So the reading we were assigned for today had to do with the personal story of someone tasked with guarding a controversial piece of art. What I really enjoyed about the article was that it was the story of someone who didn't have any real background in art but became extremely emotionally invested over the course of guarding the work. I like how he said he understood the piece better than the artist herself because he doesn't just see the work, but he sees how people react to it as well.
What I didn't really understand was how the whole thing was just made to be destroyed. The idea that the whole point of the piece was to get wrecked and then use it as an example of people's intolerance just doesn't sit well with me. I agree with the author that the piece probably had a greater effect on people while it was still on display than as a closed circuit video that may or may not even show what happened.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment