I have Amy to thank for this link to another artist that engages the viewer in active participation. Thanks Amy! :)
Daniel Buren has created an installation piece called 'Intervention II'. The exhibition comprises of a painted wall, with sliders that contain different coloured squares of perspex, as well as pieces of perspex which have been hung from the ceiling. The viewer of the wall installation can take an active participatory role within the experience of the art by moving the sliding components of the wall installation as they wish to, and create different colour combinations. So ultimately, the viewer can construct their own perceptions/views in response to Buren's art and the conditions and resources that he has provided in which to do so.
As Amy states on her blog, the sliders "allow the viewer to change their original perceptions and ideas about the art work." The intention of Buren's work relates to the positioning of the perspex structures within the gallery space in relation to windows, and the coloured perspex's interaction and reaction with light.
So from a participatory art perspective, would the viewer of Buren's work be able to engage with the art objects intention and purpose meaningfully without being able to manipulate how they percieve it to be and represent this within their response? Without the sliding/participation element to his work, wouldn't Buren be restricting the viewers of the work in responding to what he is expressing and exploring within his work?
I think that allowing the viewer to manipulate/co-construct how they percieve the artwork is important in being able to access and interpret its intention, and purpose. After all, we all percieve art in different ways, and as well as being objective, it can be subjective in relation to our individual knowledge, understanding, and experiences.
No comments:
Post a Comment