“Paragraphs on Conceptual Art”

Text reference: Artforum, June 1967, “Paragraphs on Conceptual Art” by Sol LeWitt

• ‘In conceptual art the idea or the concept is the most important aspect of the work. When an artist uses a conceptual form of art, it means that all of the planning and decisions are made beforehand and the execution is a perfunctory affair.’

I mostly agree with this statement. In my work, the most important aspect is the ideas behind the work, but it is through making the work the ideas become merged in this physical object.

• ‘What the work of art looks like isn’t too important‘ ‘No matter what form it may finally have it must begin with an idea. It is the process of conception and realisation with which the artist is concerned. Once given physical reality by the artist the work is open to the perception of all, including the artist.’
• ‘It doesn’t really matter if the viewer understands the concepts of the artist by seeing the art. Once it is out of his hand the artist has no control over the way a viewer will perceive the work. Different people will understand the same thing in a different way.’

My work towards the end of this term has been about the ideas gone into planning making a piece rather than a focus on a visual aesthetic. I don’t think the looks of the piece are important in this regard and from my perspective as long as I have carried out what I set out to do, followed the instructions I made, the work is successfully completed. I do, however, considering the viewer, understand that how the work looks is going to affect how they perceive it. I want the ideas I had to be visible but there is not escape from people’s own perception of the work. If the work is thought out enough the physical piece should show these ideas. Taking responsibility for having a thought-out plan before I make and accepting, I cannot control people’s perceptions of my work, I would agree that ‘what the work of art looks like isn’t too important.’

• ‘Art that is meant for the sensation of the eye primarily would be called perceptual rather than conceptual’ ‘the function of conception and perception are contradictory’

There is an aesthetic about a work being about the thought behind it rather than a visual aesthetic. Which is definitely what my work is about. Ideally, I want the viewer to consider the artist’s decision making and ideas that went into creating the piece rather than whether it looks pleasing or stirs and emotion or memory; none of these things are the intention of the work.

• ‘If the artist wishes to explore his idea thoroughly, then arbitrary or chance decisions would be kept to a minimum…’

During this project I realised a shift in my interest, which lay in exploring materiality though the physical making process, to the thought process before making. I disagree that ‘change decisions should be kept to a minimum’ I made a thought-out decision to use chance, partially, in my work. I allowed a random number generator to choose the number of actions I would do to the cardboard, out of seven. These seven chosen specifically based on the material and not wanting to use an added tool. My work does not completely comply with conceptualist ideas. Although, there was a lot of ideas and planning taken place before making. This was to find ways to remove myself from making decisions during the process of making as I was just following instructions.

‘To work with a plan that is preset is one way of avoiding subjectivity’

I came up with a list and set of controls for making my work to avoid subjectivity which could’ve occurred during the making and displaying of the work.

• ‘If the artist carried through his idea and makes it into visible form, then all the steps in the process are of importance. The idea itself, even if not made visual, is as much a work of art as any finished product.’

I don’t agree with this concept. With my work there are multiple ideas and only by making the work do these ideas merge, into a singular physical form. Without the making no one else can see these ideas. I think a physical form is necessary for an artwork.

• ‘Conceptual art is made to engage the mind of the viewer rather than his eye or emotions.’

There is something about the simplicity of my work visually that initiates questions from the viewer causing them to think about what the idea behind the piece is. I deliberately kept the material and support as little as possible and only used what little I needed as could be justified by the meaning behind the work, to act as a sculpture and painting caught in-tension. The material it’s self I was interested in using as a metaphor for how people are valued in society, hence the one individual box.

• ‘The conceptual artist would want to ameliorate this emphasis on materiality as much as possible or to use it in a paradoxical way (to convert it into an idea).’

Ameliorate: make something bad better

Exploring the use of materials has given me ideas but the final form is not an idea. I think there is a constant process when exploring materials of learning from them and applying new ideas to them. The material in my work functions to hold ideas and prompt the viewer to think of these ideas.

Sentences on Conceptual Art:

(First published in 0 to 9 magazine (New York) 1969, and Art-Language (England), May 1969)

6. If the artist changes his mind midway through the execution of the piece he compromises the result..’
7. The process is mechanical and should not be tampered with. it should run its course.’

I agree the statement above in regards to my latest work. Ideally, I would have been able to make the decision about display before making, and painting the space. I, also, ideally would’ve make the piece once. So, the outcome was unknown.

8. When terms such as ‘painting’ and ‘sculpture’ are used they imply acceptance of this tradition, placing limitations on the artist and the artwork. (paraphrased)

My work has been influenced and developed by reading about formal painting and looking at artists that go against these traditional ideas. By approaching my work with a set of constructs and exploring which I agree with and which I deem necessary, for the work to be considered a painting, has given me a way to approach my work. I think this point refers to once the work is done labelling it a media. I would say my work is in-between painting and sculpture. It contains aspects of both. My work cannot be labelled one way or the other but I have created this situation purposefully. I see my work more from an expanded painting point of view but it does contain aspects of formal sculpture too. Deciding what media an artwork is can alter the meaning and open it up to different criticisms than if it were labelled another media. There is a problem removing these labels completely. One problem is these constructs have been around so long that art criticism and writing has been split up as well. I think critiquing a multi-media work would be more difficult as you would have to consider the art history of both medias. I realise this is a weakness in my work as I have mostly approached it from an expanded painting perspective.