Thomas Hirschhorn was born in 1957 in Bern, Switzerland. He studied graphic design at Schule fur Gestaltung in Zurich and currently lives and works in Aubervilliers, France.
In an interview between Thomas Hirschhorn and Hans Ulrich Orbist in 2003, Hirschhorn makes an analogy between art and an archeological excavation site with regards to his project ‘Archeology of Engagement’, 2001.
Hirschhorn believes that an excavation site is the perfect arena for art because it eliminates the notion of hierarchy and commodity status which is continually enforced upon objects and artworks. This is because when objects are discovered throughout an excavation, there significance isn’t immediately apparent so one object cannot be deemed more important or valuable than the other. Hirschhorn modeled 'Archeology of Engagement' to resemble an excavation site which allowed him to exhibit and display all the information he had acquired throughout the project in a ‘value-free, nonhierarchical manner’.(394)
This raises important questions concerning the hierarchical status of artworks and constant valuations which are forced upon them. This provokes the question, on what means can someone base and therefore judge the value of a work of art? Furthermore, who should be awarded this power in deciding an artworks worth?
Moreover, Hirschhorn suggests an excavation site allows for ‘misinterpretations and incorrect judgments’, which is why he rejects exhibition catalogues, attaining that ‘the problem with catalogues is that they often want to assume authority. A catalogue is often intended to legitimize or revalorize the artwork.’(396)
Frequently catalogues or artist statements tend to legitimize a works existence by providing explanations of the artworks meaning, which not only narrows the works potential meaning but also sacrifices the ‘secret’ or awe factor within an artwork. Catalogues can also pre-condition the viewer to think in a certain way by supplying conclusions without letting the viewer interpret the work on their own accord.
Walter Benjamin details the importance of ambiguity within artworks by saying “it is half the art of storytelling to keep a story free from explanation … It is left up to [the reader] to interpret things the way he understands them, and thus narrative achieves amplitude that information lacks”.(Walter,68)
On the other hand a catalogue can also be a useful strategy in allowing an access into the work, through providing a general context, or by detailing conceptual concerns the artist has addressed, which can be easily expressed and delivered through text.
Benjamin sees the value in upholding ambiguity within an artwork, while Hirschhorn finds catalogues assert authority which somewhat justifies and therefore validates a work. This poses artists to consider if accompanying texts contribute to potency of an artwork, or are they detrimental to an artwork? Alternatively, if text is integral to the works accessibility; to what degree should one restrict information to the reader, how much should one reveal or conceal?
References:
Thomas Hirschhorn interview with Hans Ulrich Orbist, Thomas Boutoux ed., Hans Ulrich Orbist: Interviews volume 1, Milan: Charta, 2003, pp.393-400.
Jean Fisher, “Towards a Metaphysics of Shit,” in Documenta 11 Platform 5 The Catalog, Ostfildern-Ruit: Hajte Cantz, 2002, pp. 63-70.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I really enjoy that Walter Benjamin quote you have used above. I feel that the an accompanying text is a crucial aspect to an art work. Audiences sometimes rely these texts for a way in to a work, yet it can also, as you point out, reveal too much and kill the work. I guess that is way the artist statements we are required to provide as part of this course are called abstracts, perhaps this inspires a tone that is less didactic.
ReplyDeleteThe main issue here is the works engagement in a public realm.
ReplyDeleteI agree wit orm that some viewers need an opening to understand the artists intentions but i think that this can create a lack of real engagement with a work which hinders the forming of self reflective opinions. I think that artist's should be more ambiguous, a piece of text seems to undermine artist's in my mind, too much exposure can close a work down but of course this to the artist's discretion and if it can benefit the work. Personally, a title can be quite telling of the artist's intention or direction of their conceptual ideas.
I think it is case sensitive as to whether there needs to be an accompanying text to a work, however it is more or less compulsory within an institutional context, gallery or otherwise, to do so. I would say that this is due to the necessity to appeal to a broad public audience, especially when it comes to well established gallery's (Auckland Art Gallery etc). I guess its up to the viewer in such cases whether to expose themselves to this information, or let their own initial reading take precedence.
ReplyDeleteI think the question you have raised at the end of your writing is very interesting.
ReplyDeleteHow much should one reveal or conceal? I believe it's the matter of how much the artist want to hold the authority or rather passing it to the viewer.