Boris Lurie and NO!art

1

Boris Lurie in NO!art Boris Lurie and NO!art

Boris Lurie in NO!art Boris Lurie and NO!art

Kazalo

4 Boris Lurie Andreja Hribernik 24 Uvod Introduction Ivonna Veiherte 26 Skrivna sestavina umetnosti – pogum 40 The Secret Component of Great Art – Courage Stanley Fisher (1960) 56 Izjava ob Vulgarni razstavi Vulgar Show Statement Boris Lurie (1961) 58 Izjava ob Vključujoči razstavi 59 Involvement Show Statement Stanley Fisher (1961) 62 Izjava ob razstavi Pogube Doom Show Statement Boris Lurie (1964) 66 Spremna beseda k razstavi kipov NO! Sama Goodmana 68 Introduction to Sam Goodman ‘NO-sculptures’ Thomas B. Hess (1964) 70 Spremna beseda k razstavi kipov NO! 71 Introduction to the NO-sculptures show Tom Wolfe (1964) 73 Kiparstvo (Galerija Gertrude Stein) 74 Sculpture (Gallery Gertrude Stein) Dore Ashton (1988) 76 Merde, Alors!

78 Merde, Alors!

Harold Rosenberg (1974) 80 Bika za roge 81 Bull by the Horns

Contents

84 Boris Lurie 107 Sam Goodman 122 Stanley Fisher 128 Aldo Tambellini 132 John Fischer 134 Dorothy Gillespie 138 Allan D’Arcangelo 142 Erró 148 Harriet Wood (Suzanne Long) 152 Isser Aronovici 154 Yayoi Kusama 158 Jean-Jacques Lebel 164 Rocco Armento 166 Wolf Vostell 172 Michelle Stuart Marko Košan 176 Pričevanje podobe (Lurie, Mušič, Borčić) 184 The Testimony of an Image (Lurie, Mušič, Borčić) 190 Seznam razstavljenih del List of exhibited works

BORIS LURIE Portret moje matere pred ustrelitvijo / Portrait of My Mother Before Shooting, 1947, olje na platnu / Oil on canvas, 92,7 x 64,8 cm Š Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Tovorni vagon, asemblaž 1945 Adolfa Hitlerja / Flatcar. Assemblage, 1945 by Adolf Hitler, ok./circa 1962, 40,6 x 61 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Železniški kolaž (Železniška proga do Amerike) / Railroad Collage (Railroad to America), ok./circa 1963, papirni kolaž na platnu / Paper collage on canvas, 36,8 x 54 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Imigrantova NE! škatla / Immigrant‘s NO!box, 1963, akril, papirni kolaž na lesenem zaboju / Acrylic, paper collage on wood trunk, 63,5 x 61 x 102 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Nasičena slika (Buchenwald) / Saturation Painting (Buchenwald), 1960–1964, fotografije in papir na platnu / Photos and paper on canvas, 91,4 x 91,4 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Za mojo Sheino Gitl – mojo valentino / To my Sheina Gitl – My Valentine, 1981, barva, papirni kolaž, papirni trak / Paint, paper collage, tape on paper, 97 x 75 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Brez naslova / Untitled, 1960–1974, asemblaž: oljna barva, papirna masa, kovinska mrežica / Assemblage: oil paint, paper plaster, wire mesh, 40,6 x 35,6 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

15

BORIS LURIE Lolita / Lolita, 1962–1963, papirni kolaž na platnu / Paper collage on canvas, 142,2 x 102,9 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Lumumba je mrtev (Zbogom Amerika) / Lumumba is Dead (Adieu Amerique), 1959–1961, olje, papir, kolaž, igralne karte, fotografije, odpadni papir na platnu / Oil, paper, collage, playing cards, photos, wastepaper on canvas, 181,6 x 197 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE NO slika na rdečem in črnem / NO Painting with Red and Black, 1963, akril na plastiki / Acrylic on plastic, 55,9 x 89 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE NE s počeno glavo / NO with Split Head, 1963, barva, prenos, ofsetni tisk na odpadni papir na platnu / Paint, transfer, offset print on wastepaper on canvas, 61 x 76,2 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Brez naslova (NE s sprejem) / Untitled (NO sprayed), 1963, sprej na lesonitu / Spray paint on masonite, 65 x 52 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Pisave: PISS / Hard Writings: PISS, ok./circa 1972–1973 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Sram! / Shame!, 1963, Olje in fotografija na platnu / Oil paint and photo on canvas 81 x 57 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Galerija Gertrude Stein: plakat razstave NO show / Gallery Gertrude Stein: NO show poster, 1963 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Andreja Hribernik Direktorica Koroške galerije likovnih umetnosti Director of Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art Koroška

24

Uvod

Introduction

Koroška galerija likovnih umetnosti, muzej za sodobno umetnost, je leta 2017 z veliko mednarodno razstavo z naslovom Vojna praznovala 60-letnico obstoja. Njena ustanovitev ob koncu petdesetih let preteklega stoletja je povezana z dobo nekega novega upanja, ki se je prebujalo po 2. svetovni vojni in se manifestiralo v idejah, ki sta jih širila Organizacija združenih narodov in Gibanje neuvrščenih, katerega aktivna članica je bila tudi nekdanja Jugoslavija. Vrsta mednarodnih razstav v Koroški galeriji likovnih umetnosti s tematiko, posvečeno promociji kulture miru in vrednot solidarnosti, humanizma in razumevanja, je takrat ponudila prostor za umetniški in politični diskurz o vlogi umetnosti v družbi in o možnosti, da lahko umetnost spremeni svet.

In 2017, Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art Koroška celebrated its 60th anniversary by a major international exhibition War. The museum was established at the end of the 1950s during a period of new hope in the wake of the Second World War and manifested in ideas spread by the United Nations Organisation and the NonAligned movement with the former Yugoslavia as an active member. A series of international exhibitions at the Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art Koroška devoted to the promotion of the culture of peace and values of solidarity, humanism and understanding opened space for artistic and political discourse about the role of art and art’s potentials to change the world.

Tem programskim zasnovam sledi Koroška galerija likovnih umetnosti še danes. Zavedamo se nujnosti primerjave razstavnih projektov z radikalnim kritičnim nabojem, med katere sodi tudi pregledna razstava z deli Borisa Lurieja in drugih umetnikov gibanja NO!art izpred več kot 50 let, s situacijo, ki smo ji priča v sodobnem času.

Aktualnost tematik, ki jo odpira pričujoča razstava, se nam predoči že ob bežnem pogledu na vse večjo nestrpnost, etnično in rasno diskriminacijo ter posledične oborožene spopade, ekonomsko neenakost in brezsramno izkoriščanje šibkejših v razbohotenem kapitalizmu. Sporočilnost te razstave je pomembna, ne le ker spominja na utopične ideje preteklosti ali govori o idealih takratne družbe, temveč ker je njena vsebina nosilka tega utopičnega potenciala še danes.

Razstavo je omogočila Fundacija Borisa Lurieja (BLAF: Boris Lurie Art Foundation), zato gre v prvi vrsti zahvala njim, direktorici Gertrude Stein in predsedniku Anthonyju Williamsu. Posebej se za pomoč zahvaljujemo tudi Rafaelu Vostellu, Chrisu Shultzu in Jessici Wallen. Zahvala tudi muzeju RIGAS BIRŽA, kustosinji Viti Birzaka ter kustosinji razstave Ivonni Veiherte. Razstavo je podprlo Ministrstvo za kulturo Republike Slovenije.

The Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art Koroška has followed these programmatic concepts to the present day. We are aware of the necessity of comparing exhibition projects with a radical critical charge like by Boris Lurie and other NO!artists from more than 50 years ago, with the situation that we witness in contemporary times. The topicality of the exhibition’s subjects is evident upon a casual glance at the growing intolerance, ethnic and racial discrimination and resulting armed conflicts, economic inequality and shameless exploitation of the weak in bouyant capitalism. The messages conveyed by this exhibition are important not only because they recall utopian ideas of the past or address the ideals of the then society but because their content remains a vehicle of this utopian potential until today.

The exhibition was made possible by the Boris Lurie Art Foundation, so we owe our biggest thanks to the Foundation, its President Gertrude Stein and its Chairman Anthony Williams. Particular thanks go to Rafael Vostell, Chris Shultz, and Jessica Wallen for the help and support offered in the preparation of the exhibition. We would also like to thank the RIGA BOURSE Art Museum, curator Vita Birzaka and exhibition curator Ivonna Veiherte. The exhibition was also supported by the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Slovenia.

Ivonna Veiherte

26

Skrivna sestavina velike umetnosti – pogum NO!art je bil koncept, ki ga je v 50. in 60. letih 20. stoletja udejanjala radikalna umetniška skupina v New Yorku. Glavni predstavnik je bil Boris Lurie, judovski umetnik, rojen v Rusiji, ki je deloval z dvema sodelavcema, Samom Goodmanom in Stanleyjem Fisherjem. Ta koncept pa lahko vidimo tudi kot gibanje ali skupino, ki so se ji priključili drugi umetniki, ki so takrat živeli ali se zadrževali v New Yorku.

Razstava osvetljuje obdobje od leta 1959 do 1964, čas začetkov dejavnosti NO!arta, ko so jih izvajali njihovi najpomembnejši predstavniki in ko so imele največjo moč.

Ideja NO!arta se je nadaljevala tudi pozneje, vendar pa so se posamezniki, ki so pri njej sodelovali, lotili samostojnih karier, nehali delovati ali umrli. Koncept NO!arta je po svetu dosledno promoviral in se z njim identificiral zlasti Boris Lurie.

Lurie je bil na umetnostnem prizorišču v svojem času splošno znan. Bil je dejavna in pomembna osebnost v skupnostnem gibanju umetnikov na 10. ulici, ki so središče New Yorka preobrazili v povojno žarišče alternativne kulture.

New York mu je v svojem času ponudil priložnost in primerno prizorišče za umetniško izražanje.

Dejavnosti NO!arta so bile v času Luriejevega življenja dokumentirane v nekaj knjigah, razstavah in spremnem gradivu. Ustanovljena je bila Fundacija Borisa Lurieja, ki je zbirala in skrbela za njegovo delo, rokopise in arhive gradiv NO!arta, pa tudi organizirala razstave Borisa Lurieja in NO!arta v mednarodnih muzejih.

Ta razstava obravnava newyorški umetniški svet 50. in 60. let skozi alternativno umetnost in NO!art, pa tudi skozi zgodovinske resnice, povezane z Judi in holokavstom. Čeprav o skupini NO!art v zgodovini umetnosti 20. stoletja ne razpravljajo veliko, so o njej v času Luriejevega življenja pisali recenzenti in kritiki, umetnostni zgodovinarji pa so se s to temo začeli ukvarjati v Luriejevih poznejših letih in po njegovi smrti. Nekatere teh zapisov objavljamo v razstavnem katalogu. Lurie je svoje cilje, prizadevanja in stališča na široko razlagal v izjavah, intervjujih in različnih besedilih. Poleg tega je zaradi fascinantne inteligence svoje pisanje bogato in zelo grafično formuliral. Zato smo vključili Luriejeve zapise o lastnih dejavnostih in dejavnostih NO!arta.

Fundacija Borisa Lurieja se trenutno ukvarja s presojanjem korpusa Luriejevega gradiva. Na mnoga vprašanja bo treba poiskati odgovore v prihodnosti. Podobno lahko tudi ta razstava ponudi le omejen pregled NO!arta. Posebno

Skupina umetnikov z 10. ulice v ateljeju slikarja Miltona Resnicka.

The 10th Street artists group at artist Milton Resnick‘s studio. © Foto: James Burke/The LIFE Picture Collection/Getty Images

27 razstavo, posvečeno delu Borisa Lurieja, aprila letos načrtujejo v Rothkovem centru v Daugavpilsu v Latviji. To bo priložnost za prikaz umetnikovih najpomembnejših in hkrati najbolj provokativnih del, ki niso na voljo za to razstavo, saj so trenutno na ogled v Muzeju sodobne umetnosti v Krakovu. Da bi ustvarili vtis o njegovem delu kot celoti, več teh potujočih del reproduciramo v posebnem razdelku kataloga.

V fundaciji so tudi dela drugih umetnikov, ki so pripadali gibanju NO!art, vendar pa vsa dela iz tega obdobja niso ohranjena; nekatera so bila nedostopna, izgubljena v času, uničena ali nepreverjena. Zato so spremne fotografije namenjene spodbujanju domišljije. Bistvene informacije o umetnikih, ki so tu navedeni, lahko najdemo v priloženih življenjepisih, ki jih je posebej za to razstavo pripravil BLAF. Razstava »Boris Lurie in NO!art« je za Latvijo pomembna, ker je Lurie posebej povezan s to državo. Od prvega do sedemnajstega leta je namreč živel v Rigi, obiskoval tamkajšnjo nemško gimnazijo in govoril latvijsko.

Rigo je nato obiskal leta 1975 in vse svoje spomine, srečanja in občutja popisal v še neobjavljenih spominih z naslovom »V Rigi«, ki jih je pisal več let po obisku Latvije.

Da bi lahko ustrezno cenili skupino NO!art in temo razstave, moramo poznati Luriejev življenjepis in okvir, v katerem so nastajala njegova dela in dela drugih umetnikov.

Leta 1924 se je rodil v Leningradu v judovski družini, ki se je čez leto dni preselila v Rigo, saj je po Leninovi smrti podobno kot mnogi drugi poslovneži in intelektualci upala, da se bo izognila Stalinovemu preganjanju.

Ko je v Rigo vdrla nemška vojska, so družino Lurie preselili v geto, njegovo mamo, babico in sestro pa so pozneje ustrelili v gozdovih Rumbula. Boris Lurie je bil takrat star sedemnajst let; skupaj z očetom Iljo so ga do konca vojne premeščali iz enega koncentracijskega taborišča v drugega, dokler ni pristal v najgrozljivejšem – Buchenwaldu oziroma njegovem satelitskem taborišču v Magdeburgu. Izkušnja holokavsta je Borisu Lurieju odtlej oblikovala življenjsko pot, narekovala ves smisel in motivacijo ter način življenja.

Po osvoboditvi se je Boris Lurie z očetom preselil v ZDA. Pristala sta v New Yorku, kjer sta zaživela na novo. Oče je hitro pograbil nove priložnosti in uspel v newyorškem svetu nepremičnin. Borisa je zanimala umetnost, zato je na kratko študiral na šoli Art Student League, kjer je izkušnje iz taborišč smrti upodabljal na risbah in slikah.

Boris Lurie je bil premlad, da bi si od izkušnje taborišč smrti opomogel tako hitro, kot si je očitno njegov oče. Takoj po vojni je bilo tiste, ki so preživeli holokavst, sram govoriti o tem; počutili so se celo krive, ker so ostali živi. In res – le

kako bi lahko izrazili to izkušnjo, tudi če bi jo hoteli razložiti in predstaviti? Vseeno pa so jeza, izzivalnost in ogorčenje v Luriejevem delu iz leta v leto naraščali. Znova in znova je podoživljal travmatične izkušnje. Lurie je na slikah in kolažih demonstrativno uporabljal rumeno Davidovo zvezdo, svastike in dokumentarne fotografije žrtev v kombinaciji s pornografskimi slikami, vse pa je seveda prežemala izjava: NE! V 70. letih se je to preoblikovalo v lakoničen koncept – nož, zaboden v beton.

V ameriški povojni umetnosti je zlasti Boris Lurie v ospredje postavljal temo judovstva in holokavsta, pa tudi etična vprašanja. Ogromno število Judov je v želji, da bi se rešili pred trpljenjem v Evropi, prišlo v Ameriko. Bežali so pred nevarnostjo, in ker jih je Evropa pustila na cedilu, je v New Yorku nastala največja judovska diaspora na svetu.

Ta kontingent dobro izobraženih priseljencev je spodbujal znanost, kulturo in hitri gospodarski razvoj New Yorka.

Poleg tega sta v 50. in 60. letih 20. stoletja grožnja hladne vojne in atomske bombe izoblikovali ozadje, ki so se mu družbeno aktivni, ustvarjalni posamezniki postavljali po robu s pomočjo številnih dejavnosti.

Boris Lurie se je povezal z boemi in bitniki, disidentskimi kršilci družbenih norm 50. let, katerih stališče je obsojalo vse večjo usmerjenost Amerike k materialnim vrednotam in zavzemalo pacifistično držo do sodelovanja ZDA v korejski in pozneje vietnamski vojni. Ti umetniki so spadali v generacijo, ki je izkusila grozote 2. svetovne vojne.

Po vojni se je središče umetniškega sveta preselilo iz Pariza v New York, zlasti v Greenwich Village, ki je postal meka umetnikov, ustvarjalnih posameznikov, eksperimentatorjev in nekonvencionalnih avanturistov z vsega sveta; to so bili ljudje, ki so oblikovali umetniško življenje New Yorka.

V drugi polovici 50. in 60. let se je 10. ulica v newyorški četrti East Village, kjer so bile najemnine ugodnejše, razvila v neformalno srečevališče boemskih umetnikov in nekonformistov, saj je bilo več razstavnih prostorov v lasti in upravljanju samih umetnikov, ki se zato niso pokoravali splošnemu prefinjenemu okusu in pravilom drugih galerij.

Med različnimi galerijami, ki so jih ustanovili sami umetniki, so bile med najbolj dejavnimi in najbolj znanimi galerije March, Tanager, Hans, Brat in Reuben. Mnoge od njih so upravljali po zadružnem načelu: umetniki so si razdelili stroške delovanja in se skupaj odločali o urniku razstav.

Tako so ustvarili okolje za najrazličnejše eksperimentalne pojave, na primer performanse in instalacije. Tudi Yoko Ono je leta 1953 prišla v New York in do leta 1960 najemala prostor na ulici Chambers 112, kjer je predstavljala svojo umetnost performansa.

28 materiali, vključno s predmeti, ki so odslužili običajnemu namenu (na primer predmeti, najdenimi v smetnjakih), tj. »najdenimi predmeti«. Nastajala je še ena nova oblika umetnosti – asemblaž.

Neo-dadaizem, ki se je pojavil na umetniškem prizorišču v 50. letih, je ukinjal meje ned umetnostjo in življenjem, kulturo in nekulturo. Pomemben je bil tudi vpliv Marcela Duchampa: od leta 1958 se je redno pojavljal med umetniki na 10. ulici, kjer je gibanje, podobno zgodnejšemu dadaističnemu, z drznostjo in absurdnimi jukstapozicijami preraščalo v pomemben trend, nekaj, kar lahko za nazaj vidimo kot spodbudo in začetno različico poparta.

Tega duha lahko opazimo tudi na pričujoči razstavi NO!arta, saj so umetniki NO!arta resnično sodelovali pri vseh teh trendih in jih oblikovali. Bolj radikalnemu gibanju NO!art sicer manjka lahkotne ironije in humorja, vendar pa je način izražanja podoben.

Lokal The Club na vogalu 4. avenije in 10. ulice, zbirališče umetnikov, kritikov in drugih zainteresiranih, 24. januarja 1959. / The Club at 4th Ave & 10th St., a gathering place for artists, critics, and interested others of all kinds.

January 24, 1959. © Foto: Fred W. McDarrah/ Getty Images

Umetniška scena se je med letoma 1952 in 1960 tako razmahnila, da jo je bilo nemogoče spraviti v že obstoječo galerijsko strukturo. Zato so alternativo ponudile nove skupnostne galerije na 10. ulici, ki so jih podpirali in vodili sami umetniki. Tu so se lahko izražali, kakor so hoteli, in v teh majhnih prostorih, od katerih so se mnogi nahajali v kleteh, so se odvijali najrazličnejši novi eksperimenti. Vodilno vlogo je dobil sam proces, s tem pa se je začelo obdobje performansov in hepeningov v New Yorku.

Galerija March, ki jo je Boris Lurie soustanovil leta 1957, je bila v kleti na vzhodni 10. ulici. Postala je zbirališče politično in družbeno usmerjenih oseb. Kolektivna galerija je imela več kot 20 članov, od katerih je mesečno vsak plačeval dva dolarja in pol.

V Greenwich Villageu je bilo tudi več pomembnih shajališč, kjer so se umetniki različnih pripadnosti družili s kolegi: The Club, Waldorf Cafeteria in Cedar Tavern poleg Univerze v New Yorku.

Tam se je v 50. letih začelo razvijati posebno vzdušje, ki je privabljalo pustolovce, pa tudi najbolj ustvarjalne in nadarjene posameznike več generacij in etničnih skupin.

Amerika je v umetnosti postajala samozadostna in evropska umetnost ni več pomenila nekakšnega vrhunca, ki ga je treba doseči.

V 50. letih se je v New Yorku pojavilo več novih avantgardnih gibanj. Eno od teh je bilo čustveno abstraktnoekspresionistično slikarstvo, ki je sprva prevzelo vse, tudi Borisa Lurieja. To gibanje so ustvarili priseljenci iz Evrope, ne pa sami Američani, kot je pozneje veljalo za popart.1 S kolažem so se v umetniških delih začeli pojavljati neumetniški 1 Intervju z Gertrude Stein. “NO!” Berlin, NGBK, 1995, str. 113.

Neprizanesljivo sporočilo Luriejevega dela, ki je razkrinkavalo ves svet, je nagovarjalo prostor in čas. Prišel je iz sveta, podložnega abstraktnemu ekspresionizmu. »Častili smo abstraktne ekspresioniste. Vplivali so na nas,« je Lurie priznal leta 1999.

Boris Lurie je spoznal podobno mislečega umetnika Sama Goodmana, prav tako Juda, ki mu je očeta v Kanadi ubil antisemit. Goodman je bil povezan s kolektivom galerije Camino, ko pa je spoznal Lurieja, se je pridružil galeriji March. Med vojno je Goodman delal kot fotograf pri kanadskem filmskem odboru in nekatere grozote v Nemčiji videl na lastne oči. Na začetku njunega prijateljstva je dal Lurieju svojo zbirko dokumentarnih fotografij taborišč in mu dovolil ter ga spodbujal, naj jih uporabi pri svojem delu.

Lurie in Goodman sta spoznala pisatelja in umetnika Stanleyja Fisherja, ki je v vojni sodeloval kot zdravnik v invaziji na Normandijo. Vsi trije so bili judovskega rodu, družila pa sta jih tudi nedavna travmatična preteklost in dejstvo, da so,

29 čeprav v različni meri, vsi neposredno izkusili vojno in se niso mogli otresti njenega vpliva. Kot piše Peter Weibel v članku, ki bo v času razstave objavljen v reviji Likovne besede, je treba vso povojno umetnost gledati kot nekaj, kar prikazuje posledice vojne travme.2 Vsi trije so čutili temeljno nezadovoljstvo zaradi naraščajoče »komercializacije«, ki je vplivala na umetnostne galerije v obliki različnih kupcev – celo na 10. ulici – in gojili globok odpor do sodobnikov, ki so postali znani kot predstavniki poparta – Warhola, Wesselmanna in Liechtensteina – in so po njihovem mnenju ponujali »kulturo iz supermarketa«.

napisal Stanley Fisher, skupnim sporočilom svetu skupine March, odtlej znane kot skupina NO!art. »Umetnosti je konec. Svet in bivanje sta se zrušila,« v letaku trdi Fisher.

Vulgarna razstava […] je bila skupinska manifestacija, za katero so naslov in cilj izbrali kolektivno; dela so ustvarili posebej za razstavo, vključili pa so tudi obstoječa dela, če so bila uglašena s temo. Razstava je rasla spontano, tako kot mnoge poznejše. Sodelujoči so do samega konca razstave postavljali na ogled nova dela, ko so bila

Lurie pripoveduje o srečanju z Goodmanom in Fisherjem ter o njihovih skupnih načrtih: Z razstavo Adieu Amerique [leta 1960], ki je zajemala delo iz prejšnjih dveh let, sem izražal zavračanje: New York sem želel za vedno zapustiti, in to slovo sem naslikal, ko se je vse vsulo iz mene. Paradoksalno pa je, da se je to zavračanje in zanikanje spremenilo v upanja polno organizirano dejavnost skupine umetnikov, Sama Goodmana, Stanleyja Fisherja, Johna Fischerja in mene, ki smo na 10. ulici ustanovili galerijo March, skupina pa si je pozneje prislužila vzdevek NO!artists. Neposrednost, pogum bitniških pesnikov, Castrov upor in naš lastni obup so se združili, da bi nam vlili poguma vpričo takrat na videz nepremagljivega, vsemogočnega umetniškega sveta, da bi odrezali vezi, ki so nas pritrjevale nanj, v odprtem in javnem uporu; hkrati z našimi razstavami smo objavili izjave, ki naj bi nam onemogočile vrnitev pod njeno okrilje, če bi se pojavila skušnjava, če bi se naša uporniška moč omajala. Nasprotovali smo nememu, neučinkovitemu trkanju po prsih abstraktnih ekspresionistov, mistifikacijam njihove estetike, zavračanju odprtosti in konkretnosti, direktnega poimenovanja, zakrivanju močnih občutij z estetskimi sofizmi – strahu, da bi se soočili z resnico v njeni totalnosti.

Sledila je moja razstava Les Lions v skupini March, naši skupnostni kletni utrdbi. Čas: alžirska kolonialna in državljanska vojna, kolaži-slike, ki odražajo osebne situacije, ki si vztrajno prizadevajo za psihološko razrešitev skozi umetnost-dejanje. Politična, družbena vprašanja, ki sem si jih zastavil in se z njimi ukvarjal, odgovori, do katerih sem se dokopal s pomočjo samega procesa dela.3 Novembra 1960 so Lurie, Fisher in Goodman poleg Johna Fischerja prvič skupaj razstavljali na Vulgarni razstavi v galeriji March. Odprli so jo z izjavo, ki jo je za to razstavo 2 Boris Lurie. Anti-Pop. Neues Museum Nürnberg. 2017, str. 139.

3 Boris Lurie »Shit NO!« 1970. Prvič objavljeno v: Lurie, Boris; Krim, Seymour: NO!art, Köln 1988.

Skupina umetnikov z 10. ulice s svojimi deli na ulici pred ateljejem slikarja Miltona Resnicka.

The 10th Street artists group, displaying some of their works on street outside artist Milton Resnick‘s studio. © Foto: James Burke/The LIFE Picture Collection/ Getty Images

30 pripravljena, tako da sta bila razstava oziroma okolje v začetni fazi bistveno drugačna kot proti koncu. Dejansko pa konca nikoli ni bilo, saj se je obstoječa razstava naravno prelila v naslednjo, ki jo je sprožil nov razvoj misli, ko smo delali pred očmi javnosti. Sodelovali smo Sam Goodman, Stanley Fisher, John Fischer in jaz. Nameravali smo prikazati, poudariti, izpostaviti vulgarnost v nas, pa tudi vulgarnost okrog nas, sprejeti tako vulgarnost, jo absorbirati, se je zavedati, jo izganjati.4 Čeprav je ostalo le malo dokumentacije o delu, prikazanem na Vulgarni razstavi, je štiri umetnike združevala ena tema: vulgarnost sveta, ki jih obdaja, pa tudi vulgarnost v umetnikih samih. Sodeč po fotografiji je Sam Goodman prikazal Moški fetiš s karikaturo Hitlerja, natisnjeno na straniščno desko.

John Fischer (prav tako begunec iz Evrope, ki je pozneje zaslovel zaradi kipov in asemblažev iz kruha) je prispeval slike pod vplivom nadrealizma. Boris Lurie je razstavil slike iz serije »Razkosane ženske«. Dr. Eckhart Gillen je poudaril: »Razkosane ženske« so nastale kmalu po Luriejevem prihodu v New York, med letoma 1947 in [ok.] 1957. Serijo zaznamujeta dve slogovni težnji, saj se močno figurativna dela mešajo z abstraktnejšimi slikami. Na vseh so ženski liki, ki izražajo Luriejev ambivalenten pogled na ženske, pa tudi njegove izkušnje iz 2. svetovne vojne.5 Ta razstava je zaznamovala pojav jedra skupine March, kot so jo poznali, v kateri je Lurie na splošno veljal za vodjo, Goodman pa za teoretika.6 Vendar pa je vsak podajal lastno sporočilo. Utemeljitve, koncepte in razlage, kar je predstavljalo pomemben del razstav, je pisal zlasti Stanley Fisher.

Poleg Lurieja, Goodmana in Fisherja so na Vključujoči razstavi (Involvement Show) aprila 1961 sodelovali Allan Kaprow, Michelle Stuart, Jean-Jacques Lebel, Erró/Ferró, Yayoi Kusama, Isser Aronovici, Rocco Armento, Allan D’Arcangelo, Herb Brown, John Fischer, Esther Gilman, Augustus Goertz, Gloria Graves, Dorothy Gillespie, Ted Jones, Bob Logan, Lora, Suzanne Long, Mihail Mishorit, Jerome Rothenberg, Richard Tyler, Ray Wisniewski in Lee Zack.

Sodelovanje na razstavi je bilo brez omejitev; v demokratičnem duhu so bili vabljeni vsi, ki so imeli enaka prepričanja kot Lurie, Goodman in Stanley Fisher. Vključeni so bili tisti, ki so se odzvali – kategorično politično in družbeno zavedni umetniki. Vsak sodelujoči je bil lahko 4 Boris Lurie »Shit NO!« 1970.

5 Boris Lurie. Anti-Pop. Neues Museum Nürnberg, 2017, str. 31.

6 Melissa Rachleff. Inventing Downtown. NY. Grey Gallery, New York University, str. 164.

povezan z drugo alternativno galerijo, vsi pa so bili vabljeni, da podprejo dejavnosti skupine March in sodelujejo na tej razstavi.

Povezovalna tema je bila, da naj delo govori o »resničnosti« (kar pomeni absurdnosti tega sveta).

Tovrstne ideje in dejavnosti so bile takrat pomembne tudi za umetnico Michelle Stuart. Sodelovala je z NO!artom in o njem pisala v članku, objavljenem leta 1963 v reviji Artforum: Skupina iz galerije March je še en primer nenehne potrebe umetnika po prevrednotenju in redefiniciji njegovega sveta, pri čemer uporablja vsa predstavljiva sredstva, da ohrani vitalnost. Ker je ekstatičnost, ki nam jo skozi umetnost daje življenje, pogojena z vsem, tudi z njegovo grozljivostjo, je cilj umetnosti v končni fazi ta, da iz nas izvabi privolitev življenju.7 K vragu z akademskimi tabuji, starimi ali novimi! [...]

Delovanje z bogato prstjo, krvjo, blatom in seksom človeštva, ki se poblaznelo širi, je vse preveč pereče, da bi mu lahko ubežali. Soočimo se z njim!8 Kot lahko sodimo po opisih in arhivskih slikah, je bil kletni razstavni prostor poln del najrazličnejših slogov, od risb s tušem do instalacij. Čeprav je bila skupna tema politična, z referencami na nacistične zločine, so bila razstavljena dela po značaju nadvse različna.

Pozneje, leta 1970, je Lurie sklenil: ... Vključujoča razstava je bila preuranjena! Ideja o vključevanju, prelomu z izolacijo, je bila sama po sebi pravilna. Vendar pa je naša ideja vključevanja segla dlje in postala preuranjen poskus, da bi zajeli vso družbo, vključno z našimi sovražniki, da bi velikodušno zajeli vse tokove, zavrgli opozicijsko držo, se odrekli jezi. Izhajala je iz nezrelega, imaginarnega in upanja polnega prepričanja, da – ker smo se sami v svojem evforičnem stanju očitno spremenili s pomočjo dejavnosti uporniške umetnosti, se očitno očistili, ko smo šli skozi ta ogenj – se je (v naši pobožni fantaziji) isto najbrž zgodilo tudi zunanjemu svetu; da smo zdaj pripravljeni zaobseči druge, dajati in sprejemati ljubezen. Kako zmotno smo ocenili resničnost!

Zunaj se namreč ni spremenilo nič, naša dejanja, če so jih sploh opazili, pa so požela smrtno tišino. Na zunanji svet – ne miniaturni umetniški svet – pa naša kulturna dejanja niso niti najmanj vplivala. Čez nekaj let so otroci ljubezni 7 Michelle Stuart. NO is an Involvement. Artforum. 1963 (sept), str. 36–37.

8 Augustus Goertz. Izjava ob Vključujoči razstavi. 1961. Boris Lurie, Seymour Krim. NO!art. Pin-ups Excrements Protest JewArt. Berlin/Köln, 1988, str. 38–39.

31 množično razvili podobna stališča, njihovo instinktivno prizadevanje pa je bilo v stvarnem smislu zapisano propadu. Čas za projiciranje občutij pobožne fantazije, za srečevanje družbe v tako krščanskem pomenu, žal ni nikoli prišel. Vseeno pa se nam je takrat zdelo, da smo s svetom petdesetih opravili, da je pokopan, da sta se molk in prikrivanje tega obdobja nepopravljivo končala, da je Eichmannovo sojenje silovito oživilo zatrto snov, ki bi jo večina raje pozabila, prelomilo pa tudi tišino in strah ter konformizem hladne vojne in povojnega obdobja zatiranja. Ker so nas enako dajali v nič takratni avantgardni abstraktni ekspresionisti in konservativni umetniki, ker so nas kritizirali vsi esteti, češ da delamo slabo – kar je običajna taktika za razoroževanje umetnikov, ki izberejo novo pot – smo se morali popolnoma zanesti nase.

Popartistična reakcija – kontrarevolucija se takrat še ni sprožila, saj so bili bodoči člani tega gibanja še zaposleni z vpijanjem idej (v veliki meri z naših razstav), umetnostni tisk pa je bil za nas praktično zaprt (celo Village Voice, takrat skoraj alternativen medij, ni hotel pisati o naših dejavnostih, saj mi je urednik razložil, da je naša drža preveč radikalna), zato smo morali sami promovirati svoje akcije, postati lasten informativni medij.9 Kot se spominjajo sodobniki, so se umetnicam vrata v New Yorku v 50. in 60. letih le stežka odpirala. Vendar pa so dobile priložnost v Greenwich Villageu. Tudi galerija March je bila odskočna deska za umetnici, ki sta pozneje postali zelo pomembni, namreč Stuartovo in Yayoi Kusama, ki je v Ameriko v 50. letih prišla z Japonske. Po razstavi v Seattlu in galeriji Brata v New Yorku je sodelovala na razstavah skupine NO!art in imela samostojne razstave v gornjem delu mesta v Galeriji Gertrude Stein.

Kljub temu pa so v skupini prevladovali moški, a ne zaradi moškosti, moške večvrednosti ali tako imenovanega moškega šovinizma, ampak ker so bili najbolj dejavni in neustrašni. Pripadnice gibanja NO!art so se ukvarjale predvsem s strahom: ženskim, hladnim, odmaknjenim, zamrznjenim, kot na mavčnih obrazih žensk Michelle Stuart v izoliranih črnih škatlah, pokritih s temnim, komajda prosojnim steklom, kot v strašljivih ženskih sporih z vero Esther Gilman, kot v obsesivnem strahu rastočih, množečih se, grozečih polj, polnih penisov Yayoi Kusama, v manjši meri pa v asemblažih in krhkih konstrukcijah Glorie Graves. Odločne umetnice smo toplo sprejeli – zdelo se nam je, da je naš krog brez njih nepopoln – in bile so prav tako odločne kot kateri koli moški. Položaj ženske je bil položaj mnogih subjektov, ne enega samega, stanje ženske eno mnogih stanj. Med spoloma ni bilo razrednega boja, le obstoječa refleksija perverzije tekmovalne družbe – nobenega oboževanja brezspolnega uniseksa. Moški pripadniki NO!arta so ženske v svojem uporu sprejemali 9 Boris Lurie »Shit NO!« 1970.

z odprtimi rokami.10 Naslednji kolektivni podvig skupine March je prinesla Razstava pogube (Doom Show), ki so jo odprli novembra 1961, nanjo pa so vplivale hladna vojna, atomska grožnja in kubanska kriza. Sodelovali so Boris Lurie, Stanley Fisher, Sam Goodman in Jean-Jacques Lebel.

Umetniki so kot opozorilo »močnim« in tistim, ki so jih »kupili«, predstavili svoje interpretacije na temo konca sveta v času, ko sta tako ZDA kot SZ ustvarjali paniko, ko so gradili bunkerje in berlinski zid.

Obiskovalce je na kletnih vratih pozdravilo simbolično delo Sama Goodmana: napol zgorela lutka s plastičnimi rožami. Podobno depresivna, tragična in grda so bila tudi druga razstavljena dela, na primer kolaž Stanleyja Fisherja, na katerem je bila napisana beseda DOOM, prikazuje pa dele ženskega telesa, razmetane kot po eksploziji. Nekatera so bila manj nazorna, na videz »okusnejša« (na primer Lebelova). Delo Sama Goodmana je bilo naivno grozljivo in v slogu plakatov; bil je najbolj nepotrpežljiv med temi umetniki in je za to, da bi kar najhitreje sestavil in sporočil svojo idejo, 10 Boris Lurie »Shit NO!« 1970.

Delo Sama Goodmana na razstavi »Doom Show« v galeriji March leta 1961.

Death and Ressurection by Sam Goodman in Doom Show at the March Gallery, 1961.

Foto: Sam Goodman © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

32 vzel kak predmet tudi iz smetnjaka, ga preoblikoval ali iz njega naredil umetnino.

Razstava pogube je bila neposredni napad na nevarnost atomske vojne v času spora med Hruščovom in Kennedyjem zaradi Kube leta 1961, ko so gradili kletna zaklonišča za zaščito prebivalcev pred atomskim napadom, ko je državo preplavila histerija, ko je drastični, popolni obrat proti totalni umetnosti političnih tem z eno samo potezo ukinil vse subjektivne introspektivne vrednote, ki so veljale dotlej. Film Raya Wisniewskega o razstavi je v ta politični angažma vnesel vzdušje hepeninga, saj je prikazoval nenaštudirana spontana dejanja na rokovske melodije ob rastočem in spreminjajočem se okolju Razstave pogube.

Ta radikalni obrat v totalna objektivna politična vprašanja je bil poskus utemeljevanja resnične množične umetnosti zgolj na ljudskih gibanjih – razmišljanje in dejavnost Sama Goodmana o tem sta bila še posebej pomembna. Namen umetnosti ni bil več sebično služenje umetnikom in samim sebi ali pa majhni skupini kulturno posvečenih: podžgati bi morala vse ljudi – s tem, da bi bila zares ljudska.

Verjeli smo, da lahko umetnost to funkcijo opravlja, če je povezana z močno ljudsko politično osnovo, in da je taka demokratična estetika najvišje povzdigovanje umetnosti.11 Vse to je naredilo vtis in kot poudarja Simon Taylor, bilo pozitivno sprejeto celo v publikacijah, kot je Art News (60, 1962, str. 12). Elaine de Kooning je razstavo pohvalila in jo primerjala z dadaizmom: Ko vstopiš v to majhno galerijo, te preplavijo časopisni naslovi o usmrtitvah in jedrskih poskusih, groteskna pinup dekleta, odvratne nalepljene zbirke znanih obrazov – obilje humorja in groze, ki sta med seboj zamenljiva in gnusna.12 Leta 1961 so poleg Tompkins Squara v East Villageu priredili ulično parado Car Event, kjer sta Sam Goodman v maski Hruščova in D'Arcangelo v maski Kennedyja izražala stališče skupine NO!art do ameriške zunanje politike, delno v obliki protesta in delno v obliki performansa.

Leta 1962 je pisec in podpornik dadaizma Arturo Schwarz v svoji galeriji (ki je delovala od leta 1954 do 1975) priredil razstavo Luriejevih in Goodmanovih del z naslovom Razstava pogube, ki je nato gostovala v galeriji La Salita v Rimu.

Arturo Schwarz, […] avantgardni promotor, radikalec in poslovnež, ki sem ga spoznal v Milanu, je popolnoma 11 Boris Lurie »Shit NO!« 1970.

12 Elaine de Kooning: Doom Belongs to Dada. Village Scene. Št.

1. 1962, navedek iz: Simon Taylor. The NO!art Movement in New York. 1960–1964.

ponorel nad fotografijami del NO!arta, ki sem mu jih pokazal. Kmalu je prišel v New York in se še bolj navdušil, ko si je ogledal Razstavo pogube v galeriji March. Zdelo se mu je, da naše delo ustreza njegovim napovedim o razvoju umetnosti. […] Razstava v Milanu in zlasti takoj nato v Rimu je bila fantastičen uspeh v resnično ljudskem smislu, saj si jo je ogledalo 10.000 ljudi, kar je bila najbolj obiskana razstava mladih umetnikov v Rimu vseh časov. Policija je po dolgotrajnih pogajanjih z gospodom Liveranijem, lastnikom galerije La Salita, prepovedala vstop mladoletnikom, namesto da bi vsa dela zaplenila, kot je prvotno zagrozila.

Nove možnosti je ponudila Gertrude Stein, mlada umetnica in zbirateljica, ki je obiskovala alternativne galerije na 10. ulici in se še zlasti navdušila nad skupino March.

Borisa je povabila k skupnemu odprtju nove galerije, ki je nato postala središče in podporna baza teh umetnikov.

Galerija Gertrude Stein se je odprla aprila 1963, a ne v spodnjem, temveč v zgornjem delu mesta na Manhattnu – v kleti Vzhodne 81. ulice 24, z razstavo Borisa Lurieja, ki jo je Gertrude Stein predstavila sama: Delo Borisa Lurieja je močno. Meni, da slonokoščeni stolp ne more nadomestiti resnične navzočnosti v življenju; umetnost je instrument vplivanja in spodbujanja.

Noče spreobračati, ampak glasno vpije, tako da vsi razumejo. Kot simbol vzame »dekliško« sliko, domačo ameriško zvrst pornografije. Ker zavrača konvencionalne navade, gledalca pretrese; za vsako ceno si prizadeva, da bi priznavali svojo resničnost, zato nam vsiljuje bridko vizijo kruto smehljajočega se, brezsrčno oglaševalskega pin-up dekleta. Njena slika visi v garderobah; draži »utrujenega poslovneža«, ki skrivaj vtakne Playboy v aktovko; filmske zvezde postajajo blago, ki se ga meri v centimetrih, v sanjah Amerike. Naše okolje je onesnaženo z bolestno erotičnostjo in brezčutno brezbrižnostjo. Na Luriejevih slikah se pojavi »Ne«: Ne! Ne! Ne! sprejetemu, krutosti, obupu in brezupu, ki prevladuje, konformizmu in materializmu. To je močan »NE« v poplavi množično ustvarjenih »DA«. Zato pin-up dekleta raztrga; vrže jih na platno, pa naj padejo, kamor hočejo. Dal je svojo osupljivo izjavo.13 Po selitvi v gornji del mesta se je spremenilo tudi naše občinstvo. Na 10. ulici so bili večinoma umetniki, mladi ljudje. V gornjem delu mesta pa smo se spraševali, kdo je v resnici naše občinstvo: obdani smo bili z množico ljudi srednjih let, ki so bili videti kot nevrotični premožneži na lovu za užitki, množico, ki jo je bilo težko definirati, amorfno, brezoblično gmoto. Takrat so mladi t. i. modsi noreli za popartom in campom, medtem ko so resnejši 13 Letak za razstavo Borisa Lurieja v Galeriji Gertrude Stein, New York, 1963.

33 intelektualni študentje in boemi zapuščali umetniško prizorišče in se podajali v zanimivejše dejavnosti: aktivizem za državljanske pravice, ponovno presojo družbe na praktični družbeni način namesto skozi umetnost, in rok glasbo kot družbeni izraz. Bleščeče galerije v gornjem delu mesta zagotovo niso bile kraji, kjer bi se zbirali. V modi sta bila Karl Marx in Stepni volk, na umetniški cirkus pa so gledali s prezirom: prepuščali so ga negovanim in gladko obritim popartističnim genijem v belih srajcah in kravatah, ki so jih takrat promovirali kot standardne nosilce mladinske revolucije.14 Isto jesen, od 8. oktobra do 2. novembra 1963, so organizirali skupinsko razstavo skupine March (zdaj NO!art).

Poleg Borisa Lurieja, Stanleyja Fisherja in Sama Goodmana so na njej sodelovali Rocco Armento, Yayoi Kusama, Allan Kaprow, Jean-Jacques Lebel, Michelle Stuart, Esther Gilman, Gloria Graves in Richard Tyler.

14 Boris Lurie »Shit NO!« 1970.

Willem de Kooning (na sredini, s svetlimi lasmi) se pogovarja s pisateljem Noelom Cladom in njegovo ženo v soseščini galerije Tanager na 10. ulici, New York, 5. aprila 1959.

Willem de Kooning (center, with light hair) speaks with author Noel Clad and his wife next door to the Tanager Gallery on 10th Street, New York, April 5, 1959. © Photo: Fred W. McDarrah/Getty Images

34 V besedilu na razstavnem plakatu, ki je služil tudi kot obvestilo za javnost, jih je Seymour Krim, pisec in urednik revije The Beats, opisal kot »tolpo posiljevalcev« in navedel: Verjamem, da je to samo po sebi razlog za pristno spoštovanje, tudi če se ob preračunljivem ekstremizmu nekaterih del zdrznete ali ujezite. Zakaj? Ker mora resna umetnost v precej strahopetni množični družbi, kakršna je naša, javnosti nenehno zagotavljati, da jo motivira drugačen namen od zgolj dekorativnega ali preprosto umetelnega dela, ki ga človek množičnih medijev lahko pogoltne brez prebavnih motenj. Današnja Amerika ni kraj za lepoto, ki spoštuje samo sebe in ne ogroža samozadovoljstva. Na vsakem kompromitiranem področju našega življenja je preveč bolezenskega, da bi potrebovali umetnost, ki pomirja. Čudoviti francoski mojstri trenutno z nami niso uglašeni. Potrebujemo umetnost, ki kriči, rjove, bruha, besni, nori, ubija, posiljuje, zagreši vsa krvava in obscena dejanja, ki jih lahko, da izrazi zgolj kanček človeških čustev, zaprtih pod toaletnimi ploščicami v utopiji oglaševalcev.

Delo Alana Kaprowa vidim kot izjemo: je hladno, preračunano in učinkovito v nadzorovanem in zamejenem pomenu. Ima klasičen okus, njegovo stališče pa je preveč bojazljivo, da bi predstavljalo to, kar boste videli.

Polomljeni Kristus Esther Gilman kaže na razočaranje zasebne verske izkušnje, morda jo natančneje opišem kot bridko deziluzijo, in brez dvoma uspeva le na sorazmerno blagi ravni ugaslega upanja. Sadomazohistični portreti Michelle Stuart in sadovnjak penisov Yayoi Kusama se zdijo bliže natančni točki slikarstva in fantazije, izpeljane v okviru ženske senzibilnosti – tako drugačne od moje, da sem neobčutljiv prevajalec jezika vseh treh dam in vam svetujem, da se na njihove strte melodije odzovete z lastnimi čutili.15 Gertrude Stein je za promocijo NO!arta storila vse, kar je lahko. Priložnost za samostojne razstave je ponudila tudi drugim umetnikom v skupini, vključno z novinci: Yayoi Kusama je leta 1963 na primer omogočila prvo samostojno kiparsko razstavo »Aggregation: One Thousand Boats«.

Yayoi Kusama je postavila čoln, prekrit z neštetimi penisi iz belega blaga, naravnost v sredino galerije, skupaj z 999 litografijami samega dela, ki jih je kot tapete nalepila po prostoru. Ko je to razstavo videl Andy Warhol, je opazil, kakšno moč ima podvajanje, in začel tudi sam izdelovati serije grafik.

Tisoč čolnov Yayoi Kusama – en sam čoln, prekrit z belimi penisi, in vesli na tleh galerije, fotografije istega čolna, ki 15 Seymour Krim. Spremna beseda. Razstava NO Show v Galeriji Gertrude Stein. 1963).

v celoti prekrivajo stene od tal do stropa, je bila naslednja razstava, njena izkušnja nezaželene plodnosti-energije, ki brezciljno lebdi na neobstoječem oceanu ... ženska, ki ji grozi vsa ta neuravnovešena spolna moč, je najbrž pobegnila pred napadom, utonila v tleh galerije. Vse preveč moško agresivna samurajka je pozneje poniknila v obupanih ekshibicionističnih prizadevanjih.16 Leta 1964 so v Galeriji Gertrude Stein priredili tudi razstavi Errója in Herba Browna.

Sledili so na novo poslikani veliki plakati s podzemne železnice, ki jih je ustvaril Herb Brown, s čimer so arkade podzemne železnice postale umetniško okolje, predhodnik grafitov, ki so zdaj vseprisotni v podhodih – vendar s pomenom, ki izraža gnus, obrambo posameznika pred plazom nezaželenega oglaševanja.

Leta 1964 sta Sam Goodman in Dorothy Gillespie v galeriji Salle de Champagne, ki je bila del nočnega kluba v lasti Dorothy Gillespie in njenega moža, ustvarila tudi instalacijo »Ameriški način smrti«.

Po Luriejevih spominih je bil prostor urejen kot: ... realistično okolje pogrebnega zavoda s krstami, načrti grobov, pogrebnimi pripomočki, vse je bilo zvesto, realistično reproducirano, s skrbno izdelanimi plačilnimi načrti, cenami in privlačnimi opisi – predhodnik sedanje sociološke umetnosti. Na ogled so bile tudi krste s pokojniki: Sam Goodman je bil pri tem grozljivo preroški, to je bila njegova predzadnja razstava – že čez nekaj let je umrl tudi sam. Na spominski razstavi leta 1967 pri Gertrude Stein smo poleg enega naših kipov dreka znova razstavili isto krsto.17 Na začetku leta 1964 (od 14. 1. do 8. 2.) je Boris Lurie priredil razstavo »Plakati NO!arta« v tehniki sitotiska, ki jih je ponujal po 25 dolarjev. V spremni besedi k razstavi trdi, da je zamisel odkrito usmerjena proti napihnjenim tržnim cenam poparta.

Pri razstavi »Plakati NO!arta« sem se naslonil na idejo, zasnovano leta 1962: odpadni listi, ki jih uporabljajo za čiščenje preš, polni nasprotujočih si oglasnih sporočil zaradi plasti, natisnjenih drugo čez drugo, naključna umetnina stroja, ki tako popolno predstavlja potrošništvo.

Na teh grafikah v velikosti plakatov so bili natisnjeni srebrn slogan NO, ogromno pin-up dekle, ki kleči, in zbirka sadomazohističnih slik, na katerih so ljudje ponižani, zvezani in zamašenih ust. To gradivo je iz knjižnice mojih 16 Boris Lurie »Shit NO!« 1970.

17 Boris Lurie »Shit NO!« 1970.

35 simbolov izbral Sam Goodman, saj avtor ni smel zavestno posegati v rezultat (ne pa tudi v koncept). Namen je bil ustvariti protestni plakat, ki ga povsem naključno izdelajo uboge zlorabljene tiskarske preše: NE-oglaševalske plakate, NE-tajniške plakate, NE-potovalne plakate, NEindustrijske plakate, NE-motelske plakate, NE-plakate za igrače. Izdaja je bila potencialno neomejena, a je bil kljub temu vsak malce drugačen – unikat –, prodajna cena pa minimalna. Resnične ljudske protestne grafike, narejene strojno, proti dragim ročno narejenim zbirateljskim sitotiskom poparta v omejenih izdajah, ki so se izdajali za ljudsko umetnost. Da bi svoj namen jasno pokazali, smo pod vsak plakat s šablono napisali Anti-Pop. Leta 1964 sta Boris Lurie in Sam Goodman v Galeriji Gertrude Stein priredila še eno konceptualno razstavo, imenovano Razstava kipov NO, a znano pod bolj škandaloznim imenom: »Razstava dreka«. Šlo je za razstavo kipov – iztrebkov –, od katerih so vsakega pripisali znanemu trgovcu z umetninami ali kustosu: Castellijev drek, Sonnabendov drek itd. Razstava je seveda požela vsesplošno pozornost.

Te provokacije pripadnikov NO!arta niso mogli spregledati niti najuglednejši newyorški umetnostni kritiki, tako med samo razstavo kot pozneje (čeprav so bili predhodniki ideje »prodajanja lastnega dreka«).

Tema razstave kipov NO (Razstava dreka) so bili iztrebki, narejeni iz mavčnih odlitkov in pobarvani; bili so različnih velikosti, od majhnih do gromozanskih, in razstavljeni neposredno na tleh galerije.

Potem ko sva jih s Samom Goodmanom noč in dan mrzlično izdelovala v kleti galerije March na 10. ulici, sva jih razstavila v Galeriji Gertrude Stein. Kipi so se množili in polnili majhno klet na 10. ulici, kjer sva začela skupno akcijo; medtem ko je Sam Goodman vlival in stiskal mavec iz plastičnih črev, sem na prtljažni polici svojega majcenega austin-sprita dovažal nove vreče mavca, oblikoval strukture iz žične mreže in vrečevine ter barval končane iztrebke. V tem tempu sva delala več tednov, praktično dan in noč, ter drug drugega neusmiljeno priganjala, da bi naredila vse več in bolje. Počutil sem se kot vojaški vodja, odgovoren za pomemben, odločilen zračni napad. Vedela sva, da so vsi, prav vsi mostovi dokončno požgani; če ta ofenziva spodleti, bova padla tudi midva. Dokončno revolucijo na to temo lahko najdete v Galeriji Gertrude Stein ... v teh skupinah črevesne kaligrafije je veliko formalnih odlik za vsakogar, ki jih je zaradi puristične vzgoje prisiljen opaziti. Vendar pa se tema norčuje iz tistih, ki v njej najdejo formalne vrednote.

Tisti, ki jih ne, so prisiljeni zanikati legitimnost vrednot, ki so jih doslej vbijali v glavo več generacijam študentov.

(Brian O’Doherty, New York Times, decembra 1963) Paradoksalno – na naše veliko začudenje in grozovito

presenečenje – pa so začeli prihajati zbiralci poparta, špekulanti, ki so trdili, da jim je razstava všeč, da bi dela radi kupili in jih promovirali. Verjamem, da je bil ta občutek v okviru njihovega razmišljanja dokaj iskren, čeprav so vsebino in namen razumeli popolnoma napačno. To je bila za nas zastrašujoča izkušnja; domnevali smo, da smo se morda zmotili, da nam je v naših namerah spodletelo, da so odskakovale na način, ki ni bil predviden, bali smo se, da so naši novi častilci – in sovražniki – na nekako izkrivljen, a resničen način razumeli pravo vsebino dela bolje, kot smo jo po našem mnenju sami: vendar so se nam dvomi razblinili, ko so nam povedali, da bo njihova promocija vključevala paketno ponudbo, da bomo sledili njihovi estetski usmeritvi in da mora naša galerija postati satelit skupine pop galerij; poskušali so omajati naše skupno stališče, tako da bi ponudili plačilo in koristi samo nekaterim, drugim pa ne. Sam Goodman se je dolgo in burno prepiral in razpravljal z ljudmi iz poparta, med katerimi je bil tudi gospod Kraushaar, ki pa je bil med ognjevitim pričkanjem ves čas tiho. Ko mu je Kraushaar osebno čestital, je Sam nepričakovano odvrnil: »Tudi na vas se poserjem!« Kraushaar, majhen, poln zadrege, agresiven in defenziven, je pozelenel in odkorakal.18 Ni res, da sta Lurieja, Goodmana in Fisherja združevala zgolj temeljna sovražnost ali nasprotovanje, usmerjena proti vsem in vsakomur. Dejansko s svojim NE! ponujajo opomin, slutnjo; trkajo na vrata vesti in duševnega zdravja. Izmaličene maske, prostitutke in iztrebki delujejo kot opomini in svarila.

S prikazovanjem vojne, nasilja, suženjstva, hinavščine ali korupcije so prikazovali človeška dejanja in zla dejanja, preventivno, kot nekakšno cepivo proti tej norosti. Kritične bolezni zahtevajo kritična zdravila. Ljudje pa imajo kratek spomin.

Trije ustanovitelji in teoretiki NO!arta so vojno doživeli veliko bolj neposredno kot njihovi kolegi. Lurie, ki je v njej najhuje trpel, bi moral »po pravici« najglasneje kričati in rohneti. Ker pa je prihajal iz drugačnega sveta, iz izobražene družine z določenimi vrednotami, in ker je od časa do časa vpijal pariški duh, morda ni mogel, niti ko je predstavljal najbolj šokantna dela, opustiti spoštovanja, značilnega za staro kulturo – spoštovanja do tega, čemur bi lahko rekli umetniško delo oziroma »profesionalni odnos« do izbranih medijev. V njegovih slikah in kolažih je skrajna le tematika, hkrati pa je barva uravnovešena (Lumumba is Dead, 1960), in v njegovih najpomembnejših, najučinkovitejših delih je ideja predstavljena jasno in čitljivo kot na plakatu (Love Series: Bound on Red, 1963). Če je ideja lakonična, bo tudi samo dalo zlahka razumljivo. Kadar je najpomembnejša jukstapozicija, ji izrazna sredstva zgolj služijo. Tudi kadar Lurie poudari provokativni element, na primer svastiko ali Davidovo zvezdo, to stori natančno in prepričljivo. Nikoli ni 18 Boris Lurie »Shit NO!« 1970.

36 opustil tega, kar poznamo pod imenom formalne vrednote, saj so bila dela premišljena, vsaj intuitivno, in slogovno brezhibna.

Morda od teh umetnikov dejansko nihče ni pričakoval umetniških vrednot, vendar pa je na videz kaotična kompozicija organizirana, tudi če se sprva zdi le kot barvna zmešnjava. Jasno je, da ima umetnik talent in občutek za barvo. Čeprav bi sam to najraje zanikal, pa slika, kolaž ali prostorski predmet delujejo inteligentno izvedeni, tudi kadar je tema provokativna in v mnogih primerih sadomazohistična.

Zaradi Luriejevega brezhibnega občutka za slog vse delo postane gledljivo, tudi če v njem ni mogoče uživati. To velja tudi, kadar zanemari vse etične in na videz tudi estetske norme.19 Estetika se ohrani, čeprav to seveda niso estetizirana dela. Estetika NO!arta je povsem drugačna: agresivna in zvedena na družbenopolitični komentar ali sporočilo.

Sam Lurie razloži: Izražali smo idejo, da je treba odpreti meje umetnosti.

Estetska umetnost se omejuje na področja, ki jih je treba preoblikovati, in druga področja, ki se jih ne sme dotikati. Temu smo nasprotovali in hoteli vključiti vse po vrsti, vse do blata na pločniku. [...] Kar smo delali, ni nujno neestetsko. V naši skupini je bilo veliko dobrih umetnikov in ti so izdelovali estetska dela. Tisto, čemur so rekli neestetsko, je bila vsebina, ki je nastala, saj si lahko v abstraktnem ekspresionizmu privoščite neposrednost.20 Neprizanesljivo sporočilo Luriejevega dela, ki je razkrinkavalo ves svet, je bilo predstavljeno v okviru radikalnega gibanja, primernega za tisti prostor in čas. Čeprav so dela Lurieja in nekaterih drugih pripadnikov NO!arta očitno naperjena zoper aktualno dogajanje v ameriški umetnosti tistega časa, namreč popart, pa ne bi mogla nastati zunaj svojega časa; še več, slogovno se ne razlikujejo od del poparta (na primer D'Arcangelo). Vsebujejo tudi elemente abstraktnega ekspresionizma ter neodadaizma, skupaj s popularno kulturo, v tem smislu, da vidimo namerno rabo fotografij, že ustvarjenih podob in klišejev. Čeprav je bil NO!art na videz usmerjen zoper abstraktni ekspresionizem in popart, pa so ti elementi navzoči v delih pripadnikov NO!arta. Morda njihovo nasprotovanje res ni bilo toliko usmerjeno proti samim umetniškim gibanjem kot proti neposrednemu tržnemu uspehu njihovih pripadnikov in proti špekulacijam velikih umetnostnih galerij. Po vsem, kar so 19 Tudi roman House of Anita, napisan v 70. letih, je nemoralen in odvraten, a slogovno kljub temu brezhiben.

20 Alan Murdock. Intervju z Borisom Luriejem. Časnik The Daily Iowan, 4. 3. 1999.

Lurie in njegovi kolegi preživeli, so bili najbrž užaljeni tudi zaradi lahkotnosti, ironičnosti in uglajenosti drugih. Med »preganjanjem« pripadnikov poparta je Lurie pozneje obtožil dadaizem – čeprav ga je spoštoval in cenil zaradi izzivanja buržoazije – kot sokrivega za utemeljevanje poparta (ki ga je videl odetega v ameriški šovinizem).21 Leta 1970 je v isti izjavi za razstavo »Umetnost in politika« v Kunstverein Karlsruhe še naprej utemeljeval svoj boj, ki ni bil uperjen le zoper popart, ampak tudi zoper slikarstvo barvnega polja v okviru abstraktnega ekspresionizma (predstavlja ga na primer Rothko) in minimalizem; vse to je imel za »drogo, ki ljudi uspava«, čeprav je nato med razpravo o NO!art priznal: »Častili smo abstraktne ekspresioniste. Vplivali so na nas.« (Alan Murdock. Intervju z Borisom Luriejem. Časnik The Daily Iowan, 4. 3. 1999) (Zdi se, da Lurie pod izrazom abstraktni ekspresionizem razume le njegovo splošno smer čustvenega akcijskega slikarstva.)

Vendar pa NO!arta zaradi globokega, neironičnega črnega humorja ne moremo poistovetiti z dadaizmom; ukinjanje meja glede na uporabljeno snov še ne pomeni zbliževanja.

Tako kot dadaizem in neodadaizem tudi pripadniki NO!arta pri svojih delih vdihnejo narejenim predmetom metaforični pomen, nasproten temu, ki ga pri njih navadno opazimo.

Vendar pa se NO!art ne poigrava z neprimerno ikonografijo, simboliko ali izkušnjami z vsakdanjimi predmeti, tako kot se je dadaizem. Pri NO!art gre za odraslo igro življenja in smrti.

V pričevanje o uničenju so vključene celo otroške igrače (Death and Resurrection), prenosni oltar pa dobi nov pomen, ko nosi portret množičnega morilca (Eichmann Triptych).

Ali pa seznam klobas (pobitih Judov), vstavljen v ovitek jedilnega lista (Menu/Blood Wurst). Glavni zagovornik te težnje je Sam Goodman. Tukaj omenjena dela so pravzaprav njegova. Imel je najbolj nore ideje in domišljijo (Lurieja je spodbujal, naj uporabi fotografije žrtev koncentracijskih taborišč) in ustvarjal najbolj agresivna dela. Zažgane lutke, predmeti, ki so bili pri roki ali najdeni v smeteh, polomljene deske. Vsakdanjim predmetom je vdihnil simbolno in ikonografsko vrednost. Kot bi moledoval, da njegovi »kipi« ne bi bili obravnavani kot umetnine.

Goodman ni nikoli postal bogat in slaven; v tridesetih letih, ki jih je preživel v newyorškem umetniškem svetu, se ni priljubil pripadnikom tega okolja, ki so bili karieristični in netalentirani, vseeno pa je ta po mnenju mnogih komolčarski Judek odločilno vplival na premik umetnosti z dobro naoljenih tirnic, tako da nikoli več ni bila povsem enaka. Na vrhuncu vneme in navdiha je tudi sam začel čudno spominjati na smeti, saj so ga neustavljivo privlačili 21 Max Liljefors “Boris Lurie and NO!art” www.heterogenesis.com, 2003, št. 4.

37 ulični zabojniki za odpadke, v katerih je iskal sestavine za umetniška dela, in pri tem pozabil na vse, ki so hodili ob njem.22 Stanley Fisher se je s svojimi demoni boril na podoben način, tako da jih je materializiral. Obnašal se je kot vandal, spreminjal in dopolnjeval je prepoznavne ljudi in simbole, s tem pa preoblikoval njihov pomen. Njegove kolažne slike so kot žgoče parodije na vse aktualne teme NO!arta. Blatne, umazane barve, maske, besede smrti in uničenja ter grafite je uporabljal za ustvarjanje »umazanije«, ki je v nasprotju s prefinjenostjo poparta in stripovskim prikazovanjem »dobrega življenja«. Seymour Krim v spremni besedi k razstavi NO!arta leta 1963 v Galeriji Gertrude Stein piše o Fisherjevem delu, ki si ga je obesil nad domači kamin: Sovražim ga, ker je tako surovo, vulgarno, razmazano, vreščavo, komaj ga lahko ločim od vročičnih ulic, ki so ga navdihnile. Vseeno pa ga obožujem, ker je tako resnično. Ker nisem slikar, se mi zdi nekaj izrednega, da je resničnost, s katero se moram skupaj s tisočimi iz svoje generacije spopadati vsak dan, nekdo pograbil in jo preklinjajoč vrgel v umetnost.

Gertrude Stein, 1978 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Ima NO!art kaj povedati? Delo Lurieja, Goodmana in Fisherja gre v napad z bojnim krikom na ustih. To je vsebina del teh treh pripadnikov NO!arta. Omeniti je treba, da se v tem pogledu trije ustanovitelji in ideologi skupine razlikujejo od ostalih, ki niso izrazili tako velike bolečine in ki so si dovolili več koketiranja, nekateri od njih (Lebel, Kusama in Erró) pa so si v Ameriki dejansko ustvarili kariero.

Lurie svoj NE! pokaže zelo neposredno – vpiše ga neposredno na slike.

Pozneje, leta 1970, je Lurie ponudil razlago tega NE!: »NO!art je anti tržno-naložbena umetnost: (tržno-naložbena umetnost je enako kulturna manipulacija). NO!art je proti 'kliničnim', 'znanstvenim' esteticizmom (taki esteticizmi niso umetnost).« 23 V bistvu gre tudi za NE kompromisom, tihi podpori. Lurie je imel za svojo človeško dolžnost, da govori le o negativnem, da ljudi svari in straši. Te tri osebnosti kot osrednja skupina NO!art delujejo kot ljudje, ki so jih osebne izkušnje vojne privedle do točke, ko več nimajo česa izgubiti. Poleg tega trojico druži judovska bolečina, ki mora biti pravzaprav bolečina vsega človeštva, in to je tudi tema njihovega dela.

Frankfurtska filozofska šola je skupaj z izjavami Theodorja Adorna v smislu, da je »pisanje poezije po Auschwitzu 22 Boris Lurie »Shit NO!«.

23 Izjava za razstavo »Art and politics« v Karlsruhe Kunstverein, Nemčija, 1970. Objavljena v: Lurie, Boris; Krim, Seymour: NO!art, Köln 1988.

38 barbarsko« (Theodor W. Adorno, Študije v sodobni nemški družbeni misli, 1949), pozneje v 70. letih postala bolj priljubljena kot v formativnih letih NO!arta, vendar pa so ti umetniki ustvarili dela, ki so se že odzivala na ta koncept – nespodobno je analizirati umetnost, potem ko smo prestopili vse meje človečnosti.

vrednotami. Tako kot otroci s svojim obnašanjem učijo starše in jim kažejo potrebo po mejah, tudi NO!art z agresivnimi deli izziva in kaže jezik, da opozori, da je s svetom nekaj narobe. Maksimalizem, idealizem in upor niso le pravica zelo mladih ljudi. S svojo kljubovalnostjo bi se radi identificirali in potrjevali.

Temo holokavsta (šoe) je Boris Lurie razvijal še naprej.

Kot žrtev v najbolj neposrednem smislu je bil edini, ki je imel etično pravico do šokantnega izraza, da je bil Hitler največji umetnik vseh časov, saj projektov in instalacij, v katere so bili vključeni ljudje, še nihče pred njim ni izvedel v takem obsegu.

Destrukcija v delih pripadnikov NO!arta vsekakor ne pomeni, da niso imeli želje po harmoniji, čeprav so bili večinoma navajeni shajati brez nje. V resnici so pozitivno naravnani, zagovarjajo svet brez zla, brez vojne, brez nečlovečnosti. Gre za upor mladih proti nečlovečnosti, ki so ji bili že izpostavljeni.

Naj nekdo spomni te preklete pohlepne manipulatorje z umetnostjo in kulturo, te trgovce s krvjo umetnikov, na mladega bitniškega umetnika. Ni še tako dolgo, kar je živel. Ime mu je bilo Adolf Hitler. Njegova kariera bi bila lahko drugačna. Če bi ... druga klika v drugih časih ... mu ne bi bilo treba po vsej površini Evrope sejati svojih mojstrovin iz resničnega življenja.24

Lurie, Goodman in Fisher so privlačili druge, ki so se prav tako želeli realizirati skozi popolno »zanikanje« in začeti z njim. Kaj jih je torej združevalo? Miselnost? Depresija?

Trpljenje? Bes? Nakopičena agresivnost? Nasprotovanje?

Nezadovoljneži so se zbirali okrog Borisa Lurieja. Yayoi Kusama je v New Yorku hitro začela uspešno kariero; Erró se je spoprijateljil s popartisti in sprejel njihov slog.

Več Luriejevih del ne bo nikoli nehalo vzbujati nerazumevanja in jeze, na primer dokumentarne podobe, ki druge poleg druge postavljajo slike ljudi, pobitih v koncentracijskih taboriščih, in fotografije pin-up deklet. Ni treba imeti veliko domišljije, da bi razumeli travmatični učinek na najstnika, ki je prvič videl golo žensko na kupu trupel.

Lurie je bil premlad, da bi to predelal v svoji psihi. Zato je prikazoval razgaljene ženske zgolj kot predmete, namenjene uporabi, kot je veljalo v koncentracijskih taboriščih. Lurie v delih na temo holokavsta prikazuje sadizem, ki ga je doživel, predstavljen mazohistično in cinično, kot da sam ne bi bil žrtev.

Leto 1964 je pomenilo prelomnico v NO!artu, ker je skupina podala izjavo in razglasila manifest. In ali bi »Razstavi dreka« sploh lahko sledilo še kaj bolj šokantnega in norega?

Lurie in Goodman sta vzdražila tiste, ki niso bili politično in družbeno brezbrižni. Čas je šel naprej, potrebo po skupinskih razstavah so presegli in vsak umetnik je začel razvijati lastno kariero (kot lahko vidimo iz priloženih življenjepisov). Pri nekaterih je bilo to edino obdobje v umetniški karieri, ko so bili znani (Gloria Graves), drugi so si iz življenjepisov zavestno prizadevali izbrisati mladostne dejavnosti v New Yorku (Kusama), medtem ko so se jih tretji spominjali z navdušenjem, kot pomembnega dela svojega ustvarjanja (Lebel). Takrat pa so bili to mladi, dejavni, radikalni ljudje z nenavadnim okusom, za katere sta galerija March in Galerija Gertrude Stein predstavljali odskočno desko. Združevala sta jih tudi duh časa in priložnost za samoizražanje, ne vedno s skupnim glasom.

Psihološko trpljenje in osebna travma, ki jo umetniki še naprej obdelujejo v svojih delih, sta dodatna dejavnika motivacije za združevanje v skupnem nasprotovanju.

Prizadevajo si preseči duševne brazgotine in travme, tako da si ližejo rane, potem pa jih tu in tam spet odprejo in jih postavijo na ogled kot umetniške podobe.

Pomemben predmet antagonizma NO!arta je bila komercializacija na splošno, vključno s komercializacijo umetnosti, najbolj neposredno pa »establišmenta«, ki je stal za tem. V skrajni obliki se je to seveda pokazalo v Goodmanovi in Luriejevi »Razstavi dreka« leta 1964. Delo in razstave, ki jih je ustvarila ta trojica, so predstavljali splošno serijo protestov proti sleherni hinavščini. Protestniki NO!arta so preprosto vizualizirali, na platnu in v asemblažih upodabljali to, kar se je dogajalo in se dogaja s človeškimi 24 Boris Lurie, 1975(1), Spremna beseda h Curse Works, 1972–73. Boris Lurie in Seymour Krim, NO!art. Berlin in Köln: Edition Hundertmark, 1988, 94.

Leta 1964 se je začela usodna veriga tragičnih dogodkov.

Zdi se mi, čeprav bi to težko utemeljil, da je vse skupaj sprožila moja skulptura Smrt, pri kateri so bile v plastične opeke vkapsulirane kurje glave ... Goodman pa je to z Ameriškim načinom smrti le še pospešil. Leto 1964 je prineslo smrt gibanja NO!art kot kolektivne sile, čeprav so mnogi pripadniki še naprej samostojno delovali in razstavljali. Umrl mi je oče, kar me je prizadelo tako močno, kot bi me povozil tank, leta 1967 pa je umrl še Sam Goodman, ki je počasi izgubil bitko z rakom. Čeprav nas pri poigravanju z dinamitom obhajajo zle slutnje, pa nas vseeno vleče k temu, moramo se poigravati še naprej.

Po smrti očeta je Lurie leta 1964 prejel dediščino in

39 prevzel skrb za fundacijo Schaine in Josephine Lurie, ki jo je oče ustanovil za pomoč preživelim v holokavstu, zato se je začel ukvarjati z borznim trgovanjem in drugimi družbenimi dejavnostmi. Čez čas se je znova vrnil k umetnosti in spet iskal podobno misleče ljudi. Dobrega prijatelja in sorodno dušo je že našel v judovskem umetniku Wolfu Vostellu iz Zahodnega Berlina, katerega delo so v New Yorku leta 1963 prikazali na razstavi 6 TV-dé-coll/agen v galeriji Smolin. Z Luriejem sta si bila zares blizu. Ideje gibanja Fluxus, ki mu je pripadal Vostell, so bile za umetnika Luriejevega kova privlačne. Allan Kaprow, prav tako povezan z NO!artom, jih je širil na univerzi Rutgers, kjer je bil takrat zaposlen. Vostell in Lurie sta redno izmenjavala ideje in bila tesna prijatelja, kot je povedal Vostellov sin Rafael, svetovalec pri Umetniški fundaciji Borisa Lurieja in organizator razstav NO!arta. V 70. letih je Vostell povabil Lurieja v Nemčijo in ga predstavil galeristom, ki so tam organizirali razstave njegovih del. To so bili Inge Bäcker, Rene Block, Helmut Rywelski in Armin Hundertmark.

Ime NO!art je leta 1964 prvi uporabil Edward Kelly v pomladni številki revije The Art Journal v članku »Neo-dada: A critique of Pop«. Izraz se je pojavil kot oznaka za skupino March po razstavi NO v Galeriji Gertrude Stein, temeljil pa je na povezanosti z neodadaizmom. Kelly v članku pripadnike NO!arta primerja s popartisti in pojasnjuje, da je ikonografija NO!arta bolj brezsramna, bolj nasilna in bolj satirična.

Meni tudi, da je popart kot tak morda navdihnil poskus, da bi NO!art spremenili v prebavljiv predmet za javnost, ki si želi vlagati v satirične igre.25 Odnos med umetnostjo in dokumentarno fotografijo, paradoks boleče umetnosti (PPA), estetika grdega itd. so teme, ki jih obširno obravnavajo mnogi postmoderni, povojni filozofi, umetnostni teoretiki in psihoanalitiki, večina teh zapisov pa se nanaša na NO!art.

Je še kaj podobnosti s sočasnimi umetniškimi gibanji in drugimi podobno mislečimi umetniki? Poleg Fluxusa so bili seveda najbolj izzivalni dunajski akcionisti, ki jih v umetnostni zgodovini povezujejo s posledicami vojne (simbolično očiščenje avstrijskega občutka krivde zaradi podpiranja fašizma). Medtem ko lahko v Zahodni Evropi in Ameriki vidimo tovrstne pojave, namenjene razburjanju umirjenega življenja pridnih državljanov, pa so lahko nekonformistični umetniki v Vzhodni Evropi, na primer v baltskih državah, sovraštvo do političnih sistemov in bolečino zaradi smrti ljubljenih izražali le za kuhinjsko mizo, dela pa pokazali le najbližjim prijateljem.

In če danes poznamo pripadnike NO!arta in Skulpture smrti Borisa Lurieja iz leta 1964, je zanimiva ugotovitev, da se je ta ideja, takrat predstavljena na dokaj skromen način, odtlej manifestirala v obliki morskega psa in razkosane 25 KZ-Kampf-Kunst. “Boris Lurie: NO!art”, NY, 2014, str. 227–228.

krave (Damien Hirst). Če poznamo NO!art, lahko na primer razumemo, kar govori Jean-Michel Basquiat. Jasno lahko vidimo, da so temelje sodobnim performansom in hepeningom v kleteh in uličnih gledališčih položili Allan Kaprow, Sam Goodman, Allan D’Arcangelo in drugi. Čeprav so drek in provokacije postali skoraj nujni za sodobno občutje, pa so vzgibi zanje drugačni kot pri NO!artu.

NO!art je pojav, ki ga je treba še naprej raziskovati, njegove pomembnosti pa še nismo v celoti ovrednotili. Vsi umetniki, ki so sestavljali to skupino, z izjavami, idejami in deli predstavljajo del povojne družbene akcije. Z glasnim, demonstrativnim NE! so si prizadevali za vidnost in slišnost. Čeprav so bili sposobni zagovarjati in utemeljevati svoje proteste, pa povojna zgodovina kaže, da umetnik, ki opozarja na nevarnost, na splošno ne predstavlja kaj več od ganljivega Don Kihota.

Ivonna Veiherte The Secret Component of Great Art – Courage NO!art was a concept realized through the activities of a radical art group in 1950s–60s New York. The leading figure was Russian-born Jewish artist Boris Lurie, collaborating with two associates, Sam Goodman and Stanley Fisher.

But this concept can also be seen as a movement or group, joined by other artists living or staying in New York at the time.

This exhibition highlights the period 1959–1964, the time when NO!art activities began, when they were carried out by the major figures, and were at their most potent. The NO!art idea continued later as well, but various people involved in it subsequently embarked on individual careers, ceased working or died. It was Boris Lurie in particular, who consistently promoted the concept of NO!art worldwide and is identified with it.

Lurie was widely known in art scene of his time. He was an active and significant figure in the 10th street artist cooperative movement, who transformed downtown New York into a post-war center of alternative culture. The New York of his era gave him the opportunity and the appropriate setting for his artistic expressions.

NO!art activities were documented during Lurie’s lifetime in a few books , exhibitions, and accompanying. The Boris Lurie Art Foundation was set up to gather and care for his work, manuscripts, and archive of NO!art materials, as well as to organize exhibitions on Boris Lurie and NO!art in international museums.

This exhibition looks at the New York art world of the 1950s-60s through underground art and NO!art, as well as through historical truths relating to the Jews and the Holocaust.

Though not widely discussed in the history of 20th Century art, the NO!art group was written about by reviewers and critics during Lurie’s lifetime, and art historians began to take up the subject in Lurie’s later years and after his death.

Some of this writing appears in this exhibition catalogue.

Lurie himself communicated his aims, his struggles, and his views extensively in statements, interviews and various texts. Moreover, his captivating intelligence allowed him to formulate his writing richly and very graphically. Accordingly, we have included Lurie’s own accounts of his activities and those of NO!art.

The Boris Lurie Art Foundation is currently engaged in

40 assessing this corpus of Lurie’s material. Many questions remain for future answers. Likewise, this exhibition can only offer a limited view of NO!art. A separate exhibition devoted specifically to the work of Boris Lurie is planned at the Rothko Centre in Daugavpils in April of this year. This will be an opportunity to show the artist’s most important and at the same time most provocative work, which is not available for the present exhibition, since it is currently on display at the Museum of Contemporary Art Krakow. In order to give an impression of his work as a whole, several of these traveling works are reproduced in a separate section of this catalogue.

The foundation also has work by other NO! artists, but not all of the work from the period is preserved; other work was unavailable, lost to time, dismantled, or unaccounted for.

Accordingly, the accompanying photographs are provided to stimulate the imagination. The essential information about the artists featured here may be found in the attached biographies, prepared specifically for this exhibition by the BLAF. The exhibition “Boris Lurie and NO!art” is important for Latvia, because the country has a special link with Lurie.

Namely, he lived in Riga from the ages of one until the age of seventeen, attended a German grammar school in Riga and spoke Latvian.

He subsequently visited Riga in 1975, and has described all his recollections, encounters, and emotions in hitherto unpublished memoirs entitled “In Riga”, which he wrote over the course of several years following his visit to Latvia.

In order to appreciate the NO!art group and the subject of the exhibition, some knowledge is required about Lurie’s biography, and about the context in which his work and that of the other artists came into being.

He was born in Leningrad in 1924 into a Jewish family which moved a year later to Riga, because, like many other businesspeople and intellectuals, following the death of Lenin, they hoped to escape persecution under Stalin.

When the German army entered Riga the Lurie family was relocated to the ghetto; subsequently his mother, grandmother and sister were shot in the Rumbula woods.

Boris Lurie was seventeen at the time: together with his father Ilja, he was transferred from one concentration camp to another until the end of the war, eventually ending up in the grimmest of them all – Buchenwald, in one of its satellite camps, Magdeburg. Boris Lurie’s experience as a Holocaust survivor set the course of his life thereafter, determining its whole significance and motivation, and the way he lived.

After liberation Boris Lurie and his father moved to the

41

Umetniki, povezani z newyorško umetniško sceno, ki je uprizarjala happeninge, pozirajo pred Judson Hallom na Zahodni 57. ulici št. 167: Charlotte Moorman s čelom, Dick Higgins, James Tenney in Nam June Paik.

Artists associated wuth the downtown New York Happenings art scene pose outside Judson Hall at 167 West 57th St.: Charlotte Moorman with cello, Dick Higgins, James Tenney and Nam June Paik. © Foto: Steve Shapiro/Corbis via Getty Images

USA and ended up in New York, where life resumed. His father quickly made use of all the new opportunities and became successful in real estate in New York. Boris was interested in art and briefly took up studies in the Art Student League, depicting his experiences in the death camps in his drawings and paintings.

Boris Lurie was too young to recover from his experience of the death camps as quickly as his father seemingly had.

Immediately after the war, the survivors of the Holocaust were ashamed even to speak of what they had been through, and they even felt guilty for remaining alive. And indeed, even if you wished to relate and present this experience, how could it be conveyed? Nevertheless, from year to year, indignation, provocation and anger grew in Lurie’s work. He

would re-live his traumatic experiences over and over again.

In his paintings and collages, Lurie would demonstratively use the yellow Star of David, swastikas, and documentary photographs of the victims in combination with pornographic images. And all of this was, of course, pervaded by the statement: NO! In the 1970s it was all transformed into a laconic concept – a knife stabbed into concrete.

It was Boris Lurie in particular who brought Jewish and Holocaust themes as well as ethical issues to the forefront the, in American post-war art. Seeking to save themselves from peril in Europe, large numbers of Jews had arrived in America. They were fleeing danger, and since Europe had abandoned them, the world’s largest Jewish diaspora emerged in New York. This contingent of well-educated

42 immigrants stimulated science, culture, and rapid economic development in New York.

Moreover, in the 1950s and 60s, the combined threat of the Cold War and the Atomic Bomb provided a backdrop against which socially active, creative individuals would pit themselves against through a range of activities.

Boris Lurie was aligned with the bohemians and the Beats, dissident transgressors of 1950s social norms. This viewpoint condemned America’s growing orientation towards material values and adopted a pacifist stance towards US involvement in the Korean and, later, Vietnam Wars. These artists belonged to a generation that had experienced the horrors of World War II. After the war the center of the art world moved from Paris to New York, particularly to the Greenwich Village, which became a Mecca for artists, creative individuals, experimenters, and offbeat venturers from across the world; these were the people shaping the New York art life.

In the second half of the 1950s, 10th Street in New York’s East Village, where rents were more affordable, developed into an informal gathering place for bohemian artists and nonconformists, with several exhibition spaces owned and managed by the artists themselves, which consequently did not ascribe to the general refined style and rules of the other galleries.

Among the different galleries established by artists themselves, the most active and best-known included, for example, the March, Tanager, Hansa, Brata and Reuben galleries. Several of these were cooperatively run: the artists would divide the operating costs among themselves and jointly decide on the exhibition schedule.

In this way, a milieu was created for a great variety of experimental phenomena, such as performances and installations. Yoko Ono, too, arrived in New York in 1953, and by 1960 she had rented a room at 112 Chambers Street, where she presented her performance art.

Greenwich Village also had several important artists’ haunts, bringing together a diverse range of artists of different standing, along with their associates: The Club, the Waldorf Cafeteria and the Cedar Tavern by New York University.

A special kind of atmosphere had begun to emerge here in the late 1950s that attracted adventurers as well as the most creative and talented individuals of multiple generations and ethnic groups, America was becoming self-reliant in art, and European art no longer represented a kind of summit to be reached.

Člani umetniške skupine z 10. ulice plešejo na zabavi v ateljeju Miltona Resnicka.

Members of the 10th Street artists group, dancing during a party at artist Milton Resnick’s studio. © Foto: James Burke/The LIFE Picture Collection/ Getty Images

In the 1950s, several new avant-garde movements appeared in New York. One of these was the emotional Abstract-Expressionist painting, which initially captivated everyone, including Boris Lurie. But this movement had been created by emigrants from Europe, rather than being conceived by the Americans themselves, as Pop Art would later be.1 Beginning with collage, non-art materials began to appear in artworks, including items at the end of their ordinary use (such as objects retrieved from rubbish bins), i.e. “found objects”. One more new form of art was emerging, that of assemblage.

1 Interview mit Gertrude Stein. “NO!” Berlin, NGBK, 1995, S. 113

43 Neo-Dada made its appearance on the art scene in the 1950s, breaking down boundaries between art and life, culture and non-culture. The influence of Marcel Duchamp was also significant; beginning in 1958 he was a regular presence on the 10th Street scene, where something resembling the earlier Dada movement, with its audacity and its absurd juxtapositions, was growing into a major trend, something which can be seen in hindsight as the impetus and initial version of Pop Art. This spirit can be seen in the present NO!art exhibition, because the NO! artists truly participated in and shaped all of these trends. Absent from the more radical NO!art movement is the light irony and humor of Neo-Dada, but the mode of expression is similar.

The art scene between 1952 and 1960 exploded at a rate that was impossible to fit into the pre-existing commercial gallery structure. Accordingly, the new 10th Street coop galleries, supported and managed by artists themselves, provided an alternative. Here the artists could express themselves however they pleased, and a great variety of new experimentation took place in these small spaces, many of them located in basements. The process became paramount, and inaugurated the age of performances and happenings in New York.

Lurie and Goodman became acquainted with writer and artist Stanley Fisher, who witnessed the war as a medic when he participated in the Normandy invasion. All three were united by their Jewishness, their recent traumatic past and the fact that, albeit to varying degrees, they had directly experienced the war and could not shake its influence. As Peter Weibel writes in an article, in time of this exhibition republished in the art magazine Likovne besede, all the postwar art is to be seen as representing the consequences of wartime trauma.3 The three of them shared a fundamental discontent with the growing “commercialization” that was affecting art galleries in the form of collaboration with various buyers – even on 10th Street – and would develop a profound antipathy for their contemporaries who would become known as Pop Artists – Warhol, Wesselmann and Lichtenstein – whom they regarded as offering “supermarket culture”.

Lurie tells of his meeting with Goodman and Fisher, and their joint plans: My show Adieu Amerique in [1960], encompassing work done in the preceding couple of years, was a statement 3

Boris Lurie. Anti-pop. Neues Museum Nurnberg. 2017, p. 139

The March Gallery, which Boris Lurie co-founded in 1957, was located in a basement on East 10th Street. It became a gathering place for politically and socially oriented figures.

This collective gallery had more than 20 members, each of whom paid a monthly fee of $2.50.

The uncompromising message of Lurie’s work, unmasking the whole world, spoke to the place and time. He had come out of the world in thrall to Abstract-Expressionism. “We worshipped the Abstract-Expressionists. These were our influences”, admitted Lurie in 1999.2 Boris Lurie met a like-minded artist named Sam Goodman, also Jewish, whose father was killed in Canada by an anti-Semite. Goodman was connected with the collective Camino Gallery, but when he met Lurie he joined the March Gallery. Goodman served as a photographer for the Canadian film board during the war, and had seen some of the atrocities in Germany firsthand. Sometime early in their friendship he gave Lurie a collection of documentary photos of the camps that he had collected, and provided Lurie with the stimulus and permission to utilize them in his work.

2 Alan Murdock. Interview with Boris Lurie. The Daily Iowan newspaper, 1999

Galerija March March Gallery © Foto: James Burke/The LIFE Picture Collection/ Getty Images

44 of rejection: I was about to leave New York for good and I painted this farewell as it all came pouring out.

Paradoxically this rejection and negation turned into a hopeful organized activity by a group of artists, Sam Goodman, Stanley Fisher, John Fischer and I, who organized the March group gallery on Tenth Street, a group later to be nick-named NO! artists. The directness, courage of the Beat poets, Castro’s insurrection, our own desperation combined to give us courage, in the face of the then to us seemingly insurmountably powerful omnipotent art world, to cut the cords attaching us to it in open and public rebellion; we published statements concurrent with our shows intended to make it impossible for us to return to its fold should temptation arise, our strength of rebellion falter. We opposed the mute, inefficient chest-beating of the Abstract-Expressionists, the mystifications of their aesthetic, their refusal to be open and concrete, to name names, the covering of their strong emotions in effect with aesthetic sophistries – a fear to confront truth in its totality.

My exhibition Les Lions followed next at the March group, our coop underground basement strong hold. The time: Algerian colonial-civil war; the collage-paintings reflect personal situations insistently attempting psychological resolution through art-action. Political, social questions questioned and worked through, answers arrived at through the work-process itself.4 In November 1960, Lurie, Fisher and Goodman first showed their work together, alongside John Fischer, in the Vulgar Show at the March Gallery. Starting with the statement written for this exhibition by Stanley Fisher, a the joint message to the world by the March Group, henceforth known as the NO!art group.

“Art has ended. The world and being collapsed”, Fisher asserts in the flyer.

The Vulgar Show […] was a group manifestation, title and objective chosen collectively; works were produced specifically towards the show or existing works included, providing they were in tune with the theme. A spontaneously growing show, as many later exhibitions were to be, where everyone set up works as they became ready, up to the very ending of the showing, so that the exhibition or environment in its beginning stages was utterly different from what it became towards its end. But there actually never was an end, since the existing show naturally flowed into the next exhibit, called forth by new development of thought as we worked along within full public view. Sam Goodman, Stanley Fisher, John Fischer, 4 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!” 1970. First published in: Lurie, Boris; Krim, Seymour: NO!art, Cologne 1988

and I participated. We meant to show, draw attention to, underline the vulgarity within us quite as much as the vulgarity around us, to accept such vulgarity, to absorb it, to become conscious of it, to exorcise it.5 Little documentation of the work displayed in the Vulgar Show remains, but the four artists were unified by a particular theme: the vulgarity of the surrounding world as well as the vulgarity within the artists themselves. Judging from a photograph, Sam Goodman presented a Male Fetish with a portrait caricature of Hitler impressed on a toilet seat. John Fischer (also a refugee from Europe who would later be known for his sculptures and assemblages made out of bread) contributed surrealist-influenced paintings.

Boris Lurie showed paintings from his series “Dismembered Women”. As pointed out by Dr Eckhart Gillen: The “Dismembered Women” paintings were made shortly after Lurie’s arrival in New York, between 1947 and [c. 1957]. The series is characterized by the two stylistic tendencies, as strongly figurative works mix with more abstract pictures. They all feature female figures, expressing both Lurie’s ambivalent view of woman and his experiences in World War II.6 This exhibition marked the emergence of a core March group, as they were known, with Lurie being widely acknowledged as the leader and Goodman as the theoretician.7 However, they each put across their own message. The justifications, concepts and explanations, constituting an important part of the exhibitions, were mainly written by Stanley Fisher.

In addition to Lurie, Goodman, and Fisher, the participants of the Involvement Show in April 1961 included Allan Kaprow, Michelle Stuart, Jean-Jacques Lebel, Erró/Ferró, Yayoi Kusama, Isser Aronovici, Rocco Armento, Allan D’Arcangelo, Herb Brown, John Fischer, Esther Gilman, Augustus Goertz, Gloria Graves, Dorothy Gillespie, Ted Jones, Bob Logan, Lora, Suzanne Long, Mihail Mishorit, Jerome Rothenberg, Richard Tyler, Ray Wisniewski and Lee Zack.

No restrictions were placed on participation in the show; in a democratic spirit, all who shared the views of Lurie, Goodman and Stanley Fisher were invited to take part. It included those who responded – categorically politically and socially aware artists. Any participant of the exhibition could be connected with another alternative gallery, but all were invited to support the activities of the March group and to join these exhibitions.

5 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!” 1970

6 Boris Lurie. Anti- Pop.- Neues Museum Nurnberg, 2017, p. 31

7 Melissa Rachleff. Inventing Downtown. NY. Grey gallery, New York University, p. 164

45 Unifying for this show was the theme that the work should talk about “reality” (it means the absurdities of this world).

These kind of ideas and activities were also important to the artist Michelle Stuart at this time. She participated with NO!art and wrote about it in a piece published in Artforum in 1963: The March Gallery group is one more example of the continuing need of the artist to re-evaluate and redefine his world, using all conceivable means to remain vital. Since the rapture we get through art out of life is conditioned by everything including its horror, the aim of art is, in the final analysis, to wring from us our consent of life.”8 To hell with academic taboos, old or new! [...]Involvement with the rich loam, the blood and merde and sex of exploding mankind is too much of a hot sea to escape from. Let’s face it!”9 As we may judge from the descriptions and archival images, the basement exhibition space was filled with works in the widest variety of styles, from Indian ink drawings to installations. Even though the common theme was political, with references to Nazi crimes, the works exhibited were extremely diverse in character.

Later, in 1970, Lurie concluded that: ...the next Involvement Show was premature! The idea of involvement, the breaking of isolation, that by itself was all right. Yet our idea of involvement went farther into a premature attempt to embrace all society including our enemies, to embrace all culture currents liberally, to dispense with an opposition attitude, to give up anger.

It stemmed from an immature, imaginary hopeful belief that, since we in our euphoric state seemed to have changed ourselves through the throes of rebellion-art action, seemed to have purified ourselves by moving through these fires – that the world outside must have then, in our wishful fantasy, done the same; that we were now ready to embrace, to give love and to receive love. How wrong our assessment of reality had been!

For outside nothing had changed at all and our acts, if noticed at all, were rewarded with deathly silence. As to the outside world – not the minuscule art world – it was not affected in the slightest with our cultural doings.

Several years later the Love Children developed similar 8 Michelle Stuart. NO is an Involvement. Artforum.1963 (Sept), p.

36–37

9 Augustus Goertz . Involvement show statement. 1961. Boris Lurie, Seymour Krim. NO!art. Pin-ups Excrements Protest JewArt. Berlin/Koln, 1988, p. 38–39

attitudes along mass lines: and their instinctual striving lead in concrete terms to failure. The time for projecting sentiments of wishful fantasy, of meeting society on such Christian terms unfortunately never did arrive. Yet at the time it seemed to us that the world of the fifties had been done with, buried, the silence and cover-ups of that period irrevocably terminated, the Eichmann trial powerfully reviving suppressed material preferred to be forgotten by most, had also ruptured the death of silence and fear and conformity of the Cold War and post-war period of suppression. Equally maligned by then avantgarde Abstract-Expressionists as by conservative artists, having been put down by all the aesthetes for making bad art – a customary tactic to disarm all artists taking a new road – we had to shift absolutely on our own.

The pop-art reaction-counterrevolution had not been brought about as yet, their future members busy at the time absorbing ideas – to a large extent from our shows – the art press being in effect closed to us (even the then almost underground Village Voice refused to cover our activities, the editor explaining to me that our stand was too radical), we were obliged to promote our actions ourselves, to become our own information medium.10 As recalled by contemporaries, the door was not so readily opened to women artists in New York in the 1950s and 60s.

However, Greenwich Village did give them opportunities.

The March Gallery, too, was a springboard for two artists who would subsequently become very significant, namely Stuart and Yayoi Kusama, who came to America from Japan in the 1950s. Following exhibitions in Seattle and at the Brata Gallery in New York, she participated in the shows of the NO!art group, and had solo shows uptown at the Gallery: Gertrude Stein.

Still, the people dominating the group were males, not because of their maleness, or male superiority or so-called male chauvinism, but simply because they were the most active, fearless. Women NO! artists were overpoweringly concerned with fear: the female, cold, detached, frozen, as in Michelle Stuart’s plaster faces of women in isolated black boxes covered with dark hardly transparent glass, as in Esther Gilman’s fearful feminine conflicts with religion, as with Yayoi Kusama’s obsession-fears of growing, multiplying, threatening fields full of penises, and to a lesser extent in Gloria Graves’ assemblages and delicate constructions. Determined women artists were warmly welcomed – we felt our circle incomplete without them – but women artists as determined as any male.

The feminine situation was one of many subjects, not the sole subject, women’s condition one of many conditions.

There was no class-warfare between the sexes, only the existing reflection of perversion of competitive society – 10 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!” 1970

46 no adoration of sexless unisex. Male NO! artists embraced woman artists in rebellion.11 The next joint venture by the March Group was the Doom Show, which opened in November 1961, influenced by the Cold War, the atomic threat and the Cuban Missle Crisis. Boris Lurie, Stanley Fisher, Sam Goodman and JeanJacques Lebel were the participants.

As a warning to the “powerful” and those who had been “bought off”, these artists presented their interpretations on the theme of the end of the world, at a time when panic was being created both in the USA and in the USSR, bunkers were being built, and the Berlin Wall was being erected.

Greeting visitors at the basement door was a symbolic work by Sam Goodman: a half-burnt doll with plastic flowers. Other exhibited works were similarly depressive, fatal and ugly, like a collage by Stanley Fisher inscribed with the word DOOM, in which a woman’s body parts are strewn as if after an explosion. Some were less graphic, seemingly “more tasteful” (Lebel, for instance). Sam Goodman’s work is naïvely terrifying and poster-style; he is the most impatient of the artists, who, in order to put together and convey his idea as quickly as possible, would take an object from the bin, making or transforming it into a work of art.

11 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!” 1970

Otvoritev skupinske razstave v galeriji Tanager na newyorški Vzhodni 10. ulici št. 90, v božičnem času ob koncu 50-ih ali v začetku 60-ih let.

An opening around Christmas time for a group show at the Tanager Gallery, 90 East 10th Street, New York, late 1950s or early 1960s. © Foto: John Cohen/Getty Images

47 The Doom Show was a direct attack on atomic war danger at the time of Khrushchev-Kennedy confrontation over Cuba in 1961, when basement air raid shelters were to protect the population from atomic attack, hysteria swept the country, a drastic full circle turn towards total art of political issues cancelling with a single stroke all subjective introspective values heretofore still practiced.

The Doom Show film by Ray Wisniewski introduced into this political commitment a happening atmosphere, unrehearsed spontaneous actions to rock music strains to the growing and changing Doom Show environment. This radical turn into total objective political social issues was an attempt to base a true mass art on popular movements entirely – Sam Goodman’s thinking and action thereon was of particular importance. Art was not to serve artists and itself alone any longer selfishly, or serve a small group of the culturally initiated – it should turn all people on, through truly popular art. We believed art can perform such a function if wed to a strong popular political base and that such a democratic aesthetic was the highest elevation of art ever.12 All of this did leave an impression, and as Simon Taylor points out, there was positive reception even in places like Art News (60, 1962, p. 12). Elaine de Kooning praised the exhibition, likening it to Dada: When you enter this small gallery, you are overwhelmed with newspaper headlines of executions and nuclear tests, grotesque pin-up girls, hideous, pasted amalgamations of public faces – a profusion of humour and horror, interchangeable and sickening.13 1961 saw the street parade Car Event near Tompkins Square in the East Village, where Sam Goodman, in a Khrushchev mask, and D’Arcangelo, in a Kennedy mask, expressed the attitude of the NO!art group towards America’s foreign policy, partially as protest and partially as performance.

In 1962, the writer and Dada supporter Arturo Schwarz had a show of Lurie and Goodman’s work entitled the Doom Show at his gallery (active 1954–1975), which then traveled to the Galeria La Salita in Rome.

Arturo Schwartz, […] avant-garde promoter, radical, and businessman who I had met in Milan, Italy, was absolutely wild about photos of NO!art works I showed him. He soon came to New York, became even more enthusiastic when he visited the Doom show at the March. He felt our work 12 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!” 1970

13 Elaine de Kooning: Doom Belongs to Dada. Village Scene. Vol. 1. 1962, quoted after: Simon Taylor. The NO!art Movement in New York. 1960–1964

conformed to his own prognostications on development of art. […] The show in Milan and particularly right afterwards in Rome was a fantastic success in the real popular sense with thousands attending – about 10,000 – the most widely attended show by young artists in Rome ever. Police barred entrance to minors, after lengthy negotiations with Signor Liverani, owner of the gallery La Salita, instead of confiscating all works as they had threatened.14 New opportunities were offered by Gertrude Stein, a young artist and collector, who frequented the alternative galleries of the 10th Street and was particularly thrilled by the March Group. She invited Boris to open a new gallery together, which henceforth became a centre and base of support for these artists. Gallery: Gertrude Stein opened in April 1963, located not downtown but uptown – in a basement at 24 East 81st Street, with a show by Boris Lurie, which she herself introduced: The work of Boris Lurie is powerful stuff. He feels that the ivory tower cannot substitute for real involvement in life; art is an instrument of influence and stimulation. He does not want to converse, he shouts out loud, so that everyone understands. He takes as his symbol the “girly” picture, America’s home-grown brand of pornography.

Repudiating conventional manners, he shakes up the viewer; at any cost he strives to make us take heed of our reality, Lurie forces upon us the bitter vision of the cruelly smiling, heartless advertising pin-up girl. Her picture hangs in the locker rooms; it teases the “tired business man” who surreptitiously stuffs a copy of Playboy into his attaché case; movie stars become commodities to be measured in inches, the dreams of America. Our environment is polluted with sick eroticism and callous indifference, “No” appears in Lurie’s paintings: No! No! No! to the accepted, the cruelty, the desperation and despair which pre­vails, to conformism and the materialistic. It is a strong “NO” in a flood of mass-produced “YESSES”.

And so: he tears the pin-ups; he tosses them down on his canvas to fall where they may. His stunning statement has been made.15 After the move uptown our audience had changed as well.

On Tenth Street they were mainly artists, young people.

Uptown we wondered who our audience really was: around us was a middle-aged crowd of what appeared pleasure seeking neurotic well-off types, a crowd hard to define, amorphous, jelly-like. At the time young uptown Mods were going wild with pop-art and camp – while the more seriously inclined intellectual students, 14 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!” 1970

15 leaflet for the Boris Lurie show at Gallery: Gertrude Stein, New York, 1963

48

and bohemians were quitting the art scene altogether, disappearing into more interesting pursuits: getting into civil rights activism, reappraisal of society in a practical social way, not through art, and into rock music as social expression. The swank uptown galleries certainly were no place for them to congregate. Karl Marx and Steppenwolf were in, the art racket was disdainfully looked down upon: left to the well-groomed clean-shaven tie-and-whiteshirt youthful pop-art geniuses then being promoted as standard bearers of the Youth Revolution.16 A joint exhibition of the March Group (now NO!art) was held that same autumn, from 8 October to 2 November 1963.

Along with Boris Lurie, Stanley Fisher and Sam Goodman, it included Rocco Armento, Yayoi Kusama, Allan Kaprow, Jean-Jacques Lebel, Michelle Stuart, Esther Gilman, Gloria Graves and Richard Tyler.

In a text on an exhibition poster, also serving as a press 16 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!” 1970

Yajoi Kusama, Driving Image Show (plakat), Galerija Gertrude Stein, 31. marec–25. april 1964.

Yajoi Kusama, Driving Image Show (Poster), 31 March – 25 April, 1964, Gallery: Gertrude Stein © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

49 release, Seymour Krim, writer and editor of The Beats, describes them as a “band of rapists”, stating: This in itself is reason for genuine respect, I believe, even if you recoil or are angered by the calculated extremism of some of the work. Why? Because serious art in a rather cowardly mass society such as ours must constantly assert to the public that it is motivated by a different purpose than the decorative or simply artful work which is gobbled up by mass-media man without Indigestion.

America today is no place for self-respecting beauty which doesn’t threaten complacency. We have too much sickness in every compromised area of our lives to need art that soothes. Marvellous French masters are not in tune with us right now. We need art that screams, roars, vomits, rages, goes mad, murders, rapes, commits every bloody and obscene act it can to express only a shred of the human emotions that lie prisoner beneath the sanitary tiles here in adman’s utopia.

Allan Kaprow’s piece is an exception to my eye: it is cool, calculated and effective in a controlled and delimited sense. He has classic taste, but the point of view is too cautious to be representative of what you will see. Esther Gilman’s broken Christ shows the disenchantment of a private religious experience, perhaps bitter disillusionment is the closer description, and it no doubt succeeds but on a comparatively gentle level of wan hope. Michelle Stuart’s sadomasochistic portraits and Yayoi Kusama’s orchard of penises seem closer to the precise point of paint and fantasy, all done within terms of the female sensibility – so different from my own that I am an insensitive translator of all three ladies’ language and advise you to react to their broken melodies with your own sensory equipment.17 Gertrude Stein did all she could to promote NO!art.

She provided the opportunity for solo showings of work by other artists in the group as well, including new arrivals.

For example, giving Kusama her first solo sculpture show, Aggregation: One Thousand Boats” in 1963.

Kusama placed a boat covered in countless white cloth penises directly in the middle of the gallery, along with 999 lithographs of the work itself, pasted like wallpaper around the space. Andy Warhol, viewing this particular exhibition, perceived the potential of duplication and commenced his series of prints.

Yayoi Kusama’s One Thousand Boat Show – but one white penis-covered boat with ors on the gallery floor, photos of that same boat covering walls entirely from floor to ceiling, was the next show, her experience of unwanted fertility17 Seymour Krim. Introduction. NO Show at Gertrude Stein Gallery. 1963)

energy floating aimlessly on a non-existing ocean... the woman threatened by all this out-of-kilter sexual power must have escaped the assault, drowned in the gallery floor. The all too male-aggressive female Samurai vanished later into desperate exhibitionistic pursuits.18 In 1964, exhibitions by Erró and Herb Brown were also held at the Gallery: Gertrude Stein.

Overpainted large subway posters by Herb Brown came next, bringing the subway arcades into an art environment, a precursor of the graffiti craze now rampant in the subways – but with meaning, expressing disgust, the individual’s defense against the avalanche assault of unwanted publicity.19 Also in 1964 Sam Goodman and Dorothy Gillespie created the installation “American Way of Death” at the Salle de Champagne Gallery, which was part of a nightclub owned

by Dorothy Gillespie and her husband.

As Lurie recalls, the space was arranged as a: ...realistic environment of a funeral parlor with coffins, burial-lot plans, burial accessories, all faithfully, realistically reproduced, scrupulously marked out with payment plans, prices and attractive sales descriptions – precursor of the present sociological art. Coffins with the deceased on display as well: Sam Goodman horribly prophetic here, this was next to his last show – a few years later only he died himself in anger to the lost. At his Memorial show at Gertrude Stein’s in 1967 we exhibited the very same coffin again next to one of our Shit-sculptures.20 At the beginning of 1964 (14 Jan. – 8 Feb.) Boris Lurie held an exhibition of screen-printed “NO Posters”, which were advertised at $25 each. In the introduction to the exhibition he states that the idea was openly directed against the inflated market prices of Pop Art.21 My “No-Posters” show followed, an idea conceived in 1962: waste-sheets, used to clean printing presses full of contradictory advertising messages due to layers of overprinting, the accidental artwork of the machine so fully representing consumerism. These poster-size prints were uniformly overprinted in silver with the slogan NO, a large pinup girl kneeling, a group of sadomasochistic bound and gagged humiliation photos. Selection of this 18 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!” 1970 19 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!” 1970 20 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!” 1970

21 NO-posters/ANTI-POP posters. Boris Lurie, Seymour Krim “NO!art”, Cologne, 1988, p. 86

50 material from the library of my symbols was done by Sam Goodman since the result (but not the concept) was to be left of any conscious artistic interference by the author. The purpose was creation of a protest poster, entirely accidentally composed by the poor misused printing presses themselves, NO-advertising posters, NO-secretary posters, NO-travel posters, NO-industrial posters, NO-motel posters, NO-toy posters. Their edition potentially unlimited, yet almost each slightly different – a unique piece – their sales price minimal. True popular protest prints, machine-made, versus pop-art handcrafted expensive silk-screens for collectors in limited editions masquerading as popular art. To make sure of clarity and understanding of intent, stenciled and exhibited under each poster were the words Anti-Pop.22 In 1964, Sam Goodman and Boris Lurie held another conceptual exhibition at Gallery: Gertrude Stein called the NO Sculptures Show, but known more scandalously as the “Shit Show”. It was an installation of sculptures – pieces of excrement – that were each attributed to a major establishment art dealer or curator: Shit of Castelli, Shit of Sonnabend, etc. The exhibition naturally attracted general attention. This provocation by the NO! artists could not be ignored even by New York’s most respectable art reviewers and critics, either during the time of the exhibition or later (even though there were precedents for the idea of “selling your own shit”).

The No-Sculpture Show (Shit-show) was an exhibition of sculptures whose subject was excrement made of hard cast plaster and painted; it varied in size from small to mammoth displayed directly on the gallery floors.

Produced in around-the-clock hectic work in the old March gallery basement on Tenth Street by Sam Goodman and me, it was then displayed at the Gertrude Stein Gallery.

The sculptures multiplied, filling the small basement on Tenth Street, where we had started our collective action; while Sam Goodman was pouring, extruding plaster out of plastic guts, I kept on bringing in more bags of plaster on the luggage rack of my tiny Austin-Sprite, arranging the chicken wire arid burlap structures, painting the finished excrement. We worked in this tempo for several weeks practically day and night, driving each other mercilessly to produce more and more and better. I personally felt myself in command of an important decisive raid quite as a military leader. We knew that now all but all the bridges had been burned definitively, if this offensive failed we would fall with it. The ultimate revolution of the subject matter is to be found at the Gertrude Stein Gallery ... these aggregations of colonic calligraphy contain many formal excellencies for anyone whose purist education 22 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!” 1970

forces them to perceive them. But the subject matter puts the joke on those who find formal values in it. Those who do not are forced to deny the legitimacy of values that by now have been inculcated into several college generations. (Brian O’Doherty, New York Times, Dec. 1963) Paradoxically though – to our great amazement and frightening surprise – the pop collectors, speculators began to show up, professing to like the show, claiming to want to buy and promote it. I believe their feeling was quite sincere in the context of their thought, though they totally misunderstood content and intent. This was a frightening experience to us, we suspected we possibly had gone wrong, that our intentions had misfired, ricocheted in a way not anticipated, feared our newly found appreciators – and enemies – in some twisted yet true way had understood the true content of the work better than we thought we did ourselves: but our doubts were dissipated when they told us their promotion would include a package deal, that we were to follow their aesthetic direction and our gallery had to become a satellite of the pop galleries grouping; an attempt was made to drive a wedge into our united stand by holding out remuneration and gain to some, but not to others.

After lengthy violent argument and discussion with the pop people, of which Mr. Kraushaar was one, quite unexpectedly – for he had kept silent all along during the fiery exchanges – after Kraushaar congratulated him personally, Sam Goodman retorted unexpectedly: “I shit on you, too!” A short, self-conscious, aggressive and defensive man, Kraushaar turned green and walked out.23 It is not the case that Lurie, Goodman and Fisher were united solely by fundamental hostility or confrontation directed against everything and everyone. In truth, with their NO!, they offer a reminder, a prevision they knock on the doors of conscience and of sanity. The disfigured masks, prostitutes, and excrement serve the functions of reminders and warnings. By presenting war, violence, slavery, hypocrisy, or corruption, they were presenting human deeds and misdeeds, preventively, as if a vaccine against all such madness. Desperate diseases require desperate remedies.

And people have short memories.

The three founders and theoreticians of NO!art experienced the war much more immediately than their associates. Having suffered most gravely in the war, Lurie should have “by rights” been shouting and ranting the loudest.

But perhaps because he had come from a different world, from an educated family with certain values, and since he himself would from time to time simply soak up the Parisian spirit, even when presenting his most shocking work, Boris Lurie could not abandon the respect characteristic of the old culture towards what might be referred to as a work of 23 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!” 1970

51 art, or what we might call a “professional attitude” towards the chosen media. In his paintings and collages only the subject is extreme; at the same time, the color is balanced (Lumumba is Dead, 1960), and in his major, most-effective works the idea is presented clearly and legibly as in a poster (Love Series: Bound on Red, 1963). If the idea is laconic then the work itself will likewise be readily comprehensible. Where juxtaposition is paramount, all the means of expression are made to serve it. Even when Lurie highlights a provocative element, such as a swastika or Star of David, he does it precisely and convincingly. He never abandoned what are known as formal values, because the works were thought out, at least in an intuitive way, and stylistically faultless.

It may be that no-one actually expected any artistic values from these artists, but the seemingly chaotic composition is organized, even if it initially appears as just a jumble of color.

It is clear that the artist has talent and a sense for color.

Even though he himself would prefer to deny it, the painting, collage or spatial object actually appears intelligently executed, even when the subject matter is provocative and in many cases sadomasochistic. It is all rendered viewable, even if not enjoyable, by Lurie’s impeccable sense of style.

Moreover, this is the case even while ignoring all ethical and, seemingly, all aesthetic norms.24 Aesthetics are retained, even though these are, of course, not aestheticized works. The aesthetics of NO!art are altogether different: aggressive and subsumed to a socio-political commentary or message.

Lurie himself explains: The idea we expressed was to open up limitations of art.

Aesthetic art limits itself to areas that should be reworked and other areas that should not be touched. We were against it and wanted to incorporate all things, even down to the dirt on the sidewalk. [...] What we did does not have to be un-aesthetic. There were many good artists (in our group) and they were making aesthetic work.

What people called un-aesthetic was the content that came out, because you can have immediacy in AbstractExpressionism.25 The uncompromising subject matter of Lurie’s work, aimed at unmasking the whole world, was presented in the context of a radical art movement, appropriate to the place and time. Moreover, although they are seemingly directed against the topical development in American art of the time, namely Pop Art, the work of Lurie and certain other 24 Likewise, the novel House of Anita, written later in the 1970s, is amoral and disgusting, but nevertheless stylistically impeccable 25 Alan Murdock. Interview with Boris Lurie. The Daily Iowan newspaper, 4 March, 1999

NO! artists could not have been created outside of their time; moreover, they are not stylistically different from work like Pop (D’Arcangelo, for example). There are elements of Abstract-Expressionism as well as Neo-Dada, along with popular culture, in the sense that we see deliberate use of photographs, ready images and clichés. NO!art was ostensibly directed against Abstract-Expressionism and Pop Art; nevertheless, these elements are present in the NO! artists’ work. Possibly, their antagonism was directed not so much against the art movements themselves as against the immediate art market success of the artists belonging to these movements and against speculation on the part of the major art galleries. After what they had been through, Lurie and his associates would probably also have been affronted by the lightness, irony and suaveness of others.

In “hounding” the Pop Artists, Lurie later identified Dada, which he respected and valued for provoking the bourgeois, as also being guilty of justifying Pop Art (which he saw clothed in US chauvinism).26 In this same statement for the “Art and Politics” exhibition at the Kunstverein Karlsruhe in 1970 he continues to formulate his campaign not only against Pop Art but also against color field painting within Abstract-Expressionism (represented by Rothko, for example) and minimalism, all of which he regarded as “a drug for sending people to sleep” , even though subsequently, discussing NO!art, he would admit: “We worshipped the Abstract-Expressionists.

These were our influences”. (Alan Murdock. Interview with Boris Lurie. The Daily Iowan newspaper, 4 March, 1999). (It seems, with the term Abstract-Expressionism, Lurie means only its general direction of emotional action painting).

However, because of its deep, unironic, black humor, NO!art cannot be identified with Dada; the breaking down of restrictions in terms of the material used does not yet mean rapprochement. As with Dada and Neo-Dada, the work of the NO! artists imbues readymade objects with a metaphorical significance opposite to that which is generally perceived in them. However, unsmiling NO!art is not engaged in playing with inappropriate iconography, symbolism, or experiences with everyday objects, like Dada was. Thus, NO!art is a matter of grown-up boys’ games of life and death. Even children’s toys are employed in telling of destruction (Death and Resurrection) and a portable altar obtains a new meaning when it features the portrait of a mass murderer (Eichmann Triptych). Or the list of sausages (annihilated Jews) placed within the bars of a diner menu (Menu/Blood Wurst). The prime exponent of this tendency is Sam Goodman. The works mentioned here are actually his.

He is the one with the craziest ideas and imagination (he who 26 Max Liljefors “Boris Lurie and NO!art” www.heterogenesis. com, 2003, no. 4

52 encouraged Lurie to utilize photographs of concentration camp victims), and the most aggressive work. Burned dolls, objects at hand or discovered in rubbish, broken boards. He imbued everyday objects with symbolic and iconographic significance. He seems to be begging for his “sculptures” to not be seen as works of art.

Goodman never did become rich and famous, and his thirty years in the New York art world did not make him popular with its career-minded talent-less members, yet he had been a decisive influence, this pushy little Jew, as many saw him, to shove art decisively out of its welloiled tracks, so it will never be quite the same again. At the height of his heat and inspiration he strangely began looking like garbage himself, magnetically attracted to refuse cans on the streets, searching for the components of his art and forgetting the presence of anyone strolling alongside of him.27 Stanley Fisher struggled with his demons in a similar way, by materializing them. He would act like a vandal, altering and supplementing recognizable individuals and symbols, and thus transforming their meaning. His collage paintings are like virulent parodies on all the topical NO!art themes. Muddy, dirtied colors, masks, words of death and destruction, and graffiti are used to create “filth” contrasting with the refinement of Pop Art and comic-strip representation of the “good life”. Seymour Krim writes in his introduction for the 1963 NO Show exhibition at the Gallery: Gertrude Stein about a work by Fisher that he had hung at home above the fireplace: I resent it because it is so raw, vulgar, smeared, screechy, hardly separate from the fevered streets that inspired it.

And yet I love it because of its reality. Not being a painter, it seems to me extraordinary that the reality which I and thousands of my generation must cope with every day has been seized and thrown cursing into art.

Do the NO!art works have anything to say? The work of Lurie, Goodman, and Fisher goes on the attack, screaming a battle cry. This is what constituted the content of the work by these three NO! artists. It must be noted that in this regard the three founders and ideologues of the group do differ from the rest, who did not express such great pain, and who permitted themselves a greater degree of coquetry, and some of whom (Lebel, Kusama and Erró) did actually carve out a career for themselves in America.

Lurie presents his NO! in a very direct way – inscribing it directly on his paintings.

27 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!”

Later, in 1970, Lurie offered an explanation of NO!: “NO!art is anti worldmarket-investment art: (artworldmarketinvestment art equals cultural manipulation). NO!art is against “clinical”, “scientific” aestheticisms: (such aestheticisms are not art).” 28 Essentially, this is also a NO to compromise, to tacit support. Lurie took it as his human duty to speak only of the negative, to warn and scare people. These three figures, as the core group of NO!art, work as people who have through their personal experiences of the war been brought to the point where there is nothing more to lose. Moreover, this threesome shares the common Jewish sorrow, which must actually be a sorrow of all humanity, and this is the theme of their work.

The Frankfurt School of philosophy, along with statements by Theodor Adorno to the effect that “to write poetry after Auschwitz is barbaric.” (Theodor W. Adorno, Cultural Criticism and Society (1949) later, in 1970s became more popular as in NO!art was formatting years, but thees artists created the works , which responded already to this concept- is indecent to analyze art after all limits of humanity have been violated.

The theme of the Holocaust (Shoah) is further developed

by Boris Lurie himself. As a victim in the most immediate sense, he was the only one who had the ethical right to come up with the shocking expression that Hitler was the greatest artist of all time, since projects and installations involving people had never been realized on such a scale before.

Someone remind these cursed greedy art culture manipulators artist blood dealers of a young beatnik artist.

Not so long ago. Named Adolf Hitler. Whose career might have been different. If…another clique, at another time…

He would not then have to sow all over the landscape of Europe. His real-life art-masterpieces.29 Several of Lurie’s works will never cease to arouse incomprehension and provoke indignation, for example those juxtaposing documentary images of people killed in the concentration camps with photographs of pin-up girls. One does not need a great deal of imagination to understand the traumatic effect on a teenager whose first sight of a naked woman was a dead one on a pile of corpses. Lurie was too young to process it in his psyche. This is why he would show women in his pin-up works only as objects to be used, just as it was in the concentration camp. In his works on the theme of the Holocaust, Lurie depicts the sadism he had 28 Statement for the exhibition “Art and politics” at Karlsruhe Kunstverein, Germany, 1970. Published in: Lurie, Boris; Krim, Seymour: NO!art, Cologne 1988

29 Boris Lurie, 1975(1) Introduction to Curse Works, 1972–73.

Boris Lurie and Seymour Krim, NO!art. Berlin and Cologne: Edition Hundertmark, 1988, 94

53 experienced, presented masochistically and cynically, as if he himself had not been a victim.

The psychological suffering and personal trauma that the artists continue to rework in their art is a further factor motivating them to unite in common protest. They are seeking to live through their mental scars and traumas by licking their wounds, then tearing them open again from time to time and placing them on view as artistic images.

A significant object of NO!art’s antagonism was commercialization in general, including the commercialization of art, and most directly the “establishment” behind it. In its extreme form, this is, of course, visualized in Goodman and Lurie’s “Shit Show” of 1964. The work and exhibitions created by the threesome represented a general series of protests against all hypocrisy. The NO!art protesters were simply visualizing, depicting on canvas and in assemblages, that which had happened and is happening to human values. Like children teach their parents by their behavior and show the necessity for limits, so too NO!art, through its aggressive works, taunts by sticking out its tongue to indicate that something is wrong in the world. Maximalism, idealism, uprising, is not a prerogative of very young people.

Their defiance is intended to identify and attest.

The destruction in the work of the NO! artists certainly does not mean that they had no desire for harmony, even if most of them were used to doing without it. In reality, they are positively oriented, advocating a world without evil, without war, without inhumanity. It is resistance by young people to the inhumanity to which they had already been exposed.

Lurie, Goodman and Fisher attracted others who also wished to realize themselves through and likewise begin with absolute “negation”. So, what brought them together?

Their mentality? Depression? Suffering? Indignation?

Accumulated aggression? Protest? The malcontents gathered around Boris Lurie. Kusama rapidly embarked on a successful career in New York; Erró became friendly with the Pop Artists and adapted their style.

1964 marked a watershed in NO!art, because the group had made its statement and manifested itself. And could anything more shocking and crazy follow after the “Shit Show”? Lurie and Goodman had aroused the others who were not politically and socially indifferent. Time was moving on, the need for joint exhibitions had been overcome, and each artist began to develop their individual career (as can be seen from the attached biographies). For some, this would be the only period in their biographies as artists where their names were known (Gloria Graves), some would consciously seek to erase their youthful activities in New York from their biography (Kusama), and some would remember

it with delight as a significant part of their activity (Lebel).

At the time, these were young, active, radical people with unusual tastes, for whom the March Gallery and the Gallery: Gertrude Stein provided a springboard. They were also brought together by the spirit of the age and the opportunity for self-expression, not always with a common voice.

A fatal chain of tragic events unfolded for us beginning 1964. I have an idea hard to justify or defend that my Death sculpture, an encapsulation in plastic brick of several chicken-heads might have started it all … and Goodman with his American Way of Death contributed to it further, for 1964 was the death of the NO!art movement as a collective force, though many of its artists continued working and showing individually. My father died, a death that descending upon me, squashed me like a tank and in 1967 Sam Goodman died after having slowly succumbed to his cancer. We get premonitions about tinkering with dynamite and still we are drawn to, must continue tinkering.30 After the death of Lurie’s father in 1964, he received his inheritance and assumed responsibility for the Schaina and Josephina Lurje foundation his father had established to help Holocaust survivors, which led him to engage in stock market trading and other social activities.

In time, Lurie recommenced his artistic activities, and continued to seek out like-minded individuals. He had already found a close friend and kindred spirit in Jewish artist Wolf Vostell from West Berlin, whose work had been shown in New York in 1963, in the exhibition 6 TV-dé-coll/agen at the Smolin Gallery. He was a true kindred soul to Lurie. The ideas of the Fluxus movement that Vostell belonged to would have been attractive for an artist like Lurie. Allan Kaprow, also connected with NO!art, spread these ideas at Rutgers University, where he was employed at the time. Vostell and Lurie regularly exchanged ideas, and the two artists had a close friendship, as related by Vostell’s son Rafael, an advisor to the Boris Lurie Art Foundation and organiser of NO!art exhibitions. In the 1970s Vostell invited Lurie to Germany and introduced him to gallerists who organized shows of his work there: Inge Bäcker, Rene Block, Helmut Rywelski und Armin Hundertmark.

The actual name NO!art was used for the first time in an article by Edward Kelly in the spring 1964 issue of The Art Journal, in the article “Neo-dada: A critique of Pop”. The phrase appeared as a label for the March Group after the NO Show at the Gallery: Gertrude Stein, based on the link with Neo-Dada. In his article, Kelly compares the NO! artists with Pop Artists, explaining that the iconography of NO! is 30 Boris Lurie “Shit NO!” 1970

54 more shameless, more violent, and more satirical. He also suggests that Pop Art as such may have been inspired by an attempt to turn NO!art into a palatable object for a public wishing to invest in satirical games.31 The relationship between art and documentary photography, the paradox of painful Art (PPA), the aesthetics of the ugly, etc., are themes treated extensively in the work of many postmodern, postwar philosophers, art theoreticians and psychoanalysts, and much of this writing relates to NO!art.

Are there any further resemblances with art movements of the time, and with other like-minded figures? Apart from Fluxus, of course, we have the wildest provocations in Viennese Actionism, which are related in art history to the consequences of the war (to symbolically cleanse oneself of the Austrian feeling of guilt for supporting fascism). While one may see rebellious phenomena of this kind emerging in Western Europe and in America, aimed at upsetting the good citizen’s stolid life, elsewhere, in Eastern Europe for example, in the Baltic, nonconformist artists could only express their hatred of political systems and their sorrow at the extermination of loved-ones at the kitchen table, and could only show their work to their closest friends.

And if nowadays we are aware of the existence of the NO! artists and Boris Lurie’s 1964 Death Sculptures, it is interesting to observe that the idea, presented back then in a rather modest way, has since been manifested in the form of a shark and a bisected cow (Damien Hirst). If we are aware of NO!art, then we can comprehend, for example, what Jean- Michel Basquiat is saying. We can clearly see that the foundations for contemporary performances and happenings were laid in the basements and street theatres

by Allan Kaprow, Sam Goodman, Allan D’Arcangelo and others. Shit and provocation, have become almost essential for contemporary feeling, but the motivations for creating them are different than they were in NO!art.

NO!art is a phenomenon that requires further research, and its significance is still to be fully evaluated. Through their statements, ideas, and works, all of the artists comprising this group form part of post-war social action. Through their loud, demonstrative NO!, they strove to be seen and heard.

Although they were capable of arguing for and justifying their protests, the course of post-war history demonstrates that, in the big game, an artist warning of danger represents no more than a rather touching Don Quixote.

31 KZ-Kampf-Kunst. “Boris Lurie: NO!art”, NY, 2014, p. 227–228

55

Stanley Fisher (1960)

56

Izjava ob Vulgarni razstavi

Vulgar Show Statement

objavljena v: Lurie, Boris; Krim, Seymour: NO!art, Köln 1988

published in: Lurie, Boris; Krim, Seymour: NO!art, Cologne 1988

Ena izmed tisočih nepotrebnih, neutemeljenih izjav SKUPINE MARCH o temah, o katerih ne ve ničesar, na primer o umetnosti.

This one statement by the MARCH GROUP among a thousand countless uncalled for, unfounded statements that it makes on subjects like art it knows nothing about.

Potovalna Slabost

Motion Sickness

Umetnosti je konec. Svet in bivanje sta se zrušila. Kdo si? V tej vrzeli je nevidnost najpomembnejša. Pij praznino.

Pij robove. Lokaj sežnje. Kdo smo? Zemlja je enosmeren let v klavnico. Kako ta hrbtenica atomskih bomb, razkrečena med poštnimi nabiralniki in okončinami, radostí notranje oko, poneverja potne liste v raj. Pregreha. Vulgarno? To je začetek novega smrtnega rožljanja v odprtih zaprtih perverznih tonalitetah. Pričakujete, da bo poroka poroka, razpoka pa razpoka? Pomislite na nevidnost. Pijte rotacije. Podaljšajte se proti nebu. Umetnost je dosegla hitrost, pri kateri lahko ubeži sama sebi, strmoglavlja v spalnice, budoarje, bordele, banke, umobolnice in atomske bombe. Kam še? V taksije, taksone, tabernaklje, tarantele, tube in telefone.

Art has ended. The world and being collapsed. Who are you? In this void, invisibility is seminal. Drink emptiness. Drink brinks. Swill on fathoms. Who are we? The earth is a line drive single to the slaughterhouse. How that spinal column of A-bombs sprawled among letter boxes and limbs delights the indoor eye, swindles passports into paradise. Vice.

Vulgar? This is the beginning of the new death rattle in overt covert pervert keys. Do you expect marriage to be marriage, carriage to be carriage? Think invisibility. Drink rotations.

Lengthen skyward. Art has reached escape velocity from the self, it plummets into bedrooms, boudoirs, brothels, banks, bedlams, and A-bombs. Where else. Into taxis, taxidermists, tabernacles, tarantulas, tubas and telephones.

Nekoč se je človek soočil s svetlobno hitrostjo in ljudje so se nacejali nad strehami, gradili so piramide in megalite, Noetove barke. Zdaj je inercija v plamenih. Se lahko znova soočimo s hitrostjo smrti v eksplozijah vodikovih bomb in ohranimo naše truplo iz ilovice, ali pa moramo gledati kalejdoskop barve, ujete v potovalno slabost tistega poslednjega dne?

At one time man confronted speeds of light, and people swilled above their house-tops, pyramids were formed and megaliths, Noah’s arcs. Now inertia is in flames. Can we confront again the speed of death in H-bomb blasts and retain our corpse of clay or must we watch the kaleidoscope of paint immured in motion sickness of that final day?

57

Vulgarna razstava v Galeriji March / Vulgar Show at the March Gallery, 1960–61, neznani fotograf / unknown photographer Š Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Boris Lurie (1961)

58

Izjava ob Vključujoči razstavi Dobrodošli na to razstavo. Če vam oči in um dobro služijo, boste videli nekaj novega. Ko si boste ogledovali razstavo, se prosim izogibajte estetskim nalepkam; ne govorite nam realisti, neodadaisti, nadrealisti. Te nalepke v današnjem kontekstu niso niti resnične niti pomembne.

Formalistične razlike tukaj ne veljajo. Estetiko na splošno vidimo kot nekaj fiksnega, trdnega: nanjo gledamo kot na odsev spreminjajoče se resničnosti. Slonokoščeni stolp ne more nadomestiti vključevanja v življenje. V časih vojne in uničevanja vaje v estetiki in dekorativni vzorci niso dovolj.

Nismo samo »abstraktni«, »nepredmetni«, »reprezentativni« – prej smo vse to: uporabiti hočemo vse iznajdbe, pretekle in sedanje, ne da bi jih razlikovali po »slogih«. Totalnost vidimo kot skupek vseh vidikov: omejujoče, puristične, puritanske pristope zavračamo.

Nismo igrivi! Umetnost hočemo graditi, ne pa uničevati, govorimo pa natanko to, kar mislimo – za ceno lepih navad. Tu ne boste našli nobenih skrivnih jezikov, nobenih domišljijskih pobegov, nobenih pritajenih, utišanih tišin, nobenih sporočil, ki jih predvajamo ekskluzivnemu občinstvu. Umetnost je orodje vplivanja in spodbujanja. Radi bi govorili, vpili, tako da lahko razumejo vsi. Naš edini gospodar je resnica.

Nove meje ... stare meje. Je res, da je bil le en človek dovolj, da se je svet prebudil?

Eichmann živ ... Eichmann mrtev ... koga briga Eichmann?

Zdaj nam govorijo vse o koncentracijskih taboriščih. BergenBelsen so spremenili v krasen park. Tudi po osvoboditvi jih je na tisoče stradalo.

Je bilo prav, da so ugrabili Eichmanna? Mednarodno pravo? Kdo je izpeljal ugrabitev? En človek?

Poglejte dol. Kaj vidite? Preštejte mrtve! Preštejte žive? Kaj slišite? Tišino. Kako jih lahko preštejemo?

Publiciteta, vredna milijone.

Popolnoma ničesar nimamo prodati! Nekaterim postane v kletkah zelo neudobno – nič se ne zdi tako verodostojno kot prej (duhovi so začeli paradirati po New Yorku). Celo mrtvi so se tako dolgo skrivali, oropani pravice do samoizražanja.

Zdaj, ko so se nanje spomnili v časopisih, so toliko bolj pomirjeni. Za vse to pa je bil potreben en sam odločen človek.

Zakopane, zakrite, bolne, plesnive zavesti: odprite se! Človek je morda nemočen, vera pa premika gore. Svež zrak piha skozi te razpadajoče kanjone?! Plehkosti in sofizmi.

Prevara, napuh, laži.

Angažirana razstava v galeriji March / Involvement Show at the March Gallery, 1961 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

59

Boris Lurie (1961)

Involvement Show Statement Welcome to this exhibition. If your eyes and mind serve you well, you will see something new. When viewing this show, please avoid applying aesthetic labels; do not call us realists, neo-dadaists, surrealists. These labels are neither true nor important in today’s context. Formalist distinctions do not apply here. Aesthetics are generally viewed as a fixed, solid entity: we look upon it as the reflection of changing reality. The ivory tower is no substitute for Involvement in life.

In a time of wars and extermination, aesthetic exercises and decorative patterns are not enough.

We are not ‘abstract’, ‘non-objective’, ‘representational’, alone – rather, we are all of it: we want to use all inventions, past or present, without discrimination as to ‘styles’. Totality is seen as a composite of all aspects: limiting, purist, puritanical approaches are rejected. We are not playful! We want to build art and not destroy it, but we say exactly what we mean – at the expense of good manners. You will find no secret languages here, no fancy escapes, no hushed, muted silences, no messages beamed at exclusive audiences. Art is a tool of influence and urging. We want to talk, to shout, so that everybody can understand. Our only master is truth.

New frontiers...old frontiers. Is it true it only took one man to awaken the world?

Eichmann alive...Eichmann dead...who cares for Eichmann? Now they tell us all about the concentration camps. Bergen-Belsen has been turned into a beautiful park. Thousands kept on starving after the Liberation.

Was it right to kidnap Eichmann? International law? Who brought the capture about? One man?

Look down. What do you see? Count the dead! Count the living? What do you hear? Silence. How can they be counted?

Angažirana razstava v galeriji March, 'Moški fetiš' Sama Goodmana / Involvement Show at the March Gallery, Sam Goodman's Male Fetish, 1961 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation Millions worth of publicity.

We have absolutely nothing to sell! Some people get very uncomfortable in their cages – nothing seems as credible as before (the ghosts started their parade in New York). Even the Dead had been in hiding, so long, deprived of the right of self-expression. They are much more at peace now that the newspapers have remembered them. But it only took one determined man to accomplish all this.

Buried, covered up, sick, moldy consciences: open up!

Man might be helpless, but faith has moved a mountain.

Fresh air blows through these putrid canyons?! Platitudes and sophistries.

Deceit, conceit, lies.

60

Angažirana razstava v galeriji March, 'Ženski fetiš' Sama Goodmana / Involvement Show at the March Gallery, Sam Goodman's Female Fetish, 1961 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Angažirana razstava v galeriji March / Involvement Show at the March Gallery, 1961 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

61

Stanley Fisher (1961)

62

Izjava ob razstavi Pogube

Doom Show Statement

Objavljeno v: Lurie, Boris; Krim, Seymour: NO!art, Köln 1988

Published in: Lurie, Boris; Krim, Seymour: NO!art, Cologne 1988

Prišel je čas, ko bes preglasi malenkostne strahove navade in sprijaznjenosti. Bedaste in ponižujoče obstoječe sile so same sebe (in vse druge) spravile v slepo ulico, ob kateri so nacistični krematoriji sorazmerno nedolžni. Ti voditelji, trmasti v svoji neumnosti in zaničevanju, se nočejo odreči moči in priznavajo svoje kriminalno obnašanje, ker je posvečeno kriminalno vedenje postalo način življenja, vse do trpinčenja otrok doma in v šoli, ter v zanikanju spolne svobode tistim, ki so dovolj zreli, da se spopadejo z njo ... cena te vseprisotne družbene bolezni pa so duševna napihnjenost, duhovna hipokrizija in besnenje nad živim in ljubečim. Zdaj pa so posledice daljnosežne in smrtonosne ...

The time has come when outrage overwhelms the petty fears of habit and complacency. The stupid and humiliating powers-that-are have forced themselves (and everyone else) into a cul-de-sac which makes the Nazi crematoriums relatively innocuous. These leaders, stubborn in their stupidity and contempt, refuse to relinquish their powers and admit their criminal behavior, for consecrated criminal behavior has become a way of life, right down to the brutalization of children at home and in school, and in the denial of sexual freedom to those mature enough to cope with it...

Človeškega življenja ni mogoče zatreti, ne da bi ga popolnoma uničili, sredstva pa so postala dostopna ... atomska bomba in njeno grozovito spremstvo! Smo se soočili z grožnjami našemu obstoju? Smo si dovolili začutiti trpinčenje občutljivosti in ljubezni, ki je zatrlo željo, da bi kričali proti takim odvratnostim, ki so ponudile stagnacijo in rak kot nagradi za resignacijo? Ne: resnice niso zdramile domišljije ljudstva, ki si želi umreti in samo sebe draži z naslado ob pohabljanju in poškodovanju drugih. Gradijo se atomska zaklonišča, pripravljajo se kompleti pripomočkov za preživetje, ljudje so otopeli ob kršenju pravice do bivanja in pravice do ekscentričnosti. Zaklonišča so peči, v katerih se bo izvršila naša samokremacija, smrt brez smisla, smrt brez dostojanstva, samotna smrt, smrt, ki bo v nekem smislu »zaslužena«. In kje so umetniki, ki so na barikadah življenja in kulture? Zakaj se niso zbudili iz sna, da bi se soočili z neposredno grožnjo svojim svoboščinam, ki so bistvene predvsem za umetnost in sanje? Tudi oni so postali orodja Ponorele avenije denarja in slikajo kašo idiotskega sveta, ki se ne more soočiti z močnimi čustvi bivanja ali življenjskimi tveganji. Galerija March je središčna točka za tiste, ki se želijo upreti posvečeni bolezni sveta, ki se pripravlja na smrt, in kraj, ki spodbuja imobiliziranega umetnika sveta, ki želi nekaj povedati s krikom strasti. Ta razstava, imenovana Razstava pogube, je klic tistim, ki bi radi preživeli. Je umetnost za preživetje.

and the price of this ubiquitous social disease has been mental flatulence, spiritual hypocrisy and rage against the living and the loving. But now the consequences are far reaching and deadly...

You cannot suppress human life without destroying it completely, and the means have become available... the atom bomb and its accoutrements of horror! Have we faced the threats to our existence? Have we allowed ourselves to feel the brutalization of sensitivity and love which has suppressed the desire to shout out against such abominations, but which have offered stagnation and cancer as rewards of resignation? No: truths have not stirred the imagination of a people who wish to die, and who titillate themselves with the thrill of mutilation and injury to others. Fall-out shelters are being constructed, survival kits prepared, people numbed to violation of their right to be, and their right to eccentricity. The fall-out shelters are the ovens in which our self cremations will become finalized, a death without meaning, a death without dignity, a lonely death, a death in a sense ‘deserved’. And where are the artists who are on the barricades of life and culture? Why haven’t they risen from their sleep to face the imminent threat to their freedoms, essential above all to the arts and dreams? They too have become tools of Mad. Money Ave. and paint the gruel of an idiotic world which cannot face the powerful emotions of existence, or the hazards of life.

The March Gallery is a focus for those who want to strike out against the hallowed sickness of a world preparing to die, and a place offering encouragement to the immobilized artist of the world who wants to say something with a cry of passion. This show, called Doom, is a call to those who want to survive. It is Art for Survival.

63

Razstava Pogube v galeriji March / Doom Show at March Gallery, 1961 Š Boris Lurie Art Foundation

64

Razstava Pogube v galeriji March, 'Bomba s kačo' Sama Goodmana / Doom Show at the March Gallery, Sam Goodman's Bomb with Snake, 1961 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation Razstava Pogube v galeriji March / Doom Show at March Gallery, 1961 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation Razstava Pogube v galeriji March / Doom Show at March Gallery, 1961 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

65

Boris Lurie (1964)

66

Spremna beseda k razstavi kipov NO! SAMA GOODMANA Razstava, ki jo je predstavil Boris Lurie v Galeriji Gertrude Stein, New York. 12.–30. maj 1964 Pred kratkim sem se ponoči, pravzaprav že zgodaj zjutraj, oglasil v studiu Sama Goodmana. Opazil sem, da se je ukvarjal s kipom, ki je zapuščen obležal v kotu studia.

Takoj me je obšla misel, da gre za kip, ki ga je nekdo moral narediti prav v tem trenutku: umetniško gledano je bil to tiste pomladi 1964 v tem New Yorku pravi odgovor. Ta kip je moral narediti prav Goodman, nič podobnega še ni bilo narejenega kdaj prej.

Kot bi umetnik izgubil upanje ob projektu, ki je tako zahteven, tako poln eksplozivnosti, naperjene proti avtorju samemu, pa tudi svetu okrog njega, se je ideji očitno odrekel, saj je spoznal, kako brezupno in nevarno bi jo bilo uresničiti in predstaviti. Blagoslovljen sem bil z vpogledom, ki mi je omogočil, da sem ugledal pomen tistega kipa in kiparja spodbujal pri uresničevanju njegove nevarne ideje. Zares se mi zdi, da imam srečo, ker sem v tem projektu lahko odigral majhno vlogo.

Spominjam se prejšnjih Goodmanovih del, od začetka zgodovinskih razstav v uporniški galeriji March, ki so bile prvi bojni klic k resnično novi družbeni umetnosti, od bogastva, s katerim so se hranile naslednje generacije umetnikov. Od zažganih dojenčkov, lutk najinega otroštva, iz Auschwitza in Hirošime, in lutk črnskih deklic, pobitih tukaj v ZDA, se je podal bogatit našo zavest s podobo nekoristnih in odvrženih ljudi, nakopičenih cunj in odvrženih svežnjev. S konstrukcijami na Razstavi pogube je tulil, da bi izgnal jedrski holokavst, njegovi kipi NO! pa so dokončna gesta agresivnega moškega obupa, ki nam vdre v zavest z natančnostjo matadorja pri smrtnem udarcu.

Ko sem bil med vojno zaprt v nemškem koncentracijskem taborišču, so judovski jetniki utopili drugega Juda v nakopičenih iztrebkih v latrini, ker je sodeloval s sovražnikom.

Tudi v umetnosti je cena sodelovanja zadušitev v iztrebkih.

Leta 1962 je Arturo Schwarz iz Milana, edini pogumni trgovec z umetninami na svetu, razstavil izbor del z razstav Lurieja in Goodmana v stari galeriji March na vzhodni 10. ulici v New Yorku. V izboru so se znašla dela z Vulgarne in Vključujoče razstave ter Razstave pogube, izdelana po letu 1957. Osupel in presenečen sem bil, ko je Schwarz zmagoslavno izbral Goodmanovo konstrukcijo, v kateri so bili začetki njegovih sedanjih kipov NO!, in jo postavil v izložbo svoje galerije. Spomnim se, da je bil Arturo Schwarz vesel kot otrok, ker se je tega domislil, ker je pokazal pogum

in neodvisnost, ker se ni zmenil za odzive meščanov, ki so hodili mimo izložbe. S to potezo je izrazil toliko stvari naenkrat, obudil toliko dejanj, za katera smo si želeli, da jih ne bi nikoli zatrli zaradi vljudnosti ali zaradi strahu.

A taka dejanja, take poteze so tukaj zares redke. Kjer je formulacija umetnosti v rokah izmučenih, razočaranih estetskih intelektualcev in špekulantov, ki pohlepno oprezajo za kakršnokoli sprejemljivo novostjo, če je v njej dovolj »prefinjenosti«, žgečkljivosti, šovinizma in tržnega potenciala, pa ima prava umetnost, vedno povezana z resničnim pogumom, približno toliko možnosti kot lanska moda. Namesto da bi ustvarjali pogumne umetnike, ustvarjamo »pogumne« estete-intelektualce, ki v zavetju svojih medijskih hiš ali s fundacijami podprtih prostorov svobodno ustvarjajo nova umetniška gibanja ali nadlegujejo in napadajo neodvisnega umetnika, uničujejo ugled drugih v popolni varnosti svojih zatočišč, in to brez strahu, da bi jih kdo udaril nazaj ali da bi bil njihov varni položaj ogrožen.

Estet-intelektualec je preštudiral veliko umetnostne zgodovine, naučil pa se je zelo malo. Vseeno pa se mu zdi, da popolnoma obvlada zakone in pravila in različne sestavine, ki sestavljajo množico, imenovano umetnost. Njegovo uho je natančno uglašeno z zahtevami trenutnega intelektualnega ozračja in dobro se zaveda ekonomskih posledic, ki urejajo promocijo in trženje umetnosti. To znanje in spretnost, plod obsežnega študija in dolge navzočnosti v svetu umetnosti, sta zdaj uporabljena pri razglašanju 'nove' teorije. Umetniki, ki v to teorijo spadajo, so vabljeni, naj se pridružijo novi skupini, druge pa prepričujejo, naj se uklonijo. Odpre pa se iskanje nedolžnega talenta, ki mu je nekako uspelo pridobiti informacije o tem, kakšen natanko je nov trend. Z našimi izdelki se bahamo na umetnostnem sejmu v Benetkah in na svetovnem sejmu v New Yorku, kjer se kokakolasti popart zlije in poenoti z oblikovanjem in komercialno umetnostjo, ki ga obdaja. Kakšno nasprotje med kolaboracionističnim popartom in krvavimi glavami demonstrantov za državljanske pravice, ki si drznejo reči ne.

Goodmanovi kipi NO! ne bi mogli nastati v bolj pravem trenutku in na bolj pravem mestu, kot je New York leta 1964. So pravi odgovor na družbeni, estetski in psihološki ravni. Predvsem pa gre za umetnino junaštva, brez katerega ni mogoč noben velik dosežek v umetnosti. Junaštvo pomeni, da se je junak pripravljen izpostaviti tveganjem in nevarnostim. Goodmanovi kipi NO! so izjava proti strahu,

67 izjava moči vpričo podrejanja, energije vpričo kastracije, izjava posameznika, ki se noče ukloniti. Kadar tem frazam ne sledijo dejanja, zvenijo staro in obrabljeno, s tem pa brezpredmetno: sveto dejanje, neustrašen nastop pa jih odreši ter jih naredi žive in resnične.

Na estetski ravni (če si sploh želimo srečati to psevdoznanost na lastnem terenu) se Goodmanovo delo odpira drugačni obravnavi celotnega kompleksa pariških novih realistov in njegove ameriške šovinistične izpeljave in bastardizacije, imenovane 'popart'. Gre za zahtevo po vnovičnem preučevanju ponarejanja današnje umetnostne zgodovine, pisane pred in po izdelavi opisanih del, zahtevo po razgaljanju propagandnega aparata, ki je zaživel v tem obdobju post-abstraktnega ekspresionizma.

Psihološko so postavljeni pod vprašaj naše brezmadežno puritanstvo, naši tabuji in morda korenine vsega slikarstva in kiparstva. Na družbeni ravni bi poleg mnogih poudarkov,

ki sem jih v tem besedilu že omenil, rad izpostavil barve Goodmanovih kipov, ki segajo od oker in rjavih odtenkov do kovinsko in popolnoma črne. Na tej razstavi ni kipov NO!, ki bi bili beli kot lilije.

Kot pa globoko v sebi vemo vsi, velika umetnost ne nastaja iz podrejanja, brezbrižnosti, apatičnosti in zdolgočasenosti, ne glede na to, kaj nam morda govorijo ciniki. Skrivna sestavina vse umetnosti je to, česar se je najteže naučiti – pogum.

Sam Goodman na razstavi NE skulptur (dreka) v galeriji Gertrude Stein / Sam Goodman at NO (Shit) Sculptures Show at Gallery Gertrude Stein, 1964 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Boris Lurie (1964)

68

Introduction to SAM GOODMAN ‘NO-sculptures’ Exhibition presented by Boris Lurie at Gallery Gertrude Stein, 24 East 81 Street, New York. May 12—May 30, 1964 Late one night recently, early in the morning in fact, I stopped over at Sam Goodman’s studio. I noticed he had been working on a sculpture which had been discarded in a corner of his studio. It came upon me at once that this was the sculpture that had to be done by someone at this particular time: expressed in artistic terms, it was the answer, in this spring of 1964 in this City of New York. This sculpture had to be done by Goodman only, nothing like it has ever been done before.

beginnings of his present NO-sculptures within it, to be placed in the show window of his gallery. I remember Arturo Schwarz being as happy as a child to have thought of this idea, to have asserted his courage and independence, to have disregarded the reactions of the citizenry passing by his shop window. With this one gesture he expressed so many things all at once, he reversed so many acts we would like not to have ever suppressed, out of politeness, or out of fear.

The artist, as if hopeless in the pursuit of a project so difficult, so full of explosive matter directed against its author himself, as well as the art-world around him, apparently had put the idea aside, in the realization of the hopelessness and dangers involved in its execution and presentation. I was blessed with an insight that permitted me to fathom the importance of that sculpture and to support and encourage the sculptor in the execution of his dangerous idea. I consider myself lucky indeed to have been given the opportunity of playing a minor part in this project.

But such acts, such gestures are rare indeed here.

Where the formulation of art is in the hands of worn-out, disillusioned aesthete-intellectuals and speculator-collectors greedy to pounce upon any acceptable novelty providing there is enough ‘sophistication’, titillation, chauvinism and a potential market for it, true art, invariably connected with true courage, has about as much of a chance as last year’s ladies fashions. Instead of producing courageous artists we produce ‘courageous’ aesthete-intellectuals who from the sanctuary of their news media or foundation-supported enclosures, are free to create new art movements or to harass and attack the independent artist, to destroy reputations in the perfect security of their sanctuary, and without any fear of being hit back or their secure positions being jeopardized.

I remember Goodman’s work before, from the beginning of the historic exhibitions at the rebellious March Gallery that had been the first rallying call for a truly new social art, from the wealth of which a subsequent generation of artists nourished themselves. From burnt babies, dolls of our childhood, of Auschwitz and Hiroshima, and dolls of the little Negro girls killed here in the USA, he had gone on to enrich our consciousness with an image of the useless and discarded people, mounted rags and discarded bundles. His Doom-Show constructions set up a howl to exorcise nuclear holocaust, and his NO-sculptures now—an ultimate gesture of aggressive manly despair plunged into our consciousness with the exactitude of the matador in the final kill.

When I was imprisoned in a German concentration camp during the war, Jewish prisoners drowned a fellow Jew in the accumulated excrements of the latrine for collaboration with the enemy. The price of collaboration in art, too, is excremental suffocation.

In 1962, the only courageous art dealer in the world, Arturo Schwarz of Milan, Italy, exhibited selections of the Lurie-Goodman shows held at the old March Gallery on East Tenth Street in New York. The selections included work from the Vulgar, Involvement, and Doom Shows, executed since 1957. I was astonished and surprised when Schwarz jubilantly picked a Goodman construction that had the

The aesthete-intellectual has studied much art history, but he has learned very little. Nevertheless he feels he is in perfect command of the laws and regulations and varied ingredients that make up the quantity called art. His ear is finely attuned to the demands of the intellectual climate of the moment, and he is well aware of the economic implications that govern art-promoting and art-marketing.

This knowledge and skill, the fruit of much study and a long personal presence in the art world is now put to use in the promulgation of a ‘new’ theory. Artists who might fit the theory are invited to join in the new grouping, others are persuaded to comply, and a search is instituted for innocent talent who somehow or other had managed to obtain information on the precise nature of the new trend. Our products are proudly paraded at the art world fair in Venice and at the World’s Fair in New York, where coca-cola-pop-art melts into and becomes identical with the design and commercial art around it. What contrast between collaborationist-pop art and the bloodied heads of the civil rights demonstrators who dare say no.

Goodman’s NO-sculptures could not have come to us at a better moment and in a better place, in New York,

69

in 1964. It is the answer on a social, aesthetic, and on a psychological level. But over and above, it is a masterpiece of heroism without which no great achievement in art is possible. Heroism implies a willingness on the part of the hero to expose himself to risks and dangers. Goodman’s NO-sculptures are an assertion against fear, an assertion of strength in the face of submission, of energy in the face of castration, an assertion of the individual, who refuses to bend. These phrases, when not followed by deeds, sound old and outworn, and therefore meaningless: but the Holy Deed, the Fearless Act redeems them and gives them life and truth.

On an aesthetic level (if we should wish at all to meet this pseudo-science on its own grounds) Goodman’s work opens to re-examination the whole complex of the Paris New Realists and its American chauvinistic derivation and bastardization called ‘pop-art’. It is a demand to reopen inquiry on the falsification of today’s art history, written before and during the time the works described are being created, a demand to expose the propaganda-machine that has come into being in this post abstract-expressionist period.

Psychologically, our spotless Puritanism, our taboos, and perhaps the roots of all painting and sculpture are opened up to questioning. On a social level, besides many points brought out previously in this introduction, I would like to point to the coloring of Goodman’s sculptures which range from ochres and browns to metallic blacks and deep black.

There are no lily-white No-sculptures in this show.

But, as we all know deep down, it is not by submission, coolness, remoteness, apathy and boredom that great art is created, no matter what the cynics might tell us. The secret ingredient of all art is what is most difficult to learn, it is courage.

Thomas B. Hess

70

Spremna beseda k razstavi kipov NO! Razstava Borisa Lurieja v Galeriji Gertrude Stein, New York. 12.–30. maj 1964 Sam Goodman in Boris Lurie sta prava socialna realista.

Ker se intenzivno ukvarjata s političnimi in socialnimi vprašanji, sta se odločila, da bosta delovala kot državljanaumetnika, da bosta postala odgovorna, da bosta atelje – umetnost, življenje, reference – prestavila v ideološko areno.

Svojo estetiko obračata od znotraj navzven, da razkrijeta njeno etično drobovje, kite, srce, blato.

Lurie s sajastimi golimi pin-up dekleti (erotika za neprivilegirane) in Goodman, ki se poigrava z izmaličenimi celulojdnimi dojenčki, razumljivo podajata dušečo retoriko, ki se sprašuje, kam gremo.

Kot vsi umetniki uporabljata umetniška orodja, za razliko od tradicionalnih levičarskih socialnih realistov pa v gladko žolco sloga ne vtihotapita sporočil, povezanih s hladno vojno. Če Guttuso ali Siqueiros ali Lorjou ali Refregier slikajo s sprejeto akademsko uglajenostjo, da bi neki ideološki anekdoti nadeli ugleden videz, pa sta Goodman in Lurie uporabila najnovejše izrazje akcijskega slikarstva newyorške šole. A če Rauschenberg, Kaprow ali Oldenburg uporabijo prevleko smeti na formalne, poetične načine, ta slikarja zavračata vsak prenos in preobrazbo. Sramoto družbe komentirata z ubežno snovjo same družbe – ubežno snovjo za ubežnike pred našimi velikimi motnjami, našimi perifernimi obscenostmi, našimi smetmi, našimi odvratnimi tovarniško izdelanimi odpadki.

V revni državi na ulici ne morete najti kurje kosti. Goodman in Lurie sta ustvarila cel skatološki Versailles iz »načrtovane zastarelosti« ameriške »premožne družbe« (pravzaprav bi ta moralista lahko odvržene predmete enako dobičkonosno nabirala v Londonu, Parizu, Milanu, Münchnu ali Leningradu).

Vsa moderna umetnost je tako ali drugače protestna.

Navadno gre za protest tišine, zanikanja, Satanovega krika – non serviam. Včasih nanjo neposredno namiguje nevšečna vsebina slike ali zverinskost geste.

Goodman in Lurie ne namigujeta, ampak protestirata neposredno. Sorazmerno vljudne pogovore v vagonu prvega razreda prekinjata tako, da se na slepo obesita na zasilno zavoro. S pomočjo umetnosti, s pomočjo ogromnega nabora umetnostnozgodovinske in estetske misli sta našla načine, da kričita – da izpljuneta vizualno resnico.

Ironija umetnosti seveda vedno poseže vmes. Če Goodman in Lurie ne bi bila dobra slikarja, bi bilo to, kar vržeta iz sebe, navadno blebetanje. In ker sta umetnika, sta trčila ob lepoto tudi tam, kjer ju preveva največja groza.

Umetnost se vedno priplazi nazaj v atelje – tudi če se umetnik znebi njegovih sten in vrat in se preseli na ulico. Tukaj se Venera dviga iz morja dreka.

V tem dokončnem obratu usodnosti (nič čudnega, da sta razstavo v New Yorku poimenovala Razstava pogube) tiči njuna dokončna metafora. Krik pogube pa je tudi radostno, podivjano pričevanje o vstajenju.

71

Thomas B. Hess

Introduction to the NO-sculptures show Exhibition presented by Boris Lurie at Gallery Gertrude Stein, New York, May 12—30, 1964 Sam Goodman and Boris Lurie are true Social Realists.

Deeply involved with political and social issues, they have decided to work as citizen-artists to become Responsible, to move their studios – their art, their lives, their references – into the ideological arena. They turn the esthetic inside-out to discover its ethical viscera, ligaments, heart, dung.

Lurie with his grimed up Pin-up nudes (the erotics of the underprivileged), Goodman tinkering with mashed celluloid babies, spell out a choking rhetoric that is concerned with where we are going.

Like all artists they use the tools of art, but unlike the traditionally Left Social-Realists, they do not sneak ColdWar messages into smooth aspics of style. Where a Guttuso or a Siqueiros or a Lorjou or a Refregier paint with accepted academic table-manners in order to make respectable some ideological anecdote, Goodman and Lurie have seized upon the latest idioms of New York School Action Painting. But where Rauschenberg, Kaprow or Oldenburg use the lace of garbage in formal, poetic ways, these two painters reject all transpositions and metamorphoses. They comment on the disgrace of society with the refugee material of society itself – fugitive materials for fugitives from our great disorders – our peripheral obscenities, our garbage, our repulsive factory-made waste-matter.

In a poor country, you cannot find chicken bone on the streets. Goodman and Lurie have decreed whole scatological Versailles from the ‘built-in-obsolescences’ of American ‘affluent society’ (n.b., these moralists could scavenge as profitably in London, Paris, Milan, Munich, Leningrad).

All modern art is Protest, in one way or another. Usually it

is the protest of silence, negation, Satan’s cry – non serviam.

Sometimes it is directly implied in difficulties of image or in savagery of gesture.

Goodman and Lurie do not imply; they protest directly.

They brake up the relatively polite conversations in the parlor car by making a blind jump at the EMERGENCY STOP cord.

With their art, with the vast human accumulations of arthistory and esthetic thought, they have found ways to shout – to blurt the visual truth.

The irony of art, of course, always intervenes. If Goodman and Lurie were not fine painters, their blurts would be gibbers. And because they are artists they have bumped into beauty even where they are most horrified. Art always sneaks back to the studio – even when the artist has gotten rid of its walls and doors and has moved out into the street.

Here Venus arises from a sea of shit.

In this ultimate twist of fatality (no wonder they named their exhibition in New York ‘Doom’) lies their ultimate metaphor. The shriek of doom also is a gay, wild testimonial to the Resurrection.

72

NE skulpture (Razstava dreka) / NO Sculptures (Shit Show), 1964 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

NE skulpture (Razstava dreka) / NO Sculptures (Shit Show), 1964 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

NE skulpture (Razstava dreka) / NO Sculptures (Shit Show), 1964 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

73 Tom Wolfe, 1964, New York Herald Tribune Kiparstvo (Galerija Gertrude Stein) Sam Goodman, umetnik, je majhen, zalit, kosmat, razkuštran petinštiridesetletnik, ki ni nikoli prestar, da bi živel kot uporni umetnik. S prijateljem Borisom Luriejem se zadnjih sedem let na Lower East Sidu na splošno ukvarjata s tem, kako bi šokirala buržoazijo in se upirala establišmentu.

Prav to pa je največja težava. Šokirati buržoazijo je vse teže.

Buržuji zdaj vzamejo vse, kar jim vržeš v imenu umetnosti, zvite avtomobilske odbijače, stare ročke za tuširanje, ki štrlijo iz platna, karkoli, in to na smrt obožujejo!

Boris in Sam sta pred nekaj leti na primer uprizorila Vulgarno razstavo, na kateri sta prikazala zaobljene lepotice razkrečenih nog, iztrgane iz opolzkih revij, če omenimo le eno od stvari, ki se jih da omeniti. In kaj se je zgodilo? Vsi današnji babbitti, ki so prišli, večinoma umetnostni kritiki in drugi esteti-intelektualci, kot jim pravi Boris, so samo govorili nekaj v smislu 'to je v redu, Sam, to je v redu, Boris, kar tako naprej, podpiramo vaju v herojskem boju'.

Prav torej, je rekel Sam, pa poglejmo, kaj bodo rekli na tole. Tole, njuno najnovejšo razstavo, ki se je zadnjič odprla v Galeriji Gertrude Stein v zelo elegantni meščanski hiši na vogalu 24. vzhodne in 81. ulice. In tako se je pripetilo, da je 75 let moderne umetnosti po neprekosljivi logiki končno privedlo do Goodmana in Lurieja, ki sta sedela na tleh galerije tik poleg avenije Madison med 21 kipi govna sesalcev. Ki ni bilo oblikovano tako, da bi nekako spominjalo na sesalsko govno ali mu bilo bolj ali manj podobno, ali bilo kot sesalsko govno v abstraktnem smislu. Nista ga postavila na piedestal.

Leži neposredno na tleh, eden od kupov pa tehta več kot 200 kilogramov. Vse skupaj sta prikazala natanko tako, kot sta lahko prikazala govno sesalcev po 25 letih, preživetih v tradiciji Cezanna, Picassa in Matissa. Tako je Boris začel delati kipe govna – pa naj poskusijo še to. »Iztiskam ga,« je govoril Sam. »Uliti kamen uporabljam, veste? Iztiskam ga skozi cev ali nekaj takega. Uliti kamen je nekaj takega kot mavec. Iztiskam ga skozi cev, tako nekako, ne morem vam natančno povedati, kako, ker bodo potem vsi počeli enako.« Prijatelji gospoda Goodmana pritrjujejo, da je ustvarjalen mislec, in dejansko ga lahko skrbi, da bodo drugi umetniki kradli njegove ideje.

Veliko pomembnih idej ima. Pred dvema letoma sta z Borisom po Vulgarni razstavi priredila Razstavo pogube, za katero je Sam med drugim prispeval obglavljene otroške lutke, zažgane in vpete v osmojene posteljne vzmeti. In ali ni čez dva meseca ena vodilnih popartistk na razstavi prikazala zažganih otroških lutk? Točno.

Za božjo voljo, pol umetnikov v mestu se bo gnalo za

skrivnostjo oblikovanja govna, če bodo kritiki govno sprejeli takó, kot ga po Borisovih besedah sprejemajo tisti, ki prihajajo v Galerijo Gertrude Stein. Ti ljudje povzročajo nejevoljo. Še kar nočejo biti šokirani. Ti kulturniki newyorške umetnosti gledajo naravnost v kupe, ki ležijo na tleh, in govorijo o njih, kot da so nekaj normalnega, o njihovi masi, napetosti, sili, plastičnem okolju in tako naprej.

Boris je bil besen. »Ti ljudje so tako prestrašeni zaradi estetike moderne umetnosti in vse te estetske dvoumnosti,« je rekel, »bojijo se na to pogledati kot na tisto, kar je, torej govno. Nanj hočejo gledati samo kot na kip. Pridejo sem in se ga dotikajo in govorijo o 'obliki'. Mislim, da so preveč prestrašeni, da bi izrazili svoje občutke o tako imenovanem umetniškem delu.« Po Borisovi logiki je njuno oblikovano govno kritike potisnilo v kot. Navdušeni so bili nad kipi iz smeti, »najdenimi« predmeti, starimi vulkaniziranimi gumami na piedestalu, slikami Campbellovih pločevink juhe in ljubezenskimi stripi. Če so že nad vsem tako navdušeni, pa naj bodo navdušeni še nad govnom.

Gospodična Stein, ki ni daljna sestrična Gertrude Stein, vrhovne gurujke ameriških izseljenskih pisateljev v Parizu v 20. letih, med katerimi je bil tudi Hemingway, je rekla, da kritiki, če imajo kaj občutka za zgodovino, sploh ne bi smeli imeti težav z navdušenjem nad razstavo. »Vlijmo kipe NO! v bron,« je rekla, »pa bomo imeli pred sabo povzetek celotne zgodovine moderne umetnosti.« Vse to govorjenje o sprejemanju in kritiškem navdušenju pa je začelo skrbeti Sama Goodmana. Začel se je ozirati po 21 kupih, ležečih na tleh, in govoril: »Ja, ne vem pa, kaj bom naredil kot nadaljevanje tega. Po mojem lahko potujem v nasprotno smer in se napotim nazaj proti maternici ali pa, kaj pa vem, rinem naprej in uprizorim hepening, med katerim bom naredil samomor.«

Tom Wolfe, 1964, New York Herald Tribune

74

Sculpture (Gallery Gertrude Stein) Sam Goodman, the artist, is short, plump, shaggy, rumpled up, 45 and never too old for the life of Artist in Protest. He and his friend Boris Lurie have been working for the last seven years down on the Lower East Side in the general field of shocking the bourgeoisie and revolting against the establishment. And that is exactly the trouble in their lives. Shocking the bourgeoisie is getting tougher and tougher. They have gotten so they will take anything you throw at them in the name of Art, bent automobile fenders, old shower nozzles sticking out of canvas, anything, and just love it to death!

For example Boris and Sam put on something like their Vulgar Show a few years back, featuring mango-haunched babes with shanks akimbo ripped out of the flesh magazines, just to mention one of the mentionable things, and what happens? All the modern-day Babbitts who come around, mainly the art critics and other aesthete-intellectuals, as Boris calls them, just keep saying things like that’s fine, Sam, that’s fine Boris, keep it up, we are with you in the heroic struggle.

So all right, said Sam, let them try this one on for size. This one, their newest exhibition, which opened the other night at the Gertrude Stein Gallery in a very elegant townhouse at 24 E. 81st St. And so it came to pass that 75 years of Modern Art led at last with invincible logic to Goodman-Lurie seated on the floor of a gallery just off Madison Avenue amid 21 piles of sculpted mammal dung. Not designed to look vaguely like mammal dung, or more or less like mammal dung, or abstractly like mammal dung. They did not put it up on a pedestal. It lies flat on the floor, including one pile that weighs 500 pounds. They made it all look as exactly like mammal dung as 25 years spent in art in the tradition of Cezanne, Picasso and Matisse would enable them to. So Boris began sculpting dung – let them try that on for size.

“I extrude it”, Sam was saying. “I use, like, this cast stone.

You know? I extrude it through like a pipe or something. Cast stone is like, I don’t know, plaster of Paris. I extrude it through a pipe or something, I can’t tell you exactly how because then they’ll be all doing it.” Mr. Goodman’s friends testify that he is a germinal thinker, and indeed has to worry about other artists stealing his ideas.

He has a lot of important ideas. A couple of years ago after the Vulgar Show, he and Boris put on a Doom Show, one of Sam’s contributions being decapitated baby dolls burned up and embedded in burned-up bed springs. A couple of months later, did one of the leading Pop-artists turn up with incinerated doll babies in her show? Exactly.

For godsake, half the artists in town are likely to be after the secret of sculpting dung if the critics embrace dung the way Boris says the people who come by the Gertrude Stein Gallery do. These people are frustrating. They still won’t come right out and be shocked. They, the culturati of the New York art world, look right at the mounds lying there on the floor and talk about them in terms of the usual, their mass, their tension, their thrust, their plastic ambience and so forth.

Boris was outraged. “These people are so intimidated by the aesthetics of modern art and all this aesthetic doubletalk,” he said, “they are afraid to look at it as what it is, which is dung. They just want to look at it as sculpture. They come in here and touch it and talk about ‘form’. I think they’re too intimidated to express what they feel about a so-called work of art.”

According to Boris’ reasoning, their sculpted dung now has the critics backed into a corner. They have been embracing junk sculpture, “found” objects, old vulcanized tires on a pedestal, paintings of Campbell’s soup cans and love comics.

So if they are so all-embracing, let them embrace dung.

Miss Stein, who is not a third cousin of the Gertrude Stein the grand guru of America’s expatriate writers in Paris in the 1920’s such as Hemingway, was saying how the critics, if they have an eye for history, should not find it hard to embrace the show at all. “Cast the NO! Sculptures in bronze” she was saying, “and you have the entire history of modern art summed up right there”.

All this talk about acceptance and critical acclaim was beginning to worry Sam Goodman, however. He began looking around at the 21 mounds lying flat on the floor, and he was saying: “Yeah, but I don’t know what I’m going to do for an encore. I figure I can either take a return trip and head back towards the womb or, I don’t know, like forge ahead and put on a happening in which I commit suicide.”

75

NE skulpture (Razstava dreka) / NO Sculptures (Shit Show), 1964 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Dore Ashton

76

Merde, Alors!

Objavljeno v: Lurie, Boris; Krim, Seymour: NO!art, Köln 1988

Ne zdi se mi naključno, da so bila povojna leta prežeta s trpkim naslovom Sartrovega romana: Gnus. V petdeseta leta so se vlekli demoni dvoma in gnusa, ki so omogočili pojave, kakršni so se odvili v galeriji March.

Celo zdaj, ko na grotesknosti, prikazane (upam, da ironično) v imenu umetnosti, gledam z desetletne razdalje, se mi to zdi vredno resne razprave. Gnus se ni polegel.

Pojavlja se v mnogih preoblekah, ne nazadnje v tisti, ki je določena kot izziv sami umetnosti. Slogani, kot so »umetnost je umetnik«, in nedavni modni pojavi, kot je »umetnost antiforme«, izvirajo iz občutkov, kakršne so ustvarila 50. leta.

Razmišljam o okolju 10. ulice v tistih dneh, o privlačnosti, ki jo je imela galerija March za disidente različnih barv, o očitnih političnih pritiskih. Vsepovsod izdaje. Le kaj bi lahko pomenili nauki iz koncentracijskih taborišč, ko pa grozodejstvom v korejski vojni kar ni bilo konca. In potem v Vietnamu. In še jim ni konca. In vsak dan postajajo bolj običajna in vse laže jih sprejemamo. In francoska Alžirija je bila sedanjost.

Mnogi umetniki, ki jih je zdramil politični negativizem ljudi iz Marcha, so se dobro zavedali dogajanja drugje. Povojno obdobje je v 50. letih hitro postajalo obdobje trajne vojne; sploh ne optimistične trajne revolucije, ki je presevala iz nekaterih tedanjih Sartrovih člankov. Samo trajnega klanja.

Umetniki, ki niso več prenašali inercije, ali posamezniki, ki so pod okriljem »umetnosti« videli življenjski prostor, kakršnega ni mogla ponuditi nobena druga dejavnost v naši družbi, so se združili v skupnem gnusu.

Najbrž je pomenljivo, da galerija March ni bila v pritličju, ampak v nekakšni kleti, v katero so vodile štiri stopnice.

Kolikor se spomnim, se je začela kot še ena zadruga, s heterogeno in spreminjajočo se sestavo sodelujočih. Po malem je postala osrednja točka za vse mogoče družbene disidente, od katerih so mnogi opazovali politično dogajanje v 50. letih z vse večjim malodušjem. Vrstila se je izdaja za izdajo in to, kar so nekoč zavzeto zagovarjali – da je umetnost nenehna revolucija – se jim je glede na Korejo, Alžirijo, McCarthyja in boje na jugu zdela ničvredna ideja.

Iz tega vse prodornejšega gnusa je zrasla skupina March, ki je bila takrat povezana z idejo družbenega protesta in političnega ogorčenja. Za cilj si niso vzeli le same umetnosti, ampak družbo, ki lahko o njej mirno razmišlja, medtem ko se vsak dan izvajajo zločini neizrekljivih razsežnosti. Takrat je šala o aveniji Park res nekaj pomenila. Mnogi »zbiratelji« so v stanovanjih na tej aveniji (ki so še danes popolnoma enaka)

namestili pravo muzejsko osvetljavo in se lotili pridobivanja del umetnikov; v teh bogataških zavetjih je drag viski srkal celo Allen Ginsberg. Takrat je imel umetnik nelagodno karizmo, ki je bogataše vabila v njegov brlog in postavljala njegova prepričanja na kocko.

Do leta 1960, ko je Boris Lurie priredil razstavo Adieu Amerique in smo bili z nekaterimi prijatelji tako prestrašeni, da smo ustanovili »komisijo za anonimne letake«, se je veliko vznemirjenje zaradi novega ameriškega slikarstva ravno poleglo. Polegel pa se je tudi zimzeleni ameriški optimizem.

Vsi smo se znašli v težavah in takrat smo večinoma že razumeli, da je naše ozemlje trajno onesnažila strupena dediščina.

Leta 1960 sem nato videla kolaže Borisa Lurieja, ki so pogosto namigovali na koncentracijsko taborišče, v katerem je nekoč bival, in odkrito obtoževali popularno ameriško kulturo. Videla sem tudi druge člane skupine March na Vulgarni razstavi in prepoznala teme (atomske bombe, koncentracijska taborišča, okuženo mleko, linčanje na jugu, komercialni seks, poklicne množične morilce). Ni me preveč skrbelo, ali gre za umetnost ali ne. Takrat in vse odtlej mi je bilo jasno, da se pojavlja subkultura nesoglasja, v kateri bodo uporabili vse razpoložljive načine za oblikovanje novih, politiziranih vrednot. Luriejeva in Goodmanova sporočila so našla tarčo v nezadovoljnih mladih, ki so se zgrinjali na njune razstave, in ta sporočila, čeprav deležna posmeha, so se nazadnje pojavila tudi v etabliranem tisku. Umetnost ni imela s tem ničesar.

Medtem je Boris Lurie v galeriji March obiskovalce Vključujoče razstave pozdravljal z besedami, da »v časih vojne in uničevanja vaje v estetiki in dekorativni vzorci niso dovolj«. In zlovešče: »Pomnite, da ste Eichmann tudi vi!« Naslednje leto se je vrnil z Razstavo pogube, ki jo je pripravil s Samom Goodmanom, Stanleyjem Fisherjem in drugimi ter nas znova opomnil, da z umetniškim establišmentom ni vse v redu. Ta razstava je bila prava zmeda. Dobro se je spominjam. Še enkrat pa moram poudariti, da čeprav načini, na katere so ti ustvarjalci kolažev in stvari narekovali sporočila, niso bili duhoviti, briljantni ali celo ogorčeni v veliki tradiciji politične umetnosti, pa so bili edini, na katere je vse več disidentov videlo svoj težavni položaj! Gnusno do dna duše.

Nisem si mogla kaj, da me razstava NO! leta 1963 ne bi pritegnila. Takrat sem bila zaradi Vietnama in razvoja tega, kar je Eisenhower nesmrtno poimenoval vojaško-industrijski kompleks, z vsem srcem za »NE!«, ne glede na to, kaj je

77

pomenil. To zagotovo ni bila umetnostna razstava v pravem pomenu besede, je pa razglašala čudovito možnost, da rečemo NE! Sklepna izjava skupine March je bilo po mojem mnenju sodelovanje Sama Goodmana z Borisom Luriejem v Galeriji Gertrude Stein, kjer so nastopali edino iztrebki, oblikovani kot kipi. To je bila izjava nihilističnih, anarhičnih vrednot, ki jih je že dolgo ustvarjala subkultura. Kot vedno velja za moralno ogorčene, je močno verjetna patetičnost, pa tudi izničenje.

Mnogi so se sredi 60. let združili v paktu vzajemnega gnusa, in prav ta vzajemnost se je izčrpala, kot se je nekoč izčrpal dadaizem, in odprla pot spremenjenim vrednotam.

Merde alors! Dokončna, neizpodbitna izjava, ki ustavi vsako nadaljnjo razpravo.

Zaradi vsega tega sta gnus in nemir, ki sta poganjala dogajanje v galeriji March, že tradicija, na kateri lahko gradi subkultura. Razpršen, a zgovoren ropot med urbanimi umetniki opozarja na stalno vrednost »NE!« kot ustvarjalne sile. Karkoli bi že lahko rekli o kakovosti misli, ki je nedavno povzročila ustanovitev Koalicije umetniških delavcev, ostaja dejstvo, da je resnična kriza zavesti uničila večje segmente sveta umetnosti. Pomembnih vprašanj, kot je vloga »čistega« umetnika v socialni revoluciji, niso tako goreče načenjali že od sredine 30. let, ko je Ljudska fronta pred sodobnega umetnika postavila velik izziv. Nihilizem, ki je bil temelj NO!arta, je tu spremenjen. Depresijo, ki je mlade tlačila konec 50. in na začetku 60. let, spreminja spodbudno delovanje, ki kaže na možnost temeljnih sprememb. Politična kriza v Združenih državah ni spremenila le stališč mlajših umetnikov, temveč tudi način njihovega pristopa k delom, zaradi katerega so si po pravici rekli umetniki – in prav ta sprememba je omogočila prvo noto optimizma v mnogih letih (vsaj po mnenju tistih umetnikov, ki so se odrekli slikarstvu in kiparstvu v prid akcijam, dogodkom in efemernosti).

Proto-teorije skupine March so bile izpopolnjene, postale so izvedljive, vendar pa izvorni viri ostajajo: divje nezadovoljstvo, razočaranje in skromnost duhovnega življenjskega prostora. Pod okriljem »umetnosti« lahko mnogi Američani izvajajo določene dejavnosti in najdejo življenjski prostor, ki ga ne more ponuditi nobena druga kategorija ameriškega življenja. Dejavnosti umetnikov iz gibanja antiforme imajo pravzaprav malo opraviti z umetnostjo, ki ostaja nedostopna preprostim smrtnikom, so pa – vse od zgodnjih dni na 10. ulici – vedno bolj pomembne za družbo, ki več ne pozna etike in je večno lačna.

NE skulpture (Razstava dreka) / NO Sculptures (Shit Show), 1964 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Dore Ashton

78

Merde, Alors!

Published in: Lurie, Boris; Krim, Seymour: NO!art, Cologne 1988

It seems to me that it was not by accident that the postwar years were hung over with the sulphureous title of Sartre’s fiction: Nausea. Creeping into the fifties were the demons of doubt and disgust that fostered such phenomena that occurred at the March Gallery.

Even now, with ten years’ perspective on the grotesqueries presented (ironically I hope) in the name of art, it seems to me worthy of serious discussion. The nausea has not subsided.

It appears in many guises, not the least of which is the determined route of challenge to art itself. Such slogans as “art is the artist”, and such recent vogues as “anti-form” arts have their sources in the kind of feelings generated in the 1950s.

I think of the environment of Tenth Street in those days; the attraction the March Gallery had for social dissidents of varying stripes; the obvious political pressures. Betrayals everywhere. What could the lessons of a concentration camp have meant, really, when atrocities in the Korean War went on and on. And on and on to Vietnam. And haven’t stopped yet.

And become more common and more easily accepted every day. And Algerie Francaise was present.

Many of the artists alerted to the political negativism of the March people were well aware of events elsewhere.

The postwar period was adding up quickly in the 1950s to a perpetual war period, not even the optimistic perpetual revolution that peered through in some of Sartre’s articles then. Just perpetual carnage.

Artists who could no longer tolerate inertia, or individuals who saw in the umbrella-shade of “art” a living space no other activity in this society could provide, converged in mutual disgust.

Significantly perhaps, the March Gallery was not at street level, but four steps down into a kind of cellar. As I recall, it began as just another cooperative, with a heterogeneous shifting population of participants. Little by little, it became the focal point for all manner of social dissidents, many of whom had watched the political events of the 1950s with increasing discouragement. One betrayal had followed another, and what had once been zestfully suggested – that art was a perpetual revolution – seemed to them a paltry idea in the face of Korea, Algeria, McCarthy and the struggle in the South. Out of this ever more penetrating nausea grew the March group which was associated, in those days, with the idea of social protest and political indignation. Its target was not only art itself, but the society which could calmly contemplate it while crimes of unspeakable dimensions were being executed every day.

This was a time when to joke about Park Avenue really meant something. It was a time when many “collectors” had installed real museum lighting in their Park Avenue apartments (which to this day look exactly alike) and had proceeded to acquire artists. It was a time when even Alien Ginsberg could be found swilling fine Scotch in those uptown havens. It was a time when the artist had uncomfortable charisma which drew the rich to his lair, and placed his convictions into jeopardy.

By 1960, when Boris Lurie had his one-man show, “Adieu Amerique” and when some friends and I were sufficiently alarmed to form the “Night Letter Committee”, the great excitement about the new American painting was just over.

Also, just about over was the perennial American habit of optimism. We were all in trouble, and by that time most of us had understood that the poisonous legacy had permanently contaminated our territory.

In 1960, then, I saw Boris Lurie’s collages, with their frequent allusions to the concentration camp he had once inhabited, and their open indictment of popular American culture. I also saw other members of the March group in the “Vulgar Show” and recognized the themes (atom bombs, concentration camps, contaminated milk, lynchings in the South, commercial sex, professional mass-killers). I wasn’t much worried about whether they were art or not. At that time, and since, I had recognized that a sub-culture of dissent was emerging in which every mode available would be used to formulate the new, politicized values. Lurie’s and Goodman’s messages found their marks in the disaffected youth that flocked to see them, and eventually those messages, even though scorned, even appeared in the uptown press. Art had nothing to do with it.

Meanwhile, at the March Gallery, Boris Lurie was welcoming people to the Involvement Show by telling that “in times of war and extermination, aesthetic exercise and decorative patterns are not enough”. And ominously: “Remember, Eichmann is you, too!” The next year he was back with the “Doom Show”, together with Sam Goodman and Stanley Fisher and others, reminding us again that all was not well with the art establishment. It was a mess, that show. I remember it well. But I must reiterate that while the terms in which these makers of collages and things dictated their messages were not witty, brilliant, or even scathing in the great tradition of political art, they were the only terms in which an increasing number of dissidents could see their predicament! Nauseating to the seat of the soul.

I couldn’t help but be attracted by the 1963 NO!show. By that time, what with Vietnam and the coming-of-age of what

79

Eisenhower immortally called the military-industrial complex, I was all for “NO!”, no matter what it meant. It was certainly not a show as art shows go, but it did broadcast the marvelous possibility of saying NO! The final statement of the March group, it seems to me, was Sam Goodman’s collaboration with Boris Lurie shown at the Gertrude Stein Gallery, in which excrement was the sole agent, modeled to look like sculpture. This was a statement of the nihilistic, anarchic values that the subculture had long been generating. As is always the case with the morally indignant, the potential for pathos is strong, and so is the potential for annulment. Many converged in a pact of mutual disgust in the mid-1960s, and it was this mutuality that exhausted itself, as once dada had exhausted itself, making way for revised values. Merde alors! A final, incontrovertible statement which cuts off any further discourse.

For all that, the nausea and restlessness that motivated March Gallery events is already a tradition which the subculture can build upon. A diffuse but voluble clamor amongst urban artists points to the abiding value of “NO!” as a creative force. Whatever might be said about the quality of thought that brought about the foundation of the Art Workers’ Coalition not long ago, the fact remains that a genuine crise de conscience has assailed larger segments in the art world.

Important questions such as the role of the “pure” artist in social revolution have not been raised so fervently since the mid 1930s when the Popular Front posed the great challenge to the modern artist. The nihilism which underlay NO!art is altered here. The depression that assailed the young in the late 1950s and early 1960s is modified by the bracing action which suggests the possibility of vital change. The political crisis in the United States altered not only the attitudes of younger artists, but also the way in which they approached the works which justified their calling themselves artists, and it is in this alteration that the first note of optimism in many years is made possible (at least in the view of those artists who renounced easel painting and sculpture in favor of actions, events and ephemera).

The proto-theories of the March group have been refined, made viable, but the original sources remain: frantic disaffection, dismay and the paucity of spiritual lebensraum.

Under the shelter of “art”, many Americans can pursue certain activities and find a living space that no other category of American life can provide. The value forging activities of the anti-form artists finally have little to do with art which remains impervious to mere mortals, but are –ever since those early 10th Street days – increasingly important to a society which knows no ethic any more and which is perpetually hungry.

Harold Rosenberg (1974)

80

Bika za roge

Objavljeno v: Lurie, Boris; Krim, Seymour: NO!art, Köln 1988

Ljudje se naveličamo »radikalnih« umetnikov, ki v sitotisku izdelujejo nedolžne kolaže časopisnih izrezkov – strašljivih naslovov, električnih stolov, trupel – in mislijo, da zadajajo udarec družbi. Sporočajo samo, da berejo časopise, še najraje tabloide, in da so ugotovili, kako jih lahko izkoristijo za umetnost. Ni ravno preveč radikalno, če veš, da sta v atentatu umrla dva Kennedyja in da je imela Marilyn Monroe privlačna usta. Morda se taka umetnost zdi junaška, ker se je podvrgla tako nizkim informacijam, namesto da bi razmišljala o kontinuiteti slikovne ploskve in otožni ugotovitvi, da ima barva različne odtenke.

Pristno zaznavanje družbene resničnosti in mračni občutki, ki ga spremljajo, pri kritikih, kustosih in zbiralcih niso dobro zapisani, saj ti iščejo predvsem mirno uživanje v umetniških zakladih – s tem pa »nepretrgano kontinuiteto« ne le slikovne ploskve, ampak umetniškega trga in današnjih del z umetninami preteklosti. Kaj pa je svet sodobne umetnosti, če ne skrivni dogovor njegovih udeležencev, da iz umetnosti delajo razvedrilo za konec tedna, ki ga ne vznemirjajo tedenske novice?

Merilo avantgardne umetnosti je 1. stopnja razburjenja, ki jo sproži s kritiko družbe in kulture; 2. osrednji položaj tarče, na katero kritika leti.

Mislim, da gre NO!artu dobro od rok 1, nekoliko manj pa 2. (Mimogrede: menim, da je NO!art slabo ime, saj daje vtis, da pomeni »brez umetnosti«, bolje pa bi bilo reči, da gre za zanikujočo ali negativno umetnost.) Glede na to, kako vneto so se pripadniki NO!arta odzivali na sodobno Ameriko, so bili legitimni nasledniki dadaizma, čeprav brez njegovega silovitega burkaštva. Kakorkoli že, kazali so naravno sovražnost do samozavestnega, blagega popartističnega in post-dadaističnega Rauschenberga, Lichtensteina in drugih udomačenih muckov.

Nenehna negativnost za umetnika ni lahka. Navsezadnje nekdo postane umetnik zaradi izbruha občudovanja umetnine. Da rečeš ne umetnosti skozi umetnost, moraš najprej reči ne tisti izkušnji, ki te spremeni. Govorim o uboju boga – ali angela, božjega sla. Če gre pri NO!art za kaj manj, je to preprosto ne-umetnost, moderna družba pa je tega polna.

Po drugi strani pa, razen če je NE! je absoluten – načelen in nepopustljiv kot verska ali politična prisega – avtomatično postane sredstvo za vtihotapljanje nekega sloga slikanja s pomočjo propagande o družbenih stališčih.

Lurie, Goodman, Fisher in drugi so svojega estetskega

angela zadušili pod smetiščem medijskih podob, ki spadajo v kategoriji nasilja in spolnih fantazij. Documento V so napovedali deset let vnaprej – nič čudnega, da NO!art dobro kotira v deželi Josepha Beuysa in mednarodnih razstav pod sloganom »umetnost je odveč«. Lurie je v eni od izjav rekel, da si množično distribuiranih slik velikih jošk in izbočenih zadnjic deklet ni mogel izbiti iz glave, dokler jih ni izpraznil v kolaže. Organske poslastice, ki so slučajno zapakirane v človeško samico, so držale na vrelišču njegovo sovražnost do družbe, ki se je naučila zadovoljevati potrebe množičnega trga po vsem, razen po pristni riti – na državni ravni lahko priskrbi le nadomestek (pin-up dekleta), dejansko razgaljanje prsi in božanje za določeno ceno pa prepušča nadzoru lokalnih odlokov. Ni treba biti lačen jošk, da ti je všeč Levy's in da ceniš to, kar je bolelo Goodmana in Lurieja.

Prednost pripadnikov NO!arta je bilo sovraštvo, ki je napajalo samo sebe. Naslednje vprašanje je, kako dobro so izbirali tarče. Mislim, da v prvi vrsti niso ciljali na družbo, ampak na svet umetnosti. Svet umetnosti pa gre lahko k vragu le, ko gre k vragu družba. Del NO!arta so pin-up dekleta, umetnost tiste vrste, ki po Luriejevem pričevanju lahko postane obsedenost. NO!art se od pin-up deklet pomakne k iztrebkom, razstavljenim kot napoved kipov gibanja antiforme.

Kje je radikalna kritičnost? V samih eksponatih, mislim, ne v spremnih manifestih? Gola dekleta so doma na stenah umetnostnih galerij, in če jih razstavljamo kot nekaj škandaloznega, s podvezicami ali brez, v izrezkih iz pornografskih revij, hočemo s tem povedati, da jih je treba odreči revnim in neizobraženim.

Tudi drek ni radikalen pojav – Rabelais mu je napisal hvalnico kot dejavniku v humanistični revoluciji. Sporočilo NO!arta se torej skrči na izjavo, da pornografije in dreka, čeprav sta življenjski dejstvi, dotlej v umetnostnih galerijah še ni bilo. V galerijah pa prevladujejo še veliko hujše stvari, ki jih imamo za ugledne. Trgovanje z umetninami, kot bi bile z diamanti posut drek, je kulturno bolj uničujoče kot razstavljanje dreka, kot bi bil z diamanti posuta umetnina.

NO!art odraža mešanico dreka in kriminala, s katero množični mediji preplavljajo um današnjega časa. To mešanico napada tako, da jo reproducira v koncentriranih podobah. Gre za pop z dodanim strupom. Mislim, da je njegova največja vrednost v tem, da umetnostni svet opominja na obstoj stvari, ki morajo povzročati nelagodje, medtem ko se je pop prilizoval aveniji Madison, kot bi iskal sredstva za kampanjo. Glede na to, da ljudje bežijo pred neprijetnimi opomniki, sploh kadar nikakor ne morejo

81

Harold Rosenberg (1974) Bull by the Horns

Published in: Lurie, Boris; Krim, Seymour: NO!art, Cologne 1988

spremeniti situacije, lahko umetnost odvrne le: kar naj.

Naloga umetnosti ni nečesa narediti, ampak obdržati resničnost na dnevnem redu. Umetnost je od vojne naprej apolitizirana, a ne zato, ker bi se umetniki odločili izogibati politiki, ampak ker so ugotovili, da lahko pravi umetnik naredi le to, kar lahko, ne pa, kar misli, da je treba storiti.

Poleg tega je sama politika opustila vsako upanje na boljši svet. Posamezniki lahko vreščijo, nihče pa ne ve, kaj storiti. Umetnost sama po sebi ne more nič, da bi spremenila splošne pogoje življenja. In če umetnost zgolj vrešči, jo obtožijo, da se odreka umetnosti zaradi slabe politike. Je NO!art to počel? Je spraševal, čemu v današnjem svetu služi dobra umetnost? Kaki »Swiss Investment Group?« Kaki »Japanese-American Group—highest prices paid?« NO!art se je zasidral v resničnosti, ki jo je opredeljevala samouničevalna nova levica v zgodnjih šestdesetih. Od nje je sprejel sklop stvari, ki jih je treba napadati: tiranijo, umazanijo in estetsko hipokrizijo, ni pa mogel ničesar prispevati k novi politični zavesti ali uporniški senzibilnosti.

Galerija March je lahko zgolj zganjala hrup, da bi odgnala zle duhove. In da bi zgrabila bika za roge, pa čeprav bi jo zato morda vlačili po blatu.

Za dodatek nekaj vprašanj: 1. Si bo NO!art prisvojila umetnostna zgodovina?

2. Si prizadeva za prisvojitev?

3. Bodo razstave dreka priredili tudi v galerijah Marlboro, Pace in Castelli, da počastijo to epizodo umetnostne zgodovine?

4. Bosta retrospektivno razstavo dreka podprla Državni sklad za umetnost in Svet za umetnost države New York?

5. Če ne, je to ponarejanje umetnostne zgodovine?

6. Kaj pa drugi umetniki, ki so obstajali, a so jih iz umetnostne zgodovine izpustili?

One gets sick of “radical” artists who produce innocuous collages of silk-screened newspaper clippings—scare headlines, electric chairs, corpses—and imagine they are striking a blow at society. All that they are saying is that they read the papers, tabloids by preference, and have found ways of making use of them for art. It’s not really very radical to be aware that two Kennedys were assassinated and that Marilyn Monroe had an appealing mouth. Perhaps this art feels heroic because it has subjected itself to such lowgrade information instead of meditating on the continuity of the picture plane and the plangent discovery that paint comes in colors.

Genuine perception of social reality and accompanying grim feelings don’t go down well with critics, curators and collectors, who seek, above all, peaceful enjoyment of art treasures—and thus the “unbroken continuity” not only of the picture plane but of the art market and of works of today with the masterpieces of the past. What is the contemporary art world but the collusion among its parts to turn art into a Sunday Section of life untroubled by the news of the week?

The measure of vanguard art is 1. the degree of heat it registers in its criticism of society and culture; 2. the centrality of the target to which this criticism is applied.

I think NO!art does well with 1, less well with 2.

(Incidentally, I think NO!art is a bad title, because it gives the impression of meaning “without art”, whereas its better meaning is nay-saying or negative art.) In the temperature of their reaction against contemporary America, the NO! Artists were the legitimate heirs of Dada, though without the old boys’ slapstick ferocity. At any rate, they showed a natural enmity to cool, slick Pop and post-Dada Rauschenberg, Lichtenstein and other housetrained kittens.

It is not easy for an artist to be constantly negative. After all, one becomes an artist through a burst of admiration for a work of art. To say No to art through art requires, first of all, that one say No to that transforming experience. I am talking about slaying a god—or an angel, god’s messenger.

If anything less is involved in NO!art, it is simply non-art, and modern society is full of that.

On the other hand, unless the NO! is absolute—principled and non-compromising as a religious or political oath—it becomes automatically a device for smuggling in a style of painting through propaganda about social attitudes.

82 Lurie, Goodman, Fisher et al smothered their aesthetic angel under a garbage heap of media images belonging to the categories of violence and sex fantasy. They anticipated Documenta V by ten years—it is no wonder NO!art is doing well in the land of an international exhibition conducted under the slogan “art is superfluous” and of Joseph Beuys.

Lurie said in one of his statements that he couldn’t get massdistributed pictures of big tits and behinds of bent-over girls out of his head until he emptied them into his collages. The organic goodies that happen to be packaged in the human female kept at fever heat his hostility to society that has learned to satisfy mass market demands for anything but genuine ass—it can, on a national basis, supply only ersatz (the Pin-ups), leaving actual toplessness and price-fixed fondling to be controlled by local ordinances. You don’t have to be tit-hungry to like Levy’s, and to appreciate why Goodman and Lurie were sore.

The NO!artists had the advantage of a self-fueled loathing. The next question is, how good was their choice of targets? Primarily, I think, their target turns out to be not society but the art world. And the art world can only go down the drain when society does. NO!art features pinups, a kind of art, according to Lurie’s testimony, capable of becoming an obsession. From pinups NO!art advances to excrement, exhibited in anticipation of anti-form sculpture.

Where’s the radical criticism? In the exhibits themselves, I mean, not in the accompanying manifestos? Naked girls are at home on the walls of art galleries, and to exhibit them as scandalous, with or without garter belts, in cut-outs from porno magazines is to imply that they ought to be denied to the poor and uneducated.

Shit is not a radical phenomenon either—Rabelais wrote a poem in praise of it as a factor in the humanist revolution.

So the NO! message boils down to the assertion that while pornography and shit are facts of life they have not hitherto been found in art galleries. But a lot worse things are prevalent in galleries and are considered highly respectable.

To deal in masterpieces as if they were diamond-studded shit is more culturally destructive than to exhibit shit as If it were a diamond-studded masterpiece.

NO!art reflects the mixture of crap and crime with which the mass media floods the mind of our time. It attacks this mixture through reproducing it in concentrated images. It is Pop with venom added. I think its greatest value is to remind the art world that there are things to be uncomfortable about, whereas Pop glad-handed Madison Avenue as if it were looking for campaign funds. Granted that people flee unpleasant reminders, especially when there’s nothing they can do to change the situation, art can only answer, let them.

It’s not the business of art to get things done but to keep

reality on the agenda. Art has been apoliticized since the war not because artists chose to shun politics but because they found a genuine artist can only do what he can do, not what he thinks ought to be done.

Besides, politics itself has abandoned all hope for a better world. Individuals can shriek, but no one knows what to do.

Art by itself can do nothing to change the general conditions of life. And if art merely shrieks it is accused of abandoning art for bad politics. Did NO!art do that? Did it ask what is good art for in the world today? A “Swiss Investment Group?” A “Japanese-American Group—highest prices paid?”

NO!art fixed itself in the reality defined by the selfdestructive New Left of the early sixties. It accepted the latter’s package of things to attack: tyranny, filth and aesthetic hypocrisy, but it could not offer any contributions toward a new political consciousness or a rebellious sensibility. All the March Gallery could do was to make noise to drive away evil spirits. And to take the bull by the horns, at the risk of getting dragged in the dirt.

Some Questions as Appendix: 1. Will NO!art be co-opted by art history?

2. Does it seek co-option?

3. Will shit multiples be produced by Marlboro, Pace and Castelli to commemorate this episode of art history?

4. Will a retrospective shit show be sponsored by the National Endowment for the Arts and the New York State Council for the Arts?

5. If not, is the omission a falsification of art history?

6. What about other artists who have existed but have been omitted from art history?

83

Boris Lurie (1924–2008) 1924 Rojen 18. julija v Leningradu materi Schaini in očetu Iliji Lurje. Mati je radikalna pripadnica socialističnega sionističnega gibanja, oče uspešen poslovnež. Ima dve starejši sestri, Asjo in Josephino (Jeanne). 1925 Po Leninovi smrti zasežejo očetovo tovarno. Sovjetsko Zvezo najprej zapusti Schaina z otroki, nato se jim v Rigi v Latviji (ki jo je Boris kasneje imenoval »meščanska republika Latvija«) pridruži tudi oče. Boris obiskuje nemško gimnazijo, kjer se nauči tudi angleščine, predvsem pa je zelo razposajen. Materin bratranec, komercialni umetnik, opazi njegovo likovno nadarjenost. 1937 Naslika prvo likovno mojstrovino (kot je dejal sam), podobo akta. 1940 Sovjetska zveza priključi Latvijo, kar Borisovo družino vrne pod Stalinovo oblast. V letu terorja, ki je sledilo, so Sovjeti v vojaških akcijah in pomorih pobili 300.000 Latvijcev. 1941 22. junija vstopijo na latvijska tla nacistične enote. Luriejevo družino preženejo iz njihove vile Mežaparks; nastanijo se v stanovanjski hiši na ulici Stabu, v kateri živi tudi družina Borisove sošolke Ljube Treskunove, s katero zaljubljen preživlja vse trenutke dneva. Nacisti 25. oktobra preselijo vse Jude iz mesta in okolice v Veliki geto.

29. novembra iz geta evakuirajo ženske, otroke in starejše.

Naslednjega dne, 30. oktobra, jih okoli 13.000 v mrazu naženejo na marš v deset kilometrov oddaljeni gozd Rumbula, kjer se morajo sleči do golega, nato pa jih v izkopanih jamah postrelijo. 8. decembra enaka usoda doleti še 12.000 ljudi, med njimi so Borisova babica, mama Schaina Lurje, sestra Josephina Lurje in Ljuba Treskunova. 1941–1945 Boris in Ilija Lurie preživita geto v Rigi, nato Arbeitslager v Lenti ter koncentracijska taborišča v Salaspilsu, Stutthofu in Buchenwald-Magdeburgu. 1945 18. aprila je osvobojen Magdeburg. Borisa in očeta Ilijo najde sestrin mož Dino Russi. Sodeluje s protiobveščevalnim oddelkom. 1946 Boris in oče 18. junija prispeta z ladjo v New York. Boris prične risati in slikati podobe iz spominov na vojno. 1947 Nastajati začne slikarska serija Dismembered Women (Razkosane ženske). 1948 Obiskuje Art Students‘ League, kjer študira pod vodstvom Reginalda Marsha in Georga Grosza. 1950 Spozna Béatrice Lecornu (Hamilton), s katero prične deset let trajajoče razmerje. Prva samostojna razstava v Creative Gallery in v galerijah Barbizon Plaza hotela v New Yorku.

1951 Prvič se vrne v Evropo. V Parizu sreča umetnike Aragona, Francisa Sallesa, Wolsa in Pierra Soulagesa. 1952 Izdela velike stenske podobe z motivi Dismembered Women, razstavi jih v Barbizon Plaza hotelu, v umetniški galeriji Marino. 1954–1955 Veliko časa preživi v Parizu. Atelje si deli s slikarjem Edom Clarkom, spozna Sama Francisa, Beauforda Delaneyja in Chesterja Himesa. Prvič obišče Izrael.

V New Yorku najde občasno komercialno delo kot modni ilustrator. 1956 v Cedar Tavern spozna Sama Goodmana.

Sodeluje na skupinski razstavi v MOMA New York. 1957 S prijateljem Roccom Armentom, Williamom Gambinijem in enaindvajsetimi drugimi umetniki ustanovi galerijo March, eno izmed številnih kooperativnih galerij na 10. ulici. 1958 Samostojna razstava »Črne figure« (Black Figures) v galeriji

84 March, skupaj z Gambinijem razstavlja v galeriji Roland de Aenlle, sam nato še v galeriji Marino. 1959 Prične izdelovati NO!art kolaže. Spozna Stanleyja Fisherja, ki pripravlja izdajo beatniške lireature z naslovom Beat Coast East, eno izmed najzgodnejših antologij, posvečenih »beatnikom«, v kateri nastopa tudi Lurie. 1960 S Samom Goodmanom in Stanleyjem Fisherjem od Elaine de Kooning prevzame vodenje galerije March. V Parizu se udeleži otvoritve velike protestne razstave Anti-procès v podporo pravic Alžircev, ki jo s podporo šestdesetih umetnikov organizira Jean-Jacques Lebel; ob njem spozna tudi Errója. V New Yorku postavi nekaj samostojnih razstav: Dance Hall Series v D‘Arcy Galleries, Adieu Amérique v galeriji Roland de Aenlle in Les Lions v galeriji March. Sodeluje na skupinski razstavi “Tenth Street New York Cooperative” v Muzeju umetnosti v Houstonu. V galeriji March je na ogled »Vulgar Show«, prva izmed kanonskih razstav gibanja NO!art. S Samom Goodmanom razstavljata tudi v galeriji Marino. 1961 Samostojna razstava »Pinup Multiplications« v D‘Arcy Galleries. V galeriji March sta na ogled razstavi »Involvement« in »DOOM«. 1962 Potuje v Italijo, kjer nadzoruje postavitev dveh razstav »Doom« (s Samom Goodmanom) v galeriji Schwarz v Milanu in galeriji La Salita v Rimu. Med ostalimi sreča Enrica Baja. Po povratku spozna Gertrude Stein, s katero postaneta ljubimca, partnerja in prijatelja za vse življenje. Samostojna razstava »Multiplications« v D‘Arcy Galleries. 1963 Borisove »Multiplications« so prva razstava v novi galeriji Gallery: Gertrude Stein. Boris sodeluje pri programu galerije, vključno z razstavo »NO Show«. 1964 Razstava »NO Posters: ANTI-POP; s Samom Goodmanom postavita razvpito »NO Sculptures Show«/ »Shit Show«/, obe v galeriji Gertrude Stein. 9. junija umre oče Ilija Lurje. 1970 Skupinski razstavi »Aspekti rasizma« (Aspects du Racisme) v Parizu in »Umetnost in politika« (Art and Politics) v Kunstverein Karlsruhe. 1973 Samostojni razstavi v galeriji Rene Block v Berlinu in galeriji Giancarlo Bocchi v Milanu. Skupinska razstava v MOMA New York.

1974 Samostojni razstavi v galeriji Inge Baecker v Bochumu in v Galerie und Edition Hundertmark v Kölnu. Skupaj z Wolfom Vostellom razstavlja v galeriji Rewelsky v Kölnu in s Samom Goodmanom v muzeju Ein-Hod v Izraelu. Skupinska razstava v MOMA New York. 1975 Skupinska razstava v Izraelskem muzeju v Jeruzalemu. Prvič po letu 1941 se vrne v Rigo. Začne pisati spomine z naslovom V Rigi (In Riga), s katerimi se ukvarja naslednjih trideset let, prav tako z romanom Anitina hiša (House of Anita). 1978 Razstava skupaj z Erróm in Jean-Jacquesom Lebelom v American Information Service v Parizu. 1988 Samostojna razstava v galeriji Hundertmark v Kölnu, ki pospremi skoraj dvajsetletno prizadevanje za natis publikacije NO!art: Pin-ups, Excrement, Protest, Jew-art, prve antologije gibanja NO!art, ki izide pri založbi Edition Hundertmark. 1989 Skupinska razstava v Nassauischer Kunstverein v Wiesbadnu. 1993–1994 Razstavlja v galeriji Clayton v New Yorku. 1995 Pod njegovim vodstvom postavijo razstavo »NO!art« v nGbK: neue Gesellschaft für bilden-

85 de Kunst v Berlinu. Samostojni razstavi še v berlinskih Haus am Kleist park in galeriji ‚endart‘. Sodeluje na razstavi »Holokavst v Latviji« v Judovskem kulturnem centru v Rigi. 1998 Skupinska razstava v galeriji Janios Gat v New Yorku. 1999 Samostojna razstava v Spominskem muzeju Buchenwald v Weimarju ter v Muzeju umetnosti na University of Iowa v Iowa Cityju. 2001–2002 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art and the Aesthetics of Doom v Mary and Leigh Block Museum of Art v Evanstonu, Illinois in v Muzeju umetnosti na Univerzi Iowa v Iowa Cityju. 2004-2005 Razstavlja v New Yorku in v Haus am Kleistpark v Berlinu. 2008 7. januarja umre v New Yorku.

Boris Lurie v svojem ateljeju / Boris Lurie in his studio, 1962 (foto: Betty Holiday) © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Boris Lurie (1924–2008) 1924 born July 18, in Leningrad, Russia to Schaina and Ilja Lurje. His mother is a radical socialist Zionist and a dentist; his father is a successful businessman. He has two older sisters, Assya and Josephina (Jeanne). 1925 after the death of Lenin, his father’s plant is seized. First Schaina and the children, then Ilja flee the USSR for Riga in what Boris would later call “the bourgeois republic of Latvia.” Boris attends a German-speaking gymnasium, where he learns English and causes mischief. His artistic abilities are noticed by his mother’s cousin, a commercial artist. 1937 Boris produces his first self-described masterpiece, a nude. 1940 Latvia is annexed to the Soviet Union, putting the Luries back under the jurisdiction of Stalin. During this Year of Terror almost 300,000 Latvian citizens are killed by the Soviets in military actions and executions. 1941 the Nazis enter Latvia on June 22. The Luries occupy an apartment in a building on Stabu Street, as does the family of Boris’s schoolmate, Ljuba Treskunova, forced from their Mežaparks villa. They spend every day together, in love. On October 25 the Nazis relocate all Jews from Riga and the environs to the newly designated Large Ghetto. On November 29 the women, children, and elderly are evacuated from the ghetto. On November 30 approximately 13,000 people are marched 10 km in the cold to the Rumbula forest, where they are forced to strip naked, and are marched into the murder pits, where they are shot.

On December 8, another 12,000 people are marched to their deaths in Rumbula, among them Boris’s grandmother, his mother, Schaina Lurje, his sister, Josephina Lurje, and Ljuba Treskunova. 1941–1945 Boris and Ilja Lurie survive the Riga Ghetto, then the Lenta Arbeitslager, and then the Salaspils, Stutthof, and Buchenwald-Magdeburg concentration camps. 1945 on April 18, Magdeburg is officially liberated.

Boris and his father are discovered by Dino Russi, the husband of his sister gets work with the Counter Intelligence Corps. 1946 on June 18, Boris and Ilja arrive in New York by boat. Boris begins drawing and painting images from his memories of the war. 1947 begins painting works in his Dismembered Women series. 1948 attends the Art Students’ League, studying with Reginald Marsh and George Grosz.

1950 meets Béatrice Lecornu (Hamilton) and begins a tenyear relationship. Has his first solo show at Creative Gallery and the Galleries of the Barbizon Plaza Hotel, New York.

1951 returns to Europe for the first time. In Paris meets the artists Aragon, Francis Salles, Wols, and Pierre Soulages.

1952 begins his large Dismembered Women murals, shows them at the Barbizon Plaza Hotel and at Marino Art Gallery.

1954–1955 spends much of his time in Paris. Shares a studio with artist Ed Clark, meets Sam Francis, Beauford Delaney, and Chester Himes. Visits Israel for the first time.

In New York he finds occasional commercial work in fashion illustration. 1956 meets Sam Goodman at the Cedar Tavern.

Participates in a group show at the Museum of Modern Art, New York. 1957 founds the March Gallery, one of the 10th Street cooperative galleries, with his friend Rocco Armento,

86

Boris Lurie v svojem ateljeju / Boris Lurie in his studio, ok. / circa 1961 (foto: Sam Goodman) © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

William Gambini, and 21 others. 1958 has a solo show, “Black Figures”, at the March Gallery, a two-man show with Gambini at the Roland de Aenlle Gallery, as well as a show at Marino Gallery. During these years participates in 20 group shows. 1959 begins to make the NO!art collage and transfer works. Meets Stanley Fisher while Fisher is compiling his anthology of Beat literature, entitled Beat Coast East, one of the earliest anthologies devoted to the Beats, in which Lurie appears. 1960 with Sam Goodman and Stanley Fisher, takes over the leadership of the March Gallery from Elaine De Kooning. In Paris attends the opening of the large-scale protest exhibition Anti-procès in support of Algerian rights, with 60 total artists, organized by JeanJacques Lebel, whom he meets with Erró. Mounts the solo shows in New York, “Dance Hall Series” at D’Arcy Galleries, Adieu Amérique at Roland de Aenlle Gallery, and Les Lions at the March Gallery. Participates in the group show, “Tenth Street New York Cooperative”, at the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston. The March group mount the first of the shows of canonical NO!art, the “Vulgar Show”. Two-man show with Sam Goodman at Marino Gallery. 1961 has the solo show “Pinup Multiplications” at D’Arcy Galleries. “Involvement” and “DOOM” shows at the March Gallery. 1962 travels to Italy to oversee the mounting of the two-man “Doom Shows” (with Sam Goodman) at Galleria Schwarz in Milan and Galleria La Salita in Rome. Meets Enrico Baj, among

87 others. Returns home to meet Gertrude Stein, the two would become lovers, partners, and friends for the rest of his life. Has solo “Multiplications” exhibition at D’Arcy Galleries. 1963 Gallery: Gertrude Stein opens with a show of Boris’s Multiplications. Boris oversees much of the programming, including the “NO Show”. 1964 Has “NO Posters: ANTI-POP” show, and with Sam Goodman mounts the infamous “NO Sculpture Show” [“Shit Show”], both at Gallery: Gertrude Stein. Ilja Lurje dies on June 9. 1970 group shows, “Aspects du Racisme” in Paris, and “Art and Politics” at the Kunstverein Karlsruhe. 1973 solo shows at Galerie Rene Block, Berlin, and Gallerie Giancarlo Bocchi, Milan. Group show at Museum of Modern Art, New York.

1974 solo shows at Inge Baecker Galerie, Bochum, Galerie and Edition Hundertmark, Cologne. Two-man shows with Wolf Vostell at Galerie Rewelsky, Cologne, and with Sam Goodman at the Ein-Hod Museum, Israel. Group show at Museum of Modern Art, New York. 1975 group show at the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. Returns to Riga for the first time since 1941. He begins writing a memoir, In Riga, which he will work on for the next thirty years, as well as a novel, House of Anita. 1978 show with Erró and Jean-Jacques Lebel at the American Information Service, Paris. 1988 solo show at Galerie Hundertmark, Cologne to accompany the 20-year struggle to publish NO!art: Pin-ups, Excrement, Protest, Jew-art, the first anthology of the NO!art movement, published by Edition Hundertmark. 1989 group show at the Nassauischer Kunstverein, Wiesbaden. 1993–1994 shows at Clayton Gallery, New York. 1995 oversees and participates in the exhibition “NO!art” at the nGbK: neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst in Berlin. Solo shows at Haus am Kleistpark and endart Gallery, Berlin. Participates in the “Holocaust in Latvia” show at the Jewish Culture House, Riga. 1998 group shows at Janos Gat Gallery, New York. 1999 solo show at the Buchenwald Memorial, Weimar, and at the University of Iowa Museum of Art in Iowa City, IA. 2001–2002 participates in “NO!art and the Aesthetics of Doom” at the Mary and Leigh Block Museum of Art in Evanston, Illinois and at the University of Iowa Museum of Art in Iowa City, Iowa. 2004– 2005 shows in New York and at Haus am Kleistpark, Berlin.

2008 dies on January 7 in New York.

BORIS LURIE Miss Universe, 1961, akril na platnu / Acrylic on canvas, 161,3 x 101 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Prekrojeni mož (Cabot Lodge) / Altered Man (Cabot Lodge), 1963, barva, papirni kolaž na platnu / Paint, paper collage on canvas, 76,2 x 61 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Prekrojeni mož (Cabot Lodge) / Altered Man (Cabot Lodge), 1963, barva, papirni kolaž na platnu / Paint, paper collage on canvas, 76,2 x 61 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Prekrojeni mož (Cabot Lodge) / Altered Man (Cabot Lodge), 1963, barva, papirni kolaž na platnu / Paint, paper collage on canvas, 76,2 x 61 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Prekrojeni mož (Cabot Lodge) / Altered Man (Cabot Lodge), 1963, barva, papirni kolaž na platnu / Paint, paper collage on canvas, 76,2 x 61 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE NO! plakati na platnu / NO! Posters Mounted, 1963, ofsetni tisk na odpadnem papirju na platnu / Offset printing on wastepaper mounted on canvas, 221 x 172,7 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE NO! s striptizeto / NO! with Stripper, ok. / circa 1958–1962, barva, mavec na platnu / Paint, plaster on canvas, 85,1 x 69,9 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Anita, 1962, akril na platnu / Acrylic on canvas © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Cikel Ljubezen: Ženske se pretepajo / Love Series: Fighting Females, ok. / circa 1963, fotografska emulzija, akril na platnu/ Photo emulsion, acrylic on canvas, 49 x 32 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation BORIS LURIE Cikel Ljubezen: Zvezana na rdečem / Love Series: Bound on Red, ok. / circa 1963, fotografska emulzija, akril na platnu / Photo emulsion, acrylic on canvas, 195,6 x 138,4 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Cikel Ljubezen; Zvezana in začepljena / Love Series: Bound and Gagged, ok. / circa 1963, fotografska emulzija, akril na platnu / Photo emulsion, acrylic on canvas, 58,4 x 39,4 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Anti-pop šablona / Anti-Pop Stencil, 1964, olje na papir in platnu / Oil on paper and canvas, 53,3 x 61 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Več zavarovanja / More Insurance, 1963, papirni kolaž, barva na kartonu / Paper collage, paint on cardboard, 50,8 x 40,6 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Peresa / Feathers, 1962, barva, kolaž na platnu / Paint, collage on canvas, 184,2 x 116,8 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Brez naslova (Zbogom ljubezen) / Untitled (Adieu Love), ok. / circa 1960, olje, akril, papir, fotografije, sponke na kartonu / Oil, acrylic, paper, photos, staples on cardboard © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Zbogom Amerika / Adieu Amerique, 1959–1960, olje, fotografije na platnu / Oil, photo transfer on canvas, 141 x 130,8 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Oswald, 1963, papirni kolaž, akril na kartonu / Paper collage, acrylic on cardboard, 58,4 x 38,1 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Brez naslova (Čudovite ženske) / Untitled (Fabulous Femmes), 1961, papirni kolaž, plastika, barva na kartonu / Paper collage, plastic, paint on cardboard, 114,3 x 77,5 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Brez naslova (Raztrgane pin-up lepotice) / Untitled (Torn Pinups), ok. / circa 1962–1963, barva, papirni kolaž, linolej na lesu / Paint, paper collage, linoleum on playwood, 1 62,6 x 165,1 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

BORIS LURIE Prekrojene fotografije: Pin-up lepotica (Telo) / Altered Photos: Pinup (body), ok. / circa 1963, fotografska emulzija, akril na platno / Photo emulsion, acrylic on canvas, 127 x 116,8 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

107

Sam Goodman (1919–1967)

1919 Rojen v zelo revni delavski družini v Torontu v Kanadi: oče, tovarniški delavec, je umrl v nepojasnjeni delovni nesreči v tovarni. Sam Goodman je verjel, da ga je iz antisemitskih nagibov ubil eden izmed sodelavcev. 1937 Ustanovi in vodi eksperimentalno umetniško skupino. 1940–1945 Vojni fotograf za Canadian Film Board. 1945–1947 V nočnih klubih v Buffalu in Miamiju dela kot karikaturist. 1947 Preseli se v New York. Prične slikati v stilu abstraktnega ekspresionizma. V tem obdobju iznajde metodo »dolgega zamaha«, ko čopič pritrdi na ročaj metle, na palico za golf ali hokejsko palico. 1956 Ustanovi galerijo Camino, eno izmed kooperativnih galerij na 10. ulici v New Yorku. Med njenimi člani so Alice Neel, Nicholas Krushenik in Elaine de Kooning. Istega leta v krčmi Cedar Tavern sreča Borisa Lurieja. V teh zgodnjih letih njunega prijateljevanja Lurieju podari zbirko reprodukcij dokumentarnih fotografij koncentracijskih taborišč. 1957 Samostojna razstava v galeriji Camino. 1959 Sodeluje na skupinski razstavi na univerzi Columbia, začetek razstavljanja na skupinskih razstavah v galeriji March. Skupaj z Borisom Luriejem in Stanleyjem Fisherjem od Elaine de Kooning prevzame vodenje galerije March. 1960 Sodeluje v

Sam Goodman v galeriji March / Sam Goodman at the March Gallery, ok. / circa 1961 (foto: Boris Lurie) © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

razstavi The Vulgar Show v galeriji March ter na skupinski razstavi v galeriji Duo v New Yorku, z Borisom Luriejem pa še v newyorški galeriji Champagne. V besu prečka cesto ter glasno ozmerja Clementa Greenberga, ker mu je onemogočil razstavljanje v galeriji French. S tem so se skupini umetnikov okrog galerije March zaprla vrata etablirane umetniške scene, ki je odslej njihovo umetnost dosledno odklanjala.

1961 Sodeluje na razstavah Involvement Show in Doom Show v galeriji March ter skupaj z Allanom d‘Arcangellom na Car Event, protestnem uličnem dogodku na newyorškem Lower East Side. 1962 Z Borisom Luriejem pripravi razstavo Doom Show v Galleria Schwarz v Milanu in Galleria La Salita v Rimu v Italiji. 1963 Razstava NO Show v galeriji Gertrude Stein v New Yorku. 1964 V galeriji Champagne v New Yorku v sodelovanju z Dorothy Gillespie postavi instalacijo »American Way of Death« (Ameriški način umiranja). Z Borisom Luriejem postavi razvpito NO Sculpture Show (Shit Show) v galeriji Gertrude Stein. 1967 Umre za rakom na grlu. Boris Lurie pripravi spominsko razstavo v galeriji Gertrude Stein.

Sam Goodman (1919–1967)

108

1919 born in Toronto, Canada into a very poor working class family. His father, a factory worker, is killed in an accident at his plant, which Goodman always believed had been the result of an anti-Semitic action by one of his co-workers. 1937 founds and organizes the Experimental Art Group. 1940–1945 serves as a photographer with the Canadian Film Board during the war. 1945–1947 works as a caricaturist in night clubs in Buffalo and Miami. 1947 moves to New York City, begins working in the Abstract Expressionist style. In this period he invents the “longstroke” method by attaching his brush to a broom handle, golf club, or hockey stick. 1956 founds the Camino Gallery, one of the cooperative 10th street galleries in New York.

Its members include Alice Neel, Nicholas Krushenik, and Elaine de Kooning. This same year he meets Boris Lurie at the Cedar Tavern. At some point in the early years of their friendship, he gives Lurie a collection of reproductions of documentary photos from concentration camps. 1957 has a solo show at the Camino Gallery. 1959 shows in a group show at Columbia University, and begins showing in group shows at the March Gallery. With Boris Lurie and Stanley Fisher, takes over leadership of March Gallery from Elaine de Kooning. 1960 participates in the Vulgar Show at the March Gallery, in a group show at the Duo Gallery, New York, and with Boris Lurie at the Champagne Gallery, New York.

Crosses the street in a fury in order to scream at Clement Greenberg for having undermined an opportunity for him to show at French Gallery. This helps cement the New York art world’s dislike of the March Group and their work. 1961 participates in the Involvement and Doom shows at the March Gallery, New York, as well as the Car Event, a protest performance with Allan D’Arcangelo on the streets of the Lower East Side. 1962 shows with Boris Lurie in the Doom Shows at Galleria Schwarz in Milan and Galleria La Salita in Rome, Italy. 1963 the NO Show at Gallery: Gertrude Stein, New York. 1964 creates the American Way of Death installation with Dorothy Gillespie at the Champagne Gallery. With Boris Lurie mounts the infamous NO Sculpture Show [Shit Show] at Gallery: Gertrude Stein. 1967 dies of throat cancer. Boris Lurie arranges a memorial exhibition at Gallery: Gertrude Stein.

SAM GOODMAN Spomin na Marilyn / Remember Marilyn, ok. / circa 1959–1960, papirni kolaž, barva na lesenem ohišju ure / Paint on wooden clock, 106,7 x 73,7 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN TV, 1962, asemblaž iz najdenih predmetov / Found objects assemblage, 101,6 x 81,3 x 43,2 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN Eichmannovo obeležje (Triptih Eichmann) / Eichmann Remember (Eichmann Triptych), ok. / circa 1961, kolaž predmeti na leseni konstrukciji / Collage, objects on wooden construction, 99,1 x 91,4 x 20,3 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN Pieta, 1962, papir na okrasnem pokrovu avtomobilskega kolesa/ Paper on metal hubcap, 38,1 x 38,1 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN Gorila / Gorilla, 1961–1962, papir na okrasnem pokrovu avtomobilskega kolesa/ Paper on metal hubcap, 35,6 x 35,6 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN Brez naslova / Untitled, 1962, plastika na okrasnem pokrovu avtomobilskega kolesa / Plastic on metal hubcap, 36,8 x 36,8 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN Brez naslova / Untitled, 1961–1962, plastika na okrasnem pokrovu avtomobilskega kolesa / Plastic on metal hubcap, 36,8 x 36,8 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN Jedilni list (Krvavica) / Menu (Blood Wurst), 1961, asemblaž, papir, kovina, les / Assemblage, paper, metal, wood, 29,2 x 42,6 © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN Nakupovalni voziček / Cart, 1962, kovinska košara, karton, papirni kolaž barva, asemblaž na leseni plošči / Metal basket, cardboard, paper collage, paint assemblage on wooden board, 96,5 x 64,8 x 8,9 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN Duša in Nečimrnost / Psyche&Vanity, 1961, asemblaž z mavcem, barvo, najdenimi predmeti / Assemblage with plaster, paint, found objects, 165,1 x 35,6 x 61 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN Smrt in vstajenje / Death and Resurrection, 1961, zažgana plastična punčka s plastičnimi rožami / Burned plastic doll with plastic flowers, 76,2 x 55,9 x 22,9 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN Škatla / The Box, 1959–1964, asemblaž, najdeni predmeti v leseni škatli / Assemblage, found objects in wood box, 35,6 x 29,2 x 22,9 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation SAM GOODMAN Bog 20. stoletja / 20th Century God, 1962, steklo, kovina / Glass, metal, 24,1 x 12,7 x 12,7 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Lurie in/and Goodman

SAM GOODMAN, BORIS LURIE NE! skulptura (Skulptura Drek) / NO! Sculpture (Shit Sculpture), 1964, akrilna barva na mavcu / Acrylic paint on plaster, 21,6 x 34,6 x 30,5 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN, BORIS LURIE, NE! skulptura (Skulptura Drek) / NO! Sculpture (Shit Sculpture), 1964, akrilna barva na mavcu / Acrylic paint on plaster, 17,8 x 40,6 x 30,5 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN, BORIS LURIE NE! skulptura (Skulptura Drek) / NO! Sculpture (Shit Sculpture), 1964, akrilna barva na mavcu / Acrylic paint on plaster, 38,1 x 68,6 x 61 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SAM GOODMAN, BORIS LURIE NE! skulptura (Skulptura Drek) / NO! Sculpture (Shit Sculpture), 1964, akrilna barva na mavcu / Acrylic paint on plaster, 43,2 x 66 x 63,5 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Stanley Fisher (1926–1980)

1926 Rojen v New Yorku. 1944–1945 Med drugo svetovno vojno služi na fronti kot bolničar, sodeluje pri izkrcanju v Normandiji. 1959 Poročen in z družino živi v Brooklynu, kjer poučuje in piše pesmi. Borisa Lurieja sreča v zadnji fazi uredniškega dela pri zborniku beatniške literature z naslovom Beat Coast East, najzgodnejše antologije, posvečene beatniškemu gibanju, v katero je vključen tudi Lurie. Potem ko vidi razstavo v galeriji March, ga pritegnejo Luriejeva dela, ki jih vključi v izdajo, skupaj s svojimi in z deli Claesa Oldenburga, Elaine De Kooning, ob fotografijah Freda McDarraha in literarnimi prospevki Gregoryja Corsa, Diane DiPrima, Allena Ginsberga, Le Roi Jonesa, Jacka Kerouaca, Normana Mailerja, Petra Orlowskyja in Wavyja Gravyja. Skupaj z Luriejem in Samom Goodmanom prevzame vodenje galerije March.

1960 Izid kompilacije Beat Coast East ter omejene šapirografirane zbirke enaindvajsetih lastnih pesmi z naslovom Eryngo. Lurie in Goodman v njem vidita najprej pesnika in nekoga, ki je bil, kot pravi Lurie, »poslan od boga … da lahko naravno promovira našo stvar. Popolnoma osvobojen vseh omejitev človeške sramežljivosti ni poznal besede ‘strah’ ali ‘sram’«. Od razstave »Vulgar« dalje je pisal militantne izjave, ki so opredelile cilje skupine NO!art. 1961 Izdeluje kolaže, po katerih je najbolj znan, sodeluje na razstavah Involvement in Doom v galeriji March. 1963 Samostojna razstava v galeriji Stryke v New Yorku in sodeluje na razstavi NO! Show v galeriji Gertrude Stein. 1965 Samostojna razstava Sex-O-Cide v galeriji Grippi & Waddell v New Yorku. 1966 Začne pisati manifeste, ustanovi »The Group«, new-ageovsko komuno svobodne ljubezni, posvečene »idealu popolne resnicoljubnosti v medsebojnih odnosih, kakršne še ni bilo na tem planetu, čeprav predstavlja edino rešitev človeške bede.« Kmalu za tem požar v skladišču uniči skoraj Fisherjeva likovna dela.

1970-ta Svoja sporočila širi s pomočjo letakov in oglasov v medijih, kakršen je The Village Voice. Skupina »The Group« šteje okrog dvanajst članov in živi skupaj v četrti Greenwich Village v New Yorku. 1980 Umre v New Yorku.

122

1926 born in New York. 1944–1945 serves as a medic during World War II and is present during the Invasion of Normandy. 1959 a Brooklyn schoolteacher, family-man, and poet, Fisher meets Boris Lurie during the final stages of compiling his anthology of Beat literature, entitled Beat Coast East, one of the earliest anthologies devoted to the Beats. Having seen examples at the March Gallery, Fisher is drawn to Lurie’s work, and includes examples in the anthology, along with work by Claes Oldenberg, Elaine De Kooning, and himself, alongside photos by Fred McDarrah and writing by himself, Gregory Corso, Diane DiPrima, Allen Ginsberg, Le Roi Jones, Jack Kerouac, Norman Mailer, Peter Orlovsky, and Wavy Gravy. He joins the new leadership of the March Gallery with Lurie and Sam Goodman. 1960 Beat Coast East is published, as well as a limited-edition mimeographed collection of 21 of his poems, Eryngo. He is accepted by Lurie and Goodman primarily as a poet, as Lurie puts it, “a veritable godsend…the natural propagandist for our cause. Totally liberated from limitations of human modesty, he knew not the meaning of the words ‘fear’, or ‘shame’.” Beginning with the Vulgar Show, he begins to pen the combative statements that will come to define the NO!art group. 1961 begins the collages for which he is later recognized, participates in the Involvement and Doom shows at the March Gallery. 1963 has a solo show at the Stryke Gallery, New York, and participates in the NO! Show at Gallery: Gertrude Stein, New York.

1965 has the solo show Sex-O-Cide at Grippi & Waddell Gallery, New York. 1966 starts writing manifestos and begins to form “The Group”, a new-age, free-love commune dedicated to “the ideal of being absolutely truthful with one another. Absolutely truthfulness has never been tried before upon this planet and is the sole solution to the problem of man’s misery”. Sometime shortly after this, a fire in his storage warehouse destroys almost all of Fisher’s artwork.

1970s spreads his message through pamphlets and through advertisements in venues like The Village Voice. The Group numbers around twelve and lives together in the Greenwich Village in New York. 1980 dies in New York.

123

STANLEY FISHER Seks / Sex, ok. / circa 1961–1963, kolaž, papir, sprej na platnu / Collage, paper, spry paint on canvas, 128,3 x 160 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

STANLEY FISHER Brez naslova (Na pomoč) / Untitled (Help), 1959–1964, olje, papirni kolaž na platnu / Oil, paper collage on canvas, 81,3 x 72,4 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

STANLEY FISHER Brez naslova / Untitled, ok. / circa 1961–1963, olje, papirni kolaž na lesonitu / Oil, paper collage on masonite, 170,2 x 69,2 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

STANLEY FISHER Brez naslova / Untitled, 1959–1964, asemblaž z oljnimi barvami, papirjem, folijo in električnim kablom / Assemblage: oil paint, paper, foil and electrical light cord on board, 71,1 x 66 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

STANLEY FISHER DRO bomba/ DRO Bomb, ok. / circa 1961–1963, kolaž, oljna brava in sprej na papir na platnu / Collage, oil and spray paint on paper, canvas, 165,1 x 177,8 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Aldo Tambellini (1930) 1930 Rojen italijanski materi in italijansko-brazilskemu očetu v mestu Syracuse, v državi New York. 1931 Z mamo in bratom se preseli v Lucco v Italiji. 1941–1945 Obiskuje šolo za umetnost. 1944 Zavezniki bombardirajo Lucco, ubitih je enaindvajset njegovih sosedov. Tambellinijevi se preselijo v bližnji Guamo, ki ga zasedejo nacisti. 1945 Guamo osvobodi ameriška vojaška enota Buffalo, ki jo sestavljajo pretežno afro-ameriški vojaki, kar pusti Tambelliniju neizbrisen pečat.

1946 Vrne se v Združene države, kjer se preživlja z nenavadnimi priložnostnimi deli (pobira krompir, barva cisterne za bencin). Začne poučevati slikanje v muzeju v Syracuse.

1950–1955 S pomočjo štipendije študira na Univerzi Syracuse, kjer diplomira iz slikarstva. 1955–1956 Štipendija za podiplomski študij na Univerzi Oregon. 1956–1959 Štipendija za podiplomski študij na univerzi Notre Dame v South Bendu v Indiani, kjer študira pod vodstvom Ivana Meštrovića in magistrira iz kiparstva. 1959 Preseli se v New York in se ustali v soseski Lower East Side. 1962 S skupino umetnikov, ki jo sestavljajo Ron Hahne, Elsa Tambellini, Don Snyder, Ben Morea, Jackie Cassen in Peter Martinez ustanovi Group Center, ki se osredotoča na družbeno samopomoč, agitprop ter intermedijske razstave in performanse v alternativnih prostorih. Izdaja šapirografiran umetniški časopis The Screw.

V muzeju Whitney, v MOMA in Guggenheimovem muzeju uprizori performanse, s katerimi protestira proti neuvrščanju sodobnih umetnikov v njihove programe in sistemu povezav članov odborov teh muzejev s kapitalom. Razstavlja v galeriji Brata, eni iz med kooperativnih galerij na 10. ulici.

Kurira prvo razstavo skulptur na prostem pred cerkvijo Saint Mark‘s In-The-Bowery v New Yorku. 1964–1965 Organizira in sodeluje na pomembnih intermedijskih razstavah Quantum 1 in 2 v galerijah Noah Goldowsky in A. M. Sachs v New Yorku. 1965 Slika neposredno na najdene filmske trakove, ki jih predvaja na različnih mestih v svoji soseski na Lower East Sidu. Začetek sodelovanja pesniškim kolektivom UMBRA; v sodelovanju z Calvinom Herndonom, Cecilom McBeejem, Carlo Black, Ismaleom Reedom, Normanom Pritchardom, Beverley Schmidt, Benom Moreo in drugimi uprizori prve ‚elektromedijske‘ performanse z naslovi »Black«, »Black 2« in »Moondial«. 1965–1968 Brez uporabe kamere ustvari več kot ducat filmov iz serije »Black Films Series«. 1966 Z Elso Tambellini ustanovi kino Gate, ki edini v mestu vsak dan predvaja eksperimentalne in neodvisne filme. 1967 Z Ottom Pienejem nad kinom Gate odpreta prostor za multimedijske performanse in instalacije Black Gate. Začetek sodelovanja na mednarodnih festivalih eksperimentalnega filma. 1968 Z Ottom Pienejem izvedeta prvi televizijski performance, ki ga predvajajo na WDR-Köln, ter prvo umetniško televizijsko produkcijo za naslovom »Medium is the Medium« na WBGH v Bostonu, skupaj z Allanom Kaprowom, Nam June Paikom, Jamesom Seawrightom in Thomasom Tadlockom. 1968– 1971 Razstavlja video instalacije in TV skulpture; začetek sodelovanja z E. A. T. (Experiments in Arts and Technology) v Muzeju Brooklyn v New Yorku, v Rose muzeju umetnosti v

128 Brandeisu v Massachusettsu, v The Kitxchen v New Yorku, Muzeju Whitney in MOMA v New Yorku. 1976–1984 Sodelavec v Center for Advanced Visual Studies na Massachusets Institute of Technology (MIT), kjer vodi učne seminarje in delavnice ter sodeluje pri interdisciplinarnih projektih, ki vključujejo umetnost, medije in tehnologijo; sodeluje tudi na mednarodnih happeningih in intermedijskih dogodkih. 1980 Ustanovi Communicationsphere, uprizoritveno mrežo umetnikov in inženirjev, ki jih zanima vpliv telekomunikacij na družbo. 1983 Sodeluje na bienalu v São Paulu v Braziliji, kjer nato ostane celo leto. 1984–2018 Osredotoči se na pisanje, objave in uprizarjanje poezije v okolici Bostona. 2009–2010 Filmska retrospektiva v Anthology Film Archive v New Yorku, prav tako na mednarodnem intermedijskem festivalu Performav Osnabrucku v Nemčiji, v Filmskem arhivu na Harvardu v Cambridgu. Po skoraj štiridesetih letih razstavlja svoje slike in skulpture. 2010 Za dosežke na področju umetnosti mu italijanska vlada podeli zlato medaljo (Združenje Lucchesi Nel Mondo). 2011–2012 Razstava na kolidžu Emerson v Bostonu, na Univerzi Massachusetts v Amherstu, v Centru Georges Pompidou v Parizu. Samostojna instalacija v The Tanks v Tate Modern v Londonu. 2013 Samostojna razstava v galeriji James Cohan v New Yorku in filmske projekcije v MOMA New York. 2015 Sodeluje v italijanskem paviljonu na 56. bienalu v Benetkah. 2017 Velika retrospektivna razstava v ZKM v Karlsruheju v Nemčiji. 2018 Veliko število del pridobijo in razstavijo v galeriji Tate Modern v Londonu.

1930 born in Syracuse, New York to an Italian mother and an Italian-Brazilian father. 1931 moves to Lucca, Italy with his mother and brother. 1941–1945 attends art school.

1944 Lucca is bombed by the Allies, killing twenty-one of his neighbors. Tambellini moves to nearby Guamo, which is soon occupied by the Nazis. 1945 Guamo is liberated by the African-American Buffalo Soldier unit, leaving an indelible mark on Tambellini. 1946 returns to the United States and begins working odd jobs like potato picker and painting gasoline tanks. Begins teaching painting at the Syracuse museum. 1950–1955 attends Syracuse University on a scholarship and receives a BFA in painting. 1955–1956 awarded a teaching fellowship at the University of Oregon.

1956–1959 awarded a teaching fellowship at Notre Dame in South Bend, Indiana, where he studies with Ivan Mestrovic and graduates with an MFA in sculpture. 1959 moves to New York and settles on the Lower East Side. 1962 founds Group Center with Ron Hahne, Elsa Tambellini, Don Snyder, Ben Morea, Jackie Cassen and Peter Martinez. They focus on community outreach, agitprop, and intermedia exhibitions and performances in alternative spaces. Publishes the mimeographed artist’s newspaper The Screw and holds performances at the Whitney Museum, the Museum of Modern Art, and the Guggenheim Museum, protesting the underrepresentation of contemporary artists in their exhibitions and the financial ties of donors and board

129 Aldo Tambellini (1930) members. Begins exhibiting at the Brata Gallery, one of the 10th Street cooperative galleries. Curates the first exhibition of outdoor sculpture at Saint Mark’s on the Bowery Church, New York. 1964–1965 curates and participates in the seminal intermedia exhibitions Quantum 1 and 2 at Noah Goldowsky and A. M. Sachs Galleries, New York. 1965 begins painting directly on found film stock and projecting around his Lower East Side neighborhood. Begins collaborating with the UMBRA poetry collective, and creates his first Electromedia Performances, “Black”, “Black 2”, “Black Zero”, and “Moondial”, which he performs with Calvin Herndon, Cecil McBee, Carla Black, Ismael Reed, Norman Pritchard, Beverley Schmidt, Ben Morea and others. 1965–1968 Creates his “Black Films Series” of over a dozen abstract cameraless films. 1966 founds the Gate Theatre in New York with Elsa Tambellini, which is the only theater in the city with daily screenings of experimental and independent film.

1967 with Otto Piene, opens the Black Gate performance space above the Gate, to hold multimedia performances and installations. Begins to participate in international experimental film festivals. 1968 with Otto Piene, creates the first artist’s broadcast for television, “Black Gate Cologne”, an electromedia performance broadcast by WDR-Köln, and the first broadcast by artists in the U. S., “Medium is the Medium”, on WBGH, Boston, with Allan Kaprow, Nam June Paik, Otto Piene, James Seawright, and Thomas Tadlock.

1968–1971 exhibits video and TV sculptures and begins to participate with E.A.T. (Experiments in Arts and Technology) at the Brooklyn Museum, New York; the Rose Art Museum,

Brandeis, Massachusetts; The Kitchen, New York; the Whitney Museum, New York, and the Museum of Modern Art, New York. 1976–1984 becomes fellow at the Center for Advanced Visual Studies at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, teaching courses and workshops and working on interdisciplinary projects with art, media, and technology and participating in international happenings and intermedia events. 1980 founds Communicationsphere, a performative network of artists and engineers interested in the impact of telecommunications on society. 1983 attends the São Paulo Biennale in Brazil, where he stays for a year. 1984–2018 concentrates on writing, publishing, and performing poetry in the Boston area. 2009–2010 has film retrospectives at Anthology Film Archive, New York; Performa, International Media Festival, Osnabruck, Germany; and the Harvard Film Archive, Cambridge, MA. Shows his painting and sculpture for the first time in nearly 40 years. 2010 awarded a Gold medal from the Italian Government, Lucchesi Nel Mondo Organization, in recognition of his lifetime achievement in the Arts. 2011–2012 has exhibitions at Emerson College, Boston, MA; the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA; the Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris. Solo installation in the Tanks at the Tate Modern, London. 2013 solo exhibition at James Cohan Gallery, New York, and film program at the Museum of Modern Art, New York. 2015 participates in the Italian pavilion at the 56th annual Biennale in Venice, Italy. 2017 large-scale retrospective at ZKM in Karlsruhe, Germany. 2018 a number of works are acquired and put on display at the Tate Modern, London.

Aldo Tambellini ob svoji skulpturi na dvorišču cerkve sv. Marka v New Yorku, 24. oktobra 1963 / Aldo Tambelini against one of his sculptures on display in the churchyard of New York City‘s St. Mark‘s church, October 24, 1963 © Foto: Anthony Calvacca/ New York Post Archives/ NYP Holdings, Inc. Via Getty Images

ALDO TAMBELLINI Iz serije Spočetje / From the Conception Series, 1962, nitrolak, akril na papir / Duco, acrylic on paper, 66 x 66 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

ALDO TAMBELLINI Iz serije Spočetje / From the Conception Series, 1962, nitrolak, akril na papir / Duco, acrylic on paper, 66 x 66 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

John Fischer (1930–2016)

1930 Rojen v Antwerpnu v Belgiji. 1940 Družina pobegnila po bombardiranju v drugi svetovni vojni; po hudem pomanjkanju, ki so ga bili deležni pod fašizmom v vichyjskem delu Francije so se umaknili v Maroko in po osemnajstdnevnem potovanju prispeli v Združene države. 1943 Prihod v New York. 1944 Začne slikati prizore iz narave in sanj, preizkuša različne materiale, dobi nagrado mesta. 1954 Začetek dramatične serije nadrealističnih slik na platno, s katerimi raziskuje psihoanalitično ozadje težav v družini, zaznamovani z vojno. 1959 Začetek sodelovanja z galerijo Phoenix, eno izmed kooperativnih galerij na 10. ulici v New Yorku.

1961 Sodeluje na razstavi Involvement Show v galeriji March na 10. ulici. 1962 S posledicami travm vojnih doživetij in z razvijanjem nadrealističnega izraza ter raziskovanja objektne umetnosti začne izdelovati skulpture iz kruha, o katerih zelo pohvalno govorita Marcel Duchamp in Salvador Dali, ki Fischerja imenuje »prvi pravi kipar kruha«. 1964 Odmevna razstava v Allen Stone Gallery s skulpturami iz žemljic, polnozrnatih štruc ter drugih pekovskih izdelkov, premazanih z epoksi smolo. 1967–1974 Zasedba newyorškega Loeb Student Centra, ki ga napolni z ogromnimi količinami en dan starega kruha in različnim orodjem, kar je bil prvi dogodek iz serije petindvajsetih podobnih protestnih akcij hkratne peke in uničevanja kruha, mdr. v newyorških Everson Musem, Syracuse in Brooklyn Museum. 1968 Ena izmed krušnih skulptur je bila razstavljena na skupinski razstavi v Muzeju moderne umetnosti v New Yorku. 1975–1978 Vodi podstrešni prostor z imenom Environ, kjer prireja likovne razstave, jazz koncerte, plesne večere in različne performanse. Vodi skupino Interface. 1979 Odkrije računalnik, ki ga nato uporablja pri vseh svojih projektih pionirskega raziskovanja digitalne umetnosti, t. i. Electronic Paintings (elektronske slike). 1980 Preseli se v Ženevo v Švici, nato pa dvajset let z likovnimi razstavami in glasbenimi koncerti na turnejah po evropskih festivalih. 1988 Vključen v prvo antološko publikacijo NO!art gibanja z naslovom NO!art: Pin-ups, Iztrebki, Protest, Judovska umetnost v založbi Edition Hundertmark.

2000–2016 Vrne se v New York, kjer živi do smrti.

132

1930 born in Antwerp, Belgium. 1940 family leaves Antwerp after bombings during World War II, fleeing through the starvation and fascism of Vichy France across to Morocco, then an eighteen-day crossing to the United States. 1943 arrives in New York City. 1944 begins painting from nature and dreams, begins experimenting with materials and wins a city-wide prize. 1954 begins a dramatic series of surrealistic canvases that explore the psychoanalytic content of family troubles and of the war years. 1959 begins to exhibit with the Phoenix Gallery, one of the 10th Street cooperative galleries in New York 1961 participates in the Involvement Show at the cooperative March Gallery on 10th Street. 1962 as an outgrowth of his war experiences and his developing surrealist and object-art explorations, begins making sculptures out of bread and is praised by Marcel Duchamp and Salvador Dali, who calls Fischer the “first legitimate Bread Sculptor”. 1964 has a much-publicized exhibition at the Allen Stone Gallery, featuring sculptures made from bagels, pumpernickel loaves, and other bread products preserved with epoxy resin. 1967–1974 invades NYU’s Loeb Student Center with tools and a mountain of day-old bread, inaugurating a series of dozens of participatory breadbaking and bread-destroying protest events that would take place at over 25 venues, including the Everson Museum in Syracuse, New York and the Brooklyn Museum, New York.

1968 shows one of his bread sculptures in a group show at Museum of Modern Art, New York. 1975–1978 runs the loft space called Environ that hosted art exhibitions as well as jazz, dance, and other performances. Leads the group Interface. 1979 discovers the computer, which he would use for the rest of his life, creating his series of pioneering works in digital art, his Electronic Paintings. 1980 moves to Geneva, Switzerland and for twenty years tours Europe with art exhibitions and music concerts and festivals. 1988 appears in NO!art: Pin-ups, Excrement, Protest, Jew-art, the first anthology of the NO!art movement, published by Edition Hundertmark. 2000–2016 returns to New York, where he lives until his death.

JOHN FISCHER, Sekira in kruh / Axe and Bread, 1963, 33 x 45,7 x 45,7 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Dorothy Gillespie (1920–2012)

1920 Rojena v mestu Roanoke v Virginiji. 1938 Študij na univerzi Radford v Virginiji in Maryland Institute College of Art v Baltimoru. 1943 Preseli se v New York, kjer se poveže z Art Students League, sodeluje tudi z Atelier 17 Stanleyja Williama Hayterja. 1946 Poroči se z Bernardom Israelom, s katerim ima tri otroke. V Greenwich Villagu sta odprla restavracijo in nočni klub. 1961 Sodeluje na razstavi Involvement Show v kooperativni galeriji March na 10. ulici. 1962 Razstavlja v Muzeju Moderne umetnosti v Miamiju na Floridi. 1963 Razstavlja v Muzeju za likovno umetnost v Roanoku v Virginiji. 1964 V galeriji Champagne v New Yorku v sodelovanju s Samom Goodmanom predstavi instalacijo »American Way of Death« (Ameriški način umiranja). 1965 Razstava Made in the USA v galeriji Getrude Stein in galeriji Champagne v New Yorku; v galeriji Champagne pripravi tudi razstavo Light and Motion. 1966 »Flag Show« v galeriji Gertrude Stein. 1967–1973 Na radijski postaji WHBI v New Yorku gosti oddajo »The Dorothy Gillespie Show«. 1970-ta Izpostavlja feministične teme na umetniški sceni, protestira pred Whitney muzejem v New Yorku, ustanovi Women‘s Interart Center, organizira razstave umetnic, piše kritične članke. 1972 Sodeluje v programu Artist in Residence v Women‘s Interart Centru v New Yorku. 1973–1976 V Women‘s Interart Centru ustanovi in vodi Ženski zgodovinski arhiv.

1975 Članica izvršnega odbora Ženskega odbora za umetnost (Women’s Caucus for Art). 1977–1983 Serija predavanj, ki jih pripravi kot direktorica Art and Community Institute na New School for Social Research v New Yorku. Med 1970 in 1990 Naročila za projekte v javnem prostoru v New Yorku, Arkansasu, Connecticutu, na Floridi, v Marylandu, Minnesoti, Severni Karolini, Virginiji in Teksasu. Razstavlja mdr. v

134

Muzeju umetnosti Fort Wayne v Indiani, Muzeju umetnosti Delaware v Wilmingtonu, Muzeju umetnosti Huntsvile v Alabami, v Muzeju umetnosti St. John’s v Wilmingtonu v Severni Karolini. 1988 Vključena v prvo antološko publikacijo NO!art gibanja z naslovom NO!art: Pin-ups, Iztrebki, Protest, Judovska umetnost v založbi Edition Hundertmark.

1995 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art v neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst (nGbK) v Berlinu. 2001–2002 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art and the Aesthetics of Doom v Mary and Leigh Block Museum of Art v Evanstonu, Illinois in v Muzeju umetnosti na Univerzi Iowa v Iowa Cityju. 2011 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art at the Barricades v Chelsea Art Museum v New Yorku. 2012 Umre v mestu Coral Gables na Floridi; pred tem ustanovi fundacijo, ki nadaljuje njeno feministično delovanje.

135

Dorothy Gillespie (1920–2012)

Dorothy Gillespie, 1965, neznani fotograf / Unknown photographer © Boris Lurie Art Foundation 1920 born in Roanoke, Virginia. 1938 studies at Radford University, Virginia, and Maryland Institute College of Art in Baltimore, Maryland. 1943 moves to New York and studies at the Art Students League and at Stanley William Hayter’s Atelier 17 in New York. 1946 marries Bernard Israel and has three children. They open a restaurant and night club in Greenwich Village. 1961 participates in the Involvement Show at the cooperative March Gallery on 10th Street. 1962 exhibits at the Miami Museum of Modern Art in Florida.

1963 exhibits at the Fine Arts Museum, Roanoke, Virginia.

1964 creates the American Way of Death installation, with Dorothy Gillespie at the Champagne Gallery, New York.

1965 has the Made in the USA show at Gallery: Gertrude Stein, New York and Champagne Gallery as well as the Light and Motion show at Champagne Gallery. 1966 has the Flag Show at Gallery: Gertrude Stein. 1967–1973 has “The Dorothy Gillespie Show” radio show on WHBI, New York. 1970s works towards feminist goals in the art industry, picketing the Whitney Museum, New York, helps to organize the Women’s Interart Center, curates exhibitions of women’s art, and writes critical articles. 1972 is Artist in Residence, Women’s Interart Center, New York. 1973–1976 is creator and co-coordinator of the Women’s history archives at the Women’s lnterart Center. 1975 is board member, Women’s Caucus for Art. 1977–1983 lecture series as director of Art and Community Institute, New School for Social Research, New York. 1970s–1990s is commissioned to create public art projects in New York, Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, Minnesota, North Carolina, Virginia, and Texas.

Has exhibitions at the Fort Wayne Museum of Art, Indiana; Delaware Art Museum, Wilmington, Delaware; Huntsville

Museum of Art, Alabama; St. John’s Museum of Art, Wilmington, North Carolina, among other institutions. 1988 appears in NO!art: Pin-ups, Excrement, Protest, Jew-art, the first anthology of the NO!art movement, published by Edition Hundertmark. 1995 participates in the exhibition NO!art at the nGbK: neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst in Berlin. 2001–2002 participates in NO!art and the Aesthetics of Doom at the Mary and Leigh Block Museum of Art in Evanston, Illinois and at the University of Iowa Museum of Art in Iowa City, Iowa. 2011 participates in the exhibition NO!art at the Barricades at the Chelsea Art Museum, New York. 2012 dies in Coral Gables, Florida and establishes a foundation to continue her feminist work.

DOROTHY GILLESPIE MIKY, 1964, asemblaž, les, zlata folija, tkanina / Assemblage, wood, gold foil, fabric, 15,2 x 21 x 13,2 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

DOROTHY GILLESPIE Ljubica / Popsy, 1964, asemblaž, les, zlata folija / Assemblage, wood, gold foil, 24,1 x 55,9 x 25,4 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Allan D’Arcangelo (1930–1998) 1930 Rojen v italijanski imigrantski družini v Buffalu, država New York. 1948–1953 Študiral na univerzi v Buffalu in diplomiral iz zgodovine. Preseli se na Manhattan, kjer se vpiše na New School of Social Research ter City University New York, City College. Spozna abstraktni ekspresionizem.

1955 Sreča Borisa Lurieja, ki mu zgodnji umetniški fazi pomaga razvijati ideje. 1957–1959 Študij slikarstva na kolidžu v Mexico Cityju; dvakrat je razstavljal. 1959 Povratek v New York. 1961 Sodeluje na razstavi Involvement Show v galeriji March ter na Car Event, protestnem uličnem dogodku na Lower East Side. V tem času slika preproste mehanične slike z ikonografskimi motivi mitske sedanjosti. 1963 Prva samostojna razstava v galeriji Thibaud v New Yorku. Začetek dolgoletnega sodelovanja z galerijo Fischbach v New Yorku, kjer razstavlja vsako leto do 1969. Začetek poučevanja na School of Visual Arts (do 1968), nato znova med 1982 in 1992. 1964 Sodeluje na razstavi Boxes v galeriji Virginia Dwan v Los Angelesu, ob njem še Boris Lurie, George Brecht, Joseph Cornell, Marcel Duchamp, Ed Kienholz, Tom Wesselmann, James Rosenquist, Robert Rauschenberg, Robert Morris, Andy Warhol, H. C. Westerman. 1965 Samostojne razstave v Franciji in Nemčiji (mdr. v galeriji Ileane Sonnabend v Parizu). 1966 Samostojna razstava v galeriji Dwan. 1971 Naročilo Ministrstva za notranje zadeve za poslikavo jeza Grand Coulee v državi Washington. 1971–1975 Zastopa ga Galerija Marlborough v New Yorku, ki jo zapusti po sramotnem ravnanju galerije z zapuščino Marka Rothka.

1973–1992 Poučuje na kolidžu v Brooklynu. Opus iz 70-ih do 90-ih let je pokazal na samostojnih in skupinskih razstavah v Whitney Museum of American Art, New York, v Muzeju Guggenheim v New Yorku, Muzeju moderne umetnosti v New Yorku, Baltimore Museum of Art v Baltimoru, v Muzeju umetnosti Everson v Syracusu v državi New York, v Judovskem muzeju v New Yorku, v Museum of Fine Arts v Bostonu, v Državnem muzeju moderne umetnosti v Tokiju; v Württembergischer Kunstverein v Stuttgartu v Nemčiji, v Kunsthalle Bern v Švici, v Detroit Institute of Arts v Michiganu, na Bienalu v São Paulu v Braziliji, v Walker Art Center v Minneapolisu v Minnesoti, Rose Art Museum v Walthamu v državi Massachusetts, v Muzeju Hirshhorn v Washingtonu, v Galeriji Corcoran v Washingtonu, v Muzeju sodobne umetnosti v Houstonu, v Muzeju Queens v New Yorku, Grey Art Gallery v New Yorku, v Los Angeles County Museum (LACMA), v Muzeju sodobne umetnosti (LA MoCA) v Los Angelesu, na Inštitutu za sodobno umetnost v Philadelphiji, v Albright-Knox Art Gallery v Buffalu, Muzeju za sodobno umetnost v Chicagu, na Institute of Contemporary Art v London, itd. 1988 Vključen v prvo antološko publikacijo NO!art gibanja z naslovom NO!art: Pin-ups, Iztrebki, Protest, Judovska umetnost v založbi Edition Hundertmark. 1995 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art v neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst (nGbK) v Berlinu. 1998 Umre zaradi komplikacij z levkemijo.

138 1930 born in Buffalo, New York to Italian immigrants.

1948–1953 studies at the University of Buffalo and receives degree in history. Afterwards he moves to Manhattan to study at the New School of Social Research and City University of New York, City College. Learns about abstract expressionism. 1955 meets Boris Lurie, who helps him develop his ideas about art at this formative stage. 1957– 1959 studies painting at Mexico City College, shows in two exhibitions. 1959 returns to New York City. 1961 participates in the Involvement Show at the March Gallery, as well as the Car Event, a protest performance on the streets of the Lower East Side. Begins painting unaffected, mechanical, paintings using the iconography of the mythic present. 1963 has his first solo exhibition at the Thibaud Gallery in New York City.

He begins a long representation with the Fischbach Gallery, New York and has solo shows almost yearly through 1969.

Begins teaching at the School of Visual Arts, which he does until 1968, then again between 1982 and 1992. 1964 shows at the Boxes exhibition at the Virginia Dwan Gallery in Los Angeles, alongside Boris Lurie, George Brecht, Joseph Cornell, Marcel Duchamp, Ed Kienholz, Tom Wesselman, James Rosenquist, Robert Rauschenberg, Robert Morris, Andy Warhol, and H.C. Westermann, among others. 1965 begins having solo shows in France and Germany, including at the Ileana Sonnabend Gallery, Paris. 1966 has a solo show at Dwan Gallery. 1971 is commissioned by the Department of the Interior to paint the Grand Coulee Dam in Washington.

1971–1975 is represented by Marlborough Gallery, New York, which he quits because of their shameful dealing with Mark Rothko’s estate. 1973–1992 teaches at Brooklyn College.

1970s–1990s is shown in solo and group exhibitions at the Whitney Museum of American Art, New York; Guggenheim Museum of Art, New York; Museum of Modern Art, New York; Baltimore Museum of Art, Baltimore; Everson Museum of Art, Syracuse, New York; Jewish Museum, New York; Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; National Museum of Modern Art, Tokyo; Württembergischer Kunstverein, Stuttgart, Germany, 1966–1967; Kunsthalle, Bern, Switzerland, Museum of Modern Art, New York; Detroit Institute of Arts, Michigan; Bienal de São Paulo, Brazil; Walker Art Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Rose Art Museum, Waltham, Massachusetts; Hirshhorn Museum, Washington, D.C.; Corcoran Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.; Contemporary Art Museum, Houston; Queens Museum, New York; Grey Art Gallery, New York; Los Angeles County Museum (LACMA); Museum of Contemporary Art (LA MoCA), Los Angeles; Institute of Contemporary Art, Philadelphia; Albright-Knox Art Gallery, Buffalo; Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago; Institute of Contemporary Art, London, among many others.

1988 appears in NO!art: Pin-ups, Excrement, Protest, Jewart, the first anthology of the NO!art movement, published

by Edition Hundertmark. 1995 participates in the exhibition NO!art at the nGbK: neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst in Berlin. 1998 dies from complications with leukemia.

ALLAN D’ARCANGELO Made in USA, 1962, jedkanica / Etching on paper, 25,4 x 19,1 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

ALLAN D’ARCANGELO, Brez naslova / Untitled, 1962, olje na platnu / Oil on canvas, 81,3 x 185,4 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Erró (1932)

1932 Rojen kot Gudmundur Gudmundsson v Olafsviku na Islandiji. 1949 Končal Šolo za umetnost v Reykyaviku.

1952 Diplomiral na akademiji v Oslu na Norveškem. 1955 Diploma na Akademiji likovnih umetnosti v Firencah v Italiji. 1956 Kot Ferró prvič samostojno razstavljal v Milanu in Rimu. 1958 Samostojne razstave v muzeju Bezalel v Jeruzalemu, Muzeju umetnosti v Tel Avivu in Umetnostnem muzeju v Haifi v Izraelu. Preseli se v Pariz, kjer se priključi evropski umetniški avantgardi. 1961 Sodeluje na razstavi Involvement Show v kooperativni galeriji March na 10. ulici v New Yorku.

1963–1964 Med obiskom New Yorka odkrije ameriško potrošniško kulturo: izdeluje kolaže z izrezki iz stripov in sodobnih ilustriranih tiskovin ter jih umešča v slike. 1964 Samostojni razstavi v galeriji Schwarz v Milanu in galeriji Gertrude Stein v New Yorku. 1967 Znova razstavlja v Galleria Schwarz v Milanu. 1968 Spremeni ime v Erró. 1968–1986 Številne samostojne razstave v muzejih in galerijah širom Evrope. 1975 Samostojna razstava v centru Georges Pompidou v Parizu. 1986 Predstavnik Islandije na Beneškem bienalu. 1988 Vključen v prvo antološko publikacijo NO!art gibanja z naslovom NO!art: Pin-ups, Iztrebki, Protest, Judovska umetnost v založbi Edition Hundertmark. 1989 Veliko zbirko svojih del pokloni Muzeju umetnosti v Reykyaviku na Islandiji, kjer je stalno na ogled. 1989–2017 Velike pregledne in retrospektivne razstave v pomembnih muzejih umetnosti, mdr. v Muzeju umetnosti v Reykyaviku, Narodni galeriji Tajske v Bangkoku, Elements MoCA v Pekingu, Museo Nacional de Bellas Artes v Havani, Grey Art Gallery na New York University, Galerie Louis Carré v Parizu, v Kunstmuseum Bergen na Norveškem, Musée d‘Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris, Schirn Kunsthalle v Frankfurtu, Centru Georgesa Pompidouja v Parizu, Muzeju moderne in sodobne umetnostui v Saint-Etiennu v Franciji. 1995 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art v neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst (nGbK) v Berlinu. 2001–2002 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art and the Aesthetics of Doom v Mary and Leigh Block Museum of Art v Evanstonu, Illinois in v Muzeju umetnosti na Univerzi Iowa v Iowa Cityju. 2011 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art at the Barricades v Chelsea Art Museum v New Yorku. 2018 Sodeluje na skupinski razstavi Flashes of the Future v Ludwig Forumu v Aachenu.

142

1932 born as Guðmundur Guðmundsson in Ólafsvík, Iceland. 1949 graduates from Fine Arts School of Reykjavik, Iceland. 1952 graduates from the Academy of Olso, Norway.

1955 graduates from the Academy of Fine Arts, Florence.

1956 first solo exhibitions in Milan and Rome as Ferró 1958 solo exhibitions at the Bezalel Museum, Jerusalem, the Tel Aviv Museum of Art, and the Haifa Museum in Israel.

Moves to Paris and immerses himself in the European avant-garde. 1961 participates in the Involvement Show at the cooperative March Gallery on 10th Street in New York.

1963–1964 during a trip to New York, discovers American mass culture and begins to make collages out of comics and other contemporary print imagery and turn them into paintings. 1964 solo exhibitions at Galleria Schwarz, Milan and at Gallery: Gertrude Stein, New York. 1967 shows again at Galleria Schwarz, Milan. 1968 changes his name from Ferró to Erró. 1968–1986 holds multiple solo exhibitions at museums and galleries all over Europe. 1975 solo exhibition at Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris. 1986 represents Iceland at the Venice Bienale. 1988 appears in NO!art: Pin-ups, Excrement, Protest, Jew-art, the first anthology of the NO!art movement, published by Edition Hundertmark. 1989 donates a large collection of his work to Reykjavik Art Museum in Iceland, where it goes on permanent display. 1989–2017 holds large scale shows and retrospective exhibitions at international museums, including the Reykjavik Art Museum, Iceland; the National Gallery of Thailand, Bangkok; Elements MoCA, Beijing; Museo Nacional de Bellas Artes, Havana; Grey Art Gallery, New York University; Galerie Louis Carré, Paris; Bergen Kunstmuseum, Bergen, Norway; Musée d’Art Moderne de la ville de Paris; Schirn Kunsthalle, Frankfurt/ Main; Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris; Musée d’art moderne et contemporain, Saint-Etienne, France. 1995 participates in the exhibition NO!art at the nGbK: neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst in Berlin. 2001–2002 participates in NO!art and the Aesthetics of Doom at the Mary and Leigh Block Museum of Art in Evanston, Illinois and at the University of Iowa Museum of Art in Iowa City, Iowa. 2011 participates in the exhibition NO!art at the Barricades at the Chelsea Art Museum, New York. 2018 participates in the group exhibition Flashes of the Future at the Ludwig Forum, Aachen

Erró, v Parizu, Francija, ok. 1973 / Erró in Paris, France, circa 1973 © Foto: Hervé Gloaguen/Gamma-Rapho via Getty Images

ERRÓ (GUDMUNDUR GUDMUNDSSON) Arroyo, Miro, Riffeto, 1962, preslikan plakat / Paint on mylar, offset poster, 53,5 x 48,3 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

ERRÓ (GUDMUNDUR GUDMUNDSSON) Photos de film (Grimace), 1962–1967, ofsetni tisk / Offset silkscreen, 105,4 x 74,9 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

ERRÓ (GUDMUNDUR GUDMUNDSSON) B. M. Nemenski La mere (1945), Ben Shahn Sacco and Vanzetti (1931–32), 1966, olje na platnu / Oil on canvas, 53,3 x 129,5 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Harriet Wood (Suzanne Long) (1937)

1937 Rojena v Jacksonvillu na Floridi. Otroštvo preživi v gornjem delu države New York. 1959 Diplomira na Goddard kolidžu na temo iz zgodovine ženske umetnosti. Preseli se v New York. Študira na Pratt Intitute, obiskuje tečaje Art Students League. V Cedar baru spozna Sama Goodmana. Začetek sodelovanja z galerijo March na 10. ulici. Za določen čas zaposlena v MOMA, kjer sreča Lucy Lippard, pripelje jo v galerijo March. Med vožnjo v dvigalu v MOMA po naključju sliši kustosa Williama Seitza, ki med listanjem po seznamu predlogov za razstave pripomni: »Lurie in Goodman pa že ne. Absolutno ne!« 1961 Sodeluje na razstavi Involvement Show v galeriji March ter na dogodku Car Event, protestnem performansu s Samom Goodmanom in Allanom D'Arcangelom na cesti v soseski Lower East Side. 1960-ta Iz New Yorka se preseli v San Francisco in natov Seattle. Veliko potuje po Italiji, Aljaski, Mehiki in Angliji. 1970-ta Ustali se v Vermontu, kjer še danes živi, dela in redno razstavlja slike in skulpture. 1988 Vključena v prvo antološko publikacijo NO!art gibanja z naslovom NO!art: Pin-ups, Iztrebki, Protest, Judovska umetnost v založbi Edition Hundertmark. 1995 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art v neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst (nGbK) v Berlinu. 2011 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art at the Barricades v Chelsea Art Museum v New Yorku.

1937 born in Jacksonville, Florida. Grows up in Upstate New York. 1959 graduates from Goddard College with a major in the history of women’s art. Moves to New York City, studies at the Pratt Institute and the Art Students League.

Meets Sam Goodman at the Cedar Bar. Begins to participate at the March Gallery on 10th Street. Has a temporary job at the Museum of Modern Art, where she meets Lucy Lippard and brings Lippard to the March Gallery. Riding in the elevator at MoMA, she overhears curator William Seitz, looking through a list of potential exhibitions, say, “Not Lurie and Goodman.

Absolutely Not!” 1961 participates in the Involvement Show at the March Gallery, as well as in the Car Event, a protest performance with Sam Goodman and Allan D’Arcangelo on the streets of the Lower East Side. 1960s leaves New York for San Francisco and then Seattle. Travels extensively in Italy, Alaska, Mexico, and England. 1970s settles in Vermont, where to date she regularly exhibits painting and sculpture.

1988 appears in NO!art: Pin-ups, Excrement, Protest, Jewart, the first anthology of the NO!art movement, published

by Edition Hundertmark. 1995 participates in the exhibition NO!art at the nGbK: neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst in Berlin. 2011 participates in the exhibition NO!art at the Barricades at the Chelsea Art Museum, New York.

148

SUZANNE LONG Ženske in vojna / Women and War, 1962, mavec na lesu / Plaster on wood, 68,6 x 58,4 x 7,6 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

SUZANNE LONG Ne brez moških / Not without Men, 1962, olje na platnu / Oil on canvas, 156,2 x 121,9 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Isser Aronovici (1932–1994)

152

Isser Aronovici zgodnja šestdeseta leta / early 1960s, neznani fotograf / Unknown photographer © Boris Lurie Art Foundation ISSER ARONOVICI Brez naslova / Untitled, 1959–1964, gvaš / Gouache on paper, 57,2 x 71,8 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation ISSER ARONOVICI Plazeča se figura / Crawling Figure, 1963, gvaš, kreda na papirju / Gouache, crayon on paper, 38,1 x 53,3 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

1932 Rojen v New Yorku. 1950 Začetek študija na Visoki šoli za glasbo Cooper Union, nadaljuje na kolidžu v Phoenixu v Arizoni. 1954 Ukvarja se z Earth Art projekti v puščavi Apache na jugozahodu Arizone in v Velikem kanjonu (Grand Canyon). 1958 Z Lenore Jaffee ustanovi galerijo Phoenix, eno izmed kooperativnih galerij na 10. ulici v New Yorku Med ustanovnimi člani sta bila Red Grooms in Ted Joans.

1960–1961 Razstavlja s skupino okrog galerije March (Involvement Show). 1964–1967 Samostojne razstave v galeriji Gertrude Stein, s posredovanjem Borisa Lurieja: upodobitve tedanje »narkomanske scene« v »združevanju klasičnega slikarstva s primitivizmom«. 1966 Urednik revije Scab News, samostojna razstava v Elisabeth Street Gallery v New Yorku.

1968 Skupaj s Petrom Birnbaumom izda umetniško knjigo Marbles from Cockroach Morseleum. 1969–1970 Napiše eseja »Partnershit« in »Surviving Nazi« o svojih izkušnjah sodelovanja z gibanjem NO!art. Risbe razstavlja v galeriji Bieville v New Orleansu. 1971–1973 S skupino Rhino Horn razstavlja v galerijah Odyssey House in Herbert Benevy v New Yorku. Njegove slike se pojavijo tudi na stenah številnih drugih newyorških galerij (npr. Bowery Gallery) ter v ateljeju in stanovanju Petra Deana. 1972 Ustanovi Happy Lands Gallery of Romance and Fun in New York. 1973 Umetniški in plesni performans v galeriji Unaworld v New Yorku. 1988 Vključen v prvo antološko publikacijo NO!art gibanja z naslovom NO!art: Pin-ups, Iztrebki, Protest, Judovska umetnost v založbi Edition Hundertmark. 1994 Storil samomor.

1932 born in New York City. 1950 begins studies in New York City at the High School of Music, Cooper Union, then Phoenix College, Arizona. 1954 begins doing Earth Art in Arizona in the Apache desert country in the southeast part of the state and at the Grand Canyon. 1958 founds with Lenore Jaffee the Phoenix Gallery, one of the 10th Street cooperative galleries in New York. Red Grooms and Ted Joans are among the original members. 1960–1961 shows with the March Group at the March Gallery, including in the Involvement Show. 1964–1967 solo shows at Gallery Gertrude Stein, per Boris Lurie: a depiction of the “drug-scene” of the time in a “mix of classical painting with primitivism”. 1966 becomes editor of the magazine Scab News and has a solo show at the Elizabeth Street Gallery in New York. 1968 publishes the art book Marbles from Cockroach Morseleum with Peter Birnbaum. 1969–1970 writes the essays “Partnershit” and “Surviving Nazi” about his experiences in the NO!art movement. Shows his drawings at Gallery Bieville in New Orleans. 1971–1973 shows with Rhino Horn at the Odyssey House in at the Herbert Benevy Gallery in New York. Several of his paintings appear at numerous other New York galleries, such as the Bowery Gallery, as well as on the walls of Peter Dean’s studio and apartment. 1972 founds the Happy Lands Gallery of Romance and Fun in New York. 1973 does performance and dance at Unaworld Gallery in New York.

1988 appears in NO!art: Pin-ups, Excrement, Protest, Jewart, the first anthology of the NO!art movement, published by Edition Hundertmark. 1994 commits suicide.

Yayoi Kusama (1929) 1929 rojena 22. marca v bogati konservativni družini v mestu Matsumoto v prefekturi Nagano na Japonskem. 1939 Začne risati pikčaste vzorce in mreže, ki postanejo njen zaščitni znak. Sama je to povezala s halucinacijami, ki jih je imela v kaotičnem družinskem okolju, kjer je bil oče nezaustavljiv ženskar (povezano z njenimi kasnejšimi faličnimi obsesijami), mati pa zelo nasilna. 1941 Med drugo svetovno vojno je morala delati v tovarni padal. 1948–1949 V Kyotu začne študij tradicionalnega Nihonga slikarstva. 1952 Odmakne se od tradicionalnega japonskega stila in začne slikati v gvašu in olju. Pripravi dve samostojni razstavi, v vsaki je bilo na ogled več kot dvesto petdeset unikatnih del. 1955 Samostojne razstave v Tokiju. Sodeluje na razstavi akvarelov v Brooklyn Museum v New Yorku. Začetek dopisovanja z Georgio O‘Keeffe. 1957 Prva samostojna razstava v ZDA v galeriji Dusanne v Seattlu. Preden zapusti Japonsko uniči več tisoč svojih del. 1958–1959 Preseli se v New York in se vpiše v Zvezo študentov umetnosti (Art Students League).

Prične slikarski cikel Infinity Net; dela, ki jih prvič pokaže v kooperativni galeriji Brata na 10. ulici pohvalijo Dore Ashton, Donald Judd in drugi. 1960 Sodeluje na pomembni razstavi Monochrome Malerei v Städtisches Museum v Leverkusnu v Nemčiji (skupaj z Luciom Fontano, Yvesom Kleinom, Pierom Manzonijem, Markom Rothkom in Güntherjem Ueckerjem). 1961 Sodeluje na razstavi Involvement Show v galeriji March v New Yorku in na letni razstavi (Whitney Annual) v Muzeju Whitney v New Yorku. Vseli se v stavbo, kjer imata svoj atelje tudi Donald Judd in Eva Hesse. V bolnišnici zaradi izčrpanosti. 1962 Prične izdelovati svoje ‚mehke skulpture‘ (Accumulation series). Prvič jih pokaže na skupinski razstavi v Green Gallery Richarda Bellamyja, skupaj z Robertom Morrisom, Warholom, Georgom Segalom, Jamesom Rosenquistom in Claesom Oldenburgom, ki bo svojo prvo ‚mehko‘ skulpturo izdelal kasneje istega leta. Spozna Josepha Cornella, s katerem prične dolgoletno diskretno razmerje. 1963 S t. i. ‚Accumulation‘ skulpturami (Stol je danes v zbirki Muzeja Whitney) sodeluje na razstavi NO Show v galeriji Gertrude Stein v New Yorku. Naslednja razstava v galeriji Gertrude Stein je njena samostojna instalacija One Thousand Boat, s katero prvič uporabi celoten galerijski razstavni prostor. Postavitev vključuje resničen čoln za veslanje, prekrit s pobarvanimi ‚nagačenimi‘ falusi in obkrožen z 999 plakati s podobo čolna, ki prekrivajo stene, strop in tla. 1964 Vnovična samostojna razstava v galeriji Gertrude Stein. 1965 Ustvari prvi »Neskončen zrcalni prostor« (Infinity Mirror Room) in uprizori prvi performans. 1966 Dva meseca dela v ateljeju Lucia Fontane. Ustvari svojo prvo multimedijsko instalacijo z ogledali, utripajočimi lučmi in rock glasbo. Z odmevnim ambientalnim projektom »Narcissus Garden« se predstavi na Beneškem bienalu. 1967 V eksperimentalni kinodvorani Black Gate Alda Tambellinija in Otta Pieneja uprizori happening »Self-Obliteration« (Samoizbris). 1968 Filmi Obliteration, Love-In Festival in Flower Orgy. Vodi happening Homosexual Wedding v svoji ‚Cerkvi samoizbrisa‘ (Church

154 of Self-Obliteration) v New Yorku. 1969 Happening Grand Orgy to Awaken the Dead na vrtu skulptur Muzeja Moderne umetnosti (MOMA) v New Yorku. Prične izdajati periodično glasilo Kusama‘s Orgy in ustvari modno blagovno znamko.

1970–1972 Uprizori niz happeningov, orgij, modnih in fotografskih dogodkov na Japonskem, v Evropi in New Yorku.

1973 Po Cornellovi smrti se vrne na Japonsko. 1975 Poišče pomoč zaradi obsesivno kompulzivnih nevroz, hospitalizirana v bolnišnici Seiwa za duševno bolne v tokijski četrti Shinjuku, kjer živi in ustvarja še danes. 1977–1988 Izda romane A Book of Poems and Paintings, Manhattan Suicide Addict, The Hustlers Grotto of Christopher Street, The Burning of St Mark’s Church, Between Heaven and Earth in Woodstock Phallus Cutter. Tudi po tem še piše romane. 1988 Vključena v prvo antološko publikacijo NO!art gibanja z naslovom NO!art: Pin-ups, Iztrebki, Protest, Judovska umetnost v založbi Edition Hundertmark. 1993 Predstavnica japonske na 45. bienalu v Benetkah. 1995 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art v neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst (nGbK) v Berlinu.

1996–2018 Velike razstave, mdr. v Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Walker Art Center v Minneapolisu v Minnesoti, v MOMA New York, Muzeju moderne umetnosti v Tokiju, Art Park muzeju za sodobno umetnost v Sapporu na Japonskem, v Narodnem muzeju sodobne umetnosti v Kyotu, v Henie-Onstad Kunstsenter v Høvikoddenu na Norveškem, v Moderna Museet v Stockholmu, v Helsinki Art Museum na Finskem, Muzeju sodobne umetnosti v Sydneyju, Hirshhorn muzeju in parku skulptur v Washingtonu, v Seattle Art Museum, v galeriji The Broad v Los Angelesu, v Art Gallery of Ontario v Torontu, v Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofía v Madridu, v Centre Georges Pompidou v Parizu, Tate Modern v Londonu in Whitney muzeju ameriške umetnosti v New Yorku. 2001–2002 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art and the Aesthetics of Doom v Mary and Leigh Block Museum of Art v Evanstonu, Illinois in v Muzeju umetnosti na Univerzi Iowa v Iowa Cityju. 2001–2006 Prejme nagrado Asahi, japonsko medaljo s temnomodro lento, francosko Ordre des Arts et des Lettres (Officier) in nagrado guvernerja prefekture Nagano (za prispevek v umetnosti in kulturi), nacionalna priznanja za življenjsko delo (Red vzhajajočega sonca z zlatimi žarki in rozeto ter cesarsko nagrado za slikarstvo). 2011 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art at the Barricades v Chelsea Art Museum v New Yorku. 2017 V Tokiju odprejo Muzej Yayoi Kusama.

2018 Sodeluje na skupinski razstavi Flashes of the Future v galeriji Ludwig Forum v Aachenu.

155

Yayoi Kusama (1929)

1929 born March 22 in Matsumoto, Nagano Prefecture, Japan into a conservative, wealthy family. 1939 begins painting the polka dots and nets that will define her work.

She attributes this to hallucinations related to her chaotic home environment with a philandering father – leading to later phallic obsessions – and a violent mother. 1941 sent to work in a parachute factory during World War II. 1948– 1949 goes to study traditional Nihonga painting in Kyoto.

1952 moves away from the traditional Japanese style and begins to paint in gouache and oil. She holds two solo exhibitions, each with over 250 unique works. 1955 solo shows in Tokyo. Participates in a watercolor exhibition at the Brooklyn Museum, New York. Begins corresponding with Georgia O’Keeffe. 1957 first solo show in the U.S. at Dusanne Gallery, Seattle. Before leaving Japan she destroys thousands of her works. 1958–1959 moves to New York and enrolls at the Art Students League. Begins her Infinity Net paintings, which she shows at the cooperative Brata Gallery on 10th Street to the acclaim of Dore Ashton, Donald Judd, and others. 1960 participates in the important Monochrome Malerei exhibition at the Städtisches Museum in Leverkusen, Germany with Lucio Fontana, Yves Klein, Piero Manzoni, Mark Rothko, and Günther Uecker. 1961 participates in the Involvement shows at the March Gallery, New York and the Whitney Annual at the Whitney Museum, New York, and moves into a studio building with Judd and Eva Hesse. Is hospitalized for exhaustion. 1962 starts to make her soft sculptures, the Accumulation series. The first is shown at a group show at Richard Bellamy’s Green Gallery with Robert Morris, Warhol, George Segal, James Rosenquist, and Claes Oldenburg, who would begin his own soft sculptures later that year. Meets Joseph Cornell and begins a discreet, long-term relationship with him. 1963 participates in the NO Show at Gallery: Gertrude Stein, New York, including the section exhibition of her accumulation sculptures, a chair now in the collection of the Whitney. The next show at Gallery: Gertrude Stein is her One Thousand Boat Show, her first installation to use the entire gallery space. The work is composed of a real rowboat covered with her painted stuffed phalluses, surrounded by 999 posters of the boat pasted on the ceiling, floor and walls. 1964 another solo show at Gallery: Gertrude Stein. 1965 creates her first “Infinity Mirror Room” and stages her first happenings. 1966 spends two months working in Lucio Fontana’s studio. Creates her first multimedia installation with mirrors, flashing lights, and rock music. Creates “Narcissus Garden” at the Venice Biennale. 1967 stages “Self-Obliteration” happening at Aldo Tambellini and Otto Piene’s Black Gate Theatre. 1968 screens the films Obliteration, Love-In Festival, Flower Orgy, and presides over the happening Homosexual Wedding at the Church of Self-Obliteration in New York. 1969 creates the happening Grand Orgy to Awaken the Dead in the sculpture garden of the Museum of Modern Art, New York.

Begins to publish her periodical Kusama’s Orgy and creates

a fashion label. 1970–1972 stages happenings, orgies, fashion and photo-shoots in Japan, Europe, and New York.

1973 returns to Japan following the death of Cornell. 1975 seeking treatment for her obsessive-compulsive neurosis, she entered the Seiwa Hospital for the Mentally Ill in Tokyo’s Shinjuku district, where she lives and works to this day.

1977–1988 publishes the novels A Book of Poems and Paintings, Manhattan Suicide Addict, The Hustlers Grotto of Christopher Street, The Burning of St Mark’s Church, Between Heaven and Earth, and Woodstock Phallus Cutter.

She will continue to write novels. 1988 appears in NO!art: Pin-ups, Excrement, Protest, Jew-art, the first anthology of the NO!art movement, published by Edition Hundertmark.

1993 represents Japan at the 45th Venice Biennale. 1995 participates in the exhibition NO!art at the nGbK: neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst in Berlin. 1996–2018 has major exhibitions at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art; Walker Art Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Museum of Modern Art, New York; Museum of Contemporary Art, Tokyo; Art Park Museum of Contemporary Art, Sapporo; the National Museum of Modern Art, Kyoto; the Henie-Onstad Kunstsenter, Høvikodden, Norway; Moderna Museet, Stockholm; the Helsinki Art Museum, Finland; the Museum of Contemporary Art, Sydney; the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Washington, DC; the Seattle Art Museum, The Broad, Los Angeles; the Art Gallery of Ontario, Toronto; Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofía, Madrid; Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris; Tate Modern, London; and the Whitney Museum of American Art, New York, among others.

2001–2002 participates in NO!art and the Aesthetics of Doom at the Mary and Leigh Block Museum of Art in Evanston, Illinois and at the University of Iowa Museum of Art in Iowa City, Iowa. 2001–2006 receives the Asahi Prize, the Medal with Dark Navy Blue Ribbon, the French Ordre des Arts et des Lettres (Officier), and the Nagano Governor Prize (for the contribution in encouragement of art and culture) a National Lifetime Achievement Award, the Order of the Rising Sun, Gold Rays with Losette and The Praemium Imperiale-Painting. 2011 participates in the exhibition NO!art at the Barricades at the Chelsea Art Museum, New York.

2017 the Yayoi Kusama Museum opens in Tokyo. 2018 participates in the group exhibition Flashes of the Future at the Ludwig Forum, Aachen.

Japonska umetnica in pisateljica Yayoi Kusama / Japanese artist and writer Yayoi Kusama, New York, 1964 © Foto: Evelyn Hofer/ Getty Images YAYOI KUSAMA Razstava Tisoč čolnov / One Thousand Boat Show, 1963, litografija / Lithograph, 76,2 x 111,8 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation YAYOI KUSAMA Driving Image Show, Galleria d‘Arte Milano, 1966, plakat / poster, 46 x 57 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Jean-Jacques Lebel (1936)

1936 Rojen v Parizu. Njegov oče je Robert Lebel, pisatelj, umetnostni zbiratelj in zgodovinar, prijatelj nadrealistov, Jacquesa Lacana, Clauda Lévi-Straussa in prvi biograf Marcela Duchampa. 1940–1944 Z družino emigrira v New York. Živijo v soseski Greenwich Village, kjer se družijo z ostalimi umetniki-emigranti: Andréjem Bretonom, Alexandrom Calderjem, Leonoro Carrington, Duchampom, Georgesom Duthuitom, Maxom Ernstom, Wilfredom Lamom, Lévi-Straussom, Andréjem Massonom, Robertom Matto, Yvesom Tanguyjem, Dorotheo Tanning, Isabelle in Patrickom Waldbergom. 1955 Izda prvo številko svoje umetniške, politične in literarne revije Front Unique; pripravi prvo samostojno razstavo v La Galleria Numero v Firencah. 1955–1959 Član francoskega nadrealističnega gibanja. 1957 Razstavlja pri Iris Clert v Parizu. 1960–1961 Organizira veliko protestno razstavo Anti-procès v podporo pravic Alžircev, na kateri sodeluje šestdeset umetnikov, mdr. Lam, Henri Michaux, Matta, Jacques Prévert, César, Erró, Wolf Vostell, Robert Rauschenberg in Cy Twombly. Promocija razstave vključuje deklaracijo upora, ki ima v svojem programu »zavrnitev podrejanja umetniške kreativnosti komercialnim ali propagandnim interesom«. V sodelovanju z Enricom Bajem, Robertom Crippo, Giovannijem Dovo, Errójem in Antoniom Recalcatijem ustvari veliko tabelno sliko Grand Tableau Antifasciste Collectif, ki je cenzurirana in odstranjena. Anti-procès potuje v Milano in Benetke, kjer pod Lebelovim vodstvom izvedejo akcijo L’enterrement de ‘la Chose’ de Tinguely, ki obvelja za prvi evropski happening. 1961 Sodeluje na razstavah Involvement Show in Doom Show v galeriji March v New Yorku. 1963 Sodeluje na razstavi NO Show v galeriji Gertrude Stein v New Yorku.

1964–1967 Ustanovi Festival of Free Expression (Festival svobodnega izraza), na prvi prireditvi Carolee Schneemann premierno izvede svojo akcijo »Meet Joy«. 1966 Prevaja Al-

158

lena Ginsberga in Gregoryja Corsa v francoščino ter prvič objavi njuno poezijo ter pesmi drugih prijateljev iz t. i. beat generacije v La Poésie de la Beat Generation (Paris: Éditons Denoël, 1966). 1967 Na oder postavi igro Pabla Picassa Le Désir attrapé par la queue (Ujemi poželenje za rep), s Taylorjem Meadom, Rito Renoir, Ultra Violet in britansko psihedelično rock skupino The Soft Machine. 1968 Udeleženec v aktivnostih gibanja 22. marec in anarhističnih skupin Noir et Rouge in Informations et Correspondances Ouvrières; obiskuje predavanja Gillesa Deleuza na univerzi Pariz VIII – Vincennes in Saint-Denis. Pripravlja kulturne in politične oddaje za program France Culture na radiju. 1970 Z Danielom Guérinom uredi izdajo Changer la vie! (Pariz: Éditions Pierre Belfond), zbirko ponatisov najpomembnejših zgodovinskih besedil mednarodnega anarhističnega gibanja. 1979 Ustanovi mednarodni multimedijski festival Polyphonix. 1988 Vključen v prvo antološko publikacijo NO!art gibanja z naslovom NO!art: Pin-ups, Iztrebki, Protest, Judovska umetnost v založbi Edition Hundertmark. 1995 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art v neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst (nGbK) v Berlinu. 1995–2018 Svoja dela razstavlja v ameriških, evropskih in japonskih galerijah in muzejih, mdr. v Muzeju moderne umetnosti v Saint Etiennu, v Saint-Priest-en-Jarez v Franciji, v MAMCO v Ženevi in v ZKM v Karlsruheju v Nemčiji.

2001–2002 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art and the Aesthetics of Doom v Mary and Leigh Block Museum of Art v Evanstonu, Illinois in v Muzeju umetnosti na Univerzi Iowa v Iowa Cityju. 2011 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art at the Barricades v Chelsea Art Museum v New Yorku. 2018 Sodeluje na skupinski razstavi Flashes of the Future v galeriji Ludwig Forum v Aachnu; velika retrospektivna razstava v Centre Georges Pompidou v Parizu.

159

Jean-Jacques Lebel (1936)

1936 born in Paris. His father is Robert Lebel, author, art collector and historian, friend of surrealists, Jacques Lacan and Claude Lévi-Strauss, and first biographer of Marcel Duchamp. 1940–1944 exiled with his family to New York.

They live in Greenwich Village and are close with fellow exiles and expatriates André Breton, Alexander Calder, Leonora Carrington, Duchamp, Georges Duthuit, Max Ernst, Wifredo Lam, Lévi-Strauss, André Masson, Roberto Matta, Yves Tanguy, Dorothea Tanning, Isabelle and Patrick Waldberg. 1955 published the first edition of his arts, politics, and poetry magazine Front Unique, and has his first solo exhibition at La Galleria Numero in Florence. 1955– 1959 member of French Surrealist movement. 1957 shows with Iris Clert in Paris. 1960–1961 organizes the large-scale protest exhibition Anti-procès in support of Algerian rights, with a total of 60 artists, including Lam, Henri Michaux, Matta, Jacques Prévert, César, Erró, Wolf Vostell, Robert Rauschenberg, and Cy Twombly. The exhibition’s publicity included a declaration of resistance, among the planks of which was “the refusal to subordinate artistic activity to commerce or propaganda”. Creates the large Grand Tableau Antifasciste Collectif with Enrico Baj, Roberto Crippa, Gianni Dova, Erró, and Antonio Recalcati, which is censored and removed. Anti-procès traveled to Milan and Venice, where what has been identified as the first European Happening was staged by Lebel, L’enterrement de ‘la Chose’ de Tinguely.

1961 participates in the Involvement and Doom shows at the March Gallery, New York. 1963 participates in the NO Show at Gallery: Gertrude Stein, New York. 1964–1967 creates the Festival of Free Expression, at the first of which Carolee Schneemann produces “Meat Joy” for the first time. 1966 translates Allen Ginsburg and Gregory Corso into French for the first time and publishes them and other Beat poet friends in La Poésie de la Beat Generation (Paris: Éditons Denoël, 1966). 1967 stages Pablo Picasso’s play Le Désir attrapé par la queue with Taylor Mead, Rita Renoir, Ultra Violet, and The Soft Machine. 1968 takes part in the activities of the March 22nd Movement and then those of the anarchist group Noir et Rouge and in the Informations et Correspondances Ouvrières group, follows the courses of Gilles Deleuze at Vincennes and Saint-Denis. Produces programs for the France Culture radio network about numerous cultural and political topics.

1970 edits with Daniel Guérin Changer la vie! (Paris: Éditions Pierre Belfond), a collection republishing major historical texts of the international anarchist movement. 1979 creates the multimedia Polyphonix International Festival. 1988 appears in NO!art: Pin-ups, Excrement, Protest, Jew-art, the first anthology of the NO!art movement, published by Edition Hundertmark. 1995 participates in the exhibition NO!art at the nGbK: neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst in Berlin.

1995–2018 begins publicly exhibiting his own work in U.S., European, and Japanese galleries and museums, including at the Saint Etienne Museum of Modern Art, Saint-Priest-enJarez, France, MAMCO in Geneva, Switzerland, and ZKM in Karlsruhe, Germany. 2001–2002 participates in NO!art and the Aesthetics of Doom at the Mary and Leigh Block Museum of Art in Evanston, Illinois and at the University of Iowa Museum of Art in Iowa City, Iowa. 2011 participates in the exhibition NO!art at the Barricades at the Chelsea Art Museum, New York. 2018 participates in the group exhibition Flashes of the Future at the Ludwig Forum, Aachen, and has a large-scale retrospective at the Centre Georges Pompidou in Paris.

Jean-Jacques Lebel, Barricades, naslovnica knjige / book cover, published by Walther König, Köln, 2015

JEAN-JACQUES LEBEL Brez naslova / Untitled, 1963, barva, kreda, kolaž na papirju / Paint, crayon, collage on paper, 73,7 x 106,7 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

JEAN-JACQUES LEBEL Brez naslova / Untitled, 1963, tempera, kolaž na ofset plakatu / Tempera, collage on offset poster, 76,9 x 61,6 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

JEAN-JACQUES LEBEL Brez naslova / Untitled, 1961, kovina, plastika, steklo, barva, papirni kolaž na lesu / Metal, plastic, glass, paint, paper collage on wood, 119,4 x 48,3 x 12,7 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation JEAN-JACQUES LEBEL Brez naslova / Untitled, 1961, oljna barva, perje, kovina, guma, najdeni predmeti na lutki iz steklenih vlaken / Oil paint, feathers, metal, rubber, other found objects on fiberglass mannequin, 182,9 x 35,6 x 38,1 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Rocco Armento (1924–2011)

1924 Rojen na Staten Islandu v New Yorku. 1943–1945 Med drugo svetovno vojno služil v 155. fotografskem eskadronu ameriške vojske v Evropi. 1947–1954 Študiral na Art Students League, Mechanics Institute, National Academy of Design in Wagnerjevem kolidžu v New Yorku ter na Académie de la Grand Chaumière v Parizu. 1956–1959 Samostojna razstava, sodeluje na skupinskih razstavah v kooperativnih galerijah na 10. ulici v New Yorku (mdr. v galerijah Brata in Tanager). 1957 Eden od ustanoviteljev galerije March. 1961 Sodeluje na Involvement Show v galeriji March. 1961–1965 Poučuje na School of Visual Arts v New Yorku. 1963 Razstavlja na ‚NO Show‘ v Galeriji Gertrude Stein v New Yorku.

1988 Vključen v prvo antološko publikacijo NO!art gibanja z naslovom NO!art: Pin-ups, Iztrebki, Protest, Judovska umetnost v založbi Edition Hundertmark. 1995 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art v neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst (nGbK) v Berlinu. 2001–2002 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art in estetika obsodbe v Muzeju umetnosti Mary and Leigh Block v Evanstonu, Illinois in Muzeju umetnosti univerze Iowa v Iowa Cityju. 2006 Skupaj z Borisom Luriejem sodeluje pri nastanku t. i. Ax works (Dela s sekiro) in nastopi v dokumentarnem filmu Shoah and Pinups! The No!art Artist Boris Lurie. 2011 Umrl v Woodstocku v državi New York.

164

1924 born on Staten Island, New York. 1943–1945 serves in the 155th Photo Reconnaissance Squadron in the U.S. Army in the European Theater during World War II. 1947–1954 studies at Art Students League, the Mechanics Institute, the National Academy of Design, and Wagner College in New York, as well as at the Grand Chaumiere School in Paris. 1956–1959 has one man shows and participates in group exhibitions in the cooperative galleries of 10th Street in New York City, including at the Brata and Tanager Galleries. 1957 is one of the original members of the March Gallery cooperative. 1961 takes part in the Involvement Show at the March Gallery. 1961–1965 teaches at the School of Visual Arts, New York. 1963 the NO Show at Gallery: Gertrude Stein, New York. 1988 appears in NO!art: Pin-ups, Excrement, Protest, Jew-art, the first anthology of the NO!art movement, published by Edition Hundertmark.

1995 participates in the exhibition NO!art at the nGbK: neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst in Berlin. 2001–2002 participates in NO!art and the Aesthetics of Doom at the Mary and Leigh Block Museum of Art in Evanston, Illinois and at the University of Iowa Museum of Art in Iowa City, Iowa. 2006 creates Ax works with Boris Lurie and appears in Shoa and Pinups! The NO! Artist Boris Lurie documentary.

2011 dies in Woodstock, New York.

ROCCO ARMENTO Sedeča figura / Seated Figure, 1962, mavec / Plaster, 55,9 x 33 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Wolf Vostell (1932–1998)

1932 Rojen Josephu in Regini Schäfer v Leverkusnu.

Oče je železniški delavec. 1939 Vojno preživi v Chomutovu na Češkem. 1945 Po treh mesecih pešačenja se preko Budejovic, Prage, Chomutova, Dresdna, Gere in Kassla vrne se v Köln. 1950–1953 Uči se za foto-litografa. 1952 Prevzame materin dekliški priimek Vostell. 1954 Obišče Pariz, kjer na prvi strani časopisa Le Figaro opazi besedo décollage v članku o letalski nesreči neposredno po vzletu. Izraz uporabi za opis natrganih plasti plakatov na zidovih v urbanem okolju in kasneje za svoje akcije. Dé-coll/age postane Vostellov ustvarjalni princip in splošen koncept njegove umetnosti. Tega leta je pripravil prvi dé-coll/age happening v Wuppertalu. V Kölnu je spoznal Karlheinza Stockhausna.

1955–1956 Obiskuje Ècole National Supérieure des Beaux Arts v Parizu. Študira slikarstvo, grafiko in anatomijo ter dela Hieronymusa Boscha, Goye, Bruegla in Fernanda Légerja ter delo znamenitega oblikovalca Cassandra. 1957 Obiskuje umetnostno akademijo v Düsseldorfu; študij talmuda. 1958 Povratek v Pariz, kjer izvede drugi dé-coll/age happening »Gledališče je na cesti«. V svoja umetniška dela kot prvi začne vgrajevati avtomobilske dele in televizorje. Ustvari svoj prvi environment z naslovom »Schwarzes Zimmer« (Črna soba), v katerega je vključil dela »Nemški pogled«, »Treblinka« in »Žaromet iz Auschwitza« - uvrščamo jih med najzgodnejša umetniška dela, ki se ukvarjajo s holokavstom.

Sodeluje s C. G. Jungom. Obišče Extremaduro v Španiji, kjer v Caceresu prvič samostojno razstavlja. 1959 Poroči se z Mercedes Guardado Olivenza, dolgoletno ustvarjalno partnerko. Nastane prvi elektronski dé-coll/age »TV

166

distortion«. 1960 Prva pariška razstava, sreča s t. i. affichiste: Francois Dufrene, Jacques de la Villeglé, Raymond Hains in Mimo Rotella, kot tudi teorika t. i. »Novega realizma« Pierra Restanyja. Rodi se sin David. 1961 Sodeluje na razstavah »Anti-procès« v Parizu in Milanu, kjer nastopajo tudi Jean-Jacques Lebelo, Lucio Fontana, Wilfredo Lam, Henri Michaux, Matta, Jacques Prévert, César, Erró, Robert Rauschenberg, Cy Twombly, in drugi. V Kölnu živi skupaj s Stefanom Wewerko ter skupaj z njim ter Nam June Paikom in Benjaminom Pattersonom organizira spontane umetniške akcije. 1962 S Paikom in Georgom Maciunasom pripravi prvi mednarodni Fluxus festival v Kölnu. Predstavi glasbeno décoll/age akcijo »Kleenex 1« in sreča Dicka Higginsa, Alison Knowles and Emmetta Williamsa. Fluxus koncerti potujejo v Kopenhagen in Pariz. Izidejo tri številke revije dé-coll/ age, v katerih predstavi svoje aktualne ideje. Sreča Josepha Beuysa. Dé-coll/age happening na avtobusu v Parizu.

1963 Prva samostojna razstava v ZDA v galeriji Smolin v New Yorku, kjer predstavi prvi TV environment z naslovom »6 TV-dé-coll/agen«. Sodeluje na Yam Fluxus festivalu.

Sreča Johna Caga, Allana Kaprowa, Georga Brechta, Roberta Wattsa, La Monte Younga, Allena Jonesa, Ala Hansena, Claesa Oldenburga, Christa in Andyja Warhola. V Wuppertalu uprizori prvi potujoči happening »9-no-dé-coll/ agen« na devetih različnih lokacijah v mestu. Nastane prvi eksperimentalni film »Sun in your Head«. 1964 Srečanje z Borisom Luriejem, s katerim se povežeta v doživljenjsko prijateljstvo. Sodeluje pri pripravi prvega dogodka skupine Fluxus v Berlinu in happeninga v novoustanovljeni Galerie

167

Wolf Vostell v New Yorku, 1963 / Wolf Vostell in New York City, 1963 (foto: Dick Higgins) © The Wolf Vostell Estate René Block. 1965 Izvede happening v Berlinu in Wuppertalu.

Z Jürgenom Beckerjem izda antologijo Happenings. Fluxus.

Pop art. Nouveau réalisme. Eine Dokumentation. (RowohltVerlag). Srečanje z Marcelom Duchampom v Hannovru.

Rojstvo drugega sina Rafaela. 1966 Izvede 14-dnevni happening na različnih lokacijah v New Yorku, skupaj z Something Else Press Dicka Higginsa. Prva retrospektivna razstava v Kölnischer Kunstverein. 1967 v Kölnu izvede happening »Miss Vietnam«. 1968 S skladateljem Mauriciom Kaglom ter Alfredom Feussnerjem in F. Heubachom ustanovi Kölnu e.V. Laboratory, laboratorij za raziskavo ter organizacijo akustičnih in vizualnih dogodkov. 1969 Razstavlja v galeriji Schwarz v Milanu. Ustvari prvo ‘event-skulpturo’: Opel Kapitän, prekrit s cementom z naslovom »Ruhender Verkehr« (Mirujoči promet). 1970 Ustvari drugo skulpturo iz cikla »Concrete Traffic« v Muzeju za sodobno umetnost v Chicagu.

Spozna galeristko Inge Baecker v Bochumu, predstavi ji delo Borisa Lurieja. S Haraldom Szeemannom organizira prvo retrospektivno razstavo happeningov and Fluxus dogodkov v Kölnischer Kunstverein. 1971 Preseli se v Zahodni Berlin.

1972 V Neuer Berliner Kunstverein soustanovi prvo video knjižnico v Nemčiji. 1973 Soustanovitelj ADA Festival Action of the Avant-Garde. 1974 V stari tovarni za predelavo volne v zapuščeni pokrajini sredi španske Extremadure, blizu vasice Malpartida de Cáceres, ustanovi Muzej konceptualne umetnosti druge polovice dvajsetega stoletja. 1976 Otvoritev Museo Vostell Malpartida v Cáceresu v Španiji, ki je obenem dokumentacijski in razstavni center za mednarodno gibanje Fluxus. 1978 Srečanje s Salvadorjem Dalijem, ki naroči

skulpturo »Televizijski obelisk« za Dalijev muzej v Figuerasu.

V zameno podari delo za Museo Vostell Malpartida. 1979 Organizacija prvega S.A.C.O.M. (Teden sodobne umetnosti) v Museo Vostell Malpartida. 1979 Vostell pripravi scenografijo za izvedbo predstave »Hamlet«, v kateri igralci upravljajo s 120 TV sprejemniki and video kamerami. 1980 Na Institute of Contemporary Art v Los Angelesu izvede ‘environment’ z naslovom Endogenous Depression s 30 TV betonskimi skulpturami in sedmimi živimi purani. 1983 Srečanje z Jorgeom Luisom Borgesom in Jorgeom Glusbergom v Buenos Airesu. 1992 Ob šestdesetletnici Wolfa Vostella pripravi pet muzejev (Köln, Mülheim/Ruhr, Bonn, Leverkusen in Mannheim) skupno najobsežnejšo retrospektivno razstavo.

1993 Imenovan za člana Evropske akademije znanosti in umetnosti v Salzburgu. 1994 Museum Vostell Malpartida postane javna ustanova pod pokroviteljstvom deželne vlade v Extremaduri. 1996 Ustvari svojo največjo dé-coll/ age skulpturo z reaktivnim letalom with »Warum dauerte der Prozeβ zwischen Pilatus and Jesus nur 2 Minuten?« (Zakaj je Pilatovo zaslišanje Jezusa trajalo samo dve minuti?) 1998 3. aprila v petinšestdesetem letu umre zaradi srčne kapi v Berlinu. Pripravil je več kot dvesto samostojnih razstav in sodeloval na več kot sedemsto petdesetih skupinskih razstavah v Evropi, Amerikah in Aziji. Organiziral je 51 happeningov ter nastopil na petih glasbenih koncertih v obdobju pred Fluxusom ter na brezštevilnih koncertih v okviru gibanja Fluxus.

Wolf Vostell (1932–1998) 1932 born to Joseph and Regina Schäfer in Leverkusen.

His father is a railroad worker. 1939 goes to Chomutov, Czechoslovakia until the end of the war. 1945 returns to Cologne on foot over three months via Budweis, Prague, Chomutov, Dresden, Gera and Kassel. 1950–1953 apprenticeship as photo-lithographer. 1952 takes the name Vostell, his mother’s maiden name. 1954 visits Paris, where he sees the word décollage on the front page of Le Figaro, describing the crash of an airplane immediately upon takeoff.

He uses the term to describe the torn layers of posters on urban walls, and later the open flow of events. Dé-coll/age becomes Vostell’s design principle and comprehensive concept of art. Creates his first dé-coll/age happening in Wuppertal. Meets Karheinz Stockhausen in Cologne. 1955– 1956 attends the École National Supérieure des Beaux Arts in Paris. Studies painting, graphics and anatomy, Hieronymus Bosch, Goya, Bruegel and Fernand Léger, and works for the famous designer Cassandre. 1957 visits the art academy in Dusseldorf, studies the Talmud. 1958 returns to Paris and does his second dé-coll/age happening “The Theater is in the Street”. Begins to integrate car parts and televisions into his art, the first artist to do so. Creates his first environment “Schwarzes Zimmer”, with the works “Deutscher Ausblick”, “Treblinka” and “Auschwitz Scheinwerfer”, some of the earliest artworks to treat the Holocaust. Works with C. G. Jung. Visits Extremadura, Spain, and has his first solo exhibition in Cáceres. 1959 marries Mercedes Guardado Olivenza, his lifelong creative partner. First electronic décoll/age TV distortion. 1960 has his first Paris exhibition and meets the Affichistes Francois Dufrene, Jacques de la Villeglé, Raymond Hains and Mimo Rotella, as well as the theoretician of “Nouveau Réalisme” Pierre Restany. Son David is born.

1961 participates in the Anti-procès exhibitions in Paris and Milan with Jean-Jacques Lebel, Lucio Fontana, Wilfredo Lam, Henri Michaux, Matta, Jacques Prévert, César, Erró, Robert Rauschenberg, and Cy Twombly, among others. Lives with Stefan Wewerka in Cologne and creates spontaneous actions with Wewerka, Nam June Paik, and Benjamin Patterson.

1962 with Paik and George Maciunas, prepares the first international Fluxus festival in Cologne. Presents the music dé-coll/age-action “Kleenex 1”, and meets Dick Higgins, Alison Knowles and Emmett Williams. The Fluxus concerts travel to Copenhagen and Paris. Produces three issues of the magazine dé-coll/age – bulletin of current ideas. Meets Joseph Beuys. Dé-coll/age bus happening in Paris. 1963 first solo exhibition in U. S. at the Smolin Gallery in New York, with the first TV environments ever in the country: “6 TV-dé-coll/ agen”. Participates in the Yam Fluxus Festival. Meets John Cage, Allan Kaprow, George Brecht, Robert Watts, La Monte Young, Allen Jones, Al Hansen, Claes Oldenburg, Christo and Andy Warhol. In Wuppertal, performs the first travel happening “9-no-dé-coll/agen” at 9 different locations in the city. Creates his first experimental film “Sun in your Head”. 1964 meets Boris Lurie, with whom he has a lifelong friendship. Takes

168 part in Berlin’s first Fluxus event and happenings in the newly founded Galerie René Block. 1965 realizes happenings in Berlin and in Wuppertal. With Jürgen Becker, publishes the anthology Happenings. Fluxus. Pop art. Nouveau réalisme.

Eine Dokumentation. (Rowohlt-Verlag). Meets Marcel Duchamp in Hannover. Birth of the second son Rafael. 1966 realizes a 14-day happening all across New York City with Dick Higgins’s Something Else Press. Has first retrospective in the Kölnischer Kunstverein. 1967 realizes the happening “Miss Vietnam” in Cologne. 1968 founds the e.V. Laboratory for researching acoustic and visual events in Cologne with the composer Mauricio Kagel, Alfred Feussner and F. Heubach.

1969 shows at Galleria Schwarz in Milan. Creates his first event-sculpture, an Opel Kapitän covered in cement, titled “Ruhender Verkehr” (“Resting Traffic”). 1970 creates a second “Concrete Traffic” at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Chicago. Meet the gallery owner Inge Baecker in Bochum, whom he will introduce to the work of Boris Lurie. With Harald Szeemann, organizes the first retrospective exhibition of the happenings and Fluxus at the Kölnischer Kunstverein. 1971 moves to West Berlin. 1972 co-founds the first video library in Germany in the Neuer Berliner Kunstverein. 1973 co-founder of the ADA Festival Action of the Avant-Garde. 1974 in the barren landscape of the central Spanish Extremadura, near the village of Malpartida de Cáceres, Vostell founds the Museum for the Concept of Art in the 2nd Half of the 20th Century in the building of an old woolen mill. 1976 Opening of the Museo Vostell Malpartida in Cáceres, Spain, as a documentation and exhibition center for the international Fluxus movement. 1978 meets Salvador Dali, who commissions a sculpture for Dali’s museum in Figueras, “Television Obelisk”. Dali reciprocates for the Museo Vostell Malpartida. 1979 organizes for the first time the S.A.C.O.M. (Week of Contemporary Art) at the Museo Vostell Malpartida. 1979 Vostell does the stage for a “Hamlet” performance in which the actors operate 120 TV sets and video cameras. 1980 realizes his large Environments Endogenous Depression with 30 TV concrete sculptures with seven live turkeys at the Institute of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles. 1983 meets Jorge Luis Borges and Jorge Glusberg in Buenos Aires. 1992 to mark his 60th birthday, five museums in Cologne, Mülheim/Ruhr, Bonn, Leverkusen and Mannheim jointly organize the most comprehensive retrospective of his work. 1993 appointed member of the European Academy of Science and Art in Salzburg. 1994 the Museum Vostell Malpartida is nationalized by the Provincial Government of Extremadura. 1996 creates his largest dé-coll/age sculpture with a jet plane “Warum dauerte der Prozeβ zwischen Pilatus and Jesus nur 2 Minuten?” (“Why did the trial between Pilate and Jesus take only 2 Minutes?”) 1998 dies on April 3 of heart failure, aged 65 in Berlin. In his lifetime he has over 200 solo exhibitions and over 750 group exhibitions in Europe, America and Asia, organizes 51 happenings, and gives five pre-Fluxus concerts and countless Fluxus concerts.

169

WOLF VOSTELL Čistke / Combs, 1968, sitotisk na kartonu / Silk screen on cardboard, 61 x 94,6 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

WOLF VOSTELL Eisenhower in De Gaulle št. 6 / Eisenhower and De Gaulle, No 6, 1962, asemblaž, razbite žarnice, tiskarska barva / Assemblage, broken bulbs, magazines paint, 54,6 x 39,4 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

WOLF VOSTELL Sovjetska zveza št. 6 / Soviet Union, No 6, 1962, asemblaž, razbite žarnice, tiskarska barva / Assemblage, broken bulbs, magazines paint, 54,6 x 39,4 cm © Boris Lurie Art Foundation

Michelle Stuart (1933)

172

Michele Stuart v svojem manhattanskem ateljeju v New Yorku / Michelle Stuart in her Manhattan studio, New York, 1990 © Foto: Susan Wood/Getty Images MICHELLE STUART Za Borisa: z ljubeznijo in poljubi / For Boris: love+kisses, 1960, gvaš / Guache on paper, 60,3 x 47 cm 1933 Rojena v Los Angelesu v Kaliforniji. V mladosti spremlja očeta inženirja na raziskovalnih ekspedicijah po južni Kaliforniji. 1952 Diplomira na Chouinard Art Institute v Los Angelesu (danes Cal Arts) in se zaposli kot topološka risarka vodnih poti v kalifornijskih puščavah.

1954–1956 Študira na Instituto de Bellas Artes v Mexico Cityju pri prof. Diegu Riveri; sodeluje pri izdelavi njegove velikega stenske poslikave. 1958–1961 Študij na New School for Social Research v New Yorku. 1961 Sodeluje na razstavi Involvement v kooperativni galeriji March na 10. ulici v New Yorku. 1963 Sodeluje na razstavi NO Show v galeriji Gertrude Stein v New Yorku. Objavi esej »NO is an Involvement« (NE pomeni biti udeležen) v Artforumu, vol. 2, št. 3. 1973 Prva samostojna razstava na univerzi Rutgers, New Jersey. 1975 Prejme štipendijo fundacije Guggenheim.

1976 Pomaga ustanoviti feministično revijo Heresies. 1977– 1988 Samostojne razstave v galeriji Janus v Los Angelesu, v Walker Art Centru v Minneapolisu, v Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) v Cambridgu, v The Rose Art Museum v Walthamu, v Gemeentemuseum v Den Haagu na Nizozemskem, na Institute for Contemporary Art v Londonu, v Centre d‘Arts Plastique Contemporaines v Bordeauxu v Franciji, v The Ats Club v Chicagu, v Muzeju umetnosti Everson v Syracuse v državi New York. 1988 Vključena v prvo antološko publikacijo NO!art gibanja z naslovom NO!art: Pin-ups, Iztrebki, Protest, Judovska umetnost v založbi Edition Hundertmark. 1995 Sodeluje na razstavi NO!art v neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst (nGbK) v Berlinu. 2017 Svoje delo z naslovom Sayreville Strata Quartet postavi v Dia:Beacon v Beaconu, New York.

1933 born in Los Angeles, California. In her youth accompanies her father on his engineering surveys throughout Southern California. 1952 graduates from Chouinard Art Institute, Los Angeles (now Cal Arts), and works as a topological draftswoman, again mapping waterways in California’s deserts. 1954–1956 studies at the Instituto de Bellas Artes, Mexico City under Diego Rivera, working with him on one of his murals. 1958–1961 studies at the New School for Social Research, New York. 1961 participates in the Involvement shows at the 10th Street cooperative March Gallery, New York. 1963 participates in the NO Show at Gallery: Gertrude Stein, New York. Publishes the essay “NO is an Involvement” in Artforum, vol. 2, no. 3. 1973 has first solo exhibition at Rutgers University, New Jersey. 1975 wins a Guggenheim Foundation Fellowship. 1976 helps found the feminist publication Heresies. 1977–1988 has solo exhibitions at Janus Gallery, Los Angeles; the Walker Art Center, Minneapolis; Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA; The Rose Art Museum, Waltham, MA; the Gemeentemuseum Den Haag, Netherlands; the Institute of Contemporary Arts, London; Centre d’Arts Plastique Contemporaines de Bourdeaux, France; The Arts Club of Chicago; Everson Museum of Art, Syracuse, NY. 1988 appears in NO!art: Pin-ups, Excrement, Protest, Jew-art, the first anthology of the NO!art movement, published by Edition Hundertmark. 1995 participates in the exhibition NO!art at the nGbK: neue Gesellschaft für bildende Kunst in Berlin. 2017 installs her work Sayreville Strata Quartet at Dia:Beacon in Beacon, New York.

Marko Košan

176

Pričevanje podobe1 O razmerju umetnosti do pričevanja o strahotah nacističnih koncentracijskih taborišč No!art Borisa Lurieja proti dachavskim dnevnikom Zorana Mušiča in Bogdana Borčića Travmatičen spomin na bržkone najmračnejšo epizodo 20. stoletja v znamenju totalitaristične nacistične države in njenega uničevalnega aparata, ki ga paradigmatsko zastopajo koncentracijska taborišča, je šele od osemdesetih let dalje in do konca preteklega stoletja doživel številne analize raziskovalcev, ki delujejo na različnih področjih družboslovnih in humanističnih ved. Pojav, ki ga cela vrsta filozofskih tekstov prepoznava kot izrazito singularnega, izvzetega iz razvojnega zgodovinskega toka in kot takega izrazito eksemplaričnega, je sprožil teoretski diskurz, ki se z jasnimi epistemološkimi zastavki ukvarja z reprezentativnimi zmožnostmi t. i. »situacije Auschwitz«2, zlasti o možnosti in nemožnosti pričevanja. Zarisuje se v širokem polju etike oz. etične konstitucije subjekta s posebnim ozirom na Lyotardovo teorijo mnoštva in nepredstavljivosti, Lacanovo teorijo subjekta oz. realnega, različne teoretske aplikacije Foucaultovega pojma biopolitike oz. tudi v slovenskem okolju zelo prisotne Agambenove analize genealogije koncepta (človeškega) življenja v zahodni civilizaciji. Diskurzivna nit t. i. francoske epistemologije, ki je v zadnjih tridesetih letih dominantno prisotna tudi v slovenski humanistiki, se tako ukvarja z reprezentativnim dometom vizualne umetnosti kot spominskim orodjem pričevanja o nepredstavljivem, pri čemer se naslanja predvsem na Lyotardovo teoretsko izhodišče, da je le abstraktno, nepredmetno, ne-formalno slikarstvo doraslo vlogi kvalificirane, privilegirane priče, saj njen prikaz za razliko od tradicionalnega slikarstva, ki odseva realnost, meri na realno in je kot takšno lahko instrument resnice (kolikor je resnico mogoče kazati, ni pa je mogoče reprezentirati). Holokavst oziroma projekt dokončne rešitve judovskega vprašanja, s katerim so nacisti prekosili vse znane in podedovane podobe zla3, je v svoji enkratni sprevrženosti 1 Pričujoči prispevek je nastal na osnovi seminarske naloge z istim naslovom, ki jo je avtor leta 2007 pripravil pri predmetu Epistemologija v okviru doktorskega študija na programu Zgodovinska antropologija likovnega na Institutum Studiorum Humanitatis v Ljubljani.

2 Skupno ime »situacija Auschwitz« se nanaša zlasti na filozofsko misel paradigme krivice, kakor jo je zastavil francoski mislec François Lyotard (1924–1998).

3 Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, Cornell University Press, 1989 (slov. prevod: Moderna in holokavst,

zamajal temelje splošne teorije moralnosti, zato ga je domala nemogoče uvrstiti v diskurzivni univerzum vede(nja), še več: taborišče smrti je nepojmljivi dogodek, ki je za svoje dejanje načrtoval vnaprej pripravljen izbris in obstoj prič, dokumentov in v tem okviru tudi podobe, ter je bil, kot pravi Gérard Wajcman, izveden izven zgodovine4. In ravno zato, ker ta izven-zgodovinskost oziroma trans-historičnost artikulira dogodek kot neoprijemljivo zev in s svojo vsiljeno odsotnostjo onemogoči reprezentacijo, pričevanje o travmatičnem dogodku pa je nujen etičen imperativ, mora umetnost, če se hoče vživeti v vlogo priče, zlomiti reprezentacijo in njeno nemoč tako, da s pomočjo ustreznih, likovni umetnosti lastnih sredstev utelesi odsotnost objekta oz. se izkaže kot odsotnost sama na sebi.5 Vizualna umetnost, predvsem slikarstvo, mora nastopati brez upodobitve, ikonoklastično, saj lahko le na ta način prikliče opisano stanje in se tako izogne historizaciji, ki izhaja iz reprezentacije. Pri tem je bistven t. i. Lyotardov paradoks, ki se glasi, da je »prava priča ‚situacije Auschwitz‘ nema priča«, s čimer se izpostavi kontradikcija napetosti med nemožnostjo pričevanja na eni strani in etično dolžnostjo pričevanja na drugi strani. Izhodišča teze o nekomenzurabilnosti mnoštva, ki se manifestirajo skozi nezmožnost komunikacije med heterogenimi govoricami, se za naš namen pokažejo tudi kot orodje za analizo dveh izrazito introspektivnih umetniških opusov, ki sta jih ustvarila pomembna slovenska modernistična slikarja Zoran Mušič in Bogdan Borčić. Prav tako, čeprav se zdi, da gre za popolnoma drugačen, domala nasproten in neusmiljeno ter ekstrovertno neposreden, akcionističen angažma, ponudi možnost tudi za uvid v temeljne sporočilne vrednosti »judovskega« likovnega opusa Borisa Lurieja, osrednje osebnosti newyorškega gibanja NO!art.

zbirka Claritas, Študentska založba, Ljubljana, 2006, str. 233.)

4 Poleg Lyotardove misli sta referenčni okvir tega sestavka v veliki meri deli francoskega teoretskega psihoanalitika Gérarda Wajcmana: L‘Objet du siècle, Editions Verdier, 1998 (slov. prevod: Objekt stoletja, Analecta, Ljubljana, 2007) in članek Umetnost, psihoanaliza, 20. stoletje, Problemi 3–4/2001, str.

53–76.

5 Wajcman, Umetnost, psihoanaliza, 20. stoletje, str. 67.

177 Jean-François Lyotard se v svojem znamenitem delu Navzkrižje6, sledeč svoji tezi, da ne obstaja univerzalno pravilo za razsojanje med heterogenimi zvrstmi, že na samem začetku zaustavi pri dejstvu, da se travmatičen dogodek ne more verodostojno predstaviti na način, kot ga zanj denimo predpostavlja sodišče, pri čemer kot privilegirani primer navede (ne)možnost pričanja o nacističnih uničevalnih taboriščih in plinskih celicah. Šlo je namreč za zločin, ki je zaradi odsotnosti materialnih dokazov vso breme pričevanja naložil preživelim žrtvam, pri čemer pa je bistvo teh taborišč, plinska celica, za njih ostalo nevidno. Čeprav je bilo za preživele uničevalnih taborišč pričevanje pomembno in za večino v kasnejših letih celo eksistencialni smisel življenja, se je izkazalo, da je ‚situacija Auschwitz‘ kljub izjemnemu korpusu spominskih izpovedi slejkoprej dogodek brez priče, skrknjen v nemožnost zadovoljive artikulacije in v onemelem kriku pogreznjen v molk, še več: uresničuje se šele skozi naravo tega molka. Molk nosi vso težo oznanjevanja bolečine, a kot tak trpljenja uničevalnih taborišče ne zmore adekvatno artikulirati, simbolizirati. V samem jedru pričevanja torej leži navzkrižje, ki sicer onemogoča simbolizacijo doživete travmatične izkušnje, a obenem zavezuje, da je pričanje o krivici potrebno. S tem Lyotard spominu oziroma etiki spominjanja nazadnje podeli legitimnost, vendar komemorativno spominsko prakso, ki je v vsakdanjem življenju udejanjena zlasti s sporočilno funkcijo spomenikov, pa tudi z zgodovinopisjem, istočasno vidi kot mehanizem, ki pravzaprav ne ohranja spomina na krivico zločina, temveč – nasprotno – odločilno prispeva k pozabi dogodka ali vsaj k njegovi ideološki zlorabi, s katero je podjarmljena njegova heterogena narava.7 Morda se je tega zavedal tudi Boris Lurie, ko je nemoč podob travmatičnega spomina brez odvečne intelektualistične refleksije in v isti ravnini pogleda enostavno zoperstavil sočasnim ilustracijam ameriškega sna, kakršnega so slikale televizijske ‚sit-com‘ nadaljevanke in ga skupaj s pin-up erotiko t. i. »girlie magazines« zavrtinčile v obsceno poneumljajočo idolatrijo ameriškega potrošništva. Če naj torej spomin v resnici ohrani preteklost, nam sporoča Lyotard, potem se mora izogniti reprezentaciji znotraj svojega konteksta, saj se mora nenehno vpisovati v aktualno realnost, ker bo le na ta način ostala vseskozi prisotna in kot taka ne bo mogla biti pozabljena. In ravno to je s svojo tehniko kolažiranja počel tudi Boris Lurie.

Lyotardova etika pričevanja je zastavek za estetiko, v kateri ima umetnost kot privilegirana priča izrazito etično, 6 Jean-François Lyotard, Le Différend, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1983 (slov. prevod: Navzkrižje, Založba ZRC /zbirka Philosophica: series moderna /, Ljubljana, 2003).

7 O tem Lyotard še posebej v delu Heidegger et ‚les juifs‘, Éditions Galilée, 1988. Odlomek z naslovom Židje v prevodu Stojana Pelka je bil objavljen v reviji Problemi, let. XXVII, 1989, št. 2–3.

angažirano vlogo. Zato nas je torej zanimalo, kako se imperativ zvestobe dogodku – kako pričati, da obstaja ne samo nevidno, temveč neizrekljivo, ki je usojeno pozabi – zrcali v likovnih opusih Zorana Mušiča in Bogdana Borčića8, dveh slovenskih slikarjev, ki sta preživela pekel koncentracijskega taborišča Dachau.

Neposredna refleksija taboriščne izkušnje v znamenitem ciklu Nismo poslednji, s katerim se je Mušič tako silovito vpisal v evropsko likovno ustvarjalnost po drugi svetovni vojni in se umestil med velika imena sodobne figuralne umetnosti, je na slikarjevih platnih vzniknila šele v sedemdesetih letih preteklega stoletja, trideset let po travmatični izkušnji, v Borčićevem primeru pa konsistentno celo še kasneje, leta 2002, ko je po daljšem oklevanju sprejel povabilo organizatorjev za razstavljanje v spominskem muzeju nekdanjega taborišča Dachau. Oba sta prve likovne vtise s konice svinčnika prenašala na papir že na samem prizorišču groze, tik pred osvoboditvijo taborišča in v prvih dneh po njej, ko sta čakala na vrnitev domov. Mušič je to inicialno mrzlično zarotitev likovnega pričevanja sam opisal takole: »Morebiti je bilo to sredstvo, s katerim sem se skušal otresti grozot. /…/ Risal sem kot v transu. Morbidno sem obvisel na koščku papirja. Bil sem kot slep zaradi neresnične veličine taborišča, ki je bilo polno mrtvih. Od daleč so se mi zdeli kot lise belega snega, kot srebrni odsevi na gorah. Notranja nuja me je silila, da narišem vse, prav vse, tudi najmanjšo podrobnost.«9 Mušičevo hlastajoče beleženje prizorov v tem prvem trenutku torej ni bilo v poslanstvu priče, ki se zavestno odloči, kakor denimo Primo Levi,10 da bo pričal o nepredstavljivem.

Njegove risbe, ki so bile kasneje večinoma uničene oziroma izgubljene, niso nastajale kot zastavek pričevanja o travmatičnem dogodku, temveč so bile spontani odziv na šok ultimativnega soočenja s prizori groze. Takrat še ne polnoletni Bogdan Borčić, a z likovnimi izkušnjami iz predvojnega in medvojnega časa11, je na drugi strani ohranil nekaj risb s 8 Zoran Mušič se je rodil leta 1909 v Gorici, študiral je na Akademiji za likovno umetnost v Zagrebu, po drugi svetovni vojni je živel večinoma v Parizu in Benetkah. Umrl je leta 2005. Bogdan Borčič se je rodil leta 1926 v Ljubljani. S prvo generacijo študentov po drugi svetovni vojni je študiral Akademiji za likovno umetnost v Ljubljani. Nazadnje je živel v Slovenj Gradcu, kjer je umrl leta 2014.

9 Zoran Mušič, Arbeiten auf Papier von 1945 bis 1992. Razstavni katalog. Grafična zbirka Albertina na Dunaju in Deželno glavno mesto Celovec. Dunaj, Celovec 1992, str. 169.

10 Primo Levi (1919–1987), italijanski judovski kemik in pisatelj, preživeli holokavsta. Avtor dveh ključnih spominskih literarnih pričevanj o grozotah Auschwitza: Ali je to človek? (1947) ter Potopljeni in rešeni (1986).

11 Mladi Borčić je obiskoval privatne tečaje v ljubljanskih likovnih šolah slikarja Mateja Sternena in kiparja Franceta Goršeta.

178

1

tušem, ki so nastale po osvoboditvi taborišča, a na prvi pogled presenetljivo v ničemer ne evocirajo grozote taborišča, saj na videz prinašajo le premočrtne, objektivno kadrirane poglede dachauskih vedut. A v podobah, ki se izogibajo odslikavi živega življenja, saj se zaustavljajo ob upodobitvah arhitekturnih ambientov, vendarle začutimo nelagodje, nekakšno shizmo med očesom in vedenjem12, bodisi z zastrtjem pogleda kot ga razkrivajo izbrani, s premnogimi detajli preobloženi motivi13 (slika 1), ali pa kot kontrapunkt ploskovito zarisanih fasad, v ohlapni perspektivi nanizanih v prostorska odrivala nekakšnih paravanov, ki zakrivajo onemelo neizrekljivost tistega, kar je (bilo) za njimi (slika 2).

Mušič in Borčić sta po srečni vrnitvi iz Dachaua prenehala z risanjem prizorov taboriščnega življenja, da bi šele mnogo kasneje, vzdraženi z zunanjimi dejavniki14 nezadržno privreli na dan.

2

1 Bogdan Borčić, Dachau, 1945, 29,7 x 21 cm, privatna last / Private collection 2 Bogdan Borčić, Dachau, 1945, 29,7 x 21 cm, privatna last / Private collection

Ob podrobnejšem ogledu likovnih zapuščin Zorana Mušiča in Bogdana Borčića, se evidentno razkrije, da sta s travmo tematike »Auschwitz« oziroma Dachau aficirana tako rekoč celotna njuna opusa. Prisotnost »taboriščne groze« je vpisana v gosto mrežo Mušičevega raznolikega motivnega sveta, zato naslov znamenitega cikla Nismo poslednji dobi svoj polni ontološki smisel šele, ko mu v transponiranih, nezavednih oblikah sledimo v drugih motivih, ki bodisi napovedujejo najbolj znani cikel, ali pa mu v izteku opusa v zadnjih letih pridušeno sledijo. Časovno se upodobitve razčlove12 V odnosu do znamenitega koncepta objet petit a kot instance (travmatičnega) drugega, kot ga je v svoji teoretski psihoanalizi razvil Jacques Lacan.

13 Idejo zastrtega pogleda, s katerim se skozi paradigmo »rokokojske preobloženosti« skuša prikriti fantazma (zločin) kot metafora subjektove navezanosti na (travmatično) realno je v filmu Risarjeva pogodba (The Draughtman‘s Contract, 1982) sijajno vizualiziral britanski režiser Peter Greenaway.

14 Mušiča so prizadeli prizori strahot vietnamske vojne, Borčić, ki je sicer nekaj del s taboriščno tematiko ustvaril že v petdesetih in na začetku šestdesetih let, pa je, sprva le nerad, pripravil cikel dachauskih del šele po letu 2002 na povabilo Darka Lesjaka, v Münchnu živečega akad. slikarja in sodelavca likovnega razstavišča v spominskem muzeju Dachau.

179 čenih trupel denimo skoraj ujemajo z Rastlinskimi motivi, dramatično serijo ožganih, preperelih dreves, ki jih je Mušič srečal na poti po Provansi (glej sliki 3 in 4), pri čemer se drevesni kadavri z antropomorfnimi formami nespregledljivo spogledujejo z duktusom strašljivo razgaljene ugasle eksistence ogolelih človeških trupel. Mušičeva podoba je zlasti zgovorna, ko se ji približamo v detajlu, ko začne izgubljati svojo mimetično vrednost in postane abstraktna, prisotna zgolj v svoji fizični prezenci, kakršno je Mušič ujel v ciklu podob izpraznjene pokrajine iz začetka šestdesetih let (sliki 5 in 6), in jo je tenkočutno strnil slovenski likovni kritik Zoran Kržišnik, ko opazi, da »v tem po vsebini krepko poudarjenem ciklu ni šlo v izgubo nič tega, kar so dali formalnih dognanj in umirjenega mojstrstva pravkar minuli, v oblikovne rešitve in notranje likovne likovne probleme zazrti cikli15«, in dalje piše: »Rjava v raznih odtenkih, siva in predvsem zelena, /…/ z odmevom življenjske radosti ustvarja v človeškem razkroju cikla Nismo poslednji notranji kontrast, ki nas boleče prizadene prav zato, ker ne dovoljuje, da bi nam ti prividi groze, razčlovečenosti, trpljenja, do kraja zdrsnili »onstran«, da bi postali zgolj sen in himera, in jih kot z žebljički pripenja v realnost vsakdanjega obstoja. /…/ Iz žgane zemlje so do podrobnosti preizkusile odtujevalni učinek peg, negotovost obrisov, ki jo ustvarja drhteča avra ob njihovih razlivajočih se robovih, optični nemir, ki ga te lise povzročijo v sodelovanju z mrežnico človeškega očesa, ko se poglabljamo vanje in začnejo bolj intenzivno izgubljati določljivo barvo, obliko, mesto – da, celo obstoj. Zdaj so ti madeži votline oči, zevajoča rana ust, drgetajoča nosnica, in vsi odpirajo pot naravnost v lobanjo – če je to sploh lobanja in ne nekakšna na silo oblikovana, nečloveška maska vesoljskega oblačila, izraz zadnjega človeškega napuha pred padcem v popolno temo, v vesoljski Nič.« 3 Zoran Mušič, Korenine / Roots, 1972, 114 x 162 cm, privatna last / Private collection z dovoljenjem / Courtesy Vanda Mušič

5 Zoran Mušič, Dalmatinska zemlja / Dalmatian Soil, 1960, 50 x 65,5 cm, privatna last / Private collection z dovoljenjem / Courtesy Vanda Mušič

4 Zoran Mušič, Nismo poslednji / We Are Not the Last, 1971, 114 x 145,5 cm Moderna galerija Ljubljana z dovoljenjem / Courtesy Vanda Mušič

6 Zoran Mušič, Nismo poslednji / We Are Not the Last (detajl/detail), 1970, 114 x 146 cm, privatna last / Private collection z dovoljenjem / Courtesy Vanda Mušič

15 Zoran Kržišnik, Zoran Mušič, katalog razstave Umetniki eksistence, Galerija Tivoli, 1997, str. 13.

3

4

5

6

180

7

8

V jukstapoziciji s kupi mrličev in z nezavedno bližino formalnega izhodišča obeh motivov se celo grmade oziroma kopice, značilni elementi Mušičeve dalmatinske pokrajine, nehote razpenjajo v nemem kriku neskončno otožne tragike (sliki 7 in 8).

V tem smislu je skoraj programska Mušičeva slika Atelje iz leta 1983 (slika 9), pri kateri je v dominantno središče podobe, med slikarja in model, ki sta stisnjena ob levi in desni rob, umestil velikansko prazno površino, ki je brez globine, brez perspektive in kot taka ne označuje prostora, označuje le sebe, je svoj lastni referent. V klasičnem slikarskem motivu, ki ga je realist Gustave Courbet sredi 19. stoletja izkoristil, da je vanj nakopičil reprezentativne označevalce »kulturnega millieuja« svoje dobe, je Mušič upodobil dominantni simbol »kulturnega millieuja« 20. stoletja – nič. V nemi krik spačena »nečloveška« kreatura na podobah iz Nismo poslednji pa je vendarle ostala edini referent Mušičeve človeške figure, ki se je v zadnjih avtoportretnih delih17 velikih formatov inkarnirala v somnambulno senco, kjer se skozi predstavo lastne eksistence, ki jo požira praznina niča, morda kažeta nemoč in dvom o zmožnosti pričevanja s podobo (sliki 10 in 11).

Zdi se torej, da so v uzrtju eksistenčne tragike, s katero je »prestreljen« celoten Mušičev opus, in tudi v uresničevanju pričevanjske kredibilnosti v prikazu nepredstavljivosti travmatične izkušnje nacističnega taborišča smrti najbolj prepričljiva dela, ki mimo podob iz niza Nismo poslednji nimajo neposrednih aluzij na taborišča, a jasno razodevajo sublimno občutje kot posledico aficiranosti duše, ne da bi to izhajalo iz neposredne čutne zaznave.

Mušičeva umetnost je le v redkih zaključenih ciklih podob nereprezentativna oziroma abstraktna, s čimer bi lahko zadovoljila eno izmed kondicijskih predpostavk Lyotardove prepozicije po sublimnem, a Mušičeva nezavedna gradnja podobe, ki se vselej razkraja v trepetanju optičnih barvnih meglic vendarle ustreza formulaciji Gérarda Wajcmana, ko pravi, da »se zdi, da tisto, k čemur so vodilna dela umetnosti 20. stoletja najbolj formalno in najbolj trmoglavo uperjena, ni nič drugega kot tole: vpisati manko v absolutno jedro dela; pokazati praznino, odsotnost; pokazati luknjo. Torej, namesto da bi nastopala kot tisto, kar to luknjo zamaši, se za ta dela zdi, da jim gre zgolj za to, da jo razgalijo, da jo celo kot tako izdolbejo.16« 16 Gérard Wajcman, Objekt stoletja, str. 148.

7 Zoran Mušič, Dalmatinski grič / Dalmatian Hill, 1965, 38,3 x 56,3 cm Narodna galerija Ljubljana z dovoljenjem / Courtesy Vanda Mušič

8 Zoran Mušič, Kataster trupel / Register of Corpses, 1974, grafična mapa / Original prints, illustrated book KGLU z dovoljenjem / Courtesy Vanda Mušič

17 Mušič je podobno kot veliki Rembrandt svoj opus zaključil s serijo pretresljivih avtoportretov, na katerih se v sublimnem barvnem izginevanju poslavlja od lastne eksistence.

181

9 Zoran Mušič, Atelje / Studio, 1984, 65,5 x 92 cm, privatna last / Private collection z dovoljenjem / Courtesy Vanda Mušič 10 Zoran Mušič, Nismo poslednji / We Are Not the Last, 1973, 65 x 46,3 cm, privatna last / Private collection z dovoljenjem / Courtesy Vanda Mušič 11 Zoran Mušič, Portret moža s prekrižanima rokama / Portrait of a Man With Crossed Arms, 1994, 73 x 54 cm, privatna last / Private collection z dovoljenjem / Courtesy Vanda Mušič

9

10

11

182 Obsežen slikarski opus Bogdana Borčića je le na prvi pogled manj kot Mušičev »okužen« z dachavsko izkušnjo, a je z njo bržkone zaznamovan precej bolj, kot je to bil pripravljen priznati sam, oziroma kot so bili sposobni videti razlagalci njegove slikarske poetike. V dolgoletni strastni slikarski avanturi, ki mu je narekovala pospešen tempo iskanja vedno novih variantnih rešitev, se je kot zrel umetnik nenadoma zaustavil in se z osupljivo avtorefleksijo ozrl na prehojeno pot. Čeprav iz lagerja ni prinesel likovnega dnevnika konkretnih zapisov, je sporadično od konca petdesetih let dalje občasno na izrazito emblematičen način upodabljal motiviko taborišča, da bi se v začetku sedemdesetih, ko je v Münchnu prvič videl Mušičeve slike, po lastnih besedah zavestno odločil, da na temo Dachaua ne bo naredil nobene slike več.

12 Bogdan Borčić, Izza žice / Behind the Wire, 1959, 29 x 37 cm, privatna last / Private collection

13 Bogdan Borčić, Plinska celica – Dachau / Gas Chamber – Dachau, 1972, 65 x 50 cm, privatna last / Private collection

Čeprav je odtlej iz svojega podobotvorja izgnal fantomske prikazni taboriščnikov, ki so se kot vseprisotna travma pojavljali v najrazličnejših motivnih kontekstih, ki so posedovali kakršnokoli oblikovno vez s prizori iz taborišča (denimo ribiške mreže na morskem obrežju), je skozi fascinantno likovno izkušnjo v počasnih korakih sledil logičnemu razvoju likovne idiomatike od akademskega realizma preko abstrahiranja predmetnega sveta do končne radikalne abstraktne podobe, pri kateri igra le prezenca – kot bi se zavedal Lyotardovega imperativa po »iznajdbi« takega umetniškega dela, ki je že na sebi misel … »objekta, ki misli v vidnem«. A tudi na delih, kjer je prisotna simbolizirana dachavska motivika (slika 13), je ta v ospredju le kot instrumentalizirana objektivnost in je zgolj izhodišče za vpis travmatičnega občutja v vseobvladujočo črnino, ki se mimo, izza na ekran nanizanih figuralnih prizorov, perspektivično zožuje v točko niča. Nazadnje je po letu 2002 v dovršeno in v teku let izpopolnjeno semantično strukturo likovne podobe vendarle vtkal tudi boleče dachauske reminiscence, s katerimi je v čustveni meditaciji obudil spominski tok zavesti in se vrnil k intimističnemu dialogu z ekstremno življenjsko preizkušnjo.

12

13

183 14 Bogdan Borčić, Črna slika V / Black Painting V, 1983, 130 x 130 cm © KGLU

14

15

15 Bogdan Borčić, Arbeit Macht Frei, 2014, 39 x 49 cm, grafična mapa In principio erat Dachau / graphic set In Principio Erat Dachau, privatna last / Private collection

Borisu Lurieju je ameriški eksil ponudil distanco od ruševin, v katerih je v prvih dveh desetletjih po koncu vojne obležala Evropa, a je v New Yorku le še bolj radikalno občutil »hipokrizijo intelektualcev, kapitalistično manipulacijo kulture, potrošniško družbo in vse ostale ameriške molohe«, kot se je izrazil sam. Zavestno se je postavil v vlogo obstranca in z beatniško uporniško držo, ki je svoj glasen odmev našla v znameniti, leta 1956 objavljeni pesmi Howl Allena Ginsberga, na najbolj radikalen možen način zamajal domet normativnega razlikovanja med moralnim in amoralnim. Njegov NO!art je v popolni opoziciji do vsega, tudi do najbolj drznih umetniških praks, s programatskim poimenovanjem pa celo dvoumno razglaša, da to, kar je pred nami, nemara sploh ni umetnost in je s svojo »negativno estetiko« svetlobna leta oddaljeno od pojma t. i. lepih umetnosti. Heterogeni značaj kolažiranih vizualnih izjav se izkaže predvsem s tem, da nemoralo sveta demonstrativno pokaže s sredstvi, ki so tradicionalno nemoralna ter se s tem izogne lagodni asimilaciji v etični sistem vrednot, kjer bi imel nato vse možnosti, da se pobota s tem istim svetom. Tako v vsakem trenutku ostaja radikalno kritičen, zaznamuje pa ga vseprisotna transgresivnost, zato vse do današnjih dni ni izgubil nič od svoje ostrine, še več: v času, ko ob koncu drugega desetletja 21. stoletja nikjer več ne prepoznamo izrazov avantgardističnega nekonformizma, se zdi enako sporočilna in eksplozivna kot ob svojem nastanku.

Razgaljeno in eksploatirano »pin-up« (žensko) telo oziroma eksplicitna pornografija nasploh, zapolnjujeta v našem času vse sfere javnosti, saj se zdi, da na način navidezne osvobojenosti (telesa) delujejo vsi mehanizmi družbe: politika, gospodarski interesi, zabavna industrija, množični mediji, šport in svet mode, pa tudi komercialnim zahtevam podrejena umetnost, od slikarske do filmske industrije, od založništva do glasbene industrije. Potrošništvo, ki ga je v globalno okolje sveta v 21. stoletju odtisnil ameriški način življenja, je skozi vseprisotnost pornografije kot najvišjo vrednoto ustoličilo udobje, s pomočjo katerega skuša iz življenja slehernika izriniti tesnobo zaradi bivanja. A nam v resnici zgolj zrcali travmo, ki je razsvetljenstvo kot temelj novejše zahodnoevropske civilizacije z zdrsom moderne v dogodek onkraj misljivega, kakršen je holokavst, za vekomaj obremenilo z madežem, potopljenim v nezavedno, kjer bi celo lahko ostal za vekomaj skrit, če ne bi obstajala tudi temna ogledala, kakršna nam brezkompromisno nastavljajo Boris Lurie in protagonisti umetniškega gibanja NO!art, ki po več kot pol stoletja končno dobivajo veljavo, kakršno si zaslužijo.

Marko Košan

184

The Testimony of an Image1 On the Relation of Art to the testimony to the atrocities of Nazi Concentration Camps Boris Lurie’s No!art versus the Dachau Diaries by Zoran Mušič and Bogdan Borčić In was only from the 1980’s until the end of the 20th century that the traumatic memory of the grimmest 20thcentury episode staged by the totalitarian Nazi state and its destructive apparatus, paradigmatically represented by concentration camps, became a topic of a number of analyses of researchers active in various fields of social sciences and humanities. The phenomenon that a series of philosophical texts recognises as markedly singular, isolated from the development course of history and, as such, outstandingly exemplary, initiated the theoretical discourse relying on clear epistemological concepts to deal with representative potentials of the so-called “Auschwitz situation”2, especially the ability or inability to testify. It is situated in a broad field of ethics or ethical constitution of the subject with a special regard to Lyotard’s theory of multitude and unimaginability, Lacan’s theory of the subject or Real, different theoretical applications of Foucault’s notion of biopolitics or Agamben’s analysis of the genealogy of the concept of (human) life in Western civilization, which is also very present in the Slovenian environment. The discursive thread of the so-called French epistemology, which has also dominated the Slovenian humanities in the last thirty years, thus deals with the representative scope of visual arts as the memory tool of the testimony to the unimaginable, relying primarily on Lyotard’s theoretical premise that only abstract, non-objective, non-formal painting is capable of playing a role of a qualified, privileged witness, since its representation, in contrast to the traditional painting targeting reality, targets the real and as such can be an instrument of truth (insofar as truth can be shown but cannot be represented). The singular perversion of the Holocaust, or the project of the final solution to the Jewish question, by which the Nazis have dwarfed all remembered and inherited images of evil3, 1 The paper is based on an essay of the same title written by the author in 2007 for the Epistemology course, a part of his doctoral studies under the Historical Anthropology of the Image programme at the Institutum Studiorum Humanitatis in Ljubljana.

2 The common name “Auschwitz situation” refers especially to the philosophical thought of the paradigm of injustice as conceived

by French philosopher François Lyotard (1924–1998).

3 Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, Cornell

shook the foundations of the general theory of morality, so it is almost impossible to place in the discursive universe of science (knowledge); moreover: a death camp is an inconceivable event that planned the pre-arranged erasure of the existence of witnesses, documents and in this context also images, and was, according to Gérard Wajcman, carried out outside history4. And precisely because this extra-historicity or trans-historicity articulates the event as an intangible gap and, by its forced absence, disables representation, while the testimony to the traumatic event is a necessary ethical imperative, art, if it wants to identify with the role of a witness, must break the representation and its powerlessness by embodying the absence of the object or demonstrate itself as absence in itself by appropriate, intrinsic means.5 Visual art, especially painting, must act without depiction, iconoclastically, as this is the only way to invoke the described situation and avoid historisation deriving from representation. The essential element in this is the so-called Lyotard’s paradox that states that “a true witness to the ‘Auschwitz situation’ is a silent witness”, which points out the contradiction between the inability to testify on the one hand and the ethical duty to testify on the other.

The foundations of the thesis on the incommensurability of the multitude that manifest themselves through the inability of communication between heterogeneous idioms are also demonstrated for our purpose as a tool for the analysis of two extremely introspective artistic opus made by two important Slovenian modernist painters, Zoran Mušič and Bogdan Borčić. It also offers an opportunity for an insight into the fundamental communicative values of the “Jewish” artistic opus of Boris Lurie, the central figure of the New York movement NO! Art, although it seems completely different, almost opposite, relentless and extrovertly direct, actionist engagement.

4

5

University Press, 1989, p. 151.

Besides Lyotard’s thought, the frame of reference of this paper are largely the works by French theoretic psychoanalyst Gérard Wajcman: L’Objet du siècle, Editions Verdier, 1998, and article Umetnost, psihoanaliza, 20. stoletje (Art, Psychoanalysis, 20th Century), Problemi 3-4/2001, pp. 53-76.

Wajcman, Umetnost, psihoanaliza, 20. stoletje, p. 67.

185

At the very beginning of his famous work The Differend6, Jean-François Lyotard, following his premise about the lack of a universal rule of judgment among or between heterogeneous genres, stops at the fact that a traumatic event cannot be credibly presented in the way presupposed by the e.g. court, providing as a privileged example the (in)ability to testify to Nazi extermination camps and gas chambers. It was, namely, a crime where a lack of material evidence lay all the burden of testimony to the surviving victims, to whom the essence of these camps, the gas chamber, remained invisible. Although the testimony was important for survivors of the extermination camps and, for most of them even the existential meaning of life in the later years, it turned out that despite an exceptional corpus of testimonies, the ‘Auschwitz situation’ was more or less an event without a witness, hardened into the impossibility of satisfactory articulation and immersed in silence in a voiceless cry; moreover, it is materialised only through the nature of this silence. Although silence carries the full weight of declaring pain, it cannot adequately articulate or symbolise the suffering in extermination camps per se. At the very core of the testimony there is a conflict that prevents the symbolisation of the experienced traumatic experience, but at the same time imposes a commitment that the testimony to injustice is necessary. Thus Lyotard ultimately gives legitimacy to memory or the ethics of remembrance, but sees the commemorative memorial practice realised in everyday life in particular by the communicative function of monuments as well as by historiography as a mechanism that in fact does not preserve the memory of the injustice of crime but - quite the opposite - decisively contributes to forgetting the event, or at least to its ideological abuse that subjugates its heterogeneous nature.7 Perhaps this was also recognised by Boris Lurie when he simply confronted the powerlessness of images of traumatic memory without superfluous intellectual reflection and in the same view plane with the simultaneous illustrations of the American dream 6 Jean-François Lyotard, Le Différend, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1983.

7

Lyotard particularly addressed this in Heidegger et ‘les juifs’, Éditions Galilée, 1988.

as painted by television sit-coms and swirled, along with pin-up eroticism of the so-called “girlie magazines”, into an obscenely dumbing idolatry of American consumerism.

If the memory is to preserve the past, states Lyotard, it must avoid the representation within its own context; instead, it should continuously inscribe in the current reality, for this is the only way for it to remain continuously present and unable to be forgotten as such. An this is exactly what Boris Lurie did with his collage technique.

Lyotard’s ethics of testimony is a basis for aesthetics where the role of art as the privileged victim is prominently ethical, committed. We were therefore interested in how the imperative of loyalty to the event - how to testify that there is not only the invisible but the inexpressible bound to be forgotten - is reflected in the painting opuses of Zoran Mušič and Bogdan Borčić8, two Slovenian painters who survived the hell of the Dachau concentration camp.

A direct reflection of the camp experience in the famous cycle We are not the Last, with which Mušič so powerfully entered the European artistic creativity after the Second World War and became one of the great names of contemporary figurative art, sprang up on the painter’s canvases only in the 1970’s, thirty years after the traumatic experience; in Borčić’s case, it consistently appeared even later, in 2002, when he, after a long hesitation, accepted the invitation of the organisers for an exhibition at the Memorial Museum of the former Dachau Camp. Both poured their first visual impressions from the tip of their pencils on paper at the very scene of horror, just before and after the liberation of the camp, when they waited to return home. Mušič described this initial frantic enchantment of the visual testimony as follows: 8 Zoran Mušič was born in 1909 in Gorizia, studied at the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb and spent most of his life in Paris and Venice after the Second World War. He died in 2005.

Bogdan Borčić was born in 1926 in Ljubljana. He was in the first generation of students enrolled in the Academy of Visual Arts in Ljubljana after the Second World War. He spent the last part of his life in Slovenj Gradec, where he died in 2014.

186 “Maybe it was an instrument by which I tried to shake off the atrocities ... I drew as if in a trance. I morbidly hung onto a piece of paper. I felt blind because of the unreal size of the camp full of dead people. From afar, they seemed like patches of white snow, as silver reflections on the mountains. I felt a internal urge to draw everything, down to the smallest detail.”9 Mušič’s feverish sketching of scenes at this first moment was therefore not a part of the mission of a witness who consciously decides to testify about the unimaginable, as Primo Levi did.10 Mušič’s drawings, later mostly destroyed or lost, were not made as a basis for a testimony about a traumatic event but were a spontaneous reaction to the shock of the ultimate confrontation with the scenes of horror. Bogdan Borčić, still underage at the time but with art experiences from the pre-war and war period11 preserved some Indian ink drawings made after the camp’s liberation; these drawings, however, do not evoke the atrocity of the camp as they only depict straightforward, objectively outlined views of the Dachau vistas. But the images that avoid the reflection of living life because they stop at the depictions of architectural ambiences nevertheless inspire an unease, a kind of schism between the eye and the knowledge12, either by obscuring the view as revealed by the chosen motives overridden with detail13 (image 1) or as a counterpoint to the flatly drawn facades assembled in a loose perspective into spatial orientations of fronts that conceal the speechless inevitability of what lies (lay) behind them (image 2).

Although Mušič and Borčić stopped drawing the scenes from the camp life after their safe return from Dachau, these scenes irresistibly sprang up later, incited by external factors.14 9 Zoran Mušič, Arbeiten auf Papier von 1945 bis 1992. Exhibition catalogue. Graphic collection Albertina, Vienna and Regional capital Klagenfurt. Vienna, Klagenfurt 1992, p. 169 10 Primo Levi (1919–1987), Italian Jewish chemist and writer, Holocaust survivor. Author of two key literary testimonies on the atrocities of Auschwitz: If this is a Man (1947) and The Drowned and the Saved (1986).

11 Young Borčić attended private courses at Ljubljana art schools of painter Matej Sternen and sculptor France Gorše.

12 In relation to the famous concept of objet petit a as an instance of the (traumatic) other as developed in the theoretical psychoanalysis of Jacques Lacan.

13 The idea of obscured view trying to conceal, through the paradigm of “rococo overloading”, the phantasm (crime) as a metaphor of the subject’s attachment to the (traumatic) real was masterfully visualised by British director Peter Greenaway in The Draughtsman’s Contract, 1982.

14 Mušič was affected by horrible scenes from the Vietnam war, while Borčić, who made some death camp themed works in the 1950’s and early 1960’s, somehow reluctantly produced a cycle of Dachau works only after 2002, following an invitation of Darko Lesjak, Munich-based academic painter and collaborator of the visual art exhibition space at the Dachau Memorial Museum.

A closer examination of art legacies of Zoran Mušič and Bogdan Borčić evidently reveals that the trauma of the “Auschwitz” or Dachau topic affects practically the whole of their opuses. The presence of the “camp horror” is inscribed into the dense network of Mušič’s diverse motive world; therefore, the title of the famous cycle We are not the Last gets its full ontological sense only when traced in transposed, unconscious forms in other motives that either predict the most famous cycle or follow it in a suppressed form in the closing part of the opus.

In the temporal sense, the depictions of dehumanised bodies, for example, almost coincide with the Plant motifs, a dramatic series of burnt, broken trees that were encountered by Mušič on his journey across Provence (see images 3 and 4), the tree cadavers with anthropomorphic shapes insolently flirting with a ductus of scarily exposed extinguished existence of bare human bodies. Mušič’s image is especially eloquent when we approach it in detail, when it begins to lose its mimetic value and becomes abstract, present only in its physical presence as caught by Mušič in the cycle of images of the emptied landscape from the early 1960’s (images 5 and 6); it was subtly summarised by Slovenian art critic Zoran Kržišnik when he noticed that “in this cycle of strongly emphasised content, nothing was lost of all that had been achieved by the formal knowledge and the tranquil mastery of the recent cycles focusing on formal solutions and internal art problems,15” and continues: “Brown in various shades, grey and above all green ... creates with the echo of the joy of living in the human degeneration of the cycle We are not the Last an internal contrast that affects us painfully precisely because it does not allow the phantasms of horror, dehumanisation and suffering, to slip completely “beyond” in order to become only a dream and chimera, and pins them in the reality of everyday existence. ... Examined in detail are the alienating effect of spots, the uncertainty of the contours generated by the quivering aura along their spilling edges, the optical disturbance caused by these patches in cooperation with the retina of the human eye as we become absorbed in them and they begin intensely to lose a determinable colour, shape, place - yes, even existence. Now these stains are cavities of eyes, a gaping wound of mouth, a shivering nostril, and they all open the way straight into the skull - if it is a skull and not a kind of force-shaped, inhuman mask of a space suit, an expression of the last human pride before falling into the perfect darkness, into the Nothing of the space.”

In juxtaposition with the mounds of the dead and with the unconscious proximity of the formal starting point of both motifs, even the piles or clusters, characteristic elements of 15 Zoran Kržišnik, Zoran Mušič, catalogue of ‚Umetniki eksistence‘ exhibition, Galerija Tivoli, 1997, p. 13.

187 Mušič’s Dalmatian landscape, are unintentionally stretched out in the mute cry of the infinitely dreary tragedy (images 7 and 8).

It therefore seems that in the recognition of the existential tragedy that “shoots through” the entire Mušič’s opus, and also in the realisation of the credibility of testimony in the depiction of the incomprehensibility of the traumatic experience of a Nazi death camp, the most convincing works, besides the images from the We are not the Last series, are those that do not directly allude to camps, but clearly reveal the sublime feeling as a consequence of the soul’s affection, without it being derived from a direct sensory perception.

Mušič’s art is unrepresentative or abstract in only in rare completed cycles of images, by which it could satisfy one of the conditional assumptions of Lyotard’s proposition for the sublime, while Mušič’s unconscious construction of the image, which is always dissolved in the trembling of optical colour nebulae, still corresponds to the formulation of Gérard Wajcman, when he says that “what seems to be the most formal and most obstinate focus of the leading 20th century works of art is nothing but this: to write the lack into the absolute core of the work; to show emptiness, absence; to show the hole. Instead of acting as that which fixes the hole, these works seem to be only about exposing it, even digging it out as such16«.

Almost programmatic in this sense is Mušič’s painting Studio from 1983 (image 9), in which he placed in the dominant centre of the image, between a painter and a model squeezed along the left and right edges, a huge blank surface that is without depth, without perspective, and as such does not signify space but only itself; it is its own referent. In the classical painting motive used by realist Gustave Courbet in the mid-19th century to capture the representative markers of the “cultural milieu” of his era, Mušič portrayed the dominant symbol of the “20th century cultural milieu” - nothingness. The “inhuman” creature distorted in a mute cry on the paintings from We are not the Last, however, remained the only referent of Mušič’s human figure that was incarnated, in the last self-portrait works17 of large formats, into a somnambular shadow, where the idea of his own existence swallowed by the emptiness of nothingness may indicate powerlessness and doubt about the ability to witness with an image (images 10 and 11).

Although the rich painting opus of Bogdan Borčić is, at a glance, less “infected” with the Dachau experience than that of Mušič, the mark it left on the painter is much 16 Gérard Wajcman, Object of the Century, p. 148.

17 Mušič, like the great Rembrandt, concluded his opus with a series of moving self-portraits, where he bids farewell to his own existence in a sublime colour disappearance.

deeper than he was willing to admit or than the interpreters of his painting poetics were able to see. In a long-lasting passionate painting adventure that dictated an accelerated pace of search for ever new variant solutions, he suddenly stopped as a mature artist and looked at the road he had travelled with astonishing auto-reflection. Even though he did not bring an artistic log of concrete records from the camp, he occasionally, from the end of the 1950’s, depicted the motifs of the camp in an extremely emblematic manner; in the beginning of the 1970’s, when he first saw Mušič’s paintings in Munich, he consciously decided not to make any more paintings with the Dachau topic.

Although he banished from his imagery the phantomic spectres of camp inmates that appeared as an ubiquitous trauma in different motivic contexts possessing any formal link with camp scenes (e.g. fishnets on a seashore), he took slow steps through a fascinating process of examination following the logical development of visual idiomatic from academic realism through abstraction of the world of objects to the ultimate radical abstract image where presence is all that matters - as if aware of Lyotard’s imperative for the “invention” of such artwork that is in itself a thought ... “an object which thinks in the visible.” But also in works where the symbolised Dachau motifs are present (image 13), this is in the forefront only as an instrumentalised objectivity and just a basis for the inscription of a traumatic feeling in the all-encompassing blackness that perspectivically narrows into the point of nothingness beyond the figural scenes assembled on the screen. After 2002, he finally wove in the refined and perfected semantic structure of the visual image the painful Dachau reminiscences by which he revived the memorial stream of consciousness in emotional meditation and returned to the intimistic dialogue with an extreme ordeal.

Although the New York exile offered Boris Lurie a distance from ruins in which Europe lay in the first two decades after the end of the war, his feelings for the “hypocritical intelligentsia, capitalist culture manipulation, consumerism, American and other Molochs,” as he said himself, were ever more radical. He consciously took a role of an outsider and adopted a Beatnik rebel stance, which found its loudest echo in 1965 in the famous Howl by Allen Ginsberg, to shake the scope of normative distinction between the moral and immoral in the most radical possible way. His NO!art is in a total opposition to everything, including the most daring art practices; its programmatic name even ambiguously declares that what we see may not be art at all as its “negative aesthetics” places it light years away from the notion of the so-called fine arts. The heterogeneous character of collaged visual declarations is demonstrated in the fact that it demonstratively exposes the immorality of the world with the means that are traditionally immoral and thus avoids

188 complacent assimilation into an ethical system of values, which would then give it every chance to reconcile with this same world. Thus he remains radically critical at each moment and characterised by ubiquitous transgression, which is why he has not lost any of his sharpness to the present day; moreover, if expressions of avantgardist nonconformism are not recognisable anywhere at the end of the second decade of the 21st century, the communicative power and explosive character of this art seem the same as at the moment it was made.

The exposed and exploited “pin-up� (female) body, or explicit pornography in general, fill in all the spheres of the public in our time, since all the mechanisms of society seem to act in the way of illusory liberation (of the body): politics, economic interests, entertainment industry, mass media, sports and fashion world, as well as art subordinated to commercial demands, from the painting industry to the film industry, from publishing to the music industry. Consumption, which the American way of life impressed in the global environment of the 21st century, has, through the ubiquity of pornography, enthroned comfort as the highest value, by means of which it tries to oust the anxiety of living from the lives of everyday people. But it really just reflects the trauma that forever tarnished enlightenment as the foundation of the newer Western European civilisation by the slip of the modern into an event beyond thinkable, such as Holocaust, with a stain immersed in the subconscious, where it could have remained hidden forever were it not for dark mirrors so uncompromisingly held by Boris Lurie and protagonists of the NO!art movement, who are finally gaining the welldeserved recognition after more than half a century.

189

Seznam razstavljenih del

190

Iz zbirke Gertrude Stein / Collection of Gertrude Stein 1. BORIS LURIE

Za mojo Sheino Gitl – mojo valentino /

To my Sheina Gitl – My Valentine, 1981 barva, papirni kolaž, papirni trak / Paint, paper collage, tape on paper 97 x 75 cm

2. SAM GOODMAN

Spomin na Marilyn / Remember Marilyn, ok. 1959–1960 papirni kolaž, barva na lesenem ohišju ure / Paint on wooden clock 106,7 x 73,7 cm

3. BORIS LURIE

Zbogom Amerika / Adieu Amerique, 1959–1960

olje, fotografije na platnu / Oil, photo transfer on canvas 141 x 130,8 cm

8. BORIS LURIE

Prekrojeni mož (Cabot Lodge) /

Altered Man (Cabot Lodge), 1963

barva, papirni kolaž na platnu / Paint, paper collage on canvas 74,3 x 61 cm

9. BORIS LURIE

Prekrojeni mož (Cabot Lodge) /

Altered Man (Cabot Lodge), 1963

barva, papirni kolaž na platnu / Paint, paper collage on canvas 74,3 x 61 cm

10. BORIS LURIE

Brez naslova (Čudovite ženske) /

Untitled (Fabulous Femmes), 1961

papirni kolaž, plastika, barva na kartonu / Paper collage, plastic, paint on cardboard 114,3 x 77,5 cm

Iz zbirke Umetniške fundacije Borisa Lurieja / Collection of Boris Lurie Art Foundation 4. BORIS LURIE

Miss Universe, 1961

akril na platnu / Acrylic on canvas 161,3 x 101 cm

5. BORIS LURIE

NO! plakati / NO! Posters, 1963

ofsetni tisk na odpadnem papirju na platnu / Offset printing on wastepaper mounted on canvas 221 x 172,7 cm

6. BORIS LURIE

Prekrojeni mož (Cabot Lodge) /

Altered Man (Cabot Lodge), 1963

barva, papirni kolaž na platnu / Paint, paper collage on canvas 76,2 x 61 cm

7. BORIS LURIE

Prekrojeni mož (Cabot Lodge) /

Altered Man (Cabot Lodge), 1963

barva, papirni kolaž na platnu / Paint, paper collage on canvas 76,2 x 61 cm

11. BORIS LURIE Anita, 1962

akril na platnu / Acrylic on canvas 12. BORIS LURIE

NO! s striptizeto / NO! with Stripper, ok. / circa 1958–1962 Barva, mavec na platnu / Paint, plaster on canvas 85,1 x 69,9 cm

13. BORIS LURIE

Cikel Ljubezen: Ženske se pretepajo /

Love Series: Fighting Females, ok. / circa 1963 fotografska emulzija, akril na platnu/ Photo emulsion, acrylic on canvas 49 x 32 cm

14. BORIS LURIE

Cikel Ljubezen: Zvezana na rdečem /

Love Series: Bound on Red, ok. / circa 1963 fotografska emulzija, akril na platnu / Photo emulsion, acrylic on canvas 195,6 x 138,4 cm

15. BORIS LURIE

Cikel Ljubezen; Zvezana in začepljena /

Love Series: Bound and Gagged, ok. / circa 1963 fotografska emulzija, akril na platnu / Photo emulsion, acrylic on canvas 58,4 x 39,4 cm

191

List of exhibited works

16. BORIS LURIE

24. SAM GOODMAN

papirni kolaž, akril na kartonu / Paper collage, acrylic on cardboard

Eichmann Remember (Eichmann Triptych), ok. / circa 1961

Oswald,1963

58,4 x 38,1 cm

17. BORIS LURIE

Eichmannovo obeležje (Triptih Eichmann) /

kolaž predmeti na leseni konstrukciji / Collage, objects on wooden construction 99,1 x 91,4 x 20,3 cm

Anti-pop šablona / Anti-Pop Stencil, 1964

25. SAM GOODMAN

53,3 x 61 cm

papir na okrasnem pokrovu avtomobilskega kolesa/

olje na papir in platnu / Oil on paper and canvas

18. BORIS LURIE

Več zavarovanja / More Insurance, 1963 papirni kolaž, barva na kartonu / Paper collage, paint on cardboard 40,6 x 50,8 cm

19. BORIS LURIE

Peresa / Feathers, 1962

barva, kolaž na platnu / Paint, collage on canvas 184,2 x 116,8 cm

20. BORIS LURIE

Breza naslova (Zbogom ljubezen) /

Untitled (Adieu Love), ok. / circa 1960

olje, akril, papir, fotografije, sponke na kartonu / Oil, acrylic, paper, photos, staples on cardboard 80 x 105,4 x 5 cm 21. BORIS LURIE

Brez naslova (Raztrgane pin-up lepotice) / Untitled (Torn Pinups), ok. / circa 1962–1963 barva, papirni kolaž, linolej na lesu / Paint, paper collage, linoleum on playwood 162,6 x 165,1 cm

22. BORIS LURIE

Prekrojene fotografije: Pin-up lepotica (Telo) / Altered Photos: Pinup (body), ok./circa 1963 fotografska emulzija, akril na platno / Photo emulsion, acrylic on canvas 116,8 x 127 cm

23. SAM GOODMAN TV, 1962

asemblaž iz najdenih predmetov / Found objects assemblage 101,6 x 81,3 x 43,2 cm

Pieta, 1962

Paper on metal hubcap 38,1 x 38,1 cm

26. SAM GOODMAN

Brez naslova / Untitled, 1961–1962

plastika na okrasnem pokrovu avtomobilskega kolesa / Plastic on metal hubcap 36,8 x 36,8 cm

27. SAM GOODMAN

Gorila / Gorilla, 1961–1962

papir na okrasnem pokrovu avtomobilskega kolesa/ Paper on metal hubcap 35,6 x 35,6 cm

28. SAM GOODMAN

Brez naslova / Untitled, 1962

plastika na okrasnem pokrovu avtomobilskega kolesa / Plastic on metal hubcap 36,8 x 36,8 cm

29. SAM GOODMAN

Jedilni list (Krvavica) / Menu (Blood Wurst), 1961

asemblaž, papir, kovina, les 29,2 x 42,6

/ Assemblage, paper, metal, wood

30. SAM GOODMAN

Nakupovalni voziček / Cart, 1962

kovinska košara, karton, papirni kolaž brva, asemblaž na leseni plošči / Metal basket, cardboard, paper collage, paint assemblage on wooden board 96,5 x 64,8 x 8,9 cm

31. SAM GOODMAN

Duša in Nečimrnost / Psyche&Vanity, 1961

asemblaž z mavcem, barvo, najdenimi predmeti /

Assemblage with plaster, paint, found objects 165,1 x 35,6 x 61 cm

192

32. SAM GOODMAN

40. STANLEY FISHER

zažgana plastična punčka s plastičnimi rožami / Burned plastic doll with plastic flowers

olje, papirni kolaž na lesonitu / Oil, paper collage on masonite

Smrt in vstajenje / Death and Resurrection, 1961

76,2 x 55,9 x 22,9 cm 33. SAM GOODMAN

Bog 20. stoletja / 20th Century God, 1962

steklo, kovina / Glass, metal 24,1 x 12,7 x 12,7 cm 34. SAM GOODMAN

Škatla / The Box, 1959–1964

asemblaž, najdeni predmeti v leseni škatli / Assemblage, found objects in wood box 35,6 x 29,2 x 22,9 cm

35. SAM GOODMAN, BORIS LURIE

NE! skulptura (Skulptura Drek) / NO! Sculpture (Shit Sculpture), 1964

akrilna barva na mavcu / Acrylic paint on plaster 21,6 x 34,6 x 30,5 cm

36. SAM GOODMAN, BORIS LURIE

NE! skulptura (Skulptura Drek) / NO! Sculpture (Shit Sculpture), 1964

akrilna barva na mavcu / Acrylic paint on plaster 17,8 x 40,6 x 30,5 cm

37. SAM GOODMAN, BORIS LURIE

NE! skulptura (Skulptura Drek) / NO! Sculpture (Shit Sculpture), 1964

akrilna barva na mavcu / Acrylic paint on plaster 38,1 x 68,6 x 61 cm

38. SAM GOODMAN, BORIS LURIE

NE! skulptura (Skulptura Drek) / NO! Sculpture (Shit Sculpture), 1964

akrilna barva na mavcu / Acrylic paint on plaster 43,2 x 66 x 63,5 cm

39. STANLEY FISHER

Seks / Sex, ok. / circa 1961–1963

kolaž, papir, sprej na platnu / Collage, paper, spry paint on canvas 128,3 x 160 cm

Brez naslova / Untitled, ok. / circa 1961–1963 170,2 x 69,2 cm

41. STANLEY FISHER

Brez naslova (Na pomoč) / Untitled (Help), 1959–1964

olje, papirni kolaž na platnu / Oil, paper collage on canvas 81,3 x 72,4 cm

42. STANLEY FISHER

Brez naslova / Untitled, 1959–1964

Asemblaž z oljnimi barvami, papirjem, folijo in električnim kablom / Assemblage: oil paint, paper, foil and electrical light cord on board 71,1 x 66 cm

43. STANLEY FISHER

DRO bomba / DRO Bomb, ok. / circa 1961–1963 kolaž, oljna brava in sprej na papir na platnu / Collage, oil and spray paint on paper, canvas 165,1 x 177,8 cm

44. DOROTHY GILLESPIE MIKY, 1964

asemblaž, les, zlata folija, tkanina / Assemblage, wood, gold foil, fabric 15,2 x 21 x 13,2 cm

45. DOROTHY GILLESPIE Ljubica / Popsy, 1964

asemblaž, les, zlata folija / Assemblage, wood, gold foil 24,1 x 55,9 x 25,4 cm

46. ALLAN D'ARCANGELO

Brez naslova / Untitled, 1962 olje na platnu / Oil on canvas 81,3 x 185,4 cm

47. ALLAN D'ARCANGELO Made in USA, 1962

jedkanica / Etching on paper 25,4 x 19,1 cm

48. ROCCO ARMENTO

Sedeča figura / Seated Figure, 1962 mavec / Plaster 55,9 x 33 cm

193

49. ISSER ARONOVICI

Brez naslova / Untitled, 1959–1964 gvaš / Gouache on paper 57,2 x 71,8 cm

50. ISSER ARONOVICI

57. ERRÓ (GUDMUNDUR GUDMUNDSSON)

B. M. Nemenski La mere (1945), Ben Shahn Sacco and Vanzetti (1931–32), 1966 olje na platnu / Oil on canvas 53,3 x 129,5 cm

Plazeča se figura / Crawling Figure, 1963

58. SUZANNE LONG

38,1 x 53,3 cm

mavec na lesu / Plaster on wood

gvaš, kreda na papirju / Gouache, crayon on paper

51. JEAN-JACQUES LEBEL

Ženske in vojna / Women and War, 1962 68,6 x 58,4 x 7,6 cm

Brez naslova / Untitled, 1963

59. SUZANNE LONG

106,7 x 73,7 cm

olje na platnu / Oil on canvas

barva, kreda, kolaž na papirju / Paint, crayon, collage on paper

52. JEAN-JACQUES LEBEL

Ne brez moških / Not without Men, 1962 156,2 x 121,9 cm

Brez naslova / Untitled, 1963

60. WOLF VOSTELL

76,9 x 61,6 cm

asemblaž, razbite žarnice, tiskarska barva / Assemblage, broken bulbs, magazines paint

tempera, kolaž na ofset plakatu / Tempera, collage on offset poster

53. JEAN-JACQUES LEBEL

Sovjetska zveza št. 6 / Soviet Union, No 6, 1962

54,6 x 39,4 cm

Brez naslova / Untitled, 1961

61. WOLF VOSTELL

119,4 x 48,3 x 12,7 cm

asemblaž, razbite žarnice, tiskarska barva / Assemblage, broken bulbs, magazines paint

kovina, plastika, steklo, barva, papirni kolaž na lesu / Metal, plastic, glass, paint, paper collage on wood

54. JEAN-JACQUES LEBEL

Brez naslova / Untitled, 1961

oljna barva, perje, kovina, guma, najdeni predmeti na lutki iz steklenih vlaken / Oil paint, feathers, metal, rubber, other found objects on fiberglass mannequin 182,9 x 35,6 x 38,1 cm

Eisenhower in De Gaulle št. 6 / Eisenhower and De Gaulle, No 6, 1962

54,6 x 39,4 cm

62. WOLF VOSTELL

Čistke / Combs, 1968

sitotisk na kartonu / Silk screen on cardboard 61 x 94,6 cm

55. ERRÓ (GUDMUNDUR GUDMUNDSSON)

63. MICHELLE STUART

preslikan plakat / Paint on mylar, offset poster

gvaš / Guache on paper

Arroyo, Miro, Riffeto,1962 53,5 x 48,3 cm

Za Borisa: z ljubeznijo in poljubi / For Boris: love+kisses, 1960 60,3 x 47 cm

56. ERRÓ (GUDMUNDUR GUDMUNDSSON)

64. YAYOI KUSAMA

ofsetni tisk / Offset silkscreen

litografija / Lithograph

Foto kontaktne kopije / Photos from film, 1962–1967 105,4 x 74,9 cm

Razstava Tisoč čolnov / One Thousand Boat Show, 1963 76,2 x 111,8 cm

65. ALDO TAMBELLINI

Iz serije Spočetje / From the Conception Series, 1962 nitrolak, akril na papir / Duco, acrylic on paper 66 x 66 cm

Katalog / Catalogue

Boris Lurie in/and NO!art 5. 4.–2. 6. 2019 Katalog izdala / Published by: Koroška galerija likovnih umetnosti & Boris Lurie Art Foundation Zanju / Represented by: Andreja Hribernik, direktorica / Director KGLU Gertrude Stein, predsednica / President BLAF Kustosi razstave / Curators of the exhibition: Ivonna Veiherte, Rafael Vostell, Marko Košan Boris Lurie Art Foundation, New York: Gertrude Stein, predsednica / President Anthony Williams, predsednik uprave / Chairman of the Board Chris Shultz, upravljalec zbirke / Collections Manager Jessica Wallen, vodja projektov / Project Manager Rafael Vostell, svetovalec / Advisor ©Besedila / Texts: Ivonna Veiherte, Andreja Hribernik, Marko Košan Besedila s spletnega portala borislurieart.org so objavljena z dovoljenjem Boris Lurie Art Foundation. / Texts from borislurieart.org have been used with the kind permision of the Boris Lurie Art Foundation. ©Življenjepisi umetnikov / Biographies of the artists: Boris Lurie Art Foundation (prevod / translated by Marko Košan) ©Fotografije / Photos: Boris Lurie Art Foundation, Getty Images Prevodi / Translations: Polona Glavan Lektoriranje / Proof-readers: Mojca Hudolin (SLO), Chris Shultz (ENG, except text by Marko Košan) Katalog uredil / Catalogue edited by: Marko Košan Oblikovanje / Design: Matija Kovač, Zgradbazamisli Tisk / Printed: Dikplast, d. o. o.

Naklada / Edition 500 April 2019

Boris Lurie in/and NO!art

195

CIP - Kataložni zapis o publikaciji Univerzitetna knjižnica Maribor 73/76:929Lurie B.(083.824) LURIE, Boris Boris Lurie in/and NO!art : Koroška galerija likovnih umetnosti, [5. 4.

- 2. 6. 2019] / [besedila Ivonna Veiherte, Andreja Hribernik, Marko Košan ; življenjepisi umetnikov Boris Lurie Art Foundation ; fotografije Boris Lurie Art Foundation, Getty Images ; prevodi Polona Glavan, Marko Košan (življenjepisi umetnikov) ; katalog uredil Marko Košan]. - Slovenj Gradec : Koroška galerija likovnih umetnosti ; New York : Boris Lurie Art Foundation, 2019 ISBN 978-961-6827-16-4 (Koroška galerija likovnih umetnosti) 1. Gl. stv. nasl. 2. Košan, Marko COBISS.SI-ID 96388609