i hope i learn something from this

Continuing on with practical matters I have been giving some thought to how art work is experienced. What sort of response do we get from art and what does it leave us with? There is obviously not going to be a single answer to this question. Our reaction to a piece of art can range from anger to joy to deep reflection. But is one type of response that I am particularly interested in and that is how art can increase our knowledge.

Clare Copley Gallery 1974

I was led down this train of thought after reading some of Kirsi Peltomaki book called Situation Aesthetics that deals with the work of Michael Asher. Asher is best known for his interventions into institutional spaces, typically the gallery or museum, that disturb our perception of that space. Early pieces such as the one pictured (all Ashers works have no title) involved Asher removing the dividing wall that seperated the gallery from the office space at the Clare Copley Gallery. This simple gesture directs us to the administrative and commercial aspects of the gallery that are normally hidden from sight.

This was a piece that i was familiar with and could grasp its significance. Many galleries contrive to appear as just places to show art and the commercial side of things are firmly placed behind closed doors. By removing the divide, both literally and metaphorically, we encounter an often unseen side of the institution.

But this was as far as I had ever got and gave little thought to what was actually taking place for the viewer. By visiting this space our knowledge of that institution is being increased. To use Peltomaki's term Asher's intervention is 'knowledge producing'. As an artist Asher does not just evoke an emotional response but actually contributes to what we know about art and how it functions in society. The nature of this knowledge is also important. It is not something that is given to the viewer like a report or history book. Instead it is 'produced' by the viewer after considering the work. In this sense we are given the chance to engage with work and discover it for ourselves. As a result we are left with a tangible insight, that transcends aesthetic of physical constraints, which we have arrived at after a reciprocal dialogue.

Part of the reason I never really thought of this is that I can never experience the work first hand. The production of knowledge relies on such an encounter in situ and no amount of photographs can ever compensate if this is lacking. Asher's initial intervention then is intrinsically site specific: we need to experience it first hand to fully engage with it. However as the work articulates issues that transcend that physical space we do not feel completely detached from it. So even if we get a second hand account the significance of Asher's achievements do not go unnoticed.