Allan Kaprow’s Yard: Redundant Reinvention

Hauser & Wirth Gallery made their American debut with the opening of Allan Kaprow’s Yard. The exhibition consisted of “reinventions” of Allan Kaprow’s famous 1961 “happening” interpreted by three contemporary artists. In addition to this, the gallery provided various printed materials documenting and paying tribute to Yard and all its subsequent adaptations. Each “reinvention” was staged at different locations throughout the city; Yard (Sign) by Sharon Hayes at New York Marble Cemetery, Yard (Junkyard) by Josiah McElheny at the Queens Museum of Art, and Yard (To Harrow) by William Pope.L. at Hauser & Wirth. I especially focused on Pope.L.’s interpretation, being that it was situated in the actual gallery and shared the location with the supplemental materials- creating a more cohesive exhibition piece than the other two, which seemed to be floating out in NYC limbo.
Upon entering, a familiar smell immediately transported me to my grandfather’s auto shop. The lights flash red to white, and between these intervals you catch glimpses of what you are trying to walk through- mounds of black rubber tires. Toward the end of the room at your right is a shelf holding large black trash bags filled with mysterious threatening shapes (later you discover they are mannequins covered in Vaseline). Mirrored walls create the illusion that this bizarre rubber abyss goes on forever, while recordings of Pope.L.’s voice boom overhead with nonsensical phrases.
Pope.L himself describes the piece as a revival of Kaprow’s spirit of fun as well as his message of environmental consciousness. And although the idea of amusement is apparent in the playground-like construction of the tires, which encourages gallery goers to climb and haphazardly rearrange them, I found the eco-friendly concept harder to detect. The subtitle, Harrow, defined as preparation of soil for growth, is an obvious implication of nature, however this seems more in line with Pope.L.’s attempt to bridge past and present. Even more difficult to distinguish are lines between reinvention and reproduction. The similarities between Pope.L.’s Yard and Kaprow’s get to be quite confusing, and one leaves the gallery wondering if the piece was indeed paying tribute or just ripping it off. Ultimately, Hauser & Wirth Gallery’s revival of this fundamental artist and period of art history reminds us of how precarious reinventions can be. In the end perhaps it was best to simply leave “Yard” to the man who reinvented it best.