First write-ups of the massive “Marina Abramović: The Artist is Present” retrospective/performance art exhibit are starting to filter in and, thanks to the AP, most are pivoting around an unfortunate 18-year-old visitor Morgan Wolfe, who was uncomfortable and “decided not to walk between two male [nude] performers.”
As part of the exhibit, several Abramović classics are reenacted, including the Imponderabilia, 1977 (that invited museum attendants to squeeze between the nude Abramović and former partner Ulay). Of 180 auditioned, a handful of alternating pairs were picked for Imponderabilia 1977/2010, updated with mix-and-match shifts of gender.
Surprise, suprise: Nudity is still shocking and, naturally, more so than 1970s Italy (original Imponderabilia performance site). All news sources are dribbling with nudity this, shock value that, sprinkled with remarks on the artist’s old “shocking” antics flagged as “masochist” and “exhibitionist.” Still, performance art making the news is good, fretful generalizations regardless.
At a talk at MoMA preceding all this, Abramović admitted that she didn’t know how long she or the tested few picked for reenactments would last. Maybe, she should have been more worried about the audience.
Shh… it’s ok. You don’t have to, if you don’t want to.
I agree with the AP. Other things I've found to be too naked: Women's beach volleyball, the Alvin and the Chipmunks CGI movie, and my own birth.
I feel like her nipples would chafe?
People are so easily offended. Art is supposed to make you feel things you don't normally feel – like being uncomfortable. The artist was apparently shocked by people's poor reaction: http://bit.ly/9ZmEjS
Gee someone finds going in-between people uncomfortably, let alone naked people, and people have issues with such a common reaction? And bad reactions to stupidity running amuck and that some want to call art, oh dear.
Now maybe if people were having bad reactions to going in between two statues that are normal sized and shaped and other exhibits were classical art, there would be an actual issue.
Even eating off a nude person is more art than all the attached images combined and i wouldnt call that art i would call that ‘display’. Display is showing something off, and usually looking for a reaction (sound familar?) and doesnt have to have any value at all. Art does and is self evident in value. Look in many of the old world churches and see the self evident value. Noone has to explain it, it just is Art. None of that display something usually abstract (ie not self evident) business and then some people make up opinions on what it means so they dont sound like total buffoons and can maneuver others thereby with their “Expert”ness and taste and knowledge.