Is it art when one painter envisions and paints? And is it still art when a collective of assistants paint and then wait for the master to finish and/or simply approve?
Is the art in the idea, or in the planning, or in the fabrication of the object? And if the art is the idea, then shouldn’t collectors and curators give more focus to the idea itself and to sketches and documentation of those ideas, rather than largely focusing on an object that may have been fabricated by others? These are important questions for museum leaders considering how they will balance investment in exhibition, education and public programming surrounding the art they present.
In an mOppenheim.TV interview, Hirshhorn Interim Executive Director Kerry Brougher points out that “…the goal of real art is to shake you up a little bit and make you think in new ways.”
The provocative consequence of such reasoning is this: if what we are viewing, hearing or seeing does not elicit a shift in your soul, heart or head… then however others define “art”, it may not be art to you. And if it is art, then the art might not be the object we can touch.
What do you think?