Liminality in Art (1)

This is meant to be an attempt in coining a new term in the Art Theory field.

Curiously enough, the term Liminality continues not to be recognised by the modern dictionaries of English; even though numerous (stated below) researchers have been using it in academic papers. It doesn't exist as an aesthetic concept or any distinguished phenomenon in the contemporary fine art. Yet, what I would like to claim and what is the reason of this article is my knowledge that this very notion has been persistently influencing the way of defining and interpreting art of the last decades at least. Though never or very rarely (in its adjective form of the liminal) applied as such by the art critics and scholars it has been circulating in the air each time the hybridity, borderline qualities, formlessness or intersemiotics of the Postmodernism has been loathed or admired.

From Latin limen meaning threshold 'liminality' is an existential (metaphysical) subjective, state and realm of hovering 'between and betwixt' of two (or more) different planes, spaces and/or existential qualities. First described in anthropology (Arnold van Gennep, Victor Turner) as a social theory of the liminal states - spaces of a 'temporary outcast' when an individual or a group is being placed by the society on its margin in a ritual of purification and/or recognition. It has got also its usage in the contemporary psychology where the liminal means sub- or unconscious state with one's sense identity being 'hold' or dissolved to some extent. In contemporary philosophy J. Derrida has been called the 'philosopher of the liminal' due to his deconstruction attempts of the integral and solid tissue of materiality (more about it in the next parts of this series).

In visual art the 'threshold's ' aesthetics has been described on the theatre, cinema and performance field (notably S. Zizek, S. Broadhurst) and some curatorial and critical attempts has been made to embrace the liminality of the contemporary artistic expression done by more or less traditional media. Yet, it's basically the 'no man's land' when painting or sculpture is considered - those realms remain, for the today's critique and theory (and not surprisingly, by any means) immune to any 'revolutionary' 'new' aesthetic refurbishment; it became a sort of an ideological cliche - that it's more convenient to blame painting for its impotency (it's 'dead' anyway, why bother then?...) than to inject any potent conceptual spirit into it by an affirmative reflection.

When J-F. Lyotard has called Postmodernity the nascent state, the state of a permanent 'becoming' (The Postmodern Condition, 1979) he basically admitted its innate liminal character; and those artworks that seek to address this condition (both deliberately or not) are probably best recognised for their aesthetics (or anti-aesthetics) of incompleteness - sculptures/installations look as if the artist ran out of the materials to finish them to a decent level; paintings seem to be painfully 'hanged' by their own guts with indescribable forms, unidentifiable colours and freaky techniques; videos cry out for any structure, even a hint of a narrative. Their 'becomingness' is the only existence they know and it comes invariably as disquieting or even disturbing for the audience. No without a reason the primitive societies considered the liminal states as dangerous, unclean (Turner); and those affected were isolated 'pro publico bono'.

As hazardous and monstrous in moments as the liminality in art (and beyond it) seems to appear it is also probably the only truly creative state, which - if used wisely - can result in some profound discoveries and metamorphoses. This fructile chaos and the storehouse of possibilities (Turner) is a goldsmith's workshop of the contemporary art; even though some purists rise an alarm that the state of the constant flux and indeterminacy (where 'everything goes') will annihilate all the miserable bits of art that left - let's be positive... Art is best cared for if it's accepted just as it appears and shapes itself through the mill of the human spirit; even if refuses to 'become' and fit any new uniform - so what?... As far as minds and hearts are enflamed by it, even with a doubt, even with a turmoil - it fulfills its calling of the 'fifth element' - the force of life and death, possibility and danger, sanctus and profane...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the further studies on Liminality in Art (being a part of my studies on the Contemporary Art) I would bring closer the views of the scholars, philosophers mentioned above, as well as I will try to illustrate the theory with some artworks.

Troubled art - Chaim Soutine

He was that kind of a difficult snotty kid, who appeared from nowhere as if fully formed, then, like a meteor glowing with dark, perpetual fire he flashed through life fulfilled with struggles, suffering, torment and passions. He left one of the most compelling collections of paintings in the Modern Art; despite of the quite ferocious competition from Matisse, Picasso, Modigliani and many others...

Chaim Soutine was a painter of his own obsessions. Only. Buying his place in the art world at a high price of the family rejection, exile, extreme poverty, illness and the life-long emotional disturbance he remained an outsider in Paris of Modernists; moody, clumsy Jewish oddball from funny-sounding village (Smilovitchy) in Belarus.

He painted like a man possessed, staining canvasses with his own guts and each time risking that he won't survive his own probe. He handled paint like one handles a chunk of meat - he penetrated it deeply as if with a knife in order to spread it thickly across the canvas in violent patterns. An ultimate, genius painting animal - no real training, no theory or concepts behind, no alternations or preparations - only the creative act, urgent, necessary, exhausting and virtuoso at the same time.

He was often called 'the painter of death' due to his eccentric fancies for smelly carcasses and hanged turkeys; yet - I cannot agree with that. For Soutine's perpetual greed and hunger for life is much more stronger than his apparent melancholic flirting with the extinction forces... His forests and fields, dead birds and fish seemed to be endowed with life simply because they breathe with Soutine's own fever, intensity, complexity and beauty of the character. His admired master - Rembrandt has taught him that - that reality is there to be respected; the materiality, sensuality of things is at the foundation of a spiritual strength. That's why Soutine was probably the only major painter in Fauvists and Cubists' Paris having painting only from life and with no interest at all in participating in the revolution going on in art at that moment.

I have a strange fondness for that dirty Jewish kid, I envy his purest, unadulterated 'gut feeling' of paint and creative experience; and when I was looking for his grave at Montparnasse Cemetery (it took me a bit - the grave itself is a very simple, horizontal tombstone in a small, Jewish part of the place) I had in mind the words of a distinguished Polish art historian (Waldemar Lysiak) - that Chaim Soutine was forever a banished child - the one thrown out of a nest who has never fully managed to exorcise his childhood and to grant the world his absolution... And he painted, again an again, the most poignant images of little children (just like the one featured above) - alone on a road, with ominous, stormy world towering over them... Little exiles, at home in no place; so sad yet so truthful - and with no sentiment or self-pity at all...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Peter Doig or 'Viva la peinture!'

A friend has challenged me to pick out one artist, whose work will still 'matter' in 40 years time. Well, imagine we've got 2050; the number alone looks pretty surreal; doesn't it? The same can surely be said about the quantity of the imagery out there - buzzing, flashing, tempting, repulsive, genius and rubbish... But - what will be there considered as the great 'classic' - something that had been created at the turn of the centuries? Will be there any need for the 'classics' at all; who knows, maybe the 'classic' will actually mean the 'clutter' of no other than an abstract, historical value?

Well, we are we?

An artist important for my children' children, for generations with a different sense of time, space, culture (presumably); with a changed view on the 20th/21st century... That all makes the guessing game a pure shot in the dark really...

I put Peter Doig in the title as a sort of a 'tease' and a challenge. I do consider him influential and important now; I would risk stating that his particular vision of painting (notably - changing/being modified all the time) will survive through his own generation of artists - let's say - 10 more years; as well as I can predict than many of the painters from my 'class' will carry Doig's 'germs' with them for some time. Yet - to tell - that P. D.'s impossibly romantic and surprisingly (in comparison with the majority) well painted magical landscapes will break the price records in 2050? Simply impossible - and - a bit pointless perhaps... Because, why to bother with that in the first place in the era of the flux? Let's enjoy our present time - future is nothing more than the act of accepting, respecting and giving the foundations to the 'here and now'...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Peter Doig (b. 1959) - Scottish-born painter, brought up in Canada and art-educated in London. From 2002, living and working in Trinidad (studio at the Caribbean Contemporary Arts centre) . Professor at the fine arts academy in Duesseldorf, Germany. Considered as one of the most important and influential painters working today.

Doig is both acclaimed and criticized for his paint-handling - carefully layered, with the impressive sensitivity to the colour scale (his landscapes look like there is 'every colour' in it; a reason for clapping or doubting?) - his paintings are a triumph of the contemporary painterly technique. Even if his concepts seem for some to be too 'eerie' to be true; in moments strangely sweet-ish and naive; he's managed to capture hearts and imagination of hundreds, both from the 'professional' and the 'spectators's side...

What I find especially compelling about his older (late 1990s - early 2000s) works is their ongoing chase for the uncanny - there is, in some of the landscapes that extremely difficult to create moment, where a beautiful on its own, sophisticated yet 'just' - mark-making transforms into magic - the very essence of all art; the moment when you feel you hair raising at the back of your head - because you've just spotted and experienced the unsaid, the inexplicable, the horrific enchanted into a 'lovely' scene.
Other thing is - if this all was really meant there to be or 'came by' as a 'happy accident'?

Anyway, and despite of all - Doig is one of those artists who made me to believe in painting again...

To review P. Doig's recent retrospective at Tate - click the Exhibition.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Art World - The Collectors

The collector's position within the art world is probably the most comfortable of all, since s/he is unlikely to act under any pressure from any part of the AW (Art World). He or she is the shaper and mover, the blessing and the curse for art in general. Despite having often a little or no artistic background or competency the collectors due to the sheer power of their social status and money make the AW what it is and what it is going to be.

Nowadays, the collectors are likely to treat their occupation as a professional sport and an (one of many) investment. They will engage actively in the dynamics of the AW- being, in fact, the stockholders of 'goods' on a highly risky market, where artists (artworks) are their portfolio and their actions (buying/selling - especially considerable amounts of works) influence directly the entire AW. Being the main clients of galleries and museums they are able to carve art accordingly to their taste channeling paths for a particular trend and discouraging the evolution of an another. Like in any sport (and investment) the good collectors display a well-built, competitive 'body' of the collection with the quality/quantity of works especially taken into account; they also take an active part in a public life of the AW and beyond it promoting and educating, curating and supporting the public institutions.

The good collector would comply with un-written code of ethics of the profession:

- to take the responsibility for the AW - especially the artists in his/her collection and those not yet included; take care for the healthy development of the AW as a whole

- to avoid abusing his/her status within the AW; this includes pressurizing artists, dealers or curators to comply or showing 'empty' interest in a work (without any serious intentions to buy)

- to support emerging artists and art colleges

- to avoid any pretense and deception games - the best art collectors are art lovers and investors; yet (since nobody is perfect) the ethically correct 'shoppers' will admit their predominantly commercial interest in art

- to foster the freedom of speech in art-related media and topics

Some famous art collectors:

• Bernard Arnault - French billionaire businessman and the richest man in France
• Alan Bond - Australian entrepreneur
  
• Eli Broad - Eli Broad Biography - Jewish American billionaire businessman and philanthropist
• Walter Chrysler - founder of the Chrysler Corporation
  
• David Geffen - Founder of Geffen Records, listed on Forbes Rich list
• Steve Martin - Famous comedian, actor, writer and art collector from the United States
• Charles Saatchi - Founder of the advertising agency Saatchi and Saatchi
• Sakip Sabanci - Billionaire Turkish businessman and famous philanthropist
• Kerry Stokes - Australian billionaire media magnate
  
• Steve Wynn - Las Vegas Casino and Resort Developer

Exuberant struggle for integrity - Burkhard Held

Flicking through the last issue of ARTFORUM I came across this not known to me German painter. Burkhard Held (b. 1953) lives and works in Berlin. He's been exhibiting persistently and widely for the last few decades.

His "Roter Berg" from 2008 - oil on canvas, conventional size, yet another application of the neo-expressionist language. Yet, it has the potential to catch the attention, not merely due to the exuberant, affirmative palette which looks confident comparing to many other propositions from the same trend. The portrayed scape conveys the impression of stability, self-assurance despite of the patchy construction and nervously wobbly marks - the imposed, inner discipline puts a form and an order on this would-be pictorial anarchy.

Held's work seems to explore the phenomena of a form and formlessness, integrity and a collapse, an existence and a hypothesis - and while some of his paintings appear to be deliberately suspended on the verge of 'melting down' (in a very fashionable today pictorial 'explosion' of shapes, spaces, meanings) there is a struggle to be appreciated - a fight for a structure and a sense; which both remain an endangered species in the contemporary art in general and in painting in particular.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To see artist's page (in German) - Burkhard Held

Till February 21st, 2009 Michael Schultz Gallery in Berlin hosts the exhibition of the latest paintings of this artist.

Art Forum International is a well-edited monthly magazine featuring tens of oncoming and current art exhibitions and shows from around the world. Recommended to buy from time to time for the record-value, to visit online - ARTFORUM.

Modern Art by Louise Bourgeois

Art is a privilege, a blessing, a relief. (...) Privilege entitles you when you deserve nothing. Privilege is something you have and others don't.

Art was a privilege given to me and I pursue it even more than a privilege of having children. (...) It's a fantastic privilege to have access to the unconscious. I have to be worthy of this privilege and to exercise it. It was a privilege also to sublimate. A lot of people cannot sublimate. They have no access to their unconscious. There is something very special and very a painful in the access to your unconscious. But there is no escape from it and no escape from an access once it's given to you, once you are favoured with it, whether you want it or not...The life of an artist is basically a denial of sex...

(...) I'm not interested in art history (...) Art is not about art, art is about life and that sums it up (...)

Modern art(...) is about the hurt of not being able to express yourself properly, to express your intimate relations, your unconscious, to trust the world enough to express yourself directly in it. It is about trying to be sane in this situation, of being tentatively and temporarily sane by expressing yourself. All art comes from terrific failures and terrific needs that we have.

It is about the difficulty of being a self because one is neglected. Everywhere in the modern world there is neglect, the need to be recognized, which is not satisfied. Art is a way of recognizing oneself, which is why it will always be modern.

Louise Bourgeois in an interview with D. Kuspit; excerpts from her Destruction of the Father, Reconstruction of the Father: Writings and Interviews 1923-1997, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1998

What can be said more? Perhaps, being a bit bold - that art is not a therapy alone. Art is not an introspection only. Art is about the Other, about the conscious, real, about the self-rejection of the sublime and about cherishing sex. Because sex means to cherish the Other. The Other can be and is your Sublime. No one sane could possibly claim - I'm the only source of my art, of the sublimity, of the privilege and - of the pain my unconscious implies and my art excavates...