back to main page TAM / IUOMA
THE MAIL-INTERVIEW
WITH CLIVE PHILLPOT 77
Started
on 26-05-1997
RJ : Welcome to this mail-interview.
First let me ask you the traditional question. When did you get involved in the
mail-art network?
Reply
on 28-8-97
CP : Dear Ruud: I guess I got involved in 1972
when I started writing a column in Studio International , the London art
magazine. I was supposed to review things that nobody else reviewed - like
exhibition catalogues , magazines , artist books , etc.
In the
first column I mentioned Thomas Albright's two articles on 'Correspondence Art'
in Rolling Stone , also in 1972.
Slowly,
in 1972 + 1973, I began to hear from the L.A. Artists'Publication , File
Magazine , the Fluxshoe people , the Bay Area Dadaist / Dadaland
, Ecart , and received mail art pieces as well as publications from
them.......
RJ : Was this also the moment you started to
consider yourself a 'mail artist'?
reply
on 10-9-1997
CP : Aha! Mail artist! I don't think that I have
ever consider myself a mail artist. I have corresponded with many mail artists,
but usually about mail art. Though now & again I would correspond
with something other than the regular letter. (I have responded to a few calls
for mail art exhibitions.....)
The
closest I might have come to this desciption might be as a sparring partner for
Ray Johnson, mostly in the late eighties + early nineties. He kind of nudged me
into mail art responses to his mail art.
RJ : The term 'sparring partner' is
interesting. What kind of 'punches' did Ray send to you?
next
answer on 22-9-1997
CP : Given your reaction, perhaps a boxing
metaphor was not exactly right. What I had in mind by 'sparring partner' was
along the lines of a champion needing lesser lights to keep him sharp and in
shape - even if they couldn't keep up with him over ten rounds. Sometimes , in
sparring with Ray, I might raise my game to his level - other times not.
RJ : Maybe my question wasn't specific
enough either, With 'punches' I was actually asking for maybe a few examples of
some 'correspondances' you had with Ray.
next
answer on 1-11-1997
CP : OK, here's one where I came off quite well.
At some point, on the phone, Ray asked me if I knew who Anna May Wong was? Perhaps he had included an image of her in a
mailing? I said I had no idea. He told me she was a 30's (?) movie star.
After
that Ray would refer to her - in mailings , or in conversation - because of my
ignorance.
Then a
while later, in 1992, he sent me a mailing of a bunny head with the words Anna
May Shun in it, plus the question: "Who is Anna May Shun?"
I let
the question run round my head for a day or two, then responded with a sheet on
which I stuck a xerox of a photo of Chou-En Lai - with some additions - and the
phrase: "Anna May Shun is the half-sister of Chou-En Gum!"
In the
next mail I got a sheet with two bunny heads + a self-photo of Ray. The heads
said: Judy Garland (upside down!) and Chou-En Gum! There was also a note telling me to call him about this. When I
did, I asked him why he had put Chou-En Gum with Judy Garland? He said it was because Judy Garland's real
name (or her sister's?) was Frances Gumm!!!
RJ : Ray was always interested in the names of
movie stars and played a lot with names and images. Do you know where the use
of the 'bunny' originated from?
next
answer on 19-11-1997
(With the written answer Clive Phillpot sent a copy of the text he wrote for the catalog of Ray Johnson's exhibition at the Goldie Paley Gallery at the Moore College of Art and Design in Philadelphia - Pennsylvania in 1991 , which contains a very good list of principal sources).
CP : No, I can't remember Ray ever explaining
their origins. In one sense , they just grew. When I was working on the catalog
of Ray's 1991 exhibition in Philadelphia, I assembled an evolutionary chart -
derived from the letters in the 1976 North Carolina Museum publication.
He did
tell me once that when he signed a letter with a bunny head, it was a
self-portrait. But when others drew his bunny-heads, they became their
self-portraits.
Then
there was another shift at the end of the eighties, when the black
scared-looking-bunny-heads began to include people's names within their
outlines. These heads have now become a kind of Ray Johnson icon.
RJ : In the beginning of the interview you
mentioned that in 1972 you started with reviewing artists' books. At the moment
you are even lecturing about artists' books. What is so fascinating about this
form of art?
next
answer on 1-12-1997
CP : The other worlds that books contain are fascinating - these worlds can be
conjured up through words or images or both. And sometimes such books are
visual, or verbi-visual, works of art.
The
idea that some books can be hand-held movies also appeals to me, as well as the
book as a random-access artwork.
Thinking
about books as art in the context of mail art , I would say that their similar
non-institutionalization is also appealing. For me, the multiple - usually
printed - artists' books are most interesting because they are conceived to be
disseminated to a wide audience. Also books printed in editions can slip into
bookstores very easily, but surprise people browsing because of their often
unusual content.
RJ : You were the Director of the Library of
the Museum of Modern Art in New York, where there are lots of artist's books as
well. Do they also have a mail art collection?
next
answer on 17-12-1997
CP : Yeah - that's right. I had the pleasure of
buying the Franklin Furnace artist book collection just before I left the USA and leaving it to be merged with the one
I built from 1977-1994.
As for
mail art in the library, there is some. For example, there are a few pieces
from Ray Johnson that go back a bit. (He wrote to many of the curators over the
years, and some of them passed pages, etc. , on to the library). But on the
whole there is not a lot particularly because I thought it more appropriate for
the library to be collecting documentation (as well as multiple art ,
like artists' books).
So I
bought a fair number of catalogues of mail art exhibitions, plus a lot of
artist magazines, some of which were related to mail art. Of course, Ray
Johnson managed to subvert all this :-
We had
worked together on a little book during 1986-88 which was published by the
Nassau County Museum in Long Island. After this, when I was writing a piece about
him for the Philadelphia exhibition, he suggested that he create a book which
would be made up of 26 parts (chapters?) , each of 26 pages, + that he would
send me a few pages at a time through the mail.
In due
course this is what happened - in 1990. Before the book petered out in the
summer, I received about 50 pages at the library - of "A Book About Modern
Art" - plus some short sequels.
This
book is quite unique - so it went against my normal policy for mail art + for
artists' books! Trust Ray to be
different.
RJ : I think that - unlike Fluxus - mail art is
still quite unknown in the "official" art world. Is this true and
will it stay like that?
next
answer on 11-2-1998
CP : Yes, I am sure it is - in the official
sense. But, on the other hand, Ray - who I keep coming back to (as my exemplar)
- sent his mailings to so many critics ,, curators , directors & trustees of
museums, that even if they could not recognize it , they experienced mail art.
I think
that mail art will surface in museum exhibitions occasionally. When Ray gets
the big retrospective that he deserves, surely mail art will become visible
then?
But we
must not forget that even as far back as 1970 , mail art was featured in a
major museum , the Whitney Museum of Modern Art , thanks to Ray and to Marcia
Tucker!
Perhaps
a more important question is whether the acceptance of mail art by the
"official" art world would be a good thing or a bad thing? Is mail
art not more intersting as a personal expression in a guerilla relationship
with museums? Museum shows might coopt mail art? Kill it?
RJ : Yes, you might be right there. I must
confess that when I visited mail art exhibitions in galleries or museums
(especially the postal museums DO exhibit nowadays) I was always more
interested in the visitors (sometimes only mail artists....) than in the exhibited mail art. Did you also
meet some of the mail artists you were in correspondence with?
(It took some time before I heard from Clive again, so I sent him another copy of the question. It turned out he had moved to another address)
next
answer on 24-11-1998
CP : Yes, I did. Inevitably most were from New
York and the East Coast; people such as Buster Cleveland, Carlo Pittore, and
Crackerjack Kid, but also FaGaGaGa, Steve Perkins, and John Held. Plus artists
from abroad such as Ulises Carrion.
Then
there are all the fluxus artists. I have met most of them - except for three of
the best, George Maciunas, George Brecht and Robert Filliou.
And one
time, 1992 I think, I kinda hosted a congress that started at the Museum of
Modern Art and finished at the Hilton Hotel in mid-town Manhattan, especially
for Angela and Peter Netmail.
RJ : You mention both Fluxus-artists and
Mail-Artists. Is the connection really that strong as some Mail-Artists like to
make it?
next
answer on 04-01-1999
(with the answer Clive Phillpot sent me a brochure of the exhibition "Artist/Author
Contemporary Artists'Books" , an exhibition organized by the American
Federation of Arts at several locations during 1998 and 1999 in the USA. In the brochure there was a text
by Clive Phillpot: "A Concise History Of Artists' Books".
Together with Cornelia Lauf he curated the exhibition).
CP : Well, when I think of Fluxus I don't think
of Mail-Art (except perhaps for the stamps of Georg Maciunas and Bob Watts),
but when I think of Mail-Art I do think of Robert Filliou and George
Brecht, of correspondence, and of their origination of the idea of "The
Eternal Network" in 1968.
The
postal system was vital to Fluxus as the principal means for distributing their
art, but I don't think that this means that they necessarily created Mail-Art.
Fluxus is much more relevant to the histories of the multiple and performance.
However, I think that Ben Vautier's 'Postman's Choice' postcard is a Mail-Art
classic.
RJ : Are there more "Mail-Art
classics" you remember right now?
next
answer on 2-2-1999
CP : One that I think of as a classic, was
something from Ray Johnson to me. I would guess that it wasn't the first - or
last - time that he used the idea, but, as ever, he responded specifically to
the occasion.
In 1987
Ray asked me to join him is documenting a performance that he had done at the
Nassau County Museum just outside New York. He told me about the event, showed
me photos, and suggested that I ask him some questions. later I did just this,
and sent him some questions in the mail. He responded subsequently with what
seemed to me to be nonsensical answers. I had to admit to him on the phone that
I didn't understand his response.
The
next thing that happened was that I got a piece of paper folded like a kid's
airplane in an envelope from Ray. On unfolding the plane, I found that it was a
photocopy from a book on Picasso's work. Ray had underlined odd passages,
thereby revealing to me the origins of his mysterious answers. (Though not
exactly what he had meant by them.)
Then a
week or so later I got a letter in the mail that had been sent to
"Monsieur Picasso" at an address in Paris. It was inscribed
"inconnu" and stamped "return to sender" (in French). The
reason why I got it - since I never sent a letter to Picasso, even when he was
alive - was that the return address in the top left corner of the envelope was
MINE!
I guess
it's an old trick. But a neat one. A letter sent from Long Island had been sent
on a long journey via Paris to me in New York, thanks to the efficiency of the
post office, and the kindness of the people now living at Picasso's old
address.
I was
very amused by Ray's manoeuvre. But the final piece of my story took me several
more weeks to unravel.
Some
time later I looked again at the xerox from the Picasso book. Then the penny
dropped. The work illustrated was a cubist work of 1912 entitled "The
Letter". But even through the fragmented plane of the painting I was able
to make out that the painted letter was addressed to "Monsieur
Picasso" at the very same address to which Ray had despatched his letter
for me!
I am so
glad I got to know Ray.
RJ : Did you save the items you received from
Ray or are they in some kind of archive?
(Clive Phillpot's answer came after a few months because he was in New York, to give a lecture on artist books at the New York Public Library.)
next
answer on 18-5-1999
CP : Yes, I have saved everything Ray sent me,
from 1981 to late 1994 a few months before his suicide. They are part of my own
archives. I also have notes of his phone calls over many years - I still need
to transcribe and expand these.....
As well
as sending things to me personally he also sent a few things to me especially
for the Museum of Modern Art in New York, with specific instructions that they
were for the Library collections. He even asked me to send him letters
confirming that these pieces were safely in the Museum. The principal piece was
the Book About Modern Art, which was made up of several mailings of
three or four sheets each.
RJ : You mentioned your Archives. What
do they look like?
next
answer on 23-5-1999
CP : Well, I guess they look much like other
people's , you know lots of files. As for their contents and arrangements, I
imagine that they too are not very different from other people's solutions.
There
is a section on my writing comprising typescripts and photocopies (plus all the
eventual books, catalogs and magazines in my library). There are many files of correspondence
with artists, and about art. Also artist files - which include announcements of
exhibitions, press releases, cuttings and reproductions of articles, essays,
etc. There are also some specific files on artist books, and about book
artists. And as well as these art-related files there are some others on
miscellaneous things, and correspondence from friends and relatives. And if you
really want the nitty-gritty of their organization, I think most of these are
organized by name and/or by date. (There are only so many ways to skin a cat.)
I
suppose that I should add that I have discs that archive most of what I have
written on the computer, plus some email messages.
RJ : Yes, that computer. Do you like working with computers?
next
answer on 31-8-1999
CP : I like working with some computers. At home
I have an old Macintosh; I really enjoy the simplicity and logic of its
software. But at work I have a Windows-based PC. Ugh! I find it amazing that
this cluncky software rules the world. Business has won out over technology.
Much as
I enjoy computers, the thing that has really changed the way I work - and maybe
think - is word-processing. In fact word-processing helps one to write more
like one thinks. I can hardly believe that I once used a typewriter with
carbonpaper, witeout, etc.
And
almost as important as that facility is email. When I moved back to England I
felt so cut off for the few months it took me to settle down, and before I set
up email again. When one has friends - and work opportunities - in many
countries, email is unsurpassed for keeping in touch, though there are still
times when letter writing is important.
RJ : How did you become so interested in letter
writing? Is it just connected to your work in which you communicate with so many
different people worldwide, or is it the other way round? (So that you got
interested in communicating worldwide through letter writing)
(It
might look like a strange question, but I wonder because in my case I learned
through my father -at the age of 7- the thrills of communications worldwide and
because of doing the same stumbled onto the mail-art network)
(answer
on 9-10-1999)
CP : I guess I always wrote letters to friends
and relatives whom I couldn’t see regularly. Similarly when I moved to New York
in 1977 the simplest way to keep in touch with people overseas, and across the
USA, (since email was not an option) was through letters.
When I moved back to England I left
a lot of friends in the USA, so letterwriting continues, and not just to the USA,
plus a great deal more email.
Finally I think I quite enjoy the
time one gives to thinking about a communication when writing letters, and to
shaping the language of the communication. Since telephone, for example, is a
medium for talking, this is a very different kind of exercise.
(because of a break in the whole
mail-interview project, the next question only went out a long time later.
Giving an extra time-dimension to this interview).
RJ : Was there anything I forgot to ask you?
(answer
on 4-3-2001)
CP : Yes, you didn’t ask me about Solong
RJ : What would you like to tell about Solong?
(answer
on 10-3-2001)
CP : So long it’s been good to know you! Thanks
for the interview, I hope it will be useful. Cheers. Clive.
RJ : Thanks for the interview as well.
The readers will judge if it is useful. I sure did enjoy it.
Address
interviewed person:
CLIVE
PHILLPOT
3
Pevensey Avenue
New
Southgate
ENGLAND
Address
interviewer:
Ruud Janssen
P.O. box 10388
5000 JJ Tilburg
e-mail: tam@dds.nl