In thinking about my photography I often muse on how to exhibit my art. A proper exhibition is something I’ve never actually done, but may be doing at some point in the future.
I think of what kind of control I would like over the environment, the speed at which people moved through it, the lighting, the music, and so on. Obviously having this level of control allows an artist to complete his message, to really forge an experience out of it.
On the other hand most of my art gets displayed on people’s computer screens. It gets displayed in the manner which my viewer wants, on their schedule, their location - they control the experience. As the artist loses control over his (or her) artistic experience the viewer gains it.
Tools like Flickr and Youtube have opened up the viewer centric experience allowing almost any artist to throw their creations up on the net, available for anyone to experience on their own terms, and do with what they please. Our technological society has even created Creative Commons usage licenses to grant and communicate rights from the artist to the viewer.
Strange thing is I’m not entirely sure which one prefer. Part of me thinks that people can enjoy art more if they are in the right mindset - and when I control the environment and experience I’m more likely to help them into that mindset. Part of me thinks people would enjoy art more on their terms, in their favorite coffee shop with their laptop, or at home in the den on the big screen.
Which do you prefer? Does it really matter? Is it the work of art itself that matters more than the setting, or are both the design and the viewing experience combined required to make ‘art’?
Post a Comment