jon rafman at zabludowicz collection898126/fulltext02.pdf · inside the white cube: the ideology of...

!

Department of Art history

Jon Rafman at Zabludowicz Collection

- A study in Reception aesthetics

Author: Amanda Hansson ©

Field of study: Art History (Level C)

Thesis Defense: Autumn 2015

Supervisor: Lars Wängdahl

ABSTRACT

Department Uppsala University. Department of Art history

Author Amanda Hansson

Title Jon Rafman at Zabludowicz Collection - A study in Reception aesthetics

Supervisor Lars Wängdahl

Thesis Defense: Autumn (year)

2015

Summary:

In this study, I will be applying Art historian Wolfgang Kemp’s theory of the aesthetics of reception as described

in the article The Work of Art and Its Beholder: The Methodology of the Aesthetic of Reception (1998) to the Jon

Rafman solo exhibition at Zabludowicz Collection in London (2015). A close study has been carried out on a

selection of exhibition objects, as well as the exhibition space, to investigate how they address and interact with

the beholder. An examination of Rafman’s art practice will also be disclosed.

Throughout the study I will answer the following questions; How are the influences that inspired the exhibition,

presented in the exhibition?, How do Jon Rafman’s installations at Zabludowicz Collection engage the

beholder? And, how can the composition of the exhibition space be described?

!2

ABSTRACT

1. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………….…………4

1.1 Thesis Statement/Purpose……………………………………………………………………4

1.2 The Framework…………………………………………………………………….…….….5

1.3 Material Description……………………………………………………………..…….……5

1.4 Theoretical Perspectives and Methods…………………………….…………..….….……..6

1.5 Previous studies……………………………………….…………….…………….……..…7

1.6 Background……………………………………….………………………………….…..…8

2. Jon Rafman - The Amateur Anthropologist………………………..………..……..….……10

2.1 The Installations……………………………………………………………..……..….…..13

2.1.1 Still Life (Betamale)……………………….……………………….….…….14

2.1.2 Sticky drama (2015)…………………………………………..…………..…17

2.1.2 Sculpture Garden (Hedge Maze)………………………………………….…20

2.2 The Exhibition Space………………………………………………………………………22

2.3 The Inscribed Beholder……………………………………….…………….…..…….……23

3. CONCLUSIONS………….…………………………….…………………….………..……25

4. SUMMARY……………….……………………….…………………………………..……28

5. BIBLIOGRAPHY…………….………………………….…………………………….……30

5.1 Books and journals……………………….……………….…………………………..……30

5.2 Magazine and Newspaper Articles……….……………………………….………….…….30

5.3 Websites…………………………………….….…………………………..…………….…31

5.4 Films and Broadcast Media………………….…………………….…………………….…31

5.5 Interviews…………………………………….….…………………………………………32

6. LIST OF IMAGES…………………………….…………………….………………………32

!3

1. INTRODUCTION

Jon Rafman is a self-described amateur anthropologist. His work explores the fading boundaries 1

between the virtual and the real. For his recent solo exhibition at Zabludowicz Collection, Rafman

was inspired by the reality of individuals who spend most of their time in front of a computer

screen, living their lives in a virtual world, whilst simultaneously being trapped in the material

environment. 2

The exhibition consists of installations that address a presumed beholder by suggesting physical

interaction, the aim being to recreate the feelings of comfort and claustrophobia, that are frequently

invoked by virtual life. By applying Wolfgang Kemp’s theory of reception aesthetics, I will 3

investigate how a presumed beholder can be inscribed into a work of art within a contemporary art

practice. 4

1.1 Thesis Statement/Purpose

This study will primarily analyse the Jon Rafman solo exhibition at Zabludowicz Collection

according to Wolfgang Kemp’s theory of reception aesthetics. It will also examine the artist’s

treatment of the exhibition space through the conceptional theories of aesthetics of reception and

Inside the White Cube: The Ideology of the Gallery Space by writer and art critic Brian O’Doherty,

Petty, Felix: “Jon Rafman’s internet anthropology”, https://i-d.vice.com/en_gb/article/jon-rafmans-1

internet-anthropology, i-D Magazine Online, 2015-10-14 (Acc 17-11-2015), Zabludowicz Collection: “Jon Rafman 8 October–20 December 2015” http://www.zabludowiczcollection.com/exhibitions/view/jon-rafman (Acc 17-11-2015).





Kemp, Wolfgang, ”The Work of Art and Its Beholder: the Methodology of the Aesthetic of 4

Reception” The subjects of art history: Historical objects in contemporary perspectives, (eds.) Mark Cheetham, Cambridge, 1998.

!4

https://i-d.vice.com/en_gb/article/jon-rafmans-internet-anthropology

http://www.zabludowiczcollection.com/exhibitions/view/jon-rafman





by applying the separate ideas around the effects of the reception situation and its preconditions. In 5

my study I aim to answer the following questions:

- How are the influences that inspired the exhibition, presented in the exhibition?

- How do Jon Rafman’s installations at Zabludowicz Collection engage the beholder?

- How can the composition of the exhibition space be described?

1.2 The Framework

This study will be carried out within the framework of the Jon Rafman solo exhibition at

Zabludowicz Collection. All the material used in the study will be gathered from the physical space

or from an online source connected to the artist and/or the exhibition.

I will carry out a close study on three of the installations within the exhibition, as opposed to all of

the works, due to the size of the study. My selection aims to show a wide range of work in which

the artist has approached themes of immersion and fading boundaries between the real and the

virtual. I consider this selection to form the best foundation for Wolfgang Kemps theory of

aesthetics of reception.

1.3 Material Description

The material includes press material, video links, and interviews with the artist about his practice,

both in general and specifically regarding the exhibition. I have visited the exhibition on several

occasions to gather material. The first time I attended the exhibition my aim was only to observe the

exhibition objects and the space. The second time, my aim was to physically engage with all of the

exhibition objects which allowed physical interaction.

By approaching each visit to the exhibition differently, I was able to gather differing perspectives on

the exhibition as a whole, through the experience of viewing the installations visually from the

outside and the experience of interpretation whilst interacting them. I do not intend to elaborate on

the different experiences described in this study, they are only going to be used as reference

material. The primary material in the study is the close study of a selection of installations along

with a description of the exhibition space and the composition of the installations themselves.

O’Doherty, Brian, Inside the White Cube: The Ideology of the Gallery Space, Berkeley and Los 5

Angeles: University of California Press, Los Angeles, 1999 (1976).!5

1.4 Theoretical Perspectives and Methods

Wolfgang Kemp’s article The Work of Art and Its Beholder: The Methodology of the Aesthetic of

Reception (1998) will be the main theory applied to this study. In it, Kemp states that the beholders

interpretation of a work of art is dependent on preconditions including; the gender, history, social

heritage and cultural capital of the beholder, the specific physical location of the work and the

placement of the work in relation to other works.

There is one major difference between the aesthetics of reception and the psychology of reception.

The psychology of reception focuses on the beholder and the process only, whereas aesthetics of

reception focuses on the preconditions of the situation of reception in addition to the process of

reception. Despite this difference, both remain comparable as both theories are based on a dialogue

between the beholder and the work of art, the opposing view being, that a work of art can only be

understood within itself, through the creative process or by its producer. The dialogue, however, is

not a conversation between the artist and the beholder, as there will never be such a conversation

because the artist creates for an ideal beholder that doesn't exist in reality, the ideal beholder is also

referred to as the implicit beholder; the addressee of the work of art. 6

Kemp states that ”Literary theory refers to the blank or the aesthetics of indeterminacy, both

conceptualizations meaning that works of art are unfinished in themselves in order to be finished by

the beholder”. Before the beholder and the work of art cross paths, there are ”prearranged 7

interpretive spheres” which apply to both parties and will always be in existence. The specific 8

interpretive spheres of the work of art are bound to its context. Reception aesthetics obligates that

any work of art should be restored to what Kemp describes as it’s, “original context of

comprehension”. 9

Kemp’s article applies reception aesthetics to painting, a two-dimensional form of art. The implicit

beholder in Kemp’s theory is therefore outside of the artwork, looking in, even though the beholder

Kemp, 1998, p.182.6

Kemp, 1998, p.188.7

Kemp, 1998, p.184.8

Kemp, 1998, p.185.9

!6

is inscribed in the work in many ways. Lundström uses the expression Inscribed Spectator rather 10

than Kemp’s implicit beholder, as the beholder in her study, was only partly the result of

interpretation and predominately about the interaction, whilst Kemp’s results are primarily based on

interpretation. In this study, I will refer the beholder as the inscribed beholder, as my study 11

examines installations within an exhibition and not exhibition situations, therefore, I believe that the

use of beholder is more accurate terminology than spectator.

This study will examine three-dimensional objects, where the beholder is inscribed physically into

the work, and therefore I will additionally apply parts of the methods used in Former av politik: Tre

utställningssituationer på Moderna Museet 1998–2008 (2015) by art historian Anna Lundström. 12

Lundström’s dissertation explores the complex relationship between politics and art. Her study was

carried out within the framework of the Modern Museum of Art, Moderna Museet, in Stockholm,

which the author points out being a political structure as it’s practice is financed by the Swedish

government. 13

In her dissertation, Lundström describes three exhibition situations all produced by the museum, all

taking place between 1998 and 2008. These exhibition situations all share the same purpose- to

address and engage a predicted beholder. The methods that Lundström applies to the exhibition 14

situations in her study, I will also apply on two of Jon Rafman’s installations at Zabludowicz

Collection.

1.5 Previous studies

This study has been based on recent interviews with Jon Rafman about his art practice, both in

general and specifically about his solo exhibition at Zabludowicz Collection. I have supplemented

these with texts about Rafman's art practice by the artist himself and by also by others, some of

which are published on the artist’s official website. 15

Lundström, Anna, Former av politik: Tre utställningssituationer på Moderna Museet 1998–2008, 10

Makadam förlag, Diss. Stockholm, 2015, p. 26.

Lundström, 2015, p.164.11

Lundström, 2015, p. 25.12

Lundström, 2015, p. 37-38.13

Lundström, 2015, p. 12-19.14

The official website of Jon Rafman: http://jonrafman.com/ (Acc 17-11-2015).15

!7

http://jonrafman.com/

The perception of the interpretation situation according to reception aesthetics has also been applied

to this study, along with an opposing theory, Brian O’Doherty's Inside the White Cube: The

Ideology of the Gallery Space (1976), wherein O'Doherty describes his theory that the white cube as

the ideal exhibition space. 16

Anna Lundström elaborates on the complex relationship between art and politics in her dissertation

Former av politik: Tre utställningssituationer på Moderna Museet 1998–2008, within the study, she

aims to explain the connection between art and politics by appointing three exhibitions, produced

by Moderna Museet, Stockholm's Modern Museum of Art, to investigate what forms of politics,

primarily meaning public discussion and reaction, each one has generated. Each of the exhibitions 17

situations explores different ways of engaging and addressing the presumed beholder by inscribing

the beholder physically in each exhibition situation. Without the beholder's interpretation of, and

integration within, the work of art, it is viewed as incomplete. 18

Lundström describes the different exhibitions as “exhibition situations” as they are not necessarily

connected to the physical space of the museum and could also be referred to as projects in a broad

sense. 19

1.6 Background

Jon Rafman is a Canadian artist and filmmaker whose work examines the ever fading boundaries

between the real and the virtual, filtered through his creation of environments, films, photographs

and sculptures. Rafman is influenced by internet anthropology, as shown in his photo project Nine 20

Eyes (2009- ongoing), a work consisting of screen captured images from Google maps and also in

his work Kool Aid Man (2008-2011) wherein he is shown giving guided tours in the popular online

virtual world Second life, Rafman shares his videos via links on his website. 21

O’Doherty, 1976, p. 65-86.16

Lundström, 2015, p. 11-12.17

Lundström, 2015, p. 20-28.18

Lundström, 2015, p. 12-20.19

Zabludowicz Collection: “Jon Rafman 8 October–20 December 2015” http://20

www.zabludowiczcollection.com/exhibitions/view/jon-rafman (Acc 17-11-2015).

Nine Eyes (2009- ongoing) video work by Jon Rafman: http://9-eyes.com/ (Acc 17-11-2015), 21

Kool Aid Man (2008-2011) video work by Jon Rafman: http://koolaidmaninsecondlife.com/ (Acc 17-11-2015), The official website of Jon Rafman: http://jonrafman.com/ (Acc 17-11-2015).

!8


http://9-eyes.com/

http://koolaidmaninsecondlife.com/


Rafmans’s video A man digging (2013), shows the virtual world of the video game, Max Payne 3. 22

The player has been transformed from a numb fighter to a human masochist that has entered the

game. A poem about memory played, along with loops of music, while the video takes the viewer

through the digital landscape to witness the massacre.

In an interview at Zabludowicz Collection by the artist and writer Tom McCarthy, Rafman revealed

his fascination with the possibilities that digital gaming unintentionally enables. In the interview, 23

Rafman describes how he had witnessed a gamer burying his gaming character under a pile of dead

bodies in the game, for no obvious reason other than to see if the game was constructed in a way

that would enable the action.

A man digging (2013) belongs to a series that is part of an ongoing investigation by the artist into

the nature of memory and the horror of data loss, which refers to how the modern generation today,

are neglecting memory and instead rely on technology to remember for them. Seventeen gallery 24

state on their website, “While examining Rafman’s ongoing preoccupation with loss, the work

directs our attention toward the potential of the virtual archive to unveil alternative ways of

constructing and preserving our collective and personal histories.” 25

In an interview with Art Forum about his debut solo exhibition at The Contemporary Art Museum,

St Louis, in America, ”Jon Rafman: The end of the end of the end”, Rafman explains that he has

examined the nature of memory versus contemporary culture in earlier work:

I BEGAN TO KNOW the fighting game community of New York while I was doing

interviews for my 2011 film Codes of Honor, which is about a lone gamer recounting his past experiences in professional gaming. That work generally deals with a loss of history and the struggle to preserve tradition in a culture where the new sweeps away the old at a faster and faster pace. I saw the pro gamer as a contemporary tragic hero who strives for classic virtues in

A digging man (2013) video work by Jon Rafman: http://dismagazine.com/dystopia/49510/a-22

man-digging/ (Acc 17-11-2015).

Live interview with Jon Rafman by Tom McCarthy at Zabludowicz Collection, 09-11-2015.23



Seventeen Gallery: “Jon Rafman, A Man Digging” http://www.seventeengallery.com/exhibitions/25

jon-rafman/ (Acc 17-11-2015).!9


http://www.seventeengallery.com/exhibitions/jon-rafman/

http://dismagazine.com/dystopia/49510/a-man-digging/

a hyperaccelerated age. The very thing the gamer attempts to master is constantly slipping away and becoming obsolete, which acutely reflects our contemporary condition. 26

Rafman’s work has been shown in galleries and art institutions, in multiple cities across Europe and

North America. The online resource for art collecting and education, Artsy, announced Jon 27

Rafman as one of their top 15 emerging artists, published in December of 2015. proving they'd put

their esteem in the right place, in 2015 Rafman had a group show at New York's Feuer/Mesler

Gallery, opened his first solo museum exhibition at Canada's Musée d’art contemporain de

Montreal and ended the year with his most prestigious solo exhibition to date, at Zabludowicz

Collection, which Artsy described as “an uncontested highlight of Frieze Week, for which he turned

the collection into a participatory playground, complete with an Oculus Rift centrepiece.” 28

2. Jon Rafman - The Amateur Anthropologist

As a self-described amateur anthropologist, much of Rafman’s art practice art practice involves

researching online communities and subcultures as well as videos and images online to use as

material in his art practice. The artist elaborates on the subject in an interview about Zabludowicz

Collection exhibition with i-D Magazine.

In the interview about his exhibition at Zabludowicz Collection, Rafman was asked if he ever felt as

if he had been exploiting online communities when using digital material produced by someone else

for a different purpose, giving an example of, using as an example, Still life (Betamale) (2013), a

video in which Rafman used screen captures of erotic Japanese video games, consequently causing

the community involved to report feeling violated. Rafman defended himself by stating that he is an

amateur anthropologist, his aim is to take something out of one context and insert it into another,

but that this is done with no malicious intentions 29

H. Sanchez, Gabriel: “Jon Rafman”, http://artforum.com/words/id=47380, Art forum, 07-03-14, 26

(Acc 17-11-2015).

Zabludowicz Collection: “Jon Rafman b.1981, Montreal, Canada” http://27

www.zabludowiczcollection.com/collection/artists/view/jon-rafman (Acc 17-11-2015).

Artsy Editorial: “The Top 15 Emerging Artists of 2015” https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-28

editorial-the-top-emerging-artists, Artsy Magazine, 16-12-2015 (Acc 17-11-2015).

Petty, Felix: “Jon Rafman’s internet anthropology”, https://i-d.vice.com/en_gb/article/jon-29

rafmans-internet-anthropology, i-D Magazine Online, 2015-10-14 (Acc 17-11-2015).!10


https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-the-top-emerging-artists

http://artforum.com/words/id=47380

http://www.zabludowiczcollection.com/collection/artists/view/jon-rafman

Due to the nature of his works, Rafman sometimes finds himself a member of an online community

and sometimes as a passing explorer of the different subcultures. Zabludowicz Collection state on 30

their website that Rafman edits material found within online communities and adds poetic

narratives, while never revealing the original source of the material. 31

I every now and again experience when I'm surfing the Web and I suddenly discover a new

community or fully formed subculture that has its own complex vocabulary and history. It’s this overwhelming sensation that there are subcultures within subcultures, worlds upon worlds upon worlds ad infinitum. 32

The artist himself elaborates on his art practice within his video work Kool Aid Man (2008-2011), in

which he describes how his generation, referring to an online conscious generation which he

personally is included in, no longer knows if they are truly celebrating something or criticising it

sarcastically. Rafman also mentions that the past few generations are particularly interesting as the 33

time they grew up in is an historically groundless environment, meaning that they themselves are

less aware of the historical context of their time. Generations that are unaware of life before the

computer. 34

Rafman’s practice thrives the exploration of the constant evolvement of virtual worlds, emerging

from his interest in the relationship between human desire and contemporary virtual culture. He

takes inspiration from how technological amateurs are using technology simply to create, seeing

individuals that are excited about using the online formats without any intention of referring to

anything they create as art. 35


(Acc 17-11-2015).

Zabludowicz Collection: “Jon Rafman b.1981, Montreal, Canada” http://31



(Acc 17-11-2015).

Kool Aid Man (2008-2011) video work by Jon Rafman: http://koolaidmaninsecondlife.com/ (Acc 33

17-11-2015).


17-11-2015).


17-11-2015).!11







In the video Kool Aid Man (2008-2011), the artist debates what can be considered high culture or

low culture, and comes to the conclusion that neither exists in today’s world. He suggests that 36

further back in art history there may have been more of a social dichotomy between high culture or

low culture, to react to as an artist.

Another point of view that the artist discusses in the video is that he does not believe that anything

can be claimed as culture or non-culture and that art is the function of assimilating everything, a

statement which is rather descriptive of the artists practice. Which on the other hand concludes that

the artist himself is deciding what could be considered as art. Rafman's art practice involves

transferring something from one context to another, the conclusion being that it is not only Rafman

who decides what can be considered art, but that this decision is also formed by the context.


17-11-2015).!12


2.1 The Installations

Jon Rafman is a filmmaker in addition to being an artist, and every installation in the exhibition

includes a video, likewise, every installation encourages the beholder to physically interact with it

in one way or another. The artist was asked how he approached the exhibition at Zabludowicz

Collection as a whole, in an interview with i-D magazine:

I've been developing this idea of using the language of what I call the "troll cave" -- the spaces

of people who spend all their time online, in front of their computers. I'm attracted to them because there's a sense in which they're living this life that's completely virtual, but these spaces are completely material and full of the detritus of these people's lives. There's an extreme physicality to this border between the real and the virtual. There's an attraction and repulsion, too. There's the claustrophobia of being completely shut into a space, but also a total comfort and immersion, like being in a mother's womb. Out of that came these different installations. 37

In an interview with Art Forum from March 2014, more than a year before the opening of his solo

exhibition at Zabludowicz Collection, Rafman described the work he was developing at the time. 38

The sculptures and installations he described were born of his intense interest in “troll caves”,

spaces which he describes as places “inhabited by gamers during excessive hours in virtual

reality”. Rafman described his fascination with “troll caves”, as they signify destruction, 39

something which is especially poignant today, revealing material residue of a life completely lived

in a virtual reality, and the impossible escape from a physical existence. 40


rafmans-internet-anthropology, i-D Magazine Online, 2015-10-14 (Acc 17-11-2015).


(Acc 17-11-2015).


(Acc 17-11-2015).


(Acc 17-11-2015).!13





2.1.1 Still Life (Betamale)

1. Installation view Jon Rafman, 2015 at Zabludowicz Collection, London. Photo by Thierry Bal.

As you enter the exhibition, the first thing visible is a large ball pit with two screens installed onto

a pole in the centre. These screens show the video Still Life (Betamale) (2013) which is a collage of

video and image material gathered by the artist from the online forum 4chan, a website that enables

completely anonymous users to consume, publish and share otherwise socially unacceptable video

and image material, with no censorship restrictions. Still Life (Betamale) (2013) consists of 41

content from the forum, along with rather appalling images of the material environment that

surround some of its users, and can be used as a prime example of the social culture of the forum. 42

The start page of the online forum 4chan: http://www.4chan.org/ (Acc 17-11-2015).41

Still life (betamale) (2013) video work by Jon Rafman: http://jonrafman.com/betamale/ (Acc 42

17-11-2015).!14

http://www.4chan.org/

http://jonrafman.com/betamale/

The video has a soundtrack by the musician, composer and producer Daniel Lopatin, also known as

Oneohtrix Point Never. Still Life (Betamale) is also the music video that accompanies Oneohtrix 43

Point Never album track of the same name. The video was removed from both Youtube and Vimeo,

the reason being the controversial content that violates the policy of both websites, it was later

posted on Oneohtrix Point Never’s official website. 44

The video starts with a female voice saying “As you look at the screen, it is possible to believe you

are gazing into eternity, you see the things that were inside you. This is the womb, the original site

of the imagination. You do not move your eyes from the screen, you have become invisible”. This 45

speech is akin to something that would be heard during hypnosis in its encouragement of the viewer

to leave the real behind and immerse into the virtual.

Rafman later posted the finished video on the 4chan forum, and by doing so also interacted with the

community as a user of the forum. Rafman reveled in an interview with the magazine Art Forum,

that the release of Still Life (Betamale) (2013) on the 4chan forum was what the whole project had

led up to, leaving the community of 4chan and himself to come face-to-face. 46

Some of the comments were scathing, labelling the video as 'utterly unimaginative', and going on to

call out Rafman for his perceived mocking of the 4chan community. The comments went on to

accuse him of discovering the forum ”too late'47 compared to the users themselves who had been

posting for years, and branding his fascination for its style and content as 'outdated'. The importance

placed on the time of discovery is another fascination for Rafman, as when something has been

discovered it is considered, by modern culture, to be outdated. Despite harsh criticism, the majority

of the 4chan comments were positive. One going as far as to say, ”[the video is] Like an Ode to

Geslani, Michelle: “Oneohtrix Point Never’s video “Still Life (Betamale)” takes you into dark 43

underbelly of Internet”, http://consequenceofsound.net/2013/09/oneohtrix-point-nevers-video-still-life-betamale-takes-you-into-dark-underbelly-of-internet/, Consequence of sound, 25-09-2013 (Acc 20-11-2015).

Penny, Jenn: Video: “Oneohtrix Point Never's "Still Life (Betamale)" Explores Fetish Sites”, 44

http://pitchfork.com/news/52426-video-oneohtrix-point-nevers-still-life-betamale-explores-fetish-sites/, Pitchfork, 25-09-2013 (Acc 17-11-2015).

Still life (betamale) (2013) video work by Jon Rafman: http://jonrafman.com/betamale/ (Acc 45

17-11-2015).


(Acc 17-11-2015).!15


http://pitchfork.com/news/52426-video-oneohtrix-point-nevers-still-life-betamale-explores-fetish-sites/


http://consequenceofsound.net/2013/09/oneohtrix-point-nevers-video-still-life-betamale-takes-you-into-dark-underbelly-of-internet/

4chan. Love it. Disturbing, but fuck, only seen a handful of music videos this year that I can

actually remember and were interesting. This achieved that.” 47

The users of 4chan might be perceived as inhumane and perverted by the real world but this is not

the assumption made by Jon Rafman, who believes that new technical possibilities create new

forms of expressing desire in the search for meaning and pleasure. He shows that he respects the

lifestyle of these individuals by actively engaging with their world.

The interpretation of the video, made by the inscribed beholder at the exhibition and the

interpretation of the same video made by the online beholder differ. The prearranged spheres of the

Reception Situations are completely separate. The online experience of the video, within the 4chan

forum, where most of the viewers already have a relationship with the content of the video will

produce a different interpretation of the video than the interpretation of the beholder in the

exhibition space.

The installation at Zabludowicz Collection allows four viewers at a time, with each viewer having

been given a pair of headphones which play the video’s soundtrack. It is pleasant to lie in the ball

pit watching Still Life (Betamale) whilst the soundtrack leads the viewer through video. The overall

experience is stimulating and comfortable. When the video ends, the comfort is over when the

viewer realises how hard it is to make their way out of the ball pit, especially when other exhibition

attendees are watching the attempt. The feeling of comfort I felt as a viewer was short-lived, and

abruptly ended when I was faced with the physical and emotional discomfort of exiting the ball pit.

To summarise, Jon Rafman has accomplished his mission of passing on the reality of the life of a

4chan user to the exhibition visitor via a very short experience, invoking a feeling of being

comforted but also trapped at the same time. An individual that avoids reality and social

confrontation, by living a life online, would feel uncomfortable by being exposed to reality away

from the keyboard. This installation alarms the exhibition visitor of some individuals reality, it

represents the comfort of a visual life versus the social discomfort of a life in reality.

PDF document of the comments generated by 4can users on the video work Still life (betamale), 47

from when it was posted on the 4chan website: http://jonrafman.com/4chan.pdf, p. 3 (Acc 17-11-2015).

!16

http://jonrafman.com/4chan.pdf

2.1.2 Sticky Drama (2015)

2. Installation view Jon Rafman, 2015 at Zabludowicz Collection, London. Photo by Thierry Bal.

The video Sticky drama (2015), which is a collaboration between Rafman and musician, composer

and producer Daniel Lopatin, approaches the boundaries between the real and the virtual from the

perspective of reality. 48

There are three separate videos; Sticky drama - Prologue (4,53 minutes), Sticky drama (Music

video) (5,47 minutes) and the main video Sticky drama (2015) (10,36 minutes), which is a slightly

longer version of Sticky drama - Prologue and Sticky drama (Music video) combined. Sticky 49

drama (2015) was shown in a separate room at Zabludowicz Collection. Inspired by self-made

costumes, staging and improvisation of Live Action Role Play, also known as LARP. Rafman staged



Sticky drama (Music video) (2015) video work by Jon Rafman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?49

v=td-e4i2BL_Q (Acc 17-11-2015), Sticky drama - Prologue (2015) video work by Jon Rafman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49EXKsu-jTs (Acc 17-11-2015), Information provided via email by David Hoyland, Director of Seventeen gallery, official representatives of Jon Rafman in London, UK, 21-12-2016.

!17


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=td-e4i2BL_Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49EXKsu-jTs

an LARP, starring 35 school children, filmed over three weeks in London, shot by the artist himself.

Rafman was asked in an interview, about his new approach, as shown in Sticky drama (2015),

presenting an imaginary world taking place in the real world rather than reality being portrayed as

residue from a virtual life:

Yeah, it was a role reversal certainly, which is what I was trying to do. I think the dichotomy

between the virtual and real is no longer there, because if you're falling in love in the internet, or if you're having all these emotional experiences on the internet, if you're community is on the internet, then that's as valid and real as a physical community. 50

A review in Artsy described Rafman’s and Lopatin’s approach as follow “After a summer spent

considering gaming, Live Action Role Playing (or “larping”), and the way an imagined world can

become reality, Rafman devoted the last three months in London to creating the live-action short”. 51

The videos represent the violence of a child's imagination and the modern nature of digital

gaming. Sticky drama (2015) shows an imaginary world taking place in reality with imaginary 52

characters played by real children. The artist does not acknowledge that there is a dichotomy

between the virtual and real, and consider the immersion between imagination and reality, from

pretending to be in character to becoming the character and for the imaginary world, taking place in

reality, to become reality.

Sticky drama - Prologue is the prologue to Sticky drama (Music video) and a part of Sticky drama

(2015). The third was never posted online, only screened at the exhibition, whilst the first and

second were posted on Youtube on the 4th of November 2015, after the opening of the exhibition.

The soundtrack for the video was produced by Daniel Lopatin, also known as Oneohtrix Point

Never. Sticky drama (Music video) is also the official music video for Daniel Lopatin’s the album 53



Gottschalk, Molly: “Jon Rafman’s Participatory Playground Hits Harder Than You’d Think”, 51

https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-jon-rafman-s-participatory-playground-hits-harder-than, Artsy, 17-10-15 (Acc 17-11-2015).




www.zabludowiczcollection.com/exhibitions/view/jon-rafman (Acc 17-11-2015).!18




https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-jon-rafman-s-participatory-playground-hits-harder-than

track Sticky drama released on his album Garden of Delete. This is the second collaboration

between Jon Rafman and Daniel Lopatin, the fist one being Still Life (Betamale). 54

The videos were commissioned by Zabludowicz Collection and Warp records, the record label that

represents Oneohtrix Point Never. The room at Zabludowicz Collection is decorated as a teenage

bedroom, the walls are pink and covered in still photography from the videos. There are several

inactive screens amongst the furniture and splashes of green colour on top of the interior decor and

the furniture, generated from an explosion in one of the scenes from Sticky drama (2015).

In Anna Lundström’s dissertation Former av politik: Tre utställningssituationer på Moderna Museet

1998–2008, the author describes ways in which an exhibition situation addresses and interact with

the beholder. One of the methods enables to inscribe the beholder into the work of art, outside the

framework of the physical exhibition space through external components. What creates the 55

framework for the work of art is therefore not the physical space of the exhibition but the

conversation between its different parts of the work and the beholder. The external components, in

this case, would be Sticky drama - Prologue and Sticky drama (Music video), posted on Oneohtrix

Point Never's Youtube channel.

According to Lundström, regardless of the environment in which work of art is contained, different

components, that might be external to the place, creates its own framework. Lundström is 56

describing an example where a work of art is able to leave the physical space of the exhibition

through external components, and still interact with the beholder in reality, which makes it difficult

to establish what can be considered art and what can be considered reality. To establish if the videos

posted online on Youtube can be considered as art in the same way as the video shown at the

exhibition.

The physical space is not necessarily inscribing the beholder, but the work of art is. This example

can be considered as a way of disconnecting the work of art from its environment. Lundström

means that every beholder’s individual interpretation can be considered a performance piece in

response to the artwork, as each individual interpretation is the link between the components of the

work.57



Lundström, 2015, p. 121-152.55


Lundström, 2015, p. 121-152.57

!19


2.1.3 Sculpture Garden (Hedge Maze)

3. Installation view Jon Rafman, 2015 at the Zabludowicz Collection, London. Photo by Thierry Bal.

Walking through a corridor into the backroom at Zabludowicz Collection, Sculpture Garden (Hedge

Maze) unfolds in the large space, black curtains are covering the walls and it is even darker in this

room than in the main room, which is filled with a hedge maze. Along the sides of the room and

inside the maze, there are “digitally manipulated sculptural busts”, as described in the quote, on

podiums made of mirrors with a spotlight centered on each sculpture. In the middle of the maze is 58

a large golden sculpture and an “Oculus rift”, a device in the form of a headset which enables the

beholder to experience virtual reality, to get access, the exhibition visitor has to book an

appointment in advance, free of costs. 59

The developers of the device describe the product on their website as; “It creates the sensation of

being entirely transported into a virtual (or real, but digitally reproduced) three-dimensional world,




www.zabludowiczcollection.com/exhibitions/view/jon-rafman (Acc 17-11-2015).!20



and it can provide a far more visceral experience than screen-based media.” A review of Sculpture 60

Garden (Hedge Maze), including the “Oculus rift” experience, was published in Artsy:

When you hit the front of the queue, you’ll be placed face-to-face with the aforementioned

golden sculpture. But, once the headgear goes on, all that was once around you will soon disappear. Suddenly you’re moving forward, as if riding a motorized walkway in an airport, through a glassy landscape and into a tunnel that leads to a dark and enchanted forest. Looking up, starry, startlingly realistic night skies reveal themselves through the trees; every tree pulses, as if breathing, and peeking through branches are Rafman’s colossal sculptures, littering the landscape like follies you’d walk to—had you not been instructed not to move. At the climax, you’ll slowly levitate until you’re among the treetops, looking down on this magical world, until the view fades to black. 61

The artist wanted to involve an Oculus rift in the exhibition as he thinks it brings the immersive

state between the real and the virtual to another level, also because the medium still remains fresh

and unexplored. With this installation, the artist is questioning why one should live in reality if a 62

virtual world is ”better”. It almost goes without saying that the practicalities of such an existence

mean that one could never survive solely in a virtual reality. The experience is elaborating on the

desire to disappear from the real into a virtual life.

Rafman is commenting on how it is impossible to document the installation experience, and such

the installation is documented using images of the participant wearing the headset. This has 63

become an unintentional but welcoming aftereffect of the installation – the process of watching

another individual immersed in the media, gaining the experience of the installation, which the

artist afterwards realised is what the exhibition is about. 64

An introduction to Oculus Rift by the developers of the device: https://developer.oculus.com/60

documentation/intro-vr/latest/concepts/bp_intro/ (Acc 17-11-2015).










https://developer.oculus.com/documentation/intro-vr/latest/concepts/bp_intro/




Anna Lundström’s dissertation Former av politik: Tre utställningssituationer på Moderna Museet

1998–2008 discusses how a work of art can be viewed as incomplete without the beholders

interaction and interpretation. The way in which Sculpture Garden (Hedge Maze) incorporates the

beholder is in line with Lundström’s theory; the work of art is incomplete without the beholder’s

reception and interaction, as the experience of virtual reality is impossible without the beholder. 65

2.2 The Exhibition Space

The art critic and writer Brian O’Doherty reviews the effects of the exhibition space in his book

Inside the White Cube: The Ideology of the Gallery Space (1974). In it, O’Doherty discusses the

view that art should be interpreted in an impressionless environment, which he suggests as being

the white cube. He describes his white cube as a space with white walls, lit only with natural light 66

from the ceiling. O’Doherty describes the blank space enables the artworks to be “free” from the

reception situation and context in time, he further describes that the visual Eye of the beholder will

become the Eye of the Soul, only inside the white cube, where the beholder is able to leave the self

outside and fully focus on the interpretation of the art.

In the prologue of Inside the White Cube:The Ideology of the Gallery Space by Thomas McEvilley

(1986), the author compares the ideology of the white cube with the ideology of the medieval

church, a space where the light should be of natural source and come from the ceiling, with no

distracting elements, in order to fully enable to beholder to completely focus on the purity of the

subject. 67

Kemp details that the context of the white cube creates as much of an influential reception situation

as any other, going on to say that it is simply not possible to separate the reception situation from

the act of interpretation. In his article The Work of Art and Its Beholder: The Methodology of the

Aesthetic of Reception (1998), Kemp notes that “The particular task of interpreting a work of art

according to reception aesthetics starts at the point of intersection between "context" and "text": at

the point, that is, where the inner workings of the work of art initiate a dialogue both with its

surroundings and its beholders.”

Lundström, 2015, p. 49-86.65

O’Doherty, 1976, p. 35-64.66

O’Doherty, 1976, p.7-12.67

!22

The article goes on to note that “As a historical method of investigation, reception aesthetics is

obliged to reconstruct the original reception situation.” Depending on the reception situation 68

created, this referring to the white cube, the appearance of the art will also apply to the condition of

the predicted space and will, therefore, be a product of the space. According to Wolfgang Kemp, the

idea of the white cube is responsible for the creation of modern art we now know it, and has

affected its appearance and reception since.

Rafman has created an exhibition environment which could be described as the opposite to the

ideology of the white cube. Where instead of a blank environment, Rafman has created a space that

empowers his vision, through the composition of the installations as well as through the light, the

exhibition space of Zabludowicz Collection is full of impressions.

By showing modern art in an exhibition that is not in line with the philosophy of the white cube,

Rafman lets the appearance of his installations decide the composition of the room, not the other

way around. Rafman reclaims the methodology of reception aesthetics by respecting and embracing

the impression that the exhibition space has on the beholder’s reception of the work of art, rather

than trying to ignore the fact.

2.3 The Inscribed Beholder

An inscribed beholder is not a specific individual or specific individual’s interpretation. An

inscribed beholder, according to both Lundström and Kemp is a presumed beholder, inscribed in a

work of art, through interpretation and/or physical interaction suggested by the work of art. The 69

most important distinction of reception aesthetics is the function of the beholding being prescribed

in the artwork. Each work of art has an addressee, an ideal beholder. Kemp states the following ”In

communicating with us, it speaks about its place and its potential effects in society, and it speaks

about itself.” 70

According to aesthetics of reception, a work of art has to be read according to the “signs and

means” by the work, which varies depending on its place in time sociohistorically, and also their

Kemp, 1998, p.185.68

Lundström, 2015, p. 24.69

Kemp, 1998, p. 184.70

!23

aesthetic statements. The communication does not occur between the beholder and the artist but 71

between the beholder and the work of art, another conversation that is taking place is the one

between the artist and the inscribed beholder, the ideal beholder which filters through the artwork.

There is an abstract dialogue between the beholder and the artist where they can only envision each

others intentions.

The place in time in which the work of art originated from and the social ideals ruling at that time,

as well as the politics that art generates and represent across history is acknowledged by reception

aesthetics. By doing so, through signals and indications from the artist to the implicit beholder, the

artwork reveals the ideals of the time and the sociohistorical circumstances in which it was created.

Anna Lundström describes the methods in which she is applying in her study:

Focus was also put more precisely on how each exhibition engaged or addressed the presumed

spectator. This spectator was to be understood as a position inscribed in each exhibition. In this sense, the spectator was both the result of the different addresses of exhibition situation and a consequence of the interpretation of these situations. To stress that this sector was partly a result of the interpretation I chose to use the expression inscribed spectator, rather than Wolfgang Kemp’s more established implied spectator. 72

A presumed beholder is inscribed in Rafman’s installations at Zabludowicz Collection through

physical interaction. Rafman's aim with the sculptures and environments created around his video

work, the installations, was to introduce the exhibition visitor to the experience of a gamer in a troll

cave, the installations represents the fading border between the real and the virtual and means to

expose the inscribed beholder to a comfortable and claustrophobic experience. 73

The inscribed beholder revels that Rafman, through these installations, aims to teach and alert the

exhibition visitor about individuals whose life existence unfolds in a virtual world and the residue

subsequent of their material life. He also aims to inform the inscribed beholder of a generation and

a contemporary culture that is neglecting memory in its traditional form, to relay on digital media to

memorise for them inside.

Kemp, 1998, p.18371

Lundström p.164.72


(Acc 17-11-2015).!24


The videos show that the artist does not intend to reveal their source of material to the inscribed

beholder, the conclusion being that he does not intend to mock the online community that he is

leading the material from. But by understanding the source of the material, the inscribed beholder

would interpret the videos in a more profound way.

There is a different understanding of the material within the online communities, where the videos

also are posted, the change of context naturally come with new prearranged interpretive spheres.

Kemp states that the acknowledgement of the change in context is crucial:

There is a different understanding of the material within online communities where the videos also

are posted and the change of context that naturally comes with new prearranged interpretive

spheres. Kemp states that the acknowledgement of the change in context is crucial:

It is just as important to discover the processes that can provoke a change in context, that is,

not to evaluate the work of art one-sidedly under the conditions of just its first and latest appearance, but to follow work and context throughout the history that they have mutually cre-ated. 74

A vital part of Rafman’s art practice is capturing the possibilities and experiences of a virtual reality

on video, and presenting it as art, or to source material from an online community, edit this material,

and present it as art. The videos are then posted online, linked to on the artist’s website, and if

possible, posted back in the forum in which its original material was sourced, to witness the online

communities reactions generated by his actions. This having been achieved, another inscribed 75

beholder must be acknowledged, separate from the one inscribed at the exhibition space. This

inscribed beholder is the individual user of the different online communities that are exposed to the

video by the artist.

3. CONCLUSIONS

This study started with the following questions - How are the influences that inspired the exhibition,

presented in the exhibition?, How do Jon Rafman’s installations at Zabludowicz Collection engage

the beholder? And, how can the composition of the exhibition space be described?

Kemp, 1998, p.185.74


(Acc 17-11-2015).!25


The influences that inspired to the exhibition are developed out of the artist’s fascination of the

fading border between the real and the virtual, and imagination and reality, which he is approaching

in different ways. According to Kemp’s reception aesthetics, each work of art has an addressee,

which works to attract an implicit beholder. In communication with the implicit beholder, the work

of art speaks about itself, and reveals its sociohistorical place and effects in society. Kemp lists three

specific tasks for aesthetics of reception; “(1) it has to discern the signs and means by which the

work establishes contact with us; and it has to read them with regard to (2) their sociohistorical and

(3) their actual aesthetic statements.”76

The signs and means in which the artworks reveals themselves at Zabludowicz Collection, are

presented in the content of the videos which are representing both contemporary aesthetics and

sociohistory. Through contemporary, innovative technology such as “Oculus rift”, the installations

act as an archive result made by an amateur anthropologist with the ambition to capture

contemporary human behaviour. The exhibition space is dark, which draws attention to the many

screens displayed. The light in the main exhibition space is blue, referencing UV light, a common

feature of a LAN (Local Area Network) or gaming environment. Artsy titled their review of the

exhibition: “Jon Rafman’s Participatory Playground Hits Harder Than You’d Think”. It is a 77

controversial composition of the space, which along with the purposely engaging installations

creates an enjoyable environment. It is amusing to participate and to watch others do the same. The

artist's approach can be viewed as lighthearted.

Rafman has created the opposite of the white cube, by embracing the prearranged interpretive

sphere and leading them to empower his installations and videos. The environment of Zabludowicz

Collection is filled with impressions of the placing of the work and the visual construction that leads

the exhibition visitor through the exhibition whilst also keeping them entertained and curious.

The installations address a presumed beholder whose role, through interpretation and physical

engagement with the work of art, completes it. The installations and sculptures presented at

Zabludowicz Collection are an actualised environment portraying human desire of living in a virtual

reality whilst being trapped in a material world, that exists within contemporary culture.

Kemp, 1998, p.183.76



!26


The video Still Life (Betamale) (2013) is shown in an environment that shows the extreme physical

border between a material existence and a life in a virtual reality. The rest of the installations shown

at the exhibition are constructed in a similar way, except from the two other examples that I am

presenting in this study. The inscribed beholder is exposed to comfort and an immersive experience,

whilst simultaneously experiencing the claustrophobia that comes with being completely shut

within a space.

Sticky drama (2015), as an installation does not embrace the beholder with the same obvious

engagement as the environment surrounding Still Life (Betamale) (2013), except for the bench,

placed in front of the large screen playing Sticky drama (2015), where a presumed beholder is

suggested to sit and watch the video, and the actualised teenage bedroom behind the bench, which

exists in reality as well as within the video. The direction of the work cannot be explained only

through the inscribed role of the physical space alone.

If it is possible to consider the exhibition space as a framework of experience instead of a physical

place, and if the reality outside of the exhibition space was considered the same, there will be no

barrier between the exhibition space and reality. The framework of the artwork will not be

determined by the physical space it is in, but the inscribed beholder whom it is addressing. The role

of the beholder is to link these external components together.

Sculpture Garden (Hedge Maze) (2015) has a different way of engaging the beholder, the work is

incomplete without the physical interaction of the beholder. The beholders response is inscribed

into the structure of the work, which reduces the beholder’s individual choices of interaction.

Lundström describes a discovery made in her study, which I have been able to relate to the results

of my own study. The self reflections made within the role as an inscribed beholder creates a 78

distance between the work of art and the inscribed beholder themselves, a distance that does not

match the ideal of the conversation between the inscribed beholder and the artwork. When the

beholder takes on the role as the implicit beholder, and in a sense, becomes a part of the artwork. It

is impossible to direct any subjective critic to the work of art or to form an honest opinion.

Rafman concludes that the immersion experienced by the inscribed beholder in Sculpture Garden

(Hedge Maze) makes it impossible to document the beholders experience of the work from within,

consequently, the installation has only been documented through images of the inscribed beholder


!27

wearing the device, acting as a coproducer of the work.78 Rafman describes this as a welcoming

but unintentional aftereffect of the installation. According to the artist, the beholder of the

immersion same again with immersion between the work of art and its physically inscribed

beholder, is, in a way, the beholder of the work itself. He later realised that this has been the result

of the exhibition as a whole.79

4. SUMMARY

This study has applied Wolfgang Kemp’s theory of reception aesthetics, as detailed in his article

The Work of Art and Its Beholder: The Methodology of the Aesthetics of Reception (1998), to the

Jon Rafman solo exhibition at Zabludowicz Collection.

Rafman is a self-described amateur anthropologist, and a filmmaker in addition to being an artist.

Within his art practice he researches online communities and subcultures to gather material, his

work is often presented as videos. Rafman never intends to reveal the original source of the content

shown in his videos, nor does he intend to expose or humiliate the online communities. He does,

however, intend to involve the online community in the last stage of his work, by releasing the

video in the same context from where he has taken the material. With the intention to observe the

online community’s reaction to his actions. Rafman creates some of his videos in collaboration with

musician, composer and producer Daniel Lopatin where the videos double as music videos for

Daniel Lopatin also known as Oneohtrix Point Never.

The installations shown at Zabludowicz Collection encourages the beholder to physically engage

with them, the concept has developed out of the artist’s fascination with “troll caves”, and the

impossibility of escaping the material world for a life in a virtual reality. The installations at

Zabludowicz Collection are involving two different beholders but are directly addressing one,

which is the inscribed beholder, who is physically engaging with the installation. The second one is

the beholder of the inscribed beholder, who is witnessing the immersion of the inscribed beholder

and the work of art. The common factor for the inscribed beholder, engaging with the work and for

the beholder of the same - they are both exposed to, and educated in the possibilities of a virtual

existence, and of the boundary between the real and the virtual, and imagination and reality.




By disclosing the art practice of Rafman and applying a close study to the exhibition space as well

as a selection of three installations taken from where, I have gathered following results. According

to reception aesthetic, the work of art reveals itself through signs and means in which it establish

contact with us. This has been done through the source of content and aesthetics of the videos, and

innovative technology such as the “Oculus rift”, presented as an archived anthropological study of

contemporary human behaviour which represents both contemporary aesthetics and sociohistory.

The composition of the exhibition space is empowering the artist vision and is directing a desired

interpretive situation for the beholder, a controversial exhibit situation of modern art which has to

be acknowledged as a statement against the established gallery space of the “white cube”.

The videos enable the exhibition to spread outside the framework of Zabludowicz Collection, into

the virtual world, addressing the inscribed online beholder. This possibility enables the artist to

enter into an intense conversation with his ideal beholder, whilst they, in most cases anonymously,

share their thoughts about the video for the artist to see, informing him how it is affecting their

virtual existence.

!29

5. BIBLIOGRAPHY

5.1 Books and journals

Kemp, Wolfgang, ”The Work of Art and Its Beholder: the Methodology of the Aesthetic of

Reception” The subjects of art history: Historical objects in contemporary perspectives, (eds.)

Mark Cheetham, Cambridge, 1998.

Lundström, Anna, Former av politik: Tre utställningssituationer på Moderna Museet 1998–2008,

Makadam förlag, Diss. Stockholm, 2015.

O’Doherty, Brian, Inside the White Cube: The Ideology of the Gallery Space, Berkeley and Los

Angeles: University of California Press, Los Angeles, 1999 (1976).

5.2 Magazine Articles

Geslani, Michelle: “Oneohtrix Point Never’s video “Still Life (Betamale)” takes you into dark

underbelly of Internet”, http://consequenceofsound.net/2013/09/oneohtrix-point-nevers-video-still-

life-betamale-takes-you-into-dark-underbelly-of-internet/, Consequence of sound, 25-09-2013 (Acc

20-11-2015).

Gottschalk, Molly: “Jon Rafman’s Participatory Playground Hits Harder Than You’d Think”,

https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-jon-rafman-s-participatory-playground-hits-harder-than,

Artsy, 17-10-15 (Acc 17-11-2015).

H. Sanchez, Gabriel: “Jon Rafman”, http://artforum.com/words/id=47380, Art forum, 07-03-14,

(Acc 17-11-2015).

Petty, Felix: “Jon Rafman’s internet anthropology”, https://i-d.vice.com/en_gb/article/jon-rafmans-

internet-anthropology, i-D Magazine Online, 2015-10-14 (Acc 17-11-2015).

Penny, Jenn: Video: “Oneohtrix Point Never's "Still Life (Betamale)" Explores Fetish Sites”, http://

pitchfork.com/news/52426-video-oneohtrix-point-nevers-still-life-betamale-explores-fetish-sites/,

Pitchfork, 25-09-2013 (Acc 17-11-2015).

!30

http://consequenceofsound.net/2013/09/oneohtrix-point-nevers-video-still-life-betamale-takes-you-into-dark-underbelly-of-internet/




http://pitchfork.com/news/52426-video-oneohtrix-point-nevers-still-life-betamale-explores-fetish-sites/

5.3 Websites

Artsy Editorial: “The Top 15 Emerging Artists of 2015” https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-

the-top-emerging-artists, Artsy, 16-12-2015 (Acc 17-11-2015).

An introduction to Oculus Rift by the developers of the device: https://developer.oculus.com/

documentation/intro-vr/latest/concepts/bp_intro/ (Acc 17-11-2015).

PDF document of the comments generated by 4can users on the video work Still life (betamale), from when it was posted on the 4chan website: http://jonrafman.com/4chan.pdf, p. 3 (Acc 17-11-2015).

Seventeen Gallery: “Jon Rafman, A Man Digging” http://www.seventeengallery.com/exhibitions/

jon-rafman/ (Acc 17-11-2015).

The start page of the online forum 4chan: http://www.4chan.org/ (Acc 17-11-2015).

The official website of Jon Rafman: http://jonrafman.com/ (Acc 17-11-2015).

Zabludowicz Collection: “Jon Rafman 8 October–20 December 2015” http://


Zabludowicz Collection: “Jon Rafman b.1981, Montreal, Canada” http://


The Youtube channel of Oneohtrix Point Never: https://www.youtube.com/user/

OneohtrixPointNever (Acc 17-11-2015).

5.4 Films and Broadcast Media

A digging man (2013) video work by Jon Rafman: http://dismagazine.com/dystopia/49510/a-man-

digging/ (Acc 17-11-2015).

Kool Aid Man (2008-2011) video work by Jon Rafman: http://koolaidmaninsecondlife.com/ (Acc

17-11-2015).

Nine Eyes (2009- ongoing) video work by Jon Rafman: http://9-eyes.com/ (Acc 17-11-2015).

Still life (betamale) (2013) video work by Jon Rafman: http://jonrafman.com/betamale/ (Acc

17-11-2015).

!31

https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-the-top-emerging-artists

https://developer.oculus.com/documentation/intro-vr/latest/concepts/bp_intro/

http://jonrafman.com/4chan.pdf

http://www.seventeengallery.com/exhibitions/jon-rafman/

http://www.4chan.org/




https://www.youtube.com/user/OneohtrixPointNever

http://dismagazine.com/dystopia/49510/a-man-digging/


http://9-eyes.com/


Sticky drama (Music video) (2015) video work by Jon Rafman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=td-e4i2BL_Q (Acc 17-11-2015).

Sticky drama - Prologue (2015) video work by Jon Rafman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=49EXKsu-jTs (Acc 17-11-2015).

5.5 Interviews

Live interview with Jon Rafman by Tom McCarthy at Zabludowicz Collection, 09-11-2015.

Information provided via email by David Hoyland, Director of Seventeen gallery, official

representatives of Jon Rafman in London, UK, 21-12-2016.

6. LIST OF IMAGES

Front cover image: Jon Rafman & Daniel Lopatin, production still from Sticky Drama, 2015. Photo:

Reuben Henry, Courtesy the artist and Zabludowicz Collection.

1. Still from the video of Still Life (Betamale), 2013. Installation view Jon Rafman, 2015 at

Zabludowicz Collection, London. Photo by Thierry Bal.

2. The interior of the room screening Sticky drama (2015), at Zabludowicz Collection. Installation

view Jon Rafman, 2015 at Zabludowicz Collection, London. Photo by Thierry Bal.

3. An overview of the space containing Sculpture Garden (Hedge Maze), at Zabludowicz

Collection. Installation view Jon Rafman, 2015 at Zabludowicz Collection, London. Photo by

Thierry Bal.

!32

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=td-e4i2BL_Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49EXKsu-jTs

jon rafman at zabludowicz collection898126/fulltext02.pdf · inside the white cube: the ideology of...

Documents