Conceptual Art: The face of Contemporary Art.
In a time that conceptual art is at its peak in contemporary institutions and well received by its many art audiences worldwide, I find at times it can make contemporary art institutions unapproachable to their broader audiences and this can be harmful to many artists and the institutions. I will be looking at some of the structures that make up conceptual art and its sub-genres of art, that can be discussed to evolve art to make it more inclusive to all audiences.
Henty Flynt, Flux Anthology, 1963
Conceptual Art refers to a historical form of avant-garde practice that flourished in the 1960’s and 1970’s, it can be used to reference a plethora of genres of art, Found Object, Performance Art, Installation Art etc. It marked the “fall-out from the collisions of Minimal Art and various ‘anti-formal’ practices”.
The expression ‘concept art’ was first employed by Henry Flynt in the ‘Flux Anthology’ 1963 he expressed that ‘Concept Art is first an art which the material is ‘concepts’, going on to make the point, that since concepts are closely bound up with language, concept art is a kind of art which the material is the language’.
Sol LeWitt, Paragraphs on Conseptual Art, 1967
Later, American artist Sol LeWitt coined ‘Conceptual Art’, he first introduced it through a publishing of his ‘Paragraphs on Conceptual Art in 1967, and subsequently his ‘Sentences’ on ‘Conceptual Art’ in 1969. In Conceptual Art, the meaning and idea behind the artwork are the driving force and most important, “the actual execution of the work is of subordinate importance.
Taking the frameworks of Conceptual Art I will now focus on Marcel Duchamp who is regarded as the forefather of Found Object
Found Object/Readymade
Viewer looking at Marcel Duchamp’s ‘Bicycle Wheel, 1913’
“A found object is a natural or man-made object, or fragments of an object, that is found (or sometimes bought) by an artist and kept because of some intrinsic interest the artist sees in it”. (Tate Britan definition)
The gathering and display of found objects for their aesthetic properties, dates to the 16th century this was known as the “cabinets of curiosities” when the collection of individual enthusiasts was displayed in private, also called the “Wunderkammer” by Germans. It was not until the 1900’s that artists began incorporating this idea into sculptural work as an artistic gesture, The term found object is a literal translation from the French word ‘object trouve’ what we know today as the ‘the readymade’ is an updated version of that idea.
Conceptualisation of Found Objects.
Taking into consideration the frameworks of found object art, I find the very idea of the process very elitist, in the sense that there is this notion that an artist has this self-proclaimed power, to take an everyday object and be able to elevate it, to that of a work of art, with no artistic alterations, I began to ask myself what are the limits to this process ? are there even any limits ? Taking away all the pretentiousness can we really sit down and recognise these found objects as true works of arts? if so then why? Can anyone truly do this? Sometimes I wonder if a less prolific artist was behind the ‘Comedian’ 2019, would it have received the attention it received? sold at the price that it sold?
Marcel Duchamp with his Readymade ‘Bicycle wheel’ 1913
“I was interested in ideas not merely in visual products” – Duchamp
“People thought of nothing but the physical aspect of painting. No idea of freedom was taught, not the slightest philosophical idea was discussed” - Duchamp
Except Duchamp’s being works being very inaccessible, I struggle to find any philosophical ideas behind them, I am not sure what philosophy can be made for porcelain urinals, or a bicycle wheel, it is the foundations of conceptual art that validated this emergence of this honestly pretentions methodology of imposing an art context onto objects with no meaning, this has obviously been proven to be successful, and I find this very structure elitist as it implies that the artist has this ability and self-proclaimed power to play ‘God’ by elevating these objects to a ‘work of art’.
The language often accompanied with these conceptual artworks tend to be so intimidating and full of words we do not even understand let alone us in our day-to-day vocabulary, although this does not extensively apply to Duchamp, I find that sometimes the conceptualisation of these objects creates a language barrier between the audience and the artwork, what is the point of an artwork if it cannot be discussed or enjoyed by its audience without any preconceived understanding or knowledge?
“The bond between craft and art was broken in the twentieth century, and my position is that the often vague and spurious assertion that anything an artist declares as art is art, is at the root of much of contemporary art’s failure to engage with a broad audience, and to convincingly articulate or understand it’s nature”, As much I enjoy the rebel against the Formalists and much more traditional approaches to art, I find I honestly am not able to enjoy art when there is no craft at all.
Installation Art
Richard Serra
Now moving on from the Found Object I would like to look at Richard Serra and his huge installations, and risk celebrated sculptures, and the emergence of installation artworks that are site-specific an in this I would like to touch on a theory that is not commonly applied in the art world but can be and I feel should be.
Published by Fredrick Winslow in the 20th century ‘The principles of Scientific Management’, are a set of theories that individualize the idea of ‘mental and hand workers’, which is more relevant in today’s work/corporate environment, where there is a set hierarchy between the managerial class (those who come up with the ideas and delegate them) and staff (those who perform the tasks), “the managerial class, as a class is signified to have a greater mental capacity and intellect to deserve more wage by directing the labour of the employees”, even though the mental work is not as demanding or physically exerting, compared to the labour carried out by the hand workers.
This can be seen in widespread in most of the installation works of Richard Serra, his works are site -specific and are richly risk celebrated, for their size and material, and although this is a very dramatic example to use, I think it is important to discuss how these installations that are so dangerous to make and install, are often made by hand workers, and most of the times Serra was only responsible for the idea of the works,(conceptual art in its truest form) and the craftsmanship is left to the workers, which unfortunately lead to 2 people being injured and one person losing their life, this is the results of scientific management, when ideas delegated to hand workers, are physically exerting in a harmful manner, but this has no effect on the managerial class (Richard Serra), instead he was left with world wide spread acclaim and regarded highly for his installation works. This separation of mind and hand workers can be harmful and elitist in the genre of installation art. I find this demolishes the beauty that installation art can be, as it seems to have turned to a competitive genre of art of, who can make the next biggest sculpture, who will be next to have the most risk driven installation, which leads me to the question, is this a healthy competition between artists? should art be competitive? When the hard labour is placed in the hands of people who are often not recognised.
Richard Serra’s ‘Sculpture No.3”, 1971
Writing this essay has really encouraged me to be able to step back, and look at the art forms I enjoy, to learn about at their separate frameworks, ethos and their implications on contemporary art. And I hope this can encourage more people to be able to do the same and not be scared to discuss contemporary art in a different way, even though we enjoy and make contemporary art.
