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.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder