Ken Friedman
May 1995
1. Fluxus 1962
1.1 Ideas, Issues and Paradigms
The idea of Fluxus was born
long before 1962. We see it in the philosophy of Heraclitus and we see
in the idea that you can't cross the same river
twice. We find it in 14th-century
Zen texts and we find it in the paradigms of science that began taking
shape in the late 1800s.
Rene Block coined the term Fluxism
to refer to an idea. The Fluxus idea transcends a specific group of people,
and the idea has been visible
through history. While the
Fluxus idea existed long before the specific group of people called Fluxus,
the group gave Fluxism a tangible shape
through the work of experimental
artists, architects, composers and designers who created, published, exhibited
and performed under the Fluxus
label. The idea grew into a
community larger than the group, a larger community that includes people
whose ideas and work incorporate elements
based on the Fluxus experiment.
It also includes a community of individuals who themselves became important
to the Fluxus group.
Fluxus evolved around a conscious
use of model-making and paradigm formation. My purpose here is to discuss
Fluxus and to analyze some of the
models and paradigms that seem
to me essential in understanding it.
There have been many parallels
between Fluxus and science. New models in mathematics often precede and
lead to new applications in physical science.
So, too, paradigms in art emerge
when the world-view is shifting. Shifts in vision transform culture and
science as they reshape history. These shifts
are visible in the shifting
paradigms of art.
1.2 Examples and Contrasts
The decades in which Fluxus
emerged were the decades in which the sciences of transdisciplinary complexity
came into their own. Fluxus and intermedia
were born just as technology
shifted from electrical engineering to electronic engineering. The first
computers used punch cards and mechanical
systems. Computation science
was in its infancy along with early forms of evolutionary psychology and
the neurosciences. Chaos studies had not yet
emerged as a discipline, but
the foundations of chaos studies were already in place.
Fluxus grew with the intermedia
idea. It had strong foundations in music, Zen, design and architecture.
Rather than pursuing technical -- or simply
technological -- solutions,
Fluxus artists tended to move in a philosophical vein, direct and subtle
at the same time. This proved to be a
blessing, steering clear of
the dead-end solutions typical of the "art and technology" craze.
While new paradigms engender
new technology as well as new art, relatively few technologies have given
birth to interesting art forms. Buckminster
Fuller's noted a three-decade
time lag between innovative paradigms and their wide adoption. Many of
the new disciplines have only now been around
for thirty years. Some aren't
yet a decade old. As a result, the time may not yet be ripe for obvious
application in visual art.
Electronic processors and video
equipment did give rise to new art forms. They were obvious technologies
that artists could exploit. More
significant, the paradigms
on which they operate are not new. Electronic music, for example, began
with electrical equipment rather than the
electronic equipment that is
available today. Electronic music was called electronic music because the
term seemed more workable than electric music
or electrical music would have
been. The first electronic music was created with wired circuits and electrical
tubes, not with transistors and
computers. The most interesting
early equipment for electronic music was closer to an old-fashioned telephone
switchboard in appearance and
operation than it was to today's
modern desk-top computers. The equipment available to artists and composers
in those days was analog equipment,
wired and arranged by hand,
a far cry from the powerful work stations that now contain more computing
power than even the biggest mainframes once had.
The past and present of electronic
music offer merely one example. The technological applications of electronic
art are still primitive, even if
the paradigms are not, and
it seems to me that video and the electronicarts are still in their primitive
stage. In a way, video has just passed
out of its Stone Age and into
the Bronze Age.
Video is now a recognized art
form, as electronic music, electrostatic printing, electrostatic transfer
and electrostatic printmaking have become.
The media are now distinct
and simple but the artistic results are not often powerful or elegant.
Too many artists are entranced with the physical
qualities of the medium they
use and unconscious about the ideas they attempt to develop. Art is burdened
by attention to physical media and
plagued by a failure to consider
the potential of intermedia.
The equipment available to artists
today does far more physically than is really necessary. We see too many
videos that are long on technique and
short on content. Computerized
graphic design often illustrates the problem. Graphic designers explore
the capacity of a computer to set
hundreds of complex graphic
objects on a page with multiple layers and hitherto impossible effects
while they remain unaware of such simple issues
as legibility and basic communication
theory. The technical power available to computer-based designers outstrips
their design ability in many cases.
The result has been an avalanche
of complicated, trendy typography and fussy, mannerist design created to
look up-to-date rather than to
communicate. The most powerful
use of the computer in science is to create elegant, simple solutions to
complex problems. When artists use the
mechanical power of the computer
to complicate rather than to simplify, it suggests that they do not understand
the paradigms of the new technology.
They have merely learned to
manipulate the equipment.
The art forms that will one
day emerge from computation science and chaos studies haven't yet reached
the level of video and electronic music, as
basic as they still are. The
physical forms of computation science or chaos aren't as simple or as obvious
electronic music or video. Right now, the
technology dictates the medium
and technological frenzy sometimes inhibits the learning process. It may
also be that evolution demands the creation of
many dead ends on the way to
interesting art.
The computer-generated images
presented today as computer art or the fractal images of chaos studies
are simplistic presentations of an idea.
They are laboratory exercises
or displays of technical virtuosity, designed to test and demonstrate the
media and the technology. They are the
intellectual and artistic equivalent
of the paint samples that interior designers use to plan out larger projects.
They may be interesting and
useful in some way, but only
people shopping for paint find them relevant.
By contrast, Fluxus suggests
approaches that are simple rather than simplistic. The level of complexity
in any given work is determined by
philosophical paradigms. It
isn't dictated by available technology. This is an important difference
a technological age. It is distinguishes Fluxus
forms as humanistic forms,
forms determined by the artist rather than by the tools. It shaped the
roots of intermedia as opposed to multimedia. The
idea of simplicity owes as
much to the Fluxus refusal to distinguish between art and life as to the
intellectual curiosity that characterizes
Fluxus artists.
1.3 Paradigms are More Important than Technology
The paradigms of any complex,
transformative era are its most interesting features. Paradigms being born
today will transform the global environment
tomorrow. This is the environment
in which Fluxus took shape and the environment in which Fluxus continues
to grow. It hasn't led to an art of
technical applications, but
an art of subtle ideas. Some of those ideas have been complex, but few
have been complicated. Many have been simple.
Few have been simplistic. (Simplistic
Fluxus works do crop up as thought experiments or as demonstrations in
the tradition of Diogenes or the
Hodja.)
The essence of Fluxus has been
transformation. The key transformative issues in a society don't always
attract immediate notice. Transformative
issues involve paradigm shifts.
When paradigms are shifting, the previous dominant information hierarchy
holds the obvious focus of a society's
attention until the shift is
complete. One simple example of this phenomenon can be seen in the expectations
we had for videophone compared
to what we thought of telefax.
For almost two decades, journalists
have hailed videophone as the coming revolution in telecommunications.
Videophone appeared to be a natural
marriage of television and
telephone. It was a great idea. It made for fascinating illustrated articles
in magazines and great snippets on TV
shows. By contrast, telefax
was humble, almost primitive. You send a message, but you don't talk and
see your message at the same time. On an
emotional level, therefore,
telefax seems closer to telegraph than television, nowhere near as exciting
as videophone. In the long run, it
didn't matter if telefax lacked
excitement. Telefax was useful. It was application-oriented and user-friendly.
It was simple and flexible. As a
result, telefax became the
most profound development in communications technology of the past decade.
At first, the telefax was so obvious that it
was almost overlooked. Videophone
is such a dramatic idea that it held public interest long before becoming
possible as a practical,
cost-effective technology.
It diverted public attention from the telefax while telefax quietly transformed
the way we sent and received messages.
That's the way it's been with
Fluxus, too. Fluxus began to take shape in Europe, the United States and
Japan during the 1950s. It started in the
work and actions of many people.
Their activity often went unnoticed at the time. When it was noticed, people
didn't give it much thought. Even so, the
processes created and nurtured
by the Fluxus community were new paradigms for the consideration of art,
architecture, music and design.
The artists, composers, architects
and designers and who constituted the Fluxus community worked with simple
ideas, ideas so simple that they were
easy to ignore. As often happens
in developing paradigms, simplicity is a focus for concentrated thinking.
It generates depth, power and resonance.
That is how Fluxus survived
and why Fluxus was never just an art movement.
The environment also changes.
Just as the telefax redefined the way that people communicate, new media
will once again transform our way of sending
and receiving messages. Telefax
was developed before the widespread availability of the personal computer.
Today, personal computers and the
various ways of linking them
are beginning to replace telefax -- including computers that emulate a
telefax. In a sense, the telefax that once seemed
so revolutionary is beginning
to appear as an entry-level technology. The Pony Express once redefined
the world's understanding of message delivery
speed, but it lasted only two
years before it was replaced by the telegraph. The telegraph was later
replaced by the telephone, an invention
that was once thought of as
a special kind of toy for transmitting musical concerts and news broadcasts.
Today, satellite-linked telephones,
computer networks and e-mail are shaping a platform that will slowly encompass
the earth. This platform will
eventually make videophone
possible through a new technology unimagined by the original inventors
of the videophone concept. Despite the growth of
advanced technology, the relatively
simple telefax remains useful and so do land-line telephones. Today, as
in past times, there are situations in
which older technologies are
better suited to modern applications than the more advanced solutions.
One example is the suitability of entry-level
mobile phone systems for developing
nations that use a more simple and less expensive technology than the GSM
systems that are now standard in many
European nations.
Some technologies and paradigms
will probably never lose their value. Books are an example for reading.
The human voice is an example for speaking and
singing. These are examples
of simple paradigms and technologies that are accessible and available
under such a wide variety of options that they
will always be useful for some
applications. I like to think of Fluxus that way, as a useful series of
paradigms and options.
1.4 Evolution and Ancestors
Fluxus was born at a shifting
point in world views. The era that the English-speaking world once called
the Elizabethan Age is only now coming
to a close. This was the age
of the pirate kings, an age in which gunpowder technology permitted the
Western nations to conquer and dominate
the rest of the world.
The greatest portion of the
world's wealth and power were once concentrated in Asia. A number of poor
decisions on the part of Asian rulers created the
context in which the European
powers were virtually assured of global dominance, despite the relative
youth of the European empires and cultures
that were primitive in comparison
with the Asian empires. Two of the most significant of these decisions
were the mandated destruction of China's
ocean-going fleets and the
closing of Japan. These decisions were also two of the most foolish, folly
because they were decisions made by powerful
governments that finally weakened
the power of their nations. In that sense, China and Japan transformed
themselves from two of the world's most
developed nations into nations
that would later find themselves at great disadvantage primarily because
they cut themselves off from the competition
and evolution of a changing
world-wide environment.
This was a far different situation
than the situation of the nations and empires of India, Korea and Viet
Nam, all of which found themselves in
problematic situations dictated
more by historical circumstance than troubles brought about by specific
and bad decisions. For any number of
reasons, however, the empires
of Asia, old, wealthy and powerful, were unable to innovate and compete
effectively against the vigorous and often
ruthless expansion of the Western
powers. The Asian powers had their own ruthless dynasties. The triumph
of the West did not occur because the West
was willing to be immoral where
the East was spiritual and unprepared to resist. The main issues were technological
and economic: the West had a
more effective technology than
the East had, a technology that was coupled to a culture more able to innovate
and initiate change. That moment
essentially dictated the shape
of world power and the global economic system for roughly five centuries.
Those five centuries are now coming to
an end.
A new era is taking shape now.
We don't yet have a name for the new era, but it's clear that a new time
is emerging. Asia is once again a wealthy,
powerful region, expanding
and transforming the world economy. Led first by Japan, later by Korea
and Taiwan with mainland China about to emerge and
India following after, Asia
will soon be the world's largest regional economy. The Asia-Pacific region
already equals Europe and the United
States in wealth. It may soon
equal them in power and geopolitical influence. There is every reason to
believe that the Asia-Pacific region
(possibly including Australia
and North America) will play the kind of role in the 21st Century that
Europe played from the 17th century to the first
half of the 20th Century and
that America played from the early 20th century on. The consequences of
this transformation will be good and bad.
The degree to which the transformation
will work good or bad results on individuals and societies will depending
on who they are, on where they are
and on their viewpoint. Whether
the changes are good or bad, however, the moment in which the new era takes
shape will be a time-based boundary
state.
Boundary states in ecological systems give rise to interesting life forms. Transition times in history give rise to interesting culture forms.
The first signs of this global
transformation began in the last century. The old era could be said to
have ended with the Treaty of Vienna that
closed the Napoleonic Wars.
That was the last real moment of the old Europe, the old diplomacy, the
old empires. The putative revolutions of the
mid-century, the revolutions
that failed, were the beginning of the new nationalism, a clear sign that
the European empires were doomed. Even
though they didn't know it
yet, the Hapsburgs were in trouble, as were the Romanovs, the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha
Windsors-to-be and the Hohenzollerns of
Prussia, whose imperial aspirations
were essentially doomed even before their empire was cobbled together by
the Iron Chancellor. The final result
of the 20th century could not
have been predicted at that time but change was on horizon. Technology,
economy and history doomed the static and
slow-moving empires with all
their cultural baggage.
The transformative zone in the
cultural ecology that ushered in our century became visible in the 1890s
with the work of artists and composers such as
Alfred Jarry, Pablo Picasso,
Douanier Rousseau and Erik Satie. (Even though I've raised Picasso's name,
it's impossible to adequately categorize
Picasso pr his work. Picasso
opened the century in company with Jarry and the others. Unlike them, he
participated in and provoked both sides of
modernism, the public, heroic
tradition and the intellectual, hermetic tradition. Picasso's art was informed
by the cultures of many nations. His
genius and his tragedy was
that of a lucid cultural pirate, a self-willed king who shaped such a kaleidoscope
of modernist traditions that he had an
effect on all the art that
followed his work as well as half the literature and music.) The tradition
they established became a kind of left-handed,
Tantric approach to art, contrarian
and often hermetic. It was a transnational art in an era that would become
increasingly national under
the influence of the national
romantic movements in art and music that accompanied the break-up of the
empires and the liberation of conquered and
colonized nations.
As a result, this tradition
in art excited and stimulated young artists, opened the doors to many cultures
and at the same time inevitably came into
conflict with the very cultures
they enlivened. Only the moment of international modernism made Hollywood
possible, for example, and yet
Hollywood movies grew and blossomed
as a typically American art form. a cultural innovation as boldly ethnocentric
as the music of Grieg and
Sibelius, as peculiarly archetypal
in their national expression as the paintings of Matisse or Gaudi's architecture.
The end result was that this
century saw two arts and two
cultures growing side by side. One was public, heroic and national in inclination.
The other was intellectual, hermetic
and global in tone.
These two traditions challenged
and informed each other, yet for a host of reasons, they remained separate,
separated as much by the demands of
politics and economics as by
the reality of art. Take the case of Abstract Expressionism, for example.
This was the first art movement to exert
world-wide influence after
America took on the international leadership that the disintegrated European
empires and their impoverished heirs could
no longer afford.
Europe and Asia informed the
best sentiments of Abstract Expressionism. It was an art that would have
been impossible without the twin influences of
Surrealism and oriental culture
on America. When it came time for America to stand for its own in the international
art world, however, politics,
economics and political economics
dictated that Abstract Expressionism be treated as some kind of uniquely
American triumph. Viewed in one way, this
was the voice of a young nation
come into its own. Viewed another way, this was history chasing its own
tail. The triumph of American painting was
heralded by myopic art critics.
Some of them were well informed in the narrow terms of art history, but
they were conveniently ignorant of larger
cultural history. Most of them
managed to overlook the fact that the art market and art history are generally
-- and only temporarily -- dominated
by the nation that currently
holds the balance of power in the geopolitical and economic terms. This
view served the political purposes of the American
government. There was no purpose
to be served by making clear just how impossible this artistic achievement
would have been without the defeated
Japan, the problematic China,
or an occasionally fractious Europe that America was attempting to dominate
and lead. Thus the acolytes of Abstract
Expressionism ballyhooed the
grandeur of the New York painters, treating everything up to that moment
as the prelude to their triumph. One can't
entirely blame America for
this attitude. It's not as though the Greeks, the Italians, the Dutch,
the British or the Japanese hadn't done so
themselves, not to mention
that French on behalf of the their several republics and empires.
It's the other tradition that
influenced Fluxus, a tradition that has inevitably been neglected because
it is anti-nationalistic in sentiment and
tone and practiced by artists
who aren't easily used as national flag-bearers. )Individual artists such
as Marcel Duchamp and John Cage are
accurately seen as ancestors
of Fluxus, but ideas played a larger role than individuals. Russian revolutionary
art groups such as LEF were an influence
on some. For others, De Stijl
and the Bauhaus philosophy were central. The idea that one can be an artist
and -- at the same time -- an industrialist,
an architect or a designer
is a key to the way one can view Fluxus work and the artist's role in society.
It is as important to work in the factory or
the urban landscape as in the
museum. It is important to be able to shift positions and to work in both
environments.
Dada was farther from Fluxus
in many ways than either De Stijl or Bauhaus. The seeming relationship
between Fluxus and Dada is more a matter of
appearances than of deep structure.
Robert Filliou pointed this out in 1962 statement making clear that Fluxus
is not Dadaistic in its intentions. Dada
was explosive, irreverent,
and made much use of humor, as Fluxus has also done. But Dada was nihilistic,
a millenarian movement in modernist terms.
Fluxus was constructive. Fluxus
was founded on principles of creation, of transformation and its central
method sought new ways to build.
Jean Sellem asserts that the
Fluxus tradition is, indeed, a tradition rooted in hermetic philosophy
and even in the hidden traditions of such
movements as Kabbalah and Tantra.
I can't quite agree with him, yet I think he brings up a point that offers
valid ways to understand Fluxus. So, too,
this assertion works well with
some of the ways in which Fluxus works. Fluxus aspires to serve everyone
but it demands a certain kind of
perspective and commitment.
Anyone can have it, but everyone must work to get it. The premises and
the results are simple, the path from the premises
to the goal can be difficult.
One way or another, though,
Fluxus is a creature of the fluid moment. The transformative zone where
the shore meets the water is simple and complex,
too. The entire essence of
chaos theory and the new sciences of complexity suggest that profoundly
simple premises can create rich, complex
interaction and lead to surprising
results. Finding the simple elements that interact to shape our complex
environment is the goal of much science.
In culture, too, and in human
behavior, simple elements combine in many ways. On the one hand, we seek
to understand and describe them. On the
other, we seek to use them.
The fascination and delight of transformation states in boundary zones
is the way in which they evolve naturally.
1.5 When, How and Who
The formal date given for the
birth of the Fluxus group is the year 1962. Several people in Europe, Japan
and the United States had been working in
parallel art forms and pursuing
many of the same ideas in their work. The Lithuanian-born architect and
designer George Maciunas had tried to present
their work in a gallery and
through a magazine named Fluxus. The gallery folded and the magazine never
appeared. A festival was planned in
Wiesbaden, Germany, in 1962,
featuring the work of many of the artists and composers whose work had
been scheduled for publication in the magazine.
The idea of the festival was
to raise money to publish the magazine, so it was called the Fluxus Festival.
The German press referred the participants
by name of the festival, calling
them "die Fluxus leute," the Fluxus people. That's how a specific group
of artists came to be called the Fluxus
group.
The artists in Wiesbaden included
Dick Higgins, Alison Knowles, Arthur Koepcke, George Maciunas, Nam June
Paik, Benjamin Patterson, Karl Erik
Welin, Emmett Williams, and
Wolf Vostell. They were already in contact with artists and composers such
as George Brecht, Jackson Mac Low, La Monte
Young, Ben Vautier and with
many of the individuals whose work was soon to appear in An Anthology.
While Maciunas's festival gave
Fluxus its name, many of the artists and composers involved the festival
had known and worked with each other long
before 1962. The new York Audio-Visual
Group, for example, had been active since 1956. In Germany, a similar group
of artists and composers had been
working together equally as
long. Maciunas's projects offered these people a forum. For many them,
Fluxus was a forum and a meeting place without
ideological or artistic conditions
and without a defined artistic program.
After Wiesbaden, artists who
had been working on similar principles came into contact with others who
were active in the Fluxus community. Some of
them became active in the Fluxus
group. Most of them were working on a similar basis and they took part
in Fluxus because of what they had already
done.
These artists were to include
Joseph Beuys, Giuseppe Chiari, Henning Christiansen, Philip Corner, Robert
Filliou, Bengt af Klintberg, Yoko Ono,
Willem de Ridder, Takako Saito,
Tomas Schmit, Daniel Spoerri, Robert Watts, La Monte Young and others.
Some, like La Monte, had been in touch with
George long before Wiesbaden.
The group kept growing through the mid-sixties, eventually coming to include
other artists like Milan Knizak,
Geoff Hendricks, Larry Miller,
Yoshi Wada, Jean Dupuy and myself.
There were two groups of original
Fluxus members. The first group was comprised of the nine who were at Wiesbaden.
The second group included
those who came into Fluxus
in the years after, distinguished by innovativework that led the others
to welcome them.
Fluxus has been able to grow
because it's had room for dialogue and transformation. It's been able to
be born and reborn several times in
different ways. The fluid understanding
of its own history and meaning, the central insistence on dialogue and
social creativity rather than on objects
and artifacts have enabled
Fluxus to remain alive on the several occasions
that Fluxus has been declared
dead.
2. Twelve Fluxus Ideas
2.0 Core Issues
There are twelve core issues
that can be termed the basic ideas of Fluxus. In 1981, Dick Higgins wrote
a list of nine criteria that he suggested as
central to Fluxus. He stated
that a work or a project is Fluxist to the degree that it fulfills a significant
number of criteria, and that the more
criteria any one piece fills,
the more Fluxus in intention and realization it is. I found Higgins's list
a useful model, and expanded the list to
twelve. I feel that my ideas
are much the same as Higgins's, but I changed some of the terms to account
more precisely for the nuances of meaning I
feel are vital. There has been
some confusion over the use of the term criteria. Higgins and I both used
the term in the original sense of
characteristics or traits,
not standards of judgment. In short, we intended description, not prescription.
We're describing ideas and issues, not prescribing a series of standards.
The Twelve Fluxus Ideas are:
Globalism
Unity of art and life
Intermedia
Experimentalism
Chance
Playfulness
Simplicity
Implicativeness
Exemplativism
Specificity
Presence in time
Musicality
2.1 Globalism
Globalism is central to Fluxus.
It embraces the idea that we live on a single world, a world in which the
boundaries of political states are not
identical with the boundaries
of nature or culture. Dick Higgins's list used the term internationalism.
Higgins referred to Fluxus's complete lack
of interest in the national
origin of ideas or of people, but internationalism can also be a form of
competition between nations. War is
now unacceptable as a form
of national expression. Economic interests on a global scale erase national
boundaries, too. The only areas in which
nations can push themselves
forward as national interest groups with identities defined against the
identities of other nations are sports and
culture. The international
culture festivals are sometimes like soccer championships where culture
stars and national politicians push against
each other with all the vigor
and savagery of simulated warfare. Fluxus encourages dialogue among like
minds, regardless of nation. Fluxus welcomes
the dialogue of unlike minds
when social purposes are in tune.
In the 1960s, the concept of
internationalism was expressive. The United Nations was young, the cold
war was an active conflict, and mass political
groups operating as national
interest groups seemed to offer a way to establish global dialogue. Today,
globalism is a more precise expression.
It's not simply that boundaries
don't count, but that in the most important issues, there are no boundaries.
A democratic approach to culture
and to life is a part of the Fluxus view of globalism. A world inhabited
by individuals of equal worth and value
suggests -- or requires --
a method for each individual to fulfill his or her potential. This, in
turn, suggests a democratic context within which
each person can decide how
and where to live, what to become, how to do it.
The world as it is today has
been shaped by history and today's conditions are determined in great part
by social and economic factors. While the
western industrialized nations
and some developing nations are essentially democratic, we do not live
in a truly democratic world. Much of the world
is governed by tyrannies, dictatorships
or anarchic states. Finding the path from today's world to a democratic
world raises important questions,
complex questions that lie
outside the boundaries of this essay. Nevertheless, democracy seems to
most of us an appropriate goal and a valid
aspiration. It is fair to say
that many Fluxus artists see their work as a contribution to that world.
Some of the Fluxus work was
intended as a direct contribution to a more democratic world. Joseph Beuys's
projects for direct democracy, Nam June
Paik's experiments with television,
Robert Filliou's programs, Dick Higgins's Something Else Press, Milan Knizak's
Aktual projects, George
Maciunas's multiples and my
own experiments with communication and research-based art forms were all
direct attempts to bring democratic
expression into art and to
use art in the service of democracy. The artists who created these projects
wrote essays and manifestoes that made this goal
clear. The views took different
starting points, sometimes political, sometimes economic, sometimes philosophical,
sometimes even mystical or
religious. As a result, this
is one aspect of Fluxus that can be examined and understood in large global
terms, and these terms are given voice in
the words of the artists themselves.
Other Fluxus projects had similar goals, though not all have been put forward
in explicit terms.
Concurrent with a democratic
standpoint is an anti-elitist approach. When Nam June Paik read the earlier
version of the 12 Fluxus Ideas, he pointed
out that the concept of anti-elitism
was missing.
I had failed to articulate the
linkage between globalism, democracy and anti-elitism. In fact, one
can't achieve a humanistic global community
without democracy or achieve
democracy in a world controlled by an elite. In this context, one must
define the term "elitism" to mean a dominant
elite class based on inherited
wealth or power or based on the ability of dominant elites to incorporate
new members in such a way that their wealth
and power will be preserved.
This is quite contrary to an open or entrepreneurial society in which the
opportunity to advance is based on the
ability to create value in
the form of goods or services.
The basic tendency of elitist
societies to restrict opportunity is why elite societies eventually strangle
themselves. Human beings are born with
the genetic potential for talent
and the potential to create value for society without regard to gender,
race, religion or other factors. While
some social groups intensify
or weaken certain genetic possibilities through preferential selection
based on social factors, the general
tendency is that any human
being can in theory represent any potential contribution to the whole.
A society that restricts access
to education or to the ability to shape value makes it impossible for the
restricted group to contribute to the
larger society. This means
that a restrictive society will finally cripple itself in comparison to
or in competition with a society in which anyone
can provide service to others
to the greatest extent possible.
For example, a society which
permits all of its members to develop and use their talents to the fullest
extent will always be a richer and more
competitive society than a
society which doesn't allow some members to get an education because of
race, religion or social background. Modern
societies produce value through
professions based on education. Educated people create the material wealth
that enable all members of a society to
flourish through such disciplines
as physics, chemistry or engineering. It is nearly impossible to become
a physicist, a chemist or an engineer
without an education. Those
societies that make it impossible for a large section of the population
to be educated for these professions must
statistically reduce their
chances of innovative material progress in comparison with those
societies that educate every person with the aptitude
for physics, chemistry or engineering.
In suggestions a world in which
there are no restrictions based on elite social advantage, Fluxus suggests
a world in which it is possible to create
the greatest value for the
greatest number of people. This finds its parallel in many of the central
tenets of Buddhism. In economic terms, it
leads to what could be called
Buddhist capitalism or green capitalism.
In the arts, the result can
be confusing. The arts are a breeding ground and a context for experiment.
The world uses art to conduct experiments of
many kinds -- thought experiments
and sense experiments. At their best, the arts are a cultural wetlands,
a breeding ground for evolution and for the
transmutation of life forms.
In a biologically rich dynamic system, there are many more opportunities
for evolutionary dead ends than for successful
mutation. As a result, there
must be and there is greater latitude for mistakes and transgressions in
the world of the arts than in the immediate
and results-oriented world
of business or social policy. This raises the odd possibility that a healthy
art world may be a world in which there is always more bad art than good.
According to some, the concept of bad art or good is misleading: this was
Filliou's assertion, the point he made with his series of Bien Fait, Mal
Fait works.
Ultimately, the development
and availability of a multiplicity of works and views permits choice, progress
and development. This is impossible in a
centrally planned, controlled
society. The democratic context of competing visions and open information
makes this growth possible. Access to
information is a basis for
this development, which means that everyone must have the opportunity to
shape information and to use it. Just as short-term
benefits can accrue in entropic
situations, so it is possible for individuals and nations to benefit from
the short-term monopoly of
resources and opportunities.
Thus the urge for elitism based on social class and for advantage based
on nationalism. In the long run, this leads
to problems that disadvantage
everyone. Fluxism suggests globalism, democracy and anti-elitism as intelligent
premises for art, for culture and
for long-term human survival.
Paik's great 1962 manifesto,
Utopian Laser Television, pointed in this direction. He proposed a new
communications medium based on hundreds of
television channels. Each channel
would narrowcast its own program to an audience of those who wanted the
program without regard to the size of the
audience. It wouldn't make
a difference whether the audience was made of two viewers or two billion.
It wouldn't even matter whether the programs
were intelligent or ridiculous,
commonly comprehensible or perfectly eccentric. The medium would make it
possible for all information to be
transmitted and each member
of each audience would be free to select or choose his own programming
based on a menu of infinitely large
possibilities.
Even though Paik wrote his manifesto
for television rather than computer-based information, he predicted the
world-wide computer network
and its effects. As technology
advances to the point were computer power will make it possible for the
computer network to carry and deliver full
audio-visual programming such
as movies or videotapes, we will be able to see Paik's Utopian Laser Television.
That is the ultimate point of the
Internet with its promise of
an information rich world.
As Buckminster Fuller suggested,
it must eventually make sense for all human beings to have access to the
multiplexed distribution of resources in
an environment of shared benefits,
common concern and mutual conservation of resources.
2.2 Unity of Art and Life
The unity of art and life is
central to Fluxism. When Fluxus was established, the conscious goal was
to erase the boundaries between art and
life. That was the sort of
language appropriate to the time of pop art and of happenings. The founding
Fluxus circle sought to resolve what was then
seen as a dichotomy between
art and life. Today, it is clear that the radical contribution Fluxus made
to art was to suggest that there is no
boundary to be erased.
Beuys articulated it well in
suggesting that everyone is an artist, as problematic as that statement
appears to be. Another way to put it is to
say that art and life are part
of a unified field of reference, a single context. Stating it that way
poses problems, too, but the whole purpose of
Fluxus is to go where the interesting
problems are.
2.3 Intermedia
Intermedia is the appropriate
vehicle for Fluxism. Dick Higgins introduced the term "intermedia" to the
modern world in his famous 1966 essay. He
described an art form appropriate
to people who say there are no boundaries between art and life. If there
can't be a boundary between art and life,
there cannot be boundaries
between art form and art form. For purposes of history, of discussion,
of distinction, one can refer to separate art
forms, but the meaning of intermedia
is that our time often calls for art forms that draw on the roots of several
media, growing into new hybrids.
Imagine, perhaps, an art form
that is comprised 10% of music, 25% of architecture, 12% of drawing, 18%
of shoemaking, 30% of painting and 5% of
smell. What would it be like?
How would it work? How would some of the specific art works appear? How
would they function? How would the elements
interact? That's a thought
experiment that yields interesting results. Thoughts like this have given
rise to some of the most interesting art
works of our time.
2.4 Experimentalism
Fluxus applied the scientific
method to art. Experimentalism, research orientation and iconoclasm were
its hallmarks. Experimentalism doesn't
merely mean trying new things.
It means trying new things and assessing the results. Experiments that
yield useful results cease being experiments and
become usable tools, like penicillin
in medicine or imaginary numbers in mathematics.
The research orientation applies
not only to the experimental method, but to the ways in which research
is conducted. Most artists, even those who
believe themselves experimentalists,
understand very little about the ways ideas develop. In science, the notion
of collaboration, of theoreticians,
experimenters and researchers
working together to build new methods and results, is well established.
Fluxus applied this idea to art. Many Fluxus
works are the result of numbers
of artists active in dialogue. Fluxus artists are not the first to apply
this method, but Fluxus is the first art
movement to declare this way
of working as an entirely appropriate method for use over years of activity
rather than as the occasional diversion.
Many Fluxworks are still created
by single artists, but from the first to the present day, you find Fluxus
artists working together on projects where
more than one talent can be
brought to bear.
Iconoclasm is almost self-evident.
When you work in an experimental way in a field as bounded by restrictions
and prejudices as art, you've got to be
willing to break the rules
of cultural tradition.
2.5 Chance
One key aspect of Fluxus experimentation
is chance. The methods -- and results -- of chance occur over and over
again in the work of Fluxus
artists.
There are several ways of approaching
chance. Chance, in the sense of aleatoric or random chance, is a tradition
with a legacy going back to
Duchamp, to Dada and to Cage.
That's been very famous and much has been made of it. Perhaps those who
have written about Fluxus have made more of
chance than they should have,
but this is understandable in the cultural context in which Fluxus appeared.
By the late 1950s, the world
seemed to have become too routinized, opportunities for individual engagement
in the great game of life too
limited. In America, this phenomenon
was noted in books such as The Organization Man, in critiques of "the silent
generation," and in studies
such as The Lonely Crowd. The
entire artistic and political program of the Beats was built on opposition
to routine. Random chance, a way to break the
bonds, took on a powerful attraction,
and for those who grew up in the late 50s and early 60s, it still has the
nostalgic aroma that hot rods and James
Dean movies hold for others.
Even so, random chance was more useful as a technique than as a philosophy.
There is also evolutionary chance.
In the long run, evolutionary chance plays a more powerful role in innovation
than random chance. Evolutionary
chance engages a certain element
of the random. Genetic changes occur, for example, in a process that is
known as random selection. New biological
mutations occur at random under
the influence of limited entropy, for example, when radiation affects the
genetic structure. This is a technical
degeneration of the genetic
code, but some genetic deformations actually offer good options for survival
and growth. When one of these finds an
appropriate balance between
the change and the niche in which it finds itself, it does survive to become
embodied in evolutionary development.
This has parallels in art and
in music, in human cultures and societies. Something enters the scene and
changes the world-view we previously held.
That influence may be initiated
in a random way. It may begin in an unplanned way, or it may be the result
of signal interference to intended
messages, or it may be the
result of a sudden insight. Any number of possibilities exist. When the
chance input is embodied in new form,
however, it ceases to be random
and becomes evolutionary. That is why chance is closely allied to experimentation
in Fluxus. It is related to the
ways in which scientific knowledge
grows, too.
2.6 Playfulness
Playfulness has been part of
Fluxus since the beginning. Part of the concept of playfulness has been
represented by terms such as jokes, games,
puzzles and gags. This role
of gags in Fluxus has sometimes been overemphasized. This is understandable.
Human beings tend to perceive
patterns by their gestalt,
focusing on the most noticeable differences. When Fluxus emerged, art was
under the influence of a series of attitudes
in which art seemed to be a
liberal, secular substitute for religion. Art was so heavily influenced
by rigidities of conception, form and style that
the irreverent Fluxus attitude
stood out like a loud fart in a small elevator. The most visible aspect
of the irreverent style was the emphasis
on the gag. There is more to
humor than gags and jokes, and there is more to playfulness than humor.
Play comprehends far more than
humor. There is the play of ideas, the playfulness of free experimentation,
the playfulness of free association
and the play of paradigm shifting
that are as common to scientific experiment as to pranks.
2.7 Simplicity
Simplicity, sometimes called
parsimony, refers to the relationship of truth and beauty. Another term
for this concept is elegance. In mathematics or
science, an elegant idea is
that idea which expresses the fullest possible series of meanings in the
most concentrated possible statement. That is the
idea of Occam's Razor, a philosophical
tool which states that a theory that accounts for all aspects of a phenomenon
with the fewest possible terms
will be more likely to be correct
than a theory that accounts for the same phenomenon using more (or more
complex) terms. From this perspective of
philosophical modeling, Copernicus's
model of the solar system is better than Ptolemy's -- must be better --
because it accounts for a fuller range
of phenomena in fewer terms.
Parsimony, the use of frugal, essential means, is related to that concept.
This issue was presented in
Higgins's original list as minimalism, but the term minimalism has come
to have a precise meaning in the world of art.
While some of the Fluxus artists
like La Monte Young can certainly be called minimalists, the intention
and the meaning of their minimalism is
very different than the minimalism
associated with the New York art school of that name. I prefer to think
of La Monte as parsimonious. His work is a
frugal concentration of idea
and meaning that fits his long spiritual pilgrimage, closer to Pandit Pran
Nath than to Richard Serra.
Simplicity of means, perfection
of attention are what distinguish this concept in the work of the Fluxus
artists.
2.8 Implicativeness
Implicativeness means that an
ideal Fluxus work implies many more works. This notion is close to and
grows out of the notion of elegance and
parsimony. Here, too, you see
the relationship of Fluxus to experimentalism and to the scientific method.
2.9 Exemplativism
Exemplativism is the principle
that Dick Higgins outlined in another essay, the Exemplativist Manifesto.
Exemplativism is the quality of a work
exemplifying the theory and
meaning of its construction. While not all Fluxus works are exemplative,
there has always been a feeling that those
pieces which are exemplative
are in some way closer to the ideal than those which are not. You could
say, for example, that exemplativism is the
distinction between George
Brecht's poetic proposals and Ray Johnson's -- and probably shows why Brecht
is in the Fluxus circle while Johnson, as
close to Fluxus as he is, has
never really been a part of things.
2.10 Specificity
Specificity has to do with the
tendency of a work to be specific, self-contained and to embody all its
own parts. Most art works rely on
ambiguity, on the leaking away
of meanings to accumulate new meanings. When a work has specificity, it
loads meaning quite consciously. In a sense,
this may seem a contradiction
in an art movement that has come to symbolize philosophical ambiguity and
radical transformation, but it is a key element
in Fluxus.
2.11 Presence in time
Many Fluxus works take place
in time. This has sometimes been referred to by the term ephemeral but
the terms ephemerality and duration distinguish
different qualities of time
in Fluxus. It is appropriate that an art movement whose very name goes
back to the Greek philosophers of time and
the Buddhist analysis of time
and existence in human experience should place great emphasis on the element
of time in art.
The ephemeral quality is obvious
in the brief Fluxus performance works, where the term ephemeral is appropriate,
and in the production of ephemera,
fleeting objects and publications
with which Fluxus has always marked itself. But Fluxus works often embody
a different sense of duration as:
musical compositions lasting
days or weeks, performances that take place in segments over decades, even
art works that grow and evolve over equally
long spans. Time, the great
condition of human existence, is a central issue in Fluxus and in the work
that artists in the Fluxus circle create.
2.12 Musicality
Musicality refers to the fact
that many Fluxus works are designed as scores, as works which can be realized
by artists other than the creator.
While this concept may have
been born in the fact that many Fluxus artists were also composers, it
signifies far more. The events, many object
instructions, game and puzzle
works -- even some sculptures and paintings -- work this way. This means
that you can own a George Brecht piece by
carrying out one of Brecht's
scores. If that sounds odd, you might ask if you can experience Mozart
simply by listening to an orchestra play one of
Mozart's scores. The answer
is that you can. Perhaps another orchestra or Mozart himself might have
given a better rendition, but it is still
Mozart's work. This, too, is
the case with a Brecht or a Knizak or a Higgins that is created to be realized
from a score.
The issue of musicality has
fascinating implications. The mind and intention of the creator are the
key element in the work. The issue of the
hand is only germane insofar
as the skill of rendition affects the work: in some conceptual works, even
this is not an issue. Musicality is linked to
experimentalism and the scientific
method. Experiments must operate in the same manner. Any scientist must
be able to reproduce the work of any other
scientist for an experiment
to remain valid.
As with other issues in Fluxus,
this raises interesting problems. Collectors want a work with hand characteristics,
so some Fluxus works
imply their own invalidity
for collectors.
Musicality suggests that the
same work may be realized several times, and in each state it may be the
same work, even though it is a different
realization of the same work.
This bothers collectors who think of "vintage" works as works located in
a certain, distant era. The concept of
"vintage" is useful only when
you think of it in the same way you think of wine: 1962 may be a great
vintage, then 1966, then it may not be until 1979
or 1985 that another great
vintage occurs.
If you think of the composers
and conductors who have given us great interpretations of past work, say
a complete Beethoven cycle or a series of
Brahms concertos, then, a decade
or two later, gave a dramatically different, yet equally rich interpretation
of the same work, you will see
why the concept of vintage
can only be appropriate for Fluxus when it is held to mean what it means
in wine. You must measure the year by the
flavor, not the flavor by the
year.
Musicality is a key concept
in Fluxus. It has not been given adequate attention by scholars or critics.
Musicality means that anyone can play the
music. If deep engagement with
the music, with the spirit of the music is the central focus of this criterion,
then musicality may be the key concept
in Fluxus. It is central to
Fluxus because it embraces so many other issues and concepts: the social
radicalism of Maciunas in which the individual
artist takes a secondary role
to the concept of artistic practice in society, the social activism of
Beuys when he declared that we are all
artists, the social creativity
of Knizak in opening art into society, the radical intellectualism of Higgins
and the experimentalism of Flynt. All of
these and more appear in the
full meaning of musicality.
3. Fluxus 1994
3.1 After Maciunas
Discussions about Fluxus often
focus on George Maciunas, but it isn't possible to continue Maciunas's
role. George Maciunas had a unique role, a
unique way of doing things,
and a unique place in the affections of everyone who knew him, but thinking
of him as the single central figure in
Fluxus is a mistake.
Between 1962 and the early 1970s,
Maciunas was Fluxus's editorial and festival organizer. He held a role
that could be compared to the role of a
chairman. When it became evident,
even to George himself, that others had key roles to play if Fluxus was
to grow, he loosened his notion of central
control dramatically. It became
far more important to him to spread Fluxism as a social action than to
dictate the artistic terms of every Fluxus
artist. That's evident if you
see that Maciunas considered David Mayor a member of the Fluxcore, even
though Mayor was quite different than Maciunas
in his artistic choices.
By the 1970s, George Maciunas
was no longer as active in publishing and organizing for Fluxus as he had
been a few years earlier. For example,
while there were Fluxus evenings
and occasional Fluxus presentations, Maciunas organized no major festivals
after David Mayor finished the
Fluxshoe.
In 1966, Maciunas had appointed
several others as his co-directors. Fluxus South was directed by Ben Vautier
in Nice, Fluxus East by Milan Knizak and
I directed Fluxus West. Some
have tried to make a point that "Fluxus East wasn't Fluxus," as though
only Maciunas was Fluxus. That's not the case:
Maciunas authorized us to speak
for Fluxus, to represent Fluxus, to manage publications, to dispense copyright
permission, and to act in every respect
on Fluxus's behalf.
While Maciunas repudiated people
in the early 1960s, even attempting to expel or purge people from Fluxus,
that's not how he behaved a few years
later. It's a disservice to
George Maciunas to present him through the image of a petty (if lovable)
tyrant, a cross between an artistic Stalin
and a laughable Breton. This
notion belittles Maciunas's depth and capacity as a human being, his ability
to find more effective ways of working and to
find ways to grow.
George Maciunas was a fabulous
organizational technologist and a great systematic thinker, but he was
not comfortable working with people in the
million unsystematic ways that
people demand to work. That's why he changed his working method by the
mid-60s and began to share the leadership role. That is how Fluxus took
new forms and grew.
He became comfortable letting
others develop Fluxus in other ways while giving advice and criticism from
time to time. That's how Fluxus found its
feet in England in the 1970s.
That's how new Fluxus activists emerged in the States and in Europe and
how they kept the ideas and action alive. It's
why Fluxus has been continuously
active for over 30 years.
The first Fluxus disappeared a long time ago. It replaced itself with the many forms of Fluxus that came after.
The many varieties of Fluxus
activity took on their own life and had a significant history of their
own. It's unrealistic and historically inaccurate to imagine a Fluxus controlled
by one man. Fluxus was co-created by many people and it has undergone a
continuous process of co-creation and renewal for three decades.
3.2 Fluxus Today
Fluxus today isn't the Fluxus
that was sometimes considered an organized group and sometimes referred
to as a movement. Fluxus is a forum, a circle
of friends, a living community.
Fluxism as a way of thinking and working is very much alive.
What was unique about Fluxus
as a community was that we named ourselves. We found and kept our own name.
Art critics named abstract expressionism, pop art, minimalism and conceptualism.
Fluxus named Fluxus. The German press took our name and fell in love with
it, but it was our name to begin with.
What made it Fluxus was that
it wasn't confined to art and perhaps that saved us from being named by
others. If it locked us out of the art market
on many occasions, it made
it possible for us to make interesting art on our own terms.
In the last fifteen years, interest
in Fluxus has gone through two, maybe three cycles of growth and neglect.
We're still here, still doing what we
want to do, and still coming
together from time to time under the rubric of Fluxus. Since this is exactly
what happened during the 1960s and 1970s,
it's clear that Fluxus didn't
die at some magical date in the past. If you read your way down the many
lists of Fluxus artists who were young and
revolutionary back in the 1960s,
the 1990s have shown many of them to be transformative and evolutionary.
They transformed the way that the world
thinks about art, and they
transformed the relationship between art and the world around it.
The Fluxus dialogue has taken
on a life of its own. A Fluxism vital enough to continue in its own right
was exactly what people intended at the
beginning, though this has
sometimes had consequences that startled them as much as anyone else. If
it hasn't happen in exactly the ways that they
planned, it's because there
are no boundaries between art and life. What counts is the fact that it
happened.
A Fluxus Idea was written for
The World's First Digital Art Festival organized by Nam June Paik for broadcast
over the global computer network
as a simultaneous festival
on Worldwide Internet in connection with the Seoul-NYMAX Mediale, a Celebration
of Arts without Borders presented at
Anthology Film Archives in
New York, October 8 - November 6, 1994. It is a revision of a text first
published by Emily Harvey Gallery as an exhibition
monograph titled Fluxus and
Company.
First Publication
Friedman, Ken. Fluxus and Company. New York: Emily Harvey Gallery, 1989. [exhibition monograph]
Reprinted
Friedman, Ken. "Fluxus and Company."
In Ubi Fluxus, ibi motus. Achille Bonita Oliva, Gino Di Maggio and Gianni
Sassi, eds. Venice and Milan: La
Biennnale di Venezia and Mazzotta
Editore, 1990, 328-332. [book published in conjunction with exhibition]
Friedman, Ken. "Fluxus and Company."
Lund Art Press, Vol. 1, No. 4, 1990: Lund University School of Architecture,
289-299. [special magazine issue
devoted to Fluxus]
Friedman, Ken. "Fluxus and Company." In: Fluxus Subjektiv. Ursula Krinzinger, ed. Wien: Galerie Krinzinger 1990. [exhibition catalogue]
1992 Revision
Friedman, Ken. Fluxus 1992. Budapest: Artpool. Hungarian translation by Barbarczy Eszter. [monograph]
Friedman, Ken. "Fluxus 1992"
In The Seoul of Fluxus. Hong Hee Kim-Cheon, ed. Seoul, Korea: A.P. International,
Ltd., 1993, 24-34. [festival project
book and exhibition catalogue]
1994 Revision
The text was revised again in
1994 as A Fluxus Idea. It was published on Internet. It is also scheduled
for publiication in the festival catalogue:
Seoul-NYMAX Mediale, a Celebration
of Arts without Borders. Nam June Paik, Jonas Mekas and Robert Haller,
editors. New York, 1994: Anthology Film
Archives.
1995 Reprint
Friedman, Ken. "A Fluxus Idea."
In The Electronic Superhighway. Travels with Nam June Paik. Paik, Nam June,
Kenworth W. Moffett, et. al, eds. New
York, Seoul and Fort Lauderdale:
Holly Solomon Gallery, Hyundai Gallery and the Fort Lauderdale Museum of
Art, 1995, 87-97.
Copyright =A9 1994, 1995 by
Ken Friedman. All rights reserved.
This text may be quoted and
printed freely with proper acknowledgment.
Ken Friedman, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Leadership
and Strategic Design
Norwegian School of Management
Box 4676 Sofienberg
N-0506 Oslo, Norway
Phone: +47 22.98.51.07
Fax: +47 22.98.51.11
e-mail: <ken.friedman@bi.no>
FLUXNEXUS.COM
return