Deconstructing Aesthetics Sue Gablik

Gablick, S. (1991) The Reenchantment of Art, London, Thames and Hudson.
Chapter 5. Deconstructing Aesthetics, Orienting Towards the Feminine Ethos


Serra's Tilted Arc yet again. At the time this happened in New York, in 1981, I didn't hear about it at all. I was in quite a different place in my life. Recently it has come up in all sorts of debates and talks, and there is always a different aspect to consider. Although it is an interesting object, I totally agree that it is deeply unsuccessful as public art in that it made so many people feel bad, and alienated them - the point is not theoretical - it interfered with people's lives. Serra's stance and reaction was totally arrogant, and yet, how easily one can see the other side and argue for its existence for art's sake.

Ukeles' work seems so ephemeral in comparison, so invisible, and the opposite of monumental. And yet how kind it is, how uplifting and powerful. I can't help wondering about Ukeles' persuasive and administrative skills to get her projects realised and funded.

This is a persuasive piece of writing explaining a paradigm shift in thinking about what art has been and what it could be. Life and culture. It's all about the human experience.

Reflection

I once wrote an artistic assessment about Ryan Gander's work - Locked Room Scenario exhibition. In it I said that artists, like superheroes, have to choose whether to use their powers for good or evil, whether to offer solutions to humanity or to rip back the awfulness of it all. I felt Gander used the audience, took from them, and tricked them into being part of the art by making an unpleasant experience. There are so many grey areas here, but why be on the dark side? Why impose like Serra and Gander? Why not enlighten like Ukeles?

17th July 2013