December 29, 2008

Queer Proclivities

I'm reading Dave Hickey's introduction to Between Artists, where he paraphrases de Kooning:

"One can hardly expect a work of art to do anything in the world when it is trivialized as a scrap of evidence pertaining to itts maker's eccentricity. You make a painting about a crazy world, they say it was made by a crazy artist. That's a loser's game."
He goes on to say that work made in the sixties tried to extract the personal from the object, be it through pop, minimalist, or conceptual strategies. But that turns into a loser's game as well. The next generation of critics came along and used Marx, Freud, and deconstuctionist theories to
reframe the work as symptomatic of some cultural proclivity or another.

Along similar lines I was questioning (in earlier posts) the reading of queerness into abstract work by gay men or women.

This discussion started around the idea of what constitutes queer abstraction, but because we're artists, the conversation has quickly morphed into strategies for our own artistic production. As Adam said:
"...in going out and searching for this specific breed of abstraction, which you and Nicholas are trying to pin down, you are qualifying your own personal queerness through discovering potential moments of it in the world.

Thus far the queer abstraction dialogue has been centered on defining/describing the thing in an objective stance (as far as one can be objective with abstraction). The variable I been thinking about is an aesthetic one. I'm thinking that to discuss queer abstraction you have to discuss A queer abstraction, that of a particular individual's outtake."
I'm not sure how much of my own "queer proclivity" had been incorporated into the images I've posted thus far, but in qualifying my own queerness I've touched upon a few others along the way. So the point is well taken that I need to move from the general to the specific, and specifically to my own POV.

Years ago when I was is grade school, someone on the playground instructed me to make a circle, putting my thumb and index finger together with my left hand. With my right arm I was to bend my elbow as far as possible, bringing my hand near my shoulder.

The next step was to overlay the "OK" circle from my left hand over the cleavage that formed between my forearm and bicep. Looking though the circle, one would see a little butt, which made a bunch of six and seven year-olds laugh and laugh until we nearly peed our pants. We would then run off an find some elbow-butt neophytes and share our hysterical new discovery.

Forty years later, with my subcutaneous fat gone and my skin loosing its elasticity, my "elbow butts" come out wrinkled, much like the one I'm sitting on.

Sphere: Related Content

3 comments:

  1. The strength of this example comes in the need as a viewer to try it on him/herself. And this is why I think its all so Sherlock Holmes:
    -You give the history of this event and action.
    -You describe the mechanics and provide us with the results, photographs through the o.k. sign.

    (The crux of the gesture comes in the associative leap that looking at a butt is o.k. because I look through an o.k. sign.)

    -I then follow the clues to my own observations, my self-made peephole.

    I think the Holmes/Watson dynamic may be a queer abstraction in itself. I need to ponder this more though.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm not so sure about moving from the the general to specific, because that road leads to essentialism. To wit: to produce queer abstraction, I must start from what I know, which requires being queer, which requires a set of unannounced assumptions about what being queer means.

    That's exactly the apple cart I want to turn over. I want queer art to be a strategy, not a form of group identification. A lot of this is discomfort with the heteronormativity of mainstream gay culture in general, but also is just good old fashioned iconoclasm. I'm tired of seeing flesh and being told to read sexuality into it because the body = sexual. There's no natural relationship between sexuality and the body whatsoever.

    Yes, really.

    Which is why I want to get queer out of the muck of ossified identity politics and consumerism and reframe it as an activity. Maybe a surplus, usless, frivolous activity, but all the better for that.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I must start from what I know, which requires being queer, which requires a set of unannounced assumptions about what being queer means.I want queer art to be a strategy, not a form of group identification.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for continuing the conversation by leaving a comment! If you post anonymously with a question, check back here in the comments section, as I'll usually reply in the comments section. Comments on posts older than two weeks are welcome, but are moderated, so they may take a while to appear. Irrelevant linking will be deleted.