I was looking for some interesting articles about the use of narrative in interactive art and came across an piece by Anrea Lui in the NY Arts magazine. In it she posed lots of questions about the nature of narrative in installation art.
She noticed the increased prevalence of exhibitions set up as installations in the form of a narrative, whereby each part of the story was broken up into “stations” that the viewer was to view, and in a certain chronology in many more galleries and museums in her home town of New York.
She states "In its inception and original phase in the 70s, installation art engaged questions such as the collapse of the boundaries between art and audience, creating experiential immersive environments rather than a hierarchically composed work (i.e. painting), creating direct bodily experience rather than merely a representation of such, and de-centering the viewer from a singular focal point, etc."
Following on from this she asks the following very interesting questions and underneath are my own thoughts related to these areas from the perspective of my own practice. This really made me address my thoughts of working in this area.
Does the execution of narrative—a close-ended, linear entity broken into parts, proceeding in a fixed order—circumscribe or detract from the efficacy of a work of installation art and its capacity to break boundaries or foster a perceptually inclusive totality?
I feel the question is wrong as it assumes the narrative is close ended and linear and narrative does not have to be that. Fractured playful narratives are possible and whilst there is a narrative in there the audience can build their own narrative. This will allow the breaking of boundaries and foster perceptive totality as everyone can access the narrative their own way. The issue here is to keep the artists preferred reading or even a negotiated or oppositional one possibly. What is not wanted is a subversive reading which can be trickier if the door is wide open to interpretation. In my work I want a very clear narrative but this does not mean it is linear or has to be close ended.
How are narratives reconfigured or transformed, opened up or transgressed, within the context of installation art?
Installation art will allow a more playful quality to all of these. In a feature film for instance the story has to be neatly wrapped up in 120 minutes and is by and large linear and follows the 3 act paradigm. In an installation it allows this to be broken up with video pieces. These can be fractured, segmented, happen on multiple screens and therefore reconfigured or transformed, opened up or transgressed. This is what I am seeking to do on my GW piece, there is a narrative but it can be pieced together from different parts in different ways but it does all lead to a similar result.
Do video and film (within the context of installation) bear a more amenable relationship to narrative, being time-based entities; or not necessarily?
I can only speak from my own point of view but largely in my opinion yes due to their time-based nature. It is much easier to manipulate time and be constant in video installation work. However time based performance art could also work well.
How does one define “narrative” within the context of installation, or even within visual art itself? As narratives about the artist and the progression of his/her work, as narratives of the location where the installation is set, as narratives of things/people/events/sensations pictorially represented in the work, etc? Can we make a distinction between implied narrative (i.e. of artist or site) as opposed to narrative that is actively unfolded or created by the work itself?
This is due to the artist in question in my opinion and how hard they want to hang onto the reins of the narrative. I feel all of these are fair game so the definition is indeed hard. the narrative could be the artists own, site specific narratives of the environment or narratives based on the things/people/events represented in the work. As for the last question I feel that distinctions can be made between the implied narrative of the site and the narrative in the work. However those boundaries can be blurred.
How much elasticity is there in the concept of narrative—can it mean almost anything and take any form, in our postmodern era, or do there have to be certain components in place for it to qualify as narrative: temporality, causality, discrete events?
A big question this one but there is some elasticity in my opinion. However i feel that there has to be some sense of structure however fractured even if temporality, casually or discreetly. It needs to have some shape or form.
Can narrative be abstract or purely conceptual, even phenomenological, or must it relate to tangible things/events/people? Do narratives yoke us into a more conservative investment in representation, even realism, being a convention and a formal structure involving suspension of disbelief, continuity and resolution?
As above I feel it does need to be grounded in some sense of the codes and conventions of narrative so I guess this does yoke a little into representation and realism. However as long as there is some sense of this the abstract and conceptual can fit within this but a really interesting one this.
Are narratives depoliticizing by virtue of their retrograde schema of ordering the world, as opposed to questioning the conventions of representation, perception and even communication?
I feel that yes they by they very nature are depoliticizing by their nature. However I feel that within this they can question representation, perception and communication. My GW piece seeks to do just that and questions representation, perception and communication to an audience. The piece will be accessible but asks questions of all of the above as well as ideologies through it's form, construction and narrative and characters.
Are narratives neutral and it just depends on how they are used, or are they predisposed to expressing or supporting certain elements, sensibilities and ideologies in installation art and not others?
This is totally beholden to the creator and how they pitch their work. Yes they can be neutral but can also be used to support certain elements, sensibilities and ideologies. This is what I am doing in my piece. I like to work with ideologies and create messages and discussion in my work
Finally, can narratives render art discursive?
Again a yes and no. They can provide too open ended ideologies and themes but that is dependent on the art itself and the creator. they do not have to be this way, although sometimes a wandering and open to interpretation argument or arguments are more interesting than a hard focussed point in my opinion.
http://www.nyartsmagazine.com/?p=4180
No comments:
Post a Comment