Skip to main content

Abramovic Case Study - Research & Evaluation


Performance artist Marina Abramovic adopts a territory where both audience and artist coincide throughout the entirety of her performance. Abramovic’s early career commenced during the 1970’s an era where performance art was ridiculed, only fuelling her aspirations to prove critics wrong.
Abramovic’s rhythm series, which constitutes of five individual performances from 1973 to 1974, scrutinizes the tensions between abandonment and control. At the forefront of Abramovic’s rhythm series is Rhythm 10 (Abramovic, M. 1973). Rhythm 10 consisted of Abramovic recording herself stabbing between the fingers of her left hand with 10 knives, as fast as she could; changing knives every time she cut herself. When all knives were used Abramovic would rewind the tape and playing it back, she then began re-performing the actions to the rhythm of the tape. Abramovic wilfully or not, subjected her performance to a rhythm over which she had limited control. Abramovic claims each cut manifesting itself in the same place as the original, presenting the notion that “the mistakes of time pressed and type present are synchronised” (Dezeuze, A. 2010 [pg. 133]). Its important to emphasise the point that this wasn’t the first time Abramovic performed Rhythm 10; she firstly performing on her own and then again in front of a crowd at Edinburgh Festival. The action of reperforming in front of an audience forces the audience to take authorship, thus thrusting an alternative meaning where the audience subconsciously takes on the role of co-collaborator. Rhythm 10 was paramount to Abramovic’s understanding of how she utilizes the audience's energy to drive her performance; this became an important concept informing future ventures. Abramovic concludes Rhythm 10 by stating, “The sense of danger in the room had united the onlookers and me in that very moment. The here and now and nowhere else and it was a feeling I know I would have to seek out again and again and again.” (Marina Abramovic: The Artist Is Present. 2012). Thus, only emphasising Abramovic hunger for audience gratification, negative or positive isn’t important, the shear reaction of involvement is the energy that drives her performance to a conclusion.
The internal development of Abramovic’s rhythm series resides itself at her performance Rhythm 5 (Abramovic, M. 1974). After performing Rhythm 5 Abramovic realized that her performances were concerned with capacities and limits stating "The subject of my work should be the limits of the body. I would use performance to push my mental and physical limits beyond consciousness." (Lempesis, D. 2017). Rhythm 5 consisted of a wooden construction of a five-pointed star soaked in gasoline, then set alight. Ritualistically, Abramovic manoeuvred around the star cutting her hair, fingernails and toenails and throwing them into the flames before entering herself. Abramovic’s initial intention were simply to lie there until the star burned out. However, the outcome was not predictable; the burning gasoline consumed the oxygen in the space, causing Abramovich to pass out. Audience members intervened and removed her from the performance, thus thrusting audience participation onto a performance that wasn’t originally classified as such. The ramification of audience intervention prompted Abramovic to question, “How to use my body in and out of consciousness without interrupting the performance.” (Dezeuze, A. 2010 [pg. 134]).
Following Abramovic’s failure to remain physically conscious in Rhythm 5, in conjunction with audience intervention, Abramovic created a performance that induced a planned loss of control, Rhythm 2 (Abramovic, M. 1974). Rhythm 2 sees Abramovic take medication in succession, medication typically consumed by patients suffering from catatonia specifically schizophrenia. The repercussions of consumption were observed by an audience, which saw Abramovic losing all physical control over her body as well as effecting her mental state. Only revealing after the performance Abramovic felt as though she had lost her identity while still maintaining an active mind; sacrificing herself both psychologically and physically.
“In Rhythm 4 almost as if correcting the interruption of rhythm five, Abramovich prevented any intervention by viewers, but at the cost of a live audience.” (Dezeuze, A. 2010 [pg. 135]). Rhythm 4 (Abramovic, M. 1974) sees Abramovich approaching high-pressure air blower, in another room audience views of the monitor focusing on the face without the blower in view. The force of the blower results in Abramovich passing out, this doesn’t interrupt the performance. The camera continues to record Abramovic’s face which is still being distorted by the blower, meanwhile the audience is unaware of her state. Abramovic concludes the performance stating, “In the performance I succeed in using my body in out of consciousness without any interruption.” (Dezeuze, A. 2010 [pg. 134])
Rhythm 0 (Abramovic, M. 1974), which Abramovic fundamentally describes as “the conclusions of my research on the body when conscious and unconscious” (Biesenbach, K. 2009, p.74). Rhythm 0 demanded the intervention of audience, juxtaposing Abramovic’s earlier efforts, certainly in Rhythm 4, at eliminating audience intervention. Regardless of Abramovic’s previous intentions, Rhythm 0 wouldn’t exist without audience participation therefor the performance could not have been categorised as an accomplished artwork. Abramovic’s evolving interest between artist and audience are paramount in Rhythm 0, she allows the performance to become collaboration over the audience being a passive observer. In the gallery, audience members were presented with a table which displayed 72 items. Audience members were invited to use the objects on Abramovic as they desire, for a six-hour period. Instructions also lay on the table:

“Instructions.
There are 72 objects on the table that one can use on me as desired.
Performance.
I am the object.
During this period, I take full responsibility.”


A natural divide occurred, audience members who sought to harm and those who tried to protect. The audience became puppeteers, cutting Abramovic’s clothes, sticking rose thorns into her skin, cutting her skin and drinking her blood, even placing a loaded gun to her head. Abramovic states “I really wanted to take this risk, I wanted to know what the public is about, what they are going to do in this kind of situation.” (Il Sapere. 2017). At the end of the 6-hour period Abramovic began to move, unable to comprehend their actions audience members fled as though believing she was a puppet.  The audience physically directed the performance, while in Abramovic’s previous Rhythm’s she involved the audience through a dynamic exchange of energy. Abramovic concludes the Rhythm series by setting the notion that “it’s not about body limits as strength is in the mind” (Il Sapere 2017)




                               Image result for abramovic rhythm 0




***

Why Abramovic? I question myself this. Performance art something that i haven't particularly done myself i feel drawn to the work of Abramovic. Her connection with her audience which is clear within her rhythm series most certainly rhythm 10 and her performance the artist is present, which isn't written about here but i intend to add this to my dissertation should there be enough left in the word count. When researching really enjoy it when im really interested in the subject, my interest in Abramovic meant that researching her was enjoyable and rewarding. I love the personal connection she has with her audience, the way she presents herself as a strong individual in a very vulnerable position. My research on Abramovic will surely expand with more research, making connections between my subject of artist, audience and artwork. The more i research the more i see her work become more of a focal chapter than just a couple of paragraphs. The above only briefly shows evaluation which will become more in-depth and analytical as i make links between this case study, my critical theorists and other key research.




Research Investigated:
  •          Lempesis, D. (2017) TRACES:Marina Abramović. Available at:  http://www.dreamideamachine.com/en/?p=7776 (Accessed 22 October 2018)
  •          Marina Abramovic: The Artist Is Present. (2012) [Documentary]. Directed by Matthew Akers.
  •          Abramovic, M (2010), The Artist is Present [Performance]. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, America.
  •        Dezeuze, A. (2010) The 'do-it-yourself' artwork. Manchester: Manchester University Press
  •         Abramovic, M. (1973) Rhythm 10 [Performance]. Edinburgh Festival, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.  
  •          Abramovic, M. (1974) Rhythm 0 [Performance]. Studio Morra, Naples, Italy.
  •          Abramovic, M. (1974) Rhythm 5 [Performance]. Student Cultural Center, Belgrade, Serbia.
  •          Abramovic, M. (1974) Rhythm 2 [Performance]. Gallery of Contemporary Art, Zagreb, Croatia.
  •          Abramovic, M. (1974) Rhythm 4 [Performance]. Galleria Diagramma, Milan, Italy.
  •          Biesenbach, K. (2009) Marina Abramovic: The Artist is Present [exhibition catalogue], Museum of Modern Art, New York, America.
  •          Il Sapere (2017) Marina Abramovic on performing 'Rhythm 0' 1974. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kijKz3JzoD4 (Accessed 24 October 2018)
  • https://www.tate.org.uk/tate-etc/issue-40-summer-2017/interview-tehching-hsieh-marina-abramovic







Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Teach First Application - LO6 - Evidence

Evidence in LO6 Folder Application Process Sections to the application: ·          Registration ·          Pre-university academics ·          University academics ·          Competency questions ·          Situational judgement test ·          Supporting information ·          Programme preferences Registration Within the registration process I uploaded my basic information allowing them to contact me with possible job opportunities. This information was things such as name, address and contact details. Pre-University academics ·          A Level, As Level & UK equivalent ·          GCSEs, IGSCEs or UK equivalent ·          O-levels, other UK, or non-UK qualifications University academics ·          First degree studied ·          Modules                                         Competency questions Each question below had to be answered in 250 words or less.     Understanding and motivation Wh

Bishops Art Prize what i am proposing - reflection & critical evaluation

Having not know what i was going to produce for the bishops art prize for most of this unit i am extremely happy with the outcome i have produce. I wanted to carry on developing my practise by exploring different casting styles which is exactly what i have done.  When i first brought the idea to the 3D workshop technicians they dismissed the possibilities of casting an organic form in concrete. Not wanting to fall at the first hurdle i began researching to see if anything like this has been done before with not much luck. After having further discussions with the technicians and drawing up possible options we came up with a process that seemed to be the most logical. At first i present the technicians with rather complicated plants to mould - this was a result of me not knowing the mould making process for silicone moulds and thus had to go back and get some organic material that was a lot easier suited to the casting process. Still not knowing for sure if the mould would work