Assessment Coversheet Faculty of Arts, Design and Media

and Feedback Form School of Art

Complete the details marked in the coloured text and leave everything else blank. Where appropriate, copy and paste your
submission after the first pages as indicated. You are reminded of the University regulations on cheating. Except where the
assessment is group-based, the final piece of work which is submitted must be your own work. Close similarity between
submissions is likely to lead to an investigation for cheating. You must submit a file in an MSWord or equivalent format as tutors
will use MSWord to provide feedback including, where appropriate, annotations in the text.

Student Name Ben Chandler Reasonable Adjustments

Student Number 15124253 Check this box [x] if the Faculty has
notified you that you are eligible for
Course and Year BA (Hons) Fine Art
a Reasonable Adjustment (including
additional time) in relation to the
Module Code ART 5021
marking of this assessment. Please
note that action may be taken under
Module Title Art in Theory and Writing
the Universitys Student Disciplinary
Module Tutor Procedure against any student
Theo Reeves-Evison
making a false claim for Reasonable
Personal Tutor David Cheeseman Adjustments.

First Marker First Marker

Theo Reeves-Evison Date:
Name: Signature:
Feedback: General comments on the quality of the work, its successes and where it could be improved
Provisional Uncapped Mark
Marks will be capped if this
was a late submission or resit
assessment and may be
moderated up or down by the
examination board.

%
Feed Forward: How to apply the feedback to future submissions

Quality and use of Standard English and Academic Conventions

Spelling Errors Style is Colloquial Standard is a Cause for Concern

Grammatical Errors Inappropriate Structure If the box above has been ticked you should arrange
a consultation with a member of staff from the Centre
Punctuation Errors Inadequate Referencing for Academic Success via Success@bcu.ac.uk

Moderation Comments (Please note that moderation is carried out through sampling. If this section is left blank, your work is not part of the sample.)

Moderation is done via sampling. Your work was not part of the sample.

Moderator
Moderator Name: Date:
Signature:

Marking Criteria Please study this page carefully

1
 0 39% 40 49% 50 59% 60 69% 70 79% 80 100%
Fail Pass Pass Strong Pass Very Strong Exceptionally
(merit) Pass Strong Pass
(distinction) (distinction)
Criterion 1 articulate further knowledge and understanding of both historical and contemporary art
Mark:
in theory and writing.

Criterion 2 construct an informed and independent argument by critically reflecting upon, analysing
Mark:
and interpreting, key theories and writing on both historical and contemporary art.

Criterion 3 apply ethical research conduct and skills through the use of relevant examples drawn
Mark:
from a wide range of primary and secondary sources exhibiting a diversity of critical
and creative perspectives.

Criterion 4 communicate art in theory and writing through a structured and annotated academic
Mark:
essay or agreed alternative written format, including illustrations, references and a
bibliography.

2
Ben Chandler

BA (Hons) Fine Art

Dr. Theo Reeves-Evison

ART5021-A-AYR-2016/7

Word Count: 2,707

Discuss the implications of the dematerialisation of the art object

with reference to specific examples

3
Table of Contents

Title Page Page 3

Table of Contents Page 4

Introduction Page 5

Chapter 1 Page 6

Chapter 2 Page 10

Conclusion Page 14

Appendix Page 16

Bibliography Page 17

4
Introduction

The dematerialisation of the art object during the 1960s and 1970s was the main ramification of the

challenge to previous criteria for judging Western art. This was more significant than Alphonse Allaiss

monochrome paintings and Duchamps Readymades in the sense that it did not question aesthetic

criticism, it outright rejected its necessity. The ideological common ancestor of all of these appears to be

the philosophical shift towards Modernism. In his book, Critique of Pure Reason, Immanuel Kant (1781

cited in Willette, 2012) proposes using unique methods that define a specific discipline to criticise said

discipline, which would filter culture into strengthened categories (Art, Science, and Literature etc.), each

with their own unique values. Within Art, American essayist Clement Greenberg explains the impact of

Kants model of self-criticism in his Modernist Painting essay,

The task of self-criticism became to eliminate from the effects of each art any and every effect

that might conceivably be borrowed from or by the medium of any other art. Thereby each art

would be rendered 'pure', and in its 'purity' find the guarantee of its standards of quality as

well as of its independence. 'Purity' meant self-definition, and the enterprise of self-criticism

in the arts became one of self-definition with a vengeance. (Greenberg, 1960: 1-2)

If purity means self-definition, then observation should show each artistic medium distilling into their

essential idiosyncratic components. For Greenberg (1960) paintings uniqueness was within its materials

and processes: loose brushwork, unrefined base layers, and teasing the flat surface underneath all became

commonplace. The art of Edouard Manet (Figure 1.) and Mark Rothko (Figure 2.) indicates a reductive

process; colours and structures had been filtrated to the extent that recognizable spaces and figures

became obstructions, and were therefore removed.

Referencing this model, one could predict the destination of any medium before even looking at its true

actualisation. It also brings to question whether this model can be applied to other subsets of Art, so this

essay will investigate how this model is embodied by the postmodern Conceptual Art movement and its

quasi-antithetical subset, Romantic Conceptualism.

5
 Figure 1. Manet, 1876. A Figure 2. Rothko, 1959. Red on Maroon.
Portrait of Carolus-Duran.

Chapter 1

Practising the purification paradigm in Art initially seems to require focusing on the chosen subsets noun

and verb; it was discernible in the introductions example of Painting (therefore also to paint) that within

the artistic medium the action must be what requires critique. One may jest that the movement in Art

Movement to be the case, but this is not the logical source for critique; it is the concept, as this essay will

clarify. If Greenbergs Modernism supported Kantian philosophy then it must have adhered to the claim

that if our senses are stimulated by the external world, which becomes mediated by our minds structuring

in order to comprehend reality, then our experiences and knowledge are permanently constricted by

context (Kant, 1998; McCormick, n.d). The external world is inaccessible, thus Kantian ethos states our

perceived reality is governed by principles; the reductive process changed movement to action, dictated

by the mind, and finally, the concept. This realisation suggests that purification does not care for the noun

and verb, but the collectives principles; art movements must self-scrutinise their artworks means of

conception and production.

Art concerned with concepts, therefore concerned with purity, should eliminate judgement of formalist

qualities and taste in favour of practicing economy in an artworks presentation. Stripping away the

6
relevance of traditional aesthetic brings focus to an artworks meaning. Greenberg, with his preference for

formalism, would have abhorred the dissipation of the craft-based practice during the 1960s and the

1970s (Foster, 1996); conceptualism (in the most broad and accepting sense) also being a product of the

very paradigm Greenberg praised would have been equally exasperating to him. Kosuths One and Three

Chairs (Figure 3.) explores this claim through questioning the nature of what a chair is, or can be,

through triadic interplay of object, image, and dictionary definition. Assembling a limited quantity of

different codes (eg. verbal, visual) succinctly forms a mutual code to highlight that our reception of said

chair is ultimately cognitive. The presentation of these codes is simply objects side by side, no skill or

preconceived notion of beauty is present. This is supported by the claim that taste and beauty was

responded to by concept, especially for Kosuth (Duve, 1996). Despite its literal existence, the set-up is

rather open-ended to the possible things Kosuth could use, as well as what questions and conclusions the

viewer may explore. Should one be questioning what signifies a specific thing? What makes the thing? Is

it the object? Is it the image of the thing? What constitutes an image of the thing? Such forms of art align

with a Kantian declaration; being aware of ones own existence is also simultaneous awareness of

something existing permanently outside of oneself, which can be distinguished as separate from oneself

(Kant, 1998). Kosuth presents this self-awareness of the arts being; the installation proposes an external

thing existing but it remains riddled with possibilities. The thing within Kosuths series can be easily

replaced according to instructions but the art will endure, so it requires non-formalist critique. If a

conceptual artwork can be repeated and abjure conventional beautys necessity, this aligns with the

assertion from LeWitt (1967) that ideas alone can act as apparatuses to propel their art.

7
 Figure 3. Kosuth, 1965. One and Three Chairs.

Sol LeWitt is a reputable founder of conceptual art (Osbourne, 2002; Tate, n.d) however LeWitt (1967)

stated conceptual art has little to do with philosophy and that any involvement is implicit. However, the

philosophical relevance to a conceptual work is not so easily dismissed; the means to an artworks

conception, production, and critique is arguably not possible without its Kantian foundation. LeWitts

Untitled (Red Square, White Letters) (Figure 4.) is a prime example with its self-expounding,

disharmonious classification of simplified textual and visual languages. The text and colours of each

square utilise tautology within themselves insofar as clarification constructs paradoxes; antitheses sprout

within each square, row, and column across all horizontal and vertical planes, even the textless squares

muddy ones understanding by confusing oneself of their function. The pieces central square points to

nothing yet it can be argued that, willingly or not, this empty square points to the mind and its structuring

as an explanation for our confusion over the works components. The internal criticism of signs and

significations is key.

Conceptual Art manifested a semantic field: structures, codes, forms, languages, etc. Regardless of the

artworks sensory content, Kants paradigm was not concerned with physical attributes but their value as

8
 Figure 4. LeWitt, 1962. Untitled (Red Square, White
Letters).
signs instead, which initiated creative semiotic practices, in which Kosuth was a canonical figure. Kosuth

wrote,

Works of art are analytic propositions. That is, if viewed within their context as art they

provide no information whatsoever about any matter of fact. A work of art is a tautology in

that it is a presentation of the artists intention, that is, he is saying that that particular work of

art is art, which means, is a definition of art. (Kosuth, 1991: 20)

Kosuths text-based art, regarding Saussurean semiology, is actually not as tautological or transparent as

it should be because writing still retains some gesticulation (Lyotard, 1991; Perniola, 2004); text is a sign

that has rematerialised a linguistic sign (Derrida, 1975; Chandler, 2002). Mel Bochners Language Is Not

Transparent (Figure 5.) supports this by overlapping the titles statement in a numerical progression,

using structures to comment on structures. Kosuths orthodoxy contains further irony by using a

previously existing (Kantian) model as a mode of making a model (artwork) that is critically self-aware of

itself, as a model. Conceptual and perceptual art however remain minutely intertwined, and thus logically

impure. As a result, Conceptual Arts issues led to an interesting consequence.

9
 Figure 5. Bochner, 1969. Language Is
Not Transparent.

Chapter 2

Postmodernism inherited Kants influence with a significant issue; the art objects dematerialisation was

occurring in a world where perception is irremovable. Kosuth (1991) claimed that art within an art

context is closed off in its own isolated system; interesting (and rather romantic) parallels form however

when we reflect on ourselves as similarly isolated in our own perceptual cells in the context of life,

slightly separate of the external world and its contents like that of a lone figure by the vast sea. Having a

conceptual artworks self-defined structure reconfigured through ones perception and minds structuring

causes a manifestation of slippage. Romantic Conceptualism was a significant by-product of such

slippage, and it tried to reconcile the conflicts between logical systems and sentimental sensitivity by

hybridising their characteristics (Heiser, 2007). A suitable example is Susan Hillers Dedicated to the

Unknown Artists (Figure 6.) which presents hundreds of postcards depicting erupting waves by the

British coastline. The artworks museological setup has a blatant mismarriage with the postcards

dynamic contents, which in turn illustrates a subtly-styled tribute to the forgotten postcard-artists. Such

10
sentiment would be expectedly rejected by the canonical conceptual artists because emotions, however

muted, were not considered as pure, yet one can see this romantic tangent continued to go on.

Figure 6. Hiller, 1972-6. Dedicated to the Unknown Artists.

LeWitt (1967) declared that conceptual artworks should stimulate ones intellect and do so by suppressing

emotional content. Romantic Conceptualisms aim to create conceptual artwork which would

intentionally trigger emotions seems unmanageable yet Andy Warhols Kiss (Figure 7.) follows the

rules of a concise execution: still camera shots, black and white, repetitive action, and silence. The

stripped-back style clearly communicates the art, only changing footage to another couple when the

previous segments film ran out. The film references nothing else but itself in its closed system,

seemingly prepared for potentially endless sequencing from its deductively simple instructions. The film

also obeys LeWitts previously mentioned declaration and predates it by four years; moreover, Warhols

film was made three years before the art objects dematerialisation was agreed to have begun, if one takes

the accounts of Lippard (1968; 1973) and Chandler (1968) as definitive. Therefore, why should these

texts be considered so highly if Warhols film fits the criteria but is rejected from being part of

Conceptual Arts canon? Reiteration of the films intimacy is touching but its self-reflexivity could still

provoke intellectual discourse on its intimacy and the surprisingly mundane, repetitive actions that

constitute kissing. Warhols further inclusion of pairings outside the heteronormative dyad also
11
contributes a provocative political dimension that all too well expects an intellectual wrangling of

ideologies, considering the films socio-historical backdrop. Evoking emotion with a calculating coolness

that additionally welcomes intelligent discussion is possible.

Figure 7. Warhol, 1963. Kiss. [Film Still]

Another impediment in Conceptual Art stems from an edict of LeWitt (1969) who claims conceptual

artists are not rational but instead mystical since they make declarations illation cannot access. For a

purity-inspired and system-based movement, LeWitt has created confusion about his edicts meaning. It

could refer to how a conceptual artwork could be perceived as illogical by the spectator but LeWitt does

not specify whether the artists mysticism is directed towards the works concept or its means of

communication. This indicates the possibility of conceptual artists saving themselves and their art of

criticism when the art is ceded to the audience, which allows emotions and subjectivity to run amok. Bas

Jan Ader embodies this illogicality in his film Im Too Sad To Tell You (Figure 8.) where he cries to

the camera, unable to explain himself. Crying is an inbuilt ability yet the straight-shot documentation

highlights an importance attached to crying. Treating what is unmethodical (eg. Emotions, sensitivity) in

a methodical manner (Heiser, 2007) clears a route for appraising these experiences without any grand

12
embellishments, thus bringing the concept forward. Comparison of Conceptual Arts writings and

Romantic Conceptualisms art formulates further contradiction within conceptual artists reasons to be rid

of Romanticisms pathos towards the artist; attempting this with such sharp conservatism suggestively

reveals their own conceited characters (Heiser, 2007). If Kants purification paradigm is utilised by both

movements, yet they both harness a compromised methodology of their arts conception and production

that is all too close together, then what else is left for scrutiny?

Figure 8. Ader, 1971. Im Too Sad To Tell You. [Film still]

Romantically conceptual art underlined another paradox existing within itself and its unforgiving

counterpart, the works perceived ownership. Many artists like Lawrence Weiner (1969-72) asserted that

the recipients owned the work and were responsible for its production, which dismissed his authorship

post-conception, albeit for ecological purposes. Shifting responsibility onto the audience however became

an ironically authoritative act on Weiners part. It is clear that dematerialised art privileges

communication and adoption yet its desire for accessible discourse has strangely limited itself (Heiser,

2011); the artists mystification of authorship creates limitation and so leads to potentially incorrect

readings, and therefore incorrect presentations when physically realised. An exemplification of this

communicative inconsistency is Robert Barrys text piece All the things I know but of which I am not at

the moment thinking (Figure 9.). Semiotics points to language as being the absolute core of all its

systems, as noted by Jakobson (1970 cited in Jakobson, 1990). The works near-pure mode of actuality

13
through use of text is instantaneously juxtaposed by its sheer vagueness from lack of context,

contaminating its reason of being. Even with text only minutely mediating phonological signs, Barrys

printed contemplation remains muddied, but not enough for one to forget who the concept belongs to.

Analysis of ones own perception regarding this meditative proposition allows the viewer to become a

consumer despite the included date separating some spectators somewhat. His concept is also not only an

incongruity from being predetermined consciousness of the unconscious, but is also of an ironic

connection to something rather disconnected, leaving an interpretation to whether it is pure or romantic

through an odd emotional absence that floats between the two. Barrys conceptual irregularities certified a

blurred line between the creator and the consumers authority over the artworks of both art movements.

Figure 9. Barry, 1969. All the things I know but of which I am not at
the moment thinking.

Conclusion

A dialectical investigation into Conceptual Art and Romantic Conceptualism has established many

similarities between the two movements despite their hostility towards one another, but their embodiment

of the purification paradigm has highlighted their contradictions. Both movements embody Kants work

14
in their evident strive for self-definition via analysis of their arts conception and production; reductive

procedures negated aesthetic criticism, which prioritised the need of semiotic reading. Awareness of the

fundamentality of structure and its manifestation as phenomena in a restricted system caused

dematerialised art to privilege a literal presence in order to clearly signify its ideas, yet the subjective

nature of signs retains gestural qualities, which caused Conceptual Art in particular some paradoxical

concerns.

Romantic Conceptualism exploited these concerns by employing sensibility within the same austere

format of production. Experiential and transcendental qualities were abstracted by being systemised in

order to challenge ones understanding of them, this allowed the concept to protrude the artworks form in

hope of an intellectual response. Both movements worked with signs close to the purest semiotic form

(language) to seek clarity within the artworks communication yet it caused conflict with vagueness

instead, shifting the possession of the work to align with the viewers subjective embodiment of the art.

One can conclude that these movements are more entangled and less pure than originally perceived, but

both movements contributed a new criteria for judgement and a visual autonomy to art. These

achievements revealed how artworks are based on dualisms; a break within a structural harmony that

harnesses two opposing elements and their contradiction of their previous system in order to generate new

structures of their own. Creating new systems of relations creates their own language and contributes to

the overarching language of Art, which matches the dyadic tensions between the movements this essay

has identified. Saussure (1983: 119) states: The entire mechanism of language . . . is based on

oppositions of this kind and upon the phonic and conceptual differences they involve. Only through

exploiting these dualisms can we make meaning, and further examine the dynamism between the mind

and the heart.

15
Appendix

Figure 1. Manet, E., 1876. A Portrait of Carolus-Duran. [image online] Available at:

http://barber.org.uk/edouard-manet-1832-1883/ [Accessed 11 January 2017].

Figure 2. Rothko, M., 1959. Red on Maroon. [image online] Available at:

http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/rothko-red-on-maroon-t01165 [Accessed 11 January 2017].

Figure 3. Kosuth, J., 1965. One and Three Chairs. [image online] Available at:

https://www.moma.org/learn/moma_learning/joseph-kosuth-one-and-three-chairs-1965 [Accessed

18 January 2017].

Figure 4. LeWitt, S., 1962. Untitled (Red Square, White Letters). [image online] Available at:

https://www.reddit.com/r/museum/comments/tfb3t/sol_lewitt_red_square_white_letters_1962/

[Accessed 14 January 2017].

Figure 5. Bochner, M., 1969. Language Is Not Transparent. [image online] Available at:

https://www.moma.org/collection/works/95557?locale=en [Accessed 26 January 2017].

Figure 6. Hiller, S., 1972-6. Dedicated to the Unknown Artists. [image online] Available at:

http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/hiller-dedicated-to-the-unknown-artists-t13531 [Accessed 21

January 2017].

Figure 7. Warhol, A., 1963. Kiss. [image online] Available at: http://www.randian

online.com/np_event/andy-warhol-contact/ [Accessed 26 January 2017].

Figure 8. Ader, B. J., 1971. Im Too Sad To Tell You. [image online] Available at:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.artslant.com/work/image/611906/slide/20120826212721-

BasJanAder-I_mtoosad_copy.jpg [Accessed 24 January 2017].

Figure 9. Barry, R., 1969. All the things I know but of which I am not at the moment thinking. [image

online] Available at: https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/536772849316627744/ [Accessed 28 January

2017].

16
Bibliography

Chandler, D. (2002) Semiotics: The Basics. 2nd ed. Oxford: Routledge.

Chandler, J. and Lippard, L. (1968) The Dematerialization of Art. Art International, 12(2), pp. 31-36.

Derrida, J. (1976) Of Grammatology. Translated by G.C Spivak. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins

University Press.

Duve, T.d. (1996) Kant after Duchamp. London: MIT Press.

Foster, H. (1996) The Return of the Real. Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Greenberg, C. (1960) Forum Lectures. Washington, D.C.: Voice of America.

Heiser, J. (2011) Moscow, Romantic, Conceptualism, and After. E-flux, 8(29). Available at:

http://www.e-flux.com/journal/29/68122/moscow-romantic-conceptualism-and-after/ [Accessed

29 January 2017].

Heiser, J. (2007) Romantischer Konzeptualismus: Romantic conceptualism. Edited by E. Seifermann.

Bielefeld: Kerber Verlag.

Jakobson, R. (1970) Linguistics in Relation to Other Sciences. In: L. R. Waugh and M. Monville-Burston,

eds. On Language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. pp. 45188.

Kant, I. (1998) Critique of Pure Reason. Edited and translated by P. Guyer and A.W Wood. Cambridge

edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kosuth, J. (1991) Art After Philosophy, in Art After Philosophy and After: Collected Writings 1966

1990. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

LeWitt, S. (1967) Paragraphs on Conceptual Art. Artforum, 5(10), pp. 79-83.

LeWitt, S. (1969) Sentences on Conceptual Art. Art-Language, 1(1), pp.11-12.

Lippard, L. (1973) Six Years: The Dematerialization of the Art Object from 1966-1972. London: Studio

Vista.

Lisson Gallery (n.d) Lawrence Weiner. Available at: http://www.lissongallery.com/artists/lawrence

weiner [Accessed 30 January 2017].

17
Lyotard, J. F. (1991) Foreword: After the Words. In: G. Guercio, eds. Art After Philosophy and After:

Collected Writings, 1966-1990. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. pp. xv-xviii.

McCormick, M. (n.d) Immanuel Kant: Metaphysics. Available at: http://www.iep.utm.edu/kantmeta/#H2

[Accessed 15 January 2017].

Osborne, P. (2002) Conceptual Art. London: Phaidon Press Limited.

Perniola, M. (2004) Art and Its Shadow. Translated by M. Verdicchio. London: Continuum.

Saussure, F. d. (1983) Course in General Linguistics. Translated by R. Harris. London: Duckworth.

Tate (n.d) Conceptual art. Available at: http://www.tate.org.uk/learn/online

-resources/glossary/c/conceptual-art [Accessed 9 January 2017].

Weiner, L. (1969-72) Statements 1969-72. In: C. Harrison and P. Wood, eds. Art in Theory 1900-2000:

An Anthology of Changing Ideas. New edn. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. pp.893-894

Willette, J. (2012) Modernist Painting by Clement Greenberg. Available at:

http://arthistoryunstuffed.com/modernist-painting-by-clement-greenberg/ [Accessed 12 January

2017].

18