Sunday 7 December 2008

Dr Alistair Payne seminar

‘The main thing wrong with painting is that it is a rectangular plane placed flat against the wall…it determines and limits the arrangement of whatever is on or inside of it’ – Donald Judd ‘Specific Objects’

We had a very open discussion covering many broad and important questions from the limitations of painting to more general ideas such as the importance of art to society and even how one can classify a work of art (if at all possible). For those who missed the seminar I will try to repeat some of these points (if anybody thinks I have left a particularly interesting one out then please bring it up!). It is worth noting that the original seminar group read through two texts: ‘specific objects’ by Donald Judd and ‘art and objecthood’ by Michael Friedman. I have found a link to the Judd essay online however I was unable to find a whole copy of the Friedman.

Judd - cep.ens-lsh.fr/poetik/doc/judd-specific%20objects.pdf

Ever since Duchamp there have been arguments over the ‘death of painting’. Painting is limited, ‘the rectangular plane is given a lifespan’ however by concentrating on the limitations of painting are painters today giving painting fresh importance?

In his talk Alistair spoke about the idea of ‘Frontality’ and that he was interested in ‘challenging the notion of surface within painting’. His work attempts to bring painting off the two-dimensional plane into three-dimensions, but by doing so he is betraying painting’s most distinct characteristic – the flat surface. Therefore can his work still be classified as painting? Do we need to classify it?

How do we classify a work of art? I think it was Angela who talked about the idea that a streetcleaner is creating art simply by the act of cleaning the street. Alistair Payne then mentioned an artist (I can’t remember the name) who would do things such as picking up a discarded piece of clothing, take it to the dry-cleaners and then return the clothing to the spot from which he picked it up.

Judd claimed in 1965 that the ‘disinterest in painting in sculpture is a disinterest in doing it again’ but how necessary is the constant progression in art? Michael Brick suggested that perhaps this is a Western symptom, pointing out that Egyptian art had remained unchanged for over a thousand years. The idea of the ‘artist’ did not exist until Vasari’s ‘ the lives of the artists’.
This was a very interesting, and I think important, discussion and for those who missed it this is an opportunity to add your thoughts and opinions. For those who were there and feel there is something to add then please do! The blog allows room to think when adding your ideas (the seminar might have been a bit intimidating!)