Q1: We've studied past eras in which artists mocked museums within a museum, which gave me the impression that the museum committee that selects what should or should not be shown is open to different types of art. This is why I was surprised to read about Guggenheim's denial of Hans Haacke's real estate pieces, due to their "specificity" or the "naming of specific individuals" (179), as Messer defined it. The museum itself is supposed to be pure and neutral, but isn't the goal of the art to have a message, whether it be social, political or anything else the artists portrays? Why is a concept like Situationism okay, but not the message that Hans Haacke is trying to expose?
Q2: Duchamp was famed for his mantra of "if I say it's art, it's art," and his Fountain piece, while denounced at first, became the symbol for this mantra and the inspiration for many artists. If Hans Haacke says his real-estate pieces are art, why were they not regarded as so? Isn't it hypocritical for museums (and the people in charge of them) to glorify Duchamp and his followers, yet deny Hans Haacke's work?
No comments:
Post a Comment