90°. 1960. © 2016 François Morellet / Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York / ADAGP, Paris
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
François Morellet. Dashes 0°–90°. 1960. © 2016 François Morellet / Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York / ADAGP, Paris. Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/OCTO_a_00262 by guest on 28 September 2021 “Viewer to Viewer, or The Art of Unpacking One’s Picnic” and Other Essays FRANCOIS MORELLET This anthology of François Morellet’s texts was initially planned as one of the many cele- brations of the artist’s ninetieth birthday that are taking place this year (he was born on April 30, 1926). Alas, he passed away on May 10, and our accolade is now suffused with sadness. Greatly admired in Europe, his work is still little known in the US. The exhibition François Morellet: Systems, organized by the Albright-Knox Art Gallery in 1984 (and touring several North American museums, including the Brooklyn Museum), received almost no atten- tion at the time, despite its remarkable selection, notably of early works, and the excellent introduc- tory essay by Jan van der Marck. In more recent years, several American scholars and critics have begun to explore the many facets of his production during his long career, and even though their essays are being published in France and Germany rather than in the US, the tables may be turn- ing, so that Morellet might at last receive the recognition that he deserves in this country.1 Morellet was a prolific writer, especially from 1970 on, and it seemed to us that one of the most efficient ways to present his work would be to offer a selection of his writings that concern his early development, from the 1950s—during which he elaborated the systematic conception of art that would govern his practice throughout his life—to the 1960s, when he was a member of the Groupe de Recherche d’Art Visuel. The texts that follow were either written during these years or are retrospective accounts concerning this early period, often with the humor that increasingly characterized Morellet’s approach. From the 1980s on, Morellet published comments on every new series of works, every new installation—these later texts, which constitute the bulk of his writings, are too specific for the present occasion, as they would require copious illustrations to be fully intel- ligible. Let us hope that our modest selection will encourage others with more extensive means to envisage a more ambitious presentation of his production, covering his entire career. English translations of a few of these texts had already been published here and there, but they were not very accurate. In order to avoid troubling discrepancies, all translations are new. —Yve-Alain Bois 1. See, for example, Thomas McEvilley, “Morellet, pythagoricien postmoderne,” in Morellet (Paris: Galerie Nationale du Jeu de Paume, 2000), pp. 11–17 (also published in English and German in Morellet [Künzelsau: Museum Würth, 2002]), and Lynn Zelevansky, “4 Grids: François Morellet at the Crossroads,” in François Morellet 1926–2006 etc. Recent Novelties (Angers: Musée des Beaux-Arts, 2006), pp. 14–25. The considerable public interest elicited by the booth of the Galerie Hervé Bize at Frieze New York 2016, whose walls were papered over with Morellet’s Random Distribution of Squares Using the Pi Number Decimals, 50% Odd Digit Blue, 50% Even Digit Red, an environmental piece whose first occurrence dates from 1963, will, one hopes, prompt American museums to revisit his work. OCTOBER 157, Summer 2016, pp. 128–160. © 2016 October Magazine, Ltd. and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/OCTO_a_00262 by guest on 28 September 2021 130 OCTOBER For a Programmed Experimental Painting (1962)2 There are thousands of masterpieces in museums. There are thousands of talented painters who contrive to reach a vast audi- ence by successfully adapting themselves to current tastes. The isms forever follow one another, bringing shock, pleasure, or amuse- ment. It would be quite mad and hypocritical to revolt against such a flourishing scene in the visual arts. Yet we can only be astonished at the almost total absence of any sort of really experimental painting in all these miles and miles of masterpieces, and in the weighty mass of studies pertaining to them. For with none of these works can we speak of a genuine and verifiable experiment. Their authors either identify themselves with their works, seeing them as an unmeasurable manifestation of their own personality, or, following a more mod- ern development, they attach a primordial value to the discovery of a new artistic procedure, and, once the paternity of that procedure is well established, they go on to repeat a few variations of it arbitrarily chosen. A genuine experiment, however, must be carried out on the basis of verifi- able components, progressing systematically and following a program. The unfolding of an experiment must happen by itself, and in a way that is almost unconnected to its designer. Let us take one example: if we superpose very simple forms (the basic forms of Gestalt theory), and if we vary the angles of superposition, then a whole series of structures will appear. These structures, perfectly verifiable and easily recreated, are choice materi- als for aesthetic experiments, and this material is clearly much more appropriate than any sort of unique, intuitive work, and even more appropriate than tests designed by psychologists. Similarly designed experiments are applicable, for example, to color and movement. To put it briefly, such a programmed experimental painting would answer to two needs: First, the need on the part of a section of the public who want to share in the “creation” of works of art, and who are interested in demystifying art and in better understanding it; second, the need for new materials on the part of aestheticians, 2. Morellet’s statement was published in a slim catalogue accompanying the exhibition of the Groupe de Recherche d’Art Visuel at the Maison des Beaux-Arts (Centre régional des oeuvres universi- taires, or CROUS), Paris. Containing texts by most of the group’s members, this brochure is the first important publication in the history of the group, and although it was produced by the Galerie Denise René, it should be noted that the exhibition was held in a higher-education context. The Maison des Beaux-Arts, which no longer exists, was located next to the Ecole des Beaux-Arts and was part of the CROUS, an institution dedicated to the well-being of university students. Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/OCTO_a_00262 by guest on 28 September 2021 “Viewer to Viewer” 131 those scientists who are at once mathematicians and psychologists, and who, on the basis of the theories of modern psychology (in particular concerning the trans- mission of messages), are laying the foundations of a new science of art. Choice in Today’s Art (1965)3 It has been said that photographers came along just in time to take over from painters who no longer “wanted” to represent nature. Even if that is not exactly true, we can still say with certainty that photography hastened the move on the part of painters toward a non-naturalistic art. The same process is at work today with regard to the role of choice in art. We see a growing number of artists who are rejecting, in their work, the idea of an arbitrary choice available to them at each and every passing moment, just as we see the appearance of machines, increasingly perfected electronic brains, that might replace artists for a large part of the creative process. How is it that we have come to want to limit the freedom of choice that was taken to be the great strength of modern art? But also, where did we get the idea that the artist freely chooses the placement and color of each and every brush- stroke in order to create a work that is definitive and to which nothing can be added nor subtracted? To answer these questions, we might pick out, arbitrarily enough, three cate- gories of choice: 1) Conscious and reflective choice. Decisions are made after a period of reflection during which one imagines all of the possible outcomes of the actions caused by a given decision. This is choice according to the classic concept of rational intelligence. 2) Unconscious and intuitive choice. Decisions are made outside of any conscious action on the part of the subject. Unconscious decisions of this sort are not understood to be the result of chance; rather, they are seen as a response to the deep inclinations of the subject. Following the traditional view, derived from Romanticism, this ability to make choices that are outside of conscious control has been taken as the main charac- teristic of great artists, and even of great scientists. 3) Cybernetic choice. Machines make choices using their memory and their ability to foresee various possibilities. All that is needed for such choices is that machines be set up and sup- plied in a theoretically objective fashion. 3. This text was published in the catalogue of the exhibition that was part of the first Sigma festival, a weeklong series of events held annually in the city of Bordeaux until 1990. Subtitled “Arts et ten- dances contemporaines,” this show presented works from the Groupe de Recherche d’Art Visuel (GRAV) and several Op and kinetic artists alongside those of Nouveaux Réalistes such as Arman, Yves Klein, Martial Raysse, and Daniel Spoerri. Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/OCTO_a_00262 by guest on 28 September 2021 132 OCTOBER Morellet. Parallel Lines. 1957. © 2016 François Morellet / Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York / ADAGP, Paris.