[Blake_Stimson,_Gregory_Sholette]_Collectivism_aft(z-lib
After the “Descent to the Everyday” 47postminimal and conceptualist tendencies. This was aptly captured by theSecond Kyoto Biennale organized by the Kyoto Municipal Museum of Artin 1973 under the theme of “art by collectives (shudan).”This chapter will examine a crucial decade between 1964 and1973 in the history of Japanese collectivism. The survey begins with an introductionin three parts, providing a historical framework to “collectivismafter modernism” in Japan. It will outline the modern practice of group exhibitions(“exhibition collectivism”) and the various reactions against the stateand other art institutions. It will also identify an end-point of modernism,by examining the notion of the “descent to the everyday,” introduced in1964 by the critic Miyakawa Atsushi, in relation to the evolution of collectivism.The introduction will be followed by a brief discussion of Hi RedCenter’s Cleaning Event and an overview of post-HRC collectives, includingAkasegawa Genpei’s 1,000-Yen-Note Incident Discussion Group, Group “I,”Zero Dimension, Bikyoto, and Psychophysiology Research Institute. Particularnotice will be given to The Play, a collaborative collective with a scenicdimension, which was among the six collectives represented in the 1973Kyoto Biennale. In these studies, different kinds of collectivism, such as “inadvertentcollectivism” and “participatory collectivism,” will be introduced,while issues concerning collaborative collectivism will be addressed. Theywill range from the connections between radical politics and collectivismto the use of parody, anonymity vs. publicity, and shock and spectacle, allof which vitally informed an increasingly public nature of collectivism.The chapter will conclude with an overall observation on collectivism aftermodernism.INTRODUCTION IN THREE PARTS“Collectivism” in JapanCollectivism has been a vast topic in Japanese art since the Meiji period(1868–1912). Over more than half a century, through the prewar years, it isnot an exaggeration to say that the evolution and maturation of modernismwas propelled by collectivism in the form of “art organizations” (bijutsu dantai).A main engine of what I term “exhibition collectivism,” the art organizationsfunctioned primarily as exhibition societies. The importance of theart organizations during the modern eras was such that Japanese art historianshave routinely chronicled the evolution of modernism as a sequence oftheir foundings and disbandings. The intricate history was codiWed into aset of genealogical trees, one each for different areas of practice—for example,yoga (oil painting), Nihonga (the modern extension of traditional painting),and sculpture—which often accompany art-historical literature. 6
48 Reiko TomiiIn the early Meiji, Japan made a concerted effort to establish itselfas a modern nation-state. Its artists needed to adapt themselves to the rapidlychanging environment, as the Western institutions of exhibition, school,and museum were introduced. Both the concept of “Wne art” and the practiceof the public display of art were novelties. The self-organized nature ofbijutsu dantai harks back to this period. While the government ministriesoffered institutional exhibition opportunities through the “Domestic PaintingCompetition” (Naikoku kaiga kyoshinkai; 1882 and 1884) and the “DomesticIndustrial Exposition” (Naikoku kangyo hakurankai; 1877, 1881, 1890, 1895,and 1903), such early organizations as Meiji Art Society (Meiji Bijutsu-kai;founded in 1889) and Japan Art Association (Nihon Bijutsu Kyokai; foundedas Ryuchi-kai in 1879; renamed in 1887) sponsored their own exhibitionsto create ongoing opportunities for public display. 7 Hereafter, an ever growingnumber of art organizations became the engine of exhibition activitiesin modern Japan. Through their regular exhibitions, these organizations providedforums for competing artistic idioms and ideologies, frequently embracingambitions to create movements.When the Bunten (“Ministry of Education Art Exhibition”; Monbushobijutsu tenrankai) was instituted in 1907, this state-sponsored annualsalon became a focal point of art-world politics and the shifting allegianceamong bijutsu dantai. SigniWcantly, through the early postwar decades, theannual or semiannual exhibitions sponsored by dantai—called dantai-ten(“organizations’ exhibition”)—remained an indispensable, if not exclusive,opportunity to display their works in public for artists of all ages and persuasions.The commercial gallery system, especially for modern art, was slow togrow. For example, even in 1957, a directory of the art magazine Bijutsu techo(Art notebook) listed only thirty-Wve galleries in Tokyo, an overwhelmingmajority of which were not commercial venues but “rental galleries” (kashigaro) that provided their spaces to artists for a fee. 8 Since dantai-ten took theform of kobo-ten (“open call” exhibitions) that would accept non-members’works on a juried basis, the larger and older dantai soon acquired prestigeand began to assume the inXuential place in the art-world hierarchy whoseapex was the government salon. Given the limited exhibition opportunities,dissident artists, be they progressive or conservative, who were dissatisWedwith the existing dantai or the governmental salon, had to createtheir own forums (i.e., their own art organizations) to show their works.This was how the vanguard bloc emerged within yoga in the Taishoperiod (1912–26), when vibrant liberal culture and the spirit of democracythrived in Japan. A complex organizational shufXing was initiated in 1914,when progressive oil painters broke away from the Bunten salon, because thesalon refused to created a new separate section for artists with fresh approaches,
- Page 16 and 17: Prefacexvdirectly opposite individu
- Page 18 and 19: Prefacexviiadmit a desire to see al
- Page 20 and 21: Introduction: Periodizing Collectiv
- Page 22 and 23: Introduction 3to increase their pro
- Page 24 and 25: Introduction 5Modernist artists und
- Page 26 and 27: Introduction 7Those good intentions
- Page 28 and 29: Introduction 9and that helped give
- Page 30 and 31: Introduction 11collectivism brings
- Page 32 and 33: Introduction 13artists on Chicago
- Page 34 and 35: Introduction 15Phase of the Cultura
- Page 36 and 37: 1. Internationaleries: Collectivism
- Page 38 and 39: Internationaleries 19played a “us
- Page 40 and 41: Internationaleries 21Rooskens, Euge
- Page 42 and 43: FIGURE 1.2. Le “Realisme-Socialis
- Page 44 and 45: Internationaleries 25and an active
- Page 46 and 47: Internationaleries 27create a democ
- Page 48 and 49: Internationaleries 29of the fourth
- Page 50 and 51: Internationaleries 31Debord’s 196
- Page 52 and 53: Internationaleries 33in which the n
- Page 54 and 55: Internationaleries 35be demystiWed
- Page 56 and 57: Internationaleries 37printing a ser
- Page 58 and 59: Internationaleries 39NOTES1. Harold
- Page 60 and 61: Internationaleries 4136. The exhibi
- Page 62 and 63: Internationaleries 4377. Michel de
- Page 64 and 65: 2. After the “Descent to the Ever
- Page 68 and 69: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 70 and 71: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 72 and 73: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 74 and 75: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 76 and 77: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 78 and 79: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 80 and 81: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 82 and 83: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 84 and 85: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 86 and 87: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 88 and 89: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 90 and 91: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 92 and 93: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 94 and 95: After the “Descent to the Everyda
- Page 96 and 97: 3. Art & Language and the Instituti
- Page 98 and 99: Art & Language and the Institutiona
- Page 100 and 101: Art & Language and the Institutiona
- Page 102 and 103: Art & Language and the Institutiona
- Page 104 and 105: FIGURE 3.4. Cover of Blurting in A&
- Page 106 and 107: Art & Language and the Institutiona
- Page 108 and 109: Art & Language and the Institutiona
- Page 110 and 111: Art & Language and the Institutiona
- Page 112 and 113: Art & Language and the Institutiona
- Page 114 and 115: 4. The Collective Camcorder in Arta
After the “Descent to the Everyday” 47
postminimal and conceptualist tendencies. This was aptly captured by the
Second Kyoto Biennale organized by the Kyoto Municipal Museum of Art
in 1973 under the theme of “art by collectives (shudan).”
This chapter will examine a crucial decade between 1964 and
1973 in the history of Japanese collectivism. The survey begins with an introduction
in three parts, providing a historical framework to “collectivism
after modernism” in Japan. It will outline the modern practice of group exhibitions
(“exhibition collectivism”) and the various reactions against the state
and other art institutions. It will also identify an end-point of modernism,
by examining the notion of the “descent to the everyday,” introduced in
1964 by the critic Miyakawa Atsushi, in relation to the evolution of collectivism.
The introduction will be followed by a brief discussion of Hi Red
Center’s Cleaning Event and an overview of post-HRC collectives, including
Akasegawa Genpei’s 1,000-Yen-Note Incident Discussion Group, Group “I,”
Zero Dimension, Bikyoto, and Psychophysiology Research Institute. Particular
notice will be given to The Play, a collaborative collective with a scenic
dimension, which was among the six collectives represented in the 1973
Kyoto Biennale. In these studies, different kinds of collectivism, such as “inadvertent
collectivism” and “participatory collectivism,” will be introduced,
while issues concerning collaborative collectivism will be addressed. They
will range from the connections between radical politics and collectivism
to the use of parody, anonymity vs. publicity, and shock and spectacle, all
of which vitally informed an increasingly public nature of collectivism.
The chapter will conclude with an overall observation on collectivism after
modernism.
INTRODUCTION IN THREE PARTS
“Collectivism” in Japan
Collectivism has been a vast topic in Japanese art since the Meiji period
(1868–1912). Over more than half a century, through the prewar years, it is
not an exaggeration to say that the evolution and maturation of modernism
was propelled by collectivism in the form of “art organizations” (bijutsu dantai).
A main engine of what I term “exhibition collectivism,” the art organizations
functioned primarily as exhibition societies. The importance of the
art organizations during the modern eras was such that Japanese art historians
have routinely chronicled the evolution of modernism as a sequence of
their foundings and disbandings. The intricate history was codiWed into a
set of genealogical trees, one each for different areas of practice—for example,
yoga (oil painting), Nihonga (the modern extension of traditional painting),
and sculpture—which often accompany art-historical literature. 6