Painting, for some time now, has represented all that a revolutionary
aspect of the avant-garde seeks to overthrow and all that a
reactionary cultural vanguard strives to conserve. Caught within
this crossfire, the practice of painting has ritually been pronounced
dead or miraculously revived in a type of 'now you see it, now
you don't' game. The use of painting within narratives of avant-garde
transgression (painting's death) or in terms of a reactionary
relationship to history and tradition (the revival of painting)
reduces the possibility that a radical aspect which is specific
to painting can find a genuine place within critical thinking.
The last few years has seen painting
mis-used within yet another narrative confusing this situation
even further. In his essay Art
After The End of Art 2 Arthur Danto said
with, some confidence, that Modernism as a project had finally
ended and that western culture had entered a 'post-historical'
phase. By this he meant that a sense of the history of art as
an evolving succession of developments had been supplanted by
the idea that at any one moment anything is possible. For Danto
painting was what most appropriately constituted this new found
pluralism. He acknowledged within the same article that the
pluralism he was advocating was problematic. A situation where
everything is possible raises the problem of how one addresses
aspects of the culture where difference and polemics are at
work . In his article Danto refers particularly to feminism
in this context but the position of cultural minorities applies
equally here. Ideas of post-history do not make such issues
of identity magically disappear. Danto has a tranquil view of
a post-historical after-life. Painting suddenly finds itself
in business again, but this time it's reborn as pluralism (instead
of finality or origin). Surely this is somewhat over determined?
I'd like to talk about the work
of some contemporary painters without resorting to temporal
frames like post-history and pluralism, with the intention rather
of deploying painting within a critique of such terms. It may
be useful to begin with a reference to the writings of Yves-Alain
Bois, recently collected into Painting
as Model 3 and an essay by Benjamin Buchloh,
From Faktura to Factography
4
In Resisting
Blackmail , Bois's introduction to Painting
as Model , he talks of 'two formalisms'. In the post-war
period the term 'formalism' became overwhelming associated with
Greenberg's system of criticism which has played such a major
role in Modernist critical thinking. With Greenberg form and
content were locked into an opposition, works of art were accounted
for in either one of those terms. Bois regards this as being
a fundamental flaw of Greenberg's thinking (although it must
be said Bois never dismisses Greenberg out of hand). Bois identifies
European formalism as being
distinct from its American variety. Within this context he quotes
the writings of Bakhtin/Medvedev:
"European
formalism not only did not deny content, did not make content
a conditional and detachable element of the work, but on the
contrary, strove to attribute deep ideological meaning to form
itself..The formalists therefore reduced form and content to
one common denominator, although one with two aspects: (1) form
and content were both constructive elements in the closed unity
of the work, and (2) form and content were ideological elements.
The principle of contrast between form and content was thus
eliminated." 5
One way of viewing form and content
as a 'common denominator' with two aspects is to consider faktura
which is another word from the vocabulary of the soviet avant-garde
which has been the subject of the writings of both Bois and
Buchloh. For Buchloh it would seem to be a term that has perhaps
informed his writings on Gerhard Richter. Faktura
is quite distinct from facture
the latter referring to the masterful intervention of the painter's
hand, spiritualising the mere materiality of the picture. In
Buchloh's words:
"the new concern for faktura in
the Soviet avant-garde emphasizes precisely the mechanical quality,
the materiality, and the anonymity of the painterly procedure
from a perspective of empirico-critical positivism".
He later refers this to Rodchenko's
project "to reduce the process
of representation to purely indexical signs: matter seemingly
generates its own representation without mediation (the old
positivistic's dream, as it was, of course, that of the early
photographers)."
Thus faktura
is a complex distinction, at one point challenging the status
of the artist's hand in the painting and at another point looking
at a work of art in terms of representation within an unmediated
status of matter. It is faktura
which was possibly a model for Buchloh to open up his reading
of Richter's paintings whereby the photo and abstract works
are linked as two parts of a common project. It seems that much
turns on and is compounded within faktura
as a term in painting and to apply it in practice across a field
of painting might open up a useful discussion.
I'd like to throw into question
a critical axis which is currently at work in the reception
and the making of painting particularly in Britain. The reception
and success of Thérèse Oulton's paintings during the 1980s involved
a misreading of her references to landscape. Many critics viewed
her as operating within a landscape genre whereas in fact her
work was more like a critique
of romanticism and the sublime. She withdrew from such references
in her work and instead her painting turned toward a problematic
where identity is at issue. (This is why Oulton's work has been
important for a way of thinking for women within a kind of 'radicalisation'
of painting). An avant-gardist (or neo-conservative) discourse
which accounted for her work within a
genre of abstraction and a conservative faction accounting
for it within a genre of
landscape obscured a genuine reading of her work. This denied
the most radical implication of her work which addresses questions
of what constitutes painting. 6
The contrast with an artist like
Ian Mckeever may be telling here. The peculiar hybrid term lyrical
abstraction goes some way to sum up the collusion in
his work of landscape and abstraction . Despite a recent call
by Mckeever that painting should be strictly of itself7
there is a continual mesh of narratives around his work. One
narrative relates to the specificity of the practice of painting
and is consigned to a thinking of his work as 'abstraction'.
Another focuses on the naturalising and essentialising aspect
of his encounters with landscape in his quest for equivalencies
to something that he associates with painting8. The
confusion which is evident here is probably why Oulton has distanced
herself from such narratives which were early distractions from
what lay at the heart of her work.
Oulton has withdrawn to a place
which it is unwise to call a position. It is a place rather
that she inhabits where faktura
in painting is her chief concern. She asks:
"Is
painting a speculative model for something else which isn't
painting or can painting be a model for something that painting
itself is? And what could it mean to be such a model? Whether
it is a model for something else or some model of what painting
could be, if that were the case one would have to always be
aware that whatever else a painting is doing it would be proposing
something that doesn't exist prior to that painting. Put differently
this would mean that a painting if not a model at the symbolic
level for the social-philosophical, could be a model for how
art is made, could be made. Here we would have to decide whether
it is a model at all, of the social kind or of itself kind.
If not, it would have to be bereft of all echoes beyond itself.
In as much as it is itself, it is outside of meaning. Which
could be a real problem of what painting is; always itself and
always a speculation of what is not.
Here for painting to be itself or
a model of what it might be is to displace the function it has
had as a support for re-presentation. Oulton views representation
as involving painting within everything that it is not. More
importantly she sees this as chain of repetition of what she
terms 'recognitions'. Painting as representation functions as
the empowerment of that which is known prior to the making of
a painting. The causality that is bound up in this relationship
reduces painting to a function within a wider apparatus whereby
the identities which result from recognition within representation
are rendered as seemingly obvious, even natural. This configuration
of identity is something she regards as possible to counter
in painting. The faktura
in Oulton's work is the point at which, as she says, "the that
that it is" could be said to be operating. Aside from Oulton's
tight reasoning there is also a wider imperative at work which
is counter to the sense of a pluralism introduced earlier in
this essay. Identity, recognition and representation can be
read across a much wider field than painting but this is not
the place to enter into such a discussion in relation to Oulton's
painting*.
The painter Sadie Murdoch' shares
similar concerns. Her 'wiped' paintings begin with black and
white transcriptions of photographic images derived from interior
design publications. She subjects this transcription to a cleaning
process. Wiping the once immaculate representation transforms
an ideal interior into a contingency of domestic life. There
is a movement here from a representation of an ideal, in this
case an immaculate interior, to a level of signification situated
in 'base' material and process (the wiping of the painting).
The faktura involved here
challenges the position of an ideal within an hierarchical order
of things. The ideal becomes dislodged from an elevated status
by being literally de-based, and the movement involved is a
descent from image to material. In this context she has quoted
Barthes:
"In a smear we find the truth of
redness, in a wobbly line the truth of pencil....these gestures
which aim to establish matter as fact, are all associated with
making something dirty. Here is a paradox; a fact is more purely
defined if it is not clean...the truth of things is best read
in refuse."
The idea that matter in painting
can be subject to a movement through an axis and thereby put
its reading at risk is relevant to the work of Torie Begg. She
makes groups of paintings which are apparently identical. to
each other which she presents on the floor and ceiling as well
as the walls. Through this way of presentation readings that
identify similarities between paintings compete with the possibility
to read differences between the works. She uses a computer generated
'score' from which she derives a procedure. Her paintings are
a performance of a sequence of translucent layers of differently
coloured paint, applied in a 'mechanical' fashion, resulting
in a final colour which is the product of the traces of all
the layers beneath it. Faktura
here resides in the combination of mechanical procedure and
a final surface being the sum of different traces.
The relationship to photography is important in this context
particularly in terms of a trace as being indexical;
literally having a physical relationship to something the way
a photographic film has to an object by means of light.
The indexical
status of traces and a connection to photography and painting
bring Richter to mind again. Collage is a more recent invention
than photography but shares a relationship to it in that objects
from the world are brought onto or into or through a surface.
This process could be described as an obscuring one or as 'effacement'.
Like Oulton, Laura Lisbon is involved in a epistemological questioning.
She asks simply what is a painting? Her enquiry has led her
to think about effacement as a strategy for finding painting.
In Painting and Ethics (or looking
for painting) 9she says:
A difficult
negotiation of the question of the subject is a kind of erotic
relationship of helplessness in the face of the other. It is
an obliterating of the known for an engagement with the unknown.
Painting
on photographs is a clear effacement of sorts, a covering. Painting
from photographs effaces the photograph as well in order to
reveal the painting.
The French painter Christian Bonnefoi
shares with Lisbon an epistemological enquiry into painting
which has involved collage at a fundamental level. Bonnefoi
regards collage as a way towards the continuation of painting
rather than as a strategy to overcome it. Collage, like effacement,
is way of thinking that moves toward the specificity of painting,
toward a faktura of painting
as being productive and not expressive, and within a temporality
where painting is situated within a present perpetually open
to future events. He says that collage is a:
'productivity
of site for the reception of the future, unknown as such, unforeseeable,
that I call the Obscure, in a positive acceptance, not as that
which is taken in the absence of light but as that which, in
an autonomous world, holds itself facing it.' 10
The faktura
of painting is a way of thinking and making that is engaged
at the level of painting. At the same time it involves an awareness
that residing in the most localised or unmediated signification
of matter are also ideological and ethical issues. This article
has been for the most part about the vigilance of some artists
in the light of such an awareness. I have also tried to emphasize
that it is precisely in painting that this vigilance is possible.
To circumscribe painting within the free-fall of pluralism or
within the ghettos of genre
diminishes its effectiveness and its potential for vigilance
is weakened.
(c) Mick Finch. 1997
Mick Finch is a painter living in
France. He exhibits at the Purdy Hicks gallery London where
he will be having his next solo exhibition in Spring 1998. He
is also a professor at Parsons School of Design, Paris.
1 Christian Prigent,
Comme la Peinture (about
the painter Daniel Dezeuze),Yvon Lambert, Paris, 1983. Quoted
in Laura Lisbon's essay Painting
and Ethics (or Looking for Painting) to be published
in a forthcoming book, Painting
and Ethics , ed Richard Roth,
2 Artforum,
April 1993.
3 Painting
as Model, An October Book for the M.I.T. Press, 1990.
4 Originally published
in October no. 30, pp. 82-119. Also published in October: The
First Decade, the M.I.T. Press, 1987.
5Quoted by Bois in Painting
as Model p.xviii, his reference to the quote is P.N.Medvedev/M.M.
Bakhtin, The Formal Method in Literary
Scholarship (1928), English translation Albert J. Wehrle
(John Hopkins University Press, 1978.
6 Notable exceptions
here being Andrew Benjamin's Other
Abstractions: Thérèse Oulton's Abstract with Memories,
(in The Journal of Philosophy and
the Visual Arts no. 5) and Peter Gidal initially in his
catalogue text for Oulton's Fools Gold exhibition catalogue,
Gimpel Fils London, 1984.
7 Mckeever and Oulton
both gave papers at a recent conference Questions
on Painting at the Trent University, Nottingham, organised
by the School of Fine Art.
8 This is most effectively
evoked through a small text for his exhibition at the Angel
Row Gallery in Nottingham describing his work thus:
The
works draw on a nature which he seeks out through journeys to
such places as Siberia, Tasmania or Greenland. However, the
paintings worked in the studio are about the nature of paint
and painting and not travel reflections.
Here a heroic allusion is made to
Mckeever as tourist of the world's wildernesses and a parallel
activity within his practice of painting. The linkage of art
to nature here involves a sublime that is heavily hampered by
a naive exoticism. Mckeever talked at the Nottingham conference
of colour operating in terms of black as darkness and white
as luminosity. This was said as if it were a certainty of fact.
That such a statement is culturally specific (rather than phenomenally
or materially specific) and is already being stated at a level
of signification I think is as evident in the way Mckeever both
makes and talks about making paintings.
9 To be published shortly
in Painting and Ethics ,
ed Richard Roth, Lisbon is a painter but this text was written
in connection to her role as a professor in the Art Critical
Practices department of The Ohio State University, U.S.A.
10 From The
Objection that the Obscure makes to Painting by Christian
Bonnefoi, 1996, catalogue text for a touring exhibition. This
translation by Philip Armstrong. There will be a solo exhibition
of Bonnefoi's work at the Theo Waddington Gallery, London during
September 1997. |