Ken Johnson of the New York Times asks, is sculpture too free for its own good? Living with two artists, one of whom is a sculptor, has opened my eyes to what visual artists think about art. I think that often, when people see a box by Donald Judd they get annoyed that he is trying to pass that off as art, because they think he is trying to pull a fast one on them. Nobody likes to feel stupid, especially when it comes to artwork, so they claim it can't be art.
Now, the more important question posed by Johnson is that "if sculpture can be anything, then maybe it is not anything in particular." He points out that the only limits in sculpture is that it not be two-dimensional. I would guess that there could be a second article on painting which really is as broad as sculpture.
I'm going to talk to my roommate about sculpture tonight to see what his thoughts are on whether or not he feels like the limitless nature of sculpture is bad for art. I tend to love contempary art because I like how much it makes my imagination take off. Have artists pushed scupture to far?
Friday, May 07, 2004
Who killed sculpture?
-x-
