Clearly, not all art is conceptual, though, if pressed to designate the bounds of conceptual art, the boundaries turn out to be blurred. They don’t perceive the meaning behind the piece and that makes it hard for me to appreciate my art. Conceptual artwork was conceived as a movement that prolonged conventional boundaries, and hence it may be troublesome to differentiate self-aware Conceptualism from the various different developments in art of the Sixties.
The Sixties was a decade of bright expectations and potentialities, and the actions that had been widespread and explored on the time had a profound impression on the direction of the artwork world, each at the time and since then. In conventional terms an object like this can’t be called artwork, because it was not created by hand with the intention of changing into an artwork item.
For my part this can be a very stark difference after speaking concerning the summary expressionist’s and action portray with the likes of Jackson Pollock and Willem de Kooning. Lewitt focuses on subject material and develops his artwork based on a really totally different perspective.
This really instantly makes me think of Andy Warhol, he was saying he becomes a machine when making artwork. The latter article, Sentences on Conceptual Art,” take on a similar concept of laying out a collection of guidelines for conceptual artwork. Cubism, Summary Expressionism, and Neo-plasticism are three essential categories of summary artwork.
Like Duchamp and other modernists, they created artwork that is about art, and pushed its limits by utilizing minimal supplies and even text. Most of Duchamp’s work consists of ‘prepared made’ items that required little or no further work from the artist.