Chicago | Los Angeles | Miami | New York | San Francisco | Santa Fe
Amsterdam | Berlin | Brussels | London | Paris | Toronto | China | India | Worldwide
 
Paris
20100901092932-godinatheading
Alois Godinat
Galerie Chez Valentin
9 Rue saint Gilles, 75003 Paris, France
September 4, 2010 - October 9, 2010


What's the Point?
by Georgia Fee


 

 

 

"Is it art?"  And then the natural follow-on "What is Art?" This is the chain of reaction that ignites the minute I am confronted with highly conceptual art.  And such reaction, despite the fact that much of 20th century art has swung on this squeaky hinge, continues to vex, to compel me into the experience.

I think we can all agree that Smart is terribly hard to pull off, especially when it boils down to a one liner. I guess it is best said that smart is in the mind of the beholder, but it takes courage, or perhaps arrogance, to posit that a coil of bailing wire placed just so on a white wall does hold weight and substance. I look; I like. But why for god's sake? Is this a discussion of labor or constraint? Zen aesthetic or political statement?  Am I being asked to enjoy a black circle on the wall or to shuck off the binding chains of object love? Hard to tell. I stand before the mock stretcher bars of a painting done in brown ribbon and wonder if painting is finally dead, no longer able to support itself. Or maybe it is now considered woman’s work.

I circle to the sound piece, a large black speaker a la rock concert turned on its side jauntily holding court at the forefront of the gallery. I wait and listen. A drum roll builds louder and louder moving towards its final moment until – nothing – the punctuating finish (a pow on the cymbals) has been removed.  A lot of fanfare but no defining point - like shooting blanks. Perhaps that is the point.  These and other questions may be a reason to go to this exhibit, and to ponder. Aloïs Godinat was born in 1978 in Geneva, Switzerland.  He lives and works in Lausanne, Switzerland.

--Georgia Fee, Editor in Chief, living in Paris

(Images: Courtesy of the artist and Galerie Chez Valentin)



Posted by Georgia Fee on 9/7/10
Figure1 what goes round
Art reflects society that creates it. Society acts as an alphahelix structure bearing all new art implements, completing the wider pattern of human development. The first known art materials were of the found type. The first artworks known to us must seem very familiar to the viewer used to contemporary art. The tendency of reinventing found materials as well as relearning the role of simplicity and abstraction to the core, is part of this structure that gives support to the concepts of our days. This cyclic renewal of values in art, and society, gives reasons to believe of seeing all in new turns. If nature stays true to itself, we might see again descriptive artistic language on a well respected height, or a major role given to decorative arts. To describe the whole cycle or try to comprehend it all in this space is not the point, I guess. The point of a good review is not to make one believe the reviewer’s point of view, but to make one find one self’s. In this regard, Georgia’s review is the best I could find about Alois G., Its clear language offers the basic impulse for further, individual assessment. I think that the comments here are an illustration of that. I am glad to have been part of this thread.
20130401061226-2012-05-24_09 found objects
you make good points with your examples. If the purpose of conceptual art is to primarily express ideas- there seems to be more found objects than fresh or meaningful concepts/ideas. Or, perhaps the ideas/objects seem to be just a common message or by-product of a culture that is stagnant. That might be a message- but isn't it a message we all know. We all know there is garbage, dumpsters, items that have been made useless..stacks of plastic everywhere. I once made a vivid swirling painting out of layers of piled and translucent acrylic, framed it with a frame of stuffed black vinyl plastic and titled it "Noetic, narcissitic nemesis." It was concept and it was one a painting I did. It was not a found object. - it was just what it was - articulation of plastic materials. different from hanging found objects.
20100901065021-photograph found objects
A found object rarely has any intrinsic merit as art, but with the involvement of the artist this may well change. Take the example of Picasso and his 'chimp' and goat made from a collection of found objects. Even better was his creation of a bull's head from a bicycle saddle and handlebars-- his extraordinary vision to see this at that time in history was unigue. He transformed the common everyday object into something new, changed our perception, the modern conceptual artist usually just dumps the 'found' and leaves us to get on with it ! David W Whitfield
20130401061226-2012-05-24_09 les choses beaucoup
a door stands between us and the object of art. the door is opened. we view. we experience.the art stays silent. it has not changed. but we talk, we think we feel we are changed. we engage. perhaps the artists might alter the artwork at some time. but the art does not change when we view it -unless it is designed to respond to our feelings. the arts possess the histories and stories of their own. artists understand aspects of human nature and universal significance in a way that is similar to psychology or perhaps religion. if the artist works in a way to express these concepts, then perhaps the artist works as a guide spiritual and psychological. I have preference for things beautiful and compelling. It is preference only. it is not about- "this is good art" and "this is not good art. I just have prefernces. the preference that shapes my choices is towards beauty and/or what is real in human experience. but, i have not lived the many experiences of all humans; although I understand pain, I have not had to watch in terror as people kill people. but, I do not need an expression of art form to shake me emotionally, or leave me empty or jolt me into feeling. I feel and see. For me, found objects are not ' conceptual art'. They are simply an uncomplicated 'artistic' statement about current society. not a very complicated statement- a satire or a way to stop somepiece of junk from going to the dumpster. they should be in a class of their own. I do not think a found sponge should be considered sculpture. But ask Renoir or Michelangelo. what would they think of some of the found objects that are 'considered' as scultpure. I agree with them.
20100901065021-photograph
Art means many 'things' to many people, creator and consumer alike, and created for a multiple of reasons. But to go back to the 'found' object, that on it's own rarely works as an art object. The urinal from Duchamp may work as such, if no one had ever seen such an object and could see it through the unsullied eyes of a child, it could be a piece of sculpture-- it's merits are another thing. The urinal may work, but for me Warhole's brillo boxes do not; My perception may change, does this make the 'artist' an artist or a psychologist, for both may have the ability to alter my perception. David W Whifield





Copyright © 2006-2012 by ArtSlant, Inc. All images and content remain the © of their rightful owners.