Week one response
After reading our first selection from the instillation art book i started to think about how the placement of a instillation affects the the viewers response to the piece. Some instillations are designed in such a way that putting them in a gallery or museum would take away from the over all piece and thus reducing it's effectiveness to portray its meaning. Sometimes the intended audience of a piece is such that either can't go to a gallery to experience it or won't go the gallery to experience it. In that case the site of the piece is very important to the overall outcome and response because it becomes an issue of weather or not the intended audience is going to see it.
I think that hanging pictures of a piece or showing a video clip of an instillation in a gallery is almost pointless. When I look at a picture of an instillation I don't even begin to think about what that piece could mean because I don't feel like I have gotten a full view of the whole piece; the feelings, the smells, etc. The atmosphere in which you experience a piece is just as important as the piece itself. There are some pieces, though, that do work in galleries. The Sharin Nashat piece that we saw is a piece that can pe put just about anywhere and still be experienced in a similar fashion. But on the other hand I think that piece was designed to be shown in a gallery. The only pieces that work in a gallery ar pieces that were designed to be put in a gallery.
Qestions:
What are the differences between showing a piece in a gallery or in a specific public space?
Does removing a site specific piece to put it in a gallery destroy part of the piece? Think about the deffinition of instillation art.
