarily refer to specific types of documents, such involved. For the Hammer Residency, these experiences are as internal documents and communications, financial records, folded into collaboration, wherein two or more parties come and other examples of administrative files. But more than these, together to actualize some shared goal, and the interviews Machine Project’s documentary record also includes public serve as the means by which to capture that coming-together. communications (such as event announcements to the public The importance of documentation practices, or at least subscribed to the email list, over social media channels, and interrogating what such practices might look like, lies in the on the official website), photos shared over Flickr, and videos (perceived) promise of the translation from event to object, on Vimeo and YouTube. These documentary objects provide or the possibilities of fixing an ephemeral event into some a glimpse into the goings-on of Machine Project both at an recorded form. But rather than positing a one-to-one relation individual level (the event that the individual documentary object between the event and the documents created to support refers to), but also at an aggregate level (the documentary them, documentation is understood here to be processual. If object, referencing the event as situated over the course of the documentation is considered in terms of the procedures and whole oeuvre of Machine Project’s programs and events). the decisions that belie them, exploring how the documents are On the one hand is what Mark Allen described in an constructed by way of those decisions and the development of interview with Emily Lacy, Jimmy Fusil, Sam Meister, and Andrew those procedures becomes paramount. Lau as the “archival impulse” of documentation: the idea that In archival science, the field understands its scope to documentation entails a diminished level of mediation between include records in aggregation, cohered by what Luciana Duranti the event and the documenter in the mode of observation. Such refers to as “the archival bond,” or “the network of relationships a practice might resemble a camera set on a tripod, capturing that each record has with other records belonging in the same the event with as little intervention as possible. On the other aggregation.”5 According to Duranti, hand, perhaps an extreme sitting at the opposite pole, is the

“the archival bond first arises when the record is set aside and thereby documentation practice of creating highly stylized, orchestrated, connected to another in the course of action, but it is incremental, and edited documents (primarily videos). For these types of because, as the connective tissue that joins a record to those surrounding documentation, the primary motivation is to document an it, it is in continuing formation and growth until the aggregation to which experience, as opposed to providing an objective view of the it belongs is no longer subject to expansion, that is, until the activity event. One example of the latter is the documentation produced producing such an aggregation is completed.”6 for the Live Personal Soundtrack performances of the Hammer Residency. Notably, the video produced as documentation for It should be noted, however, that Duranti’s conceptualization these performances is highly edited, with shifts in the camera’s of the archival bond (and the concept of record upon which it is perspective meant to mirror shifts in subjective experience premised) is quite narrow, in that it is based on an understanding of the viewer. In some segments, the video is constructed to

Machine Project Hammer Report Andrew J. Lau 177 simulate an audience member “experiencing” the live personal soundtrack—a first-person view—then switches to a third-person To create records from view depicting performer Eric Klerks wielding his guitar, hooked up to the museum visitor wearing headphones, following her the space of the self around the galleries as she peruses the art hanging on the white walls. is to create “evidence The aforementioned archival bond described by Duranti surfaces here in terms of the multiple documents produced about of me,” to become the Live Personal Soundtrack performances: the announcements on the Hammer Museum’s website, on Machine Project’s website, a speaking subject in over Facebook and Twitter; the video documentation displayed on Vimeo; and also the post-performance interview conducted with Eric Klerks. This bond ties together these seemingly disparate the Archive. objects that together serve as the documentary record for the event. This is also true for the documents that are created around other events, like the Little William Theater performances, and the corpus of videos, postings over social media platforms, and press releases around the performances. The notion of the archival bond provides a useful heuristic to understand the accumulation of documentary objects, and how meaning and representation is accrued over time across the objects. In other words, the documentation of events, as the process of creating a documentary record of those events, is more than each individual record; it refers to the entire body of records. Each individual record draws upon other records for its meaning. In the case of the Little William Theater performances, someone viewing a video of the Paraphrase Pieces, for example, would have a better sense of the whole series of the Little William Theater performances by viewing the other videos that were created to document the other performances. Similarly, this relationship between documentary objects allows for further contextualization of the range of events of the Hammer Residency, as well as how the Residency fits within the entire archive of Machine Project’s oeuvre. Viewing the Little William Theater video documentation in conjunction with the Live Personal Soundtrack, alongside video depicting the Dream-In events, in addition to the video created for The Giant Hand experiment in signage, and so on and so forth, would allow a viewer of the documentation a more comprehensive

Machine Project Hammer Report Andrew J. Lau 178 view of the events that took place at the Hammer that Machine extent, the construction of the documentary object (or the Project was involved in, and where the Residency fits within lack thereof, as in the case with documentation practices that Machine Project’s history of activity. strive toward objective observation) is a fundamental shaping Meister observed that over the course of Machine of the “recordness” of the object through the implication of the Project’s life as an organization, the practices of documentation frame’s construction. have shifted from the objective view to one focused on For artistic practices for which there are no primary objects, documentation in service of (re-)constructing the experience of or examples of “dematerialized” art that may be performance- the event. Inevitably, the view provided by the documentation of based, site- or event-specific, or time-based, documentation of an event can only provide a partial perspective. Meister states: the activity is pivotal to the historical record. Martha Buskirk’s survey of “the contingent object of contemporary art” illustrates

“I think that’s a really important point: how the style and intention of this point well: “…the more immediate, the more ephemeral, the the documentation has evolved as the organization has evolved. When more of-the-moment or of-the–place the work is, the more likely 8 I first started doing stuff here, it was very apparent to me that there’s that it is known through images and accounts.” Thus, the stakes an essence of the experience of the events for the participant, for the of documentation for art works that are premised on notions of performer, for the artist that could only be captured to a certain extent participation, interactivity, relationality, experience, and other in documentation. But that’s such an important element in the story of ephemeral activities are such that documentation forms a sort of the organization—especially for a space like Machine and what Machine archival “window” into the past and into the work. does—just any kind of residue. But also it’s the culmination of that But this window is more than a transparent frame by residue over time and how the organization can look at that and learn which to glimpse a past event as it happened; it shapes the about itself, and then how the outside public or people who are engaged view. This was acknowledged by Emily Lacy and Jimmy Fusil with Machine in different ways can refer to that. Obviously there is as they reflected on their involvement in documenting various a decision at some point that, oh, well this mode of the more objective Machine Project events, and is also exemplified in the shift of style doesn’t work anymore, so now we need to shift to something else the documentation practice from static video capturing activity and that has, like you said, changed as the extent of involvement with toward creating documentation that attempts to incorporate outside institutions has changed as well. But I think that’s why even that the experience of the event through its visual rhetoric. The original footage is important to keep in some way even if it’s just kind of, video documentation of the Dream-In event, for example, OK, we’re just going to keep it how it is, as kind of a freeze.” features brief interviews with participants who had slept inside the Hammer Museum in which they described what they were dreaming about. As the camera closes in on the faces of the An important point that Meister touches upon is the iterative bleary-eyed sleepers, they each attempt to articulate the revisions to the practices of documentation. That is, to narratives that would otherwise exist only in their minds. The document events shift according to the motivations of the viewer of the video after the fact of the event can then imagine organization, shifts that are ultimately contingent on what what the experience would have been like had he or she the organization seeks to convey about itself through its participated. Or, if they had participated in the event, the viewer documentation. That is to say that more than the content of the video could recall in his or her own mind the experience of the documentary objects (i.e., what is recorded in the of the event, and reflect on the singularity of that instance of documentary object), the framing of the documentary object dreaming. also communicates some aspect of Machine Project. To some In reflecting on the documentation practices of Machine

Machine Project Hammer Report Andrew J. Lau 179 Project, at least three functions can be extrapolated. First is the level of the organization and its history up to the present. It is communicative function, most clearly illustrated by postings through records and documents that we are able to understand on Machine Project’s official website and various social media the totality of Machine Project’s activities, to reconstruct the pages. For these, the primary goal is to utilize the channels of past through material evidence. But this memory function also networked technologies in order to disseminate information. extends beyond Machine Project’s archive, into the Archive that In their capacity as records of the events, the documents also continues to be a major focus for contemporary art discourse. serve the purposes of potential communication, across time and The records that Machine Project keeps, the products of the space, after the fact and/or at distributed sites. This is true for documentation and recordkeeping paradigms instituted at the any record, and indeed, explains why records are considered so level of the organization, provide the material foundations that crucial to historical reconstruction of an event. The benefit of ultimately situate Machine Project in the longue durée of art and keeping records past their immediate use is not only localized to its history. the boundaries of the record itself (i.e., its content and what can Documentation practices, as well as the objects that are be extrapolated from it) but also how, where, and why it is read, created, are necessarily contingent on the varied ways that and what is read alongside it. For these reasons, recordkeeping artists work. The goals of creating the experiential records that and documentation are extremely important considerations.9 Machine Project has sought to realize might not be appropriate Second is a methodological function, as exemplified by the for other modes of artistic practice, but it does present an interviews collected by Mark Allen. As such, the interviews allow interesting case study in documentation methodology. Other not only for the explication of the individual though processes artists might consider more straightforward unmediated forms and self-reflections of the participants of Machine Project’s of documentation to fit better with their visions for how they network, but also for the archivalization (the impulse to archive, might capture their processes and products of their work. whether conscious or unconscious)10 of the multiple subject But in either case, whether seeking to create observational or positions around a collaborative endeavor like the Hammer experientially-focused documentation, Eleanor Antin’s insight Residency. This includes the methodological reflection on the continues to resonate: “documentation is not a list of neutral planning and execution of the events within Machine Project’s facts…all ‘description’ is a form of creation.”11 Residency by surfacing notions of what was successful and what was not (and possible reasons as to why), while providing a foundation for speculation as to how future inter-institutional collaborations might proceed. Additionally, the interview process as documentation practice also turns on itself as methodological self-reflection. As experiences are encoded as documents (and potentially records), we might ask: what do the interviews provide by way of sense of the events and activities that other documentation practices do not, and vice versa? How do these documents work to provide the sense of the events and activities in conjunction with one another, if we understand that each record provides only a partial view? Third is the function of memory, the ability for records to serve as a means as the foundation for self-reflection at the

Machine Project Hammer Report Andrew J. Lau 180 NOTES: 7. Duranti, “The Archival Bond.” 1. Sven Spieker, The Big Archive: Art from Bureaucracy (MIT Press, 2008). 8. Martha Buskirk, The Contingent Ob- ject of Contemporary Art (Cambridge, 2. Luciana Duranti, an archival scholar MA: MIT Press, 2005), 223. whose contributions primarily stem from her roots in a 19th century science of 9. Reflecting on the activity of curat- documents called “diplomatics,” is a ing art exhibitions, Christophe Cherix major proponent of strict definitions of states, “…in the late 1960s, ‘the rise the record. Terry Cook, a major voice in of the curator as creator,’ as Bruce the postmodern turn of archival science, Altshuler called it, not only changed our assessed her position as constituting perception of exhibitions but also cre- the logico-positivist perspective of ar- ated the need to document them more chival theory and practice. See: Luciana fully. If the context of an artwork’s pre- Duranti, Diplomatics: New Uses for an sentation has always mattered, the sec- Old Science (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow ond part of the 20th century has shown Press, 1998); Terry Cook, “What Is Past that artworks are so systematically as- Is Prologue: A History of Archival Ideas sociated with their first exhibition that Since 1898, and the Future Paradigm a lack of documentation of the latter Shift,” Archivaria 43 (Spring 1997): puts the artists’ original intentions at 17–61. risk of being misunderstood.” Although Cherix refers specifically to the stakes 3. Andrew Flinn, “Community Histories, of documentation for curatorial work, Community Archives: Some Opportuni- the insight that documentation provides ties and Challenges,” Journal of the a means by which to contextualize the Society of Archivists 28, no. 2 (2007): products of creativity rings true for 151–176. considering Machine Project’s docu- mentation practices. See: Hans-Ulrich 4. Sue McKemmish, “Evidence of me...,” Obrist, A Brief History of Curating (JRP/ Archives and Manuscripts 24, no. 1 (May Ringier, 2008). 1996): 28–45. 10. Eric Ketelaar, “Archivistics Research 5. Luciana Duranti, “The Archival Bond,” Saving the Profession,” The American Archives and Museum Informatics 11, Archivist 63, no. 2 (2000): 322–340. no. 3 (1997): 215–216. 11. Buskirk, The Contingent Object of 6. Ibid., 216. Contemporary Art, 226.

Machine Project Hammer Report Andrew J. Lau 181 The Hammer Museum wishes to thank the James Irvine Foundation for the opportunity to create a program that has been truly transformational for our institution. The grant we were awarded has allowed us to do the work we otherwise could only have dreamed of. Our deepest gratitude goes to Machine Project as well. Director Mark Allen and his collaborators have been true partners throughout, and we have all benefited as much from the collective’s thoughtful work as we have from its lively spirit. We are indebted to the dedicated Hammer staff, including Douglas Fogle, who has helped carve out a place in our curatorial department for Public Engagement. Ali Subotnick brought to life the first programs, and Elizabeth Cline has been the true curatorial mainstay of the project. As Public Engagement rippled throughout the Museum, it required the dedication of so many on our team to make each project a reality. So our thanks go to Jenni Kim, Margot Stokol, and Allison White in administration as well as to Sarah Stifler, Jennifer Gould, Morgan Kroll, Amanda Law, and Julia Luke in marketing and communications. We are grateful for the efforts of Andrew Werner and William Taylor in operations as well as for the work of the development department, led by Jennifer Wells Green. We would also like to acknowledge Jim Fetterley and his audiovisual team and preparators Peter Gould and Franky Kong, as well as Brooke Hodge and Jessica Hough in exhibitions and Portland McCormick in registration and collections management.

Acknowledgments

Machine Project Hammer Report 182