How Can a Viewer Understand the Context of a Work of Art

The circular discussion/argument regarding content versus context is an important 1 from the perspective of the artist and the public.  For me the key to the appreciation of an artist'southward work is understanding the context in which the piece was created.  This view runs counter to that of many, notably the conceptual artist Lawrence Weiner, a self-described "materialist" and "cultural dialectician" who uses linguistic communication both as a material and as a means of presenting his ideas.  Ii examples of his work are reproduced beneath.

In an interview for ArtForum (New York) in May 1982 he stated: "Why I choose linguistic communication, why you choose to paint on canvas: that's a existent personal  choice.  This is what I have been proverb for fifteen years: such a personal pick doesn't mean anything in the context of fine art.  It'south not the context that counts, information technology's the content.  This is why Duchamp isn't an interesting creative person.  Context doesn't connote art: context connotes how art is used at a certain fourth dimension merely".

This is all well and adept from the artist's point of view but I feel that a first time-viewer of Weiner's work would be hard pressed to form an opinion without being aware of his thinking (the context).

When I first encountered the piece of work of Jeff Wall at the Aurora Borealis exhibition in Montreal (1985) I was attracted by the brightly lit lite boxes and the outdoor advertising style of the works.  It was much subsequently that I learned that the photographs were staged and, in the instance of "Mimic", recreated a scene of racial abuse that Wall had witnessed (meet image below).

Armed with that context I went on to read and seek out Wall'southward work over the years and have learned to appreciate the thought and skill involved in these elaborately staged constructions.

Most people are not interested plenty nor practice they have the time for research into an creative person'southward groundwork and interests but I practice feel that about public galleries and writers almost contemporary art could exercise more to set a context for an artist's work.

We practice not all want to be art scholars just many of us would like some help in situating what we are virtually to see.  In that location is a fine line between the exhibition ii-stride (two steps forward to squint at the fine print next to a piece and two steps back to consider) and an assembly-line progression through an exhibition with little or no contextual information.  I acknowledge that at that place is also the challenge of non wanting to exist spoon-fed or to exist told what I am supposed to get from a work.

The platonic state of affairs for me is to accept read the exhibition catalogue earlier venturing into the gallery.  I know – nigh people consider this a scrap extreme.  But again, without a context it is difficult for me to form an opinion on the content.

The exhibition curator, the art historian and writers play a critical function in supporting the general public'south access to an appreciation of contemporary art.  Sometimes these individuals are function of the barrier erected betwixt the artist and the public.  My criticism is that some writers on the subject of contemporary fine art spend too much time impressing themselves and attempting to impress their colleagues with overdone theoretical pronouncements and references.  Access to clear, curtailed and relevant information would go a long manner to reducing a person's anxiety about learning to capeesh art.

The real challenge, even when y'all can find an attainable writer, is whether there is a broad enough market for well presented and well explained books and manufactures nigh art.  In an article, "The Art Books Last Stand?" (Fine art in America, September 2006), Christopher Lyon points out that on the part of certain museums "…there are now two audiences for modernistic art, 'downstairs' and 'upstairs': the audition of the street, general-involvement consumers who practise not know or care enough to engage seriously with art; and the far smaller audience of 'civilization workers' and 'aficionados'."

Lyon wonders why the fine art book market is so soft given that the potential audience seems to take grown over the by 20 years if the press manufactures almost the resurgence of prices for modern art is whatsoever indication.

I like the mode Jed Perl (Bystander, 2000), outlines in his essay "The Fine art of Seeing", the other side of the coin, the responsibility of the artist in drawing in the public: "To the extent that contemporary artists tin make people look longer and harder, they must dare to give their piece of work a complicated openness, a surprising particularity.  Artists have to discover a way to pull audiences in, for only when people come to understand that within a painting or a sculpture they tin can find a time that is outside of time will they want to keep looking."

Virtually George

My long-time interest in Canadian and international gimmicky art has led me to write and reflect on the artists I've met, the exhibitions that I've seen and the catalogues that I've read (I've been told I'1000 the only person that actually reads exhibition catalogues cover to comprehend). My interest began in the mid-1960's when I was searching for piece of cake credits and I stumbled upon "Art Appreciation 101", and the rest, as they say, is history...

carrthignot.blogspot.com

Source: https://artappreciation101.wordpress.com/2011/01/11/context-is-important/

Share this post