Robert Rauschenberg and John Cage, Automobile Tire Print
Robert Rauschenberg, First Time Piece
Robert Rauschenberg, White Paintings
Robert Rauschenberg, Untitled Red Painting
Robert Rauschenberg, Untitled Black Painting
As I discovered a few weeks into my research last quarter for one of my seminar papers, not a lot has been written on chance, unless it is reference to the historical avant-garde movements of Dada or Surrealism. There is also plenty of scholarship to be found on chance in relation to the composer John Cage (who was inspired by a number of sources, the historical avant-garde movements that used chance among them); however, most of the scholarship out there that addresses chance in artisitc practice falls into one of these two camps. If not, it at least mentions the direct influence of one of these two sources.
Because of its role in the historical avant-garde movements mentioned above, the inclusion of chance as an artistic strategy is almost always considered to be a commentary on artistic agency. The artist must remove or alter the role of her own creative subjectivity by submitting the results of the artistic project to the agency of chance. Whether in the form of the natural deterioration, or gravity, for example, chance taking a part, big or small, in the production of an artistic image is seen to undermine traditional notions of the artist as subject.
This is the current understanding of how chance operated for artists associated with the Dada movement like Hans Arp. In his Collage with Squares Arranged According to the Laws of Chance, the artist collaborated with an alternative agency--that of gravity--to produce a collage by dropping squares and fastening them where they ended up falling.
So what does Rauschenberg have to do with all this?
In both the contemporary scholarship on Rauschenberg and his early reception, the haphazard nature of his 'combine' paintings is usually defined by chance or randomness. As Rosalind Krauss recounts, “[l]eaving things ‘open’ has been Rauschenberg’s most frequently used expression in describing his artistic stance; whatever happens, he must always conspire to leave the situation open, so that, like [André] Breton, he will be surprised.” In describing openness Krauss feels she needs to distinguish this sense of openness from chance. This move is understandable, since within art discourse “chance” is a loaded term. Both the current scholarship that addresses chance as a tool for artistic practice during the post-war period, and the contemporary reception of Rauschenberg’s work make the mistake of associating Rauschenberg’s interest in chance with the systems developed by Marcel Duchamp and Dadaists, the historical avant-garde movement with which Rauschenberg is most often associated. It would be just as easy to assume that the significance of chance and accident in Rauschenberg’s work stems from the artist’s association with the composer John Cage. However, Rauschenberg makes clear that he does not subscribe to any kind of system of chance, as it was understood by the Dadaists or John Cage. Rauschenberg is quoted explaining,
"I was interested in many of John Cage’s chance operations and I liked the sense of experimentation he is involved in, but painting is just a different ground for activities. I could never figure out an interesting way to use any kind of programmed activity—and even though chance deals with the unexpected and unplanned, it sill has to be organized. Working with chance, I would end up with something that was quite geometric: I felt as though I were carrying out an idea rather than witnessing an unknown idea taking shape."
Chance stands for a system, especially within the context established by the Dadaists. It is precisely this notion of a planned and executed system that Rauschenberg tried to avoid, as it would imply the traditional process of “carrying out an idea” to which he set his own practice in opposition.
Understanding chance as something other than a system used to alter the nature of the creative agency producing the art work is where contemporary scholarship lacks. Plenty of artists did use it as a system in the post-war period--Ellsworth Kelly is one example. But considering chance only in relation to the historical avant-garde's use of it as a system leaves artists like Rauschenberg in the dark.
If you are interested in reading more about Rauschenberg's particular attitude towards chance I'd be happy to send you a copy of my paper--I'd love feedback on it. Even though its been turned in and returned already I'm still interested in developing the ideas.
Because of its role in the historical avant-garde movements mentioned above, the inclusion of chance as an artistic strategy is almost always considered to be a commentary on artistic agency. The artist must remove or alter the role of her own creative subjectivity by submitting the results of the artistic project to the agency of chance. Whether in the form of the natural deterioration, or gravity, for example, chance taking a part, big or small, in the production of an artistic image is seen to undermine traditional notions of the artist as subject.
This is the current understanding of how chance operated for artists associated with the Dada movement like Hans Arp. In his Collage with Squares Arranged According to the Laws of Chance, the artist collaborated with an alternative agency--that of gravity--to produce a collage by dropping squares and fastening them where they ended up falling.
So what does Rauschenberg have to do with all this?
In both the contemporary scholarship on Rauschenberg and his early reception, the haphazard nature of his 'combine' paintings is usually defined by chance or randomness. As Rosalind Krauss recounts, “[l]eaving things ‘open’ has been Rauschenberg’s most frequently used expression in describing his artistic stance; whatever happens, he must always conspire to leave the situation open, so that, like [André] Breton, he will be surprised.” In describing openness Krauss feels she needs to distinguish this sense of openness from chance. This move is understandable, since within art discourse “chance” is a loaded term. Both the current scholarship that addresses chance as a tool for artistic practice during the post-war period, and the contemporary reception of Rauschenberg’s work make the mistake of associating Rauschenberg’s interest in chance with the systems developed by Marcel Duchamp and Dadaists, the historical avant-garde movement with which Rauschenberg is most often associated. It would be just as easy to assume that the significance of chance and accident in Rauschenberg’s work stems from the artist’s association with the composer John Cage. However, Rauschenberg makes clear that he does not subscribe to any kind of system of chance, as it was understood by the Dadaists or John Cage. Rauschenberg is quoted explaining,
"I was interested in many of John Cage’s chance operations and I liked the sense of experimentation he is involved in, but painting is just a different ground for activities. I could never figure out an interesting way to use any kind of programmed activity—and even though chance deals with the unexpected and unplanned, it sill has to be organized. Working with chance, I would end up with something that was quite geometric: I felt as though I were carrying out an idea rather than witnessing an unknown idea taking shape."
Chance stands for a system, especially within the context established by the Dadaists. It is precisely this notion of a planned and executed system that Rauschenberg tried to avoid, as it would imply the traditional process of “carrying out an idea” to which he set his own practice in opposition.
Understanding chance as something other than a system used to alter the nature of the creative agency producing the art work is where contemporary scholarship lacks. Plenty of artists did use it as a system in the post-war period--Ellsworth Kelly is one example. But considering chance only in relation to the historical avant-garde's use of it as a system leaves artists like Rauschenberg in the dark.
If you are interested in reading more about Rauschenberg's particular attitude towards chance I'd be happy to send you a copy of my paper--I'd love feedback on it. Even though its been turned in and returned already I'm still interested in developing the ideas.
