Jan 30: In Steve Locke’s class we had a discussion of a performance both Darren and Steve had seen at the MOMA where a man ‘wore’ a piano as he pushed it around playing facing backwards.
(Jun Sun performing ‘Ode to Joy’ at the “Stop, Repair, Prepare”)
Darren and Steve had different reactions. Personally, I was impressed the man could play the piano backwards but more importantly wanted to know what his inspiration for the piece was. I found a video with the artist describing the process. http://youtu.be/iuJdI8S01-k
What’s my point? Is great, good, successful, amazing contemporary art subjective? I keep returning to this question. What are the aesthetic standards? Are there any that exist? Some people believe that the viewer should not have any reasoning or interpretation presented by the artist and that they viewer should come to their own conclusions while experiencing the piece for themselves. While I see this as important I also see how a piece can be much more appreciated when the viewer is allowed to understand the meaning behind the work. Should it be an option for the audience to have access to the motivation of the artist? I don’t always want to know the meaning of a work myself. However, I can see how having a meaning could make contemporary art accessible to a larger audience.
When showing contemporary work to my elementary students I often ask them if they want know what the artist was thinking and am impressed that often they don’t want to know. I also note that consistently half want to know and the other half don’t, and I respect that. I’ll actually have students cover their ears so they don’t have to hear! I see it as evidence that not only is contemporary art interpretative but it is appears to be aesthetically interactive.
