Installation Practices and the Relationship between the Object Viewed and the Spectator - Coursework Example

Installation Practices and the Relationship between the Object Viewed and the Spectator Installation Practices and the Relationship between the Object Viewed and the Spectator Introduction The statement that “Various modes of installation practice have irreversibly changed the relationship between the objects viewed and the spectator” is quite true. According to many experts, the used of installation art to change the relationship between objects viewed and the spectator is particularly attributed to the fact that installation not only changes the entire experience into which the work of art flows but it also expands a spectators consciousness and improves the discovery of rhythm in the object (Fried, 1998, Bishop, 2005 and Reiss, 2011). For example, the “spectator” not only becomes installed in the art work but they also become part of the environment. Consequently, installation practices are often able to change the way the artworks or objects are apprehended altogether. Installation art is all about site specific three dimensional works that are normally designed to transform and change the viewer’s perception of space. The notion of installation practices can be traced back to the late 19th century when a number of artists began to move beyond the impulse of decorating or narrating and included elements of immersing spectators in an experience of beauty that encompasses their whole field of vision. This was particularly achieved by loading large interior spaces with items that evoke multiple or complex associations of thought, moods and longing. A spectator is often is not just the beholder or the aesthetic viewer of an art but also goes to occupy a central place in aesthetic experience. Many authors such as Fried (1998) particularly describe Spectators as interactively get engaged in the work of art. Today, installation practices are commonly applied in interior exhibition spaces such as art galleries, museums as well other public or private spaces. According to De Oliveira and Oxley (2003, p.46), the installation genre of art incorporates a wide range of natural or everyday materials which are usually chosen based on their evocative qualities. This paper supports the argument that various modes of installation practice have irrevocably changed the relation between the art objects viewed and the spectator based on a comparative analysis of three important installation works.  Comparison of Three Installation Works There are a number of installation works of art that effectively confirms the irreversible effects of installation practices on the relationship and interaction between the spectators and the art objects. This is particularly evidenced in their aesthetics, popularity (Reiss, 2011, p.123). For example; one of the remarkable similarities between the selected installation works is that instead of the usual blank spectatorship between the artwork and the observers, there is an element of interactivity between the installation and the observer present in all the three installation works. “Walls Enclosing a Space” by Santiago Sierra, 2003 One of the remarkable installation works of art that best confirm the statement that installation practices have irrevocably changed the relationship between the objects viewed and the spectator is the works of a Spanish artist, Santiago Sierra titled “Walls enclosing a space.” Throughout his installation works, Sierra particularly espouses a kind of minimalism that charges phenomenological perceptions with political aspects (Bishop, 2005). For example, the works attempts to expose how national identity is often filled with legal and social exclusions just like public spaces. The same motivation underpins a number of performance arts at present because the presence of the body is treated as something ephemeral, immediate and authentic. On the other hand, Sierra’s installations are not only nihilistic but can also be seen as simple reiterations of a repressive status quo. However, Sierra has effectively managed to embed his art work into institutions such as immigration, congestion and homelessness among others as opposed to contemporary art works (Bishop, 2005). As one of the world’s most renowned installation artists, Sierra’s work particularly depicts his hatred for the political and capitalism changes that had taken place in Mexico where he lived. For example, in the “Wall Enclosing a Space” installation, much of Sierras work involve restrictions to certain places to depict the growing exploitation of the under privileged with the rise of capitalism. However, unlike many artists, Santiago Sierra does not present these institutions as reconciled but rather as distinct spheres that are fraught with instability, tension and are yet to open to change. In short it may be argued that Sierra’s installation effectively points out the racial or economic tensions and antagonisms through its awkwardness and discomfort. Fig 1: Walls Enclosing a Space by Santiago Sierra “Batallic Monument” by Thomas Hirschhorn, 2002 The words Bataille Monument simply means the milieu of the socially marginalized individuals who must work. The Bataille Monument done by a Swiss artist, Thomas Hirschhorn is another important installation work that adequately confirms the irrevocably change the relationship between the object and the viewer by enhances the engagement of the observer into the artwork by fusing reality and life. In this regard, the “spectator” not only becomes installed in the art work but they also become part of the environment. Consequently, installation practices are often able to change the way the artworks or objects are apprehended altogether. According to Bishop (2005), most of the works of Thomas Hirschhorn shown inside the galleries immerse viewers into an interactive combination of images and displays that closely bound together in a wide range of ordinary materials. Every change in aesthetic style of an image does something past charting the visual culture and history of art; it will as well depict the development of varied types of world views. The fusion of art and science in the perspective-related techniques reveal that imaging technologies have influenced changes in the historical understanding of images. However, Hirschhorn argues that his works such as “Batallic Monument” are not intended to oblige the viewers into becoming interactive with them but are rather the works are designed to enable the viewers or spectator to become involved in the installation work. For example, just like many other installation works, the site specificity of installation and minimalist features of Hirschhorn’s installation art that ensures they are able to engage the viewers by being able to provide the viewers with a wide range of multi-sensory experience (Bishop, 2005). Fig 2: Bataille Monument, 2002, Kassel, Documenta 11 by Thomas Hirschhorn “The New York Earth Room” by Walter De Maria 1977 The New York Earth Room is another iconic installation art. Designed by Walter de Maria, the work is largely an interior based sculpture that involved a permanent installation of about 197 cubic meters of earth in an area of approximately 335 square meters. The New York Earth Room was the third installation sculpture done by the artist with the first one completed in 1968 in Munich, Germany and the second one having been installed in 1974 in Darmstadt, Germany. Although the installation of the remarkable art was completed in 1977 in New York as a three month exhibition in Heiner Freidrich Gallery, it has remained in its place and is still well maintained to date (Kastner, 2000, p. 70). While interacting with the artists, individuals have an opportunity to make enquiries about issues such as the relationship that the artist’s work bears with activism. Again, there are changes that have been witnesses through facilitation of political change though there is a common belief of politics neutralizing art skills. In view of the inclusive nature of the work, political means a concept on democracy. This type of democracy appears when viewers are involved in making decisions pertaining to the material, format as well as location. In this regard, the spectator is considered to be actively engaged with the object being viewed. According to Kastner (2000, p. 70), the iconic work has remained on display to date and is currently considered to be one of the best examples of how installation works can significantly influence the relationship between the object viewed and the spectator. This is particularly evidenced by the fact that the installation work has always attracted huge numbers of visitors and public viewers since the early 1980s. Fig 3: Image of the New York Earth Room” by Walter De Maria Analysis of the three Installation Works The installation works that have been analyzed show significant similarities in a number of aspects. For example, all the installation works have effectively sought to change the relationship between the object viewed and the spectator by appealing to the spectators sense of sight, smell or hearing in order to invite the spectator to join the work of art achieve active engagement. Additionally, the multiple components of the various installation art works compared in this paper also highlight or exhibit various forms of large spaces in diverse arrangements depending on the specifications of the artist (Bishop, 2005). One of the major reasons why installation practices have significant impacts on the relationship between the objects viewed and the spectator is that the works are not only immersive but they are also able to provide the viewers with a wide range of multi-sensory experience. As a result, the installation works irrevocably changes the relationship between the spectator and the object being viewed by making the viewer to be interactively get engaged in the work of art. According to many experts, another important characteristic of installation works like the three artworks that were compared that make them engage the viewers is that the works are often site specific. This is particularly attributed to the fact that installation works are build and designed for particular space and time (Purves and Lotto, 2003, p.114). The vibrant interaction of the viewer and the objects which is evident in installation arts is an important new feature that significantly changes their relationship. Activated spectatorship in art-based works has been in place for quite some time and this has happened across a number of media. Movies or videos d tell stories. A film’s perpetual details will often combine creating a general structure and in many films, the resulting structure is a narrative. For this reason, viewers have to look the manner in which the different story pieces fit together in an attempt to understand a film. However, there have been a number of changes in the installation practices that intended to introduce active spectatorship where an audience of a viewer finds a role to play instead of just looking at a sculpture or painting Fried (1998) particularly argues that the primary intention of installation works is often to enhance the engagement of viewers and consequently absorb the spectator into the work of art. For example, as evidenced by the three works, installation works are also highly imaginative since they bring a diverse number of materials together in order to create an original and stunning pierce of art that was not expected by the viewers. Generally, the site specificity of installation often demands a kind of kinesthetic involvement from the spectator or audience. The audience interacts with or is distracted by the art work and is thus considered to be actively engaged with the object being viewed. According to Fried (1998), this consequently enhances the engagement of the observer into the artwork by fusing reality and life. Additionally, upon encountering an installation work, a spectator’s body instantly become part of the synthetic environment of the installation and may be victimized by the work (Sturken and Lisa, 2001, p.94). Generally, unlike other works of arts, installation practices are currently widely known for their expansion of the boundaries of art object in order to incorporate the spectator. This is achieved by offering the viewers a new realm of experience in which the art and the object being viewed is integrated into one perpetual field. On the other hand, minimalist installation works such as Santiago Sierras “Walls Enclosing a Space” particularly relies on the facts of light, space and materials to create a sense of both art and theater. Beckley and Shapiro (1998) argues that this further confirms the assumption and belief that installation not only changes the entire experience into which the work of art flows but it also expands a spectator’s consciousness and improves the discovery of rhythm in the object. All the three works have also shown that installation practices can significantly change the way the artworks or objects are apprehended altogether However, the use of a wide range of possible mediums and materials is sometimes considered problematic when the convention of media specificity is taken into consideration. For example, installation works not only reject media specificity but they also reject the hegemony that defined previous artworks thereby complicating its relationship with the art world. Conclusion In conclusion, it is a fact that various modes of installation practice have irreversibly changed the relationship between the objects viewed and the spectator. The analysis of the three works has revealed that installation arts not only changes the entire experience into which the work of art flows but it also expands a spectators consciousness and improves the discovery of rhythm in the object. This is largely attributed to the site specificity of installation and minimalist features of installation art that ensures they are able to engage the viewers by being able to provide the viewers with a wide range of multi-sensory experience. For example, all the three installation works compared exhibits various forms of large spaces in diverse arrangements depending on the specifications of the artist. References Beckley, B. & Shapiro, D.1998. Uncontrollable Beauty: Toward a New Aesthetics. New York: Allworth publishers. Bishop, C. 2005. Installation Art. A Critical History. London, United Kingdom: Tate Publishing house. De Oliveira, N. & Oxley, N. M. 2003. Installation Art in the New Millennium. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd. Fried, M.1998. Art and Objecthood. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kastner, J. 2000. Alone in a Crowd: The Solitude of Walter de Marias New York Earth Room. A Journal of Art, Context, and Enquiry (2), pp.69-73. Purves D, Lotto B. 2003. Why We See What We Do: An Empirical Theory of Vision. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates. Reiss, J.H. 2011. From Margin to Center: The Spaces of Installation Art. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Sturken, M. & Lisa, C. 2001. Practices of Looking: an introduction to visual culture. Oxford University Press Inc. Read More