Sunday, December 07, 2008

Better Off Without A Mic (306 Exhibition @ Hoffman LaChance, 9-12-08)





We shot propane tanks and microphones, started fires and had guest singers. Adhering to the idea of deconstruction or destruction as it were, we wanted to tear down the conventions of music composition. Like it's predicessors free jazz, punk, techno, noize etc. etc., the sound composition is steered by way of devastation or the brink of collapse. Our instruments where microphones, rifles, guns, steel plates and exploding propane tanks.

We set out to the wilds with this one and enlisted the help and property of Sherman S. Sherman, a musical companion who at times brush-hogged the fields as we plotted the carnage. The title of the piece, "Better off without a Mic", comes from a quote Sherman makes as he's reluctantly coerced into producing a segue for a song of the same name, only it's a wife not a mic. One of the hallmarks of Nosey Parker is that we do not, under any circumstances, condone domestic violence.

Our weapons consisted of a beautiful 2007 Savage 30.06, a very sturdy and well crafted 1942 British Enfield 303, a 2007 Taurus 4" .357, a POS Remington .243 and a shiny nickle-plated 1948 Colt Dick Special .38. The guns are important; they have a very distinct sound when fired and their bullets create unique sounds on impact.

(The St. louis component was curated by Michael Behle).



Here's a link to a swift review: http://www.stlbeacon.org/arts_life/visual_arts/review_70s_vibe_at_hoffman_lachance

Two identical vinyl records were pressed. Each contains audio collages of ballistic and other source audio of the event.
Here's the sounds from the record:
(please click on the link to listen)

1. .357
http://www.box.net/shared/mcj762jazk
2. gun drama
http://www.box.net/shared/nvxsu04s6e
3. animal hospital
http://www.box.net/shared/zm2czm4bjr
4. better off without a wife
http://www.box.net/shared/r1tdchdcqx
5. untitled
http://www.box.net/shared/j67ni2gv80

Two single channel video's:
a. better off without a mic compilation
video
b. slow-motion mic kill
video

Sunday, February 17, 2008

shoot/sound project



We got together and discussed another reason to use guns in art....

Friday, November 24, 2006

WHITE FLAG PROJECTS


Nosey Parker lecturing


experts from left to right: Michael Crane, Greg Edmondson, Minsoo Kang, Chris King and Michael Schuh


Nosey Parker procession


Robert and Tata - The last real cowboy


Brett next to "Socratic Western" poster


Art Vader




NOSEY PARKER'S SOCRATIC WESTERN

Performance Art Invitational, LIVE ACTION @ White Flag Projects - STL, MO
Curated by Mike Schuh, Registrar - Contemporary Art Museum St. Louis

Our performance consisted of Nosey Parker, a panel knowledgable in our diverse works, a prarie schooner pulled by "Bonnie" the horse and a live audience encouraged to participate. Brett and I started by lecturing on the history of our collaborative projects. Our goal was to reach into the notion of the American West, it's history, populace integration and re-interpretation through Modernism and Post Modernism Art. Sparked by a trip to Warrensburg, MO, a bottle of Jamieson, populace cowboy attire and a Darth Vader helmet....we positioned our conceptual evolution along the historical and cultural milestones of the American West. We performed a lecture containing key figures of the literal and fictional west; placing Nosey Parker into an evolved composite of the western paradigm through the act of performance and reference. Audience participation was key in that it created unexpected discourse helping to push Nosey Parker further into the frontier.

American Democracy Project




























We took the TAZ on the road to Central Missouri State University. Michael Crane, director of the CMSU gallery, asked Nosey Parker to participate in this national traveling show.

Thomas Jefferson lecture


Lecture collage









Poster for lecture









Brett and I have resolved to stay in continuous dialogue regarding the shape/content of our Nosey Parker collaborative.
We invited some local experts who we thought could lend to the discussion regarding the TAZ. Audience participation was also welcome and in our current TAZ model we felt that Nosey Parker, the panel and audience all contributed to the shape and content of the TAZ. We finally had done away with a fixed architectural model. We are now perhaps able to adapt quickly to any envirnment.

Friday, May 12, 2006

.....and yet more Wash U. images




We'd like to thank both Ronald Leax, head of Sculpture at Washington University and BJ Vogt for inviting us to do our interactive project through Washington University in St. Louis. BJ recently graduated from Wash U. with an MFA in sculpture. There he taught a workshop in interactive and performative art. BJ is currently the Assistant Preparator of Exhibitions at Laumeier Sculpture Park and will be doing many other things besides, in the future.

It is Nosey Parker's goal to allow for the evolution of the Temporary Autonomous Zones Project and in doing so we seek new sites for deployment in the hope that the TAZ relates both conceptually and structurally to a new environment. Wash U had presented the opportunity to lecture about our project, extend the structural construct of the TAZ space and adapt the technology by suggesting that we program an additional TAZ site.

In the begining we had TAZ A and TAZ B and now there are three. TAZ C involves the ability, through a two channel switch, to manipulate and record video and audio communication between TAZ A and B. TAZ A and B could have knowledge or may be unaware of anothers perception and documentation of their transmissions. By enabling this tertiary component we enable a true vouyer or surveillance station and perhaps construct a model of communication that is mirrored in a society at odds with autonomy, freedom of speech, etc. This is a bag of worms and not necessarily the point though it makes for a strong parallel.

Another factor in customizing the TAZ according to site-specificty was the structure itself. Until this project the TAZ architecture was represented as a self contained, easily constructed/deconstructed and moveable space made of sustainable materials. At Wash U. we altered the actual architecture of room 102 at Lewis Center by partitioning the space into TAZ A and B. We did so by building a T-shaped wall that mimiced the origional design and materials of room 102 and thus incorperated traditional building materials such as dry wall, stick walls, mudd, tape and interior white latex paint. We tied into the actual ceiling joists to emphasize the permanency of our TAZ and brought forward the idea of art as architecture or vise versa. TAZ C was represented by an indoor installation of the original TAZ architecture and located 30' outside of rm 102.

Saturday, April 08, 2006

Other views of T.A.Z. at Washington University





The T.A.Z. is shown from both sides of wall.

More Washington University T.A.Z. pictures.


Robert transmitting from the right side of the wall to Brett on the left side

Washinton University T.A.Z. pictures


This is a picture of Brett transmitting from the left side of the wall to Robert on the right side of the wall.

Washington University Lecture


Greetings everyone.
Here are the pictures of the Nosey Parker T.A.Z. exhibit at Washington University in the Lewis Center's project room.
The project started on March 24 when Robert and Brett began to construct a T-shaped wall in the project room and ended with a lecture about the T.A.Z. on March 27.

Monday, January 30, 2006

adaptation of the architectural element and perhaps the subsequent semiotical interpretation of it's video component





In the above photo's we see a combining of the original TAZ architecture. In response to St. Louis art critic Ivy Cooper's take on our original organization of the two seperate TAZ's we will combine the two distinct spaces to create an absurd interaction between viewers and a real-time video interface. It was suggested by Ms. Ivy that our first project was redundant in it's efforts to create a form of interactive autonomous space within an already fully realized communicative space....as if waving and yelling is all we should have done...or maybe cellphones would have been appropriate. Hmmm...cell phones. Our point was to make a space that was truely autonomous. if cellphones were used we might have been under surveillance and shouting does little to keep others from hearing. The other goal was to observe how viewers interact and create content within a space that visually hinted at a utopian idealism with views in sustainability, gave room for the viewer to interact with another without interference, as in an isolated group within a group and possibly called to mind happenings, actions and performances.
Technology is another reference point and may bring new possibilities to human interaction. With two moniter/camera stations situated in one space there might be a completely redundant interaction yet there will still be a recorded dialogue not seen (camera sending signal to other station) or a self awareness depicted as the extended self on screen (camera sending image to same station). If the participants choose to record their interaction then the document becomes the precedent unchanging form of the work. If nothing is recorded we have an action that in it's duration is contained within a planned environment.

Sunday, January 29, 2006

Text Library

Dan Graham - Video in Relation to Architecture