The concept of art that requires the viewer.

Do your pieces need to be disruptive to a space to be art?

I've been reading a book that deals a lot with post-modern thought in the context of animals in art. At one point an essay talks about Robert Rauschenberg's Monogramme:

There was a fairly long, tedious argument as to how this piece disrupted the space, forcing interaction with the viewer. As such, the piece would not necessarily be art were it not to disrupt space.

It's an interesting idea, intellectually. Rather than answering a question about the purpose of the piece from an philosophical point of view, the artist could simply say: "Because I want to make you walk around it".  

So the question remains: do you attempt to disrupt space with your work? Is your work passive (2d) or 3D and exuding the need to be touched?

How did you arrive there?

Views: 98


You need to be a member of The International Society of Assemblage and Collage Artists to add comments!

Join The International Society of Assemblage and Collage Artists


Posting to membership- 1 Reply

Started by Felicia Belair-Rigdon. Last reply by Cecil Touchon Sep 24, 2019.

Call for Artists: A Book About Death / Tribute to Ray Johnson

Started by Janice McDonald Jul 27, 2019.


© 2020   Created by Cecil Touchon.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service