It was both frusterating and bizzare to me that creating a puddle in a public space was considered art. It seemed more of an idea to me. It seems the same as any man made object such as dams and lakes. Someting else I tought about a lot during reading this was the idea that "cinema provides te dominant cultural experience that installation must explore" and that going to see film as been a comfort for humans wit comforatble seats and airconditioning so even druing a disturbing film te viewer is comforatble. Where in installation art some of the work is intentionally making the viewer in no way comforatble phsicaly or mentally. some questions i have, what makes artwork such as a man made puddle art rather than a concept or an action?and what about art like the cremaster? how are we supposed to interprate barney's art, with out comentary?i am sorry my key board is broken, tats wy it looks like a 2 year old wrote tis.