Documentation of Laud (Four Los Angeles Parks)
Improvised Artistic Devices:
Grafting Burbank onto Laud Humphries
Towsley Canyon Park
(Plastic leaves placed on empty branches)
Improvised Artistic Devices:
Grafting Burbank onto Laud Humphries
Towsley Canyon Park
(Plastic leaves placed on empty branches)
Site Before
Site After
Detail
Griffith Park
(Pics of Sexual Encounter Detritus Placed in Another Park)
(Pics of Sexual Encounter Detritus Placed in Another Park)
Pic of Elysian Park debris at Griffith Park
Another Pic of Elysian Park debris at Griffith Park
Another Pic of Elysian Park debris at Griffith Park
Elysian Park
(Seeds from One Park Planted in Another)
Datura Stramonium (Jimson Weed)
Dried Seed Pods Harvested from Harbor Regional Park
Seed Planting Location at Elysian Park
Detail
Harbor Regional Park
(Unwrapped Condoms Placed on Empty Branches)
(Unwrapped Condoms Placed on Empty Branches)
Encounter Zone at Harbor Park
Detail
so you transplanted the elysian debris to griffith? that calls for latex gloves.
ReplyDeletei imagine cruising does not happen so much in griffith as it is known to happen in elysian. and if this is akin to intervention. and that corresponds directly with the seed transplanting. human male seed becomes plant seed. plastic leaf becomes like a condom.
so im interested in the conversation that occurs between the parks in this. if its an exercise in socializing the parks or if it is an effort towards transforming cruising culture. or both
I am thinking now that an interpretation of a Kaprow score requires an internal dialog, or at least a solitary one, in order to sort the open language he employs.
ReplyDeleteIt is this "open" nature of the language (which is by and large like crouching metaphors) that is in need of an analogical tie to be made. Interestingly, it seems if Kaprow wanted us to freely interpret his scores to the extent of their direction he forces that the analogy be fulfilled not within language, but in action and movement in space. In a sense the score is on one side and the happening the other. It seems ineffective to consider of this in alphabetical structure as 'b' following 'a', but instead, like any journey, as the space in between 'a' and 'b'; the evaluation of the happening comes within this interior distance between the points.
With this said I am curious how an IAD works if the document photographs show the 'a' and 'b' of the circumstance. The best of Kaprow occurs when it is either the 'a' or the 'b'. To know and see both of the limits foils the ability for this solitary analogical process to transpire.
In what regard is an IAD effective as other-than-within-the-institute if Kaprow is in use here?
Does the IAD take place within the gesture/action? It seems it needs someone (most likely non-art savvy) to come across it in order for the IAD to "activate".
An IAD as I understand it would not be limited by the conventions(restraints) of presentation while still wielding all the impact of imbued criticality/expression/et al.
How do I come across these polaroids? Is previous site indicated on them. Certainly a seed does not carry its parent plant, but it does. I am not sure how the polaroid works here because the placement of them is 'in place'.
Everything here is rather scattered. Respond as far as you can and I will continue.
Daniel & Adam~
ReplyDeleteLooking at your video tonight, it reminded me of Elysian Park. For "Laud" I put Polaroids of the debris from one park to another. For the piece last week in A402 I used gloves to move the debris from Elysian to the gallery.
I see this on-site (outside the institution) work being more like a drawing than a finished piece. Part of my interest was in making subtle changes to the environment. It became evident that people noticed, since the Polaroids had disappeared on my return. At some point, someone bent down and picked the picture out of the debris and took it with them.
Most of the guys who go to these places tend to act like lone wolves, dropping by to do their business, and then are quickly on their way. When I was doing prevention work in these types of places, the biggest change was for the men to realize that the body parts they were interacting with were connected to other human beings with similar desires and fears. If any transformation takes place, ti will be subtle at most. Perhaps the realization of one another's humanity is the least (and most) we can hope for.
After doing a few of these kinds of works, I see them relating to Richard Long's walks or Smithson's "Incidents of Travel in the Yucatan" as much as Kaprow.
For the post-facto viewer of the documentation, one is usually given a personal account and some snapshots. In other places the score in presented. I think when we "reinvented" Scales, the score was with us as the event transpired: it kept getting pulled out and reread as the event transpired.
In Jeff Kelly's book, he reprints the scores along with anecdotes and other documentation. When documenting the reinventions, I would up using lines from Kaprow's score as captions under the images, and it seems to go together quite well: the one thing informs the other, though in different ways.
Score>>Action
Caption>>Documentation
For Laud, it was more sketched out that given a score. The four parks were written on a sheet of paper in a similar arrangement as a baseball diamond. I could then write was I was taking, doing, and moving, moving items around until all four places were linked together. I'm afraid if I wrote a score, it would have narrowed the reading of the work from the start. Unlike Kaprow, I can't image this work being recreated in four parks in Berlin (for example). If I were to do a similar piece there,it would be in response to unmet needs (like privacy screening) or local evidence of activity, and the economies of the surrounding communities and how that effects what is sanctioned and what is tolerated.