April 13, 2010  |  Artists, Collection & Exhibitions
Marina Abramović: What Is Performance?

This past August, I visited Marina Abramović at her home in upstate New York, where she was running a workshop with the re-performers of the exhibition Marina Abramović: The Artist Is Present. In a series of five videos that show excerpts of my conversation with the artist, she talks about her work, her exhibition at MoMA, and performance art. As an artist who uses her body as a medium, it is fascinating to hear Abramović’s feelings on fear and limitations. In this video, the artist offers her thoughts on the meaning and definition of performance art.


How appropriate, the senior MARKETING editor is pumping this nonsense up. Its all about making the too thin and too rich feel superior. Come to Watts and see real art, real labor, real pain, and triumph, not some silly exhibitionist narcissist sitting uselessly and making the smugness level explode. Southpark needs to make show on this one.

Save the Watts towers, tear down the Ivories.
And leave the spoiled children’s stuff of contempt art to the Whitney and New Mausoleums.

Is there any body out there uncapable to use this Knowledge in Architectural and Urban Desing?

My goodness have the Trustees of the Museum lost their minds. How can they allow this exhibit at MOMA. MOMA is NOT the place to exhibit live nude models within inches from the public. As anything exhibited can be debated as Art, I will not go there. But, the way this is being presented to the public at MOMA is wrong.

On our last visit to MOMA last week, my wife and I, who are members felt insulted and did not enter the exhibition area.

R Maziarski

It’s out there, and a bit odd for my taste, but it’s certainly art, and only an extreme prude would be offended. You might be shocked, but I don’t see how any adult would be offended. It is a museum of MODERN art.

Except it is not Modern art. Its contempt art. The two have very different purposes. If you cant see that, you dont feel what you are seeing at the real MoMA.

Few Modern artists have arisen since 1960, whether because of the inbred “art world” not showing them and prizing the “shlock” of the new over content, a false path which was only elicited by ignorant critics and gallery owners, not modern artists themeselves.

Anselm Kiefer is one of the very few who have “made” it in the enterteinment arena art has now become, one to pleae the few decadent rich who are its patrons. It is not shocking, just stupid. It is not offensive, except to art.

art collegia delenda est
The trained Pavlovian responses to illustrative masters thesis must end.

Come to the Watts Towers, tear down the Ivories.

“Except it is not Modern art. Its contempt art. The two have very different purposes. If you cant see that, you dont feel what you are seeing at the real MoMA.”

I feel what I’m reading in your posts is pretty tired. You’re not winning any converts, dude. Pick a different target.

There are plenty, usually hit the even more tired LA Times Culture Monster. But yeah, NYC is pretty played out. whatever comes will probably be Latin American, our MoLAA here in the LBC is way better than your childish New and Whitney. We both got silly ideas, they want to hang a fake locomotive from a crane at LACMA and call it art. Lomita and Griffith Park have train museums, get your lazy asses over there.

Not looking for converts, looking to keep youngsters from wasting their time and money on art school, and getting out into life before attempting to be an artist, Applied arts are great, we all need real skills. But the MFA is glorified toilet paper. Useless, and if you re weak minded enough to finish it, you will never be an independent artist. I cant change you, so don’t waste my time. Wouldnt want to if I could, we all gotta grow up on our own. There is no art without responsibility, commitment and sacrifice. Not seein that in contempt “art”.

Save the watts Towers, tear down the ivories.

I see a few people here who have no idea what art is, what art means, what art can do for a society. I see a few people who live in LA and for some reason think they have a handle on the NYC art scene. For the idiot who want to save Watts you’re dead WRONG … Art is in the eye of the beholder, art is supposed to make you uncomfortable, Art is supposed to make you, the audience confront that which makes you squeam in your pants. ART IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER.

Case closed. Sad, yet also LMAO.

Save the Watts Towers, tear down the Bastilles of Art
Learn how and join.

i need to say, though I’ve been biting my tongue for quite some time. Marina Abramovich used (robed?), on her biggest and most prestigious exhibition, the concept “The Artist is Present” from her colleague, and known to her, Regina Frank. I cannot understand why someone who has an accomplished career, and is for sure aware of this, would do it at such an important moment. Is she so much out of ideas that she needs to use someone else’s creativity? Or are there underlying intentions, like to wipe out the memory of her colleague and take some extra credit from unadvised travelers? Even the book edited for the occasion – Marina Abramovich “The Artist is Present” – copy cats the title from Regina Frank’s book – Regina Frank “The Artist is Present”.
A sentence doesn’t belong to anyone but I expected someone like her to do better than that.
It’s, from as far as I can see, sad for Marina to commemorate her career on such a sad note.

Knowing both women’s work, I’d say that Marina has appropriated Regina’s title but not her concept. Life is long and art is messy. Still, Joao makes a good point and credit should be given wherever and whenever it’s due.

How appropriate. As she hasnt done anything in life, or art, period.
Appropriation, the name given by those of little talent and no connection to life when stealing.

Save the Watts Towers, true passionate, dedicated creativity, not some old broad who has spent 99% of her life doing absolutely nothing. A perfect way to end a “career’.
This is NOT Modern art, it belongs elsewhere

Art is whatever someone says it is. Apparantly someone says squeezing between 2 naked people is art, and 2 clothed people sitting in chairs in a boxed square area on the floor is art. Yeah ok, whatever, I’m not artist, if MoMA says so, they’re entitled to their opinion. My opinion is that it’s talent-less, offensive, meaningless and stupid. If I want to see naked models I’ll go to a men’s club, not an art museum. My sympathies to the people and families of New York, who hoped to be able to visit MoMA to see some professional, how shall I put this… Modern Art.

it’s just bluff. shocking is not art. if i cause a shock to you i am not an artist. she’s incredible self-confident and she’s so lucky to meet people totally stupid that give her space and opportunities.
please respect the real artist, with competence, knowlewdge, talent and years od school and praticse. plase don’t go to that sort of exbitions. use better yuor money.

I have a question for anyone who knows it. Do you know what kind of agreement signed everyone who sat on the chair in front of Marina Abramovich? What did it contain?

As far as I know, the contract stated that they couldn’t move from the chair or say a single word. They could sit there for as long as they wanted, but couldn’t do anything else than to stare at her, smile or cry and that’s about it. The only one they permitted to touch her was Ulay, her ex boyfriend. After 23 years since their breakup, he sat there and they both cried and held each other’s hands. Very touching!

Leave a Comment

* required information

E-mail address*

Your comments*

Spam check*
Cri_137683 Please enter the text in the image.