During the Armory Show in early March, a new space in Chelsea opened called “X.” It’s a pretty bold name for a pretty bold space. X occupies the old Dia Beacon space that had been left unused for quite some time. The brains behind X – though she claims to be merely a board member – is gallerist Elizabeth Dee, and she managed to work out a one year deal with the current owner of the formerly empty space. For just 12 months, X will document the contemporary art world’s current transient state through forums, lectures, exhibitions and more. We spoke with Dee about X and about the current show of work by Ryan Trecartin and Lizzie Fitch up at her gallery.
WHITEWALL: You tend to represent artists that deal with conceptual, political, and social issues, like Ryan Trecartin and Lizzie Fitch's current show that explores technological development and society's infatuation with commodification. Why are you drawn to artists that deal with that kind of subject matter?
ELIZABETH DEE: I'm interested in artists who engage in expanded practices and this tends to often be manifested in the conceptual, political, and social areas. I have always searched for a more complex dialogue in the selection of artists for the gallery and am attracted to art that is responsive, commands its own territory, yet converses with its peers and can be discussed on potentially historical terms. We represent an intergenerational group of artists—the work of Renee Green, Adrian Piper, Josephine Meckseper and others, in the same gallery as younger artists like Trecartin/Fitch, which yields interesting associations and gives the gallery a point of view.
WW: Do you think art is an advantageous or appropriate medium through which to deal with these topics?
ED: Absolutely. If you look at this question historically, modernism was a political and social movement as well as a conceptual one. Abstraction was borne from similar impulses. It's impossible to look at art from any decade in an isolated way, the socio-political realities created a landscape for certain conversations to happen – furthering the historical potential and constructing a timeline. I think in those terms today.
WW: Do you feel like the recent art boom in large part, ignored conceptual art?
ED: The recent market phenomenon was a massive force of nature. I believe we're still making sense of this last cycle and seeing who benefited and where the damage occurred. In terms of "conceptual art," I will speak to the movement beginning in the 1960's, where in this last cycle certain artists were brought to new levels, certainly, with new categories of pricing. We've seen women artists from this period make an overdue jump, beginning a recalibration that should continue with the next period of growth. Museums are building collections in this area, filling in gaps and recommitting to certain artist's work. Adrian Piper is a great example of this, with support for her late '60s and early '70s work experiencing solid growth over the last 5 years. Additionally, artists of my generation (born in the 1970's) and younger artists (born in the 1980's) are approaching this movement, both in terms of inspiration and critique, something that over time, should bring further reconsideration of the importance of conceptual art.
WW: How is X a response to the political and economic climate? Why is it important to define our time at this moment? Are you hoping to find answers?
ED: The X Initiative is a gamble in the best sense. It's designed to provide the art world with a platform to create urgent and relevant programming with four to eight week lead times, which is an amazing challenge. This gives the space an opportunity to be much more responsive than a gallery, and certainly in direct contrast to museums and institutions. The time aspect of the project is becoming central to the weekly and daily programming of the space and how participants and visitors are engaging with the project. It's fascinating to watch 50 advisory board members approach this problem individually and collectively.
None of this could be possible had we not had such a global economic crisis and dramatic recession. Of course, we would like to find answers to this time as well as represent this 12 month period. Even if that doesn't happen, the success and/or failure will be interesting and will inevitably tell us something about the current moment. We are searching for meaning and also a recalibration that isn't conservative in its approach, and there seems to be genuine interest in possibly transforming or reinventing, in responding to sites, invigorating processes and transforming previous ways of thinking, as radical as that may sound.
WW: Do you see X as experimental? It set out to exist only for a year, but perhaps if it proves successful it will be continued?
ED: X is an experiment, yes. The time specificity of X is its true strength. It gives the initiative a spontaneity and yields possibilities that would not be available otherwise, so I don't think we are interested in seeing that change. To evolve into an institution would be counterintuitive.
WW: How do you make a space reflective of the transient nature of our culture at the moment?
ED: At X, the advisory board proposals envision projects that fit the platform and the unique timeframe. The artists involved have and will continue to make work on the premises and in relationship to the configuration of the space and the conceptual nature of the project. The board, comprised of artists, historians, dealers and collectors are organizing activities, programming, conversations and events that interest them and feel are pressing, given the current climate. The response has been overwhelming. We have an enormous talent pool to activate so what has been proposed and presented has been truly extraordinary.
WW: How do you balance your role as a gallery owner, and member of X?
ED: My advisory role at X feels, in some ways, like an extension of my role as an active member of the art world. To me, the original boundaries that once existed in the art world became irrelevant long ago. Galleries sometimes operate as museums, showing work with the aim to educate rather than profit financially. Artists often work as producers, sometimes of their own work and sometimes on behalf of others while collectors’ roles in the art world continue to move from more of a preservation model to something far more participatory. I am very interested in blurring these boundaries and traditions in my role as a dealer, which is why my involvement with X—engaging the 50 person board of advisors to think about the mission of X and to explore these shifting positions and their impact—very much feels like an extension of what I do at the gallery.
WW: In what way can and should collectors participate in X?
ED: The space provides a true international point of view in terms of exhibitions and weekly programming. For those who cannot be everywhere or travel extensively to see how the conversation about art is evolving, engaging with the space, viewing the exhibitions and coming to the events, can be enlightening and inform a larger understanding.
WW: Trecartin came out as one of the stars at the current New Museum Triennial. Why do you think that is?
ED: Ryan Trecartin has been in the international spotlight for three years, beginning with his 2006 participation in the Whitney Biennial and subsequent 2007 debut at our gallery in New York. I've been representing the artist's work since 2005 and have co-produced two projects, I-BE AREA and the 2009/2010 rotation, which is on view at the New Museum. He is in a unique position and contributing greatly to the conversation about the future of video and sculptural installations. It is a very exciting time.
Ryan Trecartin and Lizzie Fitch, The Aboutthing (in the air), 2009 [detail]. Mixed media installation with sound, dimensions variable, courtesy the artists and Elizabeth Dee, New York.
