Maja Horn's article, “Bodily (Re)Marks: The Performance Art of Regina José Galindo,” briefly covers Regina Jose Galindo's connection to the Dominican Republic, and she goes further in depth with the description of the performance, Tumba, and compares it to her previous work: Himenoplastia, 2004. In Tumba, Galindo hires several local men to go out into the sea and drop large suitcases into the ocean, reenacting how unwanted people disappear in the Caribbean. Though many of her work relate to local context, Horn states, “Tumba resonates with Regina J. Galindo’s substantial body of performance art work but also gestures towards new directions.” Unlike Galindo's previous work, she is not an active participant in the performance; Galindo uses uses her body as a “self-conscious tool.” The fact that Galindo may be stepping into the director's role in her future work will provide her with a new perspective on her own work, to watch instead of being watched. Since Tumba required the use of outside help, what was the characters of the men that Galindo hired: how curious were they of the situation, how well informed were they of the happenings of the performance, or did they do as they were told; no questions asked?
Timothy, you ask an important question that comes up again and again in works where the artist is NOT present. What is the role of the participants? How informed are they? How much agency do they have? How does the meaning change? If RJG performed the action herself, would the work change? How?
In Maja Horn’s article of ArtPulse Magazine, the author analyzes several works of Guatemalan performance artist, Regina José Galindo. Horn states that Galindo utilized her body throughout most of her pieces in order to depict the problems within Guatemalan society. However, one of the artist’s performance piece was not executed by the artist herself: “For her piece, entitled Tumba, Regina J. Galindo contracted several local Dominican men who, from a small boat and at a visible distance from the shore, dropped several large suitcases-large enough to fit a human body-into the ocean one after another.” This then brings in the question, “Would this still be considered as ‘performance art’ if the artist is not present?”
Although the author did state that the artist was not present in her piece, the question remained unanswered as Horn continued to explain the conception behind Tumba. Despite the absence of the artist, I believe that Galindo wanted to continue to portray powerful messages despite her not being present in her piece; even if she were to be present within her piece, she would not bring “herself” in and instead utilize her body to become the representation of her piece: “…she speaks of violence and political oppression in Guatemala, of its gendered effects, both conditions that affect her too, but she does not make her own identity her site of enunciation, and one may call her performances ‘post-identitarian’ in this sense.” In regards to the artist’s willingness to sacrifice her body to her performance artwork, another question came into my mind: “How far is too far? In other words, what is the limit in terms of utilizing one’s body for their work of art?”
One performance art that the author mentions in the article portrays an extremity that Galindo went through in order to become “a tool to voice the human costs of these larger social tragedies…” In Himenoplastia (2004), Galindo undergoes an illegal surgical procedure to fix her hymen, which represented her virginity. As I read this article along with Francisco Goldman’s interview with the artist in “Regina José Galindo,” the question in regards to the limitations of the human body continued to resound in my mind. On one hand, performance art is capable of presenting powerful images and messages while on the other hand, I question the execution and the limitations of the artist.
Rie (Jackie?), the question of the artist's presence came up for me too. I wonder if these suitcase substitutes are more apt than the real bodily presence. What do you think? And I am particularly interested in this phrase "post-identitarian." Let's discuss this further in class tomorrow.
Study. Work. Drive. Errands. Drive. Work. Study. Our daily routines are rarely modified in today’s day and age. We sit at our laptops, do our assignments, and let the world go by. Yes, we watch the censored news, get fed preserved information and assume we understand the world and its problems. Do we understand the world and its problems? It’s definite that our knowledge and, understanding of corrupt governments as well as blood stained soil has squandered since the years of our Civl war, the Mexican-American war, and the war of 1812. Of course we are faced with social pressures, as well as the pressures of our government, many don’t wake up with a fear of military attack on their homes, abduction into guerilla armies, or planned murders from military officials. Regina Jose Galindo does a good job of subtly opening our eyes to the corruption that surrounds us. To the fears that we may not wake up to, but to what someone else around us does. To walk around dipping your feet into a vat of human blood, blood that has been spilled at the hands of the countries government, and to make such a subtly strong, and loud message is exactly what a faction of performance artists strive for. Making a loud noise--quietly. It may seem like an oxymoron. How can you make a loud noise, quietly? In Galindo’s piece she doesn’t yell at the guards, at the police, at her peers, and neighbors around her. She simply walks. She walks quietly, with blood stained feet. Loud, yet quiet. This isn’t a mindless piece of “performance artists” who squirm on the ground in front of you dress in leotards. She is a person, one of us, opening our eyes, igniting something within us, to do something. To understand the message she is trying to convey. That we are not a lone. There is more to this world that we live in. Not to sit, and take what is given to us with ignorance. But to understand motives, and what suffering has been done around us. The people who have filled this bowl with blood, from conspiracies and injustice. These are the nutritional facts that Galindo is trying to expose us to. What we should be eating and understanding isn’t what is just given to us. We must understand what is going on deeper within the countries, and people around us.
Maja Horn's article, “Bodily (Re)Marks: The Performance Art of Regina José Galindo,” briefly covers Regina Jose Galindo's connection to the Dominican Republic, and she goes further in depth with the description of the performance, Tumba, and compares it to her previous work: Himenoplastia, 2004. In Tumba, Galindo hires several local men to go out into the sea and drop large suitcases into the ocean, reenacting how unwanted people disappear in the Caribbean. Though many of her work relate to local context, Horn states, “Tumba resonates with Regina J. Galindo’s substantial body of performance art work but also gestures towards new directions.” Unlike Galindo's previous work, she is not an active participant in the performance; Galindo uses uses her body as a “self-conscious tool.” The fact that Galindo may be stepping into the director's role in her future work will provide her with a new perspective on her own work, to watch instead of being watched.
ReplyDeleteSince Tumba required the use of outside help, what was the characters of the men that Galindo hired: how curious were they of the situation, how well informed were they of the happenings of the performance, or did they do as they were told; no questions asked?
Timothy, you ask an important question that comes up again and again in works where the artist is NOT present. What is the role of the participants? How informed are they? How much agency do they have? How does the meaning change? If RJG performed the action herself, would the work change? How?
DeleteIn Maja Horn’s article of ArtPulse Magazine, the author analyzes several works of Guatemalan performance artist, Regina José Galindo. Horn states that Galindo utilized her body throughout most of her pieces in order to depict the problems within Guatemalan society. However, one of the artist’s performance piece was not executed by the artist herself: “For her piece, entitled Tumba, Regina J. Galindo contracted several local Dominican men who, from a small boat and at a visible distance from the shore, dropped several large suitcases-large enough to fit a human body-into the ocean one after another.” This then brings in the question, “Would this still be considered as ‘performance art’ if the artist is not present?”
ReplyDeleteAlthough the author did state that the artist was not present in her piece, the question remained unanswered as Horn continued to explain the conception behind Tumba. Despite the absence of the artist, I believe that Galindo wanted to continue to portray powerful messages despite her not being present in her piece; even if she were to be present within her piece, she would not bring “herself” in and instead utilize her body to become the representation of her piece: “…she speaks of violence and political oppression in Guatemala, of its gendered effects, both conditions that affect her too, but she does not make her own identity her site of enunciation, and one may call her performances ‘post-identitarian’ in this sense.” In regards to the artist’s willingness to sacrifice her body to her performance artwork, another question came into my mind: “How far is too far? In other words, what is the limit in terms of utilizing one’s body for their work of art?”
One performance art that the author mentions in the article portrays an extremity that Galindo went through in order to become “a tool to voice the human costs of these larger social tragedies…” In Himenoplastia (2004), Galindo undergoes an illegal surgical procedure to fix her hymen, which represented her virginity. As I read this article along with Francisco Goldman’s interview with the artist in “Regina José Galindo,” the question in regards to the limitations of the human body continued to resound in my mind. On one hand, performance art is capable of presenting powerful images and messages while on the other hand, I question the execution and the limitations of the artist.
Rie (Jackie?), the question of the artist's presence came up for me too. I wonder if these suitcase substitutes are more apt than the real bodily presence. What do you think?
DeleteAnd I am particularly interested in this phrase "post-identitarian." Let's discuss this further in class tomorrow.
Study. Work. Drive. Errands. Drive. Work. Study. Our daily routines are rarely modified in today’s day and age. We sit at our laptops, do our assignments, and let the world go by. Yes, we watch the censored news, get fed preserved information and assume we understand the world and its problems. Do we understand the world and its problems? It’s definite that our knowledge and, understanding of corrupt governments as well as blood stained soil has squandered since the years of our Civl war, the Mexican-American war, and the war of 1812. Of course we are faced with social pressures, as well as the pressures of our government, many don’t wake up with a fear of military attack on their homes, abduction into guerilla armies, or planned murders from military officials. Regina Jose Galindo does a good job of subtly opening our eyes to the corruption that surrounds us. To the fears that we may not wake up to, but to what someone else around us does. To walk around dipping your feet into a vat of human blood, blood that has been spilled at the hands of the countries government, and to make such a subtly strong, and loud message is exactly what a faction of performance artists strive for. Making a loud noise--quietly. It may seem like an oxymoron. How can you make a loud noise, quietly? In Galindo’s piece she doesn’t yell at the guards, at the police, at her peers, and neighbors around her. She simply walks. She walks quietly, with blood stained feet. Loud, yet quiet. This isn’t a mindless piece of “performance artists” who squirm on the ground in front of you dress in leotards. She is a person, one of us, opening our eyes, igniting something within us, to do something. To understand the message she is trying to convey. That we are not a lone. There is more to this world that we live in. Not to sit, and take what is given to us with ignorance. But to understand motives, and what suffering has been done around us. The people who have filled this bowl with blood, from conspiracies and injustice. These are the nutritional facts that Galindo is trying to expose us to. What we should be eating and understanding isn’t what is just given to us. We must understand what is going on deeper within the countries, and people around us.
ReplyDelete