Search

Hélio Oiticica's “The Senses Pointing Towards a New Transformation” was written between June 18 and June 25, 1969, in London and submitted to the British art magazine Studio International, but never appeared in print. The essay negotiates art after objecthood and contextualises Oiticica's project to effect a definitive radicalization of anti-art, one that the artist held to be necessary in light of the impasse reached by the longstanding conflict between formalist art and its various neo-avant-garde negations (both within the Brazilian and the international neo-avant-gardes). For Oiticica, after both Neoconcretism and Minimalism, it was now the process of art making itself that had to be rethought. Oiticica did so by developing what he called “crebehavior,” a practice that revealed the routinized character of everyday life and proposed an immanent transformation of the same via a change in everyday behavioral patterns. Such a transformation opened up the possibility of bringing about “creleisure,” a condition that Oiticica understood to involve both the realization and the dissolution of art.

Tue Greenfort has made several works dedicated or self-consciously indebted to other artists, but within this body of his work he has turned most frequently to Hans Haacke. This can be seen most explicitly in several works entitled ‘After Hans Haacke’; Greenfort's indebtedness to Haacke is also manifest in numerous other works. How should we understand Greenfort's rearticulation of Haacke's work? What does it mean to work ‘after’ Hans Haacke in this way? The extent and depth of Greenfort's engagement indicates that there is more at stake than polite homage or the artworld pressure to conform to patrilineal legitimation. Greenfort works in the space opened up by Haacke's particular form of conceptual art, but negatively, acknowledging that the historical position embodied by his source is no longer tenable. Greenfort goes beyond Haacke by drawing environmentalism into the immanent problematic of the institutionally critical artwork. As such Greenfort's work can be considered an example of eco-institutional...

Helio Oiticica's artistic practice moved through a number of discrete, though related, conceptual phases, each with its own distinctive articulation and each bounding one or more series of works. Each successive phase of Oiticica's work developed out of his attempt to resolve the challenges raised by a preceding phase. His work was explicitly dialectical in this sense and its philosophical sophistication marks its distinctiveness in ways that are only beginning to be recognised. In the work the artist developed in New York between 1970 and 1978, elaborating on the concept of ‘creleisure’ that he had conceived in London in 1969, Oiticica proposed nothing less than a revolution in the idea of aesthetic revolution. Creleisure was a neologism that combined the senses of creativity, faith, leisure and pleasure, but in order to understand the concept's full significance it is necessary to trace its relation to the aesthetics of Schiller and Marcuse and Latin American foquismo theory.

Mel Bochner is conventionally considered a conceptual artist. Bochner, however, objects to the label and, having started his career as a painter, is now painting again. In fact he has been painting since 1973, in the immediate aftermath of the collapse of first generation conceptual art. How should Bochner's return to painting be understood? Perhaps counter-intuitively, Bochner's painting is best understood with reference to his short-lived and still little discussed photographic practice. The insights Bochner gained from his brief period of photographic experimentation are summarized in his work Misunderstandings (A Theory of Photography) (1967–70). By reconstructing and interpreting the significance of Misunderstandings for Bochner's artistic development, I reveal that it is also productive within the broader context of the ongoing reassessment of the critical significance of photoconceptualism.