Public space is political. It is political because it is where confrontation, common action and reconciliation happen. It is where we configure the relation our body with it. It is the playground of individuality and collectivity. Hence, as the boundaries between private and public space gets blurred, same happens to art production.
According to Groys; since Duchamp, the labor of division has collapsed in art context and art making is equal to displaying art. Subjects become objects. That attitude which emerged from Dadaism opened a new perspective for artists and eventually for the viewers.
The act of displaying art and using non-artistic materials made the space part of the work, which cannot be ignored while experiencing the work. As Kurt Schwitters showed with his work “Merzbau”, there was not a point where artwork ends and space begins anymore. As Fluxus artists showed there was no linear relation between disciplines of art and life anymore. Artwork become something to get in, to sit on, to touch and change or even complete. Instead of something beautiful to look at, it become the practice of everyday life that needs to co-exist with public.
Change of production and comprehension of the artworks changed the issues as well. Since public space is political the issues and motivations of artworks get political to. Participation, community, collectivity, intersubjectivity, migration, gender, identity and minority are some of the key concepts that public art nourished from. Taking those concepts back to where they come from, to the public space, is an opportunity to get closer “gesamtkunstwork” and experience what has not experienced yet.