Viewing page 46 of 71

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

16

LL:  No, [[strikethrough]] I don't think [[/strikethrough]] not a trade-mark so much as a consistency. They continue in a very definite straight line and still exclude more than [[strikethrough]] he [[/strikethrough]] they include, which is a formal point of view, [[strikethrough]] and [[/strikethrough]] whereas I think Morris and Baxter and Bruce Nauman [[strikethrough]] say [[/strikethrough]] come closer to a Dada-Surrealist [[strikethrough]] acceptive idea [[/strikethrough]] pt. [[point]] of view. [[strikethrough]] Whereas the rest of them come from a rejective idea which is more formal, where you reject almost everything for what you're working with.. [[/strikethrough]] That's an acceptive approach where the formal approach is rejective.

[[strikethrough]] UM: I wish you would elaborate on that point. I think that's a very important point. This supposition is very good. [[/strikethrough]]

LL: [[strikethrough]] I think [[/strikethrough]] There's always been [[strikethrough]] this [[/strikethrough]] that kind of dichotomy...it used to be the old Classical/Romantic thing but [[strikethrough]] I don't think there's any possible way of clueing those two up now. I think in one way [[/strikethrough]] in the last couple of yrs they've become pretty irrelevant. Barry for instance, is a [[strikethrough]] fantastically, at once neo- [[/strikethrough]] very Classical [[strikethrough]] artist [[/strikethrough]] and a [[strikethrough]] fantastically [[/strikethrough]] very Romantic artist at the same time. [[strikethrough]]; he's strict and clear, so that [[/strikethrough]] The break really comes [[strikethrough]] with either [[/strikethrough]] through acceptance or rejection of [[strikethrough]] outside [[/strikethrough]] the multiplicity of [[strikethrough]] real life [[/strikethrough]] non-art materials, or, in the [[strikethrough]] and I think it [[/strikethrough]] The split comes from Surrealism and Dada on one side, and Constructivism and Cubism on the other. [[strikethrough]] In both Dada and Constructivism I think this has been pointed out by other people too. All my adult art life [[/strikethrough]] I've always been particularly interested in Dada and [[strikethrough]] very pure things, and [[/strikethrough]] [[?]] in ultra purist & idealist idioms; eccentric abstraction [[strikethrough]] mixed [[/strikethrough]] combined aspects of the two, and that's one reason I was [[strikethrough]] truned [[/strikethrough]] on to it, because I liked that business of using something [[strikethrough]] that was very [[/strikethrough]] unclear, peculiar [[strikethrough]] and [[/strikethrough]] or ugly and funny within a very clear system. [[strikethrough]] And I think the tie, and I felt that as well [[/strikethrough]] When I was working on Reinhardt, I was aware that the tie [[strikethrough]] comes with this [[/strikethrough]] between the 2 lies in their common interest in a tabula rasa, [[strikethrough]] and it's really [[/strikethrough]] which implies a kind of utopianism, the idea that you can push something to the point where everything [[strikethrough]] is marvelous?, [[/strikethrough]] everything breaks open again & is renewed. They are both revolutionary approaches. There's both a purist, rejective idea, and a Dada-Surrealist acceptive idea, [[strikethrough]] both. That you can be kind of knocking off society as it is now and...[[/strikethrough]]

[[left margin]]
? Case of Huebler & Barry, who use non-art "materials", [[strikethrough]] acceptin [[/strikethrough]]  imposition of a closed [[strikethrough]] or even [[/strikethrough]] instead of an open framework. Barry doesn't "claim" all psychic phenomena. He very strictly & clearly selects his phenomena even when we can't name them but can only impose conditions on them. Huebler does somewhat the same thing in a more visually-oriented time & space.
[[/left margin]]

[[right margin]]
? { Dada was anti-art in that it wanted to concentrate on changing the world [[strikethrough]]; Christ [[/strikethrough]] & art was assoc. w. the status quo. The constructionists thought art could participate in that change. Dada was more original & was more realistic. Today not many artists think about that, or admit to it, but the implications are the same. Morality in both art esthetics & art activists is still involved.
[[/right margin]] 

Transcription Notes:
There are notes on both the left and right sides that may need to be transcribed by a more experienced user↓ Unsure of the name Huebler in the right margin note Also a few more ? words.