> > k

completion through removal, 2012; wood, found object; 198cm x 190cm x 157cm; 122cm x 69cm

This piece was in the 2012 Gallatin Arts Festival (the penultimate photo is of it in the gallery). 

they’re all discovering the past computer as a relic to genius, 2012; two-by-fours, first- generation polycarbonate Apple MacBook, found wood banisters, broken glass, wire screen, and canvas; 180cm x 94cm, 228cm x 98cm 

untitled, 2012; wood, wire, plexi, found vinyl adhesive; 198cm x 70cm x 5cm

cloak bluffs ice cream; linocut, 2011

mixed media monoprints with etching, 2011

abstract representation of an OWS- inspired curatorial proposal; 2011, monoprint with aquatint and etching

The following text is a curatorial proposal made for Lissette Olivares’  course titled “The Task of the Curator: Translation, Intervention and Innovation in Exhibitionary Practice,” which I took at the Gallatin School of Individualized Study in fall 2011.

Exhibition Proposal: the transference, manifestation, and dissolution of liminality within virtual and physical space

This proposal is inspired by the manifestation of #occupywallstreet but is based on theories of liminality, as well as situationist ideas, among others. I am fascinated by the way in which Zuccotti Park was transformed from a relatively sterile environment to a constantly transforming, (and, at one point, a) subversive, liminal community, which needs so much the physical space that it occupies. In recent visits, I have noticed a significant change in the structure and functioning of the apparently open community and space. Because the occupiers have been compelled to occupy more of the space physically, with their tents (which are needed for survival and sustaining the movement), there is consequently less open and undefined space in the park. This open space that had before been available for spontaneous action has now dwindled. The establishment of these tent structures have led to a extreme siphoning of space, which seems to have contributed to a sort of acceleration in the polarity of the physical occupation— in that those who sleep there now comprise most of the (physically, sustained New York City occupation) movement: they are the extreme insiders of their constructed society while are at the same time extreme outsiders of that which they are attempting to protest against. Non-camping supporters still exist, of course, but aren’t as visible and as physically present as in September or October and many are now supporters-cum- spectators, or occupiers are perhaps present in different occupied locales, or are virtually tuned in.

Prior to this siphoning of the space with tents and built structures, there existed more open spaces in the park that were occupied by curious and supportive bodies who could come and create a dialogue with other present bodies, in solidarity. With the need for protective structure came a loss of space dedicated to spontaneity, dialogue, and open-endedness, as well as—and perhaps more importantly— a polarization and categorization of those who enter the space. There are other manifestations of this growing polarity: barriers have been erected around the drum circle, transforming it into an almost-zoo-like area, which pedestrians are excluded from and consequently are prompted to gaze at. The language has changed as well—the pamphlets and signs now focus on issues of sustaining the manifestation and occupation, asking for donations. For sure, most of these entities are necessary to sustain the movement, but I think, perhaps, the part of the movement that was the most subversive and the most effecting, was that which has not been sustained, that which has been lost—the first several weeks of the manifestation in the park, which was completely fluid, still forming, and open to ideas— a real liminal community: one that cannot be sustained.

To continue, in terms of the architecture of the movement— I am interested in whether or not that liminality has been transferred upon its dissolution. There no longer exists a physical liminal community at Zuccotti Park, because of the formation of structures to sustain occupiers. I cannot comment on other occupations world wide, however I would be interested to see if the formation of other occupations initially proved to be liminal communities, despite their virtual pre-organization and existence in other cities. Could the liminality that originated in Zuccotti be transferred virtually, and manifested physically in other locales?

Building off these ideas, my curatorial proposal is inextricably linked to the manifestation, (non)structure, and unfolding of a liminal community. The exhibition would be an installation that would encourage and catalyze spontaneity and disorientation. My objective would not be to create an environment that is inherently liminal, as I don’t believe that would be possible, but rather to create a structure, that would, paradoxically, aid in the dissolution or suspension of any structure created within the structure. The exhibition would rely on its participant relations but would not be overlooked by one artist or curator; rather, it would be participant- directed and driven. So, I am not sure what role that leaves me as the curator of this ‘piece’—I guess, perhaps, it would leave me to choosing artists to create this environment, and to catalyze participation as well as to perform necessary manipulative roles.

As for a more concrete description of what such an exhibition would entail—I have provided some quick sketches. I would like for there to be a several different rooms which visitor- participants would move through. They would first enter a seemingly everyday space, with perhaps a few uncanny elements embedded within it—the most obvious (in hindsight, but not when first confronted with it) would be a screen or window of some sort that would reveal an adjacent room (the liminal room), but that would misrepresent that room. This everyday uncanny space, severed from the space where liminality is to be produced, is the space new visitors would first inhabit.

They are told by the screen, in the first room, of the events happening in the adjacent liminal room—but are not given much of an explanation, they just see a misrepresentation of that liminal room (but are not aware of the screens inaccuracy nor are they aware that the next room is assigned to be a liminal space). The passage from the room of non-participation to participation would most ideally provoke disidentification, anxiety, and disorientation—as well as identification with that which they encounter within the new space of the liminal room.

The liminal community would be made up of nomadic participants and integrated performers, who would be indistinguishable from participant visitors, but would slowly work to prevent a reintegration, reorientation, or recontextualization of the situation or environment by the viewer. There would perhaps be actions of dissolution and alternate logic that would manifest themselves within the liminal environment. The role of the performers in the room is to continue to manipulate the participants, and to try to sustain some sense of spontaneity, ambivalency, ambiguity, and aimlessness of the project. More concretely, they are to build structures, aid participants in building structures, destroy structures, or do whatever they feel is appropriate for what is taking place in the space. It could happen, too, that building ceases, there just exists a dialogue or silence—anything.

What is as important as the experience of liminality in that room is the experience of its dissolution and the consequential changes in perception, the realization of the impotency of the liminal room (or perhaps, the whole exhibition). Other intentions would be the embodiment, experience, and full realization of previously imperceptible forces, as well as the transference of liminality between changing or disparate structures. Some questions: would there be a brief creation of liminality in the initial, spectator space, and what would happen in the third room, where visitors are not allowed to return to the liminal space, and are rather, confined to watch the non-manipulated livefeed screen? What other system, structure, or installation (etc) could be incorporated to bring in this idea of the transference of liminality through virtual spaces, between physical places?

This proposal eventually inspired an 18- page research paper split up into several topics, including: Zuccotti Park as a Temporary Autonomous Zone; Relational Aesthetics, Gordon Matta- Clark, Heterotopia, and Carnival; Occupations as Microtopias and Temporary Autonomous Zones; Public Space, Carnival, and Anatagonism; Curating Process and Interventions in Public Space. It is published here.

mixed media monotype prints, 2011

a sample of four prints from three different series, 2011

(I will put up more soon, as these are just four of sixty prints that I need to scan.) 

vinylboden rausch, 2011; wood, plaster, vinyl, steel; 100 x 96 x 78cm