What am I made of?

Tze Ming Mok, “Race You There”, Landfall 2008, Dunedin: Otago University Press, 2004, pp.18-26.


Tze Ming Mok is an Auckland born, New Zealand Chinese writer who has huge a interest in politics, sociology, literature and humanity. Her work often discusses the cultural collection of the contemporary New Zealand populace. In her writing Race You There, she explores what it means to be Asian in New Zealand and her personal experiences are shared as an example.

As an immigrant from East Asia, I found this article very friendly and familiar. In addition, the concerns about race and culture were interesting in relation to me having a creative practice here in Aotearoa New Zealand. I was born in South Korea and educated and lived in New Zealand for more than half of my life. However, by walking around Auckland city, I still get that same boring question over and over again asking me where I am originally from. May be this is one of the reasons why I still find it a little bit difficult to blend in here? I agree with Mok’s view, the Asian label has become a strong collective identifier (22). Being Asian in appearance, I think, has a strong image of appealing as alienated and ‘Asian’ disregarding our life and who we really are.

Mok expresses Asian as invisible by bringing up journalist Phil Vine’s view point, migrants and their children are magical people (22). The word invisible and magical expresses what it meant to be Asian in New Zealand very well, especially at the time of her article was written. Then again, the issues of race and culture have been loosened and the population in New Zealand is now a collection of diverse immigrants creating a multicultural society. Within this system, it deals with the concept of originality, collecting and re-contextualisation. Comparing myself with artefacts in Clifford’s article On Collecting Art and Culture, I could consider myself as globalization in terms of object. I was removed from my original package and collected and collaged into a new field of culture. For me, 'belong' or 'don’t belong' is really not a big issue anymore. Instead of my desire to categorize myself into a complex situation, I see myself as cross-boundaries between two cultures like in broken boundaries of painting and sculpture in a contemporary field. I believe my identity and originality are inseparable and so as with my cultural environment in my life now which creates who I am.



Clifford, James. "On Collecting Art and Culture." The Predicament of Culture: Twentieth- Century Ethnography, Literature, and Art. Cambrigde, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1988. 215-251.

Mok, Tze Ming. "Race You There." Landfall 208, Dunedin: Otago University Press, 2004. 18-26.

Space as Material Entity

James Meyer, “The Functional Site; or, The Transformation of Site-Specificity,” in Space, Site, Intervention: Situating Installation Art, ed. Erika Suderberg, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000, 23-37.


James Meyer is an art historian and associate professor at Emory University in Atlanta specialised in Minimalism as well as other forms of American art. In this article, he explores site-specific art of the 1960s and 70s and how it has been resuscitated and explored in more recent practice. Site-specificity as Meyer distinguishes, concerns two notions of site: a literal and a functional site. A literal site refers to a physical location like monument. He mentions Richard Serra’s thought to this approach about site-oriented works, inseparable from their location (24). In contrast, the functional site may or may not incorporate a physical site. It is a temporary thing, a process occurring between sites.

Site-specific art, whether the work concerns a literal or functional site, it needs an actual location for various reasons and this makes me question the value of site within a contemporary art context. While my last three years studying at a contemporary art institution, I had a huge interest in sculpture and art installation. In addition, while producing artworks, I keep questioning what art is in a contemporary context, but I tend to care less about the site that contains the art. Maybe this is caused by my studio environment that art school provided for me. There are plain white walls waiting for me to engage with and this directly makes me think that I need to produce some work in it. In addition, plain white walls are obviously allowing the audience to interact with artworks without any interruption and this could be the reason why I look at white walls as neutral and forget their own value by themselves.

Meyer (25) noted that ‘site-specific work exposes space as material entity, a no longer neutral place, a backdrop for the merchandising of portable art objects’. Site-specifici art merged together with Land art, started off with idea of de-contextualisation of the gallery and museum space. Artworks challenged the notion to be made and viewed outside the gallery space breaking boundaries of the art world. For example, Spiral Jetty 1970 is one of most well known site-specific earthworks by American artist Robert Smithson located in the Great Salt Lake. This work is clearly showing one of his goals which was to place work in the land rather than on the land.[1] According to his view, land becomes part of the work and cannot be read inseparable. In addition, the value of space in site-specific art can be seen as the most important part of the artwork acting as material entity. Furthermore, if the functional aspect of the site or landscape is valued as material entity here, can site within an art institutional frame be any different? The relationship between art and site in a gallery setting could be expressed as artwork being with an empty white room rather than in it. The only difference could be the plain neutral site within the institutional frame functions as material to support artworks, like the people behind the stage have a hidden role for the show.


[1] Goldberg, Elyse. “About Robert Smithson." Robert Smithson. James Cohan Gallery. 13 May 2009 http://www.robertsmithson.som/introduction.html.

Art, Artist and Spectator

Bruce Barber, “Found Situations 1970-1972”, ZX #4: Situations, ed. Paul Cullen & Grant Thompson, Auckland: Manukau School of Visual Arts, 2008, pp. 10-14.


Bruce Barber is an artist, curator, writer, and educator. In his article Found Situations 1970-72, he discusses his background, interests, and influences in his art practice. Barber’s practice, particularly his early performance pieces were influenced by conceptual art, International Situationists, arte povera, Fluxus, and the Marcel Duchamp readymade.

Barber (10) noted that during his early career as an artist, he was challenged by Duchamp’s ‘rendezvous with the ready-made’ and his proposal, ‘artist only does part of the work which the spectator completes’. Readymade is produced by transforming a manufactured object in a process of cancelling its own function and giving new thought to the object. This process is giving the artist the power to call their choice of object or art. Duchamp's theory, "its art if you say it is" is evidence to the principle of what is art is defined by the artist. If making a choice is the artist’s role as an example, what is the spectator’s role towards the completion of the work? In addition, what is the artist’s responsibility to her or his spectator? For Duchamp, the artist is a 'mediumistic being' who does not really know what he is doing or why he is doing it. In addition, the spectator is the one who, through a kind of 'inner osmosis', deciphers and interprets the work’s inner qualifications, relates them to the external world (qtd. in Tomkins 3). For him, the role of the spectator is equally important to the role of the artist’s.

Duchamp’s theory "it's art if you say it is", has for years been influencing lots of artists untill the present bringing up many positive and negative issues. One of the issues can be seen in Emily Vey Duke’s article Suffering, Empathy, Art and the Greater Good written in 2005. Duke (9) argues that the influence of Duchamp’s theory creates problems in the contemporary art world because art is suffering such a crisis of irrelevance to the public at large. I cannot totally agree with this, but her point of view is convincing. It is true that work produced by contemporary artist is not appealing to many non-art-initiated viewers. This could be caused by the expanded field of modernism continuously developing from what is already available in the art world at present. The world of art gets more and more complex and harder to understand, it limits the spectators into those who have relevant knowledge to be able to actually engage with the work. Artists are producing work using their own personal skills and knowledge in a contemporary art field and spectators also needs their own personal knowledge and experience in order to engage and make interpretations of the work through their perception. I think this issue cannot be fixed within artist’s abilities, but are artists at least trying to take responsibility? Or is this problem even an issue to contemporary artists today? “Fuck-you-if you-don’t get-it” attitude is really not helping, neither is the equally popular “it-doesn’t-matter-if-it-means-anything-to-you-this-is-about-me (Duke 9)."



Duke, Emily V. “Suffering, Empathy, Art and the Greater Good.” C Magazine Issue 85 Spring 2005: 8-10.

Tomkins, Calvin. The Bride & the bachelors. New York: Viking press, 1965.

Sculpture in the Expanded Field

Rosalind Krauss, "Sculpture in the Expanded Field", October, Vol.8 (Spring, 1979), pp.30-44.


Rosalind Krauss is an American art critic, professor, and theorist. She attempts to understand the phenomenon of modernist art, in its historical, theoretical, and formal contexts. In her 1979 essay Sculpture in the Expanded Field, Krauss summarizes the development of American sculpture in the 1960s and 1970s. One of the main ideas from this article is showing the issues dealing with the category of sculpture, as it became almost infinitely malleable in the contemporary context (Krauss 30).

Krauss adopted the term ‘expanded field’ from Robert Morris as an extended physical and mental terrain for understanding ‘sculpture’ (Rendell 41). In the term ‘expanded field’, sculpture like in all other categories of art, lost its own logic. Sculpture was inseparable from the logic of the monument functioning as commemorative representation until the late nineteenth century. However in the expanded field as Krauss expresses, the boundaries between sculpture and architecture, sculpture and landscape, and landscape and architecture became unclear. The territory of sculpture has been, and still is continuously extending while artists are experimenting with its limits, seeking to understand what sculpture is. The field of sculpture with mode of practice are constantly evolving, therefore issues with territory are no longer seen as a big topic. For example, contemporary art institutions like Elam School of Fine art offer an interdisciplinary studio environment to allow students to experiment with a broad range of art and gain insight into developing infinite possibilities.

Furthermore, I agree with Krauss’s viewpoint of how the category of sculpture has been extended to include just about anything (30). This could be impacted by Duchampian paradigm, “Its art if you say it is.” A work by conceptual artist Martin Creed, Work No 79, some Blue-tack kneaded, rolled into a ball and depressed against a wall 1933, can be seen as extended physical and mental form in the contemporary sculpture. This installation piece is also dealing with the issue of art being dysfunctional outside of art an institutional frame. A piece of Blue-tack depressed against a wall can be easily found in our everyday life evidencing the idea of sculpture as being infinitely malleable. In addition, like in Duchampian paradigm, anything can be art if the artist says so? Today we are not so sure how to define sculpture. I think Krauss’s point of view is convincing especially in the context of the period it was written and some of the ideas and issues she discussed are clearly still valid in the world of contemporary art today.


Rendell, Jane. “The Expanded Field.” Art and Architecture: A Place Between. New York: I.B.Tauris & Co Ltd, 2006.

What is relationship between image and language?

W.J.T. Mitchell, excerpt from chapter “What Is An Image?”, Iconology: Image, Text, Ideology, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1986, pp. 40-46.


Mitchell, a professor of English and Art History at the University of Chicago, explores the idea of imagery by questioning what an image is and what is the difference between image and word. The main idea from this article is showing the tension and struggle between image and word caused by varying arguments including the idea that image and word are fundamentally different in nature.

As a student studying contemporary art, I see image as visual language and word as symbol disregarding the context of being classified and categorised. I agree with Mitchell’s view, image and word immersed in each other, and his argument about the pictorial expression is capable to form an act of ventriloquism (41). In Renaissance art and religious iconography as examples, each artwork acts as visual language by creating a specific mood or feelings that allow viewers to form a narrative. Formal aspects like facial expression, gesture, composition, colour, and subject matter are functioning as hidden clues from the artist. In addition, in prehistoric times, people could not read or write. They used symbols and images as a form of writing system functioning as transmitting information.

Image may function as visual language, however like in Mitchell’s purpose of questioning how much the label would be worth without the picture and how much the picture would be worth without the label, both image and word are only capable of constituting part of thoughts. Each person sees an image differently and read and understands the word differently because of our prior knowledge and our independent experience.

Additionally, through studying contemporary art, I learned that communicating through artwork today could be considered limited to those who have a lack of knowledge about contemporary art theory. In American criticism Tom Wolfe’s book The Painted Word, he questions how Modern art could be literary. This is because art theory of Modern art is complex. Modern movements from approximately twentieth century began with the rejection of the literary nature of arts like nineteenth century and Renaissance paintings which painted scenes straight from literature to form a visual language.[1] In conclusion, I like to argue the relationship between image and word that can be seen as parallel to the relationship of the Egyptian Plover bird with a crocodile.

[1] Wolfe, Tom. “Tom Wolfe." The Painted Word. Picador. 19 March 2009 http://www.tomwolfe.com/PaintedWordExcerpt.html.