Rhythm 0 performance (1974)
To test the limits of the relationship between performer and
audience, Abramović developed one of her most challenging (and best-known)
performances. She assigned a passive role to herself, with the public being the
force which would act on her.
Abramović had placed upon a table 72 objects that people were
allowed to use (a sign informed them) in any way that they chose. Some of these
were objects that could give pleasure, while others could be wielded to inflict
pain, or to harm her. Among them were a rose, a feather, honey, a whip,
scissors, a scalpel, a gun and a single bullet. For six hours the artist
allowed the audience members to manipulate her body and actions.
Initially, members of the audience reacted with caution and
modesty, but as time passed (and the artist remained impassive) people began to
act more aggressively. As Abramović described it later:
“What I learned was that... if you leave it up to the audience,
they can kill you.”, “and I felt really violated: they cut up my clothes, stuck
rose thorns in my stomach, one person aimed the gun at my head, and another
took it away. It created an aggressive atmosphere. After exactly 6 hours, as
planned, I stood up and started walking toward the audience. Everyone ran away,
to escape an actual confrontation.”
“It was kind of a lesson…I’m standing there, just dressed in
T-shirt and black jeans and these are the object. So you also can not do
anything, so why are you doing this? What is the public’s limit to the artist?
There are so many interesting questions posed for this performance. And to see
how the public really lose control - that’s kind of frightening.
There was this person who cut my neck with a razor and drank my
blood. There was another who gave me a rose and a third person who cut my
clothes and who took the thorn of the rose and stuck it into my body. They
undressed me; they didn’t rape me because their wives were there…the women
would tell the men what to do to me. And there was one who came with a
handkerchief and took my tears running down my face.
They carried me around, put me on the table and stab the knife
between my legs. And then one man took the pistol, put the bullet and put it my
hand and held it to my head to see if I would really pull the trigger by
pressing my hand. And I didn’t have any resistance. And then came another
person who took the pistol and threw it out of the window”
Instructions
There are 72 objects on the table that can be used on me as
desired.
Performance
I am the object. During this time I take full responsibility.
6 hours (8 pm-2 am)
Studio Morra, Naples
List of objects on the table:
gun
bullet
blue paint
comb
bell
whip
lipstick
pocket knife
fork
perfume
spoon
cotton
flowers
matches
rose
candle
water
scarf
mirror
drinking glass
polaroid camera
feather
chains
nails
needle
safety pin
hairpin
brush
bandage
red paint
white paint
scissors
pen
book
hat
handkerchief
sheet of white paper
kitchen knife
hammer
saw
piece of wood
ax
stick
bone of lamb
newspaper
bread
wine
honey
salt
sugar
soap
cake
metal pipe
scalpel
metal spear
box of razor blades
dish
flute
band aid
alcohol
medal
coat
shoes
chair
leather strings
yarn
wire
sulphur
grapes
olive oil
rosemary branch
apple
I stumbled upon this when I watched a documentary about her life
and works. There are many interpretations and takeaways from this but here are
a few thoughts:
People are seem inherently violent but are not always so. Remember
the person who took the gun away and threw it out the window? Why did they do
so? Selfish reasons, perhaps, but still, why?
What makes people violent?
Because they’re allowed to?
Because of curiosity? Power?
It seems to be a combination of at least two in this
case.
Contexts matter. Would the outcome have been different if the
experiment was conducted in an open space? In another country? Did people feel
that it was alright to hurt her because it was expected?
Would the outcome have been different if the artist were, let’s
say, male? Or younger/older? Disabled?
People do not like confrontation.
