In view of Barney

In Nat Trottman's "Ritual Space/Sculptural Time", which does openly suggest modern physics's concept of space and time as a single continuum wherein a point in a space versus another point in space share a duration of time*, from "space/time" as a condition for the becoming of a ritual practice, the writer abstracts what I have come to accept as a fluent quality of modern art, which is, to defy the reality of binaries.  Through many attempts towards such an impossible goal, of total truths and total falses-which is then an infinitely true situation from a separate plane-I have learned that the word for a binary reality, is contradiction. Something will stand out from the other.  In the opposite condition, things would not be distinguishable.

Into his text, Trottman pulls these ideas from reviewing the sculptural performances of Joseph Beuys and Matthew Barney.  Describing Barney's Radial Drill, in which the artist uses the same objects from another work, Trottman interprets, "By juxtaposing two videos that related to the same space, Barney opened up multiple, distinct temporal zones, all of which were experienced simultaneously by the viewer"(146).  By video and the ritual, or practiced space, the objects were given a way to "exist" twice in one, sculptural space/time.  Trottman elaborates this reconstruction of time and place perception, writing, "Barney's audience was drawn at once to the distinct but equally distant points of origin.  By displaying the videos on a loop, he furthered the impression of disorientation, stretching each action's duration into an infinite repetition and generating a new, mediated sense of ritual time"(146).  Space is not collapsed in brutly physical terms, although it is indeed, a collapse of perceived space caused by a material perception.  I identify with the latter, I would describe the effects of Barney's work to operate on a level of micro-materiality, where in Barney's videos are still material; light displayed by Barney's ritual enters the eye; it is real. While Barney poses two true situations, my mind can only flicker between the two, so quickly it seems they themselves, have disappeared into one moment.*  The repetition of their plays supports my idea that ritual functions to bring back or maintain a time, even though time has changed, conditions have changed.

Barney's intended effect in Radial Drill  is well-explained by Nancy Spector, who in her work, "In Potentia: Matthew Barney and Joseph Beuys" describes the differences between the two artists, writing, "Where Beuys envisions resolution, Barney identifies tension"(25).  Nancy also states about Barney, "Within Barney's universe, form cannot materialize or mutate unless it struggles against resistance in the process"(25).  Barney's infinitely causal representations creating awkward spaces and times is stressful.  Barney's work is ironically, realistic-in contrast to his surreal actions and costumes and landscapes-in that the artist exhibits that things exist and evolve because they contradict and they do not rest at a "disappearance", things identify each other as they identify themselves.  Casual tension is always there.

True and wonderful, but, preference draws me to Joseph Beuy's theory of Social Sculpture because it also searches not only to use ritual and symbol to understand the spatial conditions in which humankind develops, it celebrates it, which also identifies with a certain "cultural ritualness"-Barney is also abound with "cultural ritualness" though it maintains a distance as well***-and requires other-dimensional scopes to bring together search and celebration as their very own.  In Beuy's universe, it seems that humankind is believed to have a small power to halt the tension that Barney exhibits, at least for a bit.

*which fully involves the second dimension and third dimension, leading off into the "fourth".

**The only word I find sufficient enough to match Barney's effect is a vietnamese word that describes the experience of numbing, slowing down, or preventing but not entirely stopping-inhibiting.

***Drawing Restraint #9, with the occidental guests.

I have questions about the two artists, in regards to ritual/symbolism and science.

Such a coincidence that modern science and modern art begin to form certain common denominators, from tubed paints during the impressionist age to computer technology, allowing reconstruction of perceptible spaces and disorientation of course,  demanding new learning and new rituals. Does this mean new science, new art forms?

My second curiousity is concerned with ritual and disorientation.  Why do we always practice rituals and symbols to imbue meaning?  How else?