In 1974, in a studio in Naples, Italy, a woman stands still as a man aims a loaded gun at her head. Hundreds of people stand watching the scene, but only one decides to push the gun away. The woman, performance artist Marina Abramović, asserts later when the event is over: “If you leave it up to the audience, they can kill you.” The ordeal was of course part of her performance piece Rhythm 0, which is a notable example of how the audience has a tendency to react alarmingly when presented with the option to perform acts that would in other circumstances come with heavy consequences. In performance art, the body is used as an object used to create art. Many performance pieces are characterized by audience interaction that tip toes the line of
…show more content…
Before the performance commences, Abramović states: “I am the object. During this period I take full responsibility,” and as the six hour long event progressed, members of the group began to push the limits. People seemed to leap at the opportunity to do things that would normally be forbidden or taboo unless under certain circumstances, including cutting Abramović’s skin as well as groping her. However, simply because Abramović has claimed she takes full responsibility and would not have pressed charges for any offense against her during the performance, the law would still have applied in a great crime had taken place. For example, when the one audience member loaded the bullets into the gun and aimed it at Abramović’s head, had he pulled the trigger it would not have mattered whether she allowed him to do it, he would still have to face the legal consequences for assault or homicide. Even a majority of the audience members that were present during the moment with the gun, decided not to intervene although Abramović’s life was seemingly at serious risk. This is why it is especially interesting how people’s behavior is changed when they are simply controlled by the feeling that they are free of true …show more content…
In the essay “Performance Art, Pornography, and the Mis-spectator: The Ethics of Documenting Participatory Performance,” Adriana Disman points out that often the documentation of performance art requires those who want to even simply view it often have to give up some of their right to privacy. This can be seen as a form of gatekeeping and reduces the accessibility of different forms of art for all people. In some cases, viewers may be required to sign forms and waivers allowing photos and videos of them to be taken throughout the artist’s performance. This can ensure immediate and honest reactions are caught and may be important to the artwork as a whole, but at the cost of the viewers’ privacy, which would have been more ensured before the digital age. Disman notes one particular performance by Abramović in which participants were live-streamed to online viewers, and they were only notified of this upon entrance to the museum. Disman says, “there seemed to be no way to opt out of the live streaming: the absence of a ‘no’ taken as a ‘yes,’” (Disman 47). Although this many not be as traumatizing as sexual assault, it still is an example of how consent is often manipulated or wholly disregarded in performance art.
To conclude, it is clear that performance art is a great medium
Before the performance commences, Abramović states: “I am the object. During this period I take full responsibility,” and as the six hour long event progressed, members of the group began to push the limits. People seemed to leap at the opportunity to do things that would normally be forbidden or taboo unless under certain circumstances, including cutting Abramović’s skin as well as groping her. However, simply because Abramović has claimed she takes full responsibility and would not have pressed charges for any offense against her during the performance, the law would still have applied in a great crime had taken place. For example, when the one audience member loaded the bullets into the gun and aimed it at Abramović’s head, had he pulled the trigger it would not have mattered whether she allowed him to do it, he would still have to face the legal consequences for assault or homicide. Even a majority of the audience members that were present during the moment with the gun, decided not to intervene although Abramović’s life was seemingly at serious risk. This is why it is especially interesting how people’s behavior is changed when they are simply controlled by the feeling that they are free of true …show more content…
In the essay “Performance Art, Pornography, and the Mis-spectator: The Ethics of Documenting Participatory Performance,” Adriana Disman points out that often the documentation of performance art requires those who want to even simply view it often have to give up some of their right to privacy. This can be seen as a form of gatekeeping and reduces the accessibility of different forms of art for all people. In some cases, viewers may be required to sign forms and waivers allowing photos and videos of them to be taken throughout the artist’s performance. This can ensure immediate and honest reactions are caught and may be important to the artwork as a whole, but at the cost of the viewers’ privacy, which would have been more ensured before the digital age. Disman notes one particular performance by Abramović in which participants were live-streamed to online viewers, and they were only notified of this upon entrance to the museum. Disman says, “there seemed to be no way to opt out of the live streaming: the absence of a ‘no’ taken as a ‘yes,’” (Disman 47). Although this many not be as traumatizing as sexual assault, it still is an example of how consent is often manipulated or wholly disregarded in performance art.
To conclude, it is clear that performance art is a great medium