I'm a bit embarrassed that I'm going to respond to information presented so early in the text, but having a few days to distance myself from the reading, the idea of the gallery space as the a priori stimulus for the audience has resonated deeply.  O' Doherty clearly states, "We have now reached a point where we see not the art but the space first" (14).  Indeed, I remember while attending Tacoma Community College when the new campus art gallery was in its final leg of construction, I glared at the outside at its metal, rather bland, greenish-gray, horizontal siding and thought, "how ugly."  Its geometry was pushed to fit the space allotted and the inside space was...well, white with polished concrete  flooring (or something similar).  My art Prof. asked whether or not I would display my sculpture of an abstract biomorphic nature within the gallery during the student presentations and I just flat out refused.  It was the angular shape of the building, its walls thrown up just as the arcitectual CAD designer had envisioned.  Just ordinary.  In a sense, it did nothing to take away from what was inside, yet the tastelessness of the design aesthetic did nothing to lure an audience inside its confines.  It seems that O'Doherty was right on when he expressed rather cynically: "A gallery is contructed along laws as rigorous as those for building a medival church" (15).  White walls, few if any windows to seal off the outside disturbances.  As installation art has pushed the boundaries of acceptable art display, it seems that the gallery lost its monopoly on presentation due to its reliance upon its confining and limiting spaces.  My own sculpture did not fit in the Tacoma Community College art gallery because it felt like a stranger inside.  Yet the juxtaposition of the angular form of the gallery versus the seductively chaotic movements of my sculpture did nothing to give contrast, nor bring the piece its own life and context.  It would be merely content within a gallery space that gave nothing else but a dissimilar environment for its viewing.  My piece needed an environement that added to its message, its form, its strangeness.  Without doubt, the clinical nature of the gallery may have lent to the sculpture's bizarre form admist so many other typical pieces on display, but the feeling would have been lost inside amongst white walls and pretentious critics who add dialogue to the art which is out of tune with the intended purpose. The sculpture deserved an Installation.