Spanish born Antoni Muntadas offers us an example of an artist that has focussed his activities on the way viewers, as rather passive spectators, behave and react to diverse environments. Muntadas deals primarily with the role institutions play in society and the relationship they have with people. A particular characteristic in his work has been the presence of re-occurring themes or interests that depend on this role institutions have. He keeps coming back to his own work, revising it and producing alterations of it, natural evolutions of it. He has explored different media, centring in newer technologies as they arrive. This has been one of the reasons for him to work with those same institutions he lays a critical eye upon. Because these are the places where the evolution of technology seems more evident and reachable. The presence of television is another important aspect of his work. After all, this has come to be a media culture, where what we believe in, what we decide on is directed and affected by what media says. It was because of television that media had an incredible boom in North America in the 1950s, entering the family sphere. Muntadas’ use of media is engaged in confronting the passivity of western culture and questions the information and issues with relationship to media (art, communication, the public- private dichotomy, etc.) Muntadas samples images from television screenings of the messages and systems that are used to reach and inform the public (e.g. politicians’ addresses, T.V. news, etc.). Television broadcasts, through their repetition, formulaic formats and apparent simplicity of message creates a safe-zone for viewers. Mass media can be thanked and blamed for the creation of this comfortable space in which we can wander peacefully. Television connects individuals with the outside world.
We have observed how different artists, most evidently
since the turn of the century, have commented on social structures and norms, political propaganda, etc., using a banal, yet complex system of codes. This means using everyday symbols and actions to reveal layers existing underneath. The Dadaists, Surrealists or those “descending” from Duchamp are some of the first movements that show this tendency. Another important example is Fluxus, which by bringing art into the everyday, by considering all life- activities as art, have made our culture aware of the necessary and indissoluble link between art and life. This is achieved by emphasising this connection through happenings and the production of art-life experiences that would leave a residue of the event, rather than a collectible object which could be easily marketed. One of the goals of the art/life practitioners is educative and seeks to demystify the art object. Rather as we see in Muntadas work, spectators would have a role as active participants in the art- experience they were living (as in his instalations). He tries to expose the way in which mass media, as a tool, and an institution in its own right, manipulates and delivers information to the public. He does so by recreating those spaces in which the institutions centre their power. Most of this recreation depends on a high level of manipulation of, not only the physicality of the space, but the attributes that give it significance in society. This means stripping the space of its mystery. It gives the viewer a more direct environment in which he can question the “process of control”. Like the arte-povera artists in Italy, Muntadas takes those elements from the everyday life, reconsiders their status in society, and puts them forward, slightly edited in order to create some sort of awareness in the viewer. He isn't creating the exclusive, unique art object that shows the mastering of a craft, instead, he assembles a series of banal elements to reveal their content as he dissects them. Due to the simplicity of video as a medium, and the cultural implications it carries, it has become a fundamental part of Muntadas work since the seventies. It is an economic medium and one that presents itself as harmless to most viewers, one that is easily recognisable, familiar. The use of video, or more precisely, the television image comes from a: “[C]ritical analysis of the media and its effects of a relationship between the public and private spaces of contemporary Western Society.”
His use of the medium comes out of a need to work with
controlling forces in the communication world. And it happens that video is one of the most effective modes of communication media has. We become more aware of his use of Media as a medium. With the internet and CD-ROM work there is a significant shift towards the medium itself, because we are shown the full potentials these have as tools. I should add that It is television, rather than video (as in video-art) that should be the centre of attention when looking at Muntadas’ work. We should also be careful not to lose our perspective on the medium itself, because even though Muntadas diverts attention from it, he is making very conscious decisions in the way he uses it and displays it. These are what can be called artistic decisions. It is not that there is a problem with the aesthetic aspect of his practice, but there seems to be a tendency on his part to set it aside as unimportant, even though an incredible amount of work and thought has been placed into the creating of the object (i.e. the installation or the video tape). When speaking about his work, “intervention” is a better term to describe it than video or print, regardless of the fact he relies on these media to produce a piece. We can see him as making a video piece, not for the video itself, but for the action of inserting it between television programs. This works, by altering the properties of the television programs that surround the piece. The average viewer wouldn’t notice or at least question, the devices used by regular shows. With the inserted piece, a degree of chaos is created in the viewer’s mind as he begins to question the event that just took place (the broadcasting of an unexpected and unordinary program). He is then forced to reconsider those programs surrounding the intervention. Examples of this work can be seen in installations such as Quarto do fundo (Backroom, 1987), Exposición (Exhibition, 1985/87), Between the Frames: The Forum (started in 1983), or the On Translation series (started in 1998). Backroom and Exhibition are early works that expose the system of the commercial gallery. They are not didactic in their instructing the public about how the art world works in a “behind the scenes” look. Instead, different elements of this system are isolated in order to allow the spectator a clearer reading of what the: “’[H]idden ‘ mechanisms at play in the presentation of artwork, such as economic and marketing interests inextricably linked to the enterprise of art and culture.”
A process of (re) evaluation on behalf of the viewer is
possible, and triggered by the fact that the images he has seen in its reshaped context come from the context itself. They are not the product of the artist. What is the product of the artist, is the re- combination and re-contextualizing of such images. But the fact that a lot of Muntadas work seems so calculated and un-poetic is perhaps more our fault than his. So, if there was a need to talk about an artistic relevance in Muntadas work, I would consider his process, rather than the results of this. As previously mentioned, elements such as time, the “re-awakening” of the spectators ability to observe, or the need for a critical eye towards the information that life gives us, are necessary hallmarks in Muntadas work. Because his work shows a critical and direct stance from and artist proposing a self-criticism of his milieu, we overlook the insignificance in terms of power this might actually have on the majority of viewers. I find it rather ineffective , as a tool, but I do not think this is his intention. It is perhaps more important the ability to make us reconsider our role as artists, and as communicators and receivers of information. This doesn't mean we have to produce critical work, but we should consider the way in which this is inevitably going to tell something to an audience, and how we have processed the information we are conveying.
Bibliography
Alberro, Alexander and Blake Stimson ed. Conceptual Art: a critical
anthology. The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1999.
Amar, Sylvie. Interview with Antoni Muntadas in Art Press. No. 177, 1993.
Ellis, Scott. “AntonioMuntadas” in Parachute. Pg. 48, no. 58, spring
1990.
Montagut, Albert. “Pan y circo” in El Pais, pg. 6, Artes, September
29, 1990.
Wallace, Keith, ed. Whispered Art History/ Twenty years at the
Western Front. Arsenal Pulp press, Vancouver, 1993.
AC/E Digital Culture Annual Report 2016: Smart Culture: Impact of the Internet on Artistic Creation. Focus: Use of New Digital Technologies at Cultural Festivals.