Director’s Postface When I was a student, there was a moment when my compadres and I first encountered conceptual art in its purest form: a Joseph Kosuth definition piece. In that classic artwork, an actual chair was juxtaposed with its dictionary definition of “chair” and a photographic image of the same chair — three ways of expressing the same concept. We worked ourselves into a tizzy trying to figure out what role was left for our finely honed sense of rarefied aesthetics, of which we were insanely proud. How, we wondered, could one critique something as invisible as an idea? Finally one of our instructors made the possibility clearer, explaining that there could be room for aesthetic judgments with incorporeal, propositional, or anti-retinal works by using humor as the prime example: “Look, when you hear a joke, do you ask yourself ‘why is that funny?’ No. The same happens with conceptual art. The beauty or pleasure of a conceptual proposition will be as clear as day, just as the funniness of a joke is clear — at least when it is funny.” The other paradigmatic forces animating conceptual art — such as value, logic, and mystic thinking — that would complicate conceptual tropes for us in our advanced studies had not yet been encountered. So in my mind at least, the connection between conceptual art and humor was cemented, and it is still what I use with reluctant audiences. Post-war art history is dotted with humorously witty art practitioners — William Wegman, Michael Smith, Martha Wilson, The Kipper Kids, Ann Magnuson, and David Shrigley. Then there are the numerous artists whose denaturalized behaviors and performances leave viewers feeling slightly uncomfortable — wanting to laugh but being unsure if such a response would label one a rube. Such is the case with Bruce Nauman’s studio actions, cited as a source for John Wood and Paul Harrison in Toby Kamps’s essay in this volume. Goofy walks and silly puns are at the core of much absurdist humor. Laughing comes easy, but it seems inappropriate when one thinks one is in a temple of culture. But museums are as much spaces of play as worship, and rarely is laughter an inappropriate response. Artists who grant us permission to laugh do not cause more complex thoughts to vanish, but they do change the nature of those thoughts. 210
When experienced over laughter, the cultural authority of “art” reveals itself as a mere proposition for us to interpret as we may, rather than holy writ to be accepted. I would say this is a change for the better. Were I to teach a similar group of proud undergrads, I would start the lesson in conceptualism with the irresistible art of Wood and Harrison, and in some ways I have. At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, one of my jobs was to program a video art wall in a main corridor of the campus, and on many days hundreds of people would pass by, but only a small percentage would stop and watch for a bit. They were the very definition of a “non-art-world” crowd, and amongst the least likely to self-describe as fans of conceptualism. One had to work hard to find artwork that was important art but would also penetrate the over-full minds of MIT students. In that context Wood and Harrison were amazing ambassadors for conceptualism. Their comedy was physical and cerebral in equal measure — British comedic restraint mixed with slapstick. They were perfect for that odd context. Comedy is all about timing, and one of the glories of video as an art form is that one can perfect the timing in the editing process. Busy students and professors on their way to classes often didn’t wait for the magic moments, but those who did were hooked — and late for class. This show began when Kamps and former CAMH Interim Director Linda Shearer — now at Houston’s estimable Project Row Houses — were in their former positions at Cincinnati’s Contemporary Arts Center. Those of us enjoying the show today in Texas should be grateful for a long-ago conversation in Ohio, and for Shearer’s insight into the possibility that these two English lads would beguile American audiences (their prior museum exposure has been almost exclusively in the UK, Europe, and Japan). Many folks have been involved in bringing this project from dream to reality: Ralph Rugoff, Director, Hayward Gallery, London, first introduced these artists to Kamps; Jeffrey Grove, now Hoffman Family Senior Curator of Contemporary Art, Dallas Museum of Art, in his earlier role as a Curator at the High Museum in Atlanta, helped Kamps create the show into its current form; and Nicholas Baker, Director of fa projects, the artists’ London gallery, was a tireless promoter of their work from 2001 until he closed its doors in 2009, and he continues to be instrumental in Wood and Harrison’s renown today. Several of our colleagues will be hosting this exhibition, and we
thank them for sharing our enthusiasm. We are grateful that Kathryn Kanjo, former Director of University of California, Santa Barbara’s University Art Museum, Raechell Smith, Founding Director of Kansas City Art Institute H&R Block Artspace, and Mark Scala, Chief Curator, Frist Center for the Visual Arts, Nashville, are helping CAMH and Toby Kamps to show Wood and Harrison to a larger American public. All the many supporters of CAMH have helped make this exhibition a reality, but it’s really the work of our Major Exhibition Fund donors that allows CAMH the opportunity to pursue curatorial excellence unencumbered. Their vision and generosity year after year allows our great curators to do their important scholarly work. Being able to count on them is the lifeblood of our museum, enabling us to mount large-scale exhibitions of artists who have little commercial support in the USA. This catalogue is made possible by a grant from The Brown Foundation, Inc. Their support is pivotal for allowing the research and argument so carefully developed for those who may never experience the physical exhibition. Although not seeing the installed version of the show would be a shame as it is as an experience in real space and time that the case for these artists is made most irresistibly. In the 2011 lifestyle of ubiquitous floating screens, too often we fall under the delusion that all videographic works are essentially endlessly resizable and reformatable, unchanged when translated from an iPhone to an IMAX screen. That is not the case with Wood and Harrison’s work. Kamps and the artists, with the active collaborations of his CAMH colleagues Tim Barkley, Jeff Shore, Kenya Evans, and Bret Shirley, worked hard to create an irresistible installation. All of the CAMH staff have once again brought their considerable expertise in making this an exhibition to be engaged, enjoyed, and cherished. Special thanks go to Curatorial Manager Justine Waitkus who made the exhibition happen during Kamps’s transition period. Seeing their level of shared vision and mission was a daily treat that I will miss, as I am sure, will they. It is fitting that curator Toby Kamps should end his tenure at the Contemporary Arts Museum Houston with a show by Wood and Harrison. During his three and one-half years, Kamps’s CAMH shows were marked by a gentle humor. As a curator, friend, and colleague, Kamps’s regard for arts in all forms, as an amiable conversation, will be missed at CAMH.
It is a great pleasure to work again with John Wood and Paul Harrison and I can honestly say they are as witty and friendly as they appear to be in their work. Their vision and talent are breathtaking and although this exhibition is a survey designed for audiences on a new continent, I can assure you it is merely an introduction to work by artists you will be seeing much more of in the future. Bill Arning Director, Contemporary Arts Museum Houston
211