Seed Time: a report from documenta fifteen

Kassel, Germany, June–September, 2022

In a quiet room, a worn, knitted hammock sways in the light breeze, while sunbeams from the window gleam on the orange-red tiled floor. There's a yellow table, a wooden chair, and some leafy plants in the background, and not much else. The video, presented by the Nhà Sàn Collective as part of their documenta fifteen installation, moves slowly through a series of scenes like this: gentle, unassuming still-life tableau, seemingly shot in someone's nice, modest home, with very little movement (or none at all). It's a piece that would make a lot of sense installed in a wooden shed, by a garden: a place where, it feels, the world requires of you only to either work or rest, a place that invites the calm. At the same time, though, it's a piece that likely wouldn't work in a white-walled gallery/museum space: it might come off as aimless, or meandering, or detached. We're lucky, then, that in this case there was indeed a garden, and a shed, and an outdoor kitchen, and a collection of seeds from Vietnam, and a pair of large porcelain vases, and many other things, all of it sitting quietly in a semi-abandoned courtyard, waiting for visitors.

documenta happens every five years in Kassel, a small German city about two hours from Berlin. In an art world replete with recurring contemporary survey exhibits—your various biennials and such—documenta is probably the biggest perennial art show out there. And, it is big. It's hard to convey just how big documenta fifteen was—as a cultural event, sure, but even just as a physical thing. The show ran from June to September of 2022—about a thousand hours in total—and I genuinely wonder: what if someone had wanted to take all of it in? To read every book-length text, interact meaningfully with every participatory installation, watch every feature-length documentary video, read the transcripts of every panel discussion, listen to every podcast? Would a thousand hours even have been enough time? I honestly don't think it would have been. (At one point, I spoke with a visitor who was on her sixth day at the show, and she said that she still hadn't seen most of it.) It's not just that there was so much art to see, but also where the art actually was: more than thirty venues across the city of Kassel and into the neighboring town of Fulda, including a church, a public pool, a bus factory, a 16th-century fortress, a dilapidated nightlife complex, a subway underpass, a compost heap.

Kassel is sleepy in parts, but it's a pretty bustling place overall, with lots of nightclubs and a posh, downtown shopping district. You sense that this place is well used to accommodating affluent tourists, but still, the city goes all out for documenta. There are colorful documenta banners that you see first thing in the train station, the municipal buses are plastered in documenta signage, the restaurants downtown serve documenta-themed meals, and the local shops sell documenta umbrellas, documenta wallets and documenta handbags. There's even documenta-branded beer. Kassel has an abundance of museums—a Brothers Grimm museum, a museum of local agricultural history, a museum of death (the Museum of Sepulchral Culture, it's called)—and documenta seems to have claimed a significant chunk of space in all of them. At some point, it starts to feel a bit like an invasive plant (a benignly invasive plant): these curious little art projects that have sprouted up in various rooms across town, a welcome disturbance to the normal way of things, but still certainly a disturbance.

There was a particular seriousness to documenta fifteen. Not that there wasn't anything funny—there was actually a lot of humor throughout—but it was cut with a kind of severity, or solemnity. Thinking here of the installation by graphic novelist Nino Bulling, which involved loosely drawn, intimate comic-book panels printed on fabric, draped from the ceiling and lit with a fuzzy red light. There was a playful sweetness to this work, and also a strange or even ominous sense of intimacy, the images hanging like the scent of someone who's just left the room. Fehras Publishing Practices, a Berlin-based research collective, presented an installation on the culture of the Afro-Asian Solidarity Movement, and this piece also functioned as a sort of graphic novel. Individual panels of cheeky digital photos and brightly colored text, printed six feet high and fastened to large wooden stands, ordered together to form a sort of miniature labyrinth. It's an ambitious, compelling piece, but it was a bit clunky as an installation, and that kind of thing was an issue all throughout the show: when an exhibiting artist is a nebulously formed collective, or an activist project rooted in a particular location, their work might go through some punishing contortions before it can fit into a gallery space. One of the most charming pieces in the show is "Moondog": a giant, floppy dog puppet whose use has been shared between several different theater companies. It's a great puppet, but without a corps of performers to activate him, he just lays there, his jaw sagging onto the gallery floor.

documenta has always had a political cast to it (the first edition, in 1955, was meant to showcase art that had been banned by the Third Reich), but documenta fifteen wears its politics in a way that I haven't seen before at this kind of art show. This edition was curated by ruangrupa, an Indonesian collective, and the show centers collectivity and social practice, rather than the big-name gallery artists who've anchored previous editions. At times, it felt almost like some sort of educational program about modern-day collective practice, not an "art show." This isn't to diminish the work of any of the participants, which was often impressive and—so help me—inspiring, but it's hard to fully grasp these projects as a visitor (and tricky to try and evaluate them as a critic). Often, while walking through the various spaces of documenta, you'd come across a messy art studio with clay sculptures still in-progress on plastic-covered stools, or an outdoor meeting-room with a half-erased blackboard agenda, or a cache of crayon drawings by excited preschoolers, and all you could say, really, is that something happened here. At one point I came across a bunch of tattered, yellow chairs, arranged in a circle, and I honestly don't know if this was part of a project, or a project itself, or maybe just a bunch of yellow chairs.

So, you have collectives like Black Quantum Futurism, a small group based in Philadelphia, who created (among other things) a performance stage, printed advertisements, and a fanciful machine that asks visitors to submit their own thoughts on time and space (this was the piece installed in the subway underpass). There's FAFSWAG, an Aotearoa/New Zealand–based collective dedicated to queer, indigenous representation, whose work features its own members as colorful fictional characters, splashed onto trading cards, or music videos, or a delightful Mortal Kombat–like video game in which they dance-battle against one another. The Subversive Film collective curated a program of rare anti-imperialist documentaries from Tokyo. The film studio Wakaliga Uganda screened Football Kommando (2022), a collectively produced action movie. Tunisian group El Warcha created a rough-and-ready prototyping studio. The Fondation Festival sur le Niger presented wide-eyed, handmade marionettes used in activist street theater productions. The Port-au-Prince–based Atis Rezistans | Ghetto Biennale organized an exhibition within the exhibition: a bracing show of Haitian artists in a run-down German church.

Meanwhile, projects by individual artists often felt at-odds with this collective impulse but, predictably, they were some of the best works in the show. I really liked Graziela Kunsch's installation Public Daycare (2022), which not only worked well as a sculptural assemblage of mid-twentieth-century research on parenting practices, but which also functioned as a literal daycare over the course of the exhibit. Ultimately, the work is a lesson in how childhood is a space (one of many) in need of a liberatory politics. Safdar Ahmed's installation Border Farce-Sovereign Murders-Alien Citizen (2022) uses the language of DIY subcultures to tell his story of migration and detention in Australia: the harshness and morbidity of contemporary death metal echo through his own tale of violence and trauma. Pinar Öğrenci's film Aşît (2022) includes long, composed shots of her father's wintry mountain hometown in Turkey: placid, but with a cold, creeping dread.

documenta fifteen was a show of happenings, spaces, motions, feelings. I remember one moment, standing next to the graffiti-strewn indoor skatepark (a project of Thai collective Baan Noorg Collaborative Arts and Culture), looking at the big, operative printing press (provided by ruangrupa for use by other collectives), and then a guy climbed up there and started playing the drums. I don't know who the guy was, or why he did that, or why the printing press had a drum kit on top of it.

Thinking about it all now, the sensation that rings the most is one of grittiness, or dirtiness. Climate change and environmentalism had a heavy presence throughout, and in multifaceted work by Asia Art Archive, Britto Arts Trust, Cao Minghao & Chen Jianjun, and INLAND (among others), we always seem to come back to the earth, the soil, the ground. Amol K Patil's work (which was on view in a dark basement) included expansive, ground-level "stages" filled with subtly vibrating dirt. Nguyễn Trinh Thi's installation (a personal highlight) used programmed lights to cast the shadows of chili plants against the decaying walls of Kassel's Rondell, a 500-year-old defensive tower; as if by magic, the plants become instantly recognizable as human beings or, at least, some elemental trace of such, some part of something human. Jumana Emil Abboud's work (also a personal highlight) included gentle paintings, yellow wax talismans, and mournful verse penned in white ink: a sad conversation between Palestinian folk tradition, an individual person, and the land at her feet, culminating in a video in which Abboud reads poems about death over footage of a rushing, muddy stream. Hamja Asahn's tongue-in-cheek ideological chicken-shop signs (e.g. "Fanon Fried Chicken: Fast Food for the Wretched of the Earth") feel slicker than the rest of the show, with their industrially sanded edges, LED lights, and scholarly reference points, but these works, too, come back down to earth: through their evocation of a fast, greasy fried-chicken dinner. The UK-based Project Art Works collective facilitates painting workshops among neurodivergent and developmentally disabled members, and those paintings remind us that traditional art materials are also matters of grit and earth, masses of oil and mud: a tool for the people.

It seems terribly naive to call an art show "radical" when you can also buy an umbrella with the show's logo on it, but I do think there was something radical about documenta fifteen. I mean, there were moments of it, like a low pulse. At the very least, radical politics had a visible presence in this show, which is certainly not the case for most big art shows. It was those same visible politics that caused some controversy at this edition of documenta, largely due to the work of Taring Padi, an Indonesian collective that produces densely detailed agitprop paintings, many of them meant as literal protest signs. The group was accused of antisemitism because of some cartoonish characters in one of their large-scale murals, who were said to be based in antisemitic tropes (one of them had a long nose, some of them were anthropomorphized pigs), causing months of debate and leading some works to be removed from the show. A set of archival Palestinian short films called the Tokyo Reels also sparked controversy in September, initiating calls for their removal, but ultimately the work remained on view after pushback from ruangrupa.

The artistic avant-garde is, and always has been, friendly with leftist movements, but art museums often treat political radicalism as something taboo. After a while, you get the sense that an educated museum-goer expressing far-left sympathies would be like an office worker loudly worshiping a family of pagan gods. It's a disparity that I feel especially in the place I'm writing this, here in New York City, where community spaces keep getting bulldozed, and theaters keep going out of business, and a lot of the graffiti is actually ads for streetwear brands or cryptocurrency scams. I know it's a cliché—to write about how Europeans are just so much more cultured than Americans—but the fact is that I simply can't imagine anything like this happening in America right now (it probably helps that documenta is, largely, publicly funded, as opposed to major American exhibitions, which primarily rely on wealthy donors and trustees). American art institutions like to nod at progressive ideas but, come on, how much is that worth when you compare it to, say, New Delhi–based Party Office b2b Fadescha's documenta project, which included full-on underground queer BDSM sex parties? These parties took place in a dungeon-like stone-and-brick cellar, the churning drum and bass bouncing off the arched corridors. A project like that, in a show that also includes a daycare center, would likely be enough to get the whole thing shut down in the U.S., nevermind that those works are in different buildings, on opposite sides of town.

According to ruangrupa, documenta fifteen was meant as a grand-scale experiment in sharing, community, and solidarity. It's framed as a sort of large, collective project made up of smaller collective projects, with a sense that any individual pocket of the exhibit could be the site of a fully realized revolutionary vision. But then, revolutions don't mean much if they're confined to a single room, or museum, or art show; the question is, what comes after? Will the seeds of collective radicalism take root and germinate in the hearts of artgoers like me who took the train to Kassel for the weekend? Probably not anytime soon. I will be thinking about this show for a long time, though, as I'm sure many others will be, and that means something, right?

Party Office b2b Fadescha's project (which included those BDSM parties, as well as texts, videos, and other things) holds so much of what I found compelling about documenta overall. It's manifestly erotic work that's also deeply intellectualized, all without irony. There were funny images and phrases, but it never felt right to laugh. So, let's take it seriously: queerness and kink as a way to transcendence, the body as a site of liberation, a landscape across which beautiful revolutions are won. There's a real truth to this, and it's a truth that's so absent when picturing the fallow fields of the body in America's right-wing imaginary, a land of deceit where no instinct can be trusted. Even with doubts, I know what side I'd pick, which landscape I'd rather see on the horizon.

Fehras Publishing Practices' graphic novel was installed at Hafenstraße 76, an industrial building in Kassel far from the city center, and when I saw the piece, I was the only one in the room. On the outskirts of an unknown city, at the world's biggest art exhibit, in a large, concrete room, with the afternoon sun pouring in from the wide, industrial windows, I skimmed through a maze of six-foot-tall comic-book panels on the subject of radical cultural practice. All of these things happening at once, sensations joining together, and I was the only one to feel it, the only one who would ever stand in that particular light. It was brief, but I won't forget.

What Your Problem Is: Sommer Browning’s _Good Actors_

Good Actors, by Sommer Browning (Birds LLC, 2022)

“Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, my dear,” a scam artist told me recently. “It’s never about the money. Okay?” 

Impersonating a popular astrologer named Alice Sparkly Kat through direct messages on Instagram, the scam artist asked to “consider me” for an $80 reading. The tricky tone of this persona held me suspended between belief and disbelief for a full hour, an embarrassingly long time. The situation brought forth in me all of the attraction and skepticism, the thrall and resistance to thrall, so many of us feel when confronted by language that claims to teach us something about ourselves. I couldn’t help but think of the voice of this imposter, as well as the complicated response it elicited, as I encountered the speaker of Sommer Browning’s newest poetry collection, Good Actors, who also drew me in with potentially false promises of self-discovery and spiritual awakening.

One of the book’s recurrent elements involves the responses Browning collected to the pseudo-therapeutic question, “If you tell me which Twilight Zone episode you remember best, I can tell you what your problem is.” The poet asked this question to hundreds of people, writing “therapy-fueled aphorisms that ‘diagnosed’ their ‘problem’ inspired by their remembered episode,” as a footnote clarifies. Punctuating the length of Good Actors, these aphorisms are followed by brief meta-commentaries that—as becomes clear over the course of the book—are actual comments from the participants in response to their aphorisms. In this clever setup, the deeper we go into the psychology of the individual, the closer we come to finding that this is, in fact, a textual experiment in collectivity. Personality is a social document.

“An aphorist who hates aphorisms. A self-helper who hates the self,” goes a line in Browning’s poem “Life: A Draft (Prologue).” Yet despite this disavowal, Browning’s self-help aphorisms show a sharp aptitude for psychological analysis through the framework of television, which in turn frames the media itself as a kind of collective unconscious, capable of revealing nuanced sources of human suffering.

This makes sense from a poet, since readers have come to expect a degree of self-help from poetry. We want our poems to tell us something about ourselves, something that will make us better people, more enlightened, more evolved. But this raises the question: Why do we love so much to be told about ourselves? Why do we love to be told our flaws, our weaknesses, our failings—everything we deserve to be ashamed of? At what point does self-awareness undermine the very self we are trying to actualize?

The wording of Browning’s experiment assumes that every person’s fundamental problem is self-created and thus capable of being controlled, if only we become aware enough of what the problem is and what it means—an enlightened state that would make us bodhisattvas of the self. Browning addresses this issue cheekily, listing a host of her own favorite episodes when prompted by a participant, followed up by pages and pages of aphorisms written for herself.

 

*


After an hour of testing the astrologer’s impersonator to see if they were “real,” and then, once I was sure that they were “fake,” continuing to test them to see how much of an astrologer they could become when pressed, I blocked them, feeling my own powers of revelation waning. The astrologer’s impersonator did accidentally reveal that their real name is Jason.

According to Browning, it’s her mother’s theory that we are born actors into the movie of our choice. The ideal form of our character is our name; through our choices, we act out the rewards and consequences of a one-word script said to contain a self.

How did Jason feel, using social media to adopt someone’s else name (and identity) in order to convince me to send $80 over CashApp, while telling me it’s never about the money? It must have been sort of liberating, and very funny, acting like a guru and witnessing my fluctuations of faith in real time as we DM’d, as I nearly gave in to the role of follower.

In Browning’s title poem, “Good Actors,” the speaker wants to make a movie “about two actors exchanging money.” She gives them an evolving series of stage directions as they make their exchange: “EarnestlyReluctantlyHopefully.” When she finally directs them to fulfill this action “Lovingly,” the actors, having dropped the money at the speaker’s feet, move closer and turn off the camera. It was never about the money.

And yet, as one of the book’s epigraphs reads, “... it’s only in the movies that it’s easy” (John Cassavetes).

 

*


The Twilight Zone therapy aphorisms work as an extended joke throughout Good Actors because of their tight adherence to the form and their performative reach into the psyche curtailed by the absurdity of the premise. It’s a joke that recalls Dodie Bellamy’s highly original 2014 book The TV Sutras (Ugly Duckling Presse), another experiment in wacky yet banal self-help and spirituality through the mediated recourse of TV—it is, as Bellamy writes in her introductory note, “an inspired text born from a crisis of urban bombardment.” In The TV Sutras, the speaker’s routine includes doing yoga while watching Peaceful Weight Loss Through Yoga, meditating as if to get “into character,” then turning on the TV and channeling messages corresponding to whatever scenes arise. As with Good Actors, the media becomes fodder for psychological revelations that are both real and counterfeit.

But there seems to be something odd about “reading” actors the way we would read non-actors, since actors are conscious of being watched and scripts follow a preconstructed arc. Does life really imitate art? Bellamy’s Sutras read like subliminal messages from a marketing agency as much as the religious teachings of a guru. Browning’s experiment is more social; it is a Rorschach test, she herself notes, part Buzzfeed quiz, part psychonautic deep dive.

Perhaps what Browning resists more than “aphorisms” or “the self” is moralism. She writes freely of sex parties and other casual encounters, while Bellamy similarly blends spiritualism with a kind of comical pornography, as if to call out the fervor with which we attach ourselves to our spiritual leaders, cling to the words of our therapists, and relish our own moments in the spotlight, giving our friends advice and the like.

In Good Actors, there are instances in which the speaker seems to do things “for the story,” or because she identifies as “a poet.” This is a role Browning inhabits, a character she embodies, along with mother, gallerist, daughter, and friend. Maybe this kind of self-awareness in our roles is something we don’t talk about enough. When I do things with the goal of writing about them, which I do all the time whether it’s conscious or not, I tend to feel like an imposter. When Browning reveals herself as an actor of sorts, I understand this urge or even necessity to play the part, and recognizing myself in this phenomenon, I cringe, until I laugh.

“What is the connection between humor and excess?” Browning asks, following up with, “I don’t know.” The Twilight Zone aphorisms are funny to me because the speaker assumes excessive powers, giving her voice grandeur and conviction. The aphorisms are funny, too, because the speaker has mastered a voice she doesn’t necessarily identify with. They offer a kind of situational comedy next to the quippy lists that intercede them; without this juxtaposition it would be difficult to recognize the voice-throw, the deft change of register, when we return to our collective therapy session.

In one of the poems that take on an essayistic cast, schoolchildren ask Browning if she believes in the angels and muses some poets say speak through them. Browning says she believes in other people’s angels. Then she surprises, and terrifies, herself by saying:

 

I’ve been preparing for these angels my whole life.


The gravity of the statement, the irony of its potentially false characterization (an irony achieved through the intimacy of the text, no doubt, since I do get the sense that I know Sommer) creates a tension I find hilarious. The poet subsequently calls her to-do list “Prep for Angels” and begins to list the absurd choices and mistakes she’s made in preparation.

What’s an angel, I wonder, if not a voice that you trust to tell you what to do, a power that finds a way to justify itself to you? Angels are seductive, and they are everywhere, in this view.

 

*


I didn’t send the money to Jason. Instead, I paid to attend the “real” astrologer’s workshop, the one Jason was impersonating, the following afternoon. I went with the intention of writing about my experience there, for this essay. It happened to be a workshop on shame, and once in the Zoom meeting, I felt the expected shame wash over me. Much like Jason, I was an imposter, unsure of my own thoughts and feelings about astrology, attending less as myself than as a writer, a person of many masks, a scam artist for whom it—truly—is never about the money.

Halfway through the workshop, which entailed somatic exercises and journaling, I felt a deepening of attention, a shift. I discovered that in the construct of shame as it manifests in my body, one voice is always a god and another is always a believer.

Shame, I learned from the astrologer, can be transmuted, incorporated, for the sake of connection. With awareness of any conflict or contradiction between our various “voices” or “roles” comes the power to take creative liberties with scripts we’ve outgrown. It leads me to the question, what makes a “good actor”? If you recall, Browning’s title poem ends with the “good actors” turning off the camera. Lovingly.

Browning writes in “Single Mom,” “I want to make the mistakes / Famous people make … // I want to make these mistakes so well.” As Browning suggests, being beholden to another, even and perhaps especially through one’s mistakes, is also an aspect of love. 

 

*


Throughout Good Actors, Browning writes compellingly about intimacy through various angles—motherhood, sexuality, friendship—fulfilling her goal as a writer to communicate and connect, which is not the “given” it might sound like when it comes to poetry. One of my favorite poem-essays in the book revolves around the documentary Grey Gardens, about a mother and daughter who share the same name. What is the boundary between them, Browning asks? Lifting off from an exchange Big Edie and Little Edie have in the film, Browning ends the poem like this:

 

You’re free when you’re supported.

You’re free when you’re supported.

We measure love until everyone has it.


Elsewhere in the book, an observation about public land leads to these musings on collectivity:

 

And things that are ours
     Abide rules we learn through others.

      Yours and mine rules
      Are boring. We’re born with them.


Browning’s love is radical, exciting, with an eye to public good, encompassing even the self her speaker claims to hate. Preoccupied with the inner workings of “the joke” and “the surprise” within the confines of our current media reality, in which all of us are characterized as “followers,” Browning seeks out openings for shared relief, leaving no friend behind. 

The Promiscuity of Order: _Literally means collapse_ at SculptureCenter

In Alan Martín Segal’s short film Incomplete Disappearances (2020-21), a hand reaches down beside a wooden table and slips an object—a button, a folded scrap of paper, a patina-green die—beneath its uneven leg. The repeated gesture functions as a visual metaphor for the myriad patchwork solutions to systems that, on a whole, have fallen short of their ideal function or, perhaps, were never competent in the first place. My first encounter with Segal’s uncanny film took place at the dark terminus of a long, arched corridor on the lower floor of SculptureCenter in Queens, New York. The film was projected behind a sheet of scratched glass, giving it the eerie feel of a signal left behind from a distant apocalypse.

The exhibition, curated by In Practice curatorial fellow Camila Palomino and on view from May 12 to August 1, 2022, was fittingly titled Literally means collapse. The show featured newly commissioned, site-specific works by eleven artists, all attending to the theme of ruin. Situated mainly in SculptureCenter’s bunker-like lower level exhibition space, the works in the show evoked the precarity of built environments, social norms, and systems of exchange. Yet they invited viewers to think through and beyond the quick fixes we impose on our collapsed and collapsing environment. In the face of entropy, the artworks called for collective maintenance—in the forms of research, reenactment, and reconstruction.

In her writings on the exhibition, Palomino refers both to “the promiscuity of order” and to “the patina of order.”1 Evoking order as a concept both transient and external to form, the curator makes an argument not against the inevitable obsolescence of political and social systems but against those who stubbornly believe in their permanence and authority. The relationships between the pieces chosen for the exhibition were, likewise, more associative and poetic than they were historically or geographically bounded; their juxtaposition ultimately eschewed cohesion in favor of friction and paradox. According to Palomino, “Maintenance and entropy affirm each other. To maintain, then, is a spiral choreography of contradictions.”2 Working from this premise, Palomino and the team at SculptureCenter narrowed down a list of open call submissions to eleven artists whose contributions included:

A hand-carved roof ornament on an aluminum offering table (Allen Hung-Lun Chen)

A cash booth containing twenty-dollar bills and rose petals (Monsieur Zohore)

The doors of safes, jars of water, and a thick hand-bound book (Marco Barrera)

A wall sculpture made of knotted polyurethane tubes (Violet Dennison)

Planar sculptures painted blue and outfitted with minuscule conductors and filaments (Stella Zhong)

A film about rituals of maintenance in the city of Buenos Aires (Alan Martín Segal)

An interactive soft sculpture made to resemble the base of a Christopher Columbus statue in Astoria, Queens (Jessica Kairé)

Wall-mounted assemblages depicting public plazas in Mexican cities and towns where colonial struggles took place (Enrique Garcia)

A collection of wristwatches marking the times at which an event recorded in CIA documents occurred (Ignacio Gatica)

A heated stone bench and a miniature domicile made of drop ceiling tiles (Cherisse Gray)

A film that exposes discriminatory urban planning practices through historical reenactment (Fred Schmidt-Arenales)

Although Palomino’s idea of ruin is far removed from the eighteenth-century notion of picturesque travel destinations, ironic traces of romanticism can be found in Marco Barrera’s installation Reservoirs (2022), a collection of steel doors detached  from safes once used in businesses as well as in homes across the U.S. When they were produced at the turn of the twentieth century, the insides of these safes were sometimes decorated by artists—whose identities are no longer known—with miniature paintings depicting idyllic pastoral scenes replete with flowing water. Barrera purchased and transported these painted doors—some weighing up to five-hundred pounds—from various locations around the country where they had fallen into disrepair. On the four doors that made up Reservoirs, the paintings were scuffed and peeling, faded and marred from casual handling and nearly illegible in the dim light of the basement corridor. Although the interior of a safe might be a space associated with protection and preservation, such images of ruin—for instance, two cows grazing by a river in a yellowed landscape beneath a gashed sky—brought into focus the delusion and absurdity of accumulation.

Farther down the hall, Barrera presented a second installation, in many ways a sister to the first, titled Drawing a line backwards (2022). Here, four shelves displayed jars of water labeled with the locations from which they were sourced, including sites around the city of New York such as Empire City Casino, Rikers Island, and a sewer on Canal Street (where the water runs pink). The installation was created in collaboration with—and previously exhibited at—the Canal Street Research Association (CSRA), a roving pop-up founded and maintained by artists Ming Lin and Alexandra Tatarsky, who wrote an essay titled “On Water” for the installation's accompanying publication. This hefty tome rested on a wooden chair across from the shelves, its homey set-up beckoning viewers to sit and read.

According to Palomino, Barrera’s water archive is a means of self-education—an attempt to understand the city in a personal way—and his collaboration with CSRA puts forth a view of research as dérive, or meandering, as method.3 Early on in the pandemic, CSRA occupied a storefront on Canal Street and invited artists like Barrera to contribute snapshots, artifacts, and stories of the thoroughfare’s history, including the pollution and eventual burial of the canal underneath the present-day pavement. Drawing a line backwards is a direct extension of this project. As for why the artists chose water as the subject of their research, Lin and Tatarsky argue in “On Water” that urban development suppresses the way water flows and meanders, mistaking this imposed rigidity for progress.4 When research is conducted for the purpose of maintaining collective memory, the promiscuous patina of order is rubbed off, exposing the fluid forms and living histories beneath it.

On the opposite side of SculptureCenter’s labyrinthine basement—which, for this exhibition, was designed to be circled infinitely, yielding multiple narratives of ruin and revival5—was a single-channel film by the artist Fred Schmidt-Arenales titled Committee of Six (2022). In this film, actors playing University of Chicago officials and community organizers re-stage a tense closed-door meeting regarding the university’s southward expansion that took place in 1955. The neighborhood in question is Hyde Park, where the university sits today, and the members of the “committee of six,” as they are called, discuss an “urban renewal program” that would displace Black communities so as to attract white buyers. The appointed actors, who are performers, academics, Hyde Park residents, and activists, play it straight for the first few minutes of the film: dressed in suits, cardigans, holding padfolios and clicking ballpoint pens, they present the original arguments from the 1955 meeting with convincing candor. One member of the committee, whose name plate reads “Levi,” remarks, for example, “Numbers are not really the issue. The issue is cultural and economic compatibility.” To have Black and white families “knocking heads,” Levi argues, would be “too much shock to the system.”

The exhibition posits this type of gentrification, this supposed lessening of shock and disorder, as a harbinger of societal collapse. On a formal level, this argument presents itself in the film shortly after Levi delivers his searing and epiphanic line: the scene suddenly cuts to a shot of the conference room empty save for the meeting’s stenographer. From there, we hear, in voiceover, a conversation between the present-day actors, which, as we find out, takes place mid-pandemic at a picnic table in a park. The actors deliberate how to best deliver their lines, as well as how to interpret the nearly seventy-year-old script in a way that makes most sense to a contemporary audience. Later parts of the film show the actors in plain clothes rehearsing the script on set. Every so often, they all burst into laughter.

By collapsing time in the film and by letting the present mediate the past via reenactment, Schmidt-Arenales re-presents history with a critical difference, offering visitors a means to think through and beyond ruin. Similarly, Jessica Kairé’s Folding monument (Christopher Columbus Statue, Columbus Triangle, Queens, New York) (2022), a soft sculpture made to resemble the plinth beneath a controversial local sculpture, invited visitors to unfold and, using a system of pulleys and cords, collectively raise the base of the charged symbol. For context, the original—and extant—statue is a WPA work erected in 1941 in Astoria’s Columbus Square park. The statue is bronze and sits on a cast stone base. According to City of New York Parks and Recreation, the plinth is meant to resemble the prow of a ship, and it was this prow-like base that visitors reconstructed at SculptureCenter.

During the Second World War, the statue was removed from view so as to prevent it from being scrapped for metal, meaning that for some time during the forties, the plinth stood by itself in Columbus Square, representing the famous figure without bearing his likeness. In the summer of 2020, when protestors called for the removal of monuments commemorating proponents of genocide, slavery, and white supremacy, the statue was given twenty-four hour protection by two patrol officers from the 114th Precinct.

As in Committee of Six, the collective gesture of raising Columbus’s plinth was not merely a reprisal or return but, instead, reconstruction with a difference. For one, Kairé remade the base using upcycled cotton canvas. The material—pliable and unable to stand without the labor of at least four participants—undermined the height and authority of the monument and, by extension, its cultish power over collective memory. The artist’s choice to have participants raise the plinth and not the figure of Columbus himself also called back to particular periods of history when the plinth stood alone. After meditating on power ad absentia rather than on the obvious face of the atrocities, the next question became, naturally, what exactly the officers from the 114th Precinct were sent to guard in 2020.

Kairé, who quite literally placed the fate of Folding monument in the hands of the participatory public, implicitly wagered that such a gesture would translate into political knowledge: That which is raised, the sculpture suggested, can also be lowered. However, when I first encountered the sculpture, it was hanging like a lopsided spider in the center of a narrow passageway, without anyone to activate it (only during a subsequent walk-through with the curator did a large group gather around the work, at which point four of us hoisted the corners of the plinth high above our collective heads). During that first visit, the sculpture read not as pedestal but as impediment; ducking and folding my shoulders so as to pass beneath the limp canvas cords without disturbing them, I was perplexed by their cold indifference to the space. But when I realized that the deflated form was in fact an action previously completed, I came to understand another kind of ruin, that which exists when the fruits of collective action are abandoned by their publics, who mistakenly believe their creations to be eternal.

Is a sustainable structure, then, simply a shaky table under whose short leg we periodically—lovingly—slip a token of support? The exhibition obstinately refused to give a straight answer. Like the ring shape of the space, the conceptual undercurrents of Literally means collapse called for infinite circulation, analysis, and speculation. Nevertheless, at a time when, day after day, our social, political, and environmental systems teeter on the brink of collapse or actually collapse before our eyes, and when nothing better seems to be coming to take their place, art that records the kernels of difference generated in or in spite of each iteration of maintenance can provide a measure of comfort. If anything, it reminds us that we won’t step in the same river twice.




1

Camila Palomino, “In Practice: Literally means collapse,” In Practice: Literally Means Collapse (New York: SculptureCenter, 2022), 2-3

2

Palomino, “In Practice,” 2

3

Conversation with Camila Palomino, 29 July 2022; Ming Lin and Alexandra Tatarsky, “On Water,” Drawing a line backwards, ed. Canal Street Research Association (New York: Marco Barrera, 2022), n.p.

4

Lin and Tatarsky, “On Water,” n.p.

5

Conversation with Camila Palomino