Documentation as Art Practice in the 1960s

Transcription

1 Visual Resources an international journal on images and their uses ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: Documentation as Art Practice in the 1960s Christian Berger & Jessica Santone To cite this article: Christian Berger & Jessica Santone (2016) Documentation as Art Practice in the 1960s, Visual Resources, 32:3-4, , DOI: / To link to this article: Published online: 28 Nov Submit your article to this journal Article views: 2137 View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 1 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

2 INTRODUCTION Documentation as Art Practice in the 1960s Christian Berger and Jessica Santone This issue addresses the practice of documentation in the art of the 1960s. Documentation is here understood as both the creation of documents and the techniques of their management, such as collection, archiving, arrangement, contextualization, or manipulation. The texts included here attend to the political, material, intermedial, and affective dimensions of documentation through close studies of specific artists and bodies of work. The authors consider a range of practices in experimental photography, conceptualism, and performance art, by artists situated in different local or transnational contexts mostly Europe, North America, and East Asia. At stake are why and how the processes of making or organizing documents newly constituted an artistic practice in its own right during the 1960s. Building on established research on twentieth-century documentary strategies and key 1960s documents, as well as recent scholarship in media studies and performance studies, the issue fosters a richer understanding of the personal, political, and social uses of documentation in the period. Keywords: Documentation; Archiving; 1960s; Conceptualism; Performance Art; Fluxus; Photography In the past 20 years, there has been a surge of interest in documenting, documentation, and archiving as art practices. Art historians like Hal Foster initially diagnosed an archival impulse in millennial art, symptomatic of a postmodernism that had run its course, in the relational, referential paradigm of the artist-as-curator and the collection as object. 1 Likewise, documentation has become an essential corollary to ephemeral or performance practices that have grown steadily in importance and institutional recognition since the mid-twentieth century. 2 Artists uses of documenting not only reflect technological changes that have made high-quality recording more readily available, but also signal the importance of testimony and witnessing at an ever-expanding number of sites of political tension. 3 Within our period of environmental, political, and technological crises, art historian T.J. Demos sums up the power of these changes when he argues that artists have reinvent[ed] the conditions of moving images in the documentary art of photography, film, and video, that is, images that are globally circulating and politically affective. 4 Against this backdrop of our present context, we look back in this special issue to documentation as artistic practice in the 1960s. By documentation we mean both the Visual Resources, Volume 32, Numbers 3 4, September December 2016 ISSN Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

3 202 Berger and Santone material processes of creating documents and the complex work of assembling sets of documents, organizing systems of materials, or drawing connections between them. In our view, this era was pivotal to the changing epistemologies of the document and of documentation. In the context of these broader changes, artists addressed the problem of mediation in their work from new angles. The 1960s laid important groundwork for more contemporary strategies of documentation in terms of both theory and practice. As the beginning of the information age, this period ushered in new media and new attitudes about mediation, data, and knowledge. It was also a moment of significant political change, when in multiple situations globally individual and collective identities came directly into conflict with oppressive state apparatuses. New global communications technologies seemed to hold potential to help in these situations, to network shared experiences of encounter with state power across greater distances. In this context, many artists made work that engaged with the mundane everyday, with the embodied experience of the spectator, or with the politically charged critique of institutions and their discourses; documentation was a core strategy to these ends. The question of whether the document mediated access to the work of art or was, in some regard, the work itself would become during the 1960s increasingly fraught among artists working in conceptual or performative dimensions. As artists generated more material production around the idea or event seemingly at the core of their project process frequently supplanting finished product it became less and less clear where and when the artwork stopped and documentation of art began. In the meantime, modernist problems of the aesthetics, veracity, and politics of documentation continued to affect artists who explored new forms of mechanical and electronic reproduction. At various moments in the twentieth century, the document held particular relevance in art discourse. 5 Whether considered in theoretical terms, as in German critic Walter Benjamin s ( ) Thirteen Theses Against Snobs (1928), or in terms of practice, as in Georges Bataille s ( ) French Surrealist art magazine Documents ( ), the document was frequently summoned in resistance to the aesthetic point of view, the result of which was nonetheless an expansion of the boundaries of art making. 6 In the Soviet Union, as art historian Benjamin Buchloh has argued, the formalism of faktura was supplanted by a turn to the factographic photograph, which supposedly render[ed] aspects of reality visible without interference or mediation. 7 In the United States, a documentary style emerged in the work of photographer Walter Evans, who proposed that one could adopt the look and format of the document for aesthetic purposes even while a majority of the work produced in this style in the 1930s was tied to the social welfare politics of the state. 8 While the document purportedly offered a directness of experience, documentation, by contrast, was about mediated understanding. 9 Modernist bureaucratic machines of the early twentieth century churned out an abundance of paper, magnetic, and filmic records, creating in turn a demand for new strategies of collecting and archival storage. Documentation science (after 1968, called information science in Europe and North America) brought order to social history and the administration of everyday life. Documents and archives had the potential to make life function more smoothly; both were repositories of modern truths, consulted for improving

4 Introduction 203 our understanding of criminal forensics, qualitative and quantitative studies of populations, public health, and collective or personal psychologies. Given the power of these bureaucratic tools and the political regimes that wielded them, it is unsurprising that artists in the 1960s used strategies of documentation in ways that persistently challenged the nineteenth century s confidence in the registration of time (Sven Spieker), drawing new kinds of connections between media or reintroducing subjective dimensions to information. 10 After World War II, modernist aesthetic values were rapidly being reshaped alongside a revolution in recording and communications technologies. In this context, American critic Harold Rosenberg ( ) offered an important counterpoint to the prevailing ideology of autonomous art when he proposed that new American painting (Abstract Expressionism) registered the traces of an artist s activities or labors rather than a planned composition. 11 Around the same time, the writings of French philosopher Maurice Merleau-Ponty ( ) influenced artists who were increasingly concerned with embodied perception over formal dimensions of an image. 12 In opposition to the forced objectivity of totalitarian and Cold War discourse (and mass media that bolstered both state power and formalist aesthetics), a concern for the contingent and the subjective motivated artists to explore more direct acts of expression now through the same highly coded media forms as the mass media. As they engaged in documentation of everyday lived experiences in the 1960s, artists used various kinds of recording media to leave open the meaning for their audiences, encouraging more active participation in the process. As the perpetual crises of the Cold War wore on into the late 1950s and early 1960s, the use of documents to hold or enforce power deepened, as did the critique of their effects. Documents were increasingly understood as subject to revision and change. As Martha Barratt describes in her essay in this issue, documentation could be used and reused to enable resistance to historicization, a particularly empowering effect when the subject documented was the self. 13 The 1960s were thus a transitional period that moved away to some extent from the accumulation of seemingly transparent documents to the use of documentation as a literal means of communicating diverse lived realities, often in service of exposing the personal or subjective. A range of recording formats and production techniques newly available to consumers also made it possible for young artists to challenge the presumed neutrality of these forms and their function as straightforward records. With these tools, documentation could be a creative practice, allowing artists to reshape, multiple, or develop new works rejecting, in the process, the stability of recorded information. Canadian media theorist Marshall McLuhan s ( ) technologically determinist view of media resonated strongly, especially with North American artists and their publics, helping to establish documentation as an important dimension of media ecology. 14 The allegedly neutral, transparent dimension of documentation was still valued in its capacity to transmit ephemeral, site-specific, or process-based art practices, like those that art critic Lucy Lippard (b. 1937) characterized in the 1960s as dematerialized. 15 Documentation was an important concern for conceptual artists, but its role and status were ambiguous. In some cases, documentation was seen as secondary to the piece and could, according to artists Lawrence Weiner (b. 1942) and Robert

5 204 Berger and Santone Barry (b. 1936), be distracting or ge[t] in the way of the art. 16 In other instances it formed an essential component of the piece, so that the distinction between documentation and the work itself was difficult to draw. 17 While the medium of such documentation was often photography, among its privileged sites of appearance was the printed page of an artist s book or exhibition catalog. With documentation, artists had the potential to record, elaborate, or even generate works or ideas, but the portability and cheapness of its materials helped artists communicate those ideas to larger international audiences and expressed a political desire for the de-commodification of art. 18 Likewise for the emerging set of practices called new music, happenings, actions, and events, documentation was important to the transmission of details about a live performance. Beginning in the late 1950s, happenings and Fluxus-related events used live bodies, audience participation, vaudevillian theatrics, or public disruptions as art. This way of working explicitly upended systems of value in the visual arts and frequently resonated as well with the politics of countercultural protest and participation. Many artists working in performance initially limited the influence of mediation through documents, sometimes even restricting the use of recording technologies. But the potential for documentation to somehow re-stage site-specific or performative works for other audiences was compelling. 19 Moreover, written or photographic documentation granted access to the witness or audience perspective. 20 Documentation came to be understood as a key component of the work in numerous instances, something that the artists increasingly incorporated directly into performances, for example when Vito Acconci (b. 1940) turned his camera on the audience in Twelve Pictures (1969). 21 By many artists and critics, documentation was perceived during the 1960s as failing lacking the capacity to reproduce the live event even when it was instrumental to the performance s unfolding. 22 Although the study of certain documents and documentary strategies of the 1960s is by now well established, 23 a more thoroughgoing account is needed of why and how artists in this period engaged in the work of documentation. What is at stake in this special issue is a richer understanding of the specific materials of documentation and the personal or social uses of documentation in the period (as opposed to the ways that documentation is used now to access the past). While the authors here do of course provide close analyses of specific documents, our present study focuses rather on how documents were produced, consumed, or otherwise used. Moreover, we are concerned with the way that artists in the 1960s made activities that were once peripheral, like arranging a set of texts, central to their practices. The essays that follow address strategies of documentation in experimental photography, conceptualist practices, and performance art (areas which frequently intersected in artists experimentation). While these case studies are limited in their geographical scope to the United States, Western Europe, and Japan, their examples repeatedly suggest that documentation was produced and circulated in ways that looked outwardly. Berger s article describes this effect in terms of American conceptual artist Douglas Huebler s ( ) introduction of worldly matters, 24 while Samantha Ismail-Epps s contribution looks at how British and American conceptualists used documentation to extend the reach of their ideas 25 and Santone s essay discusses how documentation sustained social bonds amongst Fluxus artists. Moreover, each of

6 Introduction 205 these studies contributes to a broader narrative of documentation used strategically to critique the institutional power of media, or, as Gyewon Kim writes in her text on Japanese avant-garde photography, to disrupt the highly encoded media spectacles distributed by mass communication. 26 The extent to which documentation is a social practice and the degree to which it has the potential to subvert or reorder power whether that power is expressed through aesthetics, urban space, institutional access, bureaucratic control, or the force of history are key concerns for the articles in this special issue. In the first of these articles, Douglas Huebler and the Photographic Document, Christian Berger tackles the function of document and documentation in Douglas Huebler s art of the late 1960s. By analyzing Huebler s practice through the lens of documentation, Berger shows how conceptual artists resisted the aestheticization of photography through scrutiny of its materiality as document. He highlights how Huebler s work in particular made use of a phenomenological approach to making and organizing photographs that subordinated visual effects even as it depended on established photographic techniques. Gyewon Kim s text, Paper, Photographic Document, and the Reflection on the Urban Landscape in 1960s Japan, also looks at the materiality of documentation, in the work of the Japanese avant-garde photography group Provoke. In her analysis, the mediation and remediation of paper offered the Provoke artists the means to destabilize contemporary media discourse and to redefine the experience of the city as weightless and changeable. By using paper as a metaphor for the city in their landscapes, Kim argues, Provoke critiqued the state imposition of homogenous urban planning and design. Samantha Ismail-Epps likewise explores the specific qualities and function of paper as medium of documentation in Artists Pages: A Site for the Repetition and Extension of Conceptual Art. Here, she argues that the reproduction of documents as pages in exhibition catalogs facilitated greater access for the audience to the information artists presented whether obscure in its referents or absorbing in its details, the document as page encouraged active participation. Through close readings of selected pages, Ismail- Epps points to the intimacy of the encounter created between artist and audience by this documentation format. In her essay, Documentation as Group Activity: Performing the Fluxus Network, Jessica Santone is concerned as well with the social relations inherent in documentation. She argues that the production and distribution of documentation within Fluxus was a way not only to reach outside audiences, but also of maintaining and establishing relations within the loose and dispersed international group of artists. Furthermore, as her analysis of projects by Japanese artist Yoko Ono (b. 1933) and the radical art collective Hi Red Center (founded 1963 in Tokyo) demonstrates, documentation could serve the formation of a group identity, as well as provide a means of articulating a politics of identity and difference in relation to the body, race, and gender. Likewise, in Autobiography, Time, and Documentation in the Performances and Auto-Archives of Carolee Schneemann, Martha Barratt addresses the politics of documentation. Her paper considers self-documentation and auto-archiving in the work of American artist Carolee Schneemann (b. 1939), with particular attention to the

7 206 Berger and Santone ways that Schneemann reconfigured documentation of both personal and professional life, creating complex temporalities for her audiences and producing palimpsests of ephemera that would confound the function of documents as evidence. In this way, Barratt argues, the artist performs a feminist critique of archiving and insists on the creative use of documentation for constructing identity. Documentation was, by the end of the 1960s, increasingly about facilitating communication or producing something new, destabilized by now through so many artists interventions to subvert or further activate factographic records. As media historian Lisa Gitelman demonstrates in Paper Knowledge, acts of documenting, documents themselves, and uses of documents were occasionally confused or conflated in this period: to Xerox was to affirm the item copied as a document, to electronically read that document in the process, and to produce a copy (document) for personal use. 27 Document leaks and manipulations of recording devices constituted major international events in the 1970s (for instance, in the explosiveness of the Pentagon Papers and the Watergate Scandal in the United States). Documentation as art practice deepened and grew more complicated in the 1970s and after; it served as key support for institutional critique and site specific art while being ever more burdened by the false transparency of documents. 28 Meanwhile, emerging post-structuralist theory, such as Michel Foucault s ( ) Archaeology of Knowledge, had begun to shift understanding of the place of history in the construction of knowledge so that it would be the thick, fragmented quality of the monument rather than the false transparency of the document that would be most revealing in the postmodern era. 29 The close examination of documentation as art practice in our special issue provides what we hope is a coherent approach to the study of diverse forms of 1960s art. The essays here, moreover, give evidence of the complexity and power of documentation in the 1960s that would continue to shape the work of contemporary artists later in the twentieth century and in our present time. Our special issue thus closes with two reviews of recent texts that demonstrate the continued relevance of these concerns. Erin Silver discusses The Shape of Evidence: Contemporary Art and the Document (2014) and author Sophie Berrebi s analysis of the actual or supposed evidentiary status of the document in recent art practices. And Jelena Stojkovic reviews the edited volume Documentary Across Disciplines (2016), which positions the documentary as strategy rather than genre, and explores how it is now deployed widely across film and other media. Finally, in the Notes from the Field section, Melissa Gill addresses the importance of artist archives for scholarship devoted to conceptualist, performance, and installation art including the presence of archival documents in recent exhibitions. She discusses the complexity of authorship and the materiality of these archives from the point of view of the Getty Research Institute in Los Angeles, an institution devoted to collecting and making available contemporary artist archives. Taken together, the essays in this issue allow an exemplary look at the importance of documentation, as both form and activity, in art practices of the 1960s. By considering the materialities and political motivations of such practices, these texts demonstrate the desire for artists to take ownership of new modes of reproduction and dissemination and assert the fraught relationship between art and document in this

8 Introduction 207 period. Documentation was a meaningful way for artists of the 1960s to question traditional notions of the work of art and established uses of media such as photography, text, or drawing. It was precisely this subversion of the evidentiary status of media that allowed for new forms of practice and fostered critical potential, effects which remain consequential in the use of documentation as art practice today. Acknowledgments Several of these essays (by Berger, Ismail-Epps, and Santone) originated at the April 2015 Association of Art Historians Annual Conference in Norwich, England, where a session on Documenting in the Sixties: Politics, Techniques, and Archives was chaired by Gyewon Kim and Jessica Santone. We were so pleased to have had the additional contributions in that forum of Marco Pasqualini de Andrade, on the work of Brazilian conceptualists, and Matthias Johannes Pfaller, on Chilean photojournalism. We are grateful as well for the rich feedback from our audience in Norwich as we developed the ideas presented here. Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. Notes on contributors CHRISTIAN BERGER is a research fellow and lecturer at Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz. JESSICA SANTONE is Assistant Professor of Modern and Contemporary Art History at California State University East Bay. 1 Hal Foster, An Archival Impulse, October 110 (Fall 2004): The culmination of postmodernism might be best celebrated in the retroperspective of Catherine David s documenta X (1997). 2 Amelia Jones, Presence in Absentia: Performance Art and the Rhetoric of Presence, Art Journal 56, no. 4 (Winter 1997): Jane Blocker, Seeing Witness: Visuality and the Ethics of Testimony (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2009). 4 T.J. Demos, The Migrant Image: The Art and Politics of Documentary during Global Crisis (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2013), 245. A concern for the documentary within a newly globalized art world is also present in much recent curatorial work, as in Okwui Enwezor s exhibition Archive Fever: Uses of the Document in Contemporary Art (New York: International Center of Photography, 2008) and his multi-sited documenta 11 (2002). 5 Sophie Berrebi, The Shape of Evidence: Contemporary Art and the Document (Amsterdam: Valiz, 2014), See Erin Silver, The Shape of Evidence: Contemporary Art and the Document, Visual Resources 32 (2016): Denis Hollier, The Use-Value of the Impossible, trans. Liesl Ollman, October 60 (Spring 1992): 5. See also: Walter Benjamin, Thirteen Theses Against Snobs, in One-Way Street and other Writings, ed. Susan Sontag (London: Verso, 1979), Benjamin Buchloh, From Faktura to Factography, October 30 (Fall 1984): 103.

9 208 Berger and Santone 8 Olivier Lugon, Le style documentaire: d August Sander à Walker Evans, (Paris: Macula, 2001), Jean-François Chevrier and Philippe Roussin, Présentation, Communications 71 (2001): 5. As French scholars Chevrier and Roussin have proposed, the material document may be distinguished from documentation (as evidence) and from documentary (as style) by its perpetual strangeness; the document offers the testimony or the inquiry as experience of social, cultural and even anthropologic otherness, which distances itself from the new norms of media information. Our translation. 10 Sven Spieker, The Big Archive: Art from Bureaucracy (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008), 6. Spieker s chapter on archival art beginning in the 1970s focuses on the impact of French literary critic Roland Barthes ( ) and his study of myth as sign system, whereby artists are newly concerned with the archive s consumption as myth (136). See also: Roland Barthes, Mythologies [1957], trans. Annette Lavers (New York: Noonday Press, 1990). 11 Harold Rosenberg, The American Action Painters, Art News 51, no. 8 (December 1952): 22 3; Rosenberg later expanded this concept as it applied to the 1960s: Art communicated through documents is a development to the extreme of the Action-painting idea that a painting ought to be considered as a record of the creative processes rather than as a physical object. Harold Rosenberg, The De-Definition of Art: Action Art to Pop to Earthworks (New York: Horizon Press, 1972), 59. Amelia Jones has pointed to the limits of Rosenberg s older article, where in her view the notion of the body is merely made to stand in for the (male) artist as creative subject, effectively continuing rather than rejecting modernist ideas of genius and autonomy. See Amelia Jones, Body Art/Performing the Subject (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998), Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phénoménologie de la perception (Paris: Gallimard, 1945). An English translation of this text was first published in One could also point here to renewed interest in American philosopher John Dewey ( ), whose writings on art focused on the process of experiencing art holistically. John Dewey, Art as Experience [1934], 3rd ed. (New York: Capricorn Books, 1958). 13 Martha Barratt, Autobiography, Time, and Documentation in the Performances and Auto-Archives of Carolee Schneemann, Visual Resources 32 (2016): Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media: The Dimensions of Man [1964] (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002). 15 Lucy R. Lippard, Six Years: The Dematerialization of the Art Object from [1973] (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997). 16 Patricia Norvell, Robert Barry, May 30, 1969, in Recording Conceptual Art: Early Interviews with Barry, Huebler, Kaltenbach, LeWitt, Morris, Oppenheim, Siegelaub, Smithson, Weiner, ed. Alexander Alberro and Patricia Norvell (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001), Alexander Alberro, At the Threshold of Art as Information, in Recording Conceptual Art, ed. Alberro and Norvell, 8. See also Anne Moeglin-Delcroix, Documentation as Art in Artists Books and Other Artist Publications, in Artists Publications. Ein Genre und seine Erschließung, ed. Sigrid Schade and Anne Thurmann-Jajes (Cologne: Salon, 2009) 34 44; Robert C. Morgan, Conceptual Art: An American Perspective (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 1994). 18 Lucy R. Lippard, Escape Attempts, in Reconsidering the Object of Art, exhibition catalog, ed. Anne Goldstein and Anne Rorimer (Los Angeles: Museum of Contemporary Art, 1995), 28.

10 Introduction For a nuanced contemporary reading of photography s dialogue with artistic ideas (not only) with respect to ephemeral actions or installations, see: Nancy Foote, The Anti-Photographers, Artforum 15, no. 1 (September 1976): 54. See also: Paul Schimmel and Kristine Stiles, Out of Actions: Between Performance and the Object, , exhibition catalog (Los Angeles: Museum of Contemporary Art, [1998] 2002); Rebecca Schneider, Performance Remains, Performance Research 6, no. 2 (Summer 2001): Mechtild Widrich, The Informative Public of Performance: A Study of Viennese Actionism, , TDR 57, no. 1 (Spring 2013): ; Gavin Butt, Happenings in History, or, The Epistemology of the Memoir, Oxford Art Journal 24, no. 2 (2002): ; Carrie Lambert, Documentary Dialectics: Performance Lost and Found, Visual Resources 16, no. 3 (Summer 2000): Anne M. Wagner, Performance, Video, and the Rhetoric of Presence, October 91 (Winter 2000): Judith Rodenbeck s analysis of happenings pioneer Allan Kaprow s ( ) rejection and eventual acceptance of documentation is also instructive. See Judith F. Rodenbeck, Radical Prototypes: Allan Kaprow and the Invention of Happenings (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011), Philip Auslander, The Performativity of Performance Documentation, PAJ 28, no. 3 (September 2006): 1 10; Barbara Clausen, Performing Histories: Why the Point is Not to Make a Point, Afterall 23 (Spring 2010): In addition to the titles already referred to, see e.g. Alexander Alberro, Conceptual Art and the Politics of Publicity (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003); Benjamin H. D. Buchloh, Conceptual Art : From the Aesthetic of Administration to the Critique of Institutions, October 55 (Winter 1990): ; Photography after Conceptual Art, ed. Diarmuid Costello and Margaret Iversen (Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010); Liz Kotz, Words to be Looked at: Language in 1960s Art (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2007); Carrie Lambert-Beatty, Being Watched: Yvonne Rainer and the 1960s (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008); John Roberts, The Impossible Document: Photography and Conceptual Art in Britain, (London: Camerawork, 1997). 24 Christian Berger, Douglas Huebler and the Photographic Document, Visual Resources 32 (2016): Samantha Ismail-Epps, Artists Pages: A Site for the Repetition and Extension of Conceptual Art, Visual Resources 32 (2016): Gyewon Kim, Paper, Photographic Document, and the Reflection on the Urban Landscape in 1960s Japan, Visual Resources 32 (2016): Lisa Gitelman, Paper Knowledge: Toward a Media History of Documents (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2014), Consider the usage of documentation systems and acts in the work of French/Bulgarian artists Christo [Vladimirov Javacheff] (b. 1935) and Jeanne-Claude [Denat de Guillebon] ( ) or German conceptual artist Hans Haacke (b. 1936). Jane McFadden provides an interesting analysis of American artist Walter De Maria s ( ) resistance to art institutional expectations of documentation: Jane McFadden, Earthquakes, Photoworks, and Oz: Walter de Maria s Conceptual Art, Art Journal 68, no. 3 (Fall 2009): Michel Foucault, The Archaeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language, trans. A.M. Sheridan Smith (New York: Pantheon Books, 1972 [1969]), On the document and monument in performance and architecture: Mechtild Widrich, Performative Monuments: The Rematerialisation of Public Art (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2014),