Chris Burden’s Provocative TV Art in the 1970s
Chris Burden’s 1970s television work wasn’t just commercials; it was a deep exploration of TV’s power to shape belief. While his performance art often involved physical risk, his TV work delved into psychology, questioning how authority and media construct our understanding of the world.
Burden’s use of TVs in performances like Do You Believe in Television and Velvet Water highlighted the voyeuristic nature of the medium, distancing the audience from his often dangerous actions. This separation created alienation, prompting viewers to confront their passivity in the face of mediated experiences. His commercials, conversely, directly inserted his art into mainstream television, disrupting advertising and forcing viewers to question the medium’s authority.
Burden’s early TV work was influenced by mainstream television’s manipulative tactics and growing awareness of its impact. 1970s studies revealed the negative effects of excessive TV on mental development and critical thinking, reinforcing the idea that television was becoming the primary source of reality for many. This manipulation was exploited by politicians and advertisers, highlighting TV’s insidious power.
Inspired by this, Burden and other artists sought to expose TV’s influence. Their work aimed to deconstruct its psychological hold by appropriating its format and content. Artists like Bruce Nauman and Dara Birnbaum created disorienting installations and videos that challenged passive consumption, forcing viewers to engage more critically.
Burden’s most notorious piece, TV Ad, featured a disturbing 10-second clip of his performance Through the Night Softly, showing him crawling through broken glass. Aired during primetime on a local Los Angeles station, the ad shocked viewers with its stark imagery and contrast to typical commercials. This highlighted advertising’s absurdity and the unquestioned acceptance of its messages. By inserting his art into this space, Burden disrupted consumerism and forced viewers to confront his performance’s reality.
In Chris Burden Promo, he satirized the art world’s hierarchy by presenting himself alongside da Vinci and Picasso. By associating himself with these masters, Burden challenged validation methods and questioned the authority of art critics and institutions. This audacious self-promotion, delivered commercially, exposed the constructed nature of value and reputation. He used advertising’s language to subvert its purpose, highlighting the absurdity of self-proclaimed greatness.
His final commercial, Full Financial Disclosure, parodied post-Watergate transparency by revealing his modest income and expenses. This seemingly sincere act challenged the perceived wealth of established artists and revealed his financial investment in his TV work. By exposing the costs of accessing this powerful medium, Burden underscored the economic barriers to artistic expression and the hidden financial interests behind televised content. He revealed the significant portion of his income dedicated to buying airtime, highlighting the financial commitment required to challenge television’s dominant narratives.
Chris Burden, stills from Full Financial Disclosure, 1977
Burden’s performance Velvet Water, where he nearly drowned while observed through TV monitors, implicated the audience in his ordeal. The monitors showed Burden struggling to breathe underwater, forcing viewers to confront their inaction and the screen’s distancing effect. This highlighted television’s passive nature and its potential to desensitize viewers to real events. The juxtaposition of his struggle with the mediated image created powerful tension, questioning viewers’ roles as passive observers.
Ultimately, Burden’s TV work was a complex exploration of the medium’s power to shape belief and behavior. His performances and commercials challenged viewers to question television’s authority, confront their passivity, and engage with the world more critically. He didn’t aim to compete with TV’s reach but to expose its mechanisms and prompt viewers to question the presented reality. His legacy lies in his provocative use of the medium to challenge conventional thinking and inspire more critical engagement with television’s pervasive influence.
