In 2004, Gordon's Gin, sponsor of the Turner prize, polled 500 leading
dealers, critics, artists, and curators  about what was "the most influential
work of art in the 20th C.",  and the winner, by a landslide of 64%, was
Duchamp's "Fountain"

But  it  appears that Duchamp was trying to present an example of something
that would systematically  disqualify as art - as discussed here by P.N.
Humble:

http://bjaesthetics.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/pdf_extract/22/1/52

So Dutton steps in to "throw light"  on this question by analyzing pieces
using the 12 cluster criteria he presented in chapter 3.

And here are the results:

1. Direct pleasure: Yes (as a Dadaist gesture) , No (as a disagreeable piece
of plumbing)
2. Skill and virtuosity: Yes and No (for the same reasons given above)
3. Recognizable style : No
4. Novelty and creativity: Yes - and even after a hundred years , it continues
to astonish
5. Criticism: Does it exist alongside some kind of critical language of
judgment and appreciation? Yes - in spades.
6. Representation:Not in the Aristotelian sense
7. Special Focus: Is it bracketed off from ordinary life? Yes -- it has been
given a plinth and a title
8. Expressive Individuality: Yes and No for the same reasons given for  #1
9. Emotional saturation: Yes (it delights cognoscenti and angers everyone
else). but also No - snce the object itself embodies and expresses no
emotion.
10.Intellectual Challenge: Yes - but only regarding philosophy and art
history, not the object itself
11.Art Tradition and institutions: Is it given significance by its place in
the history and traditions of art? Yes - in spades.
   Though Dutton asserts  that, contrary to the Institutional Theory, this
criterion is neither necessary nor sufficient.
12.Imaginative Experience: Art happens in a make-believe world, the theater of
the imagination. -- No - "unless every stimulating book on art theory would be
a work of art"

And finally, we have Duchamp's own statement when asked about the origins of
the readymade "Please  note  that I didn't want to make a  work of art out of
it..the word "readymade thrust itself upon me then. It seemed perfect for
those things that weren't works of art, that weren't sketches, and to which no
art terms applied. That's why I was tempted to make them"

But considering the opiniion of the vast majorithy of experts -- as well as
the mostly positive tally registered above -- Dutton delivers  a resounding
"Yes,Fountain is  a  work of art", successful not just for challenging the
conventional artworld of 1915, but for "effectively challenging our
evolutionary response system"

Which is why it endures.

But has it really endured ?-- or did it's importance  just temporarily
skyrocket in the later decades of the last century?  I suspect that if experts
had been polled any earlier than 1965, "Fountain" wouldn't have even made the
top 100.  Perhaps,  rather than challenging our "evolutionary response
system",  "Fountain"  is the most effective symbol of the postwar collapse of
high culture.

Dutton's analysis cannot address that issue because it is strictly
a-historical, and though his analysis presents many relevant issues, it can't
take them very far because  none of those "cluster criteria" are necessary,
sufficient, or prioritized.   So, for example, it may well be that a Dadaist
gesture gives pleasure to some people -- but then so do burning buildings, and
the  the work of an arsonist would qualify for more than half of Dutton's
criteria. (and it might involve them all if the arsonist had skillfully and
controversially  torched a major  art museum)

And there's also some especially murky thought regarding  my favorite
criterion,  #9 (Emotional saturation) where Dutton distinguishes between that
which provokes emotion that which embodies and expresses it.  How can anyone
tell the difference?

Perhaps, Dutton should have required that an art work be considered more
important than  any response to it -- but that would be something other than
just one more "cluster criterion), and, of course, that would controversially
separate the contemporary art world  from all the others.

Buy he does note that "jokes can only be laughed at once, having been done,
they cannot be done again with anything like Duchampian impact"

So Dutton is willing to attack the world of contemporary art institutions
anyway, serving up the example of a Dadaist jesture from the 1960's,  Piero
Manzoni's "Merda d'artista" and mocking the Tate's "humorless defense"  of its
recent purchase of 'Can 004" as a "seminal work"  (while also, mischievously
noting that due to improper canning technique, more r than half of Manzoni's
precious tin cans have exploded)

____________________________________________________________
Hotel
Don't stay in a roach motel.  Click here to find great deals on hotels.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/c?cp=dkxtFi1TW3G9LvaAq-rSkwAAJz6c
l_zTaptgNR5c8Mer1v9kAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATRAAAAAA=

Reply via email to