The meaning of Tiravanija’s work depends on the people who uses and deal with its display. His work is a serious attempt at reshaping social space, turning gallery to a place that has totally different goals and activities. I really appreciate his innovation using the context of art in different way. As a craft artist, although I am keenly interested in contemporary art movements, this kind of display creates certain degree of frustration if I was to relate my own discipline with a conceptual artist like Tiravanija. He is clearly not interested in the artwork that their purpose was to offer its visual quality. It is not an important aspect in his works that creates dialogue within the viewer’s mind which leads to its visual appreciation. His art world, to me, seems like a complete departure from visual art. What would be the significant turning point of the way he approach this kind of enterprise of art making? How did the “relational aesthetics” born? furthermore, if the relationship and the relationship only can be consider as art, what other elements that can be considered to qualify as an art? It seems like anything can enter the gallery door with the name of "art".
Marcel Duchamp showed the way to a new kind of art. and the importance of the imagination and the intellect one should carry in creating so call "new art" has been well embraced. All the duchampian after duchamp continues to carry this fundamental theory until today. Is it a cultural and social effect that art became highly conceptual and literary? These kinds of works exist mostly to illustrate the text. this is ironical because art before modernism should be consider literary ( all those realism paintings) didn't modernism started with the idea of rejecting litarary? I look at relational aesthetic artworks and start wandering, searching, struggling to find its contexts. For the most part, I would need texts that explain the concept behind the work. When I look at this art world with cultural perspective, I see the huge respect that is for elaborated ideas. Is art becoming more like a literature and philosophy? Where is the notion of beauty in postproduction era? Or what can be defined as “beauty” in our time?
Rirkrit Tiravanija
Pierre Huyghe
Dominique Gonzalez-Foerster
Liam Gillick
Maurizio Cattelan
Philippe Parreno
No comments:
Post a Comment