week 5
Inside the White Cube
Once again I had quite some difficulty understanding much of the material O’Doherty discusses in inside the white cube and am feeling thoroughly confused and slightly frustrated. That is not to say that I did not find the concepts he touches on interesting (i.e. artists relationship to audience and how politics influence both), just challenging to interpret. I guess that’s what seminar is for…
O’Doherty also refers to the capitalistic approach to art and esthetics provided by the gallery, turning art into a commodity to be purchased and sold: “esthetics are turned into a kind of social elitism-the gallery space is exclusive. Isolated in plots of space, what is on display looks a bit like valuable scarce goods, jewelry, or silver: esthetics are turned into commerce-the gallery space is expansive. What it contains is, without initiation, well - nigh incomprehensible - art is difficult. Pg.76
He brings up some interesting concepts and describes the evolution of the gallery space from a historical perspective. He takes into account how the various cultural/socio-political environments of each decade has influenced and molded the gallery space into what it is today. He goes into detail about the many factors which affected the way in which art was displayed (referring to influential and innovative artists such as Duchamp and Schwitters whose unorthodox approach to interpreting the gallery space and the display of art forever altered gallery rhetoric.)
ko ichi
