This is the Google OCR'ed to html version of a scanned
image file
http://www.etantdonnes.com/SystemsArt/Haacke_Statement1967.html
Hans Haacke, Previously unpublished, 1967.
from: Grasskamp, Nesbit, Bird (2004); Hans Haacke, Phaidon Press; pp 102-103
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.etantdonnes.com/SystemsArt/Haacke_Statement1967.html
Hans Haacke, Previously unpublished, 1967.
from: Grasskamp, Nesbit, Bird (2004); Hans Haacke, Phaidon Press; pp 102-103
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Haacke
Untitled Statement (1967)
Untitled Statement (1967)
The concept of "systems" is widely used in the
natural and social sciences and especially in various complex technologies.
Possibly it was Jack Burnham, an artist and writer, who first suggested the
term (not to be confused with 'systematic') for the visual arts. By its use, he
was trying to distinguish certain three-dimensional situations which,
misleadingly, have been labelled as "sculpture".
A system is most generally defined as a grouping of
elements subject to a common plan and purpose. These elements or components
interact so as to arrive at a joint goal. To separate the elements would be to
destroy the system. Outside the context of the whole, the elements serve no
function. Naturally these prerequisites are also true of every good painting,
sculpture, building or similarly complex but static visual entity. The original
use of the term in the natural sciences is valuable for understanding the
behaviours of physically interdependent processes. It explained phenomena of
constant change, recycling and equilibrium. Therefore, I believe there are
sound reasons for reserving the term "system" for certain non-static "sculptures",
since only in this category does a transfer of energy, material or information
occur.
Painters, and sculptors of static works, are anxious to
prevent their works from being influenced by time and environmental conditions.
Patina is not looked for as a record of the bronzes' response to atmospheric
exposure nor is the darkening and crackle of paintings desirable in order to
demonstrate their reaction to environmental conditions. Although physical
changes take place, the intention of these artists is to make something that
alters as little as possible. Equally, the viewer hopes to see the work as it
appeared immediately after its execution.
Works, however, have been produced with the explicit
intention of having their components physically communicate with each other and
the whole communicate physically with the environment. It is this type of work
which cannot be classified as "sculpture", whereas it can be
described appropriately as a "system".
The physical self-sufficiency of such a system has a
decisive effect on the viewer's relationship to the work, due to its hitherto
unknown independence from his mental involvement. His role might be reduced to
being the source of physical energy in works conceived for viewer
participation. In these, his actions -- pulling, pushing, turning, etc. -- are
part of the programme. Or his mere presence might be sufficient. However, there
are systems which function properly even when the viewer is not present at all,
i.e., their programme operates absolutely independently of any contribution on
the part of the viewer.
Whether the viewer's physical participation is required
or not, the system's programme is not affected by his knowledge, past
experience, the mechanics of perceptual psychology, his emotions or degree of
involvement. In the past, a sculpture or painting had meaning only at the grace
of the viewer. His projections into a piece of marble or a canvas with
particular configurations provided the programme and made them significant.
Without his emotional and intellectual reactions, the material remained nothing
but stone and fabric. The system's programme, on the other hand, is absolutely
independent of the viewer's mental participation. It remains autonomous --
aloof from the viewer. As a tree's programme is not touched by the emotions of
lovers in its shadow, so the system's programme is untouched by the viewer's
feelings and thoughts. The viewer becomes a witness rather than a resounding
instrument striving for empathy.
Naturally, also a system releases a gulf of subjective
projections in the viewer. These projections, however, can be measured relative
to the system's actual programme. Compared to traditional sculpture, it has
become a partner of the viewer rather than being subjected to his whims. A
system is not imagined; it is real.
Copied from http://www.etantdonnes.com/SystemsArt/Haacke_Statement1967.html
on 03.30.17
No comments:
Post a Comment