Last week a rumor shot through the California art world. Artists Chris Burden and Nancy Rubins (his wife) had resigned their positions as teachers in UCLA's art department after an art student loaded a gun and fired it during an art performance in class. Apparently, Burden wanted the student to be reprimanded, but the university administration demurred, leading to the resignations. Both the artists and the school are mum on the matter. Burden, of course, is known for a 1971 performance piece, Shoot, in which he had himself shot in the arm with a .22 rifle.I'm on the run, so go see Sarah Hromack.
UPDATE: With all due respect to local lights Lenny and James W. Bailey, I'm afraid I've invited a misreading of my post. I won't deny it, it's funny to me that the artist-teacher who once had himself shot meets the student whose medium is also ammunition. Far more piquant, though, is the fact that UCLA felt that, without argument, some student artist's submission overrides the school's obligation to provide an educational environment in which students don't fire weapons at will. (What the hell was UCLA thinking?) But take the long view and the story's a funny one, funny enough to lead even a concerned blogger to mislabel his post on the subject.
Chris Burden's Shoot is an entirely admirable work. The idea of an artist repeating or advancing it, though, strikes me as similar to the recent Andrea Fraser kerfuffle—provocative, but not transressive, and thereby not successful. To me some aspect of the question involves whether Burden's copycat is producing good art, not whether this kind of performance is art. So long as the discharge wasn't attempted homicide, I'm willing to grant that the guy had art in mind, however bad. But art doesn't give you a license to do whatever you want.
Posted by Kriston at January 12, 2005 12:04 PMDear Kriston,
This is too good to be true! What goes around comes around. Burden should have applied for a formal copyright on his performance piece and sued the offending student artist for violating his copyright. That act of suing the student could be construed as a performance art piece in itself. Burden would be breaking new ground.
...oh the pain of watching former controversial artists toughing it out in the hierarchical world of fine art academia.
I did a cut-up zine in the 1980s that was constructed by cutting-up signed first edition hard back novels by William S. Burroughs. Burroughs thought it was a riot and gave me his imprimatur in the form of a personal letter endoring the project, along with two of his autographed books.
Where has the humor gone in the world of art?
Sincerely,
James W. Bailey
Burden's apparent ego (and comparisons to GG Allin) notwithstanding, isn't this more of an issue of the gun in the classroom than of Burden somehow getting his "comeupance"?
Posted by: Dan at January 12, 2005 8:54 PMOh, definitely. I don't think Burden's been inconsistent re this issue in any way whatsoever. I read far more humor and irony into the fact that the institution into which a student brought and fired a gun demures on the question, whereas the avante gardiste shows the moral clarity (if you will) when it counts.
It doesn't seem to me that in order to produce controversial art you need to abandon a public sensibility.
Posted by: Kriston at January 12, 2005 10:47 PMThanks for the sanity on update.
I'm a bit amazed at all the cries of "hypocrite" out there. Seems to miss the point, I think.
As I've said elsewhere, though: absent any real facts, I choose to withhold judgment. I don't wish to judge the school strictly on the basis of innuendo.
> It doesn't seem to me that in order to produce controversial art you need to abandon a public sensibility.
It's a fine line, isn't it, between the shocking work that shocks us into a greater—more human—sensitivity and that which simply deadens us? And it's a distinction the platitudes of theory often elide.
Posted by: Dan at January 13, 2005 2:01 AMThanks for directing interested parties my way, Kriston.
Thanks, too, to James W. Bailey for transforming the comment box into yet another forum for the posting of his resume--I'm sure Burroughs is proud, but maybe he should try monster.com and get it over with in one fell swoop?
As I've pointed out elsewhere, "Shoot" was not performed in a classroom, for unknowing and perhaps unwilling spectators. It was executed in a private space and witnessed by a small group of people who were there to see just that. UCLA is nervous right now, guaranteed. For regardless of who blogged about it first, I'd imagine that it'll be some time before the post traumatic stress symptoms kick in, and the parents of some shell-shocked kid decide to sue. Not everyone grew up in an arsenal with a criminologist father, you know (love ya, dad).
My post on the subject took such a tone because I think that, ultimately, the student was a fool, both in his understanding of Burden's work and in his decision to fire a gun in class and consider that some sort of "homage" to performance art. I'd imagine he's being laughed off campus as we speak.
Posted by: Sarah Hromack at January 13, 2005 10:28 AMArt school is an entirely inapropriate forum for that student's project, regardless of how derivative of Burden's work it may be. If the thin facts presented so far are true, the student should be expelled for endangering the lives of his fellow students, as well as himself and his professor. If he had wanted to stage the performance for his class he could have gotten Burden's permission and included students on an invitational basis outside of campus.
Performance kids at my school were either way too overly ernest about everything, or just creepy.
Posted by: R™ at January 13, 2005 12:43 PMK,
Good and intelligent points as usual.
PS - The word "piquant" goes well with a Texan! ;-)
Posted by: Lenny at January 13, 2005 7:27 PMThanks, Lenny. Makes me think of pecans. Mmm . . . pecan pie. . . .
Posted by: Kriston at January 13, 2005 8:19 PMFor Ms. Hromack:
1.)William S. Burroughs died in 1997.
2.)My professional resume is 14 pages long and my artist resume is 12 pages long; I am not aware that either is published online. Thank you for suggesting Monster.com. I’ve heard about it, but never used it. I’ll look into it for my art resume, as I’m presently gainfully employed.
I have granted permission to Kriston to publish a lenthy piece I wrote inspired by discussed events at UCLA and the reaction among many within the art blog community.
This piece has also been submitted to Los Angeles area newspapers, including the UCLA Daily Bruin. Late this afternoon I spoke with OP-ED editors with LA Weekly and the Los Angeles Times. It is my understanding that the story is being investigated.
My piece may also be published in print and this notice will advise Kriston of that possibility.
I have also personally emailed Chris Burden at UCLA to obtain his comments. If he responds, I will offer to Kriston an opportunity to publish my letter to Burden and Burden's response.
Sincerely,
James W. Bailey
Posted by: James W. Bailey at January 14, 2005 5:05 PMJames W. Bailey:
In the words of John Cusack, as screamed into the face of a drunken reveler in the 1989 hit Say Anthing: You Must Chill.
Sincerely,
Sarah
Dear Ms. Hromack,
It gets real hot down South...especially in Mississippi and New Orleans, where my DNA was cooked.
I'll never chill out on the hunt for the truth...it's not in my blood or nature to do so.
I'll also never chill out on the issue of Freedom of Artistic Expression.
Sincerely,
James W. Bailey
P.S. If Burden responds, you'll be one the first to know before posting on Kriston's site.
P.P.S. You may also be interested to know that late this evening EST, I notified the Orange County District Attorney's Office of the reports concerning this incident at UCLA. The general sense I'm reading among many on several art blogs seems to suggest that the art student in question should be expelled from UCLA. If that's what certain art bloggers want, let's see if we can all cooperate to make that and more happen. I appreciate your inspiring contributions to this effort - that is, your original post on the reported UCLA incident on your site inspired this creative response on my part to illustrate a point about Freedom of Artistic Expression.
R.S.V.P. (R.S.V.P. is a positive New Orleans hoodoo code thing I’ll share with you one day.) On a lighter note, I appreciate that you're a film buff; so am I. Have you ever seen Denzel Washington in "Training Day"? "To protect the sheep you gotta catch the wolf, and it takes a wolf to catch a wolf." - Alonso Harris
What does the Orange County DA's office have to do with anything? UCLA is located in Los Angeles County.
Just askin'
Posted by: anonymous at January 26, 2005 2:30 PMSupport of the Lou Zhu, Lou Zhu worked hard
Signature--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing is impossible for a willing heart.
ugg bailey button
