Genealogy of the Site Specific:

In the chapter “Genealogy of Site Specificity”, Miwon Kwon discusses about the evolution or development of site-specific art. The rise of site specific art came with the rise of the minimalist. The movement with minimalist were centered around how art works focused on the relationship between the art work and the site, and “demanded the physical presence of the viewer for the work’s completion.” The site or location of such art works were greatly stressed by several artists as Kwon mentioned in her chapter. She quotes “A site specific work and as such not to be relocated, to remove the works is to destroy the work.” The reasons Kwon suggest for the rise of site-specific work were the result of the minimalist trying to “challenge” the museum space. Kwon makes a great point about how the museum space is now seen by the artists as an artificial and controlled, and the point of the site-specific art is to break out of this normative and conventional space.
Kwon further explains in the chapter how site-specific art were being involved in more political and social complications, moving toward deaestheticization. She writes that “the work no longer seeks to be a noun/object but a verb process, provoking the viewers.” An example she uses was Mierle Ukeles exaggerated cleaning of the museum to show the hidden and devalued labor of daily maintenance the museum requires. I personally thought this was a great example; it is true that barely anyone ever thinks about things such as the labor required before hand of things we have, we simply take things for granted. Ukeles’ exaggeration is provoking because it makes people feel uncomfortable about themselves for not realizing or for being ignorant about the situation put forth.
Another up rising of site specific art was to escape the commomdification of art. However, Kwon seems to suggest how this was not an accomplished goal. The site specific art became more common and was taken up by the mainstream art world. There was an increasing trend of relocating and reproducing the ‘once unique’ site bond works. I like how Kwon mentions in the chapter about reasons some artists has for considering the relocation/reproduction of their site specific art. For example, she mentioned about the social pressures Faith Wilding had when considering whether or not to replication her piece, the Womb Room.
Question: A lot of stresses were placed on the specificity of site-specific art, so how come people started to relocated and reproducing site specific arts? I think it is really interesting how Kwon mentioned site specificity, with cities, and advertising. But I wonder if she is referring to advertising about the city or to the city? Because advertising to the city would definitely show how site specific work has a big influence, especially advertising to different social classes.