not nice

January 26, 2008

fortified

Conciraq_2

Do a Google image search for “Iraq” and a homemade pin-up of Miss Iraq immediately comes up, second after a photograph of a man with a limb blown off. Frankly, I was prepared for the gory war documents: the pools of blood, the disfigured bodies, the mugging Marines, but a corseted woman seated on what I assume is a table draped in a lace cloth? She stares at the camera with provocative exhaustion. Almost to say, “What, you too? Come on already, let’s get this over with.”

I have to admit; I have sheltered myself from this war that keeps on going. I listen to the reports, which lately have gone missing in favor of the presidential campaign, on National Public Radio. Blissfully image free. I know the visuals are out there, I just choose not to look.

So, when a dear friend sent over photographs taken by her young husband who recently shipped out to Iraq, I was struck, rather guiltily, by their banal beauty. A photograph of portable offices protected by concrete blast shields is Kahn-ish, Marfa-like, or even Eisenmanesque. My own cultural affectations buffer me from the reality of a fortified encampment just outside Baghdad.

My friend writes that there is good news: Her husband sits behind a computer all day, so he doesn’t have leave the base. Does that mean he is safe?

Conciraq_1

January 09, 2008

pretty ugly

Pollock1
It looks like am not the only one obsessed with “ugly” these days. (Yes, I’ve developed an improbable Bourdain crush. He won my heart with snide digs at Rachel Ray and boy, can he lap up the bone marrow.) Dystopic dreamer Lebbeus Woods just posted a screed regarding the relationship between new and ugly. Musing over Jackson Pollock, he ponders how some ideas, artworks, architecture, once considered nauseous-making are assimilated into aesthetic taste, and how some continue to challenge that status quo. I’ll fold it into the “Not Nice” file.

Woods writes:

The art critic Clement Greenberg once wrote that the new is always ugly. This is because it confronts us with experiences and ideas that we haven’t encountered before and don’t understand, or, at least, are not accustomed to. It follows that, because we live in a society, and an urban landscape, driven by the new, we are in for substantial, even perpetual, ugliness. His concern was the aesthetic, but also the ethical. He wrote in a post-WWII period not only of rapid expansion of American cities and the social landscape they create, but also of Existentialism, which made ugliness—if it was ‘authentic,’ that is, if it emerged from the inner nature of a thing—a virtue. Prettiness was conventional, easily acceptable, and, in a time of rapid change, an ethical crime against truth. Prettiness was used as a cosmetic by advertisers and other commercial—and political—interests to disguise the difficult, even tragic, struggles that social, economic and technological changes were forcing upon people and their ways of thinking and living. Prettiness was used by the powers-that-be not to make the new more digestible, but to disguise its deeper implications and ethical imperatives. It was a way of saying, ‘Don’t worry, everything is normal–just go on as you always have.’ In other words, 'Just let us keep running the world as we always have.’

Continue reading.

December 09, 2007

god status revisited

Mattaclark

In honor of the recent screening of Gordon Matta-Clark’s films by the LA Forum in conjunction with MOCA's exhibition Gordon Matta-Clark: You Are the Measure, I thought I’d take a not nice page out of a loud paper published originally in 1997.

God Status: A User's Guide

Timing is everything, banal but true. Especially if you are looking to become an immortal god, be it rock, art, or architecture. The proof is in the pudding, like a fine French soufflé, timing is everything. This adage is even more essential when death is involved. All the right factors need to be in place: fame - people need to miss you when you are gone, youth old people die all the time, youth is potential and the death of potential is far more tragic than potential realized, talent—added loss, the media goes crazy with this one, documentation - pictures, video, 16mm footage, just make sure your work is acid free for posterity, you never know how much the Getty will pay for you paper napkin sketches.

A slight variance in any of these factors and your god status will never be reached. Right now, I could never achieve immortality. Yeah, I have talent, potential and youth, but no fame and I always forget to take slides of my models. Perhaps a better example is Michael Hutchence, former lead singer of INXS. The poor bloke killed himself at exactly the wrong time.

When I was in high school, that man was it. He had it all, a pair of ripped jeans for every day of the week (acid washed to perfection,) hair to toss, a sexy pout (or was it sexy eyes?) and teenage girls placing lip-gloss kissed TeenBeat photos of him in lockers and on notebooks. He was sex, and he even had a giant chrome pin that said so. It gleamed from his leather jacket as he lunged towards the camera in the "I Need You Tonight" video. Yet, when he died last month, apparently of self-strangulation with his belt, an inadvertent, autoerotic suicide, his Aussie hotel room littered with bottle of speculative prescription drugs, his timing couldn't have been more off. Seven or eight years earlier and the stardom/martyrdom equation would have emblazoned his name next to Kurt, Tupac, or even Buddy Holly—suicide, murder, plane crash. Or if he had waited, his second coming may have catapulted him into the limelight along side John Travolta, whose career boom is a recent example of life after coma. Or is it coma after coma? Whatever the case may be, Michael missed out on the upcoming INXS twenty-city tour. An undertaking that could have brought him to the attention of Quentin Tarantino's Lazarus spotting eye.

Alas, Mr. Hutchence's rhythm was off, thus he is doomed to be the poor soul who pulled the belt a hit too tight, and offed himself when things got sour, not sickly sweet as in the glorified deaths of James (James Dean wore khakis) Dean or Kurt (Courtney's big career move) Cobain. Even Allanis could see the true meaning of irony in the title of the last INXS record, "Elegantly Wasted", for his demise was anything but elegant.

Like Jimmy or Kurt, Gordon Matta-Clark has achieved god status among cults of architects. His early death from cancer in 1978, at the zenith of his career, marked him for immortality. Matta-Clark's split open buildings and other types of de-installations, are undeniably beautiful, dangerous, and a challenge to the rigid confines of architectural form. Yet, the genius myths (and truths that have swirled around his life and death (especially since decon hit the scene) have given him glamour, fame, and deathlessness.

Wielding a chain saw, a hack saw, a crow bar and miles of extension cords, Matta-Clark cut gaping holes into existing buildings, exposing other meanings, other layers and other spaces, as he might have put it. To document his artwork, since the buildings he attacked were usually slated for total demolition, he photographed these dangerous spaces and filmed the anarchitecture (his term). Seduced by the act of Matta-Clark's unbuilding, architects are inspired to make again these spaces. But to attempt to build in this manner is to patently ignore the critical stance towards architecture taken by Matta-Clark. It is to fall into the trap of the temple of Matta-Clark, icon. Yves-Alain Bois writes in Formless, a User's Guide, the book of the month:

"Matta-Clark considered architecture a clownish and pretentious enterprise, and he would have been particularly enraged at having become a model, enraged to see his provisional disruptions of building stylized under the label of "deconstructionism" in the architectural projects of certain of his former professors at Cornell. If the architect takes himself for a sculptor,he masks his own role in capitalist society, which is to build rabbit warrens to the order of real estate developers." (p.191)

Not really interested in bridging any gap between architecture and art, Matta-Clark spurned his Cornell education and the uptight binds of the gentleman's profession. When I was at Cornell in the early 90's Matta-Clark's work was not taught, or even acknowledged, except as a subterranean find, which student after groupiesque student would shuttle home from the library to study as a guide to living out the promise of deconstruction. A Matta-Clark and a Libeskind monograph were as de rigueur as a Sonic Youth CD and a pair of Doc Martins. But Richard Meier, who has now taken to traipsing around the Getty in a Frank Lloyd Wright inspired cape, wasn't subject matter at Cornell either. We students were taken way back to the early cannon of Modernism. Danger came from a chance brush with the members of the historic avant-garde. So when we unearthed Matta-Clark, a folk hero was born. His past was like our present and it had enraged him. He had danger, youth, talent, fame and a future that was cut short just in time for him not to make any crucial mistakes that would hinder his cult status. Most importantly, he made sure to document his work. So it was glory be and all praise.

When the films of Matta-Clark were restored and screened recently at both UCLA and SCI-Arc, I was giddy. Finally, I had the chance to see the punk granddaddy of deconstruction, the Sid Vicious of architecture on the big screen. So I went to watch. I brought along a friend who I was trying to convince that architecture is cool, and I was appalled. He was bored. What those few yards of film revealed was not the spontaneous energy that I had expected. Nor was it the raw wonderment which is found in early CBGB footage or the films of Warhol's Factory, or even, the mainstream psychedelic era movies, made just a few years before Matta-Clark's films, where the actors are so stoned and the camerawork so trippy, that you get a contact high just by pressing play on the VCR. The films by provocateur Gordon Matta-Clark were straight out of the me (not m-m-my) generation school of documentaries and they were boring.

Office Baroque (1977), which I watched primarily on fast-forward at the MAK Center for Art and Architecture a couple months after I left the large screen screening, finds Matta-Clark crouched amidst extension cords and ripped up floorboards. He is bare chested and he sports jeans and a jaunty workers cap. In a pose worthy of a Jeff Striker movie, Matta-Clark deftly changes the chain on his saw. His masculinity and roguish edginess are in full command. His glorious voice over, which echoes off the Italian travertine walls of the temples of high art, says that occupying the space of his work is akin to the layers of line in a drawing. A man alone, prying up the floor, hard at work on his anarchitecture, Matta-Clark aims for a complexity that is indecipherable. "An undocumentable documentary" is how he describes his work. From viewing his photographs and even snippets of his films, it seems that he majestically achieves this goal and gets rock god status to boot. A deconstructivist Robert Plant. Who wouldn't be moved by a house split manually in two? He becomes the hero/martyr of the cult of labor; a grungy, manly tribe found in wood shops and scrap yards everywhere. But, unfortunately for us, Matta-Clark's films, when viewed in bulk, undermine his successful stabs at complexity and underline a certain godawful staleness to this supposedly cutting edge work.

Clockshower (1973) features Matta-Clark performing his morning ablutions while suspended from the face of a clocktower. The film wants to call into question the banalities of everyday private, indoor life. It challenges routine spaces by placing the bathroom on the face of the clock in public and on a grand scale. Unfortunately, the real time footage and the unrelenting washing off of shaving cream (such a manly, Dada endeavor) smacks of self indulgent, self important, high art filmmaking. So, even though his work wishes to achieve ruptures in art and life, and to bang hard on the doors of the establishment, Matta-Clark's anarchy becomes part of (and never was really far from) the world he strived to criticize. If anything, his work serves to give conservative architecture students a surly edginess.

The extent to which Matta-Clark's work has been deradicalized can be seen at the exhibition currently on display at the MAK Center. About a dozen or so of his photographs, an artist book, and a video collection of his films are all tastefully framed within Shindler's Kings Road house. All there is are warm wood panels, Japanese cum California styling—no angry young man could withstand the treatment. The photographs are small and pretty much forgettable. In case the images don't engrave themselves on your retina, the MAK has created a catalogue to go along with the exhibition. It is a slim volume, elegantly designed, containing a couple nausea-inducing essays, and tiny, to the point of cute, reproductions of Matta-Clark's work, all bundled in gobs of white space and class.

So the rowdy intellect who thumbed his nose at the establishment of art and architecture, is now absorbed into that culture like one of the original disciples. Just as Cobain's death allowed grunge to jump in and out of mainstream culture, depositing work boots and white male angst into middle America, Matta-Clark's death and subsequent rebirth as the lost Jedi knight of deconstruction freed architects to act out their own Rebel With a Cause fantasies of form. But I wonder how enraged (Bois' term) he would have been by being appropriated by mainstream architects. His brother had committed suicide by jumping out the window of Gordon's studio, so it would seem that he would be familiar with the death timing principle. Perhaps the best timing Matta-Clark should have used (cancer aside) in order to continue to maintain a critical distance would have been to live, and to keep living into boring ripe old age, thus undermining all the factors for god status.

December 05, 2007

dusted

Sofasnow

It’s snowing in Brooklyn today. Apparently I missed the first snow of the season while I was in California. Hence the radio silence. I spent some of my time in Berkeley organizing the loud paper archives. Otherwise known as cleaning up boxes in my parent’s basement. The amazing thing about a print publication is all the stuff that goes along with it: layouts, proofs, back issues, postcards, t-shirts, letters, posters, etc. People, if any grad student wants to do Clip/Stamp/Fold-like research on loud paper, it is all there, tucked under a house located near the Hayward Fault.

Submissions for the Not Nice issue are trickling in, but I want a flood. Please, spill forth your bile. I should clarify that it will be published digitally, right here on the loud paper blog, which opens up what can be submitted. Visuals like video and color photographs are now all fair game.

November 20, 2007

call for submissions: not nice

Pink
via kill da archy

Abject seduction is pretty much par for the course in our post-ironic era. Chalk it up to myspace or recurrent 80s fashion trends. (God help me, neon is back.) But it’s the logical contrast to nice modernism, bright green washes and bamboo floors. So, without turning the snark volume up to eleven, how can we thoughtfully address things unpleasant, ugly, and downright mean? By the same token, is it useful to not play nice? Is ugly, however subjective, transformative? Is there a place in the discourse for brutal honesty and nasty asides?

I sure hope so. loud paper is looking for essays, interviews, and projects (art and architecture) along our “Not Nice” theme.

Wit, insight, and original material are encouraged. Please send in your concise intentions—about a paragraph or two for articles. I’ll be reviewing and posting submissions on rolling basis until the end of January, so get your chops going. If you are interested in writing a book or music review, or have any other questions, please drop a line.