What exactly is the difference between the eye and the spectator?

How can we create a space for art that is sacred and personal without making it into a capitalist venture? How do we make community art spaces sustain themselves?

In the introduction to O’Doherty’s book I was struck by the idea that the gallery is a space where “The outside world must not come in” (7)”A space where the art is free to take on its own life.” The historical perspective of humans creating spaces for art throughout time (the cave drawings of France and Spain) is a really neat idea. I believe art and spiritual ritual go hand in hand. It makes sense that we have these shrines to art. I don’t think this necessarily is portrayed by the capitalist venture of a modern art gallery. Far from being a spiritual sanctuary, a white cube does not illustrate to me comfort and a place to worship. Still, I like the idea that art had a special space in our modern society, a place to contemplate and reflect on the object in front of you without the hindrance of outside forces.
On that note, the idea of art responding to its space is really interesting. How a painting in a gallery transcends time and becomes your central focus. When you buy that same painting and hang it on your wall at home it becomes a “thing” given a time you bought it, who you bought it for, where you put it in your home etc. It becomes a part of your memory and your collection and a “thing” within your space, loosing its former appeal.
Near the end of the Eye and spectator chapter he started to examine modern art stating, “Our senses are on trial in modernist works,”(55) the idea is to play with the spectator and make them loose the fact that they are looking at “Art” but actually noticing the space that surrounds them. “Things make space happen.” I found this to be true in William Anastasi’s work “West Wall, Dwan Main Gallery.” He literally made the space a work of art by reproducing the wall you would be looking at expecting to view “art.” I normally don’t like this kind of work on the basis of it being too simple. What changed for me was the new context I have for it within this book and also the process that went into him creating this reproduction.

Margaritte Knezek