Dia:Beacon

Another opportunity to escape the concrete, the visit to Dia:Beacon was most welcome.

The first artwork you see upon entering is Dan Flavin's Monument to Tatlin. Flavin's work made us question a lot of the traditions of art. Does art go beyond the work itself? The glow of the lights bathed the viewers, drawing them into the art. His positioning of lights to the edge of the wall suggests that the gallery wall itself becomes a part of the artwork. Artworks are not bound by frames, but encompass the environment. As we move through space we see the artworks from different angles, meaning our experience of it changes. As static as they are, they're an immersive artwork.

I found Michael Heizer's work to be quite powerful. The monumental size of it created primal feelings. Vertigo while looking into the deep holes in the ground, the fear that the large rock hanging unnaturally on the wall would tumble down and crush us.

Richard Serra's work had a similar feel. So large you could walk inside them, touch them, interact with them, yet they loomed ominously, twisted and unnatural. While they were reminiscent of canyons and caves, natural formations, I couldn't help but think they also represented the canyons and caves of our own creation. 

I felt much of the artwork in Dia:Beacon questioned the nature of art. Is a giant rock art? Probably not. Until it's hung and framed in a gallery. 

Is the art the object, or is it the idea? Why make a complicated painting when you can describe to someone what they would see? If we all experience the art in different ways, is it perhaps better to leave more of it to our imagination? 

Is it possible to remove the object and leave just an idea?

We discussed a champagne glass left on the floor of a gallery from an function, and how a viewer could then interpret it as art and assign it meaning, reminding me of this Ken Tanaka video.