Info & History

20/04/08
Art as analysis, as analysis part 3
Art as analysis, as analysis part 3
Section B.

1. “Art is whatever an artist chooses to be art, as long as it survives all kinds of delays”. Art cannot be defined by quality, taste or judgement, art can be good, bad or indifferent. In what sense could this contradict the practice, law, recognition, of art?

2. If art is whatever an artist chooses, then what is an artist? An artist is one who has artistic thoughts and acts upon them with serious intent (the object/action surviving all kinds of possible delays). Then what is Artistic thought?

3. An artist is one who has artistic thoughts, and acts upon them, with “serious” intention (Performative Act). Although an artist may or may not intend to make art, he or she may intend to go through a process, which at the end (at the final judgement) he or she may recognise something which is/that is art. A pursuit at perfection that cannot exist, a continuous cycle of intentions, events and actions like Hegel’s ‘Absolute Spirit’, but without its teleological end. Art as a form of representation of art, the noumena of art in an ever increasing cycle, so to speak, that of which is unattainable. Or as Wittgenstein would have it, that its meaning cannot be obtained like “game”, “being”, “knowledge”, “life”, etc. They are impenetrable (e.g. Art as a concentrated form of activity), yet we know their meaning. Does this create a continual shift, a constant deferral: Art, Artist, Artistic thought.
Can this be considered artistic thought exclusively? Can it be considered artistic thought at all? It has a tautology of meaning (a=b, all a’s are b), creating analytical definitions. Thus when asked “what is this?” Tends to lead to “what is that?” Ad on infinitum. Those who physically act upon these ideas are artists (the difference between prejudgment and discrimination is a good example here, prejudgment is to have an idea or thought, discrimination is to act upon them).

4. Art is a definition of itself, as in Kosuths tautology. With every work claiming its own definition “This is what I call art!” An artist makes a thing into art; a viewer makes a thing as a work of art. You may perform a/the role by cooking for my family, but does this make you a chef? And without serious intention the role will not survive the delay.