AleyJoseph
ART489-006ContemporaryArt April26,2022
Bodyartasasubcategoryofperformanceartisconcernedwiththeuseofthehuman formasamaterialobject.Thisuseofthebodyasanobjectwithintheperformancelendsitselfto discussionofpersonalidentity,physicalsensations,andisinherentlygendered.Duetothe inabilitytodivorcethebodyfromitscontextasahuman,andwhothathumanis,thewayitis usedasamaterialisgoingtobeheavilyempathizedwithbytheviewer,whoisgoingtodrawon theirownexperienceswithbodilysensationandnotionsofgender. Thus,bodyartisadialogical interaction,1 inwhichtheworkreplacesthetransactionalprocessinwhichtheartistisdepositing meaningontoanitemorimageandthevieweristakingfromtheartworkthemeaningwitha processthatisdependentonadialoguebetweenartistandviewerdirectly.2 Becausethislends itselftoheightenedempathyandthereisdirectinteractionbetweentheperformerandthose viewing,thereisauniqueopportunityforartiststousediscomfortontothemselvesandothers withintheperformances.
ChrisBurdenwasabodyartistandsculptorbasedprimarilyoutofCaliforniaworking fromthe1970suntilhisdeathin2015.Theperformancesinhisearlycareer,startingabout1971 ashefinishedhismaster’sthesisupuntilthestartofthe80s,utilizeBurden’sbodyinaway whereharmisenacteduponit.Hisartisparticularlycruel;emblematicofthisishisperformance pieces Shoot,wherehewasshotintheupperarm, Trans-Fixed,wherehewascrucifiedtothe hoodofacar,and TV Hijack, inwhichheheldalocaltelevisionbroadcasteratknifepoint.
CaroleeSchneemannwasalsoaperformanceartist,filmmaker,andexperimentalvisualartist workingfromtheearly1960sintotheearly2010s.Herpracticeisinfluencedbygenderand objectificationofthefemaleformintheartworld.Herworkisalsodefinedbythequalityof
1 Bakhtin,MikhailM,andMichaelHolquist 1981 Thedialogicimagination:fouressays EditedbyVadim LiapunovandCarylEmerson TranslatedbyCarylEmerson,KennethBrostrom,VadimLiapunov,andMichael Michael Austin:UniversityofTexasPress
2 Clinton,Dan.2004.“Glossary|HammerMuseum.”HammerMuseum. https://hammeruclaedu/public-engagement/resources/glossary
crueltybothtoherselfandothers,namelyintheworks Meat Joy, Interior Scroll,and Viet-Flakes. Inthestatedordertheseworksactoutanorgiasticfleshperformancebyagroup,theartist pullingapaperscrolloutofhervaginaandreadingoffofit,andafilmcompilationofcollected imagesofVietnamwaratrocities.3
Cruelty,inthispaper,referstoanactthatisdonebyaperpetrator(theperformer)untoa party(theviewerandthemselves)thatexpectsareactionofdiscomfortorpainandasubsequent gainofpleasureorfulfillmentofdesire.Thisisaqualitythatappearstobeintegralinboththese bodyartpractices,andthechoiceofitsinclusionasanelementintheseworksimpliesthatits appearanceisnecessaryfortheirefficacy.Thequestionoftheutilityofcrueltyisputintoplace, aswellasthevalue,orlackthereof,cruelartmaybringtoalargerculture.Thedialogicalvalue ofcrueltyisalsocalledintoquestion,wheretheviewerandaudienceareimpactedbythe differentdegreestowhichsadistic/masochisticactsinvolvetheminthedialogue.Throughthe examinationofChrisBurden’s Trans-Fixed, Shoot,and TV Hijacking incomparisonwith CaroleeSchneemann’s Meat Joy, Interior Scroll,and Viet-Flakes,Iaimtodefinehowcrueltyis beingutilizedineachpracticeandwhetherornotitisaneffectivetoolinachievingtheartists' intention.
WorkingDefinitions
Crueltyisoftenseenastheantithesistopleasure,whereanactororactionisdeemed cruelinthecasethereisatotalabsenceofpleasureinthevictimandperpetrator.Thehallmarkof 3 “CaroleeSchneemannFoundation.”2011.CaroleeSchneemann Foundationhttps://wwwschneemannfoundationorg/artworks/viet-flakes
crueltyisthenindifferencetowardsthediscomfortorsufferingthatiscausedbytheact.4 Thisis adefinitionofcrueltythatIwouldconsidertobetooliberalinapplication,deemingwhatis moreaptlydescribedascallousnessandcoldnesstobecruel,andtheindifferencetothevictim’s painmakescrueltyapassiveprocessbythisstandard.Inpractice,Ibelievecasesofcrueltyexist asanextensionofpleasure,inwhichtheperpetratortakespleasureincausingthesufferingor discomfortofthevictim.Further,itisthefeelingsofdisgustoftheindividual'sinvestmentin painwherethesenseofcrueltyoriginates.Anactcannotbecruelwithouttheknowledgeofthe victimortheselfperpetratorrecognizingthattheharmcausedisunnecessaryandtheperpetrator derivedpleasurefromit,andthattothevictimandthosewhoknowoftheactthisisa reprehensibleaction.
Philosophical Grounding
Thetwoprimaryphilosophicaldispositionsthatwillbeusedtoreferencethisalternate notionofcrueltyareDeleuzianandNietzschean,bothofwhichareconcernedwiththefunction ofdesireanddrivesthatcompelthecruelactortocommitacruelact.Inadditiontothisarethe literaryworksofMarquisdeSadeandSacher-MasochasanalyzedbyDeleuzethatcreatethe foundationfordiscussionsofpleasureincrueltydynamics.Theinclusionofpleasureinthe definitionofcrueltyimpliessomethingaboutthemotiveofthecruelindividualandtheirstateof moralityandattheintersectionofthosetwofields,Ibelievethatthisisthebestbasisforthe workingdefinitionofcrueltyinperformanceartbecausethemotiveoftheartistandtheefficacy arebeingweighedagainsteachotherhere.
4 OxfordLanguage.2022“OxfordEnglishDictionary.”OxfordLanguages. https://languagesoupcom/dictionaries/#oed
FromDeleuze,itisimportanttonotethebeliefthatin“theunconsciousthereis necessarilylesscrueltyandterror,andofadifferenttype”andthereforeinitsinversethe consciousmindandactionarenecessarilymorecruelandthat“theTheaterofcrueltycannotbe separatedfromthestruggleagainstourculture”.ToDeleuze,theexistenceofcrueltycomesfrom anoutsideforcethatisrealizedwithinthecruelactor,andtheperpetratoristhenparticipatingin thedesiring-machine,fulfillingthedesireof“death,punishment,andtorture”asawayof achievingproduction,thedesireinquestion.5 HisanalysisofdeSadeandMasochgivesusa senseoftheimportanceof"’nonlanguage’(violencethatdoesnotspeak,eroticismthatremains unspoken)”6,whichisrelevantinadialogicalartinwhichthediscussionarisesnotfromspoken languagebutinterpretiveperformance.ThepornographicwritingsofdeSadeandMasochpush thelimitsofwrittenlanguagetowardswhatcanbelabellednonlanguage,butthecruel performativeaspectcanproducetheunspokenactfordirectconsumptionanddialogue,even whilebeing‘written’asatextasdeSadeandMasoch.
Nietzschebelieved“againstthebroadlyliberalsentimentthatcruelty(andsuffering)is unconditionallybadandthatsocietyshoulderadicateit”andinhiscase,crueltycomesfromthe drivetofeelpower,notanoutsideforce.Fromhiswritings,acleardefinitionofthesortofacts inquestioncanbecreated,thisonebeingmadebyParmer7:
Anactiscrueliff(1)theactcausesthevictimtosuffer;(2)theperpetratoroftheact derivespleasurefromthesufferingcaused;(3)thevictimoftheactismadetosufferina
5 Guattari,Félix,andGillesDeleuze.1983.Anti-Oedipus:CapitalismandSchizophrenia.TranslatedbyMarkSeem, HelenR Lane,andRobertHurley Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress
6 Deleuze,Gilles 1991 ColdnessandCruelty NewYork:TheMITPress(Dewey2016) 22
7 Parmer,JaredW 2017 “NietzscheandtheArtofCruelty”JournalofNietzscheStudies48,no 3(Autumn): 402-429 https://www-jstor-org.unco.idm.oclc.org/stable/10.5325/jnietstud.48.3.0402?pq-origsite=summon#metadata info ta b contents
waythatshewouldavoidifshecould(andwhere,paradigmatically,theinevitabilityis duetotheperpetrator);and,byoursimplifyinghypothesis,(4)theactismotivatedbythe perpetrator’sinstincttocruelty,whichinvolvesherseeingtheactashavingfeatures(1) through(3).
Cruelty Applied to the Arts
Recognitionofthepleasurethatresultsfromharmandthevariousmotivationsintheory givesusastartingpointinlabelingactionsandactorscruel,butinthecaseofperformative pieces,thisneedstoberefined.Forthispaper,crueltyisdefinedasanexcessivelypainfulact andrevelryinthedepictionofharmtooneselforothers.Thedepictionofharmuntoanaudience createsdiscomfort,andinthecontextofperformance,thisiswhattheperpetratordoestomake thevictimsuffer.Thecruelactinthissenseapproachesmasochism,whereitisassuredinits necessity,whetherornotitismerelysufficient.Theperformativeaspectchangesthesupposed victim'sroleintheinteraction,wheretheremightbemoreofaparticipatorywillingnesstobe subjecttocruelacts.ThisgoesagainsttheNietzscheandefinitionofcruelty,wherethecruel actormustbedoingsomethingtotheacteduponthattheywouldotherwisenotwant.Through thecontextofperformance,boththeviewerandartisthaveanunderstanding,perhapslimitedon theviewers'part,thattheyareexperiencingsomethingthatrequiresthepartiestofulfilla pre-existingroleotherthanthatofthemselves.Theaudienceisbuiltbyvirtueofanactbeingput on,andtheaudiencewatchestheroleofperformer.Crueltyinthiscontextmusttakeintoaccount thatwhiletheactmightbegenuinelycruel,itwillbereceivedprimarilyaspartofthe performance.Themoralorsocialreasonsforcreatingamomentthatispronetocrueltymust
thenalsobereadthroughtheinteractivefilterbetweenthetwogroups,wherepleasureisnotthe onlythingtobegainedbyperformingusingcruelty.
Theissueofself-crueltyisleftunansweredbythisdefinitionbutispertinentininstances suchasaperformancewheretheperpetratorandvictimarethesameparties.8 Giventhatthe victimoftheactwouldbetheoneputtingthemselvesinasituationthattheywouldavoidifthey could,theperpetrator/victimmodelneedstobechangedforthisinstance.Withintheframework ofcrueltyasaresponsetodriveanddesire,theself-cruelactorcanbesplitintoconflicting drives.ToNietzsche,crueltywasanexchangeofpowerandtheexchangeinself-cruelactexists inthesublimationofcertaindrivesforthefulfillmentofothers.Theartistorperformerhasaset ofdrivesthatinfluencethemintomakingthecruelact,andtheresultoftheseisasenseof gratificationofthedesire.Wantingtoenacttheartisticvisioninexchangeforthereactionofthe audiencedominatesthedriveforbodilysafetyandcomfort.Theseartistshavestatedtheydonot necessarilywanttoperformcertainactions,9 ortheymakethesituationascomfortableas possible,10 allwhilestillcommittingtoharmthemselvesorputtheirsafetyatriskfortheir chosengoal.Acruelperformanceartworkinwhichtheartistcommitsanactofself-imposed harmordiscomfortwiththeintentionofforcingtheiraudiencetowatchandfeeldiscomfortcan thenbeseenasanexerciseinthesublimationofdrivesandasanactintendedtobeoutwardly cruel.
Dialogical Roles
8 Nietzsche,FriedrichW 1989 BeyondGoodandEvil EditedbyWalterA Kaufmann TranslatedbyWalterA KaufmannandHelenZimmern NewYork:VintageBooks 180,230
9Schneemann,Carolee 1991 “TheObsceneBody/Politic”ArtJournal50,no 4(Winter):28-35 https://www-jstor-orguncoidmoclcorg/stable/pdf/777320pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Ab77088ba4a716e132ea96568 c0cb8fd1&ab segments=&origin=.
10 Haden-Guest,Anthony 1996 Truecolors:thereallifeoftheartworld Washington:AtlanticMonthlyPress 43
Dialogismreferstothe“characteristicepistemologicalmodeofaworlddominatedby heteroglossia”11,whereeverytextisimpactedbytheexistenceofothertextsandmeaningis drawnnotsolelyfromtheauthor'sintention,butprimarilyfromtheexistenceandcontextsofits relationstoothercontent.Thedialogicmodeismandatedbythepreexistenceofotherdialogue, andasitrelatestoartisticpractices,thepreexistenceofotherartwork.Withtheviewerableto interactdirectlywiththeartistinthemomentthattheperformanceishappening,thedialogical processisdissimilarfromtraditionalartpractices.Theheteroglossiaofaudienceknowledge combinedwiththeartists“utterances”willbechangedwiththeintroductionofnewconditions, eithercuratedfromtheauthorornaturallyoccuring.
Itisthenalsoimportanttodistinguishtherolesthateachpartyisplaying.Theartist, beingthepartywhoisenactingthecruelty,istheperpetrator Theartistcanplaytworolesinthe performativeexchange:thecreative,whoplanstheperformance,andtheperformer,whois presentduringthespanoftheperformanceitself.Thepersonobservingtheworkiseithera viewerorpartofanaudience.Theviewerisconsuminganimagebecauseithasbeenplacedin frontofthem;therearenopreconceivednotionsofwhattheimageshouldbeorwhatitmight meantothepersonwhocreatedit.Viewingarisesfromaplaceofunpreparedness,wherethe surpriseofthesituationiswhatisdrivingtheinteraction.Inturn,theaudiencememberisaresult ofaviewerwhohascomeprepared.Knowingthecontextofbeingperformedto,theaudience memberisreadytointeractthroughtheroleoftherecipientwhoreacts.Becausethemediumof performanceimpactsthedialogicalexchangethatcanhappenbetweenthesetwoparties,the variouscombinationsofartist/performerandviewer/audiencememberholddifferent implicationsinthewillingnesstobesubjecttoactsofcrueltyandtheexpectedreactioneach groupissupposedtohavetothoseacts.
FormalAnalyses
Chris Burden
Shoot 1971 isthefirstbig‘injurypiece’,orperformancethatcausedrealbodilyharm, performedbyBurdenintheF-SpaceGallery.Burdenarrangedformarksmanandfellowart student,BruceDunlap,toshoothimwitha.22-caliberrifleinthearmatadistanceof15feetin thegallery TheeventwasopentotheotherstudentswhoutilizedF-Spaceandwasfilmedand photographed,resultinginasmallcrowdofBurden’speers.Theeight-secondvideoshows Burdenatawall,Dunlapstandingonapieceoftapemarkingthecorrectdistanceandraisingthe rifle,shootingBurdenintheupperarm,thenBurdenapproachingDunlapandlookingatthe bulletwound.
Fig.1ChrisBurden,Shoot,1971,Performance,FSpaceGallery,photoscourtesyofChrisBurdenArchive
Theaudiencewaswellawareoftheeventsthatwereabouttooccur,aswellastheplan forthebullettoonlygrazehisarm.Thegeneralthoughtwasthatitwouldbepreciseand thoroughlyplannedoutandthatanyinterruptionornoisewouldbeputtingBurden’ssafetyin jeopardy 12 Inthepreparationforthispiece,Dunlapshotalineoftapethatwasattheheightof whereBurdenwantedthebullettograzehisskin.Becauseitwaspracticedtobeonlyashallow wound,therewasn’tafirstaidkitinthegallery. UnfortunatelyinDunlap’sownwords,atthe verylastmomenthe“pulledatinybittotheleft”13 andwhatwassupposedtobetheequivalent ofascrapebecameabulletwoundintheupperbicep,asseeninfigure1.
ThecrueltyinthispiecereliesprimarilyonBurden’sperceivedself-cruelty.Hewas underthebeliefthateveryonewantstobeshotbecausetheimageofbeingshothadpermeated popularmediaandthelargerimagecultureinawaythatseeingsomeonegetshotwasan inevitabilityandthiscreatesanimpulsetoreenact.Thisbeliefindicatesnotonlyawillingness butadesiretoexperienceabulletwoundandwouldcontradictthedefinitionofself-cruelty.
Eventhedriveofself-preservationisaddressedintheplantoonlybegrazedandnotexperience apotentiallyfatalwound.Theonlydrivethatissublimatedinthedesireforfulfillmentthatthe gunshotwouldprovideistheaversiontopain,andsotheself-crueltyislessextremethanit appears.Totheaudience,itisstillreceivedasextreme,anddespitehisbelief,Ibelieveitisfair togeneralizethatmostpeoplearenotinterestedinorchestratingtheirownshooting.Because theirexperiencemayleadthemtobelieveBurdenissublimatingthisdrive,theyareexperiencing aneventthatiscruelertohimthanitis.
12 Dewey,Richard,dir.2016.Burden.MagnoliaPictures.https://tubitv.com/movies/552514/burden?start=true.
TheinteractionbetweentheaudienceandBurdeninregardstotheinformationthathe hasgiventhemisalmosttheinverseofsomeofhislaterpieces.Theywereawareofthefactthat 13 Ibid
hewasgoingtobeshot,andthereforetheyenteredintothissituationalreadyfeeling apprehensiveabouthowtheiractionsmaychangetheoutcomeofthepiece.Theideathatthis wasaverypreciseoperationwaspresentevenbeforetheshooterandthe‘victim’steppedinto theirpositionsandwaspresentinthemindsoftheaudience.Ifhehadnotwarnedhisaudience aboutthisfact,theremayhavebeenlessofaconcernaboutruiningthepre-plannedevent.This ofcourseassumesthattheaudiencewouldshowuptothegalleryandnotbeexpectingaplanned performanceatall,orthatoncethegunwasbroughtintotheroomtheywouldnotexpectittobe amaterialwithintheworkupuntilthemomentthegunwasfired.Thesecontextsofsettingand materialaredifficultifnotimpossibletodivorceintheworkofart,sotoperforminaplaceother thanagalleryandhidethematerialsuntilthedurationofthepiece,thenotionofruiningartistic designcouldbeavoided.Thiswouldalsomaketheappearanceofcrueltymoreextremeby relyingmoreheavilyonthefactthatthe‘victim’wouldbelesswillingtobeinthesituation.
Trans-Fixed 1974,wasaperformancethattookplaceatagarageinapublicalleywayoff SpeedwayinVenice,CaliforniainwhichBurdenwascrucifiedwiththehelpoffourassistants withtwonailsthroughthepalmsontothebacksideofapaleblueVolkswagenBeetle,asseenin figure2.Theperformancetookapproximatelytwominutesoncethecarwasrolledoutwiththe enginerunningbeforeitwasrolledbackintothegarageandBurdenwasremoved,wherehethen tookphotosofthewoundsonhishands.Itwasshownto15ofBurden’sfriendsbuttookplacein apublicsetting,allowinganyonewhosawittoparticipate,andnobodyinthegroupwaswarned oftheevents.14 Theperformancewasnotfilmedas Shoot wasandexistsnowintheformof photos,figure3,documentingthealreadycrucifiedBurdenandthewoundsonhispalms.
14 Nelson,Maggie 2011 TheArtofCruelty:AReckoning NewYork:W W Norton
Fig.2ChrisBurden,Trans-Fixed,1974,PerformanceincludingVW,SpeedwayCA,photocourtesyofCharlesHill
Fig.3ChrisBurden,1974,Handwoundsafterperformance,SpeedwayCA,photocourtesyofCharlesHill
Whatisunknowntotheaudienceiswhatmakesthisperformancefunctionasan especiallycruelpieceofart.Withoutthewarning,thereisnopreconceivedrolefortheviewerto adoptasanaudiencemember,andwhiletheyareexpectingtobeperformedtobyBurden,they arenotmentallypreparingthemselvestowitnessacrucifixionastheaudienceof Shoot was preparingthemselvestoseeabulletwound.Theyarenotmadeawareofthepreparationorthe severityoftheinjury,northefactthatBurdenwasonnovocaine,15 andthesameapprehensionof ruiningthe‘plan’isremovedduetothis.Thenailsaredriventhroughhishandsintheprivacyof theclosedgarageperhapsbecausetheirplacementwasdeliberateandmeanttocausetheleast amountoflastingdamage.16 Tothoseobserving,thiswouldhaveletthemknowthatthestuntis madetolookmoredangerousthanitactuallyis,andcomplicatedBurden’sgoalof resensitizationthroughthedepictionofrealpain.
DiscrepancybetweenwhattheviewercantellaboutBurden’spainandtherealityofwhat ishappeningtohisbodycreatesafalseintimacyinthiswork,knownbytheartistbutnotthe viewer,andtothemthecrucifixionisauthentic.Interestinglyenoughtheeventsunfoldina similarwayastheaudiencethathadbeenwarned.Beinginpublicaswellastheviewersbeinga groupofBurden’sfriends,therewasnobodytostopaninteractionfromhappeningbetween viewerorbystanderandtheartist,whetherthatbetoremovethenailsorgogetassistance.Still, theviewersallowforthecrucifixiontooccurforthefulltwominutes,justastheaudience allowedforhimtobeshotwithnoprotest.Evenwiththefearremovedofinterferingwiththe artisticvision,thevieweriscomplacentinallowingforharmtobecaused.Thewayinwhich processeswerehidden,painwaspresentedpublicly,andmaterialswithcruelhistorieswere
utilized,Ibelieveitisfairtosaythattoplacetheaudienceinthepositionofbeingableto intervenewithacruelactbutwhereitisacceptabletonotdoanythingbutwatchiscommentary aboutthestateofconsumingviolentinformationinthistime.Thediscomfortthattheviewers feelduringtheactofcomplacencyasksthemtochangethisbehaviortorectifythat,essentially toreactinsomesensitivewaytotheimagethattheyareconsuming.
TV Hijack tookplacein1972andwasacontinuationofBurden’sinclusionoftelevision intohisartpractice.Duringthisperformance,Burdenbroughtalonghisownfilmcrewand filmedhimselfholdingPhyllisLutjeans,aTVintervieweratknifepoint,seeninfigure4,asking fortheperformancetobebroadcastliveandthenthreateningtokillherifthebroadcastwas turnedoff.Hetoldherthathe“plannedtomakeherperformobsceneacts”.17 Attheendofthis, BurdendestroyedtheTVstation’stapingandofferedthestudiohisowntapewhichcaptured boththehijackinganddestructionofthetape,whichtheydenied.
17 Boehm,Mike 2015 “ChrisBurden'syouthfuledgegrabbedoneTVhostbythethroat”LosAngelesTimes https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/culture/la-et-cm-chris-burden-performance-art-with-knife-20150511-sto ryhtml
Fig.4ChrisBurden,TVHijack,1972,Performance,Channel7,photoscourtesyofGaryBeydler
Thisperformanceinparticularbringsupquestionsabouttheconsentoftheviewersto participateinthepieceatall.Withtheotherperformances,Burdencreatedanenvironmentwhere attheveryleastthepeoplewatchinghimknewthattherewouldbeaworkofartpresent. TV
Hijack, however,reliesontheaudienceofapreexistingbroadcastwithitsownsetof expectations.Theaudiencethatisbuiltfromthoseturningonthetelevisionisadifferentsortof audienceorviewerthatmightdecidetoattend Shoot or Trans-Fixed.IfthegoalofBurden’suse ofcrueltyinartistoreintroducesensitivitytotheconsumptionofviolentimagery,thenthe assumptionmustbemadeonBurden’spartthateverypersonhasbecomedesensitized,or otherwisethiswasarecklessutilizationofcruelty.1972putsthisperformancethreeyearsbefore theendoftheVietnamwarwhichisconsideredtobethefirsttelevisedwar.Thematerialusage ofthetelevisionatthistime,muchliketheVolkswagen,forcestheaudiencetoquestionhow theyinteractwiththeseobjectsandformsofmediaandthewaythoseintersectwithcruelty.
Intermsofextremity,thiswouldappeartobeBurden’smaximalutilizationofcruelty.
PhyllisLutjeans’involvementas‘hostage’differsgreatlyfromhisusualsolopracticeandeven hisperformanceswhereBarbaraBurdenwaspresent,becauseoftheuncertaintyofhowwell LutjeansknowsBurdenandtheircloseness.Whenhiswifeisincluded,thereisanunderstanding thattheyarefamiliarwitheachotherandthehistoryandpreparationofalltheperformancesthus far.Theenvironmenttheseperformancestookplaceinfurthergivestheaudienceinformation thatthosewereplannedevents.LutjeansandBurdenwerefriendspriortotheperformanceand remainedafter,andshewasfullyawareofhisplantoincludeaknife.Theweekleadinguptothe broadcast,BurdengotrepeatedconsentfromLutjeanstohaveherbeaparticipant,andduring thecourseofthehijacking,hereassuredherthatshewasnotinactualdangerofanything.18 But toaviewerturningonthebroadcastwhilethishijackingwashappening,thereisnoprior knowledgeofhowBurdenandLutjeansknoweachother,andifthisisanartpieceoragenuine actofviolence.Histhreatstotheviewerareverymuchrealandthediscomfortanddistressthat comesfromthemareauthentic.Coupledwiththeunpreparednessoftheaudience,theunknown natureoftheirrelationshipfunctionsthesameastheunknownnatureofthepalmwoundsof Trans-Fixed,removingtheaudiencefromrealitybutincreasingtheintendedreactiontothe cruelty
ChrisBurden'sperformanceartutilizespainandsufferingtoahighdegreewhileusually beingcalculatedandlessdangerousthantheyseemed.Thisreliesontheaudiencebeingfurther fromtherealityoftheactthantheyseemtoachievethelevelofperformativeexchangedesired. Thedialogicalprocessisobscuredwiththegoalofincreasingtheimpactofthecruelacts.Inthis case,itwouldseemthatatransparentdialoguewiththeviewerhinderstheextremityofcruelty,
18 Boehm,Mike
andtobecompletelyopenabouttheconditionsoftheartworkwouldhavedetractedfrom Burden’sdesiretocausediscomfortwithintheviewer.Thepreexistingexperiencestheaudience haswithpainandmaterialsthatcauseharmwerebeingreadintheseperformances,andfromthe viewersunderstanding,theseactswereanextremecruelty Theartist'sdecisiontohidethe preparationandsafetyisinitselfanotheractofcrueltytotheviewerandbychangingthe audienceintoagroupofviewersthroughobfuscation,heteroglossiaisatitsmostdiverse moment.
AversionoftheperformerrolethatBurdenplaysexistsasaresultofthechoiceto imposeviewership.Giventheabsenceofartistintroductionandinformationaboutthe preparationandsafeguardspresentwithintheworks,heappearedtohisviewersasacceptingof harmandpainandwillingtoenduredeathforhisperformance.Intheabsenceofthecreative’s truthfulnesstothoseinteracting,theideaofthedevotedperformerispresent.Weknow,however, thatBurdenwasnotwillingtodie,sayingafterhisperformance Doomed 1975 inwhichhelaid underneathasheetofplexiglassfor45hoursand10minutes, “IfithadtakenafewmoredaysI wouldhavecrawledout,I’dhavecrawledoutbecauseIdon’twanttodieofthirstforanyone.”19
Thisposesthequestionifthisisadisruptionofthedialogicalexchange;whenthetwoparties havetwovastlydifferentunderstandingsofwhateventisoccurring,20 atwhatpointisthe dialoguenolongerinteractive?Thetextoftheperformanceleadstheviewersintoreal discomfortatthedesireoftheartist,buttheviewerisonlyabletointeractwiththedevoted performerpersonafully.Idonotfindthistobeaviolationofthedialogicalexchange-theartist isjustcuratingtheconditionsofwhichthetextistobeunderstoodtoahigherdegreethanthe viewerisexpecting.Dialogueisoccurringnotonlytotheprimarycruelact,buttothesecondary
19 Rezek,Petr 2021 “BodyArt:ParadigmsofTransformationinContemporaryArt”ArtinTranslation12,no 3 (Mar):361-378 https://doi-orguncoidmoclcorg/101080/1756131020201876828
20 Ibid
cruelactofremovingconditionsthatallowaviewertooccupytheaudiencerole.Partofthe responsetotheperformerisshockanddiscomfortovernotonlybeinginaspacetoexperience somethingtheywouldotherwiseavoid,butoverthemissingcomfortofknowingwhatroleto play
Carolee Schneemann
Viet-Flakes 1965 isacompilationfilmofcollectedimagesoftheVietnamwarandits atrocities,thatincludesasoundcollagecreatedbyJamesTenney.21 Tenney’scollageuses “Vietnamesereligiouschantsandsecularsongs,fragmentsofBachand1960’spophits”22 , heighteningthesegmentedandchoppynatureoftheexperimentalfilm.Thefilmwasoriginally shotusingan8mmcamerafittedwithamakeshiftlens,apieceofglass,andthephotos themselves.23 Thecameramovesaroundthestillnewsphotosandisinterjectedwithfootageof Vietnam,invitingtheviewertothinkofthephotographsinasimilarwaytothevideos.Through therhythmicbutfracturedediting,unsettlinganddiscontinuousaudialcollage, pseudo-movementofstillimages,andtheutilizationofrealsuffering,theconditionsforthe audiencetoexperiencethecruelactandunderstanditsrolewithintheartworkarecreated.
21 Schneemann,Carolee,Viet-Flakes,CaroleeSchneemannFoundation
22 Ibid
23 Schneemann,Carolee.2022.“Viet-Flakes-CaroleeSchneemann.”TheFilm-Makers'Cooperative.Accessed April6,2022 https://film-makerscoopcom/catalogue/carolee-schneemann-viet-flakes
Thisisnotaperformancepiece,butitdoesuseothers’bodiesinmotionandinpainina waythatthecollectionofimagescanbeunderstoodasaproxyfortheperformerthrougha similardefinition.Inplaceoftheartists’bodyandtheorchestratedcruelactisrealpainand genuinecruelty Becauseofthis,theexaminationofthispiecewillhavenofocusonselfcrueltyanimagedoesnothavesublimateddrives.
Burden’sutilizationoftelevisionissimilartoSchneemann’suseofthenewsinthisfilm. Thedifferencelieswithintheaudiences’depthofunderstandingabouttheimagestheyare consuming.Wherein TV Hijack,theaudiencemayeventuallylearnofBurden’schoreographed violenceandrelationshiptohissupposed‘victim’,Schneemann’saudiencewillneverbeableto learnthattheseimagesaren’treal.Theyarethesamesortofimagesthattheymightconsume throughmainstreammedia;theimagecultureduringtheVietnamwarconsistedofreal
depictions“ofairplanesflying,oftendroppingbombs,andtroopsonpatrol,sometimesin combat”.24 Thefilmisfamiliar,utilizingthesamepopularimagerytheaudienceseesconstantly andusingthatcomfortinfamiliaritytoopenthedialogue.Bycollectingimagesfromnews sources,Schneemannisdirectlypullingfromtheimagelanguagetheaudiencewouldbeusedto, andshedisruptsthattocausediscomfortanduneaseinthosewatching.MuchlikeBurden,the complacencyinconsumingthesegraphicactsofviolenceisbeingquestioned,andtheactof crueltyupontheaudienceisforcingthemtoreconcilethat.
Meat Joy 1964 wasaperformancedonefirstattheFestivaldelaLibreExpressionin Paristhatusedlivebodiesasagesturalpainting.TheperformanceconsistedofSchneemannand eightsemi-nudeperformersinteractingwithobjectssuchaswetpaint,sausage,rawfish,scraps ofpaper,andrawchickens,seeninfigure6.Duetorestrictivelawsatthetime,itwasnot allowedfortheperformerstobenudeandalsomoveatthesametimeinParis,andmaleand femaleperformerswerenotallowedtobenudetogetheronstageinNewYork.Theperformance andsubsequentfilmedversionweredescribedasan“eroticrite”25 andasacelebrationoffleshas amaterial.
24 Mandelbaum,Michael “Vietnam:TheTelevisionWar” Daedalus 111,no 4(1982):157–69 http://www.jstor.org/stable/20024822.
25 Schneemann,Carolee,ObsceneBody/Politic
Fig.6CaroleeSchneemann,MeatJoy,1964,Performanceincludingrawflesh,FestivaldelaLibreExpression,photocourtesyof CaroleeSchneemannFoundation
Theorgiasticandplayfulchoreographycreateasimultaneouslyecstaticandrepulsive eventthatcreatedextremereactionsinsomeaudiences.InaParisperformance,amanfromthe audiencecameonstageandattemptedtostrangleSchneemann,prompting3womenwhohadnot previouslyseentheperformancetostoptheassaultasthey-correctly-didnotbelievethe stranglingtobepartoftheperformance.Afterthis,shewouldperforminfrontofaudiencesthat consistedofmostlywomen.26 Becauseofthewomens’abilitytodistinguishtheperformativeact weareremindedthattheperformativecrueltyandgenuineactsofcrueltyaredistinctandthis factisknowntotheaudience.Thecruelactofthestranglingisalwaysgoingtobeworsethanthe crueltyof Meat Joy becausethereisnoaddedlayerofperformativewillingnesstobeing strangledinthiscontext,andthisiswhythisisoneoftheonlyinstancesinwhichtheaudience
26 Delbard,Nathalie.2016.Practicable:FromParticipationtoInteractioninContemporaryArt.EditedbySamuel BianchiniandErikVerhagen Cambridge:MITPress 492
memberinteracteddirectlyintheartworksanalyzedhere.Becauseofthiswecanalsoassume thatSchneemannhadnoexpectationfortheaudiencetophysicallyinteractinthispieceanditis theinternalreactionthatwasintended-theperformativewillingnessappearstobewhatstops mostaudiencemembersfrominteractingsodirectly
MoraldecencygroupsinboththeParisandNewYorkperformanceswouldbepresentin theaudiencesandtheLondonperformancewascutshortwhenpoliceenteredthestage.Moral outrage,whiledisruptingtheperformances,isalsotheaudience'sdialogicalresponsetothe work,andtoanextentwhatSchneemanncouldhaveexpectedthereactiontoherworktobe.The performancearoseoutofanotionthattheculturehad“lostanddenied”itsconnectionstoflesh andsensoryexperience,andthattheeventwasanactofliberationfromthissuppresionand shame.
Rawnessisakeyelementinthispiece,bothintheuseofrawfleshandintheappearance ofthe‘feminine’actsofexposureandselfdisplay.Inusingtherawfleshasamodeoferotic appreciationinconjunctionwiththenearlynudehumanform,sheisachievingthesamesortof discomfortthatshewouldrevisitthenextyearwith Interior Scroll 1965.Exposureoftheflesh andbodyinamessymannerwhilestillremainingeroticbringsaskstheaudiencetoexamine theirassociationsofsexualmaterialwithdisgust.Selfcrueltyinthisperformanceisthenperhaps onlyseenfromthesideoftheaudience,whousestheirpreexistinginclinationstowardsshame anddiscomfortandappliesthattotheperformers,believingthemtoalsoholdthesameignominy withsexualacts.Onlywhenitisrealizedthattheperformersarenotbeingputinasituationthey wouldrathernotbein-exposedintheirsensualityand‘publicly’orgiastic-doestheaudience havetoreconcilewiththefacttheytoomightbesuppressingandsublimatingtheirowndesires anddrives. Recognitionoftheirownselfcrueltyandrepressioninthiswaytasksthemwith
resolvingthediscomfort,andforthisitisdeconstructingtheideathatthenudebodyandflesh aremorallyreprehensibletocelebrate.
Interior Scroll 1975,isaperformancebySchneemanninwhichsheperformedfirstin frontofagroupofmostlyfemaleartists.Sheapproachedatable,undressedandthenwrapped herselfinasheet,climbedonthetableandtoldthe“audienceshewouldreadfromherbook, Cezanne, She Was A Great Painter”27.Shethenremovedthesheet,leavingherwearinganapron andbegantopaintonherfaceandbody,recitingfromthebookandpositioningherselfinaction posesthatamodelmighttake.Shethenremovedtheapronandbegantoslowlyremoveascroll fromwithinhervaginaandreadfromthataconversationfrom“astructuralistfilm-maker”who pittedtraditionalmalerationalityagainstfemininebodilyprocessesandintuition,seenonthe sidesoffigure7.
27 Schneemann,Carolee
Fig.7CaroleeSchneemann,InteriorScroll,1975,Performance,EastHampton,photocourtesyofTateMuseum
Theobjectofthefemalenudeisbeingpervertedinthisperformance,usingthepre existingtextofthehistoricaluseofthefemalebodyasastartingpointforthedialogue.Cruelty inthispiececomesfromthecultural“terror”28 ofenvisioningawomanasbothexplicitlysexual andasprimitiveorobsceneinthesameact.Discomfortfromseeingwhathasbeenleftunseentheinteriorofthevaginaandanobjectbeingremovedfromit-isbeingusedasatoolhereto attempttochangethemeaningofthenudebody.Insteadofbeingaskedtoaltertheprocessof desensitizationinresponsetopainandviolence,theaudienceisplacedinapositionwherethey mustfirstidentifywherethediscomfortiscomingfrom.Atrocitiesanddepictionsofharmare acceptableimagerytofeeluncomfortableatviewinganditisnotdifficulttoknowwhy Feeling negativeemotionsathorrendousactionsisanexerciseinempathyandtheviewerstopping
28 Schneemann,Carolee,ObsceneBody/Politic
themselvesfrombecomingfatiguedatrepeatedexposuretoemotionallydrainingimagesdoes notrequiretheappearanceoftheimagetobechangedintheirmind.Thefemalebodyonthe otherhandisaneutralitem,wherethereactionofshockandsorrowisnottheintuitiveresponse. Humanbodiesaresomethingthatisfamiliartotheviewerbecausebyvirtueofbeingahuman theyseethatimagecontinuously.Thecrueltyofcausingthisdiscomfortdoesnotaskthemto changetheprocessofconsumingthediscomfortingimage,buttoreevaluatethenotionthatthe imageisdisconcerting.
SelfcrueltyinthisworkismuchmoreexplicitwithSchneemansaying“Ididn’twantto pullascrolloutofmyvaginaandreaditinpublic”butthatitwastheculturalactofsuppression andlossofmeaningfortheimageofthefemalebodythatdrovehertodoso.Herdriveto performthiswasdutifulinnature,andsheisdirectlysublimatingherdesireforpersonalcomfort toachievethisgoal.
CaroleeSchneemann usesthebodyinseeminglylessextremewaysthanBurden,butis seentocauseamorevisceralresponseinunnervingheraudience.Theyarenotcomplacentinthe cruelimagerybecausethecrueltycomesnotfrompainbutarepressionofdesireintheaudience andrelianceontheobjectificationofthefemalebodythathadbeenestablishedintheartworld.
Thecrueltytoherownbodyandelementsofflesh,eroticism,anderraticismdonotappear conceptuallyaloneandheridentityasawomanandobjectintheseperformancesarevery present.ThesimilarsortsofactionsBurdenwouldtakeadecadelaterdonothavethesame relianceontheaudiencebeinguncomfortablewiththeperformer'sbodybeingseenasanobject withagency.Burden’sviewersandaudienceidentifywithBurden’sbodyasahumaninpain
whereasSchneemann’saudiencemustfirstmovepasttheobjectificationoftheartisticnude femaletoidentifywithherasahumanbodyfeelingsensoryliberation.
Schneemannandotherfemaleperformersactinginthenudewasaradicalactforthe attempttotakeagencyoftheirownbodiesfromthe“aestheticprocess[of]maleartists”29 Historicaluseofthefemalenudeplacesitastheobjectofvoyeuristicpleasure,somethingthatis tobelookedatandnotinteractedwith.TheartworkofYvesKlieninwhichnude“femalemodels [writhed]onacanvascoveredinhistrademarkbluepaint”canbeseenasthespiritualprecursor toSchneemann’sgesturalpaintings,butthedifferenceisthatthefemalemodelhasnoagencyin howherownobjectificationisreceivedwithintheartwork.TheunclothedSchneemannisableto decidewhoseestheperformanceandwhatkindofaudiencesheisgoingtocaterto,whileKlein hasthefinalsayforthebluemodels.Thereisalsonodenialoferoticismandsexualityfor SchneemannlikethereisforKlein30,andbecauseofthistheaudience,saturatedinshameabout sensualityandfemalesexuality/nudeness/agencyisallthemoreuncomfortable.
Utilityofcruelty
Throughtheanalysisoftheseselectedworks,thedifferenceinhowChrisBurdenand CaroleeSchneemannusecrueltywithintheirperformativeartworksbecomesclear Burden’s usagerequirestheaudiencetoexaminetheircomplacencyinthefaceofviolenceandpaintothe humanbody,andtochoosetoremainsensitivetotheseacts.Hemusthidecertainelementsto createtheconditionsfortheaudienceandviewertobelievehimtobeinthemostamountofpain andtheretobethehighestlevelofextremity.Thiscreatesthediscomfortoftheviewertobeat
29 Martin,Jay 2002 “SomaestheticsandDemocracy:DeweyandContemporaryBodyArt”TheJournalof AestheticEducation36,no 4(Winter):55-69 https://doi-orguncoidmoclcorg/3301568 59
30 Klein,Yves.1960.“Selectedtexts-"Livingbrushes"Excerptfrom"TruthBecomesReality."”YvesKlein. http://wwwyveskleincom/en/textes-choisis/view/29/living-brushes/
itsgreatest,andforthesensitivitytotheacttomimicthelevelofextremity.Schneemann’susage requirestheaudiencetoreexamineaculturaldefinitionanddiscomfortwiththefemalenudeand eroticism.Itdoesn’tasktheaudiencetochangetheresponsetothediscomfortingimage,butto redefinewhatthatimageistothem.
InBurden’scase,thisthenbegsthequestionwhathappenswhentheresensitizingstops beingeffective?Doesthefactthatthegoalwastoreintroducesensitivityintothetransaction betweenimageandaudiencematterwhenitsuddenlybecomesjustacruelbutpalatableobject? Hisgoalofresensitizationhingedontheabilityofhisviewertobeabletocontinuetosee cruelty,andspecificallyharm,whilereactingaspecificwayafterbeingconfrontedwithhis performance.InSchneemann’sperformancesrevolvingaroundthefemalenude,inthe reevaluationofthetext,thedialogicalprocessischangeduponeachviewingexperienceofthe sameperformance.Understandingfromtheaudiencedoesnotweakenuponarepeatedviewing orrevisitationtothefeelingsofthefirstviewingbecausetheheteroglossiahaschanged.For Burden,theperformanceisshockingimmediatelyandcausesavisceraldiscomfortfrom identificationwiththehumanbodyinpain.Theproblemcomesfromthecruelactbeingunable toprogresswithtimebecausetheessentialtaskBurdenhasaskedofhisvieweristobeableto replicatethesensitivitytothesamestimulusrepeatedly Nothingabouttheprocessofconsuming theoriginalimageischanged,andthereactiontotheimagecannotbeassumedtochange merelybecausetheviewerisbeingaskedtodoso.Andbecauseoftheephemeralqualityof Burden’susageofcruelty,hehasessentiallyjustaddedmorecruelandharmfulimagerytothe pooloftextsthataviewermaygrowdesensitizedto.Itisnotthemosteffectivewaytoutilize cruelty,andisnotvaluabletotheultimategoalofresensitization.
ThisisalsowhyCaroleeSchneemann’s Viet-Flakes istheweakestuseofcrueltyoutof thethreeartworksexamined.IntheuseofVietnamwarfootagefromnewssources,shewasnot onlyattemptingtocreatetheconditionsfortheaudiencetoberesensitized,butwaspullingfrom thepoolof imagesthoughttobesusceptibletodesensitizationalready Theunsettlingnatureof thefilmactsmuchlikethevisceralshockofseeingBurden’sbodyinpain,butifweareto believetheartistthatpeoplearecomplacentinviewingpainthroughmedia,usingthesame imagestheyhavealreadyproventobepassivelyconsumingwithouttherepeated recontextualizationwillresultinthesamepatternofresponse.Thisusageissimilarly unsuccessfulinitsultimategoal.
Asuccessfuluseofcrueltythenappearstobeonethatcreatesthespacetoexaminethe negativereactionssurroundingtheunwantedstimulus.Theviewerandaudiencemustbeableto selfreplicatetheresultofthisexamination,inthiscasearedefiningofimagevalue.The processesofviewingacruelanddiscomfortingimageareableprogressinthesuccessfulusageif therevisitationtotheimageslossofextremityisthedesiredeffect.
References
Bakhtin,MikhailM.,andMichaelHolquist.1981. The dialogic imagination: four essays. Edited byVadimLiapunovandCarylEmerson.TranslatedbyCarylEmerson,Kenneth Brostrom,VadimLiapunov,andMichaelMichael.Austin:UniversityofTexasPress.
ThisisacollectionoffouressaysbyRussianphilosopherMikhailBakhtin.Intheseessays, Bakhtinintroducestheconceptsofheteroglossiaanddialogismasanepistemological mode,aworldthatisdominatedbytheinteractivenatureofaworldinwhichlanguage exists.Dialogicalcriticismasappliedtotheartworldgivesawaytodiscussthedialogue betweenartistandviewer,andinthiscasewheretheboundaryliesbetweenthem.
Beydler,Gary.1972. TV Hijack,PerformativeTVhijackingft.ChrisBurdenandPhyllis Lutjeans.Channel7:Photograph.
“BodyArtMovementOverview|TheArtStory.”2017.TheArtStory. https://www.theartstory.org/movement/body-art/.
TheArtStoryaimstocompileandmakeaccessibleartworksandinformationaboutartistsand movementsandtheirwritersaresupposedlyexpertsintheirfields,althoughspecific writersarenoteasilyfound,andinformationneedstobetakenwithanairofskepticism inresponse.ThisoverviewofBodyArtactsasacompilationofimportanttopics,artists, artworks,andinfluences.Itactssolelyasalistofwhatissupposedlyculturally significantandaccessibleofthesecategoriesandprovidescursory,butalsothemost notable,biographicalinformationabouttheartistsfeatured.
Boehm,Mike.2015.“ChrisBurden'syouthfuledgegrabbedoneTVhostbythethroat.”Los AngelesTimes.
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/culture/la-et-cm-chris-burden-performance-a rt-with-knife-20150511-story.html.
Burden,Chris,dir.1972. TV Hijacking.Channel3CablevisionIrvine.Color.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10261332/technical?ref_=ttco_sa_5.
PerformanceartistChrisBurden’spieceTVHijacking1972wasperformedduringalive broadcastinwhichBurdenheldinterviewer,PhyllisLutjeans,atknifepointand threatenedtokillheriftheshowended.ThestuntisanexampleofthewaythatBurden’s worktendedtointeractwithhisaudienceandhowtheboundarybetweenperformance andrealityisobfuscated.Thissourcehasadetailedlistoftechnicalspecificationsand accreditationofpeoplefeaturedinthefilmandisagoodreferenceasBurdenwrotethat hedestroyedtheoriginaltape.
Burden,Chris.2007.“ChrisBurden|TVHijack.February9,1972.”TheMetropolitanMuseum ofArt.https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/284248.
TheMetropolitanMuseumofArtincludesanexhibitionhistoryoftheTVHijackingaswellas Burden’saccountoftheeventsandhisprocessthroughouttheperformance. CaroleeSchneemannFoundation.1964.“MeatJoy,”Performanceincludingrawfleshand8 dancers.FestivaldelaLibreExpression.Photograph.
“CaroleeSchneemannFoundation.”CaroleeSchneemannFoundation.AccessedApril6,2022.
https://www.schneemannfoundation.org/artworks/viet-flakes.
ChrisBurdenArchive.1971. Shoot,ChrisBurdenperformance.FSpaceGallery:Photograph.
“ChrisBurdenPerformances,Bio,Ideas|TheArtStory.”2022.TheArtStory.
https://www.theartstory.org/artist/burden-chris/#pnt_2.
ThisisanoverviewofChrisBurden’sartisticpractices,performances,andotherworks, influences,andbiographicalinformation.Thisinformationisprimarilyusedasawayto givecontexttoBurden’spersonalandartisticventuresandthechronologyofhisartwork asawhole.
Clinton,Dan.2004.“Glossary|HammerMuseum.”HammerMuseum.
https://hammer.ucla.edu/public-engagement/resources/glossary.
ThisglossaryentryfromtheHammerMuseumdefines“dialogical”inregardstoartas introducedbyBahktinandexpoundeduponbyGrantKestertobeapplicableinasocial sense.Thisdefinitionistheonethatisusedtoviewtheinteractivenatureofperformative bodyartasopposedtothetransactionalviewthatdescribesartasadepositionof meaninginanobjectorimagetobeextractedseparatelybytheviewerasdescribedby theoristPauloFriere.
“DangerousArt:TheWeaponsofPerformanceArtistChrisBurden.”2022.TheArtStory.
https://www.theartstory.org/blog/dangerous-art-the-weapons-of-performance-artist-chrisburden/.
ThisblogpostactsmerelyasacompiledlistofwhatmightbeculturallyreceivedasChris Burden’smostinfluentialandextremeartworks.Thefiveartworksfeaturedaresortedby thematerialusedthatmakestheworkeitherdangerousordistinct,andarenot comprehensiveorinformativefurtherthantheirnotionthatthesespecificpiecesare indeedregardedasextremebyanaudience,andthereforeelicitanemotionalresponse thatBurdenwassupposedlyseeking.
Delbard,Nathalie.2016. Practicable: From Participation to Interaction in Contemporary Art EditedbySamuelBianchiniandErikVerhagen.Cambridge:MITPress.
SamuelBianchini,artistandresearcheratÉcoleNationaleSupérieuredesArtsDécoratifs, examinestherelationshipbetweenaudienceandartworkinspaceswheretheinteraction isbothaestheticandphysical.Thebookalsoexploreshowtheemergenceof internet-basedartanddigitaltechnologiescreatesparticipatoryspacesoutsideofthe physicalarenaandcanbeusedtocomparewiththeinteractivepropertiesoftheoriginal PerformanceArtmovement.Thedifferencesindegreesofaudienceparticipationandthe roleinwhichtheyplayhelptodrawdifferentlevelsofimpactthatcrueltymighthaveon aviewerandtheartistindifferentphysicalspacesandcontexts.
Deleuze,Gilles.1991. Coldness and Cruelty NewYork:TheMITPress.
PhilosopherGillesDeleuzecompilesexamplesofsadismandmasochismintheworksofthe
MarquisdeSadeandLeopoldRittervonSacher-Masochinthisbookandexplorestheir dependenceononeanother Deleuzeassertsthatsuspenseandwaitingarecriticalpartsof theartofMasoch,andthustheappearanceofhanging,crucifixion,andliteralsuspension arephysicalinterpretationsoftheritualofwaiting.Thisishelpfulwhendiscussingthe appearanceofbothphysicalandtemporalsuspensioninperformativebodyart.
Dewey,Richard,dir.2016. Burden.MagnoliaPictures.
https://tubitv.com/movies/552514/burden?start=true.
DiPonio,Amanda.2018. The Early Modern Theatre of Cruelty and Its Doubles: Artaud and Influence.NewYork:SpringerInternationalPublishing.
Inthisbook,ProfessorAmandaDiPonioprovidesaframeworkintowhichAntoninArtaud’s writingmightbeinterpreted.Theconceptofthetheater ofcrueltyisprevalentinmany oftheotherwritings,andunderstandingArtaud'smeaningandhowitappearsin contemporaryartiscrucialinthefullunderstandingofmuchofthephilosophyofcruelty
Eken,Bülent.1999. Gilles Deleuze's Philosophy of Art: The Cruelty of Affect.Anarka,Turkey: BilkentUniversity.
ScholarBülentEken’smaster’sthesisexploresthedebtor-creditorrelationshipofcrueltyasit appliestoSpinozian,Deleuzian,andNietzscheanphilosophyandexaminesparticularly theoriginsofDeleuze’saesthetictheory.Itsupposesthatartcanbeviewedasan
interactionbetweenjudgmentandreceptionthatareseenasbreaksoftension,a viewpointthatisvaluablewhentalkingaboutartthatspecificallyseekstocreatetension.
Guattari,Félix,andGillesDeleuze.1983. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia TranslatedbyMarkSeem,HelenR.Lane,andRobertHurley.Minneapolis:Universityof MinnesotaPress.
Frenchphilosophers,GillesDeleuze’sandFélixGuattari’sessayisanexaminationoftheway thatcapitalisminformsdesire,andcritiqueandreferenceahostofotherphilosophers, namelyMarxandNietzscheinregardstocruelty.Deleuze’sdefinitionofcrueltyasa positionofdesireandasnotmerelyactsofviolencegiveamorenuancedandapplicable wayofrelatingtheconcepttoBodyArt.
Haden-Guest,Anthony.1996. True colors: the real life of the art world.Washington:Atlantic MonthlyPress.
Hill,Charles.1974.Handwoundsafterperformance,ChrisBurden's.SpeedwayCA. Photograph.
Hill,Charles.1974.“Trans-Fixed,”ChrisBurdenperformanceincludingacrucifixionontoa VW.SpeedwayCA.Photograph.
Jones,Amelia.1998. Body Art / Performing the Subject.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesota Press.
AmeliaJones,anAmericanarthistorian,examinestherelationshipbetweenbodyartanda capitaliststructure.Thebookworkstodescribethewaythatsocietalstructuresinformthe experienceofsubjectivityandthedistinctionbetweentheartistasauthorandtheartistas materialintheartthatutilizesthebodyasthesubject.
Jones,Amelia,JohannaBurton,ChrisBurden,MatthewD.Jackson,andThomasCrow.2019.
Chris Burden: Extreme Measures.EditedbyMassimilianoGioni,JennyMoore,andLisa Phillips.NewYork:RandomHouseIncorporated.
ThissurveycreatedbytheNewMuseumcompilesChrisBurden’sartworksandexaminesthem throughthemessuchasgendertheoryandinstitutionalcritiquethatlendcontexttothe piecesandactasastartingplaceinunderstandingeachoneinvariouslights.Thebookis createdasatextversionoftheexhibitintheNewMuseumthattookplacefrom2013to 2014andallowsBurden’sworktobeseenascloseaspossibletothemuseumsettingas possible,andthewaysaninstitutionbelievestheworkshouldbeseenanddisplayed.
Klein,Yves.1960.“Selectedtexts-"Livingbrushes"Excerptfrom"TruthBecomesReality."”
YvesKlein.http://www.yvesklein.com/en/textes-choisis/view/29/living-brushes/.
Loeffler,CarlE.,andDarleneTongs.1989. Performance Anthology: Source Book of California Performance Art.SanFrancisco:LastGaspPress.
CarlE.Loefflerwasthefounderofoneofthefirstalternativeartist-runinstitutions,La Mamelle/ArtCom.Thisanthologydocumentsawidevarietyofperformanceartists workingoutofCaliforniainthe70s.Itincludesinfluentialbiographies,essays,reviews,
catalogs,andothertextsthatareusefulinunderstandingwhattheperformanceartscene wasconcernedwithinCalifornia,andprovidesbiographicalinformationaboutBurden andhiscontemporaries.
Lowry,D.2019.“CaroleeSchneemann.”MoMA.https://www.moma.org/artists/7712.
TheMuseumofModernArtcompilesimportantbiographicalinformation,aswellasseminal worksofSchneemannthatgiveagoodindicationofthemostculturallyinfluentialworks.
TheMoMAalsoincludesimagesandaudiofrom42works,includingsomeolderpieces thatarenotaseasilyaccessibleontheartist'sownwebsite,butgiveagoodideaofthe progressioninartisticpracticeforSchneemann.
Mandelbaum,Michael.1982.“Vietnam:TheTelevisionWar.” Daedalus 111(4):157-69. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20024822.
Martin,Jay.2002.“SomaestheticsandDemocracy:DeweyandContemporaryBodyArt.” The Journal of Aesthetic Education 36,no.4(Winter):55-69. https://doi-org.unco.idm.oclc.org/3301568.
MartinJay,doctorofphilosophyandAmericanhistorian,discussesinthisjournalarticleJohn Dewey’saesthetictheoryandrejectionofpassivecontemplationinregardstoartistic aestheticism.Hedescribesthewaythatfemalecontemporarybodyartistsutilizedtheir bodiesasaradicalwaytosubverttheartisticcreativeprocess,anddetailsthesupposed devolutionofbodyartintoshockartthatcontradictsDewey’stheory.
Nelson,Maggie.2011. The Art of Cruelty: A Reckoning.NewYork:W.W.Norton.
MaggieNelson,anauthoroftenworkingintherealmofcriticismandaesthetictheory,looksat thewaysinwhichcrueltyfunctionsinasocietyallegedlysurroundedbyviolentimagery andacultureofindifference.Thebooksynthesizesahostoftheoriesaboutthefunction ofcrueltyandcontainsahostofexamplesofcrueltyintheartthatisbothsuccessfuland noteffective.InregardstoChrisBurden’sart,shecompareshisworkstothoseofhis contemporariesandexplorestheprogressionofhisthoughtsontheroletheaudienceand theauthorshouldplayinaperformance.
Nietzsche,FriedrichW 1989. Beyond good and evil EditedbyWalterA.Kaufmann.Translated byWalterA.KaufmannandHelenZimmern.NewYork:VintageBooks.
OxfordLanguage.2022“OxfordEnglishDictionary.”OxfordLanguages.AccessedApril6, 2022.https://languages.oup.com/dictionaries/#oed.
Parmer,JaredW 2017.“NietzscheandtheArtofCruelty.” Journal of Nietzsche Studies 48,no. 3(Autumn):402-429.
https://www-jstor-org.unco.idm.oclc.org/stable/10.5325/jnietstud.48.3.0402?pq-origsite= summon#metadata_info_tab_contents.
Post-doctoralresearcherW.JaredParmeranalyzesinthisjournalarticlewhatcrueltymeansin Nietzscheanphilosophyandhowself-inflictedcrueltyiscrucialtounderstanding Nietzsche’stheoryabouttheimprovementofman.Thisgivesinsightintohowcruelty
mightfunctionasatoolinartmadetoelicitaresponseandcallintoquestion complacencyfromtheviewer.
Puetz,Michelle,IraLicht,DennisO'Shea,andChrisBurden.2015.“MCA-InSupportof Uncertainty:ChrisBurden'sDoomed.”MuseumofContemporaryArtChicago.
https://mcachicago.org/publications/blog/2015/05/in-support-of-uncertainty-chris-burden s-doomed.
Artadministratorandhistorian,MichellePuetz,writesthisarticleaboutBurden’spieceDoomed aftertheartist’spassingandspeakswiththemuseumemployeethatinteractedand inadvertentlyendedtheperformance.Theinteractionbetweenartistandvieweris emblematicoftherelationshipthatisbeingexploredhereandisanotableexample becauseofthetermsoftheartworkthatBurdendidnotmakeapparenttothemuseum anditsstaff.
Rezek,Petr.2021.“BodyArt:ParadigmsofTransformationinContemporaryArt.” Art in Translation 12,no.3(Mar):361-378.
https://doi-org.unco.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/17561310.2020.1876828.
CzechphilosopherandarttheoristPetrRezekexaminestheaestheticboundarythatiscalledinto questionbytheartists'useoftheirownbodiesinaworkofart.Hediscussesahandfulof Burden’sworkandwhatitmeansforBurdentobeamaterialinapieceandhowthe transformationfromartistandcreatortoobjectinfluencestheaudienceorviewers' participation,andsubsequentlywhatthismeansabouttheirroleandmaterialstatusinthe artwork.
Sacher-Masoch,Leopoldv.,andGillesDeleuze.1989. Masochism.TranslatedbyJeanMcNeil andLeopoldv Sacher-Masoch.NewYork:ZoneBooks.
Schneemann,Carolee,dir.1965. Viet-Flakes.16mmandnewspaperclippings.WhitneyMuseum.
ThisvideocomesfromperformancebodyartistCaroleeSchneemann’spersonalwebsitewith includedstillsandinformationabouttheperformance.Thispieceisincludedasa contrastingperformancetoBurden’sShootasitalsoaddressestheartist’sfeelingsabout theVietnamwar.Thesimilaritybetweenthetwoconceptsallowsfordistinctionsin practicetobemoreclearlyseen.
Schneemann,Carolee.1991.“TheObsceneBody/Politic.” Art Journal 50,no.4(Winter):28-35.
https://www-jstor-org.unco.idm.oclc.org/stable/pdf/777320.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Ab 77088ba4a716e132ea96568c0cb8fd1&ab_segments=&origin=.
Schneemann,Carolee.2011.“onEyeBody:36TransformativeActionsforCamera,1963.”
CaroleeSchneemannFoundation.
https://www.schneemannfoundation.org/writing/on-eye-body-36-transformative-actions-f or-camera.
FromCaroleeSchneemann’swebsite,EyeBody:36TransformativeActionsforCameraisa seriesofimagesthataddressesthebodyasamaterial,specificallytheconnotationthat thefemalebodyandnudehaveasatext.Thewritingincludedabouttheworkgives insightintothecreativeprocessandintentionbehindSchneemann’simageconception.
Schneemann,Carolee.2011.“Viet-Flakes-CaroleeSchneemann.”TheFilm-Makers' Cooperative.https://film-makerscoop.com/catalogue/carolee-schneemann-viet-flakes.
Schneemann,Carolee,andPerformers:ShigekoKubota,TyroneMitchell,PhoebeNeville,James
Tenney,PeterWatts.1967“Snows,1967.”CaroleeSchneemannFoundation. https://www.schneemannfoundation.org/artworks/snows.
TateMuseum.1975. Interior Scroll,PerformancebyCaroleeSchneemann.EastHampton: Photographandwriting.
Teti,Matthew."FromMinimalismtoPerformanceArt:ChrisBurden,1967-1971."OrderNo. 10829495,ColumbiaUniversity,2018.
https://unco.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/minim alism-performance-art-chris-burden-1967-1971/docview/2071826071/se-2?accountid=12 832.
MatthewTeti,anarthistorianspecializinginPerformanceArt,writesthis dissertationasanaddendumtoChrisBurden’sself-publishedcatalogsandlooksindepth attheearlyworksofBurden’sthatareformativeinhisfutureartpractice.Hisanalysisof thesocietaltrendsthatinfluencedBurden’searlyworkleadingintohisperformativeart givesabettersenseofwhichthemovementasawholewasconceivedandwhatcultural contextlieswithinhisperformances.