What changed about your understanding of community based arts after reviewing this genealogy?
I don’t think my understanding of community based art has really changed much; however, I did learn about the history of community based art and got to see some great examples. I personally think that Richard Serra’s tilted arc was very interesting. It was such a simple yet impactful piece not only for the duration it was installed for but afterwards as well. Even just by observing it through some pictures and reading about, I feel both annoyed by the piece itself and annoyed that it was removed. I could imagine being there and having to walk around this giant wall and feeling irked that it was taking away the simplicity and comfort of walking with the natural flow of people walking but then remembering Serra's quote, “To move the work is to destroy the work”. How contradictory!
What questions emerged for you?
I didn’t quite understand why the art piece “Spoonbridge and Cherry” by Coose Van Bruggen and Claes Oldenburg was listed under site specific art. This may just be the fact that I was as intrigued by the art piece but I don’t quite understand what the site does for the art piece or vice versa.
What new connections became clear?
I think the significance of space and art became a little bit more clear. I guess I had always been more focused on the connection between the artist and the community itself when it comes to community based art but now I see that pieces (although sometimes not for the best intentions) with a stronger focus and connection with a specific site can have a large impact in how a community responds.
Comments
Post a Comment