“These things are fun and fun is good.” -Dr. Seuss University of Alberta Preventing Predictions: The Political Possibilities of Play and Aesthetics in Contemporary Installation Art and Works by Carsten Höller and Gabriel Orozco by Samantha Josephine Judina Mallett A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History of Art, Design and Visual Culture Department of Art and Design © Samantha Josephine Judina Mallett Fall 2010 Edmonton, Alberta Permission is hereby granted to the University of Alberta Libraries to reproduce single copies of this thesis and to lend or sell such copies for private, scholarly or scientific research purposes only. Where the thesis is converted to, or otherwise made available in digital form, the University of Alberta will advise potential users of the thesis of these terms. The author reserves all other publication and other rights in association with the copyright in the thesis and, except as herein before provided, neither the thesis nor any substantial portion thereof may be printed or otherwise reproduced in any material form whatsoever without the author's prior written permission. Examining Committee Steven Harris, Department of Art and Design Amanda Boetzkes, Department of Art and Design Marko Zivkovic, Department of Anthropology for my perpetually playing mother Abstract This thesis analyzes contemporary participatory installation art, play theory, especially Johan Huizinga’s seminal Homo Ludens, and the aesthetic theories of Nicolas Bourriaud’s Relational Aesthetics and Jacques Rancière’s Politics of Aesthetics. Ping Pond Table 1998 by Gabriel Orozco and Test Site 2006 by Cartsen Höller are studied to illustrate how play and the aesthetic can become political by repositioning the contemporary ‘viewer’ as an active and playing participant in the artwork, prompting an awareness of the matrix of power between audience, artwork and institution, and by creating the possibility for dynamic social roles. This thesis, like the artworks it examines, invokes a conception of play as a vital construct of culture rather than simply the domain of childhood imagination. Overturning the dominant concept of play and reinstating play in adult life becomes a political act because it engages adults in liberated, creative thinking that challenges traditional, consumer-driven, practical and thus ‘constructive’ behaviours. Key words: Installation Art, Participation, Play, Relational Aesthetics, Contemporary Art, Orozco, Höller, Bourriaud, Huizinga, Rancière, Politics, Art History, Tate Modern slide now. we all fall a square pond, with green around free play array Acknowledgement Thank you to my dutiful and patient advisor Steven Harris, without whose assistance I would have never really understood the political and aesthetic thought of Jacques Rancière. Thank you to my outlandish, hilarious and fun best-friend Chris Rechner who has edited my words, listened to my thoughts, challenged me with ideas and made me countless cups of delicious coffee. Thank you to my dear and genius brother Robert, confidante and conspirer. Your intelligence, wit and company will always be invaluable treasures to me. Thank you to my brother Daniel and my sister Lisa for the little joys. Thank you to my parents for their support throughout my long education and for instilling the value of education in me from a young age. Gracias a mi amor lúdico Elliot Kerr para hacer el viaje más dulce. Thank you to Elizabeth Bauerle, Alexandra Tiffin, Clarice Eckford, Nickelas Johnson, Atom Leborgne, Brad Sime, Paul Arnusch, Peter Ferenczi, Kristen Hutchinson, Sara Kowalski, and the graduate students in the Department of Art & Design for being fun and sharing your joie-de-vivre with me. Thank you to the Department of Art and Design, the FGSR, the GSA and the Government of Alberta for the generous funding that made my research possible. Table of Contents Introduction ..........................................................................................................................1 Argument .................................................................................................................................9 Notes......................................................................................................................................10 Chapter 1: Installation Art and Participation .........................................................................12 Installation Art........................................................................................................................12 A Partial History of Participation............................................................................................18 Play in the Visual Arts.............................................................................................................32 Why Play?...............................................................................................................................36 The Politics of Participation in Art..........................................................................................39 Notes......................................................................................................................................45 Chapter 2: Participation and Play in the Contemporary Art Museum: Changes in Curatorial Practice, Institutions and Artists’ Roles.................................................................51 The Public(?) Art Institution...................................................................................................51 Curatorial Strategies ..............................................................................................................60 Politics of Relational Aesthetics.............................................................................................63 Institutional Changes: Playing in Tate Modern......................................................................73 Common Wealth: Artists’ Roles .............................................................................................77 Conclusion..............................................................................................................................79 Notes......................................................................................................................................79 Chapter 3: Two Case Studies: Höller and Orozco ...................................................................85 Creating Experience ...............................................................................................................96 The Slide: A History ..............................................................................................................102 Reception of the Works: Viewers’ Comments.....................................................................103 Feasibility .............................................................................................................................106 The Slide in Architecture......................................................................................................108 Ping Pond Table: A Discussion .............................................................................................110 The Playing Audience: The Aesthetic Experience (Not the Object).....................................117 Conclusion............................................................................................................................123 Notes....................................................................................................................................124 Conclusion.........................................................................................................................129 Notes....................................................................................................................................132 Bibliography ......................................................................................................................133 List of Figures Figure 1. George Maciunas, Four Altered Ping-Pong Rackets .......................................................25 Figure 2. Mona Hatoum, Pull .........................................................................................................29 Figure 3. Ulay and Marina Abramović, Imponderabilia .................................................................30 Figure 4. Gabriel Orozco, Ping Pond Table.....................................................................................87 Figure 5. Carsten Höller, Frisbee House .........................................................................................87 Figure 6. Carsten Höller, Test Site..................................................................................................88 Figure 7. Carsten Höller, Test Site..................................................................................................89 Figure 8. Carsten Höller, Test Site..................................................................................................90 Figure 9. Carsten Höller, Test Site..................................................................................................91 Figure 10. Carsten Höller, Test Site................................................................................................91 Figure 11. Carsten Höller, Test Site................................................................................................92