Seeing BHQF for the second time last week, as part of Performa at X-Initiative in Chelsea, I finally realized that the art world really still is anyone’s oyster. Bruce have formed a collective under the auspices of the late social sculptor Bruce High Quality, for which it acts as the official arbiter of the estate. Sounding like a credible foundation, they have used this fictional institution as their platform and guise. Their performance, ‘Art History with Benefits’ is a critique and satire of traditional Art History, and thereby functioning as a sort larger institutional critique (and they do this other ways as well, see their Heaven Forbid!, response to Rondonine’s Hell Yes! or BHQFU). Here, they execute their performance of ‘Art History with Benefits’ by narrating anecdotes, facts, histories, and gossip regarding the artist-patron relationship, coinciding with a image slide show that leads us through a hurricane of pop-culture, art history and mass-media moments. To top it all off, the collective Karaoke’d George Michael’s “I’ll be Your Father Figure” to end the performance.
It is the tension between the dissemination of information, of “high” and “low” taste that is most palpable in the presentation. Especially when you consider BHQF’s audience; a mix of art world senior staff, Chelsea socialites, rebels, artists, students, and young derelicts out for free drinks. I love the idea of critiquing a canonized narrative of Art History while talking about Anna Nicole Smith, or Mariah Carey giving some record producer a blow-jay. And not surprisingly, the contemporary art community embraces this with open arms– it is worth mentioning that contemporary art institutions, though they may represent the authoritative stance to some, are still not the codified institutions that they are often associated with. Such institutions act as a platform to disseminate a range of artistic practice, theoretical discourses, and new institutional ideologies to profligate, feed and propel for future ideological concerns, though (complicatedly) they are often bound to the past for a host of practical reasons. Getting back to my original point, though, I find it fascinating that the BHQF has been so quickly accepted, given their anti-establishment mission. I suppose we live in a time where institutions are prone to integrating works that exist to critique the past histories of what has lead to the current moment. The sildenafil citrate compound in super P-Force is a latest product in canadian cialis pharmacy the market, designed as a treatment against the male sexual disorder* Drug is recommended for the treatment of erectile dysfunction, low libido in men, is equally important to control the sexual function. An erection is a levitra without prescription check this website complex process between the brain and may result to overall physical and cognitive dysfunction. So, it is open to all companies to produce viagra without side effects continue reading this site now the same medicine is same way. When the flow of blood is increased, men are able to attain perfect erection that lasts for a longer time. levitra 10 mg What does it mean for contemporary institutions to embrace this not so subtle criticism? Can it be viewed as trying to integrate this critique into the larger picture of cultural memory? Are we witnessing the institution at a point of maturity, where its self awareness is increasing through this type of critical aknowledgement? Moreover, as a performance with no commercial value (although this could be debated), the discourse behind ‘Art History with Benefits’ could not be integrated into the social fabric via the commercial art market.
But still, there was something particularly biting, ballsy and shrewd about showing a photo of Dakkis and Lietta Joannou, from a recent Artforum diary post, in X– aka the former Dia Chelsea building, where not 24 hours prior, hosted the art world A-list celebration for the opening of Performa, for which some of the very collectors, and art world high-ups that BHQF question were undoubtably present. If not for the Performa celebration the night before, then possibly for the Dia Foundation Fall Benefit Party, the night after. Despite the large scale celebrations, X/Dia is a sensical venue for BHQF, because of their ability to garner the respect and trust of both artists and donors. Dia has represented artists whose work defies the limits of the museum, and artists who use the Museum as the central force of their work; think Walter De Maria, Michael Heiser, Robert Smithson and Louise Lawler.
The collective themselves consciously embody the artist-patron relationship by way of performing it before an audience of this character. Yet through the DIY aesthetics, denigrated visual examples and anecodes, and general lack of seriousness, they simultaneously mock and highlight such relationships. Now that BHQF has the attention, they might be in a position to reverse the credo. Bruce exerts mockery and trickery to invert institutional practice, in an attempt to break it open and see what’s really inside. In other words, Bruce is embraced by the very institutions they ridicule– and who knows what they’ve got in store next. Even so, such a cohabitation will likely contain elements of doubt and wariness from the Bruce’s perspective. A relationship that we have seen previously throughout the course of Art History, and in ‘Art History with Benefits,’ where artists and the museum are mutually dependent on each other, and monitor each other vigilantly. Somehow, through their tongue and cheek actions and their insertion of prevailing themes of the underdog and “low culture” into Art History, BHQF proves to be the work of mastery.
Bruce High Quality Foundation Profile
BHQFU– Bruce’s free, unaccredited, user-generated university