#Frieze,#KatySiegel, materiality, representation, translation

Listening to Katy Siegel’s talk on ‘The Luxury of Incommensurability’ at Frieze ’11 caused me to ponder a little further on acts of translation (the ‘t’ element of a/r/tography to followers of this blog).

The mainspring of Katy’s fascinating and informed lecture was the relationship between material and representation. Katy argued for an analysis of art history that embraced the influence of politics and social cultures; such that defenders of a dichotomy between material and representation were themselves products of the dichotomous Cold War era (think good/bad, black/white, them/us, material/representation). She argued that the ‘Luxury of Incommensurability’ was the (post?) postmodern ability to hold “two thoughts in mind at the same time” (i.e. to listen to the materiality of paint, canvas et cetera, whilst at the same time comprehending the represented). She argued that contemporary greats such as Richter, Freud and Twombly were masters of this luxury, and that this demonstrated a separation between art and the political and social spheres.

I found myself disagreeing on a few points. To take the latter first, I think it rather more likely that contemporary artists are still reflecting political and social influences in their works (how could they not?). It’s just that the politics of our day is diverse, post-structural, multi-perspectival, eclectic and a tad more unmasked. This is what is reflected in Richter’s appropriation of the photographic and its disruption, and in Freud’s and Twombly’s communication of the qualities of the represented through materiality.

Secondly, I’m not convinced that there ever really was a dichotomy between material and representation in the eyes of anyone other than a few art critics and theorists. Confronted with a Michelangelo, despite his uncanny mimetic abilities, has anyone ever been duped into forgetting the material of what is represented? And there are many examples of more ‘unfinished’ or deliberately imperfect pre-Modernist artworks which would seem to be intended to draw the viewer’s attention to the ‘incommensurability’ of both material and representation, and deny the restriction of art to mimesis.

David in all his materiality

David in all his materiality

Surely the popularity of contemporary art is premised on an enjoyment of the suspension of disbelief (which the artist must persuade is worth the effort), and/or the marvel of the mechanics of the artist’s technical achievement, and/or play on contrary positions, as in Found Art. It is this latter move that demonstrates the more sophisticated, multi-perspectival position that is reflective of our socio-economic times.

'Rug',MadeIn Company, 2011, at Frieze 2011

'Rug',MadeIn Company, 2011, at Frieze 2011

Darren Lago 'Mickey de Balzac' (grand) 2009-11. Self-coloured cast glass, reinforced plastic, Frieze 2011

Darren Lago 'Mickey de Balzac' (grand) 2009-11. Self-coloured cast glass, reinforced plastic, Frieze 2011

Siegel is right to refer to this as a luxury, since I’m not sure this postmodern turn has been so wholeheartedly understood by other audiences. Take the case of languages/linguistics. Since the 1950’s linguists such as J.L. Austin, Searle and their followers have argued for an understanding of the gaps between material and representation (the signified and the signifier if you’re a fan of Saussure). These gaps are vital to an appreciation of what may be lost and gained in communication, and more so in translation. Yet not a decade ago I prompted a storm of protest by referencing these gaps in a paper presented to a conference of legal translators and interpreters at the United Nations. One woman screamed at me that there were of course direct equivalents between languages; that water was l’eau was agua et cetera, and that consequently the act of translation was as pure as a mountain stream. (And these are the professionals!)

Of course, at one level, water is eau, but at many others it is not. When I think of water, it is British water. It comes from a tap, is a certain chilly temperature, it is derived from the limestone hills around where I lived as a child and has a slightly chlorinated taste. This is my prototypical water. When I encounter the word, this is what I taste. My prototypical eau is salty, comes from a bottle that has been purchased and is quaffed in the dusty, yellow-infused heat of France. I’m sure both your water and your eau differ from mine.

Language, and therefore translation, simultaneously represent and can never account for all these personal understandings and nuances. Yet I think the vast majority of people expect them to, and naively believe that they do. They are unaware of the materiality of the representation. Even in our multi-lingual, multi-cultural (post) postmodern society. But an understanding and acknowledgement of the lacks, gaps and unintended gains inherent in communication and in processes of translation are necessary in order to move towards the luxurious position of embracing and understanding the incommensurability of language.

This is why I recently entered the InsideArts poetry translation competition, with a translation of a sign language poem into written English. My interest is in the huge discrepancy between material and re-presentation in this case. The materialities of source and target texts are so different that the gaps, cracks and additions inherent in the act of translation cannot be smoothed over (even by a UN translator), and we are forced to address incommensurability head on.

What emerges? More in the next blog……


About nanafroufrou

Nana is currently developing two strands of creative practice; translation art ,and [w]righting. View all posts by nanafroufrou

2 responses to “#Frieze,#KatySiegel, materiality, representation, translation

  • Fliss Watts

    I think this is relevant: it seems to me that a distinctive feature of art product/production is that unlike non-art representational stuff (eg directions as opposed to poems, diagrams as opposed to paintings) the material specificity of the representation is crucial. If I give you directions it doesn’t matter how I phrase them as long as they get you from a to b, but if I write a poem the particular words and their arrangement makes all the difference, so I’d tend to say that a translation of a poem has to be a new poem. What makes Freud’s work great is not what it represents (his paintings of plants and sinks and buildings are no less full of whatever it is than his portraits) it is the very particular way the paint is used. The representational element gives an added layer of weight to the work and is clearly what drove the artist – while other artists may focus even more on the specific materiality of a medium and dispense with representation altogether (and be labelled ‘abstract’ oddly enough) – eg Pollock, Carl Andre et al.

  • nanafroufrou

    I think that’s very relevant, and elegantly expressed. After I’d written the post I wanted to add something about that language loop- where (poetry aside) folks seem much more willing to trust in the representational ability of a word/ phrase without feeling they should pay too much heed to what you’re calling the ‘material specificity’ (I like that) of words.Thus, the translator/ interpreter is expected to re-present the original utterance in its entirety in another language (even though the original utterance itself was probably over-reliant on the representational and failed to focus adequately on [the limits?] of its materiality).
    I think people approach visual art, and perhaps poetry, in a much more clued-up way- assuming that the artist has already edited and vetted both the material and representational in their act of translation of thought into art or poem- as indeed they have.
    I think what interests me then, is this act of translation- so clumsy in simultaneous language interpretation, so potentially refined in art and poetry. Yet the same act ?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

sheila sea

like thalassic velvet

Sage Brice

Formerly Jethro Brice / Socially and environmentally engaged art - developing collaborative approaches for a changeable world.


Just another WordPress.com site

DoubleU = W


Elan Mudrow



A blog full of humorous and poignant observations.

Keep trying

Just another WordPress.com weblog

Globe Drifting

Global issues, travel, photography & fashion. Drifting across the globe; the world is my oyster, my oyster through a lens.


Model behaviors you want to see more of. Seek out people you want to mirror.

Investigate | Create

involve, surprise, enthuse

%d bloggers like this: