http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/arts/design/work-by-niki-de-saint-phalle-and-bruce-high-quality-foundation.html?pagewanted=1
This is a great article to read for many reasons. One it specifically mentions Charles Long's piece in Madison Square Park. Two it goes over a lot of issues that public art face in New York City that you wouldn't normally think about.
What stuck with me the most was the author's quote from Douglas Huebler, "The world is full of objects, more or less interesting; I do not wish to add any more."
Is it for the better that we make objects? Should we be focusing on concept?
What do you guys think? Is it just some crazy conceptualist's opinion?
Art really is opinion after all.
For me, the pictures in the slideshow of people interacting and engaging with the sculptures makes this quote from the article ring true for me.
ReplyDelete"There is another, more democratic — utopian, even — rationale for presenting this sort of art to the public. It might interrupt the usual flow of collective consciousness, diverting minds from routine compliance with the banal order of things and opening up ordinarily hidden vistas of imaginative vision."
Thanks for sharing!
Zac -
ReplyDeleteGreat article, really.
But I don't know if the question should be an either / or scenario.
Perhaps it can be a both / and.
As in both and object and concept.
Brian,
ReplyDeleteI agree on the notion of object/concept and object + concept. It is very well put. I've been trained that objects create concept.
I think a lot of "conceptual artists" make work that is literal and therefore the thought is this is what "conceptual" art is. Nothing more, nothing less.
I think their works, which are generally in fact objects by the way, are intended to put the conceptual idea in your head. I believe the objects I make are intended to do the same thing. A concept is more than just an idea though; it is an emotion, a feeling, a thought, a political concept, a moment, a circumstance, a situation, etc.
I am a conceptual artist because the intention of my work is to put the concept in to your head. I don't do it literally, and I don't like to give the viewer much as to what the exact idea is, I find that visually and conceptually boring. I believe a concept can be open to interpretation by the viewer.
The first thing Gerald Nichols said to me when he came in to my studio this summer was “Great, objects. Just what this world needs more of.” I get shit on for making objects. And I think people are wrong for shitting on object makers.
We all know art can’t be just eye candy, but I don’t think it should be laden with concept either. Let the concept flow, don’t force it. I find that art just as boring as eye candy art. I think we should find the perfect medium of visual and conceptual interest. I believe in the creation of art that represents your intellectual and conceptual subconscious. It is this art that is interesting on the visual and conceptual level.
Follow your emotions, your gut, and your intuition. It won’t always lead you down the right path, but you won’t over think it and make something no one wants to look at or think about. I believe an image/idea from an object/concept can be imprinted in someone’s mind heavier than just an idea.
Thanks for reading folks!