Review: Minor Threats
Posted by: Lisa Radon on Nov 18, 2009 at 09:00AM
23 Comments
If what passes for punk in 2009 is dropping in under the Burnside Bridge or hopping a train to NorCal, its Kraft® processed cheese food version is in the Manuel Izquierdo Gallery at PNCA at the moment, and I feel fine. Matt Green’s simple gesture of embedding a single chrome pyramid stud in the wall at eye level for Minor Threats made my night on First Thursday, as a tiny, minimalist sculpture that also happened to be a postcard from the past (the studs of course littered many a shoulder on a black leather jacket 2-3 decades ago) and a reminder that eventually every trapping of rebellion will be packaged and sold in a denatured version in the mall. Surf culture, skate culture, and punk were all converted into commodities years ago, and its only the more insulting that the mass market reprocessors of cultural signifiers mix their chocolate with their peanut butter and put the trappings of punk on the shelves next to the trappings of goths and the kids don’t give a shit. Artist Philip Iosca remarked that he’d have liked it more if the stud had been recast into a different metal. Yes, that would further decontextualize (and fetishize) it, but I thought about that and concluded that the stud symbolizes the fact that not only every signifier of punk, but punk itself have been recast often enough that the stud itself functions as its recast model might as both a more pointed* and a watered-down comment on itself. This is all acknowledged, of course, in the title of the exhibition curated by Derek Franklin, where Minor Threat, iconic hardcore band that spearheaded straightedge is drastically diluted with the simple gesture of an “s.”
So what are a bunch of young artists doing making art that refers to punk tropes as with Green’s Pepsi bottle with the Suicidal Tendencies sticker on it? For Green at least, it makes sense that his explorations of recent American masculine cultural expressions (see his MFA thesis show performance—rocker or roadie—on top of a giant black “stage”) would lead to punk. It’s a man’s world. One might forget, thanks to riot grrls that Penelope Houston of the Avengers was a rare bird. The Dead Milkmen could sing, “You and me punk rock girl,” in the 80’s but the girl likely wasn’t holding a mic. Israel Lund, having titled his Tumblr “Youth Against,” might be expected to address punk’s archetypal youthy againstness, and he has made previous work with punk-on-paper, the zine.
Brad Troemel’s short video “Sprinting from Back to Bed to the AT&T Store” documents Troemel doing just that, dashing across a mini-mall parking lot. This is best in show, recalling task-based pieces like Barry Le Va’s “Impact Run.” If suburban living was fertile ground for punk, Troemel’s sprinter looped into speeding nowhere again and again is the kid who never got out.
The edition produced for the show acknowledges punk’s end of the line in brilliant and subtle ways. On the postcard with the Ramones logo on it, all of the names but Tommy’s have been erased. And Israel Lund’s zine with its solid black copied pages couldn’t be any more punk, any more anti-, the negation negating the negation, a symbol of an end game for a game people won’t quit playing.
Well played, Derek Franklin, and thanks for bringing Troemel’s work to Portland.
*pun unintended but acknowledged
UPDATE: SJPC points out the obvious below in comments (thank god someone’s reading and keeping me honest). I blinked and didn’t see it. Coke is now Pepsi. This kind of thing matters to the Suicidal Tendencies and also to Laverne.
Lisa,
Thanks for the review of this show put together by Derek. He’s not only an exceptionally talented artist, but is showing himself adept and competent in the realm of curating. Too often, especially in cities like Portland where young artists are given an absurd amount of curatorial opportunities, shows put together by relatively young curators are show-and-tells for their closest friends. Granted, Franklin’s indeed familiar with the artists in this show (and even friends with most of them), but his choices both in work exhibited and the general composition of that work in the gallery shows a genuine interest in how each individual piece speaks to the others. It’s refreshing as well to read a legitimate critical examination of a show featuring predominantly young artists and curated by an up-and-comer.
One note that I have about your review though, and I only point this out because it is truly relevant to the contextualization of one of Matthew Green’s works, is that the Suicidal Tendencies sticker was affixed to a Pepsi bottle. This piece serves as an inside joke to those of us that grew up in skateboard and punk cultures, referencing the Suicidal Tendencies song “Institutionalized” where singer Mike Muir’s mother accuses him of being on drugs and he responds, “All I wanted was a Pepsi, just one Pepsi and she wouldn’t give it to me!”
Although, I must say now having pondered it for a minute, that affixing the sticker to a Coke bottle would have been pretty damn funny. In any case, thanks, Lisa, for spending time to really critically analyze what might be considered outsider art with diligence and care. Those of us operating in that realm might exhibit work that appears ambivalent, nihilistic or abrasive for abrasive’s sake, but we’re not idiot-savants. Your willingness to do more than simply entertain the work is a much appreciated gesture.
That’s funny SJPC, and I can only say “duh” because I love that song, and obviously just spaced out. Ha on me and thanks for commenting about it. It would have been funnier, you’re right, if it had been on a Coke bottle. I think often about the details I miss (or mis-remember), but finally just have to not get all bent about it and just write the damn review.
I haven’t had the pleasure to see Derek’s show yet, however, I have noticed the term ‘punk’ being littered (loitered) about quite a bit ‘round town as of late. It’s a term I am all too familiar with from my youth. In an interview between Modou Dieng and Eva Lake it was bantered some, and I’m not sure the point was driven, but the spirit was there. Punk also came up generously when I interviewed Arnold J. Kemp for Just Out about his current show at PDX Contemporary. I won’t forget the moshpits for Circle Jerks nor The Cramps anytime too soon, and have always felt this direct line ’tween the edge of punk rock and contemporary art…but why now?
Who knows why things bubble up at certain points, TJ, but you are so right for noting it. I have to go read your Kemp/Just Out piece. I want to get that connection for Kemp’s show. He brought X-Ray Spex when he was on Modou Dieng’s PNCA radio show, but I don’t remember him talking about punk re his work. Re: Modou, based on his show at Marylhurst right now, I think he found inspiration in a combination of funk and hip hop that grew out of it AND punk. I want to know more about that. :::: We should have a punk panel. I know Kristan Kennedy would be down. And obviously Eva. ::::::: Incidentally TJ, you seem like an awfully nice guy to be in a Circle Jerks mosh pit.
JUST ONE PEPSI!!
with works like this stud on the wall, i can never figure out whether my reaction is, “How brilliant!” or “This is why people think conceptual art sucks!” is it clever, and is clever enough? how is that artist’s true self or soul involved in this creation, and does anyone care about such retro-Romantic ideas in art/lit anyway? the stud in the wall comments, but does it really reveal?
i wasn’t even there, so i’m just asking, not answering questions.
(this doesn’t stop me from wishing someone would do a retro deathrock-oldschool goth show. i’d hammer a pointy-toed Nana shoe into the wall, hanging it by its own plethora of buckles…)
“And she wouldn’t give it to me.” Tiff, YOU can do the Siouxie/Ministry show. I’ll come. ::: I don’t want to read more into Green’s stud than is there, but if one were a mad chemist in a lab trying to distill what it is to be a man of consequence, someone who took a stand, you could do worse than to boil punk’s politics/alienation/existential condition down to a 3D geometric form that happens to have multi-thousand-year-old connotations of power.
sounds like it was a pretty clear readymade, and it obviously caught your attention live in person, and you ain’t no slouch… so there must be something to it. the stud idea does sound fun and it does resonate with cultural goodies.
i just sometimes feel like, eek, we are never going to get past the bicycle, the bidet, the n’est-pas-une-pipe, etc., meta-stage of our existence. makes me want to paint some non-ironic gold cherubim or something.
Yup, rough and readymade. But I didn’t address what you were talking about above regarding conceptual art. Conceptual art means the “artist’s true self or soul” is beside the point…it’s investigation not expression…its appeal is to the mind rather than the emotion. Yes, Duchamp is a heavy weight (still!) on art makers, but the difference is that contemporary makers take his strategies and apply them not to comments on art/the art world but other subjects, as Green did here. (This sets aside the wave of cover artists redoing art pieces.) I do agree with you that there’s something we need to break free of…with any innovation there is a breakthrough by a vanguard with a long tail of makers working through the implications of the innovation. Re: gold cherubim, I require a great deal of convincing to think that any easel painting is not to some degree reactionary.
In 1990 I did a show called ‘Unearthing Censors’ for the Boston Center for the Arts’ Black Box Gallery which included rough collages I did, some using parts of shirts and laces and scraps torn off big Southie guys while moshing at The Channel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Channel_nightclub) at shows by The Plasmatics, Nina Hagen, The Freeze, The Descendents, Black Flag, Minor Threat, Echo & the Bunnymen….What a rush – out there in the midst of chaos, youth, angst, rebellion, testosterone – oh the heydey of punk was ripe. In its retro-fit application some 25+ years later remains curious to me, but perhaps even I am exploring it in my new work (tba….), though through a long lens, the filter of memory blurs some, though the edges remain a sharp as an axe just before the fall. I’m ready for a panel!
Let’s panel, TJ. Then we can hear from horses’ mouths why it’s a hot topic. I’m into it.
lisa ~ ya know what though? punk rock was nothing if not reactionary. what revolution isn’t?
punk rock also depended on raw, sweaty emotion. John Lydon was clever, but he was nothing without the Fuck You. Patti Smith was cool and smart, but she idolized Rimbaud. thousands of people living in squats and collective houses, making their own media, and/or singing their off-key hearts out… all these represent high octane, invested emotional risks on the part of the artists and participants. i suppose the stud might be a comment on that, too. i should find and ask the artist.
well beyond punk rock, we could demand more of conceptual art. intellectual thinky-thoughts don’t have to override or circumvent emotional and personal investment. Yoko Ono seems to’ve meshed those together brilliantly.
but maybe the paths have diverged too much…? the Karen Finleys and Ron Atheys, and their fans, went off in one direction… the post-Kaprows went elsewhere… the clever conceptualists in another corner… plus a bunch of people who decoupaged Adobe Illustrator images of rainbows and bird silhouettes onto wood chunks. someone out there is painting color fields. and the people throwing non-Republican tea parties as art, we’re hiding out in the kitchen.
how connected is it all, both aesthetically and in terms of the social divisions within the creative community, and informing its relationship with the inhabitants of the real world? (i’m always fascinated by the latter.)
i defer to experts like yourselves.
(i have NO IDEA whether the punk stud artist in question applies to this discussion; i’m just riffing.)
If you’re going to talk punk and art I suggest inviting V. Vale.
http://researchpubs.com/Blog/?page_id=151
I sincerely hope there will be a mosh pit @ yr panel :^) :::::: “Why now?” for a resurgence of interest in punk? IMHO: For one, isn’t retro just cyclical? For two, punk is apropos with our times—cultural chaos, nihilism and anger, economic woes, etc. For three, punk & avant garde art have a lot of overlap—including an ample dose of “fuck you.” :::::: On one hand a minimal gesture, presenting the stud as a piece of art is terrific from an erudite, art-savvy point of view. (Indeed, it is beautiful how textual interpretations blossom with deep reading. Beyond this cascade of meaning-making, the “whats” and “whys” of a less-than-1-inch-square ready made are so potent that there will be a panel to explore them. The piece of art is not the art. The art exists in the observer as they ask questions about the art. Lovely! Elegant how meaning resides in things.) :::::::: But on the other hand, magdalen22 commented that part of her response to such a minimal ready-made is “This is why people think conceptual art sucks!” When we get deeply in the know about modern art, we accept that a decorative stud on a wall is a piece of art & immediately begin reading it (Would it be better cast in another material? No: it means more as is.) In contrast, I think many people (with less art-immersed points of view) would first- and most viscerally- experience the underlying “fuck you.” :::::::: I can’t speak to Matt Green’s intent, but Duchamp’s invention of the ready-made was a huge “fuck you” to established traditions and that sentiment is carried (to some degree) in the ready-mades that follow—even if they have become part of art tradition themselves. And the same “fuck you” that made Duchamp’s first readymades shocking and outrageous is very much like the “fuck you” that made punk music shocking and outrageous. “You think (sculpture/music) is one thing? Well fuck you! It is (a urinal/punk rock)”… Uncouth, rule breaking, out of bounds. Both gestures may have become tame in time—punk has been retro for decades, ready-mades are a well known part of modern art’s foundation—but there must still be a huge portion of ppl that will hear punk and think it is a horrible offensive racket / see a ready-made and roll their eyes and think “That is supposed to be art?” :::::::: Really the stud piece is brilliant for embedding the “fuck you” of the ready-made in a piece about punk. How clever is clever enough? That is clever enough. People who don’t know theory will hate it in just the right way. But art insiders can write essays about it. :::::::: Thanks for the interesting piece & interesting comments. MCH
twitter is the mosh pit for the current generation.
why now ?
I do think that after 2 and half years of Worksound in the pdx scene, the new emerging scene is starting to getting rid of some old complexes. Artists are taught to not borrow from musicians, its ‘to low brow’. but a gallery like Worksound placed its agenda in the middle of the pit .
we curate art and music together and a punk record label in the house .
Remember Matt Green first show in pdx was at Worksound and His piece was “I am selling my record collection”, and then his first performance was at Worksound with the post punk band PISS.
why now?
there is an audience and a platform to express it.
Picks of the show here: http://www.openwidepdx.com/?p=2265
Punk is dead. Painting is dead. Long live Conformist Sculpture. :)
Excellent show everyone, but I would argue that this show isn’t about “punk” at all. Rather it is about our new-ish hipster generation, and how “punk” has become flacid and the counter-culture is now the mainstream. A superficial counter-culture brought on by some type of consumerist subconscious telling us for decades that we are all unique and alternative. Suicidal Tendencies are now just as “punk” as Pepsi is. Fuck them anyway, I drink my whiskeys with Coke. And my choice in soft drinks is my own, better than anyone else’s soft drink, and no one else shares it.
Seriously though, can we please have a panel on punk? That would be hilarious.
If we do a panel on punk, can we please secure Lee Kelly to moderate?
Lee Kelly, would be cool and all, but don’t you really think this would be a job for Tanner Dobson?
CRC, did you read what I wrote, dude? The point is, given that you and I pretty much agree, and I’m guessing the artists do too, why are artists exploring this now? Because this isn’t the only place it’s come up. The panel would not be on punk, it would be on the question of why artists are addressing it as a theme in visual art. And I do think the age of the artist is an interesting part of that equation? Did you live it? Or is it fiction for you to explore? ::::::: Modou, I think you have a good point about music/art overlaps and WS as a venue for that interaction/integration.
Ha. I totally read what you wrote. :) I suppose we are saying the exact same thing. I guess I was concerning myself with people saying that certain things in the show were really “punk” gestures. When they actually all seem to be sincere love songs to punk. Punk was a lover that left us, or worse, something that we only wish we could have fallen in love with because we are too young. Matt Green’s stud wasn’t “punk” or even a big “fuck you”, like some other commenters have suggested. It was the final note of punk’s swan song (which is sad but true). Now, who needs a beer?
sorry guys . taking back what I said . have fun .
Carl
you talking nonsense and too much. U need to be back in the studio
and get some work done. U are an artist with a bfa not a writer or a critic.
Do you want an art career by any chance ?
LOL.