Grip, Grasp, Grope and Fondle

On March 4, 2010 I executed a 3-hour performance in The Autzen Gallery at Portland State University. Inside of the space there were five baby-sized coffins. Each had a metronome in its interior that was quietly ticking. At the start of the performance I used a propane torch to ignite devices that produced a large amount of sage smoke inside of each of the coffins. With the lids closed, the coffins emitted curls of smoke from the cracks at their tops. I then stripped and began to dismantle a sixth coffin with a Japanese saw. At times this process was slow and methodical and at others it was loud and violent. Periodically I would stop sawing and re-light the sage. At the end of the performance the pieces of the dismantled coffin were arranged neatly on the floor of the gallery. I then put my clothes back on and exited the space. Follow this link to see a video of the project: http://www.vimeo.com/10253056

Below is the first stage of some new research that spawned this piece:

On April 3rd of 1968 Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. gave his “I’ve Been to the Mountain Top” speech in Memphis Tennessee. In the speech he outlined an incident in 1955 in which a homeless women stabbed him in the chest while he was autographing books in New York City. The knife had come incredibly close to cutting his aorta, which would have meant certain death. He went on to recount the many things that he had been able to witness because his life had been spared that day. In the speech he said that there had been several recent threats on his life during his stay in Memphis. He continued and said that none of it mattered to him anymore because God had allowed him to go up the mountain and view the Promised Land:

Like anybody, I would like to live a long life.

Longevity has its place.

But I’m not concerned about that now.

I just want to do God’s will.

And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain.

And I’ve looked over.

And I’ve seen the Promised Land.

I may not get there with you.

But I want you to know tonight, that we,

As a people will get to the Promised Land!

And so I’m happy tonight.

I’m not worried about anything.

I’m not fearing any man!

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0FiCxZKuv8

The next day on April 4th of 1968 he was shot and killed while standing on the balcony of his hotel room.

What is the difference between “compulsion” and “duty?” The historical meanings of “compulsion” are rooted in notions of forced coercion or loss of control. In this history actions spawned from compulsion are the result of a person, group, institution, or ideology forcing another person to act in a certain way. “Duty” on the other hand historically has implications of respect. It is an expression of submission out of reverence. It also refers to a debt that one owes to another. “A payment due and enforced by law or costume.” (O.E.D.) But it also refers to, “Action, or an act, that is due in the way of moral or legal obligation; that which one ought or is bound to do; an obligation.” (O.E.D.) And, an “obligation” refers to a commitment that one is morally or legally bound to. It represents an articulated point of connection. These ideas of debt and payment reminded me of the passage bellow regarding the karma and fatalism:

“Karma does not mean fatalism, but rather, compensation. When a man buys something on credit, he creates a dept, and the law declares that he must pay that debt. In a material, economic transaction this would not be regarded as fatalism, but as responsibility.” Essential Hinduism, p. 175

What strikes me about Dr. Kings speech is the line, “I just want to do God’s will.” Does he feel that God is compelling him to do certain things or does he feel that it’s his duty? How does Dr. King do Gods will in this instance? Is he referring to the marches and protests that are scheduled to occur while he is in Memphis or is he referring to his possible death? In light of above definitions of “duty” what is it that Dr. King owes God?

He said he wasn’t afraid of anything or any man. What was it that made him so fearless? Is it courage? Over the years the word “courage” has been used to described ones personal nature or disposition, ones desires or inclination, liveliness, vigor, confidence, anger, pride, sexual vigor, lust, or bravery. (O.E.D.) We face fear with courage. And in courage we must bring all that we have, including our hopes, desires, strengths, weaknesses, lust, love, and bravery…etc. These are not implored in order to overcome a challenge. Instead they must be used to overcome the fear that arises as a result of the challenge. Fear brings all of our weaknesses to the surface. It challenges our conception of ourselves. Fear holds a distorted mirror to our face. It shades ones self-perception with ideas of doubt and inadequacy. It makes us feel that we are not capable and weak. It convinces us that we cannot possibly do what must be done because we are such “flawed creatures.” Tasks then seem insurmountable and we hide. We then make a decision through indecision because we cannot choose to take action or to run. Fear takes our power to choose away and we freeze. And, that is the true power that fear wields. It freezes us into inaction. In our modern age, after a person freezes, many of will then take refuge in vices and distractions that are all too easy and abundant to partake in.

In the animal kingdom there exists a device called a monkey trap. It looks like a vase that has a wide bottom and a narrow hole at the top and inside there is a banana. The hole at the top is large enough for a monkey to squeeze its hand through but not wide enough for the monkey to get its hand out while clutching the banana. The monkey is faced with a dilemma: 1) to have the object of its desire and remain trapped or 2) To be free but not have the object of its desire.

The tighter the monkey clutches the banana the greater the grip binding its detention becomes. In this case the monkey’s grip is the captor. When the monkey first sticks its hand into the vase it must grope for the banana and, after a few grasps, is able to grab hold of it. After taking a moment to fondle the prize the monkey realizes as the attempt is made to remove the banana that the action of griping will not allow the monkey actually “have” the banana. The very thing that allows the monkey to possess the banana is the thing that will not allow the monkey to have and consume it. “Grip” refers to holding something tightly with hands, mouth, feet, beak, claws…etc. “Grasp” refers to grabbing repeatedly in an attempt to snatch something i.e. “grasping at thin air.” In current usage it also refers to the full mental comprehension of an idea. “Grope” refers to using the hands to feel, touch or handle something. It also describes an attempt to feel about with the hands in a dark space as a blind person might, so there is an implied lack of precision in the word. In modern times there are notions of violation associated with the word referring to sexual harassment. “Fondle” means to handle and treat with fond indulgence: to pamper or caress. Like “grope” modern usage defines “fondle” as inappropriate or possibly abusive touching. These are powerful words but all originally referred to how humans or other primates used their hands to keep things close to them or to show affection.

The monkey can’t bear to let the banana go and becomes handicapped by the vase that is on its arm. As time passes, the monkey observes that he or she seems to be connected to the vase, and begins to view the vase as part of itself. More time passes and the monkey begins to forget where its hand ends and the banana begins. Now the monkey can’t tell the difference between itself, its prison and the object of its desire. Our fear is similar. We grip it tightly and eventually see it as part of who we are and become entrapped by our grip upon it.

When Dr. Kings concludes his intense and moving oration he stumbles to the rear of the stage. One of his colleagues then grabs him and helps him sit down. As the crowd erupts with applause and accolades he seems to be dazed, exhausted and stunned. It appears to me on that night he broke free of his “trap” and expelled whatever fear he might have had.

Lucas Murgida 03/04/10

The Oracle Contracted by The Thing Quarterly for The San Francisco Film Societies “Cinema By The Bay” opening party. 10/09.

Several months ago I began a study of how to predict the future. My initial research yielded mixed results ranging from complete failures to almost interesting (please see “Muster” and “(w)hole” for more information.) Although I was able to anticipate in a general sense what people would do in different situations, I was unable to predict with exacting detail the specific and precise course of action that would arise at any particular moment. Through these examinations I found that we are all capable of predicting the future to some extent as each of us follows certain patterns that shape our future experiences in the world. However, life has a way of changing abruptly in ways that our patterns cannot anticipate, and when it does our predictive abilities disintegrate quickly. In the end we all want to know the specific details of the future.

When the word “prediction” is dissected it into its two parts one finds:

pre: meaning “before”

diction: meaning “a word or an utterance of speech.”

This could be taken at face value to mean in a literal sense: “I knew what you were going to say before you said it.” However there seems to be a more potent imbedded meaning to the word, referring to a type of knowledge or insight that comes before language. A type of understanding that cannot be described by thought, word, or action. This type of insight would predate language itself and is literally: knowledge “before the word.”

In modern usage the word “before” can be used to describe the past, present, or future. For example: “What happened before,” “What is before me in the moment,” and “What lies before me down the road.” The structure of our language points out that in order to make a prediction one must have some sort of anticipatory knowledge “before the word.” However, knowing something “before the word” implies that one knows things about the past, present and future simultaneously and insinuates that there is perhaps no difference between the three. To understand this better one only needs to close their eyes and image how we think about time.

When most people close their eyes and think of tomorrow generally a picture is formed that is fragmented, out of focus and scattered, based on the days and months that preceded it. However, when most people close their eyes and remember the past it too appears to be fragmented, distorted and lacking details based on the totality of experiences that each of us has had in our lives. Further, we know that we are capable of observing only a small portion of the things that transpire around us. For instance we cannot see infrared colors, however they exist. We can hear many things but we cannot hear high pitched frequencies like a dog can. We observe very little of what happens around us. So, in some ways our relationship to the present is almost exactly the same as our relationship to the past and future: incomplete, extrapolated, and fragmented. In fact all three appear to be a hazy, out of focus jumble of extrapolated information. Therefore, the reason we can’t see the details of future specifically lies in our inability to see the present with any sort of clarity. As of today, it would seem that we are not capable of seeing with precision the details of the future. However, when a person is faced with something that they are not capable of doing for themselves the smart thing to do is to ask for help.

For thousands of years, when our personal attempts to predict the future fail many have sought the advice of a fortuneteller, profit, or oracle. In ancient Greece people traveled to see the oracle of Delphi. This particular oracle could be found in the temple of Apollo, which historians believe was built over a chasm in the earth. Gases from inside the earth would vent up and induce hallucinogenic visions when inhaled (or so the theory goes). The oracle was always an older townswoman that was chosen to be conduit between Apollo and the humans. She would be placed in a harness near the crack in the earth and breath in the fumes. Fortune seekers would come to ask their questions of the oracle. The answers would typically be cryptic and disjointed. Priests would take the oracles words and form them into poems and these poems were given to the fortune seeker. It was then up to that person to interpret the poems and apply the metaphoric information to their questions. So, the pattern is this: Apollo speaks through the oracle, the oracles words are edited by a priest, the fortune seeker interprets the information and then must find concrete connections that exist in the world to match the prophecies. This movement of information seems like the childhood game of “telephone” where a message becomes more and more convoluted as it is whispered from one child’s ear to the next until all meaning of the original message is lost.

Though the oracle does not directly foretell the future, she does in fact influence the future as the fortune seeker looks for patterns in their life to match the words she foretold. However the fortune seeker still must fill in the blanks for themselves as they begin to shape their future in accordance to the predictions of the oracle. So, in many ways the words of the oracle are not about the future. Instead, they are about shaping the present to coincide with a potential series of events. It would appear that in the end that the fortune seeker becomes their own oracle as it is up to them find the specific answers to their question.

So, why not cut out all the middlemen and create an oracle that would directly allow the fortune seekers to be their own oracle? To do this I made a telephone booth out of wood that was slightly larger than scale. The windows of the booth were constructed out of two-way mirrors instead of panes of glass. When no one was inside the oracle there was a bright light hanging above the booth and people could see their reflections in the booths outside mirrors. As soon as a fortune seeker went into the oracle the light illuminating the outside of the booth turned off and a light inside of the booth went on. When the light inside the booth was activated the person inside was surrounded by mirrored reflections of themselves. However, people watching from the outside were now able to see into the booth and the person within. Simply, from the outside the oracle displayed a vision of the world to the fortune seeker. From within, the oracle exposed the fortune seeker to themselves and to the world outside. I made a perimeter around the oracle out of velvet ropes and stanchions and I escorted people to and from the oracle. If people asked me about how the oracle functioned I did my best to say that my job was only to escort people in and out of the oracle and that it wasn’t my place to say how a fortune seeker was to interact with the oracle (which was themselves). If people were skeptical of my intentions, I outlined the details of my research and previous projects, but by and large I kept the information vague as to not taint the fortune seekers experience. Before people entered the oracle I told them that they could ask anything and that the oracle revealed all. Fortune seekers got one timed minute in the oracle and then I escorted them out.

I would like to thank John Herschend and Will Rogan of The Thing Quarterly for this opportunity and Sean Uyehara of the San Francisco Film Society for all his help and support!!

Lucas Murgida, 10/09.

(w)hole

Several months ago I began a study of how to predict the future. My initial research led me to an examination of “herding”. If a person sets up a particular set of parameters in order to move a group of animals in a desired fashion, they are in a sense predicting the way that the animals will react to that particular stimuli. Stimuli can take many different forms such as voice commands, dogs barking, electric fences or (for the purposes of this particular installation) food presentation. The first recorded usage of the word “herd” referred to a person who controls or musters animals. Soon after “herd” also began to describe the group of animals that are being controlled. Originally, English speakers made no distinction between the group being controlled and the person that controls them. Building on this idea for The Charlie James Gallery my latest piece (w)hole will assert predictions of our future by “consuming” our sense of taste.

The original usage of the word “consumption” referred to a process or an illness that causes strength and vitality to be depleted from a person or a thing (related to “pneumonia”). Consumption also refers to ingesting or processing plants, animals, or minerals in order to gain strength and vitality. And, in current usage the word has taken on specific negative connotations, referring to ideas of over usage and waste. Imbedded in this word lies some very complicated contradictions as well as an age-old truth that can be best summed up as, “something cannot come from nothing.” In order for any living thing to stay alive it must deplete the life or strength from other things. Whether it is absorbing the rays of the sun, breathing in volumes of air, eating a planet, or slaughtering an animal, every living thing takes energy away from other things in order to survive. In science this process is called The Law of Conservation of Energy, which states that matter can neither be created nor destroyed. In religion it is often named karma, or the universal law of cause and effect.

To address these issues of herding and predicting through the use of consumption I have been examining two distinct things. The first is how food is used to move and stimulate animals and the second is the delicate and vulnerable nature of the mouth (w)hole.

Food presentation is perhaps the simplest and most effective way to move animals. When a farmer introduces food and water troughs to a herd, the animals will naturally gravitate towards the troughs without the use of electric fences, dogs, or coaxing of any kind. Humans are of course no exception to this phenomenon. Consider how many times you have found yourself hanging out in the kitchen at a house party. We naturally organize ourselves around the places where our consumption is facilitated. For (w)hole I have constructed two wooden cabinets that look like refrigerators to serve as food troughs. The food and beverages that gallery goers will consume on the night of the opening will be inside these “troughs.” This will include single serving bottles of red wine, cracker jacks, popcorn, grape juice, and raisins. All of the things in the “troughs” will either stain a consumers mouth or will get stuck in his or her teeth. This provides the viewer with an unbeknownst physical remnant that each will struggle to dislodge from his or her teeth over the course of the evening.

Once viewers enter the gallery they will naturally gravitate towards the refrigerators, compelled by the “troughs” placement in the gallery and by the viewer’s natural inclination to explore a food source. Once a viewer is compelled to open the doors the other gallery goers will congregate around the “troughs” and begin to consume the contents following the path of the herd leader.

Near the front door of the gallery I will be standing behind a table with a metal harness inserted into the corners of my mouth. This harness is connected to the refrigerator doors by a string and pulley system that runs the length of the ceiling. As consumers open the “trough” doors the string is pulled taut and then lifts the metal harness in my mouth up, forcing me into an awkward and painful smile. During this time I will be talking to people about this particular piece as well as the other projects that are related to what is going on. After talking to people I will explain that I am offering viewers the chance to have a muscle inside of their mouth massaged. As people come and go, I will have participants lie down on the table and I will gently apply direct, soft pressure to the pterygoid, which is one of the muscles responsible for shutting the jaw.

Many people (including myself) hold a tremendous amount of tension in and around the muscles and joints of the jaw. (Metaphorically, this is where “consumption” is given physical articulation). The muscles of consumption tend to become tight and locked as they are constantly implored to extract energy from other things and at the same time are called upon up to open and close to allow a persons personal energy to escape as he or she breathes and talks. When these muscles relax some people experience a quieting sensation throughout their entire body. Though the action of touching these muscles is quite invasive and uncomfortable while it is occurring afterwards most will feel a certain amount of relief.

I rarely assume a traditional performance art posture, in which an artist takes on a silent or austere role. Instead I talk and interact with people. If audience members are confused about something, I do my best to answer their questions in an honest and straightforward fashion. Also, for every challenging action that I ask my viewers to do, I put myself into what appears to be a more vulnerable and submissive position. So, by taking a very informal performance posture, by offering a nurturing (albeit painful) service and by creating a situation in which I am being physically taxed by the actions of the audience I effectively set a stage to compel the “herd” to do something that they would never normally do: let a stranger put his hand into their mouths. In my opinion there is no other position that is quite as submissive.

I would first like to thank Charlie James for this incredible opportunity. I would also like to offer my sincere and humble thanks to Dane Johnson. The show would not have happened without his integrity and hard work. Thanks for making this happen!

Lucas Murgida 07/09