The Article "Site-Specifics" focuses reader's attention toward the debate on site-specific art. Exactly how much of an impact does the specificity of a site have on artists' work and the connection it has with it's audience? It is arguable to say that it has absolutely no impact on some work but a dramatic impact on others. Fact of the matter is there is no right or wrong answer to this debate. One example that comes to mind when I contemplate the subject is Robert Smithson's "Spiral Jetty". Spiral Jetty was said to be Smithson's most known work of art. This piece of art is actually an earthwork which was constructed in Utah in the 1970's located right near the Great Salt Lake. As you may have guessed the land was constructed into a spiral shape which extends just out into the lake. The reason I used this work of art as an example was because the location of the work is crucial to the piece and had this piece been made in another location it would be an entirely different piece.
The Modernist art critic, Michael Fried discussed the impression specific-site location has on art pertaining to minimalist art. He states: "In forcing an incursion of the time and space of viewing into the experience of the work, Fried argues, minimalism enters into a realm which 'lies between the arts' where 'art degenerates as it approaches the condition of the theatre". In other words, in Minimalist art, one of the main focuses of the piece isn't the art but the actual space between the art. Minimalist art is a great example of this because its a form of art which isn't concerned with place as much as it is with space. What Fried is trying to say is that location is essential to this particular movement of art because much of what is focused on is the space between and around the object.
The second article, "Locative Media Artists in the Contested-Aware City" is about how cell phones have reached the largest audience of consumers in the world. In doing so, it has made it so that practically every person in the world (majority) has some type of computer on them at all times, making it possible to pinpoint the whereabouts of most people in the world. This creates a large controversy throughout the art world and many artists have used technology to comment on both the positives and the negatives of being able to be tracked at any given time. Most people already overlook the fact that they are being filmed in public places without their consent or even their knowledge. Obviously there are positives to having video recording enabled in public places, for instance if a crime is committed, a car accident occurs, or if a person has gone missing. For these reasons, video surveillance is needed and very useful, however where is the line drawn?
In the art world, location in regards to site-specific art can make or break a piece. In fact, location is so crucial to a piece of art that it can change the meaning of the art entirely. Examples such as Spiral Jetty show that sculpture art can be made with earth as the actual medium and the locations of these works are considered carefully so that the work can be made to its fullest potential. This is also evident within modern-day technology. The cell phone movement has targeted such a widespread market that just about anybody can be tracked down with computers. With tracking devices becoming such a widespread commodity, one questions whether the privacy of the common people has been compromised and if it has, should anything be done about it?
No comments:
Post a Comment