The (Moving) Pictures Generation: The Cinematic Impulse in Downtown New York Art and Film

248 Pages·2012·12.87 MB·English

by  Vera Dika (auth.)

The (Moving) Pictures Generation
The (Moving) Pictures Generation
The Cinematic Impulse in Downtown
New York Art and Film
Vera Dika
THE(MOVING)PICTURESGENERATION
Copyright©VeraDika,2012.
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 2012 978-0-230-34144-9
Allrightsreserved.
Firstpublishedin2012by
PALGRAVEMACMILLAN®
intheUnitedStates—adivisionofSt.Martin’sPressLLC,
175FifthAvenue,NewYork,NY10010.
WherethisbookisdistributedintheUK,EuropeandtherestoftheWorld,
thisisbyPalgraveMacmillan,adivisionofMacmillanPublishersLimited,
registeredinEngland,companynumber785998,ofHoundmills,
Basingstoke,HampshireRG216XS.
PalgraveMacmillanistheglobalacademicimprintoftheabove
companiesandhascompaniesandrepresentativesthroughouttheworld.
Palgrave®andMacmillan®areregisteredtrademarksintheUnited
States,theUnitedKingdom,Europeandothercountries.
ISBN 978-1-349-34429-1 ISBN 978-1-137-11851-6 (eBook)
DOI 10.1057/9781137118516
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Dika,Vera,1951–
The(moving)picturesgeneration:thecinematicimpulsein
downtownNewYorkartandfilm/VeraDika.—1sted.
p. cm.
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
1. Artandmotionpictures—NewYork(State)—NewYork—
History—20thcentury. 2. Art,American—NewYork(State)—
NewYork—20thcentury. 3. Experimentalfilms—NewYork
(State)—NewYork—History—20thcentury. I. Title.
N72.M6D552012
709.04(cid:2)07—dc23 2011039301
AcataloguerecordofthebookisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary.
DesignbyIntegraSoftwareServices
Firstedition:April2012
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Tomyhusband,HenrySeggerman
Contents
ListofIllustrations ix
Acknowledgments xi
Prologue:DowntownNewYorkintheLate1970sandBeyond xiii
(Moving)Pictures
1 (Moving)Pictures:Introduction 3
2 Stillness/Movement:JosephCornell,EdisonCompany,
AndyWarhol,JackGoldstein 23
3 TheFemaleBodyandtheFilmFrame:AndyWarhol,
CindySherman 33
4 VivienneDick’sFilmPortraits 53
Community
5 AmosPoeandtheNewYorkNewWave 71
6 DowntownandCommunity:EricMitchell,JamesNares,
NanGoldin 87
NarrativeExpectations
7 StrategiesofTransformation:JackGoldstein,RobertLongo,
CindySherman 119
8 StrategiesofOpposition:EricMitchell,KathrynBigelow,
LizzieBorden 141
TheCinematicBody
9 PerformanceandtheCinematic:PaulSwan,EricBogosian 155
10 TheEphemeralBody/TheFemaleVoice:LouiseLawler,
ErickaBeckman 167
viii Contents
DowntownandtheMainstream
11 IncursionsintoPopularCulture:RobertLongo,Cindy
Sherman,KathrynBigelow 181
ConclusionandContinuation 205
Notes 211
Bibliography 227
Index 233
List of Illustrations
1 RobertLongo,SevenSealsforMissouriBreaks,1976 4
2 AndyWarhol,Beauty#2,1965 11
3 JackGoldstein,TwoFencers,1977 13
4 AndyWarhol,Empire,1964 28
5 JackGoldstein,TheJump,1978 30
6 EdieSedgwickinAndyWarhol’sScreenTests,1965 35
7 CindySherman,UntitledFilmStill#5,1977 42
8 AnyaPhillipsinVivienneDick’sGuerillereTalks,1978 63
9 DuncanHannahinAmosPoe’sUnmadeBeds,1976 85
10 EricMitchellinAmosPoe’sUnmadeBeds,1976 89
11 JamesChance,AnyaPhillips,andDavidMcDermottinJames
Nares’sRome‘78,1978 104
12 NanGoldin,“JimmyPauletteandTabboo!Inthebathroom,
NYC,”TheBalladofSexualDependency,1991 113
13 RobertLongo,pagefromthescreenplayforunproducedfilm
Empire,1982 136
14 PattiAstorinEricMitchell’sUndergroundUSA,1980 143
15 WillemDafoeinKathrynBigelow’sTheLoveless,1982 145
16 EricBogosian,Funhouse,1983 163
17 LouiseLawler,AMovieWillBeShownWithoutthePicture,
1979 169
18 PaulMcMahoninErickaBeckman’sOutofHand,1980 176
19 DorineinCindySherman-likedisguise,OfficeKiller,1997 198
20 StasisinextrememovementinKathrynBigelow’sPoint
Break,1991 201
Acknowledgments
I would like to express my appreciation to a number of people whose assis-
tanceandfriendshipmadepossiblethecompletionofthiswork.Firstonmy
list are Lisa Fiol-Matta and Jo Bruno who allowed me a leave of absence,
and who encouraged my scholarly endeavor. Next, but certainly not sec-
ondary, are my longtime supporters William Rothman and Marian Keane.
Their generous input, and critiques, greatly helped to shape this project.
I also want to thank David Sterritt for his quick wit and razor-sharp com-
mentary, and for seeing the merit of the book. Also thanks to Pam Wendt,
whosecareful readingguidedmethroughthe treacherousprocessof rewrit-
ing.Tomyeditor,SamanthaHasey,Iextendathankyouforsupportingthe
publicationofmybook,andforseeingittocompletionwithskillandprofes-
sionalism. To Jennifer Smyth, Krin Gabbard, and Charles Musser, as always,
I welcome your support. And to my family—my daughter, Alexandra; her
husband,Stephen;andmyhusband,Henry—Ithankyouforyourhelp,love,
andunderstanding.
Prologue: Downtown New York in
the Late 1970s and Beyond
F
irst, I must clarify my choice of terminology regarding the naming of
a generation of New York-based artists and filmmakers who came into
prominence in the last quarter of the twentieth century. Many critics had
initially described the new practice in the late 1970s as “Postmodern Art.”1
Inmorerecentyears,thedesignationhaslargelybeenreplacedwithtermslike
“Downtown Art”2 and “The Pictures Generation,”3 each used to address a
differentconfigurationofartistsandtheirpractices:theformerincorporating
alarger,moreeclecticgroup,andthelatteraselecthighartendeavor.Inthis
book,Ihavechosentouse“DowntownNewYork”asabackdropwhendis-
cussing a number of artists who engaged in work I am calling “(Moving)
Pictures.” I have selected this group somewhat differently than those in the
categories noted above, making a determination on the basis of a particular
typeofcinematicactivity.Ihave,moreover,utilizedtheterms“Downtown”
and “New York” for a specific purpose. Not only do these names help to
define a literal location, but when taken in tandem, they can point to a par-
ticular era and to important historical and cinematic connotations. For this
reason,IwillbeginbydistinguishingbetweendowntownNewYorkasaplace
andDowntownNewYorkasanidea.
The term “Downtown Art” came into prominence at a time when the
location of the downtown art scene had largely faded,4 in part because of
thearea’sextensivegentrification.Inscribedintheterm“Downtown,”then,
is a sense of looking back, almost nostalgically, if not historically. But if the
term is thus compromised, why use it at all? I have chosen to do so because
the location of downtown New York had long been considered “dead” or
“decaying,”especiallytheareabelowCanalStreetandneartheBowery,and
was certainly seen that way in the late 1970s. In fact, it was precisely this
quality of pastness that gave the place its allure, its fascination. Downtown
NewYorkmayhavebeen“dead”inthelate1970s,deadtomuchofitsman-
ufacturing and immigrant past, as evidenced in the many empty warehouses
and deserted nighttime streets, but the area was also invigorated by the new
artcommunitythatgatheredthere.
ThecityofNewYorkitselfisoftenrememberedintermsofdecayduring
thisera,andironically,foritsvibrantenergy.Theperiodwasoneofrecession,