Deconstruction, existentialism, and art

Rochester Institute of Technology

RIT Scholar Works

Theses

Thesis/Dissertation Collections

1996

Deconstruction, existentialism, and art

Ryutaro Furuhashi

Follow this and additional works at:

http://scholarworks.rit.edu/theses

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Thesis/Dissertation Collections at RIT Scholar Works. It has been accepted for inclusion

in Theses by an authorized administrator of RIT Scholar Works. For more information, please contact

[email protected]

.

Recommended Citation

ROCHESTER

INSTITUTE OF

TECHNOLOGY

A Thesis Submitted

to the

Faculty

of

The

College

of

Imaging

Arts

and

Scienses

In

Candidacy

for

the

Degree

of

MASTER

OF

FINE

ARTS

DECONSTRUCTION,

EXISTENTIALISM,

AND ART

by

Ryutaro Furuhashi

Approvals

Adviser:/?1!tanitz

Date:

~

r(

Associate Adviser: Leonard Urso

Date:

Jf

-r··

96

Associate Adviser: Elaine Defibaugh

Date:

q

~}

<I -

J

f.,

Department Chairperson: Robert Schmitz

Date:

<£/

-II -

"7",

TABLE

OF

CONTENTS

LIST

OF

ILLUSTRATIONS

ii

Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION

1

2. DECONSTRUCTION

AND ART

2

3. EXISTENTIALISM AND

ART

6

4.

WORKS IN

DECONSTRUCTION

9

5. CONCLUSION

12

ILLUSTRATIONS

13

LIST

OF

ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure

1. Ryutaro

Furuhashi,

Existence. 1995

13

2. Ryutaro

Furuhashi,

Consciousness. 1995

14

3.

Ryutaro

Furuhashi,

Gaze. 1995

15

4.

Ryutaro

Furuhashi,

Purpose. 1995

16

5.

Ryutaro

Furuhashi,

Certainty.

1995

17

6.

Ryutaro

Furuhashi,

Freedom.

1995

18

CHAPTER

1

INTRODUCTION

My

thesis

is

about

deconstruction

of existentialismthroughvisual

images,

or

more

precisely,

deconstructive

visual representations of existential themes.

The

question of

human

existence

has been

a primal

interest in my

work.

What

is

the

meaning

ofexistence?

How

can

I

make sense of man's unique

intellectual

capacity

toquestion one's ownexistence?

My

concern

is

not so much about

coming

up

with

the

answer,

but

to

have

a

language

to

disclose

thecondition.

In

the

past,

my

work was

merely

theambiguous expression oftheexistential

feeling

without

any

particular

conceptual

foundation.

My

work

is

now amanifestationof confrontationwiththe

very

awareness of existence.

In

this

thesis

project,

my

intention is

toexplore a more analytical approach

to

the

representationofthe

subject,

by

applying

the

deconstructionist

principle

to

the

conceptionof

my

work.

The

objective of

incorporating

deconstructive

thinking

is

to

examinethenature ofthe

relationship between

the

images

andtheir

meanings,

andto

investigate how

theworks of art construct and representtheiroverallconcepts.

In

doing

so,

I

intend

toprovidesufficient

information

onthe

deconstructonist

practice,

the

CHAPTER

2

DECONSTRUCTION

AND ART

Deconstruction

was originated

by

the

French

philosopher

Jacques Derrida

in

the

late 1960s.

Originally

it

waspracticed

in

philosophical writings and

literary

criticisms.

However,

since

then,

thepractice

has

spreadto the

fields

of social

sciences, architecture,

and

the

visual arts.

Nowadays it is

a

broadly

used

(and

misused)

term

and,

in

some

cases,

it has little

to

do

withtheoriginalphilosophical

idea.

Although

its influence

on

thecurrent postmodern culture cannot

be

denied,

there

is

a certain

degree

of skepticism

about

its

real significance.

Commonly,

deconstruction

seemsto

be

misunderstood

by

thegeneral public

because

its

identity

is

rather

intangible

andobscured.

Part

ofthe reason

for

this

is

caused

by

Derrida

himself,

who refuses to

define

what

deconstruction

is.

In

the

interview

with

Christopher

Norris,

Derrida

states:

Since it is

nota

system,

nota

method,

it

cannot

be

homogenised. Since it

takes

the

singularity

of

every

context

into

account,

Deconstruction

is different from

one

contexttoanother.

So

I

should

certainly

wanttorejectthe

idea

that

'Deconstruction'

denotes

any theory,

method or univocalconcept.1

'Jacques

Derrida,

"Jacques Derrida: In Discussion

with

Christopher

Norris,"

interview

by

Christopher

Norris,

in Deconstruction:

Omnibus

Volume,

ed.

Andreas

This does

not meanthat

deconstruction is

unknowable.

Norris

summarizes the

deconstructionist

activity

as

follows:

Deconstruction

locates

certain crucial oppositions or

binary

structures of

meaning

andvalue

that

constitute

the

discourse

of

'Western

metaphysics'.

These include

(among

many

others)

the

distinctions

between

form

and

content,

nature and

culture,

thought

and

perception,

essence and

accident,

mind and

body,

theory

and

practice,

maleand

female,

concept and

metaphor,

speech and

writing

etc.

A

Deconstructive

reading

thengoes ontoshow

how

thesetermsare

inscribed

withina systematic structure of

hierarchical

privilege,

such

that

one of each pairwill always appear

to

occupy

the

sovereign or

governing

position.

The

aim

is

thento

demonstrate

-by

way

of close

reading

-

how

this system

is

undone,

so

to speak,

from

within;

how

the

second or subordinateterm

in

each pair

has

an equal

(maybe

a

prior)

claim

to

be

treatedas a condition

ofpossibility

for

theentire system.

Thus writing

is

regularly

marginalised,

denounced

or put

in

its

place

-a

strictly

secondary,

'supplementary'

place

-by

a

long

line

of

thinkers

in

the

Western tradition,

from

Plato

and

Aristotle

to

Rousseau, Husserl, Saussure,

Levi-Strauss

andthe

latter-day

structuralist

human

sciences.2

This

typeof

thinking

certainly

seems to

have

an

affinity

withthepostmodernart

world.

However,

can

deconstruction really

be

applied

to the

visualarts?

Since

the

deconstructionist

practice

is

heavily

rooted

in

the

questioning

of

linguistic

structure and

reading

of

texts,

its

applicationto

the

visual arts seems absurd.

Here

is

Derrida's

response:

[TJhe

most effective

deconstruction,

and

I

have

said

this often,

is

onethat

deals

with

the nondiscursive, orwith

discursive

institutions

that

don't have

the

form

of a written

discourse.

. . .

Now,

because

therecannot

be

anything,

and

in

particular

any

art,

that

isn't

textualized

in

the sense

I

giveto theword"text"

-which goes

beyond

the

purely discursive

- there

is

text

_{as soon as}

deconstruction is

engaged

in fields

saidto

be

artistic,visualor spatial.

There

is

text

because

there

is

always a

little

discourse

somewhere

in

the visual

arts,

and also

because

even

if

there

is

no

HDhristopher

Norris,

Introduction

to

"Jacques Derrida:

In

Discussion

with

discourse,

the

effectof

spacing already implies

atextualization. . . .

Deconstruction

starts with

the

deconstruction

of

logocentrism,

and

thus

towant

to

confine

it

to

linguistic

phenomena

is

the

most suspectofoperations.3

So

deconstruction

can

surely

take

place

in

the

field

of visual arts.

However,

how

can

deconstructive

art

be visually

recognized?

The

word

deconstruction

has

been

used

by

criticsto

describe

theworks of such artists as

Marcel

Duchamp,

Jasper

Johns,

and

Francis

Bacon.4

Some

artists such as

Francis

Bacon,

Valerio

Adami,

and

Gerard

Titus-Carmel have

talked

of

Derrida's influence

ontheirworks.

Yet

the

distinction

between deconstructive

art and

many

oftheother modern andpostmodernarts remains

unclear/

Andrew

Benjamin

explains this

difficulty

in specifying

a particular work of art as

an

instance

of

deconstruction:

Part

ofthe

difficulty

withthis

is

trying

to

locate

Deconstruction

in

an object. . . .

The

question oftheobject returns

in

another

way

and

it

goes

back

to thepoint put

to

Derrida

astowhetheror not

Deconstruction

is

something

thatcomesto

be

enacted within anobject or

is

a

way

of

reading

objects or a

way

of

reading

texts.

As

is

always thecase with these

things,

it's

clearly

both;

thequestion of enactment

is

problematic.6

3Jacques

Derrida,

"The Spatial Arts: An Interview

with

Jacques

Derrida,"

interview

by

Peter Brunette

and

David

Wills,

trans.

Laurie

Volpe,

in

Deconstruction

andthe

Visual

Arts,

ed.

Peter

Brunette

and

David

Wills

(Cambridge:

Cambridge

University

Press, 1994),

14-15.

4Norris,

71.

5David

Lodge,

"Deconstruction: A Review

ofthe

Tate

Gallery

Symposium,"

in

Deconstruction:

Omnibus

Volume.

89-90.

Andrew

Benjamin,

"Discussion

and

Comments,"

discussion

with

Stephen

Geoff Bennington

puts

it

this way,

"Deconstruction

is

not

in

objects

[Ojbjects

are

in

Deconstruction."7

There is

another reason

why

it is difficult

to

identify

deconstruction

in

art.

Deconstruction is certainly

rebellious against traditionalphilosophical

thinking.

Such

a

frame

of mind

is

very

similar

to

the attitudesof

many contemporary

artists who

continuously

question

the

value of established styles and concepts.

That

explains

why,

in

art,

deconstruction does

not appearto

be

anything

distinctively

different

visually.

Here is Bennington

again:

[T]he

mosttraditionalphilosophical views of art asmimesis, and

its

most academic

practice,

have

always

necessarily left uneasily

open a sense of art as a

dangerous

event

in

which

something

happens

to

disturb

the

integrity

of

'nature

herself'

(and

not

just

respondto

her),

somewhere

resisting

the

grasp

of concept and

commentary,

andthroughthe

insufficiency

of attempted explanations ofthisevent

in

termsof

talent,

inspiration

or

genius,

something

ofthis

deconstructive

edge or

'point',

as

Derrida

says,

has

always

been

at work.

To

this

extent,

art

has

always

already been

in

excess of

its

concepts,

already deconstructive

. . .

[Deconstruction]

is in any

case a provisional and

necessarily improper

name

for

the

movement one of whose

traditionalnames

has

been

'art'.8

7Geoff

Bennington,

"Discussion

andComments,"

discussion

with

Stephen

BannetaL,

in Deconstruction: Omnibus

Volume. 77.

"Geoff

Bennington,

"Deconstruction

andPostmodernism,"

in

CHAPTER 3

EXISTENTIALISM

AND

ART

The

question of

human

existence

is

themaintheme

in

my

work.

It

seems

inevitable for human beings

to

face

thisquestion.

Why

do

weexist?

The

question of

existence

is

disturbing

and unsettling.

We

cannot

help

but

feel

anguished

because

we

are conscious

beings.

The philosophy

of existentialism offers a

very

clear view of whatthe state of

human reality

is. The

principleof existentialism

is

that, in

thecase of

human

beings,

existence precedes essence.

In

other

words,

you

have

tostartwithsubjectivity.

We

exist

first,

and

then,

we

become

something

afterward.

There is

no predetermined

human

nature.9

In

thewords of

Jean-Paul

Sartre,

"Man

is nothing

else

but

what

he

makes of

himself."10

Human

beings

are

free

to

choose

any

actions.

Consequently,

each

individual

is

totally

responsible

for

his/her

own actions.11

Some

of

my

works are

simply

expressions of various existential

feelings.

They

are more or

less

intuitively

conceived

images

ratherthan

deeply

analytical, yet,

a

'Jean-Paul

Sartre,

"The

Humanism

ofExistentialism,"

trans.

Bernard

Frechtman,

in Essays in Existentialism,

witha

foreword

and edited

by

Wade Baskin

(New York: A

Citadel

Press

Book, 1993),

35-36.

Ibid.,

36.

particularexistential

issue

underlieseach work.

For

instance,

Existence

(fig.l)

is

about

the

contingency

of

human

existence

in

this

world.

It

represents a man's accidental

appearance and

disappearance

in

a certain space and

time.

What

lies in between his

birth

and

death is only his freedom

ofchoice

in

life.

Consciousness

(fig.2)

is

about

the

nothingness of

being. The

face in

the

center

symbolizes a man'sreflectiveconsciousness and

his

realizationof self.

At

the same

time,

it is

the

realizationofthe emptinessof

being

as well.

So

the

vast

empty

space

is

actually

the

reflection of

himself.

In

Sartre's

thought,

theconcept ofnothingness

is

deeply

relatedto thatof

being. To

understand

this,

first,

you needtounderstandthe

nature of consciousness.

Arthur

C.

Danto

explains:

The

primary

structure of

consciousness,

the absolute

beginning

point,

as much

for

Sartre

as

for

the

entire phenomenological

school,

is

thatconsciousness always

is

of

something.

It

is

not,

soto

speak,

a pure

state,

and no one

is

merely

conscious

without

there

being

something

ofwhich

he is

conscious.12

Therefore,

since consciousness

is

invariably

conscious of

something

external,

consciousness

itself

is

a sort ofnothingness.13

In

other

words,

as

Sartre

writes,

"Nothingness lies

coiled

in

the

heart

of

being

-

like

aworm."14

Gaze

(fig.3)

is

about anontologicalconflict

between

individuals. It depicts

the

mentaltormentcaused

by

thepresence of anotherconsciousness.

Sartre

points outtwo

"Arthur

C.

Danto,

"Nothingness:

or,

Consciousness

andOntology,"

in

Jean-Paul

Sartre (New York: The

Viking

Press, 1975),

43.

13Ibid.,

57.

14Jean-Paul

Sartre,

"The

Problem

ofNothingness,"

trans.

Hazel E.

Barnes,

basic

types

of

being. The

being-for-itself

is

_the

type

of

being

which possesses

its

own

consciousness,

such as a

human

being.

The

being-in-itself

is

the

onewhichexists

withoutconsciousness of

its

own,

such as an object.

And

the

being-for-itself

can turn

into

another

type

of

being,

which

is

called thebeing-for-others.15

What

turnsa

being-for-itself

toa

being-for-others

is

thegaze of another

human

being. The

look

ofanother

human

being

makes an

individual

perceive

him/herself

as

"a

possible object

for

that

look".16

So,

in

thework

Gaze,

the

face

which appears onthe surface oftheeye

is

actually

thereflection ofthe

being

who

is

reducedto the state of an object

by

the

look.

The

workportrays the

loss

of

his

sense of

freedom,

andtheontologicalproblem of

others.

All

threeofthese worksconsist ofthecombination of representational and

abstract elements.

The

most

visually

intelligible

elementthrough theseworks

is

the

image

of a

face.

Certainly

it is

accessible toviewers

because

the

image is easily

recognizable and

it has

a certain undisguised symbolic quality.

It clearly

symbolizes the

awareness of existential problems.

Even

though

the

image

of a

face

can evoke a

strong

emotionalresponse towhich aviewercan

possibly

relate, the

conceptual under current

of eachwork

is

not so obvious.

Therefore

it

becomes necessary for

theviewerto

interpret

theabstractsymbolsandtheother

implications in

theworksto

fully

perceive

their wholeconcepts.

15Danto,

41-42.

16Arthur

C.

Danto,

"Shame:

or, the

Problem

of

Other

Minds,"

in

Jean-Paul

Sartre.

121.

CHAPTER 4

WORKS

IN DECONSTRUCTION

One

obvious

binary

relationship

which occurs

in

art

is

thatof

image

and

meaning.

It is

a system of signs which

is

of a

social, cultural,

or

individual

creation.

Since

artists

freely

combine various visual

images

from

a social

icon

toa personal

symbol

in

their

works,

how

aworkof art represents

its

concept varies

from

oneto

another.

The meaning

of a certain

image is

not

fixed but

also changes

according

to

its

context.

Therefore,

how

aworkof art

is

perceived

depends

heavily

uponeach

individual's knowledge

oftheworkand

how he/she interprets

the

visual

images.

This

does

not meanthataworkof art

is

all visual

images

with

hidden

meanings.

The

issue

oftitle

brings

up

an

interesting

aspect

in

art.

The

title

of aworkoccupies an ambiguous position

in

art.

It

is

not a part ofthe

represented

image,

yet

it is

not

completely

outside oftheworkeither.

What

it does is

to

createacertain condition

for

theworkto

be

seen

in

a certain way.

In

some of

my

works,

the titles

play

a

very

significantrole.

Purpose

(fig.4)

can

be described

as

the

work whichquestions

the

existential

concept ofthepurpose of

being by

questioning

the

purpose of

the

art object

itself.

In

otherwords, the

image has

no

logical

relationto

its title. So

theaim ofthework

is

to

raisethequestion:

"Why

is

thisworkcalled

Purpose?".

Even

though

the

relationship

between

the

image

and

its title

or

meaning is completely

arbitrary,

the

bullet

shaped

bronze

piece and

its

reflective glass

base

are meant

to

be

perceivedas

something

meaningful.

Certainly,

this

image has

an undeniable serene

quality

of a meditative or an

absolute state.

What

thewhole work

ultimately implies is

the

purposelessness of

human

existence

in its

very

essence.

Certainty

(fig.5)

uses a

play

of contradictiontooriginatethequestionaboutthe

concept of certainty.

The

broken

circle acts as a

contradictory image

to

its title

Certainty. There is nothing

certain aboutthe

broken

circle

because

of

its

incompleteness. So

what

is

certainty?

How

can we

be

certain about

anything

afterall?

The

concept of

certainty is

a man made abstract concept which comes withtheproblem

of

language.

The

workquestions

how

uncertain

certainty is

andthe

certainty

of what

wethinkof

human

reality.

Freedom

(fig.6)

is

about the

freedom

of man.

The

existential concept of

human

freedom

revealstheparadoxical aspect of

human

condition.

Sartre

writes:

[M]an

is

condemnedto

be free.

Condemned,

because he did

not create

himself,

yet,

in

otherrespect

is

free; because,

once

thrown

into

the

world,

he is

responsible

for

everything

he

does.17

In

other

words,

human beings

cannotescape

from

theirown

freedom. The

chained

steel

rings

andtheircold

heavy

property

ofthematerialsymbolizethis

heavy

human

conditionof

being

bound

toone's own

freedom. The

image

ofthework

is certainly

a

17Jean-Paul

Sartre,

"The

Humanism

ofExistentialism,"

trans.

Bernard

Frechtman,

in Essays in Existentialism.

41.

contrastto the

ordinary

concept of

the term

freedom.

Therefore,

thework

forces

a

viewerto

face

these

two

seemingly contrary

views

and,

as a

result,

toquestionthe

concept of

human freedom

at

its very

core.

All

three

of

these

works explore

the

relationships

between

the

images

andtheir

meanings

in

theirown unique ways.

The

overall concept of each work

only

comes

into

existence withintheperceptible

difference

between

therepresented object and

its

meaning implied

by

the

title.

However,

these works cannotescape

from

thepolysemous

nature of signs after

all,

no matter

how

clearly

they

are

titled

or

how obviously

they

are

represented.

In

the

end,

everything

seemsto

be

same as

it

was.

The

works ofart

remain silent and ambiguous.

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION

In

the

past

few

years,

it

seems

that, consciously

or

unconsciously,

my

struggle as

an artist was

to

attain a certain

clarity in my

work.

I

seemed

to

believe

that

the

idea

of a

workcould

be

manifested

clearly in

a visual

image

or an art object

As

a

result,

I

could

not

help facing

a sort of

dilemma between my

concept of what art can

be

andthe

way

art

is.

Even

though thereseemstoexist an

illusion

of art as an

intelligible

substance

because

of

its

visual

status,

it is

not quite

so,

as

Peter Brunette

and

David

Wills

correctiy

point

out,

"Artistic

expression

is

nevertheunmediated manifestation of emotionthat

it

wants topretend

it

is."18

So it

goes

back

to the

very

basic

questionof what art

is. More

than

anything,

what

I

discovered,

or rather

rediscovered,

through this thesisproject

is

that thenature of

art

is

a

heuristic

medium.

Since

artcannever escape

from

the system of

signs,

works of

art always come with some ambiguity.

This ambiguity

is

precisely

what gives a sense of

mystery

to

a work of art.

And

the

mystery

is

probably

necessary

for

art,

in

order

to

transcend

its

makerand

its

mere objectness.

"Peter Brunette

and

David

Wills,

"Introduction,"

in

Deconstruction

andthe

Visual

Arts. 4.

rH|OJ

b

ro

CD

N

c

o

(D

Cn

H

fa

Fig.

2.

Consciousness:

Bronze, Plywood,

and Acrylic

Paint,

48"x48"x3" [image:19.540.57.482.166.605.2]

ro

oo

CO ro

CD 0) -P Ul

C td

U 0)

&

u

tn H fa

Fig.

4.

Purpose: Bronze and

Glass,

35nx12"x12" [image:21.540.69.483.172.613.2]

Fig.

5.

Certainty:

Steel, Marble,

and

Paint,

2-5/8"x13,,x13,, [image:22.540.60.484.173.621.2]

CO

tn a

H

u

CD

$

en

JS

Si

c

CD CD

H

Q

tn

WORKS

CITED

Brunette,

Peter,

and

David

Wills,

eds.

Deconstruction

and

the

Visual

Arts.

Cambridge:

Cambridge

University

Press,

1994.

Danto,

Arthur

C.

Jean-Paul

Sartre.

New York: The

Viking

Press,

1975.

Papadakis, Andreas,

Catherine

Cooke,

and

Andrew

Benjamin,

eds.

Deconstruction:

Omnibus Volume. London:

Academy

Editions,

1989.

Sartre,

Jean-Paul. Essays in Existentialism. With

a

foreword

and edited

by

Wade Baskin.

Translated

by

Bernard Frechtman

and others.

New

York: A Citadel

Press,

1993.