Marina Abramovic's MOCA Gala Controversy: Jeffrey Deitch Confronted and the Performers Speak Out

skeleton-center.jpg
Getty Images for MOCA
A human centerpiece at the "Artist Life Manifesto" directed by Marina Abramovic for the MOCA Gala

The guests at MOCA's annual galas are patrons high in the economic hierarchy: politicians, heirs, celebrities, moguls, entrepreneurs who've made bank. Tickets cost an arm and a leg -- they ranged from $2,500 to $10,000 at this year's gala on Nov. 12 -- and the draw is always that some particularly famous artist "directs" the event, a deal made sweeter by the appearance of a token celebrity or two. Two years ago, Italian artist Francesco Vezzoli directed and Lady Gaga performed "Speechless," but this year, the token celebrity, Debbie Harry, was less tantalizing to many in L.A.'s arts community than the director: Marina Abramovic.

The New York-based Serbian artist just closed her Museum of Modern Art retrospective, "The Artist is Present," where she appeared in person, sitting for hours in a long red dress and locking eyes with visitors who endured winding lines to sit across from her. For her gala performance, she planned again to subject guests to unnerving intimacy and she needed help to do so.

At her gala, most of the table centerpieces would be rotating human heads that would lock eyes with guests as they circled. Naked bodies positioned beneath life-sized skeletons would rotate around six additional tables, and a chorus of volunteers would also be needed to dress the guests in white lab coats and shout out Abramovic's artist's manifesto at the appropriate time. She held auditions that attracted a number of admiring artists, dancers and actors. Prospective performers were warned that gala guests could try to poke or feed them, they would be expected to sign a non-disclosure agreement, and would be paid with $150 and a year-long MOCA membership. That was just the beginning of the controversy, which was hashed out and argued over at a reflective public forum on Saturday.

Dancer Sara Wookey, who participated in the November 7 auditions, wrote to her mentor Yvonne Rainer, a filmmaker, choreographer and dancer who studied with Martha Graham and Merce Cunningham before breaking out to pursue a freer version of dance that celebrated the "everyday body." Rainer composed a letter to MOCA's director, Jeffrey Deitch, expressing her frustration about poor compensation and potential exploitation of artists. She forwarded the letter to a few friends for their feedback and a snowball effect ensued. Soon, the letter had been "leaked" online. Bloggers responded, the L.A. Times weighed in and Deitch invited Rainer to attend the auditions to see for herself.

Panel_LACE_Small.jpg
Saturday's public forum on the MOCA gala
"Yvonne Rainer's letter was a performative act," said theorist, professor and sometimes-performer Matias Viegener on Saturday, at the start of the public forum, which dealt with Abramovic's gala, Rainer's response and the potential implications. Viegener co-organized the forum, held at Los Angeles Contemporary Exhibition (LACE), with cultural critic Jennifer Doyle and artist-curator Dino Dinco. By "performative act," Viegener meant that Rainer wasn't merely criticizing. By taking a stance, she was participating, or intervening, in Abramovic's performance and he hoped that the forum could function similarly.

The strange thing about the MOCA Gala controversy is that the majority of the people talking about it weren't there, a fact that is itself controversial. For the most part, the approximately 750 guests haven't spoken up, and opinions of actual performers, who were not named in the gala program, have been overshadowed by Rainer's letter. The forum started by attempting to remedy that. Around a dozen gala participants who were there described their experiences.

Artist Marjan Vayghan helped guests into white lab coats as they arrived (Abramovic requested all guests wear them) and recalled that some reacted viscerally to the prospect of covering themselves up. Artist Honey McMoney, who also helped with the lab coats, noted it became increasingly difficult to tell guests apart from the waiters, volunteers and performers. "The nature of the power structure started to crumble in a really delightful way," he said.

Carrie McILwain, an artist who co-runs the alt space Raid Projects, performed as a turning head and found her presence made some guests visibly uncomfortable. "One woman, I felt like she couldn't eat in front of me," said McILwain.

Artist Blaine O'Neill also performed as a head, and spent the night rotating around a table that included Eli Broad, Mayor Villarogosa, and a number of collectors. "The only person who gave me more than five minutes [of eye-contact] was the mayor," said O'Neill. "But that was a pretty fun experience -- to stare down the mayor."

The way they described it, the performers had more power than guests did in their roles at the gala. But that didn't mean they weren't exploited.

Artist Adam Vuiitton also attended the gala, but as a protester, not a performer, and he brought with him a sign showing a guillotine. Since performing artists appeared "beheaded on the tables of the ultra-rich," it seemed a relevant metaphor. Another of the protesters with him had decided, at one point, to break in to the gala, dodged past security and made it far enough to yell to the guests that, one day, their heads would be on the tables. Guards escorted her out, but took no further measures. Then, said Vuiitton, the protesters went out for a beer and talked about starting an artists' union.

That issue -- wages and economics -- became a major one as the forum continued. Artists work for free and for less than $150 all the time, either for the experience or the principle, but does that make it excusable? And what does it mean that artists were the engine driving an event they could not afford to attend? Certainly, rarefied events generate important revenue for a place like MOCA. But they still alienate, as Doyle, the critic, noted. "Someone like me begins to feel already always unwelcome" in the space of the museum, she said.

Something else had been unwelcome at the museum, too. Abramovic initially wanted both male and female bodies to circle around those on those six special tables, but only women appeared. When MOCA director Jeffrey Deitch slipped in near the end of the forum, someone posed the question to him: why no naked men? "That was my request to Marina Abramovic," said Deitch, citing the discomfort the conventional businessman feels when confronted with male nudity. "We subjected people to a lot of things," he continued, but said when you push something out to the edge you have to be careful not to go over.

Marjan Vayghan reacted, and her words, which closed the forum, reflected the conflictedness that had coursed through the whole discussion. She thanked Deitch for even attending, acknowledged how difficult his job must be and that she had found her participation in Abramovic's performance powerful. But why was it the female body that was still always subject to display? Why were we stuck in these old molds of acceptability and unacceptability? And was it really true that the guests, who had democratized by donning the lab coats, couldn't have pushed themselves just a little bit further and accepted another kind of democratization, too?

Follow @cgwagley and @LAWeeklyArts on Twitter.

My Voice Nation Help
13 comments
Marjan Khoshbakhti Vayghan
Marjan Khoshbakhti Vayghan

BTW: This is happening: http://www.moca.org/blasts/marina_invite.htmlMARINA ABRAMOVIĆTHE ARTIST IS PRESENTSeductive, fearless, and outrageous, Marina Abramović has been redefining what art is for nearly forty years. Using her own body as a vehicle, pushing herself beyond her physical and mental limits–and at times risking her life in the process–she creates performances that challenge, shock, and move us. hrough her and with her, boundaries are crossed, consciousness expanded, and art as we know it is reborn. She is, quite simply, one of the most compelling artists of our time.Marina Abramović was MOCA's 2011 Gala artist.OPENS JUNE 15th

Dino Dinco
Dino Dinco

Due to the nature of copy and pasting from Word (and the limitations of this blog platform), my response had to be posted 3 parts and has unanticipated spacing.  Like many things in life, please start from the bottom and work your way up.  Thank you.

Dino Dinco
Dino Dinco

Pt. 3 

Even if MOCA would likethe gala event to have inspired controversy, or to be viewed by the public as atrue controversy, my impetus for organizing this forum wasn't to aid MOCA'squest for publicity or to appear "radical" in any way.  In fact,many of MOCA's decisions exposed it as just the opposite -- a tried-and-trueconservative U.S. institution that teases (or worse, fronts) with rocking theboat but whose top-of-the-line life preserver is firmly in place -- including,but not restricted to, the explicit ban on nude male performers but embracingnude female performers with wide open arms and eyes, for the consumptivepleasures of those in attendance.

The investigation of how performance is approached, conceived -- and funded --will and should continue.  Much of the discourse, however,is trapped in academic settings, at performance conferences and in scholarship,not where the bulk of performance really takes place, which is why more ofthese panels, talk backs, etc. must happen.  The MOCA nontroversyoffered a rich (no pun intended, much) and highly public example of how we, ascultural producers, practicing artists and critics, can extend and expand thediscourse and criticality of the ethical and practical facets of performance,not only at these high ticket museum "spectacles" (attempts to keepthe institution "spicy" in the eye of the public and the Board ofDirectors) but in the galleries, non-profit art spaces like LACE, publicinterventions, etc. by and for those who are genuinely invested in thediscipline.    

Dino Dinco

 

Performance Art Curatorin Residence 

Los Angeles ContemporaryExhibitions

email: dinodinco [at] welcometolace[dot] org

Dino Dinco
Dino Dinco

Pt. 2 (the odd spacing is a result of copy / pasting from Word)

One goal for the forum was to invite those who participated in the MOCAperformance to voice their take on their experience, particularly when manyfelt that Ms. Rainer's critical letter was uninvitingly speaking for them. But another goal was to use the MOCA gala "nontroversy" (as afriend best put it) as merely a recent example to explore issues of financialcompensation, the limitations of viewing performance purely and only asspectacle, performance for the wealthy, performance as a fundraising tool, etc.inspired, in part, by Sara Wookey's letter to Ms. Rainer, explaining Wookey'sdecision to turn down her participation in the gala show.

Severine7, I both agree and disagree with you.  The "nothing" ofwhich you write is very much "something" to us, which is why morediscussions like this one need to take place.  This isn't about thepointless task of convincing anyone the importance of performance or defendingit, but yes, it can involve the complex nature of theater for the "superrich" and I'll sidestep the arguments here concerning the merits /pitfalls of wealth, but they are part of the equation.  

Dino Dinco
Dino Dinco

After many attempts to post this overdue response, I'm hoping that posting it in pieces will satisfy the blog's requirements.  We'll see...

As the organizer of thispanel, I just want to clarify a few things that maybe Ms. Wagley's articleleaves unclear.

The use of the word "controversy" is both over- and under-reaching inregards to both the MOCA gala and why this panel was assembled. Mr. Deitch'sbrief appearance was appreciated by many, however he arrived quite close to theend of the three hour discussion, missing the bulk of the forum.  As Ms.Wagley and I shared, the panel, the gala, etc. offer a challenging matrix ofissues of which to write and talk concerning art / power / money / ethics /accusations of exploitation and who exactly was being exploited.  It'simportant to note, however, that although Mr. Deitch was generous to answer afew questions regarding the logistics of Marina Abramovic's performance, hisbrief appearance should not be misconstrued as the panel's fulcrum.  

This was a room of people invested in the complex nature(s) of performance art-- its current and future practice -- including performance makers, curators,arts writers, scholars and students. About 16 of the 80 people who performed inthe gala piece attended and participated. (Yvonne Rainer and Ms. Abramovic wereboth invited via email.  Ms. Rainer declined and Ms. Abramovic did not reply.) Collectively, those who attended the panel view performance as much morethan strictly spectacle, even if the discipline at times offers what manyconsider spectacular elements.      

Dino Dinco
Dino Dinco

As the organizer of thispanel, I just want to clarify a few things that maybe Ms. Wagley's articleleaves unclear or more so, that articles about her article (yes, like this one http://www.galleristny.com/201...) further obfuscate.  

The use of the word "controversy" is both over- and under-reaching inregards to both the MOCA gala and why this panel was assembled. Mr. Deitch'sbrief appearance was appreciated by many, however he arrived quite close to theend of the three hour discussion, missing the bulk of the forum.  As Ms.Wagley and I shared, the panel, the gala, etc. offer a challenging matrix of issuesof which to write and talk concerning art / power / money / ethics /accusations of exploitation and who exactly was being exploited.  It'simportant to note, however, that although Mr. Deitch was generous to answer afew questions regarding the logistics of Marina Abramovic's performance, hisbrief appearance should not be misconstrued as the panel's fulcrum.  

This was a room of people invested in the complex nature(s) of performance art-- its current and future practice -- including performance makers, curators,arts writers, scholars and students. About 16 of the 80 people who performed inthe gala piece attended and participated. (Yvonne Rainer and Ms. Abramovic wereboth invited via email.  Ms. Rainer declined and Ms. Abramovic did not reply.) Collectively, those who attended the panel view performance as much morethan strictly spectacle, even if the discipline at times offers what manyconsider spectacular elements.  

One goal for the forum was to invite those who participated in the MOCA performanceto voice their take on their experience, particularly when many felt that Ms.Rainer's critical letter was uninvitingly speaking for them.  But anothergoal was to use the MOCA gala "nontroversy" (as a friend best put it)as merely a recent example to explore issues of financial compensation, thelimitations of viewing performance purely and only as spectacle, performancefor the wealthy, performance as a fundraising tool, etc. inspired, in part, bySara Wookey's letter to Ms. Rainer, explaining Wookey's decision to turn downher participation in the gala show.

Severine7, I both agree and disagree with you.  The "nothing" ofwhich you write is very much "something" to us, which is why morediscussions like this one need to take place.  This isn't about thepointless task of convincing anyone the importance of performance or defendingit, but yes, it can involve the complex nature of theater for the "superrich" and I'll sidestep the arguments here concerning the merits /pitfalls of wealth, but they are part of the equation.  

Even if MOCA would like the gala event to have inspired controversy, or to beviewed by the public as a true controversy, my impetus for organizing thisforum wasn't to aid MOCA's quest for publicity or to appear "radical"in any way.  In fact, many of MOCA's decisions exposed it as just theopposite -- a tried-and-true conservative U.S. institution that teases (orworse, fronts) with rocking the boat but whose top-of-the-line life preserveris firmly in place -- including, but not restricted to, the explicit ban onnude male performers but embracing nude female performers with wide open armsand eyes, for the consumptive pleasures of those in attendance.

The investigation of how performance is approached, conceived -- and funded --will and should continue.  Much of the discourse, however,is trapped in academic settings, at performance conferences and in scholarship,not where the bulk of performance really takes place, which is why more ofthese panels, talk backs, etc. must happen.  The MOCA nontroversyoffered a rich (no pun intended, much) and highly public example of how we, ascultural producers, practicing artists and critics, can extend and expand thediscourse and criticality of the ethical and practical facets of performance,not only at these high ticket museum "spectacles" (attempts to keepthe institution "spicy" in the eye of the public and the Board ofDirectors) but in the galleries, non-profit art spaces like LACE, publicinterventions, etc. by and for those who are genuinely invested in thediscipline.    

Dino Dinco

 

Performance Art Curatorin Residence 

Los Angeles ContemporaryExhibitions

email: dinodinco [at] welcometolace[dot] org

 

Dino Dinco
Dino Dinco

As the organizer of this panel, I just want to clarify a few things that maybe Ms. Wagley's article leaves unclear or more so, that articles about her article (yes, like this one  http://www.galleristny.com/201... ) further obfuscate.  

The use of the word "controversy" is both over- and under-reaching in regards to both the MOCA gala and why this panel was assembled. Mr. Deitch's brief appearance was appreciated by many, however he arrived quite close to the end of the three hour discussion, missing the bulk of the forum.  As Ms. Wagley and I shared, the panel, the gala, etc. offer a challenging matrix of issues of which to write and talk concerning art / power / money / ethics / accusations of exploitation and who exactly was being exploited.  It's important to note, however, that although Mr. Deitch was generous to answer a few questions regarding the logistics of Marina Abramovic's performance, his brief appearance should not be misconstrued as the panel's fulcrum.  

This was a room of people invested in the complex nature(s) of performance art -- its current and future practice -- including performance makers, curators, arts writers, scholars and students. About 16 of the 80 people who performed in the gala piece attended and participated. (Yvonne Rainer and Ms. Abramovic were both invited via email.  Ms. Rainer declined and Ms. Abramovic did not reply.)  Collectively, those who attended the panel view performance as much more than strictly spectacle, even if the discipline at times offers what many consider spectacular elements.  

One goal for the forum was to invite those who participated in the MOCA performance to voice their take on their experience, particularly when many felt that Ms. Rainer's critical letter was uninvitingly speaking for them.  But another goal was to use the MOCA gala "nontroversy" (as a friend best put it) as merely a recent example to explore issues of financial compensation, the limitations of viewing performance purely and only as spectacle, performance for the wealthy, performance as a fundraising tool, etc. inspired, in part, by Sara Wookey's letter to Ms. Rainer, explaining Wookey's decision to turn down her participation in the gala show.

Severine7, I both agree and disagree with you.  The "nothing" of which you write is very much "something" to us, which is why more discussions like this one need to take place  This isn't about the pointless task of convincing anyone the importance of performance or defending it, but yes, it can involve the complex nature of theater for the "super rich" and I'll sidestep the arguments here concerning the merits / pitfalls of wealth, but they are part of the equation.  

Even if MOCA would like the gala event to have inspired controversy, or to be viewed by the public as a true controversy, my impetus for organizing this forum wasn't to aid MOCA's quest for publicity or to appear "radical" in any way.  In fact, many of MOCA's decisions exposed it as just the opposite -- a tried-and-true conservative U.S. institution that teases (or worse, fronts) with rocking the boat but whose top-of-the-line life preserver is firmly in place -- including, but not restricted to, the explicit ban on nude male performers but embracing nude female performers with wide open arms and eyes, for the consumptive pleasures of those in attendance.

The investigation of how performance is approached, conceived -- and funded -- will and should continue.  Much of the discourse, however, is trapped in academic settings, at performance conferences and in scholarship, not where the bulk of performance really takes place, which is why more of these panels, talk backs, etc. must happen.  The MOCA nontroversy offered a rich (no pun intended, much) and highly public example of how we, as cultural producers, practicing artists and critics, can extend and expand the discourse and criticality of the ethical and practical facets of performance, not only at these high ticket museum "spectacles" (attempts to keep the institution "spicy" in the eye of the public and the Board of Directors) but in the galleries, non-profit art spaces like LACE, public interventions, etc. by and for those who are genuinely invested in the discipline.  

Big thanks to co-moderators Jennifer Doyle and Matias Viegener and to Carol Stakenas / Los Angeles Contemporary Exhibitions for hosting us.

Dino DincoPerformance Art Curator in Residence Los Angeles Contemporary Exhibitionsemail: dinodinco [at] welcometolace [dot] org  

Rohndvd
Rohndvd

too bad it was only nude women; if 'businessmen' are rendered uncomfortable with male nudity maybe it s part of the job of art to help them 'move forward'. I suspect it brings up issues around homophobia for some people.  In any event the fear of nudity and discomfort about the body, when even butt cracks, not to mention breasts, are blurred over on tv, is OUT OF CONTROL.  The inventors of the Olympic games (not to mention democracy) celebrated nudity in their art and sport. A millenia later the Renaissance based it s acheivements in art and architecture on the human body: the fundamental paragon of beauty of the Humanist ethos.  When there s an opportunity to go forward in a museum let s let artists, not businessmen, define it.

Severine7
Severine7

So, this all seems like much ado about nothing. The art "world" is so excited when it thinks it has something resembling political controversy. But this is just more entertainment for the super-wealthy---not so different from the entire art industry as is. Now let's move on to actual political controversies.

JohnnyNaked
JohnnyNaked

I'm posting here on the fly while working my day job that I use to support my artistic endeavors... but isn't Deitch opening himself and/or MOCA to a discrimination lawsuit by publicly admitting this?

Leila
Leila

Your description of my friend asking a question of Jeffrey as "Deitch Confronted" seems out of context. It's a telling act for him to show up to LACE to engage in conversation. Folks pointed out his presence and that he should be engaged in the talk and it wasn't until the end of the event that my friend asked him the question about male nudity. Your quote on his response to the question as "citing the discomfort the conventional businessman feels when confronted with male nudity" also doesn't reflect his real answer. Since most people couldn't attend the event, it's that much more critical for you to expand correctly on his response, especially since the censorship of male nudity seems to have come to the surface as one of the most critical issues from the event.

Dino Dinco
Dino Dinco

Tried to post this 2x as a stand-alone comment but the blog isn't allowing so maybe this will work.  This is not a reply to Leila's comment specifically, but rather, a workaround. 

---

As the organizer of thispanel, I just want to clarify a few things that maybe Ms. Wagley's articleleaves unclear or more so, that articles about her article (yes, like this one  http://www.galleristny.com/201...) further obfuscate.  

The use of the word "controversy" is both over- and under-reaching inregards to both the MOCA gala and why this panel was assembled. Mr. Deitch'sbrief appearance was appreciated by many, however he arrived quite close to theend of the three hour discussion, missing the bulk of the forum.  As Ms.Wagley and I shared, the panel, the gala, etc. offer a challenging matrix ofissues of which to write and talk concerning art / power / money / ethics /accusations of exploitation and who exactly was being exploited.  It'simportant to note, however, that although Mr. Deitch was generous to answer afew questions regarding the logistics of Marina Abramovic's performance, hisbrief appearance should not be misconstrued as the panel's fulcrum.  

This was a room of people invested in the complex nature(s) of performance art-- its current and future practice -- including performance makers, curators,arts writers, scholars and students. About 16 of the 80 people who performed inthe gala piece attended and participated. (Yvonne Rainer and Ms. Abramovic wereboth invited via email.  Ms. Rainer declined and Ms. Abramovic did not reply.) Collectively, those who attended the panel view performance as much morethan strictly spectacle, even if the discipline at times offers what manyconsider spectacular elements.  

One goal for the forum was to invite those who participated in the MOCAperformance to voice their take on their experience, particularly when manyfelt that Ms. Rainer's critical letter was uninvitingly speaking for them. But another goal was to use the MOCA gala "nontroversy" (as afriend best put it) as merely a recent example to explore issues of financialcompensation, the limitations of viewing performance purely and only asspectacle, performance for the wealthy, performance as a fundraising tool, etc.inspired, in part, by Sara Wookey's letter to Ms. Rainer, explaining Wookey'sdecision to turn down her participation in the gala show.

Severine7, I both agree and disagree with you.  The "nothing" ofwhich you write is very much "something" to us, which is why morediscussions like this one need to take place.  This isn't about thepointless task of convincing anyone the importance of performance or defendingit, but yes, it can involve the complex nature of theater for the "superrich" and I'll sidestep the arguments here concerning the merits /pitfalls of wealth, but they are part of the equation.  

Even if MOCA would like the gala event to have inspired controversy, or to beviewed by the public as a true controversy, my impetus for organizing thisforum wasn't to aid MOCA's quest for publicity or to appear "radical"in any way.  In fact, many of MOCA's decisions exposed it as just theopposite -- a tried-and-true conservative U.S. institution that teases (orworse, fronts) with rocking the boat but whose top-of-the-line life preserveris firmly in place -- including, but not restricted to, the explicit ban onnude male performers but embracing nude female performers with wide open armsand eyes, for the consumptive pleasures of those in attendance.

The investigation of how performance is approached, conceived -- and funded --will and should continue.  Much of the discourse, however,is trapped in academic settings, at performance conferences and in scholarship,not where the bulk of performance really takes place, which is why more ofthese panels, talk backs, etc. must happen.  The MOCA nontroversyoffered a rich (no pun intended, much) and highly public example of how we, ascultural producers, practicing artists and critics, can extend and expand thediscourse and criticality of the ethical and practical facets of performance,not only at these high ticket museum "spectacles" (attempts to keepthe institution "spicy" in the eye of the public and the Board ofDirectors) but in the galleries, non-profit art spaces like LACE, publicinterventions, etc. by and for those who are genuinely invested in thediscipline.    

Dino Dinco

 

Performance Art Curatorin Residence 

Los Angeles ContemporaryExhibitions

email: dinodinco [at] welcometolace[dot] org

 

Best Deals
Best Deals

Great Blog!! That was amazing. Your thought processing is wonderful. The way you tell the thing is awesome. You are really a  master.  Best Deals

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

General

Los Angeles Event Tickets
©2013 LA Weekly, LP, All rights reserved.
Browse Voice Nation
  • Voice Places Los Angeles

    Voice Places

    Find everything you're looking for in your city

  • Happy Hour App

    Happy Hour App

    Find the best happy hour deals in your city

  • Daily Deals

    Daily Deals

    Get today's exclusive deals at savings of anywhere from 50-90%

  • Best Of

    Best Of...

    Check out the hottest list of places and things to do around your city