Loose writings on Conceptual Art 1

"When an artist uses a conceptual form of art, it means all of the planning and decisions are made beforehand and the execution is a perfunctory affair. The idea becomes a machine that makes the art.." (Sol LeWitt)

"What the work of art looks like isn't too important... No matter what form it may finally have it must begin with an idea." (Sol LeWitt)

"Conceptual Art is good only when the idea is good." (Sol LeWitt)

Welcome to the world of ideas. Welcome to a world where thinking is valued and doing, unfortuantely, is more or less essentially useless, if we agree with Weiner that "the piece need not be built".

We have a very big problem here.

Why is a good idea = art? Why is a good idea not simply a good idea? We have a group of people who claim that art = a good idea or a good idea = art without making it clear to us why and how so. Perhaps (just perhaps) it is a reaction to things that came before.

Assuming that art = a good idea or a good idea = art, we are not given the slightest idea of what makes a good idea or what makes a bad idea. We are not told why or how one idea is more interesting or less interesting than another.

To quote my teacher, it's "navel-gazing". However, in the spirit of the book "But Is It Art" (I can't remember who the author is...a certain Cynthia-something), I am going to explore Conceptual Art by referring to actual artworks themselves.

***

Before I begin, I want to talk a little about what I dislike about Conceptual Art. Firstly, it places too much emphasis on the intellect. It has little regard for emotion or expression. Secondly, it is somewhat detached from life. (Think Sol LeWitt's cubes and Joseph Kosuth's investigations.) It reduces the role/function of the artist to an idea-generating machine. Of course I'm making generalisations here; things get more interesting with time.

***

Steam cloud, Robert Morris, 1966. I mean seriously, what does releasing gas in a gallery achieve? What does it mean? What does it say?

LeWitt NEVER proclaimed that ANY idea is art or ANYTHING can be art. He actually tries to suggest that there is good art and bad art (i.e. good ideas vs bad ideas), although he does not tell us how he makes the distinction.

... ...

I actually agree with one of Lucy Lippard's artists' cards, which might just give us an idea of what good Conceptual Art might be:

"Deliberately low-keyed art often resembles ruins, like neolithic rather than classical monuments, amalgams of past and future, remains of something "more", vestiges of some unknown venture. The ghost of content continues to hover over the most obdurately abstract art. The more open, or ambiguous, the experience offered, the more the viewer is forced to depend on his own perceptions."

The sad truth is, you can say the same thing for Duchamp's urinal or any of Joseph Beuys's drawings as well. (Then what's the point of saying it?)

***

From Wikipedia:

"Seedbed is a performance piece first performed by Vito Acconci on 15–29 January 1971 at Sonnabend Gallery in New York.

A low wooden ramp merging with the floor - it extends across the width of the room, beginning two feet up the side of one wall and slanting down to the middle of the floor. Acconci lay hidden underneath the ramp installed at the Sonnabend Gallery, masturbating. The artist's spoken fantasies about the visitors walking above him were heard through loudspeakers in the gallery."

How this kind of crap can pass off as art is beyond me. How is this a GOOD idea? Now, in any debate, the onus is on the proposition to explain why something IS, the onus is not on the opposition to explain why something iS NOT.

Nevertheless, I shall try to explain why I think it is NOT a good idea. I mean, isn't there any law against this? Well, maybe there isn't, considering that people like Akon can sing a song like "I want to f*** you" and it gets aired on radio. Try saying this to the next stranger you see. Very soon, the law will have a hard time deciding what is sexual harassment and what is not.

Under types of sexual harassment, Wikipedia includes the following:

Great Gallant - This mostly VERBAL harassment involves excessive compliments and personal comments that focus on appearance and gender, and are OUT OF PLACE AND EMBARASSING TO THE RECIPIENT. Such comments are sometimes accompanied by leering looks.

Unintentional - Acts or COMMENTS OF A SEXUAL NATURE, not intended to harass, CAN CONSTITUTE SEXUAL HARASSMENT IF ANOTHER PERSON FEELS UNCOMFORTABLE WITH SUCH SUBJECTS.