Conceptual Art: Definition, Characteristics & 25 Artists Who Defined Conceptual Art
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ก.ค. 2024
- Reference publication on Conceptual Art by Taschen: amzn.to/3nQzRFE
Today we take on Conceptual Art, presenting a definition, listing the main characteristics and discussing the 25 most important conceptual artists who defined the historical art movement. Read the entire article online here: www.contemporaryartissue.com/...
As we only discussed the artists in question very briefly, for further reading on we highly recommend the following books:
1. Vito Acconci: amzn.to/33N2Djw
2. Art & Language
3. John Baldessari: amzn.to/3FYqud3
4. Robert Barry
5. Mel Bochner: amzn.to/3tRrXj3
6. Alighiero Boëtti: amzn.to/3tRzIFV
7. Marcel Broodthaers: amzn.to/35ky0CN
8. Stanley Brouwn
9. Daniel Buren: amzn.to/3GXa325
10. Victor Burgin: amzn.to/3tRzn67
11. Hanne Darboven
12. Jan Dibbets: amzn.to/3nPm9Tm
13. Hans-Peter Feldmann: amzn.to/3GV4aCC
14. Dan Graham: amzn.to/3KD1o74
15. Hans Haacke: amzn.to/3tRyOt1
16. Jenny Holzer: amzn.to/3ApQIEb
17. Douglas Huebler: amzn.to/3nQMzEq
18. On Kawara: amzn.to/3GV491w
19. Joseph Kosuth: amzn.to/3tRyhav
20. Piero Manzoni: amzn.to/3Ap1SsO
21. Sol LeWitt: amzn.to/3rH6DKD
22. Gordon Matta-Clark: amzn.to/33ZVPz5
23. Bruce Nauman: amzn.to/32nKqsb
24. Adrian Piper: amzn.to/3AxFNbS
25. Lawrence Weiner: amzn.to/3nRRNzH
🌟 Overview: Career Advice for Artists
→ www.contemporaryartissue.com/...
🍿 Watch Next (Key Videos for Artists)
→ Self-Taught Success: • 6 Steps To Success as ...
→ How To Make Money as an Artist: • 20 Ways: How To Make M...
→ Develop Your Art Style: • How To Develop A Consi...
→ The Art World Explained: • Explained: What is the...
📖 Recommended Books:
→ Art World & Career Advice: amzn.to/46anb09
→ How To Become A Successful Artist: amzn.to/3YwtjvS
→ Art History: amzn.to/3I0ri5I
→ Overview of books: www.contemporaryartissue.com/...
✏️ Recommended Tools & Ressources:
→ Squarespace for artist websites: squarespace.syuh.net/9W4rDY
→ Artenda for art opportunities: artenda.net
→ Artfacts for career rankings: artfacts.net/register?ref=596...
❤️ Support us on Patreon:
→ / contemporaryartissue
ℹ️ About CAI:
CAI is the abbreviation of 'Contemporary Art Issue,' a hybrid platform for contemporary art including:
→ Online Magazine: www.contemporaryartissue.com/...
→ Advice for Artists: www.contemporaryartissue.com/...
→ CAI Gallery: www.contemporaryartissue.com/...
→ Webshop: www.contemporaryartissue.com/...
👨 About the host Julien Delagrange:
Julien Delagrange is an art historian, contemporary artist, and the founder and director of CAI. Delagrange studied Science of Arts at Ghent University, Belgium, and worked for the Centre for Fine Arts (BOZAR) in Brussels, the Jan Vercruysse Foundation, the Ghent University Library, and has contributed to the international contemporary art scene as an art critic, lecturer, curator, gallery director, consultant, advisor, and as an artist. As an artist, he is represented by Galerie Sabine Bayasli in Paris, France, and Gallery Space60 in Antwerp, Belgium.
🎯 The mission of the CAI TH-cam channel:
→ To empower artists by providing adequate and industry-approved advice for artists for long-term success in the highest realms of the art world, sharing inside information and proven strategies based on real-life experiences in the art world.
→ To contribute to the online canonization of recent art history, having its finger at the pulse of contemporary art.
🌐 www.contemporaryartissue.com
📧 info@contemporaryartissue.com
Every effort has been made to trace copyright holders. However, if you feel you have inadvertently been overlooked, please take up contact with Contemporary Art Issue.
Table of contents:
00:00 - Intro
00:42 - Definition
02:05 - Main Characteristics
03:48 - 1. Vito Acconci
04:30 - 2. Art & Language
05:08 - 3. John Baldessari
05:55 - 4. Robert Barry
06:36 - 5. Mel Bochner
07:24 - 6. Alighiero Boëtti
08:04 - 7. Marcel Broodthaers
08:42 - 8. Stanley Brouwn
09:24 - 9. Daniel Buren
10:12 - 10. Victor Burgin
10:50 - 11. Hanne Darboven
11:21 - 12. Jan Dibbets
12:06 - 13. Hans-Peter Feldmann
12:52 - 14. Dan Graham
13:28 - 15. Hans Haacke
13:58 - 16. Jenny Holzer
14:36 - 17. Douglas Huebler
15:07 - 18. On Kawara
15:44 - 19. Joseph Kosuth
16:35 - 20. Piero Manzoni
17:16 - 21. Sol LeWitt
18:14 - 22. Gordon Matta-Clark
18:46 - 23. Bruce Nauman
19:28 - 24. Adrian Piper
20:00 - 25. Lawrence Weiner
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.77[1/2] ก็ไม่ได้ชอบเอาชนะ แต่เรื่องอะไรต้องแพ้!!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JraaBYOd7I0/mqdefault.jpg)
Dear readers and subscribers, this week we take on conceptual art and the top 25 artists who defined the historical art movement. What do you think about conceptual art, and who did we miss in our selection? For our returning viewers, how do you like our new voice, and, which one the you prefer? Chat soon!
You have done great 👍
@@MakhdoomSadiqKhan Thanks!
Great video. I think Joseph Beuys and Nam June Paik should be included in the list.
Thank you for tuning in, you are absolutely right! Two major absentees for sure
I extremely love your channel, thanks for the effort
Thank you so much, the pleasure is ours!
Thank you for this great presentation and analysis of conceptual art. Keep on doing this amazing job please!
Thank you so much for your kind and appreciative words, will do!
Yes I agree 💯
Yes, yes very good, excellent! Thank you CAI as we need to be refreshed we hold on to things. Over time the idea of them become something else- then when first encountered, developed and we smugly concluded something…and now? So refreshing how you place so much, so precisely in so little time. Thank you all of you for leaving the ivory tower and coming to meet us.
Hi Daniel, the pleasure is all mine! Thank you so much for watching and stay tuned for more :-)
Agreed: "great presentation and analysis of conceptual art." I alway learn a good deal with your videos and they are always done well. Thanks for maintaining your channel.
Thank you once more George for tuning in and for your appreciation. Have a great day!
Yes I absolutely agree with you too 👍
I think Yves Klein is a must on this list. Allan Kaprow who coined the term happening is also a serious omission. Good video and ambitious. Keep up the good work.
I agree! Thank you for tuning in and for leaving a spot on comment
@contemporaryartissue maybe Koons ?
Thank you for this. In the section on Acconci, the guy draped over a plank leaning against the wall is Charles Ray.
Thank you for tuning in!
Great video and great channel! Thanks a million for this. In regard to your question "who did you miss on this list?", I do miss Ai Weiwei :)
Great understanding
Thank you for tuning in
helpful video. thanks
The pleasure is all mine! Thank you for tuning in
This is a very unique video about conceptual art 🎭 great job
However after looking at all this I think myself and banksy are missing on your list 🥰👍🥰🏆🏆🏆
Good knowledge of art
Thank you!
Gotta say, HUH. Found it much like writing on minimal Art which often includes ideas and images that have little value in explaining Minimalism. But I appreciate the effort of your video.
How the fck u know it doesn't have meaning?
It seems incredible not to have included Luis Camnitzer, and other important conceptual artists from Latin America. From your video it seems conceptual art was centered around NY, some European countries and Japan, which is a very narrow and Euro-American view of modern art.
I saw a critique recently (another UTube channel that click baited me) that presented “what is and is not conceptual art”. It was densely-convoluted and arguably a disservice. For me Dada sought a new way of describing meaning not art. The presenter sought a critique that would determine conceptual art as art i.e., sublime-properly effecting. All of this disquieting since how can an Anti art message become art? The history of conventional art esthetic well documents, priori and A priori judgments; experience through observation, theoretical- retinal/cerebral. The presenter used these to decree by wrote Conceptual art. I think the better way here with CAI. The intention is not a perscription but a description. Best informed by the artist themselves. Their ideas by means or things they chose or did not choose, to convey them. Finally for me and I speak only for me but I do speak. Dada is not art it is anti art to make it art deletes the lesson. Or does it reintroduce the lesson? It must be art how else are we to sell it.
You missed Beuys.
Hi Gisa, you are absolutely right! Wel spotted!
Where did Alan Kaprow fit into Conceptual art?
I think you misspelled Joseph Kosuth
Marcel Broodthaers / Hans Haacke / Mary Kelly / Santiago Sierra / Felix-Gonzales Torrez / Piero Manzoni / Yoko Ono / Bas-Jan Ader / Ilya Kabakov / Marina Abramovic & Ulay / Christo & Jean-Claude / Alan Kaprow /...
Terrific recital!
The death of reason 🙂
You missed me for your list.
I am inviting you all the Kingston Biennial in Jamaica on Sunday 26 June 2022 to December 31. You will see my art work and 23 other important artists.
😂 Nice try...
Marina Abramović and Ulay??
No.4 Robert Barry's used radiowaves as his medium. It will be interesting to see who may be using AI to Brain as used/being developed in 21st century signals intelligence in their work. Transhumanist Telepathy?
Needs Felix gonzales Torres dhit
P ex: Francis Alys
Barbara Krüger ?
Hi Gabrielle, she definitely could/should be included. However when it comes to categorizing artist Krüger most often ends up in the Feminist Art movement, however she definitely fits in both Conceptual Art as Conceptual Art. Thank you pointing out and for tuning in!
The misnomer is the word 'Art'. They are conceptual works calling for your attention certainly. Sometimes they are insightful, sometimes thoughtful. sometimes innovative or political and so on - but can everything along those lines be called art? Yes they are criticisms on the concept of art and it is art that they discuss, but those are not artworks. Perhaps statements at best.
Hi there, thank you for watching and for your utmost interesting comment! In fact, when I was at the university studying art history, I had the exact same theory when we were having Conceptual Art lectures. My opinion back then was the term 'art' was wrong, and there should be a different category for these types of works. They oppose art, so why see them as art. Now I do believe it can be categorized as art, but I still find true value in this discussion. For instance, a conceptual artwork can be a statement on a political event, but what distinguishes this work as a work of artwork in comparison with any political statement by activists? A very interesting issue for sure, so thank you for pointing this out!
👋👋👋👋
Art is not an object it is a uniquely profound conveyance from one human being to another. Perhaps even a cry for help. That art became an object it did so as a conveyance., given to the mental conditions of the artist at the time of it’s creation. It doesn’t mean less (for me) that something is put on a cave wall or the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. The finger reaches out to convey what the mind thinks. It would be sad if I lost their ability to move even a finger I were denied the ability to make meaningful art. As artist move to a more inclusive world our future rest in intellectual ideas, concepts and systems- from all viewpoints/spectrums; that we master them in all the ways humanly possible. The type of conveyance does not bother me (now today). if it enlightens us to touch the finger of god and the universe that best describes him- independent of personal beliefs. I would like to share with you the passing of SFAI (it was shuttered this past summer). I am a figure painter having studied in Boston and Europe. My time at SFAI changed my life forever. Help! Finally do not disappointment if what I say here is wrong. Help! I am not foolish enough to think I could write something on art that is wholly correct. Of all the comments I was reading yours touched me the most. For there is a small part that though once greater feels as you do. Help!
Wait, did you read the DEFINITION of art? I don't even like most conceptual art (there's a shovel on the wall of Canada's National Art Gallery in Ottawa, for example 😂) But conceptual art still fits the definition of both art and fine art. What is not art, is decorative paintings and drawings lacking depth we mostly see these days. But nobody with refined taste would care about.
@@mikesamovarov4054The criticism of art in the 1960's was valid, but the art which we look at differs from art made up in the mind of the artist or viewer, which is akin to literature and philosophy.. Your thoughts can write a book about the shovel, but the object you are looking at remains a tool used to decorate a wall. The sophisticated mind disparages decoration because it thinks we have become more, yet decoration is a fundemental origen of visual art. Beauty will also always attract more than that which is not - it is in our nature, as lazy thinking which produces bad 'art' is. We cannot all be van Gogh. Great visual art survives exactly because we can recognise the quality of thinking that went into it, as well as the skill in excecuting that thought. The quality of thinking of the viewer is not the artwork.
Where is my all-time hero Timm Ulrichs??? :-(
Yes! Terrific suggestion, one of my personal favorites too!
Conceptual art is basically fake it untill you make it.
I'm currently in school of contemporary art. Each week we assign with task eg. Making clay sculpture of 2 animals combine or drawing something using 1 continued line. There is no teaching what so ever. I asked if we going to learn how to draw properly and the answer was "anyone can draw but we just didn't draw like how society told us what is correct what is not. School focusing too much on concept and ideas but without critical skills needed. None of what I have in my head will ever come through. I wanted to go to school of fine arts but it is very expensive. Therefore, I did extra study outside the class from TH-cam or books. I don't appreciate conceptual arts nor planning to make one.
Well if you don't appreciate conceptual art you can't be an artist. All art is conceptual
Most modern artists started by learning more or less ‘classical’ skills such as perspective, color theory, composition,and so on, before turning to abstraction or other forms of art. So, I agree with you. Your teachers should at least give you the opportunity to make your own decision, which means teaching you the basic skills first. Many contemporary artists went through this dilemma too: Fabienne Verdier went to China to learn calligraphy and now makes absolute fantastic works of art, H.Craig Hannna went to Italy and the Netherlands to learn from the Renaissance painters, and so many more. Why not just leave your school and find a different one?
@@MOJSTER99empiricism vs rationalism.
I think an empiricist would say that concepts are human made and not real, based on associations made in the brain.
AcconCi...you you read it like Acconchi :)
Thank you so much for pointing out and for tuning in
u forgot 2 include ..me. ~ jk.
Gordon Matta-Clark / was a unique treat for me to discover!
🙌⛩️🕉️☯️⚛️⛩️🙌.
Thank you so much for watching. Yes, Matta-Clark is a true genius!
Let me begin by telling you that when my brother was just starting school, he rebelled at the rules of spelling.
Why did words have to be spelled in a particular way?
Why couldn't he spell them as he wanted to spell them?
He resented the rules and he resisted the authority of those who made them !
Keep this in mind.
I think that Conceptual art originated with people who could not and would not do the difficult work required to become a 'traditional' artist.
Can't master the necessary skills ?
No knowledge of perspective?
Can't draw?
Don't want to have to learn color theory?
Can't master composition?
No knowledge of human anatomy?
Can't render tonal values
Can’t be bothered ?
These are skills that you have to WORK to perfect.
It’s difficult.
It takes…..effort.
You want a fast track to the exalted position of "artist “.
Well then, belittle the importance of those skills and debase the notion that they are a prerequisite to creating art.
Instead, create an art genre that you CAN do.
A new genre.
And let's call it Conceptual art.
Conceptual artists claim that IDEAS and CONCEPTS are the main feature of their art.
They can slap anything together and call it ''conceptual art'' confident that viewers will find SOMETHING to think about it no matter how banal or trivial the artist's concept!
There is no way conceptual art pieces can be judged.
The promoters of this art have attacked the motives and credibility of authorities and critics who might disparage the work.
They have rejected museums and galleries as defining authorities.
They reject the idea that art can be judged or criticized .
All of this results in a decline in standards.
And when you jettison standards, quality suffers.
There really IS such a thing as BAD art !
We know this only because we have standards and criteria by which such things can be evaluated.
It seems that conceptual art comes down to a basic idea:
No one has the right or authority to make any judgements about art !
Art is anything you can get away with !
A whole new language has been created to give the work an air of legitimacy and gravitas.
Conceptual art is 'sold' to the unwary public with ....."ArtSpeak".
ArtSpeak is a unique assemblage of English words and phrases that the International Art world uses but which are devoid of meaning!
Have you ever found yourself confronted by an art gallery’s description of an exhibition which seems completely indecipherable?
Or an artist’s statement about their work which left you more confused than enlightened?
You’re not alone.
Here are examples of ArtSpeak:
'Works that probe the dialectic between innovations that seem to have been forgotten, the ruinous present state of projects once created amid great euphoria, and the present as an era of transitions and new beginnings.''
Or
''The exhibition reactivates his career-long investigation into the social mutations of desire and repression. But his earlier concerns with repression production--in the adolescent or in the family as a whole--give way to the vertiginous retrieval and wayward reinvention of mythical community and sub-cultural traditions.''
This language is meant to convince me that there is real substance to this drivel which is being passed off as art.
I don't buy it.
But plenty of other people DO buy it.
Not because they love the work.
They are laying out enormous sums in the belief that their investment will bring them high returns in the future.
One Jeff Koons conceptual piece is three basketballs suspended in a fish tank.
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Three_Ball_Total_Equilibrium_Tank_by_Jeff_Koons,_Tate_Liverpool.jpg
Here is Koons' own ArtSpeak explanation of his floating basketball 'concept' verbatim:
“ This is an ultimate state of being.
I wanted to play with people’s desires.
They desire this equilibrium.
They desire pre-birth.
I was giving a definition of life and death.
This is the eternal.
This is what life is like, also, after death.
Aspects of the eternal”
Rather lofty goals for 3 basketballs suspended in a fish tank!!
It sold for $350,000.
I wonder what it would have fetched without Koons' name attached to it.
Or take the case of Martin Creed's ball of crumpled white copy paper.
www.abebooks.com/signed/Work-sheet-paper-crumpled-ball-Creed/7404135374/bd
He made almost 700 of them!
Some sold for hundreds of dollars.
Martin Creed, when asked during an interview how he would respond to those who say the crumpled paper ball isn’t art said :
“ I wouldn’t call this art either. Who says, anyway, what’s good and what’s bad?”
Interviewer:
''When confronted with conceptual art, we shouldn’t worry whether it’s art or not because no one really knows what art is.''
Is this what art has come to??
_________________________________
Something radical has happened to the art scene in the past 50 years.
Cubism slid into non-representational art....what is often called Abstract.
Abstract or non-representational art is a legitimate and often profound genre.
But to many people, it appeared as if this new style had no structure, principles or standards of evaluation.
It’s markings seemed random and arbitrary.
Something that anyone could do.
Any composition of blotches or scribbles was “Abstract Art”.
This was the slippery slope that led to the abandonment of standards in art.
Art is what I say it is....and lots of people jumped on the art bandwagon.
Anyone can be an artist.
Anyone can mount a show.
And who is to say if it has value or not ?
A tacit agreement has formed among critics, galleries, publications and auction houses to promote and celebrate certain artists and styles.
Objects with no artistic merit are touted and praised .
Their value increases with every magazine article, every exhibition in a prestigious gallery.
And when they come up for auction, sometimes the auction houses will lend vast sums to a bidder so that it appears as if the work of the particular artist is increasing in value.
The upward spiral begins and fortunes are made.
And many are reluctant to declare that the Emperor is, in fact, naked lest they appear boorish unsophisticated Philistines !
This is what dominates the art market today.
The love of money is the root of all evil.
It has corrupted politics.
It has corrupted sport.
It has corrupted healthcare.
It has corrupted religion.
And now it has corrupted art.
But, there is reason to hope.
As much of the wisdom of the Greeks and Romans was kept alive through the Middle Ages in small pockets of learning and culture, ateliers have sprung up around the world that are devoted to preserving and handing down the traditional visual arts: drawing, painting and sculpting to each new generation.
And when this craze for conceptual art has burned itself out and when visual art is no longer looked on as mere decoration and when schools that have dissolved their art programs want to reestablish them again, the world will find these skills preserved through the atelier movement.
Thanks for your, uhhhh, novella, I guess? You make some valid points, but your central point about conceptual artists having no skills or being too lazy to develop them is absolutely laughable. For some, that may be the case, but to assume that is very short sighted. Art is about expression & non verbal communication & that can utilize an almost unlimited amount of forms. It's not necessary to be able to glean a specific meaning from everything! Now, that's lazy! It's as simple as do you like something, does it create a an emotion or feeling, does it inspire? If not move on. All this anger & emotion & crying about what art sells for or is worth, is childish & a waste of time. There is plenty of excellent art, in every genre, that sells for almost nothing, support what you like! Everyone's opinion is valid, for themselves. Honestly, you sound pretty pretentious in your "professorial" rant, you might want to look into having that stick removed!
@@jeffreyolson2139 “the stick” is called backbone.
@@renzo6490 more like arrogance
@@jeffreyolson2139
No. Just confidence in the rightness of my views.
It's why I don't have to attack you personally for your views.
Yes, conceptual artists often lack respect for the hard work or rules. That's why most people with well refined taste laugh at that fake stuff. Those "concepts" aren't all that clever, just stuрid. You should see the garbage in the modern museum sections of National Art Galleries 🤦🏻♀️🙄 My degree is in math, my IQ is pretty high and I find a lot of contemporary "art" lacking originality and depth. It's bad enough that most traditional art is portraits or landscapes, very repetitive 😂 But people now try to avoid getting real art skills (through immediate gratification addiction), so they're trying to be oh so clever with surface level "conceptual art" 99.99% of art lovers frown upon. There's nothing there, we don't need to pretend to like it 😂
None of the concepts in conceptual art are even remotely interesting. -👈 This is a conceptual art.
Primitive at best and shows lack of artistic taste and skill. Conceptual art is laughable and shallow. You're correct! ❤
Why are all the examples male ??🥴
Are you talking seroiusly?
robot voices...i need human
No, you don't. You can turn the volume down and just read the subtitles.
Art is ಠ_ಠ
Thank you for tuning in!
Real Art today has to be a potential tax write off or it doesn't count as Art at all ...How is that for a concept ? LOL
😂 You're right!
A bad concept until you explain it further, then it becomes a good concept.
It's all about rigidity!
I would like to watch this video but I cannot stand that squeaky robot voice All pass
Reduce the volume and read the subtitles. Works fine.
@@mikesamovarov4054 oh😮 thank you
@anthonycavallero6637 I know you probably don't realise, but keeping your comment up after finding a solution hurts the perception of the video.
People only read your comment, think the video is bad, then move on. Maybe you could remove it, and then comment the tip you've learned instead?
@@byattwurns1553
oh😮
The use of a computer generated voice, that manages to mangle the pronunciation of artists' names, is REALLY annoying.
😂 Totally
God, whatever the reason you've used a computer to read out the text of this video, stop it. It's just horrible.
We have! The past year we have been hosting the videos personally. So feel free to stay tuned
Rubbish from distorted depressed society rejects..
You mean "degenerates?"
Yes, it's pretty shallow, low IQ/skill type of garbage. It's funny to hear how stuрid people try to rationalize to like it 😂
@@tbrockplaysI love degenerate art. Hitler didn't tho.
You missed women. Such a bias list. There are only 3 women on this list!!
So lol u expect 100 or something?! Wtf wrong with u
How on Earth could you not include Jeffery Valance?! en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Vallance
Why are all the examples male ??🥴
@Van Brighouse okay then. Why were there so few females as opposed to males? 🤨
Because women mostly do crafts, not fine arts. Women aren't motivated the same way, their biological focus is on raising children, as a priority. Not pushing cultural limits, which is a RISKY behaviour dominated in biological males. Btw, I'm a woman, 43 years old.
wow.... interesting... @@mikesamovarov4054
@@mikesamovarov4054I don't think being a woman makes you automatically intelligent about women, just like birds don't know why they fly.
Male and female psychology is identical, while brain structure is slightly reversed. So no, childrearing isn't a woman's "biological goal".
You shouldn't be so misogynistic.