Artbash makes it easy (and free) to create a website if you are an artist or an art gallery.

Get started on your website now.
 

Understanding Et Al

Forum > Educational Presentations

by Populuxe
67 Comments
Article of the Month August 2006
understanding-et-al As part of a project to educate our politicians about contemporary art, and the work of Et Al in particular (especially after the profound ignorance demonstrated in their comments on Venice 2005), I have decided to develop an educational resource in a language they would understand - ie. powerpoint.

With your feedback to perfect this presentation, I will email the package on to Helen Clark and Judith Tizard - and probably Deborah Coddington and a few others as well.




---
download power point (590 KB)
download pdf (361 KB)

Cartoon credit: Ross P. Kettle at Dorking Labs
Image of Rapture available at Telecom Prospect

lbudd lbuddetalpmule


Comments:
1 to 20 of 67
Knoby
22 comments since 20 Jun 2006
Isn't the furore over Et Al

really just a sympton of government funded art? Thereby easily avoided if the artists went elsewhere for sponsorship?

Because, in this case in particular, it's not the politicians but the population you need to educate. Maybe send it in to Campbell Live or Close Up instead?
John Hurrell
122 articles & 1507 comments since 2 Dec 2005
Of course [a] certain artist [s] might be

inclined to respond with "Understanding Populuxe: an Idiot's Guide to Andrew Paul Wood."
Lee-looking-profound-1
Artbasher
137 articles & 705 comments since 12 Feb 2005
I think it was

Paul Holmes who really started all the fuss.

Jeepers John, I thought you might have enjoyed Andrew's no-nonsense approach to explaining some of the complexities of twenty-first century art. I certainly found it informative and amusing.

It's funny that this work Rapture seems rather easy to pin down as Andrew has. Kind of funny the media never bothered. I mean, I think compared to the work that went to Venice (not that I saw that in the flesh), Rapture is rather straight forward and witty. I guess the complete lack of discussion and controversy over The Fundamental Practice is due to the public's general inability to comprehend it. I'm not sure what it says about artists (perhaps they retreat to obscurity?), but it certainly says something about the public: they expect art to be obscure. There's a sort of inherent loftiness to obscurity that a toilet in any form does away with.
John Hurrell
122 articles & 1507 comments since 2 Dec 2005
I was thinking about et al. I don't she [they]

is [are] very keen on explanations or clarity. The more confusion generated the better.
John Hurrell
122 articles & 1507 comments since 2 Dec 2005
I think Andrew is quite wrong in the early stages. 'Fountain' was not a critique of

the dealer system but about exposing a committee that claimed all work submitted would be exhibited. That is quite different.

Also Andrew's connecting of the Portaloo with minimalism is far fetched. With Fountain, yes I agree.

et al and Duchamp are nihilists - et al more so. Rational argument is not a component, so Andrew's sincere labours will not be appreciated despite there being some wonderful observations there.

Populuxe
19 articles & 495 comments since 9 Aug 2005
Well Mesire Hurrell

"I think Andrew is quite wrong in the early stages. 'Fountain' was not a critique of
the dealer system but about exposing a committee that claimed all work submitted would be exhibited. That is quite different."

Actually, I said dealer AND gallery system which is a broader and more general way of putting it that includes your point. Regardless, Duchamp was no simpleton given to idle two-dimensional pranks, and a Dadaist critique is a critique nonetheless. They are hardly "quite different".

"Also Andrew's connecting of the Portaloo with minimalism is far fetched. With Fountain, yes I agree."

Come on John - they are featureless white cubes, of course they suggest minimalism. That's like saying "I'm not going to think about a pink elephant" (an annoying paradox) - she/it/they knows it exists, the similarity can hardly be coincidental. Besides, put it in the context of her deconstructions of gallery space. You were there when Ruth Watson suggested The Fundemental Practice would have made more sense in the white cube of a gallery than in the naked brick of an old church.

And I have always found the subunit/s of the collective only too happy to discuss their/her/its work and have it discussed - it's a probably a huge relief that someone is talking about the art rather than talking about her/it/them. Disambiguation isn't an issue - nor is the work in question particularly nihilistic.

Finally, I would be only too greatful to be imortalised in "Understanding Populuxe: an Idiot's Guide to Andrew Paul Wood." - it would ensure my immortality forever. How flattering. (and I know he/she/it/they are reading this).

John Hurrell
122 articles & 1507 comments since 2 Dec 2005
Sorry old [er..young] chap, I still think you are absolutely

mistaken.

The idea behind Fountain's submission in 1917 in New York - not Paris, please note- was nothing at all to do with the power of the dealers to create trends. It was about democracy and the stated premise stated by the committee that if you paid your fee the work was to be automatically accepted. That principle has no connection with testing the alleged influence of dealers to sway art history. That is a nutty revisionist fantasy from the safety of ninety years hindsight.

The two ideas are very different, as is a Portaloo from the Minimalist sculpture of say Donald Judd. As a sculpture a Portaloo is nothing like a Judd. You said 'featureless white cube' but I think you meant a Judd. And I think Ruth was talking about the space.

I like your idea of all these 'et al subunits' eagerly reading this conversation.

How about it, subunit leader? Any non-nihilistic 'subunit thoughts'?
Populuxe
19 articles & 495 comments since 9 Aug 2005
Ok, not featureless

- a scruffy white cube - hence the humour. And is not an art gallery space merely a judd turned inside out in principle?

Very well, New York - I did ask for corrections and feedback. I will change that. But that revisionist fantasy with 90 years of hindsight does save a rather involved analysis of the NY art world in the early twentieth century - please remember the art of the powerpoint is like the art of the haiku: brevity, not complexity (nor even accuracy) is everything.

My foray into conceptual art is intended to be largely a parody as well - can you not think of anything more hilarious than a powerpoint presentation for politicians about He/She/It/Them who must not be named?
John Hurrell
122 articles & 1507 comments since 2 Dec 2005
The fact is Judd sculptures are nothing like the modernist

white cube. Judd's surfaces are colourful, sensual, and so sexy. They even sparkle, most being just plain gorgeous. Actually maybe the very early work by Judd was much tougher.

Probably the term "Minimalist" was also first applied to exhibitions like the Robert Morris L-beam installation, or to Tony Smith or Ronald Bladen sculptures.

It's interesting that that Portaloo is kind of like a big walk-in fridge, which makes it much creepier than Judd sculpture because of it's food storage connotations. Yeeech!
Populuxe
19 articles & 495 comments since 9 Aug 2005
If artists like

Janine Antoni (chocolate and lard) and Eva Hesse (Accession II) can play with the notion of the minimal cube - I don't think it's such a huge leap. Liberate yourself from formalism John!
John Hurrell
122 articles & 1507 comments since 2 Dec 2005
More nutty revisionism, PPLX.

Not Hesse obviously.
Populuxe
19 articles & 495 comments since 9 Aug 2005
Au contrare John

Accession II was made in 1967, contemporary with the second wave of self-referential minimalism and the likes of Carl Andre, Anne Truitt, Dan Flavin, Sol LeWitt, Frank Stella, Donald Judd, Ad Reinhardt and Robert Smithson. And indeed, Hesse was one of the first artists to make the transition from Minimalism to Postminimalism.

I very much fear you are talking out your arse.
John Hurrell
122 articles & 1507 comments since 2 Dec 2005
Get some new specs my friend.

I said that your revisionism did not include Hesse. I was distinguishing her from Antoni [later generation] whom you paired her with.
Populuxe
19 articles & 495 comments since 9 Aug 2005
Ah, but

Both are reacting historically to the same thing and for similar reasons (rejecting the hypermasculinity of the avant-garde). Both can be included among the post-minimalists, and Antoni would certainly be aware of Hesse. Clinging to chronology will not help you here - stylistic categories are what matter. Generations be damned.
John Hurrell
122 articles & 1507 comments since 2 Dec 2005
Smack,smack, stop being a slippery wee weasel.

Just because you've seen Anna Chave and you've suddenly decided to bring her ideas into the conversation as a smoke screen - because you misread.

What a rascal!
the ambassador
134 comments since 13 May 2006
chronology be damned.

a duchamp by any other name smells like shit.
Populuxe
19 articles & 495 comments since 9 Aug 2005
Tsk tsk John,

I didn't say minimalism was fascist. It is, however autistic.
paul
1 articles & 141 comments since 11 Aug 2006
who's the nude guy with the crown?

I understand et al. but I don't like it much, it is like looking at the shiny arse of a politian's suit, it's amusing, but at the expense of something better.
John Hurrell
122 articles & 1507 comments since 2 Dec 2005
I didn't say you said mimimalism was fascist.

Maybe you are having a flash-back to some earlier conversation we had about 6 months ago.

You should be careful what you imbibe! Turn to Jesus, Andrew.
Chris Taylor
1 articles & 308 comments since 30 Apr 2006
For a moment I felt like contributing

to this conversation, but I quickly realised it was irrelevant.

I hope you are happy together JH and Andrew.

Join or Login to comment
Page Loads
1 2 0 5 2