Diana Taylor’s article brings up insightful ideas of ethnography, voyeurism and institutions in the context of performance art. Going back to Mexican Cabaret and the work of Astrid Hadad, Taylor states, “By "theatricality" I refer to the aesthetic, political, and perspectival structures within which the characters are positioned and perform their prescribed roles” (Taylor 161). This quote actually makes me think back to the article we read about the installation of the Columbian collection at LACMA. As a “first world” society we have placed ourselves above those we would consider “exotic”. Museums have only provoked this idea. “Since their inception in the 19th century, museums have literalized the theatricality of colonialism-taking the cultural other out of context and isolating it, reducing the live performance of cultural practice into a dead object behind glass” (Taylor 164). Pena and Fusco play into this by presenting themselves as objects to the viewers. Devoid of personality, they serve as a critique of the colonization and objectification of the “other”.
I think it’s interesting how many people actually believed the performance was real, especially when they showed at places like the Whitney. But for those who knew it was a performance, how did they feel? It seems like it was just merely a spectacle for most of them. There were also no interventions with the performance that didn’t have to do with the payments for food/genitals. Maybe that makes a statement that as humans we will either stand back and watch the others or take our part in their objectification by humiliating them. Or perhaps they saw a bit of themselves in the native. A part of them they wanted to leave locked up in a cage just like them, a secret.
In the article "A Savage Performance" written by Diana Taylor the author brings to light the ethnographic practices along side the institutions and audiences who all play a part in the past and present views and treatment of the "other". Using Pena and Fusco's world touring exhibit "Couple in the Cage" which was done in the heart of societies which are infamous for promoting and practicing the enslavement and "objectifying" of native "bodies" from the New World, the author makes connections between the performance piece and real world perspectives and feelings on the subject. In describing the aesthetic of the performance of the two artists and the very "real", "historic" ethnographic material produced through out history around the world she brings up the very "theatrical" elements used by supposed unbiased scientific persons, "Though clearly a setup, the theatricality of the colonial encounter can be no less regulatory than performance in producing "the effects that it names". In other words the conquering peoples made the natives barbaric, then domesticated them, then left them voiceless. The natives were set up to fail and in this way reinforcing the differences and one sided Eurocentric view. I find it very interesting how Pena and Fusco used the very weapons used by the supposed ethnographers of the past to in a way document and frame the audience as the "other". Although the artists themselves were surprised at the reactions of some of the audience in a way it reinforces the thing they were trying to bring attention to:the power and effectiveness of using these techniques that were widely used by the enemy of the natives. Some audience members thought this performance authentic and real, others were simply offended and some even reacted violently. I think that the inner guilt, or whit burden of the audience was the cause of these reactions which brings the validity and effectiveness of their performance to great levels. I loved it!
Diana Taylor’s article brings up insightful ideas of ethnography, voyeurism and institutions in the context of performance art. Going back to Mexican Cabaret and the work of Astrid Hadad, Taylor states, “By "theatricality" I refer to the aesthetic, political, and perspectival structures within which the characters are positioned and perform their prescribed roles” (Taylor 161). This quote actually makes me think back to the article we read about the installation of the Columbian collection at LACMA. As a “first world” society we have placed ourselves above those we would consider “exotic”. Museums have only provoked this idea. “Since their inception in the 19th century, museums have literalized the theatricality of colonialism-taking the cultural other out of context and isolating it, reducing the live performance of cultural practice into a dead object behind glass” (Taylor 164). Pena and Fusco play into this by presenting themselves as objects to the viewers. Devoid of personality, they serve as a critique of the colonization and objectification of the “other”.
ReplyDeleteI think it’s interesting how many people actually believed the performance was real, especially when they showed at places like the Whitney. But for those who knew it was a performance, how did they feel? It seems like it was just merely a spectacle for most of them. There were also no interventions with the performance that didn’t have to do with the payments for food/genitals. Maybe that makes a statement that as humans we will either stand back and watch the others or take our part in their objectification by humiliating them. Or perhaps they saw a bit of themselves in the native. A part of them they wanted to leave locked up in a cage just like them, a secret.
In the article "A Savage Performance" written by Diana Taylor the author brings to light the ethnographic practices along side the institutions and audiences who all play a part in the past and present views and treatment of the "other". Using Pena and Fusco's world touring exhibit "Couple in the Cage" which was done in the heart of societies which are infamous for promoting and practicing the enslavement and "objectifying" of native "bodies" from the New World, the author makes connections between the performance piece and real world perspectives and feelings on the subject. In describing the aesthetic of the performance of the two artists and the very "real", "historic" ethnographic material produced through out history around the world she brings up the very "theatrical" elements used by supposed unbiased scientific persons, "Though clearly a setup, the theatricality of the colonial encounter can be no less regulatory than performance in producing "the effects that it names". In other words the conquering peoples made the natives barbaric, then domesticated them, then left them voiceless. The natives were set up to fail and in this way reinforcing the differences and one sided Eurocentric view.
ReplyDeleteI find it very interesting how Pena and Fusco used the very weapons used by the supposed ethnographers of the past to in a way document and frame the audience as the "other". Although the artists themselves were surprised at the reactions of some of the audience in a way it reinforces the thing they were trying to bring attention to:the power and effectiveness of using these techniques that were widely used by the enemy of the natives. Some audience members thought this performance authentic and real, others were simply offended and some even reacted violently. I think that the inner guilt, or whit burden of the audience was the cause of these reactions which brings the validity and effectiveness of their performance to great levels. I loved it!