The other day, a friend tagged me in a link to a Hi-Fructose article about a mural by Norwegian artist Henrik Aa. Uldalen. She thought it would be of interest to me in light of my recent series on destruction in art. The mural was beautiful and the image of the wall being demolished was striking, but as I read the article, another issue struck me: wow, that machine sure is beating the shit out of that naked, unconscious woman’s body.Continue reading Art Rant: Henrik Aa. Uldalen’s Mural Demolition
Erased de Kooning Drawing, A Potential Piece of Yellowism, and Rindy Sam’s alteration of Twombly’s Phædrus all address issues of ownership in conjunction with destruction. After all, not many would react to or care about these incidents if they were purely private acts. In utilizing pieces of art in the public sphere, which people feel invested in and take ownership of, they illicit a different response than they would otherwise. By doing so, the artists challenge the nature of ownership.
Robert Rauschenberg’s Erased de Kooning Drawing (1953) was probably the first time this discussion was seriously held in the fine arts world. Appropriation and repurposing of materials had been debated in the cases of Picasso and Braque’s Cubist collages and had been discussed to the point of exhaustion in the case of the Dadaists. In Rauschenberg’s case, however, a well-known artist’s work was involved. In fact, it had to be involved. Said Rauschenberg later:
I was making drawings myself and erasing them and that just looked like an erased Rauschenberg, and it was nothing. I figured out it had to begin as art, and Bill de Kooning was the best-known acceptable American artist that could be indisputably considered art. (Richmond)
Destruction has been recognized as an accepted element of fine art since the 1950s, in part thanks to the international Destructivist art movement in the 1950s and early 1960s, and the Destruction in Art Symposium (DIAS) in 1966. The movement aimed “to focus attention on the element of destruction in Happenings and other art forms, and to relate this destruction in society” (July 1966 DIAS press release) in reaction to the overwhelming violence of the twentieth century, in particularly the horrors of the Holocaust and World War II. Artists commented on violence and destruction through destructive performances (such as Raphael Montañez Ortiz demolishing a piano at the symposium itself) and using destructive means on canvas within the context of painting.