Andreas methods 23-01-19

See the previous versions of this text on Andreas methods 05-12-18

Version 3 from 23-01-19

Synopsis on Life, Once more: Forms of reenactment in contemporary art by Sven Lütticken and The Culture of the Copy: Striking Likenesses, Unreasonable Facsimiles by Hillel Schwartz

Introduction

I am working on a project that deals with originality. Where does inspiration end and copying start? As a first step I would like to summarize and analyze the act of reliving the past. Staging various events in reality seems to have appealeded to a lot of people, as depicted by Sven Lütticken and Hillel Schwartz.

Synopsis on Life, Once More: Forms of reenactment in contemporary art by Sven Lütticken

In the chapter ‘An Arena in Which to Reenact’ Sven Lütticken specifies that performative art tries to fight repetition with repetition, ultimately recharging the past by duplicating the events. The writer expresses that history is coming from authors, who are actors and spectators at the same time. Taking the 1960s as an example, he says that people should submit themselves as commodities rather than consume commodities passively. The labor crowd shall step out of being interchangeable and rather become, or ‘perform’ (Lütticken) as a unique commodity-person. That representation is happening in every society ‘(…) with people presenting themselves in ways that seem favorable and suited themselves (…)’. (Lütticken, 2005, p. 17) He depicts how Festzüge (a large civilian parade) developed into the more narrative form of pageants, where they tried to break out from the limitations of the stage and is also showing the downside of reenactments: He states that they can also be a denial instead of a real engagement with history and underlines this with the example of the Jonestown Re-enactment. Lütticken compares it to the nineteenth-century culture, ‘in which the French Revolution had revived, relived, reenacted ancient Rome.’ (Lütticken, 2005, p. 43) Referring to the ‘Storming of the Winter Palace’, Lütticken points out that reenactments can also be over-dramatised and proves this with research done by Slavoj Žižek: Instead of being played by a small group of Bolsheviks, it became a participatory mass theater. Furthermore Lütticken states that in Contemporary Art reenactment has the freedom to be an extremely literal repetition, or on the other hand, very free in variation. He describes that historical reenactment may help people escape daily life, but may also be an archaic challenge to the present. Ultimately he displays that everything is open to appropriation and mainstream historical reenactment may provide impulses eventually creating new spaces for possible, extraordinary work.

Synopsis on The Culture of the Copy: Striking Likenesses, Unreasonable Facsimiles by Hillel Schwartz

In the Chapter ‘Once More, With Feeling’ Hillel Schwartz is talking about reenactments and replications. Schwartz begins with the game ‘Little Wars: a game for boys from twelve years of age to one hundred and fifty and for that more intelligent sort of girl who likes boys’ games and books.’ by H.G. Wells. He draws parallels between the game's strategic values to the tactics of chess. The author depicts the importance of drill in-between strategy and tactics on parade grounds as well as killing grounds. Maurice, Prince of Orange, captain-general of Holland introduced drill during the 1950s to improve flexibility and speed, ultimately gaining the decisive advantage in battles. He states that the repetition of exercising with tabletop wargames ‘would be the equivalent drill for officers.’ (Schwartz, 2000, p. 260) Over decades this has played an important role at war, but in another form: the form of a green table, being used by Napoleon as well as German coastal commanders on D-Day. ‘The kriegspiel had to consist of attacks whose repetition led to unintended results.’ (Schwartz, 2000, p. 263) Of similar use are modern computer programs that support war games or even instigate nuclear alerts, like the NORAD war game in 1979. But war games can also be a mode of denial, he says, by quoting Peter Young's idea ‘One has yet to see an enjoyable evening’s play based on the destruction of Nagasaki.’ (Schwartz, 2000, p. 268) Schwartz then talks about museums being opened to the pageantry and public education around 1900. He states that history must outlive the past and puts up the famous epigram ‘Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.’ (Schwartz, 2000, p. 271) by the philosopher George Santayana. The writer states, that the illusion of reversibility can also be a reason for reenactments, like the Battle of Bull Run, in which the North and South join in the end to sing ‘God Bless America’. Or American veterans who return to Vietnam to recover from their trauma. He sums it up perfectly: ‘What’s done, if it can’t be undone, can be redone, once more, with feeling.’ (Schwartz, 2000, p. 280)

Conclusion

According to Schwartz, wargames' initial idea was to practice for parties involved in a real act of war. Having its roots in the tactics of drill in the 1590s (Schwartz, 2000, p. 260) it became an essential tool to lay out various, potential scenarios. Overall it is interesting to see where reenactments are coming from and how different their purpose can be. After all, this shows that ‘copying’ in the form of acting can serve as a way to identify with the ‘original’, or to pass wisdom along history. Very interesting is the illusion of reversibility, by reenacting but changing minor details or the whole outcome. On one hand, reenactment is a dangerous concept of faking the past, but also a possibility to create new, original work.

Relating to (fine) art it is interesting to see which of these concepts artists apply to their work and how they make use of it.

Bibliography:

Lütticken, S., 2005. Life, once more. Witte De With, Rotterdam., pp. 17, 43

Schwartz, H., 2000. The Culture of the Copy, 4th ed. MIT Press, New York, NY., pp. 260, 263, 268, 271, 280