Material Traces Performativity, Artistic “Work,” and New Concepts of Agency Amelia Jones

The setting is a boxing gym in Montreal, borrowed and transformed for the 2013 Edgy Women Festival.1 The work I am there to experience, Becoming an Image, is by Los Angeles–based artist Heather Cassils. I am led, with other participants, into a completely dark room. Something looms in the center, which we can see peripherally beyond the tiny cones of light thrown off by the assistants’ flashlights as they put us in place along the walls of the small room set up inside the larger space of the gym. The assistants turn off their lights and we are left waiting. A vis- ceral sense of claustrophobia, the rustling and heat of other bodies, the loamy smell of damp earth (that hulking form I saw looming in the center of the room when we entered must be a lump of clay)...the darkness closes in. We hear someone enter the room. We hear a body flailing and beating the form in the middle of the room, laboring to change the shape of the clay; the body’s efforts are punctuated by the sharp hiss of an aspirated exhale at every punch. I am in the front row and standing so close to the laboring body I can feel drops of sweat fling through the air and hear grunts and huffing and puffing as the boxer/artist relentlessly

1. This project was generously supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and would not have “materialized” without this support.

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02 October 2021 Material Traces 19 Becoming Becoming setting off the flash, flash, the off setting before the strenuous breathing, the the strenuous breathing, — , a Cassils show at Ronald Feldman Feldman Ronald at show Cassils a , Body Work of This goes on for a good 20 minutes and we can sense 2 in Image an Becoming performance still, Edgy Women Festival, Festival, Women performance Image an Edgystill, Becoming Impressed with the efforts of the sweating boxer, the huge boxer, Impressed with the efforts of the sweating 3 , 2,000-pound clay bash, remnant sculpture from the performancethe from sculpture remnant bash, clay 2,000-pound After,

Otherwise: Imagining Queer Feminist Feminist Otherwise: Queer Imagining Silver, (Whitechapel, 2014); and, coedited with Erin

In actuality the photographer uses a verya uses photographer the actuality scene the illuminate to light bright In was version Montreal the for photographer indistinguishable. The are flashes two the perceptually but Alejandro Santiago. of installation the on riffing am I Here, - ver Montreal the to relation in place took however, clay, the of experience My 2013. York, New Gallery, projection a via is installation York New later the of experience my performancethe of sion here; described as artistthe to grateful am I clips. sound and photographs installation via and experience, for Montreal this of supplying these. Later in New York, via remnants and photographs from different performances of Becoming via remnants and photographs York, Later in New 2. 3. Amelia Jones is the Robert A. Day Professor in Art and Design and Vice Dean of Critical Studies at at Studies of Critical Dean Vice and and Design in Art Professor is the Robert Day A. Jones Amelia of Southern California. A curator and a theorist and at University and Design School of Art the Roski Art Live Record: Repeat historian of art publications include Perform and performance, her recent Differently: Seeing Heathfield; 2012), coedited with Adrian Press, of Chicago in History (University Visual 2012); the edited volume Arts (Routledge, A History and TheoryIdentification and the of Sexuality and Time Traces: exhibition Material forthcoming). Her Press, University (Manchester Art Histories [email protected] in Contemporary Art took place in 2013 in Montreal. the Gesture Figure 1. (facing page) Heather Cassils, Cassils, Heather page) (facing 1. Figure Cassils by photo Cassils; Heather © (Artworks knees). on (hands right the to is Jones Amelia 2013. Montreal, Art) Fine courtesy artistSantiago; the Feldman of Ronald and Alejandro and

pummels the clay. Suddenly a photographer’s flash illuminates the scene and we see the sweaty Suddenly a photographer’s pummels the clay. body and the human-sized lump of clay. Figure 2. Heather Cassils, Cassils, Heather 2. Figure , Edgy Women Festival, Montreal, 2013. (Artworks © Heather Cassils; photo by Cassils and and Cassils by photo Cassils; Heather © (Artworks 2013. Montreal, Festival, Women Edgy, Image an Art) Fine courtesy Santiago; artistFeldman the of Ronald and Alejandro the fatigue that is setting in for the “boxer” as time goes by “boxer” the fatigue that is setting in for the the laboring body in brief flash in the front row, splashes of sweat that land on those of us our retinas. which we apprehend only a split second later as afterimages burned into images, the fatigue in our own bodies as well: the experiencing identify with the laboring body, We co-embodiment are exhausting. the projective the listening, standing, the piece is displayed. an Image, Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02 October 2021 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02October 2021

20 Amelia Jones of theirhavingbeenmade, speakabodyhavingbeenin motion alities affectmysenseofbeinginspace(asdoMinimalistsculptures) butalso, throughthesigns artistic labor;asIengageit, itenactsandenlivensmyown senseofembodiment. These materi- laboring body. The claypresentsitselfashaving beenmade, havingbeenformedbyanintense the clayproducesphenomenologicaleffectsrelatingtoprevious creativeactionofanartist’s to thebodiesinquestion:waywhich, whetherornotIexperiencedtheperformanceitself, action andmateriality. What interestsmeis, forexample, thematerialityofclayinrelation lump ofclay)andthewayinwhichprojectasawholeinterrogatesinterrelationbetween tion ortheactionitselfbutperformativityofremains(inparticular experience Idescribeofherembodiedaction. Butwhatinterestsmeisnotthistypeofdescrip- did infactattendtheversionCassilsproducedMontreal, andthusmyownbodyinhabitsthe (expressed theartist’sfeelingsorrepresentedsomethinginworld)(Austin[1961]1989). in J.L. Austin’s originalformulation, theactiondid grounded, withtheprocessesofartisticmakingindicatedormarkedthroughthesematerialities. object, butthat, initsperformativity, alsoinvolvesmaterialitiesclearlymanipulatedandfore- inadequate tothekindofartthatinterestsmehere rect waysmostinterpretationinthesedisciplinarydiscourses.) the twodisciplineshere, mysketchesofthebasictenetsnonethelessstillinforminatleastindi- because itcomplicatesbothofthesetendencies. (AlthoughIcouldbeaccusedofcaricaturing to an “authentic” bodyofaction. Itisworthlookingmorecloselyatsuchhybridworkprecisely of theperformativemomentenactment, dwellingonthisexperienceasproofofouraccess reading themasstaticobjects, performancestudieswouldtendtodiscussthevisceralexperience dwell onthephotographsalone, designatingCassilsastheirintentional, activatingagentand “authenticity” fortheperforminglivebody. While curatorialpracticeandarthistorywould based inperformancestudies’tendencytoemphasizeprocessandnarrativecontentorclaim (generally speaking, investedinfinal “products” asmadebyintentionalagentscalledartists)or Such worksshowthelimitsofoldmethodsinterpretation, whetherarthistoricalorcuratorial tive yetexistinvariousmaterialforms(including, arguably, thatoftheartist’slaboringbody). body, conceptual, andinstallationarttorendernewcomplexexperiencesthatareperforma- It isabodytome. ItreanimatesCassils’sactions. ceral relationshiptothishunkofclay-flesh. Surelyitsmellsofsweat?Ithasthetextureskin. of scaleand(throughidentification)mydesiretoactorreact what Iwanttocallthefeelingoftheir “having beenmade,” affectingmyphysicality, mysense onto thepastaction. These elementsalltogetherareevocativeinaphenomenologicalsenseof rapher whoseflashesgaveusglimpsesoftheaction piece, thesoundhasbeendramatized, editedforeffect). The pictures artistic labor. The clayisaccompaniedbyasoundtrack(tapedduringoneperformanceofthe lump ofmanipulatedclaystandsasarecordthepastaction, markedbythematerialtracesof

5. 4. In thisimmediatecase, Cassils’sperformanceitselfwasinobviouswaysperformative:as This projectbyCassilsepitomizesanewmodeofhybridpracticesthatdrawsonlegacy been made as a material trace of artistic productionbeen made as a material is trace of dramatized.artistic Havinghowever,not they witnessed witnessed the the performance. performance, my relation to the clay’s having this effect would occur for most people experiencing the clay in its exhibitionI context,am whetherorcertain time. For studies see Jones and performance history an elaboration of the tendencies in (2008).art my show. and explore is an attempt to go further the complexitiesThis of article how such a project works over in Montreal; Cassils’s of the piece again at Edgy performance Women coincidentally occurred of during the run action of the event; the exhibition took place at the Leonard and Ellen at Concordia Bina Gallery University Art install solely Cassils’s photographs, from an earlier version(in Los Angeles), to evoke of the performance the In fact, as curator of the 2013 exhibition Material Traces: Time and the Gesture in Contemporary Art, I chose to (an actofmaking)ratherthandescribed — — art thatisnotlodgedinorasonlyafinal are glossy, beautiful, gleamingwindows in return. Ihaveaparticularlyvis- 4 Bothofthesetendenciesare — in thiscase, violentlyso. — taken bythephotog-

I Material Traces 21 - show, show, Body Work of such as new — intersects with materials to , 2,000-pound clay bash, remnant sculpture sculpture remnant bash, clay 2,000-pound After, performance surrounded by four performance four by Image an surrounded Becoming each of the sticks of wood has a “head” whit- “head” each of the sticks of wood has a — Ronald Feldman Gallery, New York, 7 September–12 October 2013. (Artworks (Artworks 2013. October September–12 7 York, New Gallery, Feldman Ronald courtesy artistthe of Mikushkina; and Varvara by photo Cassils; © Heather Art) Fine Feldman Ronald Figure 3. Heather Cassils, Cassils, Heather 3. Figure performancethe from Cassils’s in installed as Ghost, installation audio channel that allow for a focus on how action - — - the whittled ends, which speak at this later time of the chips and slices made by which speak at this later the whittled ends, its key site of activity — (2013). The stack is, however, uneven and its precarious skittering off however, The stack is, Untitled (Studs) (2013).

(even Becoming an Image one that incorporates aspects of art history (attention to form and materiality), perfor (attention to form and materiality), one that incorporates aspects of art history

— I’m “in” the clay and it’s “in” “in” the clay and it’s “in” I’m Such hybrid practices thus beg for new hybrid modes of analysis. I would like to offer one I would like to modes of analysis. Such hybrid practices thus beg for new hybrid It is not difficult for me to imagine this body (he lives with me and his studio is downstairs) me. We reciprocally define each define each reciprocally We me. relating back to both of us other, a previous materi- as “Cassils” as previous embodiment, a ality, - agential force of mak well as an a new This project typifies ing. art approach in contemporary perfor that merges aspects of mance with aspects of the visual mance with aspects of habit- with the latter’s arts, “materiality.” ual reliance on Cassils’s the title speaks of this) exem- the title speaks of this) a new mode plifies and explores that can- of contemporary art solely not be fully understood through formalism or structural analyses (its hybrid and perfor mative nature makes such analyses less than useful as there is no single final product to be exam- ined) nor through performance theory’s emphasis on ephemeral action (the materiality of the work is and its transformation is key to the experience). here mance theory (a sensitivity towards how activities over time accrue significance in relation tomance theory (a sensitivity towards how activities but also calls for new models of analysis receivers) and Marxian theories of labor, produce new spaces of meaning. produce new spaces of meaning. materialism and thing theory The Allure and Limits of Theorizing Artistic Labor and Limits of Theorizing Allure The stamped osten- each piece of wood of two-by-fours, I encounter a stack Entering the gallery, Depot and is the the label is from Home (in fact, “STUD” tatiously on one end with the word This is Paul used in building construction as studs). industry standard for labeling wood to be Donald’s it is no mystery that I tend to Having seen the piece being made, to one side makes me uneasy. focus in on the manipulated nature of the wood tled laboriously into a strange, organic knob. A giant could pick one up in her hand, holding the A giant could pick one up in her hand, knob. organic tled laboriously into a strange, Bodily functions are thus suggested both in weapon. and use the board as a phallic whittled end, look like the handle-like references and the content or symbolism of the carved shapes (which or lasciviously pointing fingers) but also in the signs of their having penises, scrota, tool handles, been made Donald’s laboring body in the past. it awkwardly while reshaping the end into an echo holding leaning over the long piece of wood, isof the body’s own appendages or prostheses (the very bodily tools with which the carving Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02 October 2021 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02October 2021

22 Amelia Jones by Paul Litherland; Leonard courtesy & Bina Ellen Art Gallery) , LeonardArt & Bina Ellen Art Gallery, Concordia University, Montreal. (Photo work as installed in Figure 4. Paul Donald, ing ofobjectswiththeprocessualnatureperformance. Rather thanassumingthatmaking and thingtheory, combinedwithphenomenology’s tools materialities thatgoesbeyondtheoriesofartisticlabor ing lateraudiencesthroughaparticularkindofperformativity. Inturn, throughafocuson cially, toexplorehowthetracesofartisticmaking can beinscribedinthematerialities, engag- practice functionsforthosewhoengagethematerialitiesonce theliteralactionisoverand, cru- signs ofproduction, providesathoughtspacethatallows metoexaminehowthiskindofhybrid Marxist analysesrelatinglaborprimarilyorsolelytothecirculation ofcapitalandtheerasure junction Marx’stheorynonethelessopensup. making andthematerialities(includinghumans)transformedthroughtheseprocesses the work’sproduction;second, Iintendtostresstheinterrelationsamongprocessesoflaboror italism effacessignsof “process,” emphasizingratherartpracticesthatexaggeratethesignsof to distancemyargumentsfromaMarxistorneo-Marxistemphasisonthewaysinwhichcap- 1961:180). IciteMarxstrategically. Through thisgestureIwanttodotwothings:first, Iaim tion [...]inthematerialworkedupon” suchthatthe “process disappearsintheproduct” ([1867] Karl Marxnotedof “man’s activity” that, assistedby “instruments oflabor[it]effectsanaltera- blages andthelaboringbody(ofartist, butalsooftheinterpreter)?Inhis1867opusCapital the cruxofhernewmaterialisttheory “vibrant matter.” and hiswoodepitomizethehuman-nonhumanassemblagethatBennettsoincisivelyexploresas on “doing and[...]effectingbyahuman-nonhumanassemblage” (2010:28). Donaldandhistools ing beenmade, Donald’spieceseemsexplicitlytoenactJaneBennett’snewmaterialistemphasis tools, nottomentionthesitesofmakinganddisplayart. With itsclearsignsofhav- or, whatwemightbettercall “experiencer,” toevokealllevelsofinterpretiveengagement)and

6. Starting mytheorywithMarx, whilemovinginadifferent directionfromMarxistorneo- How doweunderstandtherelationshipbetweensuchhybridperformative-materialassem- and materials. of his body and wood and being in dialogue with him about his relationship as a making subject with his tools has to do with the fact that these projects developed out of watching Donald out of producethe materialities art in dialogue with me for my show labor; see artistic spaces, explicitly addressing works in trated which performance he labors publicly to build structures in gallery Paul Donald and I watched him at of variousthis work. is my life partner points make parts He has also orches- Material Traces: Time and the Gesture in Contemporary Untitled (Studs), 2013; pine 2 x 4’s (“studs”). Final Would Work (2011) and Material Traces. My decision to include his work in that show and again here Causeway (2013). In the case of — — specifically throughnewmaterialism this explorationconnectsthemak- maker and interpreter (viewer maker andinterpreter(viewer action ofwoodandhumans, but alsocallsforththeinter form. The artworkissuesfrom mately congealedinmaterial turn requiredthoughtandulti- through action, actionthatin thing animateagain, butalive (wood, fromatree)intosome- formed aformerlylivingmaterial called an “artist”) thathastrans- attached toit(abodyofsomeone and thenatureofclaims at theendofeachpiecewood, which imprinttheorganicforms cisely thelabor, theeffectsof encountering itIrealizeispre- multiple senses. Itmovesme. In done). Untitled (Studs), the works were made 6 The woodisanimatein — a con- - Material Traces 23 , work in progress progress in work , (Studs) Untitled , work in progress showing showing progress in work , (Studs) Untitled Figure 6. Paul Donald, Donald, Paul 6. Figure Donald) courtesy (Photo 2013. Paul of workshop, of view showing Figure 5. Paul Donald, Donald, Paul 5. Figure carving of pine 2 x 4 (“stud”). Shown in workshop, 2013. (Photo (Photo 2013. workshop, in Shown carving(“stud”). 4 x 2 pine of Donald) courtesyPaul of to that of — rather than — per or perform itself

I am interested in hybrid I am interested in hybrid works such as these by Cassils works such as these by to and Donald that continue to pro- have significance and after the duce effects and affects moment of their initial manip- the ulation (or more accurately, infinite moments of their manip- since things take time ulation, art involves process while sub- art involves process into a final suming the interpretations object through only on the object that focus immutable (as art as static and - and art his curating, criticism, engage with I tory tend to do), in process objects as themselves as indicat- and more importantly or processes of making ing previous what I call the having been made of the work of art. produce and exist through time). I argue that they do this precisely by insistently rendering or materializing Marx on the labor of produc- ing the effacing commodity — the signs of their having been While Marxist and neo- made. Marxist arguments have proved extremely useful in generating debates about the relationships and the the art, among the artist, I do not marketplaces for art, focus in this article on this point (although I have elsewhere; see I argue instead that Jones 2006). art can work through another angle materialities (including those of the laboring bodies of making and engaging with art’s stuff). The limits of Marxist or neo- Marxist theories of labor are clear in relation to art: they do not interrogate how the mate- . work rialities of art themselves New materialist theory pro- vides a key method to examine how the complex of material- to pro- “works” ities in the art duce endlessly shifting meanings In particular I make and values. Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02 October 2021 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02October 2021

24 Amelia Jones The Allure andLimitsofNew Materialist Theory manipulated materialities. the kindofhybridartpracticethatinsistentlyreturnstoovertlyinscribedandperformatively and others, extendingmythoughtexperimentandmovingmetowardsanunderstandingof the “thing theory” or “Actor-Network-Theory” ofnewmaterialistphilosopherBrunoLatour use hereofphilosopherandphysicistKarenBarad’snewmaterialisttheory, closelyrelatedto Paul Litherland; Leonard courtesy & Bina Ellen Art Gallery) Bina Ellen Art Gallery, Concordia University, Montreal. (Photo by Traces: Time, Leonard and the Art Gesture & in Contemporary silicone rubber,As installed in fiberglass, plastic, metal. Figure 7. Juliana Cerqueira Leite, way along)isdynamicinspace, hungdownwardfromapointintheceilingandyetappear free fall(acontradictionthatseemspossiblethroughthismateriality). her bodyrotatingdownwardortumbling, asifcarvingspacelikeadancer, butoneincontrolled tion, thelargespiralofrubberysiliconeseemstohavebeenshapedbyvoidsproduced through directbodilyimprint. Onfirstencounter, evenifweknownothingofitsconstruc- the climbisalsofall (2011), offersdramaticsurfaces, hollows, andexpansesapparentlymolded Juliana CerquieraLeite’slargetwistingsilicone, rubber, fiberglass, andplasticsculpturalform, This spillofskin-likeswathessilicone(markedwithhand-, foot-, andskin-printsallthe the climb is also the fall, 2011; Material the piecework this impossibletwistthatmakes high. It’stheanxietycausedby cipitous, theupwardreachtoo downward trajectoryistoopre- eye My bodywrithesinmymind’s through sympatheticprojection. in ordertoinhabitthefolds (how ithadtohavebeenmade) mind arounditsconstruction as amaterialtrace. Iwrapmy and thenexhibitedforus “here” form tohavebeenconstructed for thiscorporeallymolded been “there,” movinginspace, Leite’s body, whichhadtohave presents (ordoesitre- active formsofaspiralstaircase, ing bodyguidedbythespatially object, asdynamicamov- effort. A monumentalsilicone been made, evocativeofcreative in turnbythesemarksofhaving ment. We areliterallyimpressed ground inamuscularmove- ing topressupwardfromthe plex methodsofengagement such practicesdemandcom- tors’ bodies). Fullyexperienced, ing theartist’sandspecta- activates materialities(includ- and labor space) —performs and aworkofart(athingin both aperformancedocument Leite’s hybridpractice — I can’tquitegothere. The onandforme. present?) — -

Material Traces 25 The point is facilitates my 8 , 2011, 2011, fall, the also is climb the it allows for an interpretation that is provisional and it allows for an interpretation that is provisional — Figure 8. Juliana Cerqueira Leite, Cerqueira Juliana 8. Figure Leite) Cerquiera courtesy (Photo detail. Juliana of the phenomenon of the inherent ontological indeterminacy” indeterminacy” local resolution within the phenomenon of the inherent ontological

rather than dangerous or threatening interrelatedness. Just as Barad agues for the interrelationality interrelationality the for agues Barad as Just interrelatedness. threatening or dangerous than rather creative As suggested, these ideas these As suggested,

7 of materiality itself (including humans), so Oliver argues for “a truly interrelational conception of subjectiv- of conception truly interrelational “a for argues Oliver so humans), (including itself materiality of model, this in self, The the veryas life, of force the as seen is change.” dependence of possibility [wherein...] ity via- most the becomes thus interpretation and sovereign,” than rather relational and dialogic “fundamentally is two the in articulatedbe to ethics an thus for and difference key The 144). 1999:159, (see resignifying for site ble both. from draw I that clear be will it human-centered; still is latter the that is Oliver’s) and (Barad’s models See Barad (2003:812) and Barad’s 2009 interview with Rick Dolphijn and Iris van der Tuin (2012). Barad’s Barad’s (2012). Tuin der van interview2009 Iris and Dolphijn Rick with Barad’s and (2003:812) Barad See ontology an both is “it argues, Andersen Tawny performanceas theorist or, theory“onto-epistemology” an is ‘is’”;what perceive we see how from separated be cannot ‘is’ what that argues Barad since epistemology, an and Andersen (2014). Butler’s Judith of binarism lingering the be to argues she what rejects Oliver Here, (1999). Oliver Kelly also See inter- that stressing by relation self-other the revivifying for calls and theoryinfluential hugely performativity, of perforor visual of - surely and other, of self, (of meaning of determination the in implicated is itself pretation and desiring potentially a through but opposition and antagonism art),mance through only not occurs which even My thought experiment, My thought experiment, 7. 8. that I am not by any means fully in control of this cut as intentional subject (which, arguably, arguably, of this cut as intentional subject (which, that I am not by any means fully in control from Cassils’s I engage, I am largely guided by the materialities Rather, Cartesianism promises). of my computer keyboard as it lump of clay and laboring body to the vicissitudes

that acknowledge the tension that acknowledge and mate- between activation Barad’s key point (like riality. key Deleuzian that of other such as Rosi new materialists is that all materialities Braidotti) and thus force, “agential” have deprivi- that human agency is all mean- leged as the source of action in ingful expression or what Barad stresses the world. ontol- “relational she calls a (includ- where materialities ogy” ing human bodies/subjects) a continual affect one another in way. seem particularly well suited to seem particularly well rethinking how hybrid art works, and in particular to doing this by hybrid meth- in turn, creating, ods across performance theory methods that are and art theory, themselves performative. is reliant on a method of then, activating what Barad theo- into the “agential cuts” rizes as interrelational flow of meaning the materialities interpretations as interventions that expose between me and the stuff called art, which substantiates the In contrast to the Cartesian cut, at play in the relationship between us. the agential the putatively inert objects in the world, thinking human subject in opposition to cut “enacts a between humans and other materialities it in any final way (Barad 2003:815). interrelated with its object rather than fixing Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02 October 2021 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02October 2021

26 Amelia Jones cally andsolelyhuman Gell specificallyclaimsthatartobjectsare “indexesof agency,” andthisagencyisparadigmati- with anextremehumanistinvestmentinsingularagency.and Agency, Forexample, Alfred inArt structures ofdesireFreuddescribedsowell[see(1927) 1963]), afetishizationcoexisting can accrue case inwhichmaterialityisfetishizedpsychicallyaswelleconomically (theobject, which curatorial practices, arthistoricalwriting, andartcriticismtoaesthetictheory)offersanextreme from aspectsoftheartist’sembodiment, motivations, and/orconceptualdrives. Visual art(from intentional origin)andthestuffofart, whichisinterpreteddirectlyorindirectlyasresulting all visualartsinstitutionsanddiscoursesmakesomekindofconnectionbetweenthemaker(as ory), inturn, isawholeseriesofbeliefsthatcomplicatethesetheoriesindramaticways. First, new materialistorthingtheory(nottomentionneo-Marxistandperformancethe- and Christopher Braddock) of the (Photoartist courtesy , with Amelia Art JonesContemporary engaging and explaining. installed in 2011. As Figure 9. Juliana Cerqueira Leite, structures ofbeliefandvalue, tends toturnthelivingbodyintoanobject. Even withtime-basedworkssuchasliveperformances, thevisual artsworld, relyingonthese artistic agencyasfullyintentionalanddeterminablethrough reasoned interpretivemethods. arguments simplycrystallizethegeneraltendencyinartdiscourses andinstitutionstoreify describes theartworkassimplyatraceofhumanagencywithnoagentialforceitsown. Gell’s rialist theoristssuchasBaradandLatour, andtypicalofmainstreambeliefsaboutart, Gell 9. dency (see Jones 2011). throughout the opening hours of the museum in the atrium of the Museum of Modern exemplifies Art, this ten- The 2010 Marina Abramović retrospective astronomical commodityandcultural, political, or “aesthetic” valueasbasedonthe Material Traces: Time and the Gesture in (1998: seeesp. 14–15). the climb is also the fall, The is Artist Present, In strongcontrasttotheargumentsofnewmate- the centerpiece of which was Abramović sitting courses, andinstitutionsoffer ties Icannotforesee. tions andinterpretivemateriali- text andthenproducenewreac- the future, mayengagewithmy congeal assuchjustyou, in the materialitiesofworksto but ofcourseIamalso “causing” in howyouinterprettheworld; and thusinsomewayplayarole can thenaffectyou, myreader, tions and, inturn, asifmywords if theworks “caused” myreac- cause andeffect(815). Iwriteas causal structure” ofconstructed actions,” hopingtoinstilla “local am partofasystem “intra- capacities. InBarad’sterms, I ing mywordstoitsanimating gies ofartisticagencybyattach- me to “cut” throughideolo- engagement withit, enabling that theclaycalledforthmy processes. Icouldsay, infact, ities inrelationtoart-working vious experiencesofmaterial- I mobilizetotrydescribepre- access tothetheoriesandwords What visualartpractices, dis- 9

Material Traces 27 materialities. materialities. 11 “human-nonhuman “human-nonhuman — the climb is also the fall, the also is climb the per Barad’s argument quoted earlier quoted argument Barad’s per — 2011; silicone rubber, fiberglass, plastic, metal, 2011. 2011. metal, plastic, fiberglass, installed As rubber, silicone 2011; Jones) Amelia by (Photo York. New Brooklyn, Gallery, A.I.R. at Figure 10. Juliana Cerqueira Leite, Cerqueira Juliana 10. Figure as — We can We 10 I suggest that our

—

assemblage(s).” in way the to points this not; do Barad and Latour while subject,” “human of idea the maintains Brown Notably, returns. usually “subject” the artwhen which, picture, the into comes I would argue against allowing the notion of agency to apply equally to nonhuman and human and nonhuman to equally to apply agency of the notion allowing against argue would I Nonetheless the new materialist argument opens up the question of forces of production and meaning in veryin meaning and production of newthe forces of the question up opens argument materialist Nonetheless on emphasis its in least the ways, not useful Given the entrenched nature Given the of these beliefs about art of these beliefs - confirming our capac essentially enact our inten- ity both to and unmediated tion in a full transcend our brute way and to by mak- our labor, embodiment, ing art meth- goal should be to adopt with ods that allow us to engage - the materialities we encoun we assist in the doing so, By ter. making, art’s ongoing meaning to connect its potential that is, and thus us to past materialities, whether to past agential forces, fully human or not. 11. 10. only hope to exacerbate potential tensions and gaps and open- and to foster potential ings, pauses, transformations, shifts, and awarenesses (no matter how small) in the making-interpretation nexus and thus in social away from Turning relations. Gell’s romantic and instrumen- talizing views of artistic agency, I must not interpret these effects as caused by the artist or the artwork as static entities or ori- as These effects are not, gins. Actor- Latour would argue in his Network-Theory (or ANT), by intentional agents “caused” nor in fact could “artists,” called they be said to arise fully from objects and humans are interre- Rather, “art historians.” or “curators,” “critics,” the agency of artworks] have to I would insist, objects [such as, be accounted for, “To as Latour notes: lated, they offer no information to the observer and will If no trace is produced, enter into accounts. and “intermediaries,” are not mediators but Objects have no visible effect on other agents.” as Bill Brown Or, (2005:79). them talk ” [...] to make “specific tricks must be activated through “The story of objects asserting themselves as things Theory”: “Thing puts it in his 2001 article the thing [...] is the story of a changed relation to the human subject and thus the story of how (2001:4). really names less an object than a particular subject-object relation” Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02 October 2021 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02October 2021

28 Amelia Jones words? All areintra-active. ory of the work, and your access to it, and thus what the work “is” for those who have read these articulation similartotheway in whichmydescriptionofthisexperiencehereaffectsmem - the movementsofLeiteincomposingimprintedbody-work Iencounter. Isn’tthisco- materialities thewayinwhichsilicone, thesteps, and gravityconspiredtolimitanddefine preter whileclaimingtosayeverythingabouttheworksheor heisdescribingandevaluating. course disingenuousatbestandself-servingworst, inthat itsayseverythingabouttheinter without suchself-reflexivity, suchcircuitsputintoplaycontradictions thatrendermuchartdis- archives) tothematerialitiesofwork’sproduction. Itencourages theacknowledgmentthat, which wereturn(conceptually, psychically, orliterally made affordsthepossibilityoftracingratherthandisavowing orignoringtheseloopsthrough focusing onthematerialitiesofworkbyengagingthemas potentialsignsofitshavingbeen tic” becausethepersondoingitpositionshim/herselfasanartist. At theveryleast, mymodelof transformed throughlabor. This islaborthatdefinedinatautologicalrecursiveloopas “artis- sites ofdisplay, aswellthepotential “others” (experiencers)engagingthestuffthathasbeen or conceptiscommunicated(including, withperformanceorbodyart, theartist’sbody), the include elementsamongthefollowing:artist, theobject, themeansthroughwhichidea ventional, conceptual, orperformanceartworks, thediscursivematerialitiesinquestionmight ontology,” assheputsit[2003:812]). crete anddefinedentitiesinrelation;intra-action describesamuchmoreprofound “relational same timeaffectsinsideandoutsideofthematteractivated(inter-action implies, rather, twodis- riencers acrosstime. Byintra-actionBaradindicatesanimatingmovementthatatoneandthe to animatefutureviewersor, moreaccurately(becausetheengagementismultisensorial), expe- of theseintra-actionsisextremelyusefulinteasingouthowcertainartisticpracticesfunction as things, apparatuses, andtheworld, andherideaoftheperformative “agential” quality riality Idrawontomakethesearguments. Barad’sideaofintra-actionsbetweenhumansand/ Barad’s 2003theoryof “posthumanist performativity” isitselfananimatingdiscursivemate- ing ofthepreviousactionsinvolvedintheirhavingbeenmadepast). As Ihavenoted, these materialities(i.e., thatthroughtheirspecificmanifestations, theypromoteanunderstand- and animatingpotentialofmaterialitieswhilealsoacknowledgingtheperformativeaspect “true” becausetheyarepresumablyconveyedbytheobjectwithoutmediation. determining meaningandvaluesoheorshecanclaimhisherinterpretationsassimply ernist criticism. The claimfunctionsasawayofdisavowingtheparticipationcriticin “things themselves” conveytheirmeaningdirectlytotheinterpreterisaclassiccanardofmod- tionality throughwhichtheymanifestandcometomean. Inartdiscourse, theclaimtolet At thesametimeIrejecthisfocuson “things themselves,” whichinfactbeliestherela- artworks inordertodescribetheanimatingpotentialofcertainkindsart- suggest amethodofinterpretationthroughwhichwefollowthe “motion” ofcertainkinds in-motion thatilluminatetheirhumanandsocialcontext” (1986:5). Iwant(per Appadurai) to we havetofollowthethingsthemselves[...F]romamethodological I hopeamfollowingwellhere: To “illuminate theconcrete, historicalcirculationofthings[...] to thedevelopmentofthingtheoryandnewmaterialism, heoffersmethodologicaladvicethat humans) thatwecall “art.” In Arjun Appadurai’s 1986bookTheSocialLifeof Things, influential of theartsituation, allowingusstrategicallytoreworkhowweapproachthestuff(workedby In engagingJulianaCerquieraLeite’stheclimbisalsofall, Iexperiencethroughits Transferring thesenewmaterialisttermstothefieldofart, whetherwearediscussingcon- Through someofthekeyinsightsnewmaterialisttheory, wecanattendtotheanimated Clearly newmaterialismoffersaveryinterestingwayofthinkingaboutthematerialities — through thestudyofartists’detritusin point ofviewitisthethings- making acrosstime. - Material Traces 29 series, series, Material Traces: Time Time Traces: Material Observational Diptychs ObservationalDiptychs from the from Untitled Untitled

Material Traces. Material Figure 11. Mark Igloliorte, Igloliorte, Mark 11. Figure 2010; oil on phone book page. One pair, as installed in installed as pair, One page. book phone on oil 2010; Gallery, Art Ellen Contemporaryin Bina & Gesture the Artand Leonard , & courtesy Leonard Litherland; Paul by (Photo Montreal. University, Concordia Gallery) Art Ellen Bina - As duos, As duos, 12 Diptychs Observational

I installed this particular set of diptychs in my show show my in particularthis installed I diptychs of set are not primarily “representational” in the obvious sense, the obvious sense, in “representational” are not primarily Diptychs the Observational Again, 12. sion of the same mundane object a rumpled a trash can, (a shoe, etc.). piece of paper, This hybrid interpretive model can address in this way the interrelations among thought, among thought, the interrelations can address in this way interpretive model This hybrid Such interrelations experiencers. artist as well as subsequent materiality for the and action, - in relation to mate physical actions awareness of previous out the interpreter’s not only draw our rialities; they call forth previ- sensitivity to the artist’s as con- ous thought processes resulted nected to choices that in actions affecting materialities, visible the signs of which are we view to us in the present as Mark For example, the work. Igloliorte’s eight pairs of a group of (2010), with matched images painted gestural swaths of paint on thin paper torn from phone books, provoke an acute awareness of the contingency and durational- ity of artistic perception and later viewer perception (as well which as the fragility of matter, deteriorates over time): each of the paired images shows a slightly different perceptual ver New Materialisms, Hidden Humanisms, Hidden Humanisms, Materialisms, New and Performance Theory and Performance each points to the other as hav- in each Encountering the two images in time. ing been made at a slightly different moment I find my mind shifting back and forth, visual echo of the other, one a slightly distorted pair, in space to view shifting of Igloliorte’s body, recreating a perceptual moment (and movement, This awareness is called been completed in the past. different sides of mundane objects) having the thin paper; it is evoked as well by the orientation forth not only by the marks as they pucker Igloliorte slightly differently in each image according to where in space of the things painted, positioned himself in relation to the objects. They unglue our although they do evoke things in space in more or less recognizable ways. an emotionally and representing tendency to view something called art as explicitly expressing with the dried former But these doubled pictures, charged moment in the artist’s/agent’s past. call forth the dampness of the paint clotting and pinching the paper like fingers grasping skin, we make interrelation between the material world and the gestural and perceptual meanings In doing so they foreground (through their from this world as we pass through and inhabit it. fact that mak- manipulated through bodily gesture cum bodily labor) the specific materiality, always in process and taking dialogical practices, ing and experiencing art are always social, and thus psychological awareness and connectedness, By opening perceptual place over time. into his with a brief hug of hello, He draws us, Igloliorte’s achieved depiction is performative. Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02 October 2021 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02October 2021

30 Amelia Jones some ofthisdiscoursecantendtoimply. that newmaterialismplacesus “beyond” (inoppositionto)the evilsofsocialconstructivism, as and therelatedembraceofmaterialitiessomehowestablishes a fully “posthuman” situation, nor new materialistsfromLatouronwardintheirclaimthattherejection of “representationalism” also CooleandFrost2010:seeesp. 2). Iamnot, however, inagreementwithBaradandother thinking abouthowthematerialitiesofworld, includinghumans, interrelateovertime(see relationality or, asBaradputsit, “intra-action,” whichprovidesanuancedandproductivewayof allows amorenuancedconceptionofhowmaterialitieswork. Also compellingistheideaof idealist assumptionthatallstuffisonlyknowninandthroughthehuman tional andsuperiorto “objects” or “things” and performanceinterpretation. theory allowsustocomplicatethenotionofperformativeaswellenlivenmodelsart (suturing theinsidetooutside, emphasizingthe “intra-” aspectofintra-action). new materialism, awayofmakingartthatinsistsuponthecontingencyperceptionitself you finishreadingbutcontinuetoresonate. Igloliorteisgivingusapsychologicallyinflected world ofsmallrecognitions. The diptychsarelikethebestshortstories, whichdon’tstopwhen 14. 13. and justbecauseaworkpresentslivebodydoesnotmeanitis ities thatexisttobetouchedandotherwiseexperienced, doesnotmeanitisperformative; here inrelationtoperformancestudies, then, isthatjustbecauseapracticeproducesmaterial- materialities alwaysalreadyinprocessandworkingrelationally. Oneofthepointstobemade are performative, producingmaterialitiesthat “do” ratherthansimply “say” (orrepresent), represents somethingintheworldorsomeaspectofemotionsartist). As such, they “representationalism,” thebeliefbehindstandardassumptionsaboutart, thatanartwork than produce “representations” thatarestaticandknowablebyhumans(viz. whatBaradcalls uniquely performativeinitseffects. PracticessuchasIgloliorte’sevoke “intra-actions” that mayornotinvolve (2003:815,‘humans’” 817). apparatuses ofbodilyproduction. Agential intra-actionsarespecificcausalmaterialenactments become meaningful[...]. Phenomenaareproducedthroughagentialintra-actionsofmultiple of the ‘components’ ofphenomenabecomedeterminateandtheparticularembodiedconcepts ing intra-actions:itis “through specificagentialintra-actionsthattheboundariesandproperties and worksofartaswellinterpreters)coarticulateoneanotherinflowsmutuallyinflect- in relationtomateriality:Barad’sargument, theworldof “phenomena” (includingartists through Igloliorte’sprojectexemplifiesBarad’scriticalreworkingofourconceptionagency the intra-actively articulatedstuffofart, whichinturndifferentially “matter” theartistaswell but also “are” theworkofart reciprocal authoritythisintra-actioncastsupontheperceived discursivesourceofitsclaims(so (to saytheleast)innot “intra-actively” acknowledgingitsown claimstotruthvalue, andthe The newmaterialistinterrogationoftheCartesianobsessionwithsubjectivityasopposi- With workssuchasIglo Furthermore, thismodelallowsustocomplicatebeliefsaboutperformanceorliveartas (2008:23–39). On this point, see Sara Ahmed’s of this opposition in the context of feminist debates brilliant deconstruction art context. that felt open or in process, if that is what we mean more loosely when we use the word “performative” in the created by the klieg lights and architectural/institutional setting; there was nothing in the experience of the work was to deactivate her agency but in fact the end result was that her live body became enveloped in the spectacle Again, the case in point is Abramović’s emotionless sitting body in I wouldinsistthatanyacademictextproclaimingwearefully posthumanisdisingenuous experiencers (albeit, we’dhavetoargue, indifferentways). The circuitIamexploringhere liorte’s diptychs, thematerialtracesofprocessesmakingenact — the materialityandgestureare, asBaradmightargue, the 14

— the humanasparadigmaticofexistenceand The is Artist Present. Perhaps of her point part performative. — is convincingand 13 Newmaterialist

— rather Material Traces 31 series, series, ObservationalDiptychs from the from Untitled 2013). 2013). he provided an example for artists in the 1960s and he provided an example for artists in the — 2010; oil on phone book page. Detail of one half of a diptych. (Photo courtesy (Photo of diptych. a of half one of Detail page. book phone on oil 2010; artistthe Braddock) Christopher and Figure 12. Mark Igloliorte, Igloliorte, Mark 12. Figure - We do not, in fact, have to claim that the status of human consciousness is human consciousness that the status of have to claim in fact, do not, We 15

16 just because we have a just because

such as the 1914 Bottle Rack —

— that the “human” is onto- “human” that the

See Latour (2013) and the website associated with the project (AIME project the with associated website the and (2013) Latour See On the complexities of materiality in relation to live art, see Jones (2012:9–25). (2012:9–25). art, live to Jones see relation in materiality of complexities the On A key way to tease out this referred the gesture of the readymade referred Even more importantly to the point I am making here, — nil - “non same as the logically the human” ourselves new understanding of with as materialities interrelated and a new other materialities, as intra- concept of our agency contin- actively determined in the stuff ual engagements with we our of which of the world, The very selves are constituted. variations attempts to articulate that we of this argument indicate own con- still have a stake in our or whatever intellect, sciousness, we want to call the force of our as agential. thought, problem in relation to art dis- course is in fact to look at an example central to debates in the visual arts over the past 50 years: the gesture of the ready- When Marcel Duchamp made. objects and designated them as art in the supposedly randomly chose industrially produced 1910s 1970s who wished to turn art away from skill-based criteria of making as well as away from 1970s who wished to turn art away from towards con- in its shift The readymade gesture, materialities that could be commodified. “dema- the was central to what Lucy Lippard and others theorized as cept or idea over form, artists were moving towards de-emphasizing As Lippard famously argued, of art. terialization” more explic- becoming object (“dematerializing,” the idea of an artwork as a discrete and final particularly the reduction and so turning their backs on modernist formalism, itly time-based, through the abstracting strategies of formalist crit- of art to commodity perceived as occurring and At the same time, 1999:47; Lippard [1973] 1977). icism) (see Chandler and Lippard [1968] transform- other kinds of materiality came to play in the art situation, even Lippard admits this, a after all, is, The Bottle Rack “art.” be considered ing and expanding the frame for what could The shift to concept or and a menacing materiality. heft, with physical shape, metal bottle rack, - idea and away from form or thing was not in fact a total rejection of materiality as such: all art albeit sometimes quite ists with conceptually based practices continued to work with materials, or the bits and pieces of doc- ephemeral ones such as actual bodies performing in actual spaces, umentation and other remainders that sustained historical memory around each conceptual art gesture. 15. , the artist. It was not just a “concept” that “concept” It was not just a the artist. subject, to the materiality of the choosing inexorably back 16. much is patently clear in Latour’s brilliant but problematic “Modes of Existence” website and website “Modes of Existence” brilliant but problematic clear in Latour’s much is patently around its supposed immense authority accrues author-name where a singular book project, “posthumanism”). Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02 October 2021 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02October 2021

32 Amelia Jones how art’smaterialitiescometomeanandbevalued. we foregroundaswellthework rialize,” inBarad’sterms)theartworkalongwith thework riality ofthephilosopher/subjectatotherend)inorderto articulate(or “discursively mate- notion oftheartworkasbridge(inKant’ssystem, one almost asprivilegedtheagentialmate- ing) orasafixedbeginningpoint(ofinterpretation). Through Barad’smodel, wecanrevisethe opposition betweensubjectandobjecttheideaofartwork asafixedendpoint(ofmak- about Barad’snewmaterialisttheoryisthatitallowsustothrow out, oratleastquestion, the and hasdefinedthegeneralunderstandingofartexperience tothepresentday. Whatisnew body what madethegesturesoprofoundlyinfluentialin Americanartinthe1960sand1970s. A drove thereadymadegesture 17. as “subjects”and “objects.”understood stood thattheaesthetic, materializedas “art,” providedabridgeofsortsbetweenwhatwasthen practices Iinter-actively interprethere. EvenImmanuelKantinthelate18thcenturyunder to anyartencounter to anotherthroughstructuresthatallowusstabilizemeaningmomentarilyperfectlyapplies action It ispreciselyBarad’sunderstandingofthe “spacetime” implicationsofthisconceptionintra- the-future responsesandnew “materialities” inBarad’ssense. As Baradargues, formatively (and, again, notnecessarilyprogressively)acrosstimetoproduceever-farther-in- and artists. As well, itallowsustobeginaddress, inamorefocusedway, howart “works” per world’s otherdiscursivematerialities, inthestructuresofmeaningandvaluesurroundingart preters/experiencers, exhibitions, institutionsofart, nottomentiontheinfiniteexpanseof affords thepossibilityofunderstandingmutualcoextensivityartists, artworks, inter relating totheendpointposthumanismofmuchthistheory. Mostimportantly, Barad’smodel others’) workonmaterialityopensupwhilesettingasidethisapparentparadox(orhypocrisy) do inthesameway). meaning andmakingchoicesasinformedbypastunderstandings(somethingotherstuffcannot rialities inhowhumansfunctionandmakemeaningoftheworld. We arestill, afterall, making tic practice, orfromahumanistmodelofagencytoonethatacknowledgestheforcemate- just becausewemayhaveshiftedourvaluesystemfromaskill-basedtoconcept-basedartis- and aspuriouspoliticalclaim, topretendthatwehavenoinvestmentin “human” consciousness lutely centraltohowweview(andvalue)thereadymades. Mypointisthatitwouldbefruitless, been chosen(avariationonthehavingmade). Duchamp’sputativeconsciousnessisabso- ity emergeinthisprocessualhistoricity. (Barad2003:817–18) ing andformintherealizationofdifferentagentialpossibilities. Temporality andspatial- an ongoingopenprocessofmatteringthroughwhich “mattering” itselfacquiresmean- does nottakeplaceinspaceandtimebutthemakingofspacetimeitself. The worldis which localcausalstructures, boundaries, andpropertiesarestabilizeddestabilized world makesitselfdifferentiallyintelligibletoanother “part” oftheworldandthrough patterns ofmarksonbodies. This ongoingflowofagencythroughwhich “part” ofthe determinate causalstructureswithboundaries, properties, meanings, and The worldisadynamicprocessofintra-activityintheongoingreconfiguringlocally For now, IwanttomakeuseoftheradicallyreworkedconceptagencythatBarad’s(and See Kant ([1790] 2014) and Jacques Derrida’s exploration of the Kantian aesthetic ([1978] 1987). — — and onealreadydefinedpositionedasanartist and Iwanttostressthatherdescriptionofonematerialitymakingitselfintelligible — which pointstothemostprofoundimplicationsofkindhybrid — of interpretationandcometoanewlevelunderstanding although theforegroundingofconceptorideaiscentralto 17 This ideaaboutartinformedtheriseofmodernism — of itshavingbeenmade. Insodoing was centraltotheobject’shaving - - - Material Traces 33 - - Bakhtin’s 18 in more subtle putting “dematerialization” and these hybrid “dematerialization” putting — one through which bodies manipulate materialities that one through which bodies manipulate materialities —

Lazzarato claims these arguments for the idea of “social creativity” in his essay “Immaterial Labour” (1996). (1996). Labour” “Immaterial essay his in creativity” “social of idea the for arguments these claims Lazzarato These hybrid practices suggest that the question of materialities in the context of art is These hybrid practices suggest that the question I have hoped in this article to push beyond new materialisms’ paradoxical (at best, I think) new materialisms’ paradoxical (at best, I have hoped in this article to push beyond 18. New Materiality and Artistic Labor Artistic Materiality and New - here up against argu I have developed running the model to an ending it is worth In coming theory labor in neo-Marxist ments about explored in the work “immaterial labor” in relation to the of recent practices “materialities” Antonio Negri (2001). and Lazzarato (1996) and Michael Hardt of theorists such as Maurizio that artists in the contempo- art historian John Roberts has argued Drawing on these theories, as an of artistic labor itself, emphasized and explored the limits rary period have increasingly of the division between intel- “the dissolution developments wherein extension of these broader “the basis for the [...] dissolution in society at large becomes labour” lectual labour and manual the this aspect of contemporary art, While I am not denying (2011:43). of art into social praxis” artworks circulating around the testified to by the thriving discourses and vibrancy of which is a different trajectory wherein art- my interest has been in identifying “social practice,” notion of cases their own bodies) address in which materialities (including in some ists explore the ways does not preclude the other, One category “spacetimes.” future others across ever-expanding to be obviously or directly focused on works that might not appear but I have strategically make a point about how art can work in order to “socially engaged” political or ways through its materialities as such. as of objects to be circulated on the marketplace, not limited to handiwork or the production encouraging It is also about evoking and to suggest. Marxist or neo-Marxist theory might seem draw- engagements: it is about what Lazzarato, bodily responses and the possibility for social (1996). “social creativity” calls 1992), ing on the work of Mikhail Bakhtin ([1975] Concluding Thoughts Concluding account, like Lazzarato’s for the most part, is thoroughly humanist and human centered, which is thoroughly humanist and human centered, like Lazzarato’s for the most part, account, with their the emphasis of the new materialists, is one aspect of it that differs strongly from relates Bakhtin’s social creativity as rearticulated by Lazzarato emphasis on the posthuman. of social performance where every encounter closely to sociologist Erving Goffman’s theory “reciprocal influence,” subjects) is considered an interaction entailing between again, (implicitly, of social interac- Both models ([1956] 1959:26). and thus defines meaning in social relationships performative particularly those activating the tion can be extrapolated to engage with artworks, we can bring social creativity to materialities as such. through new materialism, dimension; and, on labor as I have also put the neo-Marxist emphasis insistence that we are beyond the human. the background in order to focus on a broadened con- relating solely to the circuits of capital in cept of Bakhtinian social creativity restaged and reinterpreted over time and in var affect them in turn and that are continually materialities thereby further transforming the meanings, ied spaces to produce ever-changing artworks I have the my pointed interpretations here, Through of future subjects and objects. what engaged with thus remind us that the artist is one among a network of agencies activating proffering marks of Art of a particular kind, and giving it meaning in the world. “art” we call that animates or reanimates a range of materi- opens itself to an encounter having been made, I have tried interpreted through a particularly phenomenological model, In certain ways, alities. or openly critical of the art mar “Marxist” not explicitly while to demonstrate how such works, in particular ways that produce ongoing effects can be argued to animate the world ketplace, I am claiming through my own activations of them futurity. and affects in an ever-unfolding as key to the that they might be seen as challenging the abstraction of labor that Marx identified depending on who is working of capitalism; they might be seen to do a whole range of things, engaging the works and intra-actively relating to them. Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02 October 2021 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02October 2021

34 Amelia Jones cally, forarttheorists, arthistorians, orinterpretersingeneraltotaketheearly21st century. things (Latour2005:84). This mightbethemostinterestingstepforvisualartistsand, recipro- and nonhumans,” showingsocialandindividualmeaningtoresonateinthroughmade developing awarenessLatourhasexplored, anawarenessofthe “many entanglementsofhumans these worksasweencounterthemtodaycouldbethoughtof, precisely, asparticipatinginthis personalities. Rather, byactivatingthesignsofworks’havingbeenmade, thematerialitiesof imprints orCassils’smoldedlumpofclayas “expressing” someinterioraspectoftheirsoulsor of artvaluebasedonhumanexpressivity 19. Derrida, Jacques. (1978)1987. “Parergon.” InThe Truth inPainting , translatedbyGeoffBennington and Coole, Diana, andSamanthaFrost. 2010. “Introducing theNewMaterialisms.” In NewMaterialisms: Chandler, John, andLucyR. Lippard. (1968)1999. “The Dematerializationof Art.” InConceptualArt:A Cassils, Heather. 2015. “Becoming anImage.” HeatherCassils(artist’swebsite). Accessed 23May2015. Brown,Bill.2001. “ThingTheory.” Bennett, Jane. 2010. Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecologyof Things. Durham, NC:DukeUniversityPress. Barad, Karen. 2003. “Posthumanist Performativity: Toward anUnderstandingofHowMatterComesto Bakhtin, Mikhail. (1975)1992. TheDialogicImagination: Four Essays. EditedbyMichaelHolquist, translated Austin, J.L. (1961)1989. “Performative Utterances.” InPhilosophicalPapers, edited byJ.O. Urmsonand Appadurai, Arjun.1986. intoModesofExistence[AIME].2013. An Inquiry Andersen, Tawny.2014. “(Re)Imagining‘Reality’:TowardsMaterialist,Performative Aesthetics.”New a Ahmed, Sarah. 2008. “Open ForumImaginaryProhibitions:SomePreliminaryRemarksontheFounding References century (Latour2013). making ustakeaccountoftheimportancedevelopingnew “modes ofexistence” inthe21st strategies forraisingawarenessoftheinterrelatednessbodiesandthingsinlatecapitalism, networks bindingustoourworld. According toLatour, nothingcouldbemoreimportantthan nected and “develop inrelationtoeachother.” They activatewhatLatourhasarguedarethe visible throughmaterialitiesorthestuffofart and developinrelationtoeachother” (2007:435). Signsofartisticlaborinvestedinandmade of highlightingthewayinwhich, asSeanSayersparaphrases, “subject andobject[can]change Artists animatingartthroughthelaborofmaterialtracearenotextendingtraditions As Hegelarguedoflaboringeneralovertwocenturiesago, artisticlaborbecomesameans extrinsic to human concern. as an ecology being destroyed by human activity and the human tendency to disregard materialities (things) as Latour’s main concern in Ian McLeod, 12–147. Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress. University Press. Ontology, Agency, andPolitics , editedbyDianaCooleandSamantha Frost, 1–46. Durham, NC:Duke Critical Anthology, editedby Alex Alberro andBlakeStimson, 46–51. Cambridge, MA: The MITPress. http://heathercassils.com/portfolio/becoming-an-image-2/. Matter.” by CarylEmersonandMichaelHolquist. G.L. Warnock, 3rdedition, 233–52. Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. University Press. Paper presentedatUAAC-AAUC Conference, OCADUniversity, Toronto, Canada. Gestures ofthe ‘New Materialism.’” EuropeanJournal of Women’s Studies15, 1:23–39. Signs: Journal of Women inCulture andSociety28, 3:801–31. The SocialLifeof Things: CommoditiesinCultural Perspective. Cambridge:Cambridge 19

Modes of Existence: of the Moderns An (2013) is to save “Gaia,” Anthropology or the earth 28(Autumn):1–22. Critical Inquiry Austin: Universityof Texas Press. — Accessed 17March2015. we donottendtointerpretLeite’ssiliconebodily can thus activatethewaysinwhichwearecon- www.modesofexistence.org. Material Traces 35 Performance Studies, Performance The Cambridge Guide to The Cambridge . Translated by Samuel Moore and Edward B. Aveling. Moscow: Aveling. by Samuel Moore and Edward B. Translated I. Volume 1, 2 (Fall):144–66. 1, Philosophy Studies in Practical

edited by Tracy C. Davis, 151–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cambridge: 151–65. Davis, C. Tracy edited by 1 (T209):16–45. TDR 55, Bristol: Intellect Press. 9–25. Adrian Heathfield, Amelia Jones and edited by Art in History, Live Record: Adelaide. Australia: University of University Press. University Press. MA: Harvard Cambridge, Catherine Porter. Minneapolis: 132–46. translated by Paul Colilli and Ed Emory, and Michael Hardt, Virno by Paolo University of Minnesota Press. http://www.julianacerqueiraleite.com/v2/sculptures/#/14. Accessed 23 May 2015. University of California Press. Foreign Languages Publishing House. Through.” http://quod.lib.umich.edu/o/ohp/11515701 11 December 2014. Accessed 48–70. , and Cartographies .0001.001/1:4.3/--new-materialism-interviews-cartographies?rgn=div2;view=fulltext. paulcdonald.com/en/artwork/would-work/. paulcdonald.com/en/artwork/cause-way/. Macmillan. York: New 214–19. translated by Joan Riviere, Aaron Henry Rogers and edited by , Paradigm Art: Materiality in a Post-Material of and the Politics Article Press. AL: Birmingham, 132–50. Williamson, Jones, Amelia. 2011. “‘The Artist is Present’: Artistic Re-enactments and the Impossibility of Presence.” of Presence.” Artistic Re-enactments and the Impossibility “‘TheArtist is Present’: 2011. Amelia. Jones, Repeat, In Perform, Art in History.” Now and the Has Been: Paradoxes of Live “The 2012. Amelia. Jones, Adelaide, by James Creed Meredith. Translated Critique of Judgment. 2014. (1790) Immanuel. Kant, Oxford: Oxford Actor-Network-Theory. An Introduction to Reassembling the Social: 2005. Bruno. Latour, by Translated Anthropology of the Moderns. An An Inquiry into Modes of Existence: 2013. Bruno. Latour, edited , Politics A Potential Thought in Italy: In Radical “Immaterial Labour.” 1996. Maurizio. Lazzarato, Juliana Cerquiera Leite (artist’s website). 2011.” “the climb is also the fall, n.d. Juliana Cerquiera. Leite, Berkeley: Art Object from 1966 to 1972. The Dematerialization of the Years: Six (1973) 1997. Lucy R. Lippard, Capital, (1867) 1961. Karl. Marx, Working- about the Performative? From Repetition to Transformative “What Is 1999. Kelly. Oliver, 41 (Spring):43–47. Variant “The Intangibilities of Form.” 2011. John. Roberts, 4 (October):431–54. Science & Society 71, “The Concept of Labor: Marx and His Critics.” 2007. Sean. Sayers, Donald, Paul. 2011. “Would Work.” Paul Donald (artist’s website). Accessed 17 March 2015. http:// March 2015. Accessed 17 Donald (artist’s website). Paul Work.” “Would 2011. Paul. Donald, http:// 2015. Accessed 17 March (artist’s website). Paul Donald Way.” “Cause 2013. Paul. Donald, edited by Philip Rieff, Love, of Sexuality and the Psychology In “Fetishism.” (1927) 1963. Sigmund. Freud, 1998. Art Alfred. Gell, Oxford: Clarendon Press. Theory. An Anthropological and Agency: Doubleday. NJ: Garden City, Life. of Self in Everyday The Presentation (1956) 1959. Erving. Goffman, MA: Harvard University Press. Cambridge, . Empire 2001. Negri. Antonio and Michael, Hardt, Pastiche Parody, You! In Art Becomes Artist as Commodity Fetish.” “The Contemporary 2006. Amelia. Jones, “Live Art in Art 2008. Amelia. History: A Jones, In Paradox?” New Materialism: Interviews New Materialism: In Karen Barad.” with “Interview 2012. Tuin. and Iris van der Rick, Dolphijn, Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00494 by guest on 02 October 2021