Introduction Wendy Tuxill
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A Re-Conceptualisation of Contemporary Sculptural Ceramics Practice From A Post-Minimalist Perspective Wendy Patricia Tuxill A portfolio submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the University of Hertfordshire for the degree of PhD The programme of research was carried out in the School of Creative Arts, Faculty of Science, Technology, and Creative Arts July 2010 ABSTRACT This thesis examines the extent to which the 1960s process art strand of post-Minimalism can provide an analytical template for critical writing around contemporary ceramic art. A dearth of critical writing is an acknowledged problem in all types of ceramics practice and some of the reasons for this situation will be explored. In the past decade frequent calls have been made by artists, critics, academics, and curators for a body of critical writing to underpin contemporary work and connect with wider cultural debates. During this period, artists have begun to use the process of making the work to form part of the content. Such work has no relationship to traditional studio pottery, and critics have described it as difficult to write about and classify in normative ceramic terms. However, this area of ceramic practice shares characteristics with post-Minimalism, a movement of the 1960s that emphasised the behaviour of materials and the act of making. In The Archaeology of Knowledge the French philosopher Michel Foucault suggests that a new critical language may emerge from the appropriation of other discourses, providing new interpretations for subject areas not yet theoretically mapped out. Foucault’s notions on the formation of discourse are used as a methodological approach to investigate how process-led sculptural ceramics may be articulated by an understanding of post-Minimalist critical writings. A substantial body of critical writing developed around post-Minimalist process art, providing a context for radical new approaches which broke with modernist traditions and which expanded and changed traditional definitions of sculpture. Key post-Minimalist texts are investigated as an analytical template for a new critical discourse for process-led ceramic art. A study of the sculptural ceramics of Richard Deacon and Kosho is undertaken as a means of identifying process-led tendencies and the possibility of a re-conceptualisation from a post- minimalist perspective. An analysis of the role of process within my own practice is used to provide visual evidence of contemporary ceramic work that can be re-conceptualised from a post-Minimalist perspective. After twenty years of stagnant debate in the ceramics field, this 2 research might provide a new critical context for process-led ceramic art. The project shows a way that artists may be empowered to develop a critical literacy in a field that has traditionally lacked a research based approach. It is hoped that it may well encourage other ceramics practitioners to explore new ways of presenting an academic critique of their own area of practice. The contribution to knowledge identifies a new critical context and approach to writing for the process-led area of ceramics practice that is currently described as being difficult to write about, as having no appropriate critical language of its own, and of being difficult to categorise in standard ceramic terms. 3 Table of Contents………………………………………………………………….................4 List of Illustrations………………………………………………………………...................6 Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………......8 Introduction………………………………………………………………..............................9 1. The Archaeology of Knowledge: a methodological guide to discourse………………...23 1.1 The formation of discourse…………………………………………………………26 1.2 The appropriation of discourse……………………………………...........................34 2. Ceramics and critical writing from 1940…………………………………………………43 2.1 The dominance of Leachean ideology…………………………………………........45 2.2 Exhibition essays and journal articles from 1990……...……………………………53 2.3 Exhibition essays and journal articles from 2000….………………………………..69 2.4 An organisational approach to ceramic discourse……………………………...........90 3. Post-Minimalism in the 1960s: a decade of change………………….............................103 3.1 Process art and shifts in artistic values…………………….......................................106 3.2 The expanded field of sculpture…………………………………………………….120 3.3 A theorization of process……………………………………………………………134 4. Contemporary ceramics from a post-minimalist perspective…………………………...149 4.1 Process in ceramics practice………………………………………………………..154 4.2 A post-Minimalist approach to the ceramics of Richard Deacon and Kosho Ito......161 4.3 Drawing through process, the porcelain drawings of Wendy Tuxill……………….179 4 Conclusions…………………………………………………………………………………206 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………...........219 5 List of illustrations 1 Tony Cragg, Laibe, 1991……………………………………………………….................62 2 Peter Voulkos, Untitled Vase Sculpture, 1963…………………………………………...112 3 Richard Serra, Verb List, 1962-1968……………………………………………………..115 4 Richard Serra, One Ton Prop, House of Cards, 1969……………………………………117 5 Eva Hesse, Right After, 1969……………………………………………………………..125 6 Eva Hesse, Studioworks, 1969……………………………………………………………131 7 Eva Hesse, Studioworks, 1969, detail…………………………………………………….132 8 Jackson Pollock, Painting Number 32, 1950……………………………………………..136 9 Jackson Pollock, Untitled Terracotta Clay Sculpture, 1950……………………………...137 10 Neil Brownsword, Marl Hole Project, 2009…………………………………………….155 11 Alexandra Engelfriet, Marl Hole Project, 2009…………………………………………156 12 Robert Smithson, Asphalt rundown, 1969……………………………………………….158 13 Richard Deacon, Small Clay Sculptures, 1999-2005……………………………………167 14 Richard Deacon, Flower, 2004…………………………………………………………..168 15 Richard Deacon, Venice Twist, 2007……………………………………………………169 16 Richard Deacon, Work in progress, 2003……………………………………………….171 17 Kosho Ito, Seafolds, 2002……………………………………………………………….175 18 Kosho Ito, Earthfolds, 2002……………………………………………………………..176 19 Wendy Tuxill, Multi-part Mould, 2007…………………………………………………184 20 Wendy Tuxill, Multi-part Mould, detail, 2007………………………………………….185 21 Wendy Tuxill, Cast form, detail, 2007…………………………………………………..185 22a, 22b, Wendy Tuxill, Test pieces, 2007…………………………………………………188 23, 24, Wendy Tuxill, Test pieces, 2007……………………………………………………189 25a, 25b, Wendy Tuxill, Test pieces, details 2007………………………………………….190 26 Wendy Tuxill, Liminal Series, Drawing 1, 2007………………………………………..192 27 Wendy Tuxill, Liminal Series, Drawing 12, 2009……………………………………....193 6 List of illustrations 28 Wendy Tuxill, Liminal Series, Drawings 2, 3, 7, 2007, 2008…………………………...194 29a Wendy Tuxill, Liminal Series, Drawings 1-9, Installation view, 2009………………...195 29b Wendy Tuxill, Liminal Series, Drawings 1-3, Installation view, 2009………………...195 30a Wendy Tuxill, Liminal Series, Drawing 8, Framed, 2008……………………………..196 30b Wendy Tuxill, Liminal Series, Drawing 8, Unframed, 2008…………………………..196 31a Wendy Tuxill, Liminal Series, Porcelain Drawing, 2008……………………………..197 31b Wendy Tuxill, Lacuna Series, Sculptural Drawing 1, View 1, 2008………………….197 31c Wendy Tuxill, Lacuna Series, Sculptural Drawing 1, View 2, 2008………………….197 32a Wendy Tuxill, Lacuna Series, Drawing 2, 2008……………………………………….198 32b Wendy Tuxill, Lacuna Series, Drawing 2, detail, 2008………………………………..198 33 Wendy Tuxill, Lacuna Series, Drawing 3, 2008………………………………………...199 34 Wendy Tuxill, Lacuna Series, Drawing 4, 2008………………………………………...200 35 Wendy Tuxill, Lacuna Series, Drawing 5, 2008………………………………………...201 36 Wendy Tuxill, Lacuna Series, Drawing 5, Trackside poster, 2009……………………..201 7 Acknowledgements I wish to acknowledge my thanks for the support of each member of my supervisory team: Professor Marty St. James, principal supervisor. Dr Steven Adams. Professor Michael Biggs. My thanks also to: Richard Deacon, sculptor, for agreeing to be interviewed about his work. Susan Daniel-McElroy, Director, for agreeing to be interviewed about ceramic exhibitions at Tate St.Ives. Arwen Fitch, Press Officer, for images of ceramic artworks at Tate St.Ives exhibitions. Stedelijk Museum, The Netherlands, for images from the Museum’s ceramic collection. The Estate of Eva Hesse, courtesy of Hauser and Wirth, for images of artworks by Eva Hesse. The Fruitmarket Gallery, Edinburgh, for images of artworks by Eva Hesse. Conveners and delegates at conferences at the International Ceramics Academy, Hungary, (2006), University of Dundee, (2007), Fuping Pottery Village, Xian, China, (2007), and the University of North Texas, Dallas, (2008), for feedback and encouragement in the pursuit of this research project. Curators at galleries in Chicago, Winscombe, Worcester, and Hatfield for showing interest in and exhibiting the research artworks. Kevin Mead, photographer, Art Van Go, Knebworth. Gordon Engravings, Bespoke Perspex Frames, Canterbury, Kent. Anthony R. Tuxill for his continued and invaluable support throughout the project. 8 INTRODUCTION This thesis examines the extent to which the 1960s post-Minimalist strand of process art may provide an analytical template to fill an identified dearth of critical writing for an area of contemporary ceramic art which is process-led. This area of work is currently described as difficult to write about in standard ceramic terms as it is unlike any other form of traditional ceramics practice. 1 Over the past two decades, in contrast to other art practices, it has become evident that a dearth of critical writing exists for all forms of ceramic work. 2 Throughout this period, calls have