'Inside the White Cube': how does the space influences our perception of art. Part 2

Within the discussion of gallery space and how it influences the perception of it's content, O'Doherty moves on towards a more straightforward discussion of the space, which he now refers to as 'context'. For better explanation, he starts with an example of the how the gallery ceiling broadened the horizons of artistic expression. By discussing Duchamp's '1200 Bags of Coal' was the first time the gallery was 'turned' upside down that got much audience response at that time. By putting the bags with, presumably, coal over the source of the light on the floor (which normally should be on the ceiling) Duchamp managed not merely to fulfill his conceptual ends, but to created a niche in utilization of an art space.  It was the invention of a new context that he successfully filled with gestures. 

'1200 Bags of Coal'

Marcel Duchamp

1938

Gesture can be a synonym of invention in some sense. It is the first documented case of shifting the paradigm, even if it' not something revolutionary. The power of gestures is in it's novelty and might disappear gradually by becoming something that is taken for granted. Thereafter, it can only stay a gesture if it preserved some qualities of being historically remarkable. Gesture is not really an art, but something that helps to bring art to the other level. When it becomes generally acknowledged, a gesture can be multiply repeated in a form of a project, a kind of reference or inspiration for it. Projects are similarly short-lasting and are idea-driven more than art-driven. 

Another Duchamp's gesture considered by O'Doherty, was similarly connected to the idea of gallery space-modification - 'Mile of String'. The string tied in a form of disorganized net between the walls of the exhibition room. It wrapped the space in a way that prevented the visitors from properly experiencing the paintings on the walls and created a kind of a container in the middle of the room. This gesture was a literal representation of the challenging to the audience character of  Modernism. 

To summarize, both of the artworks consisted a gesture that demonstrated how space can be actively involved into the process of art-experiencing. 

The idea of 'working' gallery space is particularly interesting in the context of contemporary art. So far, we had a chance to witness multiple ways of how the space can be modified and tailored to the needs of an artwork. Advanced visual technology and artist's ambitions can even make the sun shine in the gallery. It is a bit different when it comes to sound installations. I think it is possible to say that the physical laws are a priority while working with sound. Therefore, the adaptation of a gallery space for this kind of artwork would normally demand a good old unfurnished white cube. The emptiness and plainness of the space can actually be beneficial in this case: sound installations imply more listening than watching (apart from the visual components of the artwork) and require good acoustic qualities. Let's see, for example, a sound installation by Bruce Nauman 'Days'. It seems like the artist tried to make the physical objects (speaker in this case) to merge into the exhibition space. Nevertheless, the work's perception depends heavily on the space - the position of the listener in the room determines what sounds he/she will be able to hear. As well as the installation has no start and no end point, that evens the experience in different spots of the room. 

'Days'

Bruce Nauman

2012