Artist
Presentation
Charles Gaines
Synopsis
by Yoko Kanayama
Gaines
began his presentation emphasizing the need for a theoretical framework
behind art production. He showed slides of his 1974 Regression Series:
a set of 28 drawings utilizing systems of calculation to determine the
visual composition of numbers on a page.
The
conceptual backbone of these drawings is found in the process of transcription
that is designed to realize the numerical relationships that in turn
form the image. The sums form the shape, Gaines explained. Form
follows mathematical function. The first drawing in the Regression
Series maps numerical sums on a grid in order to form a triangle.
From this point on, everything is determined by a system. The triangle
is made up of cells, each with a numerical value which, according to
the system, are multiplied, increasing the number of cells in each subsequent
drawing throughout the series. Each new drawing is produced by the previous
one.
Gaines
is interested in both the image and the system and suggests that they
are two discrete elements of the artwork. To quote, They are not
the same thing in terms of a work of art, because we respond to the
image differently from the way we respond to the system. The system
is mechanical production whereas the image is something psychological.
By way of example, he associated the numeric shapes with the contours
of a human torso. He called this anthropomorphic association a psychological
act. This relationship between numeric shape and a male torso has nothing
to do with its generative properties. This illustrates the difference
between the relationship one has with the process and the relationship
one has to the image that has been produced.
At
this point, Gaines started to use the word production instead
of the word system in relation to the image. In this sense,
production refers to the image-making activity, the act
of photographing or painting, etc., an aspect of art-making conventionally
considered separate from the image and its effect on the viewer.
Gaines separated the process from the image/product in order to
create a system of production that is not based on the artist.
He was not interested in the artist as subject. He developed
systems of production to provide a purely conceptual experience, an
experience of image unmediated by personal interpretations.
By
analyzing the idea of production and how productive forces evolve in
the image, Gaines believes that he can locate the artist outside of
these forces. This is where Gaines proclaims his artistic practice stands.
Gaines
connected his Regression Series to what he sees as the central
concern of conceptual art in the 60s and 70s: the artwork is a process
through which the subject becomes the nature of what is art in order
to create new kinds of meaning. Gaines expands this idea when he says
that it is necessary for artists to theorize what art is in order to
locate themselves outside of these theories.
To
illustrate this argument, Gaines read from his own paper which included
the story of a conversation between an Indian wise man and a European.
In the story, the European asks the Indian man to explain the location
of the earth. The Indian man replies that the earth is on the back of
a great elephant, which is on the back of a great turtle, which is on
the back of another turtle, and so on into infinity. According to Gaines,
the story reveals the European desire to know where things are located.
However, attempting to locate the earth reveals the very impossibility
of doing so in an absolute manner; its location is always relative and
must be stated in terms of contextual relationships. It is the incomprehensibility
of the concept of infinity that Gaines put forth as the sublime. He
supported this proposition of the sublime by referring to Kants
assertion that the feeling of incomprehensibility that accompanies
the attempt to grasp the totality of life and existence is reflective
of the incomprehensibility of the event. Gaines compared the feeling
of the sublime to the feeling of being lost in space: The attempt
to locate oneself in the vastness of time and space fails again and
again. Gaines argues that the failure to locate oneself produces
the pleasurable experience of being in
a transcendent space,
floating above the anchored realities where one is free to experience
the pleasure of the immense and the vast. To quote Lyotard, the sublime
experience occurs every time the imagination fails. Gaines argued
that people reveal their resistance to the sublime experience by locating
a concept in relational terms.
Gaines
diagrammed the numeric lines from 1 to zero and 1 to infinity.
Here the infinity of numbers is incomprehensible and therefore sublime.
While the number 1 refers to or contains all the numbers
which follow it, the number zero suggests another infinity, one of nothingness.
Gaines proposed that zero is the original by which all other numbers
are relationally defined. He directed the interpretation of
this example by stressing that zero be understood as a metaphor rather
than as a number itself. Zero, then, can be seen as a metaphor for all
ideas of origin. By extension, the sublime can be seen as any kind of
transcendentalism --the ideas of God, pure form, any concepts not located
within the social structure.
Gaines
went on to propose that the inability to address the purely conceptual
without relational or contextual rationalizations has actually created
the concept of transcendentalism, which is a social response to the
incomprehensible. Transcendentalism is, then, the social construct
by which we attempt to fix in space the unfixable. As an example,
Gaines located the concepts of Beauty and Creativity within the social
sphere. Members of the audience questioned how these concepts are socially
determined and how the concept of infinity allowed for the sublime experience
in art. Gaines responded by acknowledging that he had not yet
figured that out but he suspects it is through language through metonymy.
Returning
to his paper, Gaines cited Marxs three notions of value in his
critique of capitalism: exchange value, use value, and surplus value.
These three value systems encapsulate capitalism's determination that
an object's value is a function of its exchangeability. An object's
intrinsic value is thus incomprehensible and thereby sublime or transcendental.
Gaines tied this idea back to his work in the 70s, including the
Regression Series, by pointing out that he attempted to collapse
the image and its system of production, so that the image is created
and revealed by its own production. By trying to include the system
of production within the context of the image, the transcendental is
revealed in the system of production, not mystified as Inspiration from
on high. Gaines ties this back to his work in the 70s such as
the Regression Series. This work was an attempt to collapse the
image and its system of production so that the image was created by,
and revealed through, its own production. Gaines explained that
this work reveals the transcendental by including the system of production
within the context of the image.
Gaines
finished his lecture by showing slides of his Night Crime series
which also explores the issue of the sublime. In this series he researched
the Los Angeles Times archives to find crime scenes and photographs
of people who were convicted of murder. Gaines randomly links
these found photographs of murderers with crime scenes. He uses cosmological
charts to recreate the night sky that existed at the exact moment that
the crime was committed. He inserts text which states the time of the
crime and the location, and also the location of the night sky in measurements
of latitude and longitude.
This
work displaces the moment of the crime by matching it with a criminal
who committed another crime, and displaces the criminal subject by matching
him with a crime he did not commit. For Gaines this suggests the idea
of infinite cycle and repetition, that anybody can be a victim and anybody
can be a perpetrator. He also mentioned that in this series there is
a metaphorical narrative dealing with the notion of repetition in the
context of horrific social events.
Gaines
again theorized, The work is entered not from a distance, through
the observation of the narrative, but through the mechanics of the work
itself, the production itself which is the system of the image. You
are entering the work through the language system.
Finally,
Gaines concluded his lecture with a reference to Alfred Hitchcock.
He explained that Hitchcock uses the narrative structure strategically
to produce suspense rather than simply producing an illusionistic reality,
positioning the viewer as a spectator observing events from a distance.
Thus Hitchcock movies have no sense of the real.
Analyis
by Christopher Frederick
When
looking at Charles Gaines Regression Series, the viewer
sees a series of numbers plotted on a grid. Generally, these numbers
are in a rectilinear framework, with one or more of the edges of numbers
being unjustified to the rectilinear form, creating a ragged edge on
that particular side. Graphic designers often refer to this type of
edge as a river. The grid and numbers suggest a system of information.
Indeed, Gaines follows a mathematical equation to determine the numbers
and their placement beginning with a random number selection. While
the numbers reflect a systematic process, the process holds artistic
significance, not scientific. These numbers are not to be interpreted
for any ends other than their own, they refer to nothing but themselves.
Gaines utilizes this self-contained system to redefine the terms sublimity,
beauty, and form. Rather than rely on classical definitions of such
terms, Gaines aims to remove the binaries between the terms in order
to demystify the traditionally privileged concept of the sublime.
Gaines
work attempts to address the experience of a work of art through our
affective relations with it. His Regression Series creates an
affective experience that has traditionally been defined in classical
models through the concepts of expression, form and aesthetics. By stripping
away the traditional forms, aesthetics and means of expression from
his series, Gaines use of systems and graphs points toward the
arbitrariness of his artistic procedure. The form of his work
is less important than the ideas and motivation behind the form. The
ability to have affect lies not only in craftsmanship, but also in concept.
Unlike the old masters, who use craftsmanship to seduce
viewers into a sublime state (loaded with implications of religion and
spirituality), Gaines cool logic moves away from the impassioned
bliss of an encounter with the ineffable toward a sublime experience
which can be described. The abstract numeric set confronts the
viewer with his/her exclusion from the potentially infinite system.
In recognizing an infinity that lies outside the viewer, one realizes
his/her inability to fully comprehend, creating a less melodramatic
sense of the sublime.
Of
course, it is arguable that both the classical understanding of the
sublime and Gaines redefinition of the term are contextually bound
to their historic time period, and that both attempt to address a confrontation
with the incomprehensible. While a good deal of intellectuals and academics
have abandoned the ideology of transcendental religious experiences
as a means to encounter the sublime, there still exists an awe in that
which lies beyond the self. Science, math and logic can now be used
to conjure a more watered down version of the sublime. In place of the
classical intensity lies a self-conscious semblance of comprehension.
In this paradigm shift, Gaines replaces the scapegoat of spiritual in-articulation
with an articulate sense of displacement.
In
Gaines ambitious lecture, the time slot allotted failed to allow
him the ability to fully articulate his ideas. Just as Gaines had begun
to redefine concepts of the sublime for a postmodern culture, the time
elapsed, cutting short his synthesis of how the sublime interacts with
Marxist use value, and how the linguistic idea of metonymy connects
his work with the sublime and the political.