Michael

FRIED
[1967]
and as projected

Art and Objecthood

~... ] What is it aboutobjecthood ypostatized by the literalists

that makes it, ifonly from the

perspectiveof recent Modernist painting, antithetical art?Theanswer Iwant to propose is this: the literalist espousal ofobject hood amounts

to

points to its source. Judd himselfhas acknowledged enterprise interesting' the problematic

as much as of the literalist

character

to nothing other than a

by his claim, 'A work needs only to be

pleafora new genre of theatre; and theatre is now the negation of art. literalist sensibility is theatrical because, to beginwith, it is concerned with the actual circumstances inwhich the beholder encounters literalist work. Morris

l... J
with time - mo. r precise Iy, . - is, I suggest, of the experience theatrical:

" The literalist preoccupation With the duration paradigmatically

as though theatre confronts him, with the but of time; or as is a

makes this explicit. Whereas in previous art 'what is to be had from the work is located strictly within [it]', the experienceofliteralist art is of an object in a situation that, Yirtuallybydefinition, includes the beholder -one

the beholder, and thereby isolates endlessness not just of objecthood

though the sense which, at bottom, theatre addresses sense oftemporality, simultaneously apprehended preoccupation of time both passing and to come, and receding, as if ... 'This

l... J

The theatricality of Morris' notion of the 'nonpersonal or public mode' seems obvious: the largeness inconjunction with its nonrelational, ofthe piece,

approaching

in an infinite perspective marks a profound

unitary character,

difference between It is

distances the beholder - not just physically but psychically,ttts, one might say, precisely this distancing that makes the beholder a subject and the piece in question ... an object [ ... } Furthermore, the presence ofliteralistart, which Greenberg was the first to analyse, is basically a theatrical effector quality-a kind of stage presence. not just ofthe obtrusiveness It is a function,

literalist work and Modernist as though one's experience

painting and sculpture.

ofthe latter has no durationa picture by Kenneth by David Smith or

not because one in fact experiences Noland or Jules Olitski or a sculpture

Anthony Caro in no time at all, but because at every moment the work itselfis wholly manifest
1 The connection experience between spatial ity recession

I... J
and some such were a in

and, often, even aggressive-

of temporal

- almost as if the first

ness ofliteralist work, but ofthe special complicity that that work extorts from the beholder. Something have presence when it demands is said to

kind of natur aj metaphor nuch Surrealist Tanguy, Magritte for example, presentiment, painting

for the second - is present (e.g., de Chirico, temporality dread, anxiety, - is often Ilelt ,

that the beholder take it

... ) Moreover,

- manifested.

into account, that he take it seriously - and when the fulfilmentofthat demand consists simply in being aware ... J

as expectation,

memory. nostalgia, of their paintings,

stasis

the

ofitand, so to speak, in acting accordingly[ What has compelled Modernist suspend its own objecthood

axplt ct t subject a deep affinity sensibility felt

There is. and Surrealist

in fact,

painting to defeat or

between literalists (at any rate,

is not just developments

as the latter

makes itself which ouaht to

internal to itself, but the same general, enveloping, Infectious theatricality that corrupted literalist sensibility

in the work of the above painters), Both employ imagery fragmentary. that

be noted.

is at once whol t s t t c both resort or to

in the first place and in the grip of which the developments in question -and Modernist painting in general-are seen

and. in a sense, a similar

incomplete; of objects

anthropomorphiz.ing of objects

as nothing more than an uncompelling kindoftheatre.tt

and presenceless

conglomerations dolls capable

(in Sur-r-eall sm the use of explicit); effects both are of 'presence' and persons

was the need to break the fingers ofthis an issue for Modernist

and mannequins of achieving

makes this remarkable

griptnat madeobjecthood painting.

and both tend to deploy

and isolate

Objects

Objecthood has also become an issue for Modernist sculpture. Tnis is true despite the fact that sculpture, three-dimensional, resembles being

in situations art
j

the closed

room and the abandoned

fici all ancs c epe are as i nrport ant to Sur-r-eal i sm as to (Tony Smith, etc. it will be recalled, landscapes'.) Surrealist described This

both ordinary objects and

literalism. the airstrips,

as 'Surrealist

literalist work in a way that painting does not[ ... } Itmay seem paradoxical to claim both that literalist sensibility aspires to an ideal of'something understand' everyone can itself
affinlty can be summed up by saying that sens i b t 1 i t y as man; fested artists,
theatrical.

1n the work of certain are both as

(Smith) and that literalist art addresses

a~d tt t er atts t sensibility I do not wish, because share

to the beholder alone, but the paradox is only apparent. Someone has merely to enter the room in which a literalist work has been placed to become that beholder, that audience of one - almost as though the work in question has been waiting for him. And in as much as literalist work depends on the beholder, is incomplete without him. it has

however, to be understood

Saying that works that

they are theatrical,

all Sur-reelt s t fail can be

t

the above characteristics

as art;

a conspiCUOUS example of major work that described sculpture. sigl1i/ical1ce as theatrical On the other that Smith's

is m acoeett t "s Surreal hand, It is perhaps

st

not wHhout

supr-eme example of a Surrealist ground at Nuremberg.

Artforum Anthology,

been waiting for him. And once he is in the room the work refuses,obstinately, to let him alone-which is to say, it
landscape Michael Fried, reprinted was the parade

refuses to stop confronting

him, distancing him, isolating

'Art and Objecthood'.

A Critical

(June 1967); eo . Gregory

in Minima) Art:

him[ ... ] Itis, I think, significant that in their various statements the literalists have largely avoided the issue of value or quality at the same time as they have shown considerable uncertainty as to whether or not what they are making is art. To describe their enterprise as an attempt to establish

ga t t ccck (New York: E.P, Dutton & Co. 1968) 116-47.

a new art does not remove the uncertainty; at most it