post object

More traditional object based works are generally created by the artist (creator) and presented to the viewer with the impact or response having no effect on the work. Art doesn’t usually communicate. Historically it has been about personal vision and autonomy. The conceptual art movement of the 60’s rebelled against institutions and the increasing commercialisation and globalisation within the wider world and art world. Giving birth to ‘Art as an Idea’[1] it began to challenge the visual status of the work and the way that the viewer relates to it. Conceptual art changed collectors “possession” of items.

In the 1960’s and 70’s there was a gradual movement of works being produced that welcomed direct physical interaction, (work and viewer) it began to change the concept of aesthetic experience. Early video installations that held the viewer’s attention for a long period of time, the Fluxus instructions and emergence of performative art were precursory to interactive. For example Alan Kaprow’s ‘Happenings’ and Suzanne Lacy’s feminist performances and ‘New Genre Public’ artworks that emerged in the 80’s.

Dialogical aesthetic works have been compared to the Avant guard as the “shock of the new” because it pushes viewers out of our familiar boundaries and perceptual complacencies. Kester talks about Avant guard artists trying to create ‘A kind of epiphany that lifts viewers out of our shared discursive systems (linguistic, visual) or outside of common language.’[2] Dialogical aesthetics do encourage participants to challenge fixed identities; they do it through a cumulative process rather than a single shock for a more effective long-term impact.

[1] Alexander Alberro ‘Conceptual Art and the Politics of Publicity’ MIT 2003
[2]Grant. H Kester ‘Conversation pieces Community and Conversation in Modern Art.’ University of California Press, London 2004