art ??


When I introduced the idea of ‘found art‘, the examples I gave were quite clearly ‘creative’ in intent. Today’s found art object is somewhat more ambiguous. A CD tied to a fence doesn’t really sound all that creative, but then what is this object doing there? Why in that particular place? Was it intentional, or coincidence that the text on the CD matches the colour of the flagging tape? Ever since Duchamp started to present his readymades in 1915, then any object or juxtaposition of objects could become art when presented in a gallery. But how do we recognize a “readymade” art object if it isn’t in a gallery, if it isn’t labeled as art. Is it only the preserve of artists to be able to label an object as art, or can the viewer act as the agent that defines what is art – even if the person who put the object there had some other intention. If I find some subtle intervention in the expected order of things (like a CD tied to a fence with flagging tape) and decide that I will read it as the trace of a creative act, does that make it art. Oh I like the sound of that – “the trace of a creative act”.


Tags: , ,

One Response to “art ??”

  1. segmation Says:

    Hi Pete,
    Interesting photo! I wonder what Duchamp would think of CDs!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: