Over the past
fifteen years I have worked in four different organizations that
were founded in New York in 1976/1977. These organizations are
all part of the history of the Alternative Arts movement in New
York, were all founded in downtown New York, all received significant
start up funding from the New York State Council on the Arts and
were originated to address under-recognized art forms, artists,
and anti-institutional curatorial practice (non-collecting) (P.S.1
and The Drawing Center) or a desire on the part of craft practitioners
to free artistic production from the factories (UrbanGlass and
Dieu Donne Papermill).
In this essay
I will present a timeline of institutions and events between the
late 1960’s to early 1970’s. The four major ideas
that I will explore are:
1. Arts and Politics
2. Identity Politics
3. The Anti-Institutional Institutions
4. Studio Craft Movement
We will see from
this timeline that the Alternative Arts Movement in New York was
intricately linked to the political and aesthetic issues prevalent
in the late 1960’s – mid 1970’s. Vacant real
estate and a soft economy also played important roles in the development
of these groups. During this time New York experienced one of
its worst economic crises – leaving large swaths of the
city undeveloped and empty buildings, schools, and warehouses
were left vacant. At the time a handful of politicians and city
planners were cognizant of the fact that culture could be a way
to stimulate the economies of certain geographic locations. Through
the auspices of the government arts agency called The New York
State Council on the Arts and their leadership significant start
up grants were given to these groups once they had assembled and
gotten their non-profit status and governance in place. In addition,
Borough Presidents (who today have little power) were able to
turn over abandon city buildings, repurpose them for cultural
use and make them CIG’s (Cultural Institution Groups) which
were then added to the city’s line item budgets in perpetuity.
This was an important step in helping these groups stabilize early
on and has provided the basis for survival moving forward. Of
course city funding has not keep apace with rising budgets and
often when things are bad economically in New York the culture
budgets are the first to be slashed which in turn means cutbacks
of staff, hours and offerings at CIG’s.
I also want to
highlight that many of these spaces were direct offshoots of political
action groups protesting the war and policies at the major museums
like MoMA, the MET, and the Whitney. Today there is still ongoing
scrutiny of many of the issues raised by these groups including:
the percentage of women and people of color represented in museum
exhibitions and in permanent collections, how often these works
are shown, what kind of position museums take in relation to sensitive
racial and political topics. However, overall, there seems to
be a more collegial relationship between organizations and even
wholesale affiliations between old enemies (P.S.1 and MoMA).
Arts and Politics
The beginning
of the Alternative Space Movement is very much tied to the social
and political movements of the late 1960’s when artist,
writers and other creative people began to mobilize in protest
against the Vietnam War. This then turned into broader protests
and actions in relationship to artists’ individual rights
in institutional contexts. Among the important groups and actions
that laid the groundwork for the Alternative Space Movement were:
Artists and Writers Protest against the War in Vietnam (aka Artist
Protest), 1965; Art Workers’ Coalition, 1969; Artists Poster
Committee, 1969; Guerrilla Art Action Group, 1969; Art Strike,
aka New York Artist Strike, aka Art Strike against Racism, War
and Oppression, 1970; and Artists Meeting for Cultural Change,
1975.
The Art Worker’s
Coalition (AWC) had the most far reaching impact on the development
of Alternative Spaces in New York. AWC was started in response
to the artist Takis removing his sculpture from MoMA because he
did not want to be represented by the piece in the Machine exhibition
they were organizing. The work was in MoMA’s collection
so this created a problem and a question as to what rights artists
had in relationship to their work being show once it was in a
museum collection. A group of artists and then director of MoMA
Bates Lowry meet to discuss their demands. AWC held a forum on
April 10th 1969 at SVA and later redefined its demands to MoMA
and all New York museums. They published the transcript of the
“Open Hearing” at SVA and also produced Documents
I which surveyed the groups activities up until 1971 when they
officially disbanded. Some of the documents from the “Open
Hearing” are available on the internet, are still quite
relevant today and are very much worth reading. They can be found
at http://www.journalofaestheticsandprotest.org/5/articles/forkert.htm.
Identity Politics
AWC mobilized
activity around ethnic, gender, and sexual orientation in relationship
to institutional exposure and professional inequities faced by
people of color, women and the gay and lesbian community in the
art world both in terms of exhibition possibilities, recognition
in the canon and the issue of culturally underserved geographic
areas in the city. Out of AWC several non-profit arts organizations
were founded in the 1970’s including Studio Museum in Harlem,
El Museo Del Barrio in the Bronx, and the Bronx Museum of Art,
who were focused on black and Hispanic audiences and neighborhoods.
These organizations became CIG’s (Cultural Institution Groups
on city owned property, in city owned buildings that receive annual
line item support from the NEW YORKDepartment of Cultural Affairs)
in the late 1960’s early 1970’s.
Among the important
groups who played a role in shaping the discussion about ethnic
representation in museums were the Black Emergency Cultural Coalition
1968 – 1969 (BECC), which was founded after the Whitney
Museum’s “1930’s: Painting and Sculpture in
America” in 1968 failed to include aNew YorkBlack artists.
Under Henri Ghent’s guidance the group produced a counter
exhibition at the Studio Museum called Invisible Artists: 1930.
BECC was also involved with a critique and demonstration of Harlem
on My Mind, an exhibition at the MET in 1969 curated by Allan
Schoener under Thomas Hoving. Their mission statement at the time
was to be “an action-oriented, watchdog organization to
implement the legitimate rights and aspirations of the individual
artists and the total arts community.” Later BECC was involved
with an Art in Prison program and most notably worked with artists
and writers in Attica before the riots in 1971.
During this time
there was also a significant amount of organizing being done around
gender issues in the art world. The Women Artists in Revolution
(WAR), founded in 1969, an offshoot of AWC fought for women’s
rights in the art world. WAR organized art actions, newsletters,
posters, wrote articles, and met with museum representatives.
Their mission statement and list of demands included “Museums
should encourage female artists to overcome centuries of damage
done to the image of the female as an artist by establishing equal
representation of the sexes in shows, museum purchases, and on
selection committees. As well groups like: Ad Hoc Women’s
Artist’s Committee, 1970, which was formed to specifically
address the low number of women artists included in the Whitney’s
Annual (later Biennial) exhibition; A.I.R Gallery, 1972, the first
independent woman’s gallery in the US and later the Guerrilla
Girls, 1985, who combat sexism in the art world by using statically
information about gender representation in museums, all added
to the rise of importance of feminist issues in the art community
and in major cultural institutions.
The Anti-Institutional Institutions
In the late 1960’s
and early 1970’s there was a shift in the way that artists
were conceiving, producing and exhibition their work. With the
rise of Minimalism, Anti-Form Art, Street Works, the Fluxus Movement
and Performance Art, the context for art activity moved out of
the gallery and into the world. Much of the work produced during
this time could not be collected in a traditional way by museums
and often required specific sites, architectural settings our
live audiences to be activated.
In an effort to
deal with these new art forms several non-profits were founded
by artists, curators and critics who wanted to provide platforms
for this kind of work and also wanted to stand in opposition to
the canonical and rigid collecting institutions.
Among the groups
that were started during this time to address these types of issues
were: 112 Workshop / 112 Greene Street, 1970 (aka White Columns),
which was founded by Jeffrey Lew and Gordon Matta-Clark as a site
for the production of new sculpture in unexpected materials; The
Kitchen, 1971, founded by artists who were frustrated that museums
and galleries were not showing video art; The Clocktower Gallery,
The Institute for Art and Urban Resources, Idea Warehouse (1971)
later becoming P.S.1 Contemporary Art Center in 1976, founded
by Alanna Heiss, whose mission was to convert abandon or under-utilized
buildings into performance, exhibition or studio spaces for contemporary
artists who were not shown in established museums; Artists Space/Committee
for Visual Arts, 1972; started by Irving Sandler and Trudie Grace,
whose mission was to provide a service organization for artists
that offered exhibitions, programming by artists, a space for
performance, cultural meetings, events, the Emergency Materials
Fund and the Independent Exhibition Program which awarded grants
to artists and groups for presenting their work in other non-profit
venues and unorthodox sites; Creative Time, 1974, founded by Anita
Contini, which took advantage of the economic downturn that emptied
hundreds of thousands of square footage of office space in Lower
Manhattan and whose original mission statement states “Public
art, as presented by Creative Time, challenges both the chronic
isolation of artists and the widespread notion that “Art”
is an elitist pastime”; The Alternative Museum, 1974 founded
with the principle that “Alternative Museums (if not all
museums) should devote themselves more often to exhibitions with
controversial substance, otherwise they won’t be alternatives
at all”; The New Museum of Contemporary Art, aka The New
Museum, 1977; founded by Marcia Tucker, a former curator at the
Whitney, who had put on several controversial shows there, whose
mission was to act as a “exhibition, information, and documentation
center for contemporary – focusing on living artists and
the work they make – work that does not yet have wide exposure
or critical acceptance. The New Museums projected scope lies between
the non-historically oriented alternative spaces and the major
museums” and The Drawing Center, 1977, founded by former
MoMA curator Martha Beck, with principle “of encouraging
work on paper, and the visibility and appreciation of drawings
which are often intimate, direct and experimental state of an
artist’s creative process … The Gallery presents shows
of promising lesser-known artists, and also historical or thematic
exhibitions by established figures.”
Studio Craft Movement
The Studio Craft
Movement also played a role in the development of the Alternative
Arts Movement. Artists working in craft materials were interested
in taking control of the means of production in craft field outside
of the factory setting by setting up independent studio in urban
settings. They also wanted to collaborate with visual arts and
anyone else interested in working with these materials. Two organizations
that were founded in New York under these auspices were: UrbanGlass,
aka New York Experimental Glass Workshop, 1976 was founded in
Soho in 1976 by artists who wanted to create a glass making studio
in New York to make their own work and also to collaborate with
visual artists, architects and industrial designers and Dieu Donné
Papermill, 1976 which started in Soho as a commercial enterprise
by two students who had graduated from the hand papermaking program
at Madison, Wisconsin. In the early 1980’s Dieu Donne was
incorporated as a non-profit and started to offer classes, residencies
and exhibition opportunities and has introduced handmade paper
to hundreds of artists and created an important and lasting body
of work in the medium.
Are Alternative Arts Groups still viable today?
The institutions and production groups that were founded in New
York during this time form the backbone of the thriving culture
scene in our city. On any given night there are public programs,
performances, exhibition openings, symposium, concerts etc in
these spaces. There is no doubt in my mind that New York would
be a much less exciting place if these spaces did not exist.
However, many of these groups are going through transitional phases
of leadership, are re-evaluating their missions and must rebuild
their boards and audiences as they go.
What should the values and activities of organizations of this
type be in 2008?
In my opinion it is interesting to re-evaluate where these institutions
stand vis a vis their relationships to the larger canonical organizations,
current events and the needs of artists. In my career I have had
first hand knowledge dealing with some of the transitional issues
that these kinds of organizations have gone through in the 1990’s
to the present as they relate to founders syndrome and coming
to grips with maintaining “core values” while discarding
outmoded thinking in relation to organizational culture, economic
models and the new reality we live in where the cultural sector
seems to privilege and absorb the contemporary in a totally overheated
art market. In my mind there are new paradigms, issues and questions
that need to be asked of artists, mediums and anti-institutional
postures to create viable and relevant organizations for the future.
I am indebted
to the exhibition at The Drawing Center called Cultural Economies:
Histories from the Alternative Arts Movement curated by Julie
Ault in 1996 and her follow up book Alternative Art New York,
1965 – 1985, published by The Drawing Center and the
University of Minnesota Press in 2002 for much of the historical
research for this talk.