Conceptual Artwork As Type: an Account of Dematerialization in Conceptual Art
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CONCEPTUAL ARTWORK AS TYPE: AN ACCOUNT OF DEMATERIALIZATION IN CONCEPTUAL ART A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF GRAPHIC DESIGN AND THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES OF İHSAN DOĞRAMACI BİLKENT UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF FINE ARTS By Mustafa Kemal İz May, 2011 I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. MUSTAFA KEMAL İZ ii I certify that I have read this thesis and that in my opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Fine Arts. Assist. Prof. Dr. Dilek Kaya Mutlu (Principal Advisor) I certify that I have read this thesis and that in my opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Fine Arts. Assist. Prof. Ercan Sağlam I certify that I have read this thesis and that in my opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Fine Arts. Dr. Özlem Özkal Approved by the Graduate School of Fine Arts Prof. Dr. Bülent Özgüç, Director of the Graduate School of Fine Arts iii ABSTRACT CONCEPTUAL ARTWORK AS TYPE: AN ACCOUNT OF DEMATERIALIZATION IN CONCEPTUAL ART Mustafa Kemal İz MFA in Graphic Design Supervisor: Assist. Prof. Dr. Dilek Kaya Mutlu May, 2011. This thesis explores the concept of dematerialization, which was introduced by Lucy Lippard and John Chandler to art context, by the means of a new characterization of word-based Conceptual artworks as types. Concerning the notion of dematerialization, it is argued that the notion itself is controversial and vague. In order to clarify the notion of dematerialization, a distinction between art-work and art object, which is dematerialized, is executed. Following this distinction, it is claimed that in the context of Conceptual art, the notion of artwork is more proper than the notion of art object. In this respect, art object is taken as the final product or a part of the artwork. Via taking the dematerialization process as a negation of artwork as object qua end product; ephemeral or transient character of Conceptual works; use of words as artistic material into consideration, it is argued that Conceptual artworks are types. It is argued that use of words in Conceptual art is one of the main conditions reinforcing the dematerialization process which can be seen in almost every example of word-based Conceptual artworks. Through this characterization of Conceptual artworks as types, notion of dematerialization is clarified. Finally, it is argued that as the art object dematerializes; in word-based Conceptual artworks, the place of dematerialized art object is replaced by the use of words. Keywords: conceptual art, dematerialization, artwork, art object, type iv ÖZET TİP OLARAK KAVRAMSAL SANAT İŞİ: KAVRAMSAL SANATTA MADDESİZLEŞMENİN BİR AÇIKLAMASI Mustafa Kemal İz Grafik Tasarım Yüksek Lisans Programı Danışman: Yrd. Doç. Dr. Dilek Kaya Mutlu Mayıs, 2011. Bu tez, Lucy Lippard ve John Chandler tarafından sanat bağlamına sunulmuş maddesizleşme kavramını, sözcük-temelli kavramsal sanat işlerinin birer tip olarak karakterize edilmesi yoluyla inceler. Maddesizleşme kavramını ilişkin olarak, kavramın tartışmalı ve belirsiz bir kavram olduğu iddia edildi. Maddesizleşme kavramını açıklamak adına, sanat işi ile maddesizleşen sanat-nesnesi arasında bir ayrım yapıldı. Bu ayrımı takiben, kavramsal sanat bağlamında, sanat işi kavramının sanat-nesnesi kavramına oranla daha uygun olduğu iddia edildi. Bu anlamda sanat- nesnesi, sanat işinin bir parçası ya da bir son ürünü olarak alındı. Sanat işinin bir nesne veya sonuç ürünü olarak reddi, kavramsal sanat işlerinin geçici ve kısa süreli karakteristiği ve sözcüklerin sanatsal malzeme olarak kullanımı göz önüne alındığında, kavramsal sanat işlerinin birer tip (type) olduğu iddia edildi. Kavramsal sanatta sözcük kullanımının, birçok sözcük-temelli kavramsal sanat işinde görülen maddesizleşme sürecini pekiştirdiği iddia edildi. Kavramsal sanat işlerinin birer tip olarak karakterize edilmesi üzerinden maddesizleşme kavramı açıklandı. Son olarak, sözcük-temelli kavramsal sanat işlerinde sanat-nesnesi maddesizleşirken, maddesizleşen sanat nesnesinin yerini sözcüklerin aldığı iddiasında bulunuldu. Anahtar Sözcükler: kavramsal sanat, maddesizleşme, sanat işi, sanat nesnesi, tip v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor Assist. Prof. Dr. Dilek Kaya Mutlu for her helpful guidance, continual trust and invaluable criticism throughout my research. I am also very grateful to Dr. Özlem Özkal for her thought-provoking suggestions and insightful comments during my research. I also wish to thank Assist. Prof. Ercan Sağlam for his suggestions and criticism in my thesis defense. For their never-ending trust and unlimited support, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my mother, my father and my sister without whom I could not realize my dreams. Finally, I am very grateful to Duygu Beykal for her priceless encouragement and invaluable help throughout my research. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS SIGNATURE PAGE..................................................................................................... iii ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................ iv ÖZET ............................................................................................................................. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................vi TABLE OF CONTENTS.............................................................................................. vii 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 1 2. PRECURSORS OF CONCEPTUAL ART..................................................... 11 2.1. Duchamp’s Legacy.............................................................................11 2.2. Greenberg’s Modernism..................................................................... 19 2.3. Historical Preliminaries of Conceptual Art........................................ 22 2.3.1. Fluxus..................................................................................... 28 2.3.2. Minimalism............................................................................ 34 3. AN OVERVIEW OF CONCEPTUAL ART .................................................40 3.1. The Difficulty in Defining Conceptual Art........................................40 3.2. What is conceptual in Conceptual art? ............................................... 42 3.2.1. Henry Flynt’s Account of Concept Art................................... 42 3.2.2. Edward Kienholz’s Concept Tableaux ..................................43 3.2.3. Sol LeWitt’s Account of Conceptual Art...............................44 3.2.4. Joseph Kosuth’s Account of Conceptual Art.........................48 3.2.5. Different Accounts of Conceptual Art in Comparison ..........54 vii 4. CONCEPTUAL ARTWORKS AND DEMATERIALIZATION ..................57 4.1. “The Dematerialization of the Art Object”.......................................... 57 4.1.1. Artwork and Art Object Distinguished ................................68 4.1.2. Reconsidering Dematerialization .........................................70 4.1.3. Conceptual Artworks as Types ............................................71 4.2. Word-Based Conceptual Artworks as Types...................................... 74 4.2.1. Joseph Kosuth’s Investigation..............................................77 4.2.2. Robert Barry’s Something Series.........................................82 4.2.3. Lawrence Weiner’s Statements............................................84 5. CONCLUSION.................................................................................................. 88 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 98 viii 1. INTRODUCTION In his canonical essay “The Origin of the Work of Art,” Martin Heidegger (1975) sets out to pursue the origin of the work of art in order to conceal the essence of the art(work), presupposing the essence of something is what makes this particular something what it is. First of all, activity of the artist is indicated as the origin or the source of the work of art. But this indication, as Heidegger (1975) too acknowledges, begets another crucial question: What is the essence or nature of the artist? Origin of the artwork and nature of the artist refer to each other, so claims Heidegger (1975): “The artist is the origin of the work. The work is the origin of the artist. Neither is without the other” (pp. 15-16). But this claim is not the end of the story. Heidegger deepens the inter-referentiality between the artwork and the artist via adding another dimension which is a third thing, but prior to them: art. Although the artwork and the artist are necessary for each other’s essences, they are not sufficient for themselves, i.e. they are not the sole support of the other. So “the question of the origin of the work of art becomes a question about the nature of art” (Heidegger, 1975, pp. 15-16). The interrelation between the artwork and the artist opens up in another interrelation which is more complex, namely