Review of: Robert Smithson. Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles. 12 Sep.-13 Dec. 2005.
We saw this show together. We saw it differently. We enjoyed those differences and
wanted to convey that pleasure.
Below we mention Smithson's Four-Sided Vortex, which gives the viewer the ability to see one's companions in a
mirror instead of oneself, for a moment. Here are some glimpses of our experience.
Boy Genius
MOCA's approach to the problem of exhibiting Robert Smithson de-emphasizes writings, plans, and reproductions of
large-scale works (although these are represented, selectively) in favor of Smithson's paintings and drawings, a few
films, and several elegant and quietly assertive sculptures. Through this relatively intimate Smithson--a living room and
backyard kind of Smithson--the viewer remembers and catches glimpses of the colossal earthworks. The effect is to imply
a continuity between the kind of interest we have as children in the rocks and old lumber that collect at the side of
one's house and the architect's ambition to reshape the landscape, or between junior high school notebook fantasies and
Smithson's brainy, eclectic sketches for projects (for example, his Proposal for a Monument in Antarctica
[1966]). In the showily juvenile male fantasies of the barely post-adolescent Smithson, airplane parts and erect nipples
are motifs of competing interest; the famous Smithson too was never more than a very young man, his language full of
ostentatious allusion, deadpan humor, and other tropes of precocity. The question is not so much how Smithson's
smart-aleck rhetoric becomes something more as how he manages to convey the nascent challenge in adolescent
intellectualism when it starts asking questions of the physical world.
Beginnings
Robert Smithson seems an enticing anomaly. In an age where the
reigning interest is political, Smithson
still gets treated as he would want to see himself--that is, through the lens of powers attributed to genius or, as he
puts it, as above all a "generative artist" (88), creating context more than responding to specific cultural forces.
Thus MOCA's show brings into focus Smithson's capacity to reinvent himself in order to make art objects so visibly and
entertainingly the realization of a thinking that could have no other satisfying outlet. Make no mistake: Smithson was
so deeply engaged in the cultural life of his time that he could become perhaps his age's most powerful critic of the
then-dominant formalist modernism. But he could manage that role because his fealties lay not with the human or social
orders so much as with an imaginative site produced by the mind's dialogue with geologic time and crystallographic
space. Comparisons to Leonardo are not uncommon, and not unjustified in relation to Smithson's constant inventive
activity, as well as in relation to how that activity seems to warrant a position apart from the culture wars.
Born in 1938, Smithson worked at first (after high school and the army) primarily in drawing and in painting. His
brushwork and palette in works like Eye of Blood (1960), From the Valley of the Suicides
(1962), and various renderings of the passion of Christ make me think of Philip Guston on speed. There is everywhere
the intense painterly activity unwilling to settle for representation, but like Guston, Smithson insists on providing
an image as the provocative source of that activity. But this Guston-on-speed also manifests a Blakean spirit of
linear excess, here adapted to what would become the cross between the psychedelic and the comic book sensibilities
common in the art of the mid-seventies. In one respect Smithson's painting is the work of the classic repressed nerd
(fifteen years before the emergence of that figure for genius), albeit one talented nerd. I love the tension between
human and organic forms in the painting and drawings responding to Dante's valley of the suicides: clearly suicide is
no solution, since the soul's discomfort only carries over into other forms of alienated material existence. The
Christ paintings are remarkable for their evocation of a manifestly staged pathos that elicits what can only be called
"vulnerability on a divine scale." Even Christ, or especially Christ, finds it impossible to inhabit an expressive body
and must resign himself to metonymies like hands and feet. When the entire body emerges in Jesus
Mocked (1961), it seems so aware of its impotence relative to what it might want to signify that it is ready for
the tomb.
Thought as Non-Site
Like Warhol, whose early works include little portraits of people covered in gold leaf, miniature versions of his
paralyzed icons of fame, Smithson explores anxiety about and attraction to reification as the other side of familiarity
with inanimate nature. By this logic he moves from comic-like representations of cultural stereotypes to paintings based
on Dante and Blake--allegories of imprisoned persons whose fantasies of escape into mind produce only a more rigid
version of the body, or "emanations" that seek to represent something
that is neither body nor mind, but wind up seeming
less than both. Meanwhile, on the separate track of the sketches for sculptures and architecture, Smithson's persona
unfurls, like an emanation itself, in the handwritten annotations that populate these pages. The notes seem to immerse
the sketches in a mental non-space of arcana and asides. Like the voiceover Smithson uses in a film or two, these
jottings have a thin, haphazard relation to the shapes on the page, but present the artist's thinking self as an ironic,
disembodied interlocutor.
The Unrepresentable and the Presentable
I think of Cézanne as the presiding model of visual genius here. Cézanne had similar beginnings. He did
not know Blake or prefigure the alienations of psychedelic culture, but his early work shares with Smithson's the sense
that the only good image is an image so distorted by the painter's energies that these energies have to seem utterly
overdetermined in relation to what they are trying to represent. The representable is haunted by the unrepresentable,
with the painter's affective identity established by the effort to locate the sense of difference between the two as an
effect of the ego.
Then both artists eventually sublate the energies that undo representation into the will to form enabling the precision
of gestures toward representation. (I am counting the Nonsites as bizarre representations by representative materials.)
Both realize that identifying the individual subject only with the production of excess with energies possible for the
eye is less a result than a cause of alienation. Ultimately the work of genius is not to express the self's anxieties
but to find sites where anxiety seems trivial in comparison to the mind's capacities for intricate impersonal
appreciation of where it can find itself situated. One does not have to
look very hard at Smithson's Eye of Blood to
see how it could be transformed into a stone spiral jetty in a red sea, in a world where the return of energy to the
subject is a sign of insufficient awareness of the contemporary person's limited place in the world.
Blind Spots and Rabbit Holes
At least two kinds of Smithson's mirror works are represented at MOCA: wall-mounted or floor-standing
arrangements of brightly painted metal with reflecting panes, and heaps of rocks and minerals bisected by glass. The
first group are funhouse-like pieces with pop/op touches. Smithson frames blind spots as though once you knew where one
was, you could handily store things in it. Thus the sculptures model and parody psychic interiors. Untitled painted metal
and glass polyhedrons (1964-65), like large split and mounted beveled stones, make the floor hover over one's head and
parts of the room at middle height disappear. A reconstruction of Smithson's Enantiomorphic Chambers--a
series of metal and glass frames resembling a row of partly opened residential windows--evokes infinite regress when you
try to look through all the frames from one end. The floor-standing sculptures look more unassuming and are more
deceptive. Four-Sided Vortex (1965), a mirror-lined steel rectangle about three feet high, is a kind of
negative wishing well: looking in, you can stand in such a way as not to see yourself, only the person beside you. A
similar untitled piece from 1965 looks like the kind of green plastic wastebasket you might come across in a city park,
but drops the eye into a kaleidoscopic netherworld.
Minimalism MaximizedSmithson put himself on a path to this capacious perspective by turning from painting to collage, then to
wall structures that drew their inspiration from crystallography, then to a geological perspective that could
contextualize why the crystalline might prove so fertile a source of fascination. To grapple with the content promised
by these different angles of vision, Smithson turned from expressivist traditions to the minimalism that had recently
become fashionable. But he could accept neither the cult of all-at-once apprehension that attracted Donald Judd and
Frank Stella nor the pure play on conditions of response that characterized work like Robert Morris's circles.
Technically his work in floor sculpture would be characterized not by minimalist seriality but by progression in various
dimensions (22). And, more important, that work would not settle as either a distinctive, immediately graspable object
or an event manifesting some aspect of the phenomenology of seeing. Rather, object and event would enter dizzying
interactions allowing both object properties and event properties to dangle intricate metaphoric possibilities leading
beyond the material object but not beyond theater (in the sense of the term popularized by Michael Fried). In Smithson's
later work, all the event properties that include the viewer's perspective return us to aspects of his materials while
opening them up to the play of mind. Even his simplest structures, like Pointless Vanishing Point (1967)
and Leaning Strata (1968), make manifest forces that enter perception while focusing one's attention on
astonishingly elegant objects that one has to let unfold and linger before the mind's eye.
My general claims about Smithson's relation to minimalism will be difficult to demonstrate in this limited space. I hope
it suffices to say that a good part of the breakthrough stems from his appreciating the capacities of mirrors to provide
both distinctive substance and irreducible metaphors of reflection and mobility. By making the mirrors part of floor
sculptures, Smithson can extend the sense of enantiomorphic structure into complex interactive fields. As one walks
around the sculptural object, the mirrors simultaneously stabilize the assemblies of rock by making them dynamically
occupy space and destablize those assemblies by playing on what is substance, what shadow, and what illusion. For
example, in Chalk Mirror Displacement (1969) (see Figure 1), eight long but low rectangular mirrors radiate out
from a center, dividing the work into an open octagon. Because the space is filled with crumbled mineral chalk of various
sizes, one is tempted to think of this piece as a large pill box for minerals. But the minerals will not rest in their
container. We are constantly stopped as we move around because the glass seems both transparent and reflecting. So the
pile of chalk seems both continuous and discontinuous: at times the chalk appears as fluid as water, even as we see the
edges and shadows that mark discrete objects. Yet these discrete objects also enter into various mirroring relations, so
what is substantial merges with what is reflected. And the chalk comes to seem endlessly alive, proliferating textural
qualities and rewarding the sense that as one moves one is productively bound to sheer contingency. How one sees and how
one thinks depends here entirely on where one stands.
|
|
Figure
1: Chalk Mirror Displacement (1969) Estate of Robert Smithson Courtesy
James Cohan Gallery, New York © Estate of Robert Smithson/Licensed by VAGA, New York
|
Lyric Sheets
Smithson's mirror-divided piles of rocks and minerals are the really lyrical pieces in the exhibition. The mirrors lie on
the floor with the minerals on top of them (as in his Nonsite from 1969), line a corner so as to seem to
round out an actually interrupted cone (as in Mirror with Crushed Shells [Sanibel Island] [1969]--see Figure
2), or bisect
minerals sloped into symmetrical heaps so that as the viewer looks at any segment of the pile, the reflection of the
segment seems to join it to the whole, even though our actual view of the whole is occluded by the slicing glass. In each
case the reflections act as supplements so nearly perfect that we continually overlook what's missing and what's been
quietly replaced. This is "aesthetic ideology" so smooth that you can barely feel its sublimated violence. The piles of
stones themselves imply human contact, since they're beautified by sorting. Loose aggregations rather than objects, they
are not integral enough in the first place to be broken by the more explicitly human interruptions of the dividing glass
sheets. As a result there is something simultaneously sacrificial and nonviolent about these pieces. The glass planks
that section them are as simple and surgical as the monolith in Kubrick's 2001, yet painless, as though
phantom limbs really restored amputations and any cut were also a repair.
|
|
Figure
2: Mirror with Crushed Shells [Sanibel Island] (1969)
Estate of Robert Smithson Courtesy
James Cohan Gallery, New York © Estate of Robert Smithson/Licensed by VAGA, New York
|
Nonsites and the Play of Difference
In Rocks and Mirror Square II (1969/1971) (see Figure 3), Smithson turns the dividing panes of mirror into a
rectangular
container and rocks take the place of the chalk, now located both within the mirror and outside as a border. Here
relations between what is inside and what is outside seem as unstable as the dizzying interactions between substance and
reflection and between determinateness of structure and the flow of constant visual eventfulness. Because we are invited
to move around, we cannot help thinking that the psyche is caught within this same play of inner and outer,
self-reflection and escape from self into elegant sheer materiality. At the same time, the rocks convey an aura of
immense power to resist inwardness because they retain their obdurateness even as they seduce us with texture and
intricate play among edges and shadows. Ultimately it seems impossible not to feel at once deeply grounded in geological
time and as inconstant as passing reflections. And both worlds of flux and permanence seem to mock our merely human
interests. One might say that Smithson's genius was most evident in his realizing in practical terms how almost a
century of abstraction in art might produce this turn from the anthropomorphic in life.
|
|
Figure
3: Rocks and Mirror Square II (1969/1971)
Image used by permission of the National Gallery of
Australia Art © Estate of Robert Smithson/Licensed by VAGA, New York, NY
|
I am going to have to pass over Smithson's many intriguing sketches and diagrams, the remarkably inventive photo
sequences that place mirror surfaces in various landscapes, and Smithson's fascination with what might be called marginal
architectural forms that begins with his work on the Dallas Airport. But I have to at least mention my favorite Nonsite,
Mono Lake Nonsite [1968] (see Figure 4). This combination of wall and floor objects offers an apparent wall
map of the lake
with most of its surface covered by a plain white painted rectangle. Then the floor piece provides one rectangle
nested within another, the larger one matching in size the white painted area. The rectangles present the stuff that the
map refers to but which cannot be represented by the map--the outer rectangle containing rocks and the inner one sand.
Likewise, I must remark on two films, the justly famous thirty-two-minute film of the building of Spiral Jetty and a film of Smithson describing a suite of architectural photographs he made at the Hotel Palenque in which his
speaking tone proves as intricate as the relation between inside and outside in his work with mirrors.
|
|
Figure
4: Mono Lake Nonsite (1968)
Image used by permission of the Museum of Contemporary Art, San Diego |
Minimalist Architecture
The domestic cousins of Smithson's negative places--unrealized plans, blind spots, margins, minds--are airports,
outbuildings and hotels, the between- and afterthoughts of supposed destinations. The exhibition gives us Smithson's
recorded comments over a slideshow of photos he took at the Hotel Palenque, a dilapidated Yucatan inn of no more
vernacular fascination than any neighborhood dive, where you might imagine someone like William Burroughs staging a
literary decline. In a laconic vein somewhere between Cage and Godard, Smithson praises or pretends to praise to an
amused university audience the idiosyncrasy that accumulates there or anywhere. A set of double doors painted green,
turtles in the turtle pond, "interesting" rubble--minimalism's respect for the indestructibility of curiosity, or irony
about that respect?
Memorials
The otherwise admirable catalogue does not pay much attention to questions of tone, or, for that matter, to the
expressive detail of his work. It is too busy trying to figure out what Smithson might be thinking--perhaps one of the
pitfalls of being taken as a genius. The most useful of the essays for me were Eugenie Tsai's summary of Smithson's
career, a wide-ranging interview focused on his dislike of Duchamp, and particular treatments of his relation to
Christianity, of his idea of the enantiomorph, of his work in the Yucatan with mirrors, and of his legacy in the form of
"post-studio art."
Futures
In the brief film Swamp (1969), Smithson urges his collaborator, Nancy Holt, to walk with her
movie camera into a marsh thick with rushes and reeds higher than her head. Smithson directs her to go left or right or
turn around and walk further, seemingly randomly, in this landscape without reference points. Anxious almost
immediately, Holt keeps saying, "I can't see anything!" Smithson tells her it's OK, she should just keep walking,
straight ahead as much as possible. It's a surprisingly tense encounter, the little contest between her body and the
rushes that give way easily underfoot, but never give onto anything else. She never becomes less anxious and never
learns anything about where she is. In the middle of a discussion about how much film is left (Smithson thinks there
should be more), the film runs out. We might read Swamp as a
mini-emblem of the antiheroism of Smithson's contacts with
the nonhuman, contacts that record resistance to the latent inanimacy of the living body without making too much or too
little out of it.
Robert Smithson closed at the Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles on December 13. The show travels to
The Dallas Museum of Art and the Whitney Museum of American Art. The catalogue for this exhibit is Robert
Smithson, ed. Eugenie Tsai (Berkeley and Los Angeles: U of California P, 2004).
Department of English
University of California, Berkeley
altieri@uclink4.berkeley.edu
Departments of English and Comparative Literature
University of California, Irvine
terada@uci.edu
COPYRIGHT (c) 2005 by Charles Altieri and Rei Terada.
READERS MAY USE PORTIONS
OF THIS WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FAIR USE PROVISIONS OF U.S. COPYRIGHT
LAW. IN ADDITION, SUBSCRIBERS AND MEMBERS OF SUBSCRIBED INSTITUTIONS MAY
USE THE ENTIRE WORK FOR ANY INTERNAL NONCOMMERCIAL PURPOSE BUT, OTHER THAN
ONE COPY SENT BY EMAIL, PRINT OR FAX TO ONE PERSON AT ANOTHER LOCATION FOR
THAT INDIVIDUAL'S PERSONAL USE, DISTRIBUTION OF THIS ARTICLE OUTSIDE OF A
SUBSCRIBED INSTITUTION WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM EITHER THE
AUTHOR OR THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY PRESS IS EXPRESSLY FORBIDDEN.
THIS ARTICLE AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS ISSUE ARE
AVAILABLE FREE OF CHARGE UNTIL RELEASE OF THE NEXT ISSUE. A
TEXT-ONLY ARCHIVE OF THE JOURNAL IS ALSO AVAILABLE FREE OF CHARGE. FOR
FULL HYPERTEXT ACCESS TO BACK ISSUES, SEARCH UTILITIES, AND OTHER VALUABLE
FEATURES, YOU OR YOUR INSTITUTION MAY SUBSCRIBE TO
PROJECT MUSE, THE
ON-LINE JOURNALS PROJECT OF THE JOHNS
HOPKINS UNIVERSITY PRESS.
|