Lets all blame Duchamp!

The influence the work of Marcel Duchamp has had on modern and contemporary art. Do you feel his work still has influence on artists working in the world today?

When we look at Marcel Duchamp’s “Fountain” we recall an image in our minds, not just of the originality of the artwork, but also of a profound intervention in the art world. What Duchamp had named as art was to be the pioneering piece that changed our ideas of modern art and of what art could be. It essentially challenged the boundaries of what art would be and become. His work opened up questions not only as to how art could be presented, but how it could be made, thought about, the materials used and the viewers’ involvement with the art to conceptual. Within this he created a “new art” that was to undoubtedly be of interest to future artists and with an idea so striking, be of influence to neo conceptual artists working today. In this essay I aim to explore the influence Duchamp had on the transformation in art from the creation of dada, through several movements such as abstract expressionism, surrealism and Pop art to conceptual art. By looking at various works in detail, providing a comparison and contrast of how the Duchamp effect was and still is being carried through in art practices today.

Sol lewitts, in his sentences on conceptual art states “in conceptual art the idea or concept is the most important aspect of the work. When an artist uses a conceptual form of art, it means that all of the planning and decisions are made beforehand and the execution is a perfunctory affair. The idea becomes a machine that makes the art”[1]. How is it that Marcel Duchamp’s work which is considered the birth of conceptual art itself came to progressively influence artist after him theoretically and in their works, which all hold this idea as its most imperative element in order for the artwork to function?  It is interesting to determine what works and movements influenced Marcel Duchamp when considering the lead up to his intervention of the art world, this will enable us to see a progression of what art he was looking at, creating and then we shall see the extent of the transformation he made in art and what the main catalysts of conceptual art were. One of Duchamp’s last retinal arts was the nude descending the staircase, which caused controversy at the New York armory show in 1913[2]. With obvious mechanistic and cubist themes in the piece, it was undoubtedly innovative in that it held futuristic elements. One could suggest that Duchamp held a rebel attitude when it came to exploring his ideas and for his new ways of creating to flourish. Soon after his ideas of mysterious symbolism, the formation of Dadaism was beginning to mould Duchamp’s ideas into an art movement. This idea of the machine was the first innovative work that sought to overthrow a traditional aesthetic way of looking, called the large glass, which was a composite of wedged machinery between sheets of glass, out rightly rejecting conventional painterly artistic practices. A fundamental theme which was being teased out of his works and now with the creation of his ready-mades was even more prominent was the questioning of the idea of art, is that all art is an idea? Consequently he had created the idea of the art representing a devaluation of mastery. Here we can point out the one of the main influences Duchamp passed onto future artists and movements were that the designation of a simple object that had already been created in the world could exist and essentially become categorized as art. The artwork that epitomises this notion is his non representational piece named “fountain” which was photographed by Alfred Stieglitz in 1917. Obviously the work was not handcrafted; the urinal already served a purpose within the world that meant that its intention surely was not for artistic purposes.  Duchamp’s recognition and acceptance played a major role in the idea of conceptual art that held no intrinsic meaning, this fundamental acknowledgement was made by Joseph Kosuth in his essay on  Art after Philosophy, 1969, "All art (after Duchamp) is conceptual (in nature) because art only exists conceptually."[3] Of course this opened up a whole new possibility for what art was, what it could be and what it will be in the future. One issue or rather an innovation that arises from this idea of an artist pin pointing an object and granting it an artwork is that surely anyone in the world has the potential to be an artist. This idea is explored in the art journal October; in Thierry de Duve and Rosalind Krauss’s article “Marcel Duchamp, or The Phynancier of modern life”, “...it’s true everybody has the potential to become an artist. But does that guarantee that “creativity” and “use-value” even exist?”[4] This suggests that the act of choosing an object that anybody else could and name it art, actually devaluates the creativity of the artist, but if art happens to be an gestural amalgamation of representation and reality, surely everybody withholds the cultural signifiers in able to create art, that is simply made up of an attitude towards concepts in the world. This then implies purely existence and experience counters the need for a considerably high level of creativity.

By looking at later periods in art history we can establish the extent of Duchamp’s influence in selected art movements as well as what constitutes an artist. Here I will consider abstract expressionism, surrealism and pop art, alongside their corresponding, most prominent artists of the movement. Abstract expressionists were primarily concerned with making art that captured the presence of movement with paint onto the canvas. The main focus here is that artists such as Jackson Pollock became aware that the actual making of the work, is equal in relation to the actual work itself. Once again reinforcing the idea of a dualism between the actual makings or privileging of an object and an idea being applied, which may in fact be the artwork in itself, in this example the “process” is equated to the finalised artwork. So if movement and the actual execution of a work can be considered a piece of artwork, we appreciate that Duchamp’s simple notion of applying an idea to stand alone objects, a selection process and now a physical process, art would be changed forever and art as a process would move forward to go above and beyond expectations; art can therefore be considered as a proposition of what art can be, either through activity or gesture. In the modernist world of art, works withheld an autonomous nature, it could be understood universally in time and experience, for conceptual art was the birth of bringing together of representation and reality. Beauty and aesthetics were no longer prioritised and thought to be the main centre of observation in an artwork. A tabula rasa approach had been installed into art appreciation, which enabled Duchamp’s legacy to develop art through this influence. We could therefore suggest that conceptual art after Duchamp was initially an understanding of an attitude alongside the appearance of reality, in essence with an excentric view which succeeded traditional arts targeted concentric view within a constrictive frame. A movement which is important to therefore consider is Pop art, an art of immediacy and is quintessentially known for the dismissal of aesthetical appreciation. Furthering this idea of Duchamp creating art that was conjuring certain attitudes, either towards the artwork or the creation of new attitudes about art itself, the pop art movement is centred upon this idea for the artists involved wanted to defer from the art of high culture, which was highly elitist.  It raised questions about mass production in popular culture, the actual works being produced by mass production machinery and the end product being a form of advertisement, such as labelling brands that feature on mass produced items sold in supermarkets. The iconic figure of Pop art was the American artist Andy Warhol. From looking at Warhol’s works, namely the work “Brillo Soap Box” which was a collection of hollow soap boxes made from plywood, it is also important to note that Warhol was known for his silk screening and paintings. The Brillo soap boxes were considered to be sculpture. Looking at the boxes we assume that they are found objects that like Duchamp have been privileged art status, but they were made in a commercial line like strategy. Warhol employed carpenters to make the boxes and then painted them so that they could not be distinguished from the original boxes. They were stacked up high within the gallery space, creating a warehouse type interior. Of course this caused controversy because it was an imitation of a found object that was considered boring and an object of no value. But most importantly, like Duchamp’s conceptual works, the Bike wheel on an upturned stall and the Fountain, they were granted non-conformist and an intrusion of the exhibition they were placed in, which did not compliment the gestural paintings of the era. It would seem that Duchamp’s influence of initiating a new attitude towards arts value was to be played out all over again.

It seems what Duchamp was asking of the art world was why rely on creation of material alone? Why not use what is already in the world used with the idea of forming a concept and name it art? This exclamation is targeting the nature of art, could the change in art be art? Could the naming of what is and isn’t art actually be the art itself? All of which are ideas, or it would seem just an idea that extenuates from material form; it becomes subjective. Obviously Duchamp’s bottle rack is a bottle rack and if found in a kitchen would not be subject to questioning, it carries out its function as a bottle rack. But because Duchamp claimed it as art and gave it a pedestal, the privileging of the object as art is its concept. This was his innovation that is evident throughout conceptual art that is still made by artists working today. Moving forward to later movements such as installation art and artists, along with neo-conceptualists working around the world today, we see Duchamp’s legacy as being at the centre of the works value. Installation art centres itself upon its requirement for the viewer’s engagement with the artwork in order to gain any conceptual understanding. In Michael Asher’s works, a space or room is subtly or dramatically modified in which the viewer becomes aware of the object in space that surrounds them. One person’s body perception is also a part of the experience, people know when a space is awkwardly arranged and one becomes aware that it differs from the norm; one such experience could be that of claustrophobia. Once again to enforce Duchamp’s influence on installation art is that it is the rejection of a purely aesthetic central viewpoint, but evokes an involvement and concept requirement from the viewer. This not only epitomises the idea of art now being non aesthetical and pure form and concept, but we see a progression on from Duchamp which is essentially physical presence in and around the artwork; an interaction of people, art and place. Moving on to works being made today by artist known as neo-conceptualists, all of these previous distinctions as to what constitutes modern and conceptual art are all present within neo-conceptualist art, but there is a suggestion of a post-Duchampian element of the works. This element that has come to be the centre of most neo-conceptualists’ creative process is that they provide the viewer with an experience of apperception. A movement that were keen to express this were the YBA’s. Through the act of not even consciously knowing that an object or environment could be art, for instance Tracey Emins’ bed was privileged as art after a 3 day episode of depression. Her experiences had created something so groundbreaking as in personal experiences being shared with other people, whom would then consider their own condition and experiences through looking at the piece; art became autobiographical. Going back to this idea of progression from Duchamp up until know, a piece that incorporates all of these elements of what art constitutes is exemplified in Emins “Everyone I Have Ever Slept with 1963–1995”. The work was a tent that had stitched names on the inside all of who Emin had been intimate with, in both a sexual and non sexual way. The work is essentially thought provoking, producing body and space awareness and this idea of apperception, consequently you entered a small intimate space which was metaphorical of a situation Emin had encountered with all the names inside. Once you had left the tent your mind was then asking you the same question, how many people have you been intimate with, questioning our own experience; ultimately asking for the viewer’s interaction. We can see a direct link to Duchamp’s innovative concept and influential notions as Judovitz here states according to his works, “Duchamp’s works compel the spectator to question the traditional categorize that have defined the notion of the art object, the creative act and the position of the artist. The spectator completes, as it were, the creative process not as a passive consumer but as an active interpreter”[5]. This implies that a transcendental thought process is formed which is formed using social relations, the imagination, as well as our perceived reality.

Considering Duchamp’s influence upon art through various movements up until today, it would not be wrong to say that his flipping of the art world upside down and inside out made him the pioneer of modern art. He expanded the visual field by abolishing the centre of contemplation that traditional works were centred upon, creating a conceptual dialogue between the artwork and the viewer. This has become one of the fundamental tools used within conceptual art; engaging with the viewers intrigue and involvement. The devaluation of creativity and questioning the artist status of ability is also at the forefront of questions about de-materialised art being produced today. Duchamp introduced the ongoing art debate of what is original and reproduction, consequently altering the concepts we have surrounding the boundaries and possibilities of art as well as the proceeding artists ideas of making these types of arts to challenge the status quo by making a political statement through art.  To group all of these influences of Duchamp’s work together and consider an epitomic statement that would define Duchamp’s legacy would be a quote from the man himself “Everything important that I have done can be put into a little suitcase”- Marcel Duchamp, New York, March 1952[6]. This satirically reiterates what Duchamp’s intervention of the artwork has achieved; his ideas and artworks were conceptually portable among future artists, just as much as they were physically.

Bibliography:

Judovitz, D, Unpacking Duchamp: Art in Transit, University of California Press, 1998.

LeWitt, Sol, “paragraphs on Conceptual art”, (1967), in Art in theory 1900-1990, (Oxford:Blackwells

Masheck, J. Marcel Duchamp in perspective, Da Capo Press, 2002.

Articles:

Thierry de Duve and Rosalind Krauss: October Vol. 52, (spring, 1990), pp. 60-75 Published by: The MIT Press. Accessed 27^th November 2010 11:57am.

---

[1] LeWitt, Sol, “paragraphs on Conceptual art”, (1967), in Art in theory 1900-1990, (Oxford: Blackwells), pp79.

[2] Masheck, J. Marcel Duchamp in perspective, Da Capo Press, 2002, pp 12.

[3] Kosuth,J.  Art after Philosophy, 1969.pp 164.

[4] October Vol. 52, (spring, 1990), published by: The MIT Press. pp61.

[5] D.Judovitz, Unpacking Duchamp: Art in Transit, University of California Press, 1998.pp 1, introduction.

[6] D.Judovitz, Unpacking Duchamp: Art in Transit, University of California Press, 1998.pp 1.