The Service Project: Winfield Mounds
David JP Hooker and Greg Halvorsen Schreck. 2011
more work by Greg Schreck

This is the first time I’ve written about this project, it’s taken me most of a year to understand it this much…

The Service Project is an ongoing exploration of place, ritual, and identity. It involves a performance in which I serve tennis balls in a particular space for an extended period of time. Sometimes the space is of special significance (Winfield Mounds, above, is an ancient Native American burial ground, all but forgotten in the Western Chicago suburbs).

I love tennis. I played tennis competitively as a junior, and still enjoy playing tennis today. Hitting tennis balls is so much a part of my muscle memory that it is practically in my DNA. But I also recognize it is a sport fraught with tension: it is primarily seen as an “elitist” sport, played mostly by the upper classes. As such it is a sport which calls in question the distribution and use of resources: environmental, economic, and temporal (in this way it is not unlike art).

By hitting serves in different locations, I hope to find a way to personally commune with the spaces, to call attention to them, to perhaps even sanctify them through ritualistic action. At them same time I want to acknowledge the tensions inherent in the action.
The pun in the project title is intentional. To me, this project asks fundamental questions about the nature of art: What is the nature and purpose of art? Does art serve a purpose?  Can art be of service? It is my hope that the work is paradoxical, perhaps even ironic, without being cynical.

more about this project, including some video excerpts, are available from my website.

For me, the interesting thing about this list is how few ceramic artists are on it. What does that mean, exactly? Rather, what are the implications for my artistic practice?

In no particular order…

• Tehching Hsieh
• Marina Abramovic
• Don Pilcher
• Martin Puryear
• Richard Tuttle
• William Kentridge
• Lilly McEroy
• Robert Brady
• Akio Takamori
• Kirk Mangus
• Pepon Osorio
• Krzysztof Wodiczko
• Guy Chase
• Charles Ray
• Jan Yager
• Vija Celmins
• Arturo Herrera
• Kimsooja
• Yinka Shonabare
• Andrea Zittel

Well, as you may be able to tell from the notes, I thought yesterday’s sermon was a doosy. A three pager. It unfolded a bit like a Thomas Hardy novel: there’s a long “set-up” at the beginning, but then things start happening rapidly, and you can then see how all the pieces fit together. At that point your mind is playing catch-up. This is one of the things I love about Father Martin’s sermons.

In short, the sermon was an unpacking of Matthew 25: 1-13, with the emphasis being on love rather than faith (admittedly, impossible to separate completely, as Father Martin Pointed out). What really got me excited was a quote from Luther (not surprising, for those who know me) about the nature of Love. Basically it comes to this: God’s love creates the object it loves, human love seeks love in that which already exists.  Simple enough, and logical enough. God creates ex nihlo, we do not. But the implications are staggering. God produces, we consume.  God’s perfect love is completely sacrificial, while our love is ultimately selfish. At least that was my reading, or perhaps the what I needed (not wanted) to hear. Of course, with the Holy Spirit’s help (and ONLY with that  help) we can learn to love as He does.

The other main points of the sermon had to do with both waiting and acting. Waiting for Jesus, and also being active in the world because He is already present, and in the places we think we are least likely to find Him.

As I said, it was a novel.

Point is, all this is very timely for me because I am beginning a series of posts for Gideon Strauss on “What I Love.” I will link here when they are up (it may be a month or so). I have started a list….

The list is (intentionally) both very material and based primarily on very ordinary things. It is interesting to think about my relationship to these things in relation to “love=consuming/ love= producing.” As an visual artist constantly working in/with the material world the relationship between consumption/ production/ stewardship/ redemption is always present, and often filled with tension. OK, that’s probably too many slashes for one sentence, but I hope you get the gist of it. I’m guessing this might all show up in my posts…

ok, so really these are notes from two sermons and an Adult Ed Class. The first is from Revd Mary Baker’s excellent breakdown of “Jesus as Priest,” The second (three pages worth) is from Mike Strachan’s mind blowing exploration of (primarily) Matthew 22- btw he started the sermon stating how much he hated it, but really, it was moving. The third is from today’s sermon, shortened a bit by a wonderful baptism, by Father Martin.  Although it was shorter than usual, it was none the less eloquent, and was well crafted to perfectly set up the sacrament.

oh yeah, and the last picture is my son’s illuminated letter “S’ that he made today.  Connects to this post, somehow.

What strikes a big chord with me personally in all of this are two phrases from the past two weeks. First, Mike’s challenge that we (the Church) are to be in the business of working with God to subject all of the created order to the Lordship of Jesus Christ, and the second is Father Martin’s reference to Martin Luther’s statement from a Christmas sermon that God becomes man so that man can become God. Sorry can’t quote that exactly- not sure I wrote it down faithfully. But I’m pretty much for any quotation of Luther.

These statements together make me think about trends in contemporary art, or more specifically contemporary sculpture. I’m thinking specifically about sculptors who emphasize mundane materials, recontextualized, both in galleries and outside of them. Sometimes these artists are falsely (I think) put in the “anti-aesthetic” camp. But I think what they are doing is as much about lifting up the “lowly” material as it is disrupting the “sacred” space (usually gallery). When you change medium you change everything about your understanding of both the concept and the medium. So important to realize that, so easy to forget it.

Here’s some artists I think about in relation to these quotes:

Judy Pfaff

Wolgang Laib

Tara Donovan

Guy Chase

Charles Ray here and here

There are plenty others, to be sure. Feel free to chime in with others.

A new piece I worked on today. I’ve got new markers, which I hope make the construction a little more fully dimensional. I hope it makes the drawings tie in with the sculpture a little better. (see below)

Meek Construction
earthenware
2011

Just about every week I take notes on the sermon in my sketchbook. From time to time I’ll publish them here. My ultimate goal is conversation, not critique.

This week I’d like to give a big shout of thanks to Michael Strachan for beautifully opening up this passage from Matthew 22.  I am so amazed at the depth of understanding he brings; his ability to connect the language from one text to other texts, which brings a totally new dimension to the passage. In this case, I was amazed by the power of Jesus’ words. I have always read this passage as “Look how clever Jesus was to “wriggle of the hook”– to escape the trap set for him by Pharisees. But Jesus doesn’t just wriggle off the hook- he puts the Pharisees, and by extension most of the rest of us (myself included), on it.

On another note- what an amazing anthem by Nathan Walhout. It was so emotionally powerful. We have a “no clapping,” rule at AllSouls, and I understand the rationale, but when something like this is offered I have to question it. Applause is a way for the audience to respond, to have a chance to participate. We get a chance to respond during the Eucharist (Christ has died. Christ is risen. Christ will come again). Is there something we could do here? Even having a moment of silence would be nice. I felt like I was still trying to process the music when it was time to move on.

Anyway- I’m making too big a deal of this. Main point: Rock on, Nathan!

http://civa.org/civablog/quilt-a-new-resolution/#more-841

The Fourth Sunday of Epiphany
Collect
God our creator,
who in the beginning
commanded the light to shine out of darkness:
we pray that the light of the glorious gospel of Christ
may dispel the darkness of ignorance and unbelief,
shine into the hearts of all your people,
and reveal the knowledge of your glory
in the face of Jesus Christ your Son our Lord,
who is alive and reigns with you,
in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, now and for ever.

This work is one of the more conceptually oriented in the book. The piece was created by writing a word–”believe” on one page and “breathe” on another–with each breath for 60 consecutive breaths. The words were written with a quill pen.

This is more challenging than it may fist appear: it’s actually hard to breathe in a steady, rhythmic way when you are conscious of every breath (you can see where I had to rush through a word at times). Also, the pen has to be dipped, and the tip wiped of excess ink, with every word. Plus, you have to keep count; oh, and try not to misspell the word. (Ever notice how the more times you write a word repeatedly the more it looks wrong?)I actually made a video of my writing but I didn’t realize that it was out of focus until I was done (the camera battery was on it’s last legs). sigh.

By the way, if you have the time and inclination, I would encourage you to try this little project for yourself–let me know what you think.

To me, this piece makes several connections: to spiritual disciplines, and liturgy; to Medieval monks and the copying of manuscripts; to breath prayer.  I also don’t want to leave out the connection to the disciplinary writing of sentences I had to do when I got in trouble in third grade. (I still remember the actual sentence I had to write: ” I will conduct myself in an orderly manner at all times so as not to be a distraction to my class.”) All of these connections, along with the visual similarities of the words, lead me to ask certain questions about the nature of these two things. What about belief is voluntary and natural, what is forced, what is conditioned response? What is the role of grace in this? Can I “command” myself to believe,  or for that matter can I command myself to breathe? When you, the viewer, see the pages, do you feel that I (or the book) am issuing a command to you?

This project (and the collect) makes me think of Mark 9:24, where the father of the boy with the unclean spirit exclaims “I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!”