Video/Media Culture of the Late Twentieth Century Author(S): John G
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Video/Media Culture of the Late Twentieth Century Author(s): John G. Hanhardt and Maria Christina Villaseñor Source: Art Journal, Vol. 54, No. 4, Video Art (Winter, 1995), pp. 20-25 Published by: College Art Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/777689 Accessed: 19/01/2009 14:11 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=caa. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. College Art Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Art Journal. http://www.jstor.org 'S S~r~,rm Video/MediaCulture of the Late Twentieth Century John G. Ilanhardt and Jlarica ChristinlaI 'llasefior he opportunityto edit an issue of the College ArtAssocia- Downey, Terry Berkowitz, Rita Myers, Matthew Barney, Buky tion'sArt Journal provides yet another chance for the aca- Schwartz, Peggy Ahwesh, Leslie Thornton, Willie Varela, Renee demic art history community to rediscoverthe roles of Tajima,Steve Fagin,among others, can be seen in relationto the video in today's culture. As we preparethis issue, we are looking complex history of an aesthetic discourse that has lent itself to a forward to a veritable catalogue of major video representation varietyof distinctivebodies of work within multiplegenres, styles, 20 withinthe art world: BillViola's representation of the United States forms, and formats of multimediapresentation, as well as within in the 1995 Venice Biennale;the HenryArt Museum'stouring Gary performance-basedwork and in videotapes created for television Hill exhibition at the Guggenheim Museum; Bruce Nauman's broadcastand for private,gallery, and theatricaldistribution. This WalkerArt Center-organized travelingretrospective and Barbara much-abbreviatedlist of artists and events alludes to a nonlinear London'sinternational survey of video installationart, both at the historyof video, a historythat does not unfold within a sequential Museum of Modern Art in New York; Bruce and Norman logic of developmentsdefined by technology, nor does it lend itself Yonemoto'sexhibition at the WexnerCenter for the Arts,Columbus, to a reductivist and essentialist reading of video as a medium Ohio; a Joan Jonas retrospectiveat the StedelijkMuseum, Amster- uniquelycreated by one sole communityof artists. dam; new media galleriesand flexible exhibitionspaces at the San At a time when video productionis increasinglycommon in FranciscoMuseum of Modern Art; video installationsby Mary all aspects of media and multimediaproduction, the statusof video Lucierand Shigeko Kubotain the Whitney Museum of American art remains on the margins, its recognition and support largely Art's permanent collection (with a survey of Kubota'snew video contained within a small media arts community.The film commu- sculpturesalso scheduled); Nam June Paik'stouring exhibitionThe nity itself often chooses to ignore works producedin video, shun- InformationSuperhighway; and finally,the preparationof a large- ning it in film festivalsand in the process losing the opportunityto scale historicalvideo exhibitionby the Whitney Museum of Ameri- discovera body of strong, innovativeworks. If videoworkis consid- can Art and the Museum of Modern Art, Oxford, England. ered, it is most often presentedas a subcategory,as in the case of the Along with these exhibitionswe are witnessingan increasing renowned -New York Film Festival'ssidebar offering, the little- acquisitionof video installationand single-channelart for the per- recognizedpoor relation,the New YorkVideo Festival. manent collections of such museums as the Whitney Museum of Despitethe future'sclear move toward multimediaand inter- AmericanArt, the San FranciscoMuseum of ModernArt, and the active growth, and such looming possibilitiesof huge mergers by Museum of Modern Art, New York. Private collectors are also media and communicationscorporations, the impactof video fails increasinglywanting to representthe history of video art in their to be widely examined. Severalquestions about the role of video own collections, among them Richardand PamelaKramlich of San must be raisedat this point: Where are the variouswritten histories Francisco,while such private foundations as FredrickB. Henry's of the medium? Why is there not a sustained criticaldiscourse on Bohen Foundationuse innovativemeans to activelyacquire or sup- video in place in the literatureof the arts?Why is video-based work port new video projects.The expansionof internationalrentals and relegatedto being regularlyre-discovered? Why is video not exam- sales of artists'videotapes by ElectronicArts Intermix and the distri- ined in terms of its dynamic relationshipto the other arts?Why are bution initiativesof Video Data Bankreflect an increasedattention video's impact and large role in an increasinglydigital future not focused on the work of independent media artists. being scrutinized? All of this current activity-and this is just a sampling- Part of the answer to these and related questions lies in follows upon a long-term production,over the past thirtyyears, by video'srepresenting fundamental changes in mediaoccurring in the artistsworking with video in the UnitedStates. Within the video arts late twentieth century,changes that are not sufficientlyabsorbed or community, the prominent position of such artists as Paik, Peter theorized.The expansionof art practicesto includenew technology Campus, Nauman, FrancescTorres, Julia Scher, Hill, Antonio Mun- as artists'media, includingthe use of video, challengesthe defining tadas, Chip Lord, Alan Rath, Jim Campbell, Adrian Piper,Juan paradigmstraditionally relied upon in the historiographyand theo- WINTER 1995 The historyof video art offers powerfulcritiques and insights on the nature,possibilities, uses, and abuses of the medium,provid- ing an essential primer for an increasinglydigital, media-based culture.The following are highlightsfrom that historydrawn from the late 1960s and early1970s. These observationsare earlyindica- tors of video's complex historyand focus on its relationto television, offering how the developments and initiativestaken by artistsde- scribe a varied and complex discourse. In the mid-1960s, both in this country and in Europe,artists made use of practicesdeveloping in the avant-gardesto engage in a direct confrontation with the institutionof television. Within the questioning, adversarial,and anti-high-art project of Fluxus,two key figures in video's early history,the Korean-bornPaik and Ger- man artist Wolf Vostell, turned to the television set as a means to the of a new media-based within a FIG. 1 Installationview of NamJune Paik's exhibition Exposition of Music- explore fashioning practice ElectronicTelevision, 1963, at GalerieParnass, Wuppertal, West Germany. redefinedmedia culture. In 1963 at the GalerieParnass in Wupper- tal, Germany,Paik filled a galleryspace with televisions,in whichthe reception and the positioning of images distortedthe viewers'ac- customed relationsto the receiver,reorienting their preconceived expectations of the medium (fig. 1). In this way Paikextended his object-making,performance, and compositionalstrategies to incor- poratethe television receiver.At the Smolin Galleryin New Yorkin 1963, Vostell placed modified televisions alongside his "de- collaged" magazine covers, thus relatinghis visual art practicesto his modificationof the received broadcastimage (fig. 2).1 In effect, Paikand Vostell reframedthe discourseof television,disrupting its commercialflow of messages and images, and positing the televi- sion as an artist'smedium. Paikwas to take a leading role in removingtelevision from its context of corporatecontrol and privatizedentertainment and turn- FIG. 2 WolfVostell, TV-Decollage, 1963, installationat SmolinGallery, New York. ing it into a tool for creativeimage making (fig. 3). With the intro- duction of the portable video camera and playerin 1965, the elec- reticalexaminations of art practices.A reluctanceto directlyengage tronic moving-image recorderwas availableto artistsand virtually the challenge posed by video is evident even in such professional anyone who wanted access to this new technology.This availability programsas the College Art Association'sannual meetings, which made it possibleto buildan alternativeproduction, distribution, and feature perhaps at most one panel discussionthat engages video- exhibition program out of video, once the exclusive domain of based art practicesand historicaldevelopments, and the Society for commercial broadcasting. An example of this practice is Richard Cinema Studies,