Taryn Revell

What are some of your first impressions of Marina Abramovic’s performance works, based on the documentary? Use an image/example of one or two works to describe aspects you admire, and aspects you might agree are problematic?

One of the first things I noticed about Marina Abramovic is that because of her performance works, she is likely considered an ‘outrageous woman’ by the media. Her artwork is a reflection of not only her personality, but also her visceral outlook on human nature. People as a whole don’t appreciate unconventional displays such as hers, especially when outside the setting of art viewership. An example of this would be the clip of Marina whipping her own back being displayed on a large screen in the middle of a city square. The surrounding crowd looked horrified and disturbed more than moved. Another example would be when a news channel compared Lady Gaga’s newest music video; showing dancers in their underwear, to Marina’s exhibit where viewers had to squeeze between nude performers in order to get through a hallway. These artworks of hers were considered problematic by the public, because they were brought to the public’s attention through a pre-disturbed outside lens, rather than an artistic one. However, I appreciate the problematic aspects of these pieces because that was the purpose of the art; to make people uncomfortable. I also found the comments made about Marina concerning these pieces interesting; that she used her own body to make violent statements, and that Marina was a ‘provocateur.’ 

Discuss the ways performance art resists many museum and commercial artworld conventions. How does Abramovic solve/negotiate some of these challenges, and do you find these compromises add to, or undermine the ideas at play in her work?

As stated before, art like Marina’s seen in public can give people the feeling of shock, disgust and even anger, however when seen in an art setting – while the feeling viewers get is still out of the norm for creative communities – it gives people a more arts-based group mentality. They may still feel disgusted, but they are now in a space where they are almost obligated to appreciate the disturbing. ‘Traditional art’ tends to tell a tale or history that people have the ability to fully understand, and get a sense of accomplishment from. While Marina’s performance art seems to only give viewers a glimpse into her mind, past, and perspectives. I can honestly say that seeing her performance would give me a sort of feeling of superiority to those that cannot see her art past their initial negative reaction. Some people likely have a hunger to see more art like hers, because a glimpse gave them a connection to the art that other people don’t have, and they would want to see more, if not only because of  a morbid curiosity. These drastic contradictions to the feelings that most art communities give the viewers only adds to the message her work intends to convey, that ‘groups of people become bestial when given the chance.’