Anyone care to discuss Sol Lewitt’s sentences on conceptual art?

Sentences on Conceptual Art

by Sol Lewitt

1. Conceptual artists are mystics rather than rationalists. They leap to conclusions that logic cannot reach.
2. Rational judgements repeat rational judgements.
3. Irrational judgements lead to new experience.
4. Formal art is essentially rational.
5. Irrational thoughts should be followed absolutely and logically.
6. If the artist changes his mind midway through the execution of the piece he compromises the result and repeats past results.
7. The artist’s will is secondary to the process he initiates from idea to completion. His wilfulness may only be ego.
8. When words such as painting and sculpture are used, they connote a whole tradition and imply a consequent acceptance of this tradition, thus placing limitations on the artist who would be reluctant to make art that goes beyond the limitations.
9. The concept and idea are different. The former implies a general direction while the latter is the component. Ideas implement the concept.
10. Ideas can be works of art; they are in a chain of development that may eventually find some form. All ideas need not be made physical.
11. Ideas do not necessarily proceed in logical order. They may set one off in unexpected directions, but an idea must necessarily be completed in the mind before the next one is formed.
12. For each work of art that becomes physical there are many variations that do not.
13. A work of art may be understood as a conductor from the artist’s mind to the viewer’s. But it may never reach the viewer, or it may never leave the artist’s mind.
14. The words of one artist to another may induce an idea chain, if they share the same concept.
15. Since no form is intrinsically superior to another, the artist may use any form, from an expression of words (written or spoken) to physical reality, equally.
16. If words are used, and they proceed from ideas about art, then they are art and not literature; numbers are not mathematics.
17. All ideas are art if they are concerned with art and fall within the conventions of art.
18. One usually understands the art of the past by applying the convention of the present, thus misunderstanding the art of the past.
19. The conventions of art are altered by works of art.
20. Successful art changes our understanding of the conventions by altering our perceptions.
21. Perception of ideas leads to new ideas.
22. The artist cannot imagine his art, and cannot perceive it until it is complete.
23. The artist may misperceive (understand it differently from the artist) a work of art but still be set off in his own chain of thought by that misconstrual.
24. Perception is subjective.
25. The artist may not necessarily understand his own art. His perception is neither better nor worse than that of others.
26. An artist may perceive the art of others better than his own.
27. The concept of a work of art may involve the matter of the piece or the process in which it is made.
28. Once the idea of the piece is established in the artist’s mind and the final form is decided, the process is carried out blindly. There are many side effects that the artist cannot imagine. These may be used as ideas for new works.
29. The process is mechanical and should not be tampered with. It should run its course.
30. There are many elements involved in a work of art. The most important are the most obvious.
31. If an artist uses the same form in a group of works, and changes the material, one would assume the artist’s concept involved the material.
32. Banal ideas cannot be rescued by beautiful execution.
33. It is difficult to bungle a good idea.
34. When an artist learns his craft too well he makes slick art.
35. These sentences comment on art, but are not art.

First published in 0-9 (New York), 1969, and Art-Language (England), May 1969
Our online pharmacy is the perfect resource for people to get their drugs without any hassles or awkwardness. buy cialis We work hard to make sure you save money every time you shop with us. buy levitrabuy soma At our online store, you pay less and get more. buy viagra

Judd, anyone?

I am curious of people’s thoughts about Judd’s work. Feel free to center your comments on the included image, or Judd in general. I have always liked Judd’s work, and been drawn to it, but have also had a hard time expressing exactly why. Mysterious? Minimal? Clean? Geometric? Systematic? Anyone?

What sorts of trends do you foresee by way of future art genres? (note: get as “art-sci-fi” as you want, and money or resources are no obstacle.)

the world we are in is supersaturated with art, imagery, ideas,
stimulation, conversation, entertainment, things created for a reason
and for no reason. there is so much to look at, so much to hear, so
much to contemplate, so much. so much. so much.

I have access to so much now. so much really inspired stuff. so
much to listen to. so much to see. so much to experience. so so so
much.

stuff I created is in that pile of masses and masses of stuff for
others to consider.

It’s like a mass hysterical creating frenzy. “I create therefore I am.”

I could create a piece about it but we all have already seen that
piece and thought about it and talked about it and sang about it and
and and

and theres also the byproduct of creating, of art. all that
garbage. chemicals. pollution. all the experimenting. all the
stuff that didnt work. all the stuff that did work. all the stuff.
piles and piles and piles of stuff.

silence is the novelty now, stillness, but an artist needs something,
some thing, more things, piles and piles and piles of things.

rooms of things, courtyards with things, defined spaces with things.
things in unexpected places. everywhere. everywhere. art everywhere.
everywhere.

moremoremore stuff.

tootootoo much.

sh. stop creating. all of you. please stop it.

Here is a new thread to focus comments on PAC. And if anyone who bailed from PORT wants to write here ( or anyone else for that matter) feel free to contact Soap@thebrillobox.com I have had someone contact me about doing artist interviews. Those should be coming out soon. Thanks to the folks who are focusing the dialogue on the BB. It is all about conversation.

XO

Soap

We have all put a lot of energy into defending or degrading, Ruth Ann Brown, Jesse Hayward, and the Jupiter Hotel. What if we try to put some effort into thinking what would be the best thing for Portland Artists: not galleries, or critics, but artists. What would be a meaningful thing that could happen that would make a difference? What can we do to make it happent?

Yes things have slowed down in the box. It does take effort to run this site, and I, Soap have put my best foot forward. I started it so that people would have an alternative to the sites mentioned on the Jupiter thread, but if no one writes, then nothing gets published. Funny isn’t it?

 Hate Brillo Box? Think it sucks? Write what you want to see here. It is YOUR site.

The “Affair” is right around the corner. What are people’s thoughts on how this is helping the Portland art community? Has there been any progress made in terms of artists’ careers being promoted outside of Portland as a result of the fair? Are local galleries experiencing an increase in sales as a result of the Affair? Are you seeing good art? Is it just a good party? What are sales at the actual event like?

It is coming up on the 3rd year, it is should be telling.

Brillo Box read the list of folks for the final cut in the Northwest “what ever the hell they are calling that new show at the museum”  at  http://blog.oregonlive.com/visualarts/.”

The 28 artists are: Daniel Attoe, Gretchen Bennett, Joshua Berger, Buddy Bunting, Cat Clifford, Cooke, Claire Cowie, Marc Dombrosky, Ellen Garvens, Jesse Hayward, Mary Henry, Jones, Michael Knutson, Lavadour, Margie Livingston, D.E. May, Jeffry Mitchell, Seth Nehil, Richard Notkin, Geraldine Ondrizek, Joseph Park, Akio Takamori, Whiting Tennis, Storm Tharp, Oscar Tuazon, Laura Vandenburg, Marie Watt and Robert Yoder.

And Soap wants to know two things:

Why Jesse Hayward? ( really, could someone explain to me why his work is good or say better than anyone else’s?)

Aren’t there ANY artists in Idaho?

Sincerely,

Soap