Paul McCarthy, Mechanical Pig, 2003-05, Courtesy Hauser & Wirth. |
|
Paul McCarthy, Performing the Western World |
S.M.A.K. By MAGNUS AF PETERSENS Like a sports commentator, I take frantic scribbled notes on the spectacle before me. I am in the basement of the Hauser & Wirth Gallery in London, situated in what was formerly a bank, designed by Sir Edward Lutyens in the 1920s. The basement itself is an old vault and suggests claustrophobia even to someone who is not normally uncomfortable in cramped spaces. “This time he’s really gone too far,” I say to myself. But I remember thinking that even when I saw Sailor’s Meat from 1975. Of course he goes too far. McCarthy nearly always does. In hindsight, I doubt that I was making notes to aid my memory — the scenes were so nightmarish that I probably could not forget them even if I tried. On the contrary, it was an attempt to distance myself from what I was witnessing. For McCarthy’s works are so invasive, frightening and loud that all critical detachment appears impossible. Prior to being in this bank vault, I had met and worked with McCarthy on several occasions. I knew him to be one of the most sympathetic, modest people I’ve ever met – erudite and attentive, a teacher who promotes his students, a successful artist who speaks in glowing terms of the artists who inspired him. This has been pointed out in most articles on McCarthy and is worth repeating since his art is so overwhelming that one easily confuses the man with the work. What he does, the bacchanalian chaos he generates and the terror and lust he arouses in most onlookers, is the result of an exceedingly conscious oeuvre — 40 years of hard work. Even if his method and oeuvre leave room for improvisation and intuition, they are by no means the work of a madman — this is obvious to anyone who is familiar with him and his place in art history, but to the uninitiated visitor who is confronted with his work for the first time it can be worth pointing out. Nor are these the autobiographical attempts of a disturbed mind to come to terms with his own personal problems. Paul McCarthy’s works incorporate a sharp social critique, which focuses on social and cultural traumas rather than on private issues. This is the dark side of the American Dream, of the consumer society we all live in, even in Sweden and the rest of Western Europe. He also touches on a variety of existential issues. But he can also be exceedingly comical, although the laughter often sticks in your throat. He is a clown, a buffoon in the Rabelaisian sense — his burlesque, dark humour has the subversive edge and undermining character that the Russian linguist and critic Mikhail Bakhtin specifically distinguishes in his book on Rabelais. McCarthy has been inspirational to several generations of artists and pioneered methods that are fairly common today. His way of creating sculptural video installations out of the sets he used in performance works, for instance, has been adopted by many others. Artists who have been considered influenced in one way or another by McCarthy include Cindy Sherman, Mike Kelley, Jason Rhoades, Jonathan Meese, John Bock, Jake and Dinos Chapman, to name a few, often referring to their fascination for the abject, for Dionysian excesses and a penchant for overloaded, baroque or grotesque aesthetics. Paul McCarthy moves in and out of his own oeuvre in a way that makes it hard to discern the chronology. Many themes return throughout his production, from the early years at art school to the present day. He repeats and recreates many works, and the repetition and translation, the transferral of certain works into other media, has emerged as a theme in itself. He also occasionally executes a work twenty years after making the preliminary sketches. For this exhibition he has created works based on ideas from the numerous notebooks he has amassed since the late 1960s, containing instructions for sculptures, videos and performances. Sometimes the same idea pops up more or less unchanged year after year. This repetition and recycling reflects his open attitude to the works — they are in a state of transformation. McCarthy sometimes engages in large projects where the works are incorporated in an ongoing process that alters previous presentations, since they merge with a constantly growing context. Therefore, neither the exhibition nor this essay are primarily arranged in chronological order, but more according to the subject matter and theme. However, in order to outline some sort of development process, I have divided the essay into three main sections that correspond to three periods in McCarthy’s oeuvre: Starting points (1966-1973) deals with several of the themes he processes throughout his work; The performance years (1973-1984) describes the period when McCarthy worked with audience-attended performance art and developed certain key themes that later recur in his work; the final section, Mechanical ballets, sculptures and video installations (1984- ), accounts for the work method that McCarthy still uses today. In 1984, he stopped doing performances which were focused on a live audience. After a few years of exploration, he started working with (often mechanical) sculptures and with large-scale film and video productions in which he expanded on his performance works and also involved other actors and used more elaborate sets. This essay attempts to provide an overview of his oeuvre and is complemented by two essays that delve deeper into particular facets: Iwona Blazwick writes about McCarthy’s figurative sculptures, while Thomas McEvilley studies his performance and video works. Starting points (1966-1973) Painting as action In 1966, he acquires a copy of Allan Kaprow’s volume Assemblages, Environments and Happenings (1966) and becomes aware of the Japanese Gutai group, Tetsumi Kudo, Wolf Vostell, and the happenings of Allan Kaprow. The same year, he finds out about the performances of Gustav Metzger and Ralph Ortiz. Jackson Pollock, Yves Klein’s Anthropometries (impressions left by nude female bodies covered in Klein’s patented blue pigment), Nam June Paik, who dips his tie in paint and uses it as a brush, and John Cage who drives a car across paper in Robert Rauschenberg’s Automobile Tire Print (1953), are some of the artists that worked in this spirit, though not all of them were known to McCarthy at the time. For McCarthy painting is intimately linked to performance, and in several of his earliest works that were documented photographically or on video McCarthy appears in the role of an action painter, as in Face Painting – Floor, White Line (1972), where he shuffles across the floor with a tin of white paint in front of him, dragging his body in the paint, and Whipping a Wall with Paint (1974), in which he dips a blanket in thin paint and flings it around and against the walls. Or Penis Brush Painting, Windshield, Black Paint (1974), where he dips his penis in paint and paints a windshield, in parody of the action painters. Variations on this theme recur in many of his performance works over the years, most specifically, perhaps, in Painter (1994), but also in, say, Bossy Burger (1991), Tokyo Santa (1996) and Piccadilly Circus (2003). In this borderland between conceptual art, performance and sculpture, the relationship and parallels between these superficially different phenomena is revealed. This is in evidence in many artists in the 1960s and 1970s, but is especially pronounced in the works of Paul McCarthy and Bruce Nauman. In an essay on Bruce Nauman, Janet Kraynak highlights the pragmatic linguistic philosophy originating in the British philosopher and linguist J.L. Austin’s theories on “speech acts”. By speech act Austin means a statement that is not solely descriptive but also constitutes some form of action. A promise, for instance, is a speech act. This approach to language as a performative tool fascinated many artists operating in the intersection between conceptual art and performance, including Bruce Nauman, Lawrence Wiener, Allan Kaprow and the Fluxus artists Yoko Ono and George Brecht. This does not mean to say that they were directly influenced by, or attempted to illustrate, Austin, but it does clarify the connection between conceptual art and performance-based art. One forerunner is John Cage, who replaced conventional graphic notation with terse, typed instructions in words and numbers. Minimalism McCarthy takes the minimalist cube — which is always empty in traditional minimalist art, not only literally, physically, but also metaphorically, in that it does not refer to anything but itself — and endows it with allusions to the human body, as inferred already by the titles, Dead H and Skull with a Tail. The cube transforms into a receptacle for something human, the outer shell representing skin, a thin membrane separating the elusive inside — meat, blood and guts, but also thoughts, feelings and ideas — from the outside world. This theme is repeated in Ketchup Sandwich (realised as variations in the 1970s, 1980s and in 2006), which consists of sheets of glass stacked up to form a cube. Between the sheets McCarthy has poured ketchup that is squeezed out by the weight of the glass. Here, the hollow, minimalist cube is replaced by a cube with its contents leaking — and the ketchup most obviously symbolising blood. This was the first work in which McCarthy used ketchup, an ingredient that was to become something of a trademark for him. Vented Cube, found in a drawing from 1975 but never constructed, is imagined as a minimalist cube with rows of vents built into the sides, for air to pass through, like a ventilation box. The venting suggests some form of inner pressure or odour that needs to be aired out – an image McCarthy uses to describe his art as a whole: “You may understand my actions as vented culture, you may understand my actions as vented fear.” Allusions to minimalism are also found in works such as The Three Boxes, (1972-1984) and The Trunks (1984), which utilise the minimalist cube as a shape but also present its opposite, filled as they are with content, meaning, history. The same applies to The Box (1999) externally shaped like a huge wooden crate, but inside containing an entire copy of his studio. The minimalist cube is also inferred in titles such as Brain Box, which refers to the skull as a box to hold all our thoughts and feelings. Looking Out, Skull Card (1968) is a simple piece of cardboard with two holes signifying the eyes. It is suspended in the air by a nylon thread. In her essay, Iwona Blazwick links this early work to McCarthys later use of masks in his performances. The masks have multiple purposes. They enable the artist to assume a persona — a role. These masks can be bought in toyshops or costume and gag shops and thus belong to popular culture, consumer society. They conjure up the B-horror movies that fascinate McCarthy — a mad serial killer is even more frightening in a smiling mask. The masks can portray American presidents or comic book characters, stereotypes with no facial mobility. McCarthy also uses dolls, stuffed animals and mannequins in numerous works, including performances, videos and sculptures. His focus on the tension between the outside and inside of the sculpture (and the human being) is thus expressed in both abstract and figurative works and is something of a dominant theme in McCarthy’s oeuvre. Hanging Hollow Torso (1966) consists of a doll with head, arms and legs missing. Through the holes where these once were attached we can look into the empty, hollow body. Body Cave (1990) is a plaster cast form of a lower body. Also his monumental inflatable sculptures consist mainly of inner emptiness. Admittedly, the most famous example, Blockhead (2003), a 35-metre tall Pinocchio figure with a cube for a head exhibited outside Tate Modern in London, contained gigantic fans, a steel structure and a candy dispenser; but on the whole, these inflatables are basically air filled balloons. Falling — on losing control This theme permeates McCarthy’s entire production. It is manifest in several of his filmed performances from the 1970s, for instance Spinning (1970), in which he spins round with arms extended in a rather diminutive room where his arms soon smack into the walls. It is also tangible in many works with a labyrinthine architecture and rotating or overturned spaces, such as the photographs Inverted Hallways and Inverted Rooms (1970), where the symmetry of the images prevents us from noticing immediately that the photographs have been mounted upside down; and the previously mentioned sculpture The Box. Variations on this theme include the rotating rooms or cameras, as in Picabia Love Bed, Dream Bed (1999), inverted cameras that confuse our senses, alter our spatial perception, and movements that create or reflect altered states of consciousness. The loss of control also recurs in the movements and words that are repeated like mantras in his performances and appear to put the artist in a trance. McCarthy appears, moreover, to be out of control in many videos where he acts hysterical, comical and pathetic, but where this can suddenly turn nasty, in the way that alcoholic, violent men sometimes go too far. The latent violence that sometimes breaks out always appears senseless and baffling — unlike the violence we encounter in the entertainment industry, media and politics, which people try to explain and sometimes even to justify. The formative power of social At an early stage in his career, McCarthy zoomed in on destructive art, where creating and destroying coincide. Saw/Hammer (1967) is one of his first performance works. On stage he and a friend smash up furniture to the accompaniment of “noise” music by a local rock group. They run amok with a hammer, a saw and a chainsaw and finally McCarthy falls off the stage. This performance generated one of the first surviving sculptures, Mannequin Head and Squirrel. This was the year after Gustav Metzger’s famous seminar Destruction in Arts Symposium in London, in which Wolf Wostell and Ralph Ortiz also participated. Metzger lectured at the art school where Pete Townshend was a student. Townshend was the guitarist in The Who, and his appearances were not wholly unlike the performance art of the time, especially when he smashed his guitar on stage, as Jimi Hendrix would also do a year or so later. Back home in Utah, Paul and his wife Karen McCarthy and friends formed The Up-River School, an art-collective that operated on the boundary between performance, art and music. They created parties and performed at events. Paul arrived at the name from a dream, and it reflects the group’s ambition to go against the stream. The growing interest in art as action in the late 1960s was linked to a more fervent interest in politics. That does not mean to say that this art should necessarily be interpreted as political, but one could justifiably claim that time as a phenomenon was beginning to be conceived as real, in the sense of the time it took to stage a performance, or the time it took to walk round an minimalist sculpture, or the time it took to see a video work — but also the time in which a work of art was created and to which it belonged — and on which it commented. The (impossible) timelessness on the Parnassus was no longer worth hankering for. The performance years (1973-1984) This role play, together with the use of masks and “costumes” and various props, is typical of McCarthy’s mature performance period. Another aspect of the role play in McCarthy’s performances is when the artist alternates between male and female roles, enacting and investigating forbidden and repressed territory, including unconventional sexuality, but also excrement and other body effluents — the things our severely potty-trained Western culture does its utmost to suppress. In Sailor’s Meat (1975), McCarthy appears in a blonde wig, eye shadow and underpants on a bed in a shabby hotel room. In bed with him is a lump of raw ground beef that he alternately caresses himself with, alternately straddles and tries to penetrate. He stuffs a hot dog down his pants and puts his penis in a hot dog bun. In another video, Tubbing, recorded the same evening, he is in a bathroom, sucking a hot dog, drinking ketchup and rubbing himself with hand cream, stepping in and out of the bathtub. On one occasion he seems about to throw up. The takes are long, and the feeling of disgust makes it hard to watch them to the end. The hardships McCarthy puts himself through have induced comparisons to the Vienna Actionists (Hermann Nitsch, Otto Muhl, Günter Brus and Rudolf Schwartzkogler) and to Carolee Schneeman. Thomas McEvilley instigated these associations in his seminal essay Art in the Dark, in Artforum, in 1983, in which he points at several topical similarities. He compares the works of these artists with religious rites, and the artist’s role with that of a shaman. On the one hand, there appear to be fundamental differences between McCarthy’s mediated, obviously theatrical performances, and those who were interested in performance as real events rather than as representational or symbolic. Chris Burden, for instance, has himself shot at for real in Shoot (1971). On the other hand, one could say that McCarthy presents the mediated, the enacted, just as frighteningly, as realistically as if it were indeed “real” or “authentic”, thereby cancelling out or repudiating the difference — which makes him postmodernly ironic rather than modern and heroic. The straight-faced instructions for archetypal myths, fertility rites and sacrifice are replaced here by references to the modern myths, produced by Hollywood and Disney. A similar parody is found in Bruce Nauman’s blinking neon work proclaiming that The True Artist Reveals Mystic Truth. One is forced to accede, however, that McEvilley’s analysis does reveal connections and possible interpretations that transcend the consensus that so easily arises when attempting to fit an artist’s oeuvre into art history. In 1983, McCarthy stopped doing live performances. Even if his previous performances often had only a diminutive audience, and although he continued to produce filmed enactments that resemble performances, this appears to have been a momentous decision for McCarthy. He packed all the remaining props he had used in performances from 1973 to 1983 in six trunks and shut them up. The suitcases then became a sculpture, The Trunks (1972-1984), which was included in several exhibitions — always with the trunks closed. McCarthy then had the idea of replacing himself (as the performance actor) with sculptures. His first attempt to create a performative humanoid, was Human Object (1982) — a rudimentary mannequin with a featureless head with only a mouth, a box-like torso with a dildo in place of a penis and a rubber sex toy vagina. The audience is encouraged to talk to the object and can feed the mannequin, the food or drink dribbles through the body and runs out through an orifice. His idea of replacing himself with a machine can also be interpreted symbolically/ metaphorically. Eva Meyer-Hermann asks in an essay, “Is that what remains, a mechanical spectacle that defines both the inner and outer world? What remains of the world when myths have been unveiled?” In 1992 he opened the Trunks and photographed the objects inside: rubber masks, ketchup bottles and jars of mayonnaise, knives, toys, kitchen utensils, mutilated dolls, and so on. The photographs, Propo (1992) were exhibited together with The Trunks. He then stood the sculpture Human Object on top of The Trunks, forming a totality, a “closure”. Nowadays, the three works are always exhibited together in this way. Mechanical ballets, sculptures Pop Hollywood As a performance artist, McCarthy progressively moved towards larger and more complex works involving role play and props. The fact that he took the step into film and video works using sets and sometimes several actors appears only natural. His first work in this vein is Family Tyranny. But even if Hollywood is an essential backdrop and a context for McCarthy’s work, his method and expression are obviously wholly different to those of the Hollywood production. When McCarthy invited his artist friend Mike Kelly to participate in the work, his only instructions were: “I’m the father, you’re the son.” Bossy Burger (1991) is the first of McCarthy’s works for which the video set was preserved as a sculpture/installation. The shabby, grimy, primitive set, which was given to McCarthy from a television studio, bears distinct marks of his antics. It had originally been used in the old TV sitcom Family Affair. In the video, McCarthy wears an Alfred E. Neuman mask, clown shoes and a cook’s outfit. Like practically all of McCarthy’s characters, he appears to be captive in the setting. The architecture is a sealed world that restricts the actors’ possibilities and movements. The figures McCarthy plays do their utmost to break open the architecture. They attack the walls with drills, saws and other instruments, to open new windows – peepholes against which they press their faces. This is a theme that fascinated McCarthy even in his earliest performance works, with titles that eloquently describe what they are all about: Making a Window Where There is None (1970), Pounding a Line of Holes in the Wall with a Solid Steel Rod (1970), Plaster Your Head and One Arm Into a Wall (1973). In the 1990s, McCarthy also performed numerous works jointly with Mike Kelley. The installation Heidi: Midlife Crisis Trauma Center and Negative Media-Engram Abreaction Release Zone (1992) juxtaposes corrupt culture with pure, innocent nature. The sick girl lives in the city and the healthy Heidi lives in the alps. But it all goes horribly wrong, the old grandfather and Peter have unclean thoughts (which they don’t hesitate to put into action), and Heidi gets a tattoo. The tattoo is a reference to the rigorous theoretician (and practitioner) of modern architecture, Adolf Loos, who writes in Ornament and Crime (1908) that the wish to decorate is unsound and degenerate — an inclination in which only criminals and “savages” can indulge. The work consists of sets, sculptures, paintings and a stuffed goat. It also includes an hour-long video, Heidi (1992), which is now considered to be a classic. Fresh Acconci (1995), An Architechture Composed of the Paintings of Richard M. Powers and Francis Picabia (1997) and Sod and Sadie Socks (1998) are other major collaborations with Mike Kelley. A common denominator is the vast array of references to phenomena which may appear at first glance to be disparate and impossible to consolidate, but which are interwoven in a form of paranoid chain of associations, into a critique of both highbrow and lowbrow culture and the norms and values that shape the individual. Serious art, not least, is exposed to breakneck parody, an element that recurs in McCarthy’s Painter (1994), one of his most comical and hysterical video installations. Sporting a blond wig, he paints, bickers with his gallery owner and stumbles around in clown shoes and what appears to be a painter’s smock or a hospital gown — but without pants. Since the early 1990s, McCarthy has explored roles and themes relating to the mythos of popular culture: Pinocchio, Santa Claus, the Western, pirates. The Western theme is part of the mythology of American history, with an accoutrement of stereotypes that have been established through countless Hollywood productions. Saloon Theater (1995–96), Saloon Film (1995), Yaa-Hoo Town and Bunkhouse (1996), F-Fort (2003–2005) and Wagons (2003–2005) are all works that focus on the wild west of the movie world. Caribbean Pirates (2003-2005) a project comprised of The Frigate, The Cakebox, The Houseboat, and The Underwater World and video works, Pirate Party (2005) and Houseboat Party (2005). This piece, which is loosely based on the Disneyland attraction Pirates of the Caribbean, is a collaboration that Paul McCarthy and his son Damon McCarthy have been working on for several years. In addition to McCarthy himself, the later works feature other participants, including professional and non-professional actors. To enter the hall where the enormous reddish-brown fibreglass pirate ship, the house-boat and the mechanical Underwater World is rocking up and down and sideways, is like descending into one of the circles of hell. But there is plenty of jovial and burlesque buffoonery, along with rage, disgust and terror. The pirate ship is strewn with silicon arm and leg prostheses, with hoses that have been filled with film blood. Projections of the pirates’ ruthless orgies of brutality, gluttony and sex are shown on the walls and in the adjoining rooms. Both the Western projects and the pirate project can be read as a criticism of colonialism and global capitalism — cowboys, pioneers and pirates who venture to unknown regions where they can engage unseen in plunder, rape and torture. In the Western project Paul and Damon McCarthy only issue a few simple instructions and then step back to let the “soldiers” film one another — the chaos is built into the structure and things quickly start to get out of hand. In the historiography of modern art, the principle of reduction is highly thought of. Paul McCarthy’s aesthetic, however, tends in the opposite direction, and this in itself constitutes a criticism against the modernist striving for purity. His large-scale projects in recent years consist of three huge installations, numerous sculptures and drawings, tens of thousands of photos and more than one hundred hours of video. It may seem remarkable that such a baroque stream of images can maintain such a consistently high quality. In McCarthy’s kitchen we discuss the physical invasiveness and looming danger of the enormous installation The Underwater World. McCarthy who has periodically made a living as a construction worker and knows about the forces involved, says that many museum visitors today don’t realise that they need to be cautious when they approach an enormous mechanical work such as this. I mention Chris Burden’s monumental sculpture with a balancing steam roller, and some of the works by Bruce Nauman and Richard Serra, and ask if he believes these overwhelming sculptures which evoke physical sensations are typically American. McCarthy refutes this and insists that he is not a macho artist. But he relates a short anecdote about an encounter with a sculpture by Richard Serra, and the gist of the story, I believe, has some relevance to his own work: In an almost empty museum McCarthy enters a square gallery with doors at both ends. From each corner of the room a mighty iron sheet juts out diagonally to the middle of the gallery. They don’t quite meet but leave a relatively narrow passageway. In the gallery he meets one other visitor, who sniffs and shakes his head disdainfully, looks at McCarthy and asks, “Is this supposed to be art?” McCarthy replies, “What I find interesting is that it appears to me that the only thing holding these enormous iron sheets upright is the corners of the room.” The man stops dead, regards the iron sheets that probably weigh several tons, sees how they are wedged into the corners of the gallery — turns on his heel and runs out. “I think he got it!” McCarthy chuckles. Perhaps this physical reaction, the realisation that the work before us is potentially dangerous — is a veritable sign of actually having understood the work — and perhaps this also applies to the feelings of disgust, terror and laughter that most of us experience immediately when confronted with many of McCarthy’s works. While being redolent with art historic influences and current political references, more than anything they hit you right in the guts. |
Paul McCarthy, Caribbean Pirates, 2001-05. Collection of the Artist, Courtesy Hauser & Wirth Zürich London.
Paul McCarthy, Daddies Bighead, 2003, Installation at Tate Modern, North Landscape, Courtesy: Hauser and Wirth Gallery London/Zurich and Luhring Augustine, New York, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Santa Claus with a Butt-Plug, Antwerp.
Paul McCarthy, Spaghetti Man, 1993, Collection FRAK.
Paul McCarthy, Mutant, 1994, Collection of the Vancouver Art Gallery, Vancouver.
Paul McCarthy, Bunkhouse, 1996, Courtesy Phillips de Pury & Company.
Paul McCarthy, Butt-Plug, Multiple.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, ©Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy. \ Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy.
Paul McCarthy, Grand Pop 1977, Los Angeles California, 1977, 1995 {printed}, © Paul McCarthy. |
Paul McCarthy, Bossy Burger, 1991, Courtesy Hauser & Wirth. |
|