Shane Aslan Selzer (Dual Degree, MFA/VCS 2004) is an artist, writer and organizer whose practice develops micro-communities where artists can expand on larger social issues such as exchange, critique and failure. Selzer is a founding member and Co-Director of Global Crit Clinic, an international peer learning network for artists working to diversify the field by sharing tools for participation. With Ted Purves, Shane is the co-editor of What We Want is Free: Critical Exchanges in Recent Art, first released in 2005, and recently updated. The book examines a twenty-year history of artistic productions that both model and occupy the various forms of exchange within contemporary society, from shops, gifts, and dinner parties to contract labor and petty theft.
- 6.26.2013 / Shane Aslan Selzer, Children’s Museum of Arts, Tweet
- 6.24.2013 / Shane Aslan Selzer on Panel About Playtime
- 6.21.2013 / Shane Aslan Selzer Edits Book, Speaks at MoMA
- 03.23.2012 / Shane Aslan Selzer Participates in Roundtable Discussion
About Shane Aslan Selzer’s Thesis Project
From Outside to Inside: Where is My Object Now?
The following essay uses the British psychoanalyst D. W. Winnicott’s “Summary of the Qualities of the Relationship Between an Infant and a Transitional Object” as a lens for viewing the relationship between specific artists and the sculptural objects they produce. In the larger thesis, which is situated by the historical lineage of Minimalism in the United States, Arte Povera in Italy, and the Neoconcretes in Brazil, these artists are Urs Fischer, based in Berlin and Los Angeles; Mark Manders, based in Amsterdam; and Jewyo Rhii, based in Korea. The essay presented here concentrates on Urs Fischer (Zurich born), placed in the arc of Minimalism from 1960s America. The numbered list points of the essay form the skeleton for an argument that uses psychoanalytical theory to understand contemporary art practices, putting them in a trajectory of artists working with the problem of subject and object relations. A discussion, also stemming from Winnicott’s list, reflects on the relevance of these theories in relation to a sculptural game, an action played to test the limits of the theory itself.