Last night I heard Joseph
Kosuth speak at the
Hirshhorn Museum and what an experience -- I've been attending artist lectures for over a decade and nothing compared to this one. Where to begin? This is an artist who pioneered conceptual art, most notably in the 1960s when he undertook his series of "investigations" into ways in which art could exceed the limitations of
institutional and structural hierarchies of art and art history.
Kosuth is known for his brilliant and ironic appropriation of words -- in which the reading of the words and the subsequent understanding of its meaning (by the viewer) is the ultimate goal of the artwork and aesthetics. Whether or not the viewer deems it ugly or beautiful is besides the point -- the process is what matters. Which again goes to the heart of my own perspective about "where" art resides -- it's in the interaction between artwork and viewer, when the viewer is moved/disturbed/inspired/puzzled/etc.
Prior to hearing
Kosuth speak, I was most familiar with his neon works. But during the lecture I was really intrigued with his larger-scaled pieces, particularly the permanent installations at various venues in Europe, in which he employed significant portions of texts and ideas -- that contradicted each other -- resulting in textures and overlays of meaning and ideas. His installation in Copenhagen was one of the pieces I was most struck by. He began with a section of Hans Christian
Anderson's "Emperor's New Clothes" (one of
Kosuth's favorite childhood stories) and then visually
interspersed it with fragments of
Kierkegaard's damning review of the same text - but took these fragments out of context and connected them in such a way that it read in
defense of
Anderson. Brilliant. I absolutely love
Kosuth's genius and rebellious nature, which (in this particular instance) was defiant against the philosopher who had criticized his beloved author, but in a larger context, defied the very annals of art history in the making of his highly intellectualized text art that negated the requirement of paper and paintbrush that had come before him.
Initially signed with Leo
Castelli (when
Kosuth was a mere 24 years old), he has been represented by
Sean Kelly Gallery for many years, has exhibited around the world (including several years at Documenta and the Venice Biennale) and is currently showing a large holding of his work at the
Hirshhorn Museum. I will continue to enjoy learning about and viewing his work.
Joseph Kosuth, Self-Defined Object (White), neon, 1966
I really enjoyed getting this candid look inside Sotheby's contemporary art department, now a month after the November sales. I absolutely agree with what Tobias Meyer said -- that if the right piece comes up, something that is rare, from a pivotal point in the artist's oeuvre, and with the right provenance and condition -- then the market will respond. And I love that my pick of favorites last night included the Currin, which is shown here.
We'll see how these post-war and contemporary NY auctions fare over the next several weeks; in the meantime everyone is on pins & needles waiting to see if the art market can stand on its own, or if it will succumb to the same fate as the rest of the world markets. According to Marc Porter of Christie's, “Prices of all assets have fallen — stocks, gold, oil, real estate — and it would be unrealistic to expect works of art to be immune to the market’s pressures.” For more of Carol Vogel's article recently published in the NY Times about the sales, read here.
Last night I heard Joseph Kosuth speak at the Hirshhorn Museum and what an experience -- I've been attending artist lectures for over a decade and nothing compared to this one. Where to begin? This is an artist who pioneered conceptual art, most notably in the 1960s when he undertook his series of "investigations" into ways in which art could exceed the limitations of institutional and structural hierarchies of art and art history. Kosuth is known for his brilliant and ironic appropriation of words -- in which the reading of the words and the subsequent understanding of its meaning (by the viewer) is the ultimate goal of the artwork and aesthetics. Whether or not the viewer deems it ugly or beautiful is besides the point -- the process is what matters. Which again goes to the heart of my own perspective about "where" art resides -- it's in the interaction between artwork and viewer, when the viewer is moved/disturbed/inspired/puzzled/etc.
Posts
