Anthony Scott AH 5560 09/13/2015

Reflection:  Stiles, Performance

    I have extracted that Kristine Stiles thesis is the terminology applied to “performance art” as it has evolved through the twentieth century. Stiles titles the thesis and emphasizes the term (performance) as being key, wrapped around Jim Dines’ "The Smiling Workman" as a continual example of the internal and/or intent of performance art, thus posing as a “commissure” in itself in regard to terminologies applied to performance art in the twentieth century (p. 77). The multiple content and variety of emphases and expressions performed (with body) throughout this time period being political, urban societal, sexual and/or racial awareness and injustice to name a few, there emerged several attempts to labeling the performing arts, separate it from conventional art historian views through embracing it, and rejecting it.      

     Styles opens with the clarification of performing arts and its separation from conventional arts, as the “artwork is the artist” to which the human body itself is “being and doing” as a “representation and presentation” between the artist and audience (p. 75). The multiple achievements available to link “mutual identification” of the subject, or subjects, to an object through “interstitial continuum” are seemingly infinite as performance has so displayed throughout the twentieth century (p. 76). With the endless opportunities to communicate, listed above, and in conjunction to Styles, it is my belief that through the “mimesis” in performances, brought about the need for categorizing and applying terminologies to the different intents and styles of performing artist. The “challenging distinctions between the real and artificial” through the achievements with the use of commissure purposely blurred the artist intention in some cases, and dramatically emphasized truth and exposure in others (P. 88). For example, the “hybrid presentational art” of the OMT was bluntly “controversial and political” exposing the truths of past “violent” Western cultural history, to “derive” from (p. 89). In addition, the 1960’s women’s performances bringing “public attention…to women’s issues” (p. 86). With this “direct engagement in the social sphere” arousing “cultural change” (p. 89) resulting in bringing forth public awareness of injustice, and challenging the preexisting social and political structures, one might question the intentions of political and dominate financial organizations suppressing the performing arts by applying new terms.

     Styles notates “the term “performance” is due primarily to the insistence of critics” during the 1970’s, on the contrary, artist continued to apply their own “original appellations”. Furthermore, in the 1980’s the term “Perfotainment” has been used to describe “some styles of performance” (p. 85). With today’s technology and animation capabilities available and at demand, thus adopting possible (new terms) applied to performance, I cannot imagine the disregard of live performance as a means to communicate as an art. Regardless to the terms applied, performance art is still an “act of doing” with the “human body”, telling the “truth about art” and the “conditions of truth” politically and socially (p. 95). It is my personal concern for the arts that political suppression exist towards performing arts, as Styles outlines the “decade debate in Congress” of the “National Endowment for the Arts”. Even know this was a debate of “tax dollars” (p. 94, 95) for the funding of, one may conclude the debate was to suppress the freedom of expression in the Arts, which is freedom of speech, and the desire to communicate. With the humans need to understand and