This page is referenced by:

• 1 2016-05-07T18:27:40-07:00 Embodiment, Performativity and Process. 16 plain 2016-05-25T17:20:33-07:00
  Another source of influence for Voulkos was avant-garde dance, which is often centered on themes of process and embodiment. Although performance art became increasingly prevalent in America in the 1960s, ceramics remained largely a studio practice that was shuttered from public sight. Never one to abide by tradition however, Voulkos was widely credited for reframing the educational format of the ceramic demonstration as a dynamic, public performance. Even though the best-documented examples of the ceramist’s public demonstrations date back to the 1970s, an early written testament by ceramist Rudy Autio reveals that Voulkos had been performing clay demonstrations since 1954. Incidentally, Autio’s testament was dated a year after Voulkos met avant-garde dancer Merce Cunningham at Black Mountain College, where he witnessed Cunningham’s performances. In 1961, after completing Gallas Rock, Voulkos abruptly stopped building his ceramic sculptures. Instead, for roughly a decade between the 1960s to 1970s, he shifted his attention to bronze sculpture. During this time, his performative clay demonstrations became a means for Voulkos to stay in touch with the clay material. Upon returning to clay, Voulkos grew increasingly involved in carrying out such demonstrations, which became a means of transforming his vessels into process-driven, public sculptures. By comparing Voulkos’ and Cunningham’s performances respectively, I will discuss how the ceramist used performance as a strategic means of challenging the notion of clay as a supplementary medium that cannot exist independently in its own right.
  
  While it is commonplace for professional ceramists to demonstrate their skills, audiences tend to be a small, select group of students or hobbyists that gather in specialized workshops. Instead, Voulkos opened up the studio to the public, transforming it into a locus for lively social events. An example of this can be seen in a 1974 video filmed at the Kansas City Art Institute. Standing in front of a small gathered crowd, Voulkos threw clay cylinders on multiple pottery wheels. Using the slip and score method, he proceeded to stack and connect them, one on top of another. In between his work, Voulkos would stop and converse with his audience, often cracking jokes.
  
  In addition to framing his vessels as public sculpture, Voulkos’ performances challenged the restrictive notion of ceramic objects as final products designed to fulfill a specific function. The notion that high art should not have function was promoted by Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher from the enlightenment period, and American art critic Clement Greenberg. Such ideas are problematic in the context of ceramics, specifically the ubiquitous clay vessel. The vessel, with its ties to function and desire, does not fit into Kant’s definition of “disinterested beauty.” According to Kant, objects belonging to this category are meant to be free from function and desire. Greenberg takes this another step further, arguing that each medium should be reduced to the purest, most unique expression of its form. In this regard, the suggestion of containment reflected by Voulkos’ ceramic vessels is seen as an extraneous factor that hinders the achievement of a truly pure expression of clay. In short, Voulkos’ stacked ceramic forms, assessed by Greenbergian terms, would be considered a “failed” expression of the clay medium.
   
  Despite their vessel-like appearance, however, Voulkos’ stacked forms, such as Gash (1978), are non-utilitarian. Nor were they tied to a specific function. Although it is unclear if Gash was performed in front of a live audience, its form nonetheless reflects traces of performativity resulting from Voulkos’ working process. This can be seen from the long cut, extending vertically downwards from its rim, which Voulkos created using a knife-tool. As this cut extends all the way through Gash’s clay body, the vessel ultimately “fails” to hold water. Although Gash’s form rejects functionality, its physical form still clearly references the clay vessel. On one hand, the fact that Gash does not fit comfortably within definitions of fine art can be seen as a “failure” to attain Kant and Greenberg’s idea of aesthetic purity. On the other hand, this “failure” can also serve as a means of complicating both critics’ inflexible definition of fine art. By removing function from Gash but choosing to retain the connotations of containment tied to the vessel-form, Voulkos presents a seemingly impossible proposition, that it is possible to create sculptural objects that reference clay’s functional origins.
   
  Voulkos’ attempt to sever clay from function through performance echoes the non-narrative choreography of American avant-garde dancer Merce Cunningham. By considering Voulkos’ clay performances in relation to Cunningham’s Antic Meet (1958), I will demonstrate the ways in which Voulkos’ clay performances challenge viewers to see ceramic objects in terms of their materiality, as well as the ceramist’s embodied, creative process.
  
  Antic Meet is an avant-garde dance performance performed and choreographed by Cunningham. Much like Vaudeville theatrical performances, its narrative structure is comprised of multiple disparate acts. This reference is especially apparent in its second act, Room for Two, where Cunningham performs as a bumbling clown-like character that wears a chair strapped to his back and dances erratically with a woman in a flowing gown. Despite its resemblance to Vaudeville, the sheer absurdity of Antic Meet rejects the assertion of a recognizable narrative. This can be a confusing experience for viewers who may perceive choreography as a means to convey a clear-cut storyline. By purposefully “failing” to fulfill such expectations, Cunningham placed his viewers in an unfamiliar position where they are forced to focus their attention upon the embodied, aesthetic possibilities presented by movement itself.
   
  By using performativity in strategic ways, Voulkos and Cunningham encouraged their audiences to focus their attention on the embodied process that lies at the root of clay and dance, a crucial aspect that has either been largely overlooked or taken for granted. While both Voulkos’ clay performances and Cunningham’s Antic Meet clearly refer to function and narrative, they ultimately “fail” in these endeavors and thus, transcend the supplementary notions imposed upon their respective mediums. In addition to extending the boundaries of clay and dance, “failure” becomes a catalyst that challenges viewers to actively question Voulkos and Cage's creative motivations.