Reconsidering Conceptual Art, 1966-1977

Reconsidering Conceptual Art, 1966-1977

Alexander Alberro

Alberro, Alexander, and Blake Stimson. "Reconsidering Conceptual Art, 1966-1977." Conceptual Art: A Critical Anthology. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1999. N. pag. Print.
  
List of primary claims made in this reading:

Alberro explores the Analytic vs. Synthetic proposition in conceptual art. A few key points he suggests is that conceptual participatory art met it’s logistical end when the execution of the work was left completely up to the viewer, or “receiver.” He also suggests that conceptual art “making”does not point back to the artists, it is in the exchange between the viewer and the analytical proposition. As a result, “these works clearly transcend their contexts and intersect with the ideological values of the culture at large.” (xxv)

Great introduction to conceptual art, covering  a great range of artists and conceptual practices. 

Key Quotes:

“Following Ayer, Kosuth argues that forms of art that depend for their validity on being verified by the world and the “infinite space of the human condition” are synthetic propositions while “forms of art most clearly finally referable only to art” are analytic propositions. Then, making the unlikely pairing of analytic proposition and and meaning on the one hand, and synthetic proposition and language on the other, Kosuth brackets off and expels any questionons of a referential dimension from his theoretical model, concluding that “art’s only claim is for art. Art is the definition of art.” (xviii)

“And of course once art language is considered “inside the framework of ‘conceptual art,’”the distinction between work and text becomes blurred, leading to questions about the status of artworks…” (xix)

“The idea, [Sol LeWitt] writes, becomes “a machine that makes art,” a logical operation that “eliminates the arbitrary, capricious, and the subjective as much as possible.” (xx)

“A statements define linguistically the material structure of the work, presenting in the past participle facts about its materials and processes of production.” (xxii)

Weiner’s “declaration of intent” 1968:

1. The artist may construct the piece 

2. The piece may be fabricated 

3. The piece need not be built

Each being equal and consistent with the intent of the artist, the decision as to condition rests with the receiver upon the occasion of receivership.

“For although LeWitt eliminates rational decisionmaking from the manufacture state of the work, thereby separating execution from artistic value, he maintained that the work should still take on a physical form.” (xxiii)

  

Key figures mentioned in article:

Sol LeWitt

Joseph Kusoth

Lawrence Weiner

Hans Haacke – MoMA-Poll (1970), Gallery-Visitor’s Profile (1969-73)

Daniel Burens

Victor Burgin

Jenny Holzer

Mary Kelly

Barbara Kruger

Questions from this reading?