Re: Last Supper

by dagwead (06.08.10 02:20 pm)

Quite a show! From this perspective, it was interesting to think about MA's project at MoMA. The parallelism raised interesting questions for me, of a social, feminist or political nature—not a line of cooption or appropriation—although larger issues of appropriation abound in general—yellow/purple/green—the nature of performance art as high art, no double entendre intended.

In terms of the fashion involved, and how the market and the art involve themselves, one would not be hesitant to think of the Beecroft show at the Guggenheim—not in terms of questions of innovation, but the difference between the artworld then and now, and what that particular occasion offers as a counterpoint (is there an aporia there, a curator's analogical inversion in terms of a counterstructuralist point of inversion...etc)?
Does the distinction between “modern” and “contemporary” break down along the lines of...you know, is the primary reference point Sherman or Friedlander...Albers or Picasso...?

It's an interesting place to meet the Vinaya (i.e the monastic aspect of Tibetan Buddhism). The issue of fame and costume can become problemmatic in terms of the Vinaya, can it not? But there is an interesting interplay between conceptualism and Madyamika philosophy (whose primary misinterpretation tends to be the concern of nihilism), which differs from the line of thinking of Vedic philosophy (whose interpretations raise other philosophical concerns), by which realisation of the jnana yogi (jnana as a term involves a different sort of valence in the Vedic tradition). The crux being, realization in terms of pure pholosophy. A tulku is, in terms of the lamaic tradition, a lama who reincarnates—for instance, the Dalai Lama is a tulku also—he is the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama who preceded him. Perhaps the artworld is a sort of charnel ground where beings are working out their relationship to western culture. The artworld's relationship to bearing witness to the AIDS crisis historically, in terms of New York being an epicenter for that great tragedy. And if one were to bear witness to personal tragedies in terms of that larger context, which is problemmatic in terms of the Vinaya, there might be a place to bear witness in terms of Western exclusion of homosexuality, and how that figured in terms of the mindset, where one begins to believe there is no possibility of true love, only the possibility of physical actions. This is coming from the perspective of being raised with an extremely devout religious perspective, and not really knowing how to manage a culture, or a personal experience where the opposite seemed to be the case. An extreme example.

Perhaps that is the place where the Vedas are a helpful reminder, love on THIS SIDE of the equation—the created earth, where human love is also a possibility. Not to imply the Vinaya thinks differently. Just in terms of the PHILOSOPHICAL (i.e. conceptual) distinctions between atman and anatman. The puranas are part of the dedication of the Great Stupa, you know. Speaking to philosophical confusion of the searcher in the wide array of teachings available in western culture. May the student always gain benefit from the teaching, and remember that though the teachings and the journey may be difficult, love is always still the answer. And, for the artworld, John Cage's Oxcart Paper Towels are worthy of consideration.

Re: Last Supper

by john dog (06.09.10 08:13 am)

as photos (by the visiting public) were not allowed, here's a perspective from the art+culture site adobe-airstream that documented the exhibition w/out the pesky limitations of cameras:

adobeairstream.com/elements/art/article/387-last-days-for-marina-abramovi-show.html

Re: Last Supper

by Foreststud (06.14.10 05:05 pm)

Too bad there is no photograph of the magnificent Roberto Bolle one of the most charming and gracious guests at he Givency dinner for Abramovic.