READY SET GO WITH DUCHAMP
Ready-Made Art
Visit the website www.marcelduchamp.org/ and go to “Encounter with Duchamp” and then enter” the Encounter Room” which displays reproductions of works by this radical artist. View the works and read the accompanying stores, discuss whether or not you eel these objects are art. If so, what makes them art? If now, what is the difference between them and a work of art? Do these objects fit in with your definition of art you gave me for the first journal entry?
Visit the website www.marcelduchamp.org/ and go to “Encounter with Duchamp” and then enter” the Encounter Room” which displays reproductions of works by this radical artist. View the works and read the accompanying stores, discuss whether or not you eel these objects are art. If so, what makes them art? If now, what is the difference between them and a work of art? Do these objects fit in with your definition of art you gave me for the first journal entry?
Okay, I am going to be brutally honest. I hate this Duchamp piece. I hate it. It evokes disrespect for one of the most well-known masterpieces and painted by "my man" Da Vinci. Is this art? I do not think defacing another's piece of art is art. Period. I learned when I was much younger when going into a gallery or place where people's art is being shown, unless they are interactive, RESPECT the artist's heart and soul and do not touch! I can read and study all the words out there on Duchamp's motivation for "creating" this piece (and I must admit in class, Mrs. Frankino gave a really great perspective causing me to relinquish my extreme hatred for the piece into a mild hatred).
However, did he create something though? I believe he did. So I guess that means it is art? I guess so. Yet, I still do not believe in art being defacing another's. Hmmmm. I am not sure how to rectify my opposing ideals. I guess I will resign with I do not believe in - under any circumstance - defacing another's art unless it is necessary for the well being of something. However, when one creates something new, even if it using something else to do so, it is still art.
Now this piece, I like. Obviously there is a sexual element since a urinal directly relates to genitalia releasing liquid. I like the inversion of the urinal, for it appears more feminine somehow. I do not know why I see that, but I do. I also like the idea this receptacle would splash right back on the male urinating. I like the connotation of a man having his personal body fluids sent right back to him when trying to "release."
Are these pieces art? I have to concede, yes. Do they match my original definition at the beginning of the semester? Yes.
Reason being I had to come to the conclusion that everything can be art, regardless whether I like it or not.
Reason being I had to come to the conclusion that everything can be art, regardless whether I like it or not.