Art can mean many different things, from intricate prose to abstract paintings. It functions as a medium for activism and for storytelling — and dissecting art often requires understanding its socio-political and historical context.
On social media platforms such as TikTok and X, modern art is often looked down upon for its supposedly easy means of making and for its lack of visual impact on the consumer.
However, art is meant to be dissected and understood outside of a visual experience. Modern art doesn’t need to be visually appealing, it just needs to have intention behind it.
“Untitled (Portrait of Ross in L.A.)” is a piece created by Félix González-Torres in 1991. It consists of a pile of candy, weighing 175 pounds — despite visitors being able to take candy from this pile and its display changing each time that happens, its weight remains the same.
González-Torres based this work off his late partner, Ross Laycock, who died due to AIDS complications. The piece acts as a tribute to not just Laycock, but to all of those who’ve passed due to the negligence of the U.S. government during the HIV/AIDS epidemic. The weight of the work is the average body weight of an adult male. The visual nature of the piece changes each time visitors come and go, connecting the piece with loss and deteriorating health.
Though the piece is arguably easy to recreate — all one needs is 175 pounds of candy — nobody but González-Torres would have thought of it. Nobody else has the life experiences and love that he has for Laycock that would have resulted in the conception of that work, and the intention was there. That intention is what makes the artwork what it is.
Mentally dividing artworks into categories of easy versus hard to create gets rid of the point of art altogether. Pieces of artwork are supposed to be dissected and analyzed more so than they are supposed to be subjected to criticism of their visual appearance.
As a museum frequenter myself, I find that tours emphasize the technique, the brushwork and the aesthetics of a painting less than they do the historical period and steps the artist took before the pieces’ conception. One should look beyond the visual display and more at this aforementioned background.
Modern art can also be a technical feat as opposed to a reflection of the times. Yves Klein, a French artist, was most noted for his 1961 piece, “Blue Monochrome.” With the help of a chemist, Klein created a deep blue hue — the first of its kind. The color was named “International Klein Blue (IKB)” after the artist.
The hue itself was transformative, as it isn’t every day the world conceives a new color. However, the piece itself is meant to exude Klein’s “utopian vision of the world,” according to the Museum of Modern Art.
Whether it’s to storytell or to create something never seen before, art should not be confined to pretty pictures or towering statues, when it’s so much more than that. Just because a piece of art is easy to replicate, it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t evoke some sort of unique emotion from its audience.
Though social commentary is a large part of why most pieces of art are conceived of, it doesn’t always have to serve as a performance for a wider audience; it can exist as a form of expression for the artist and the artist alone.
A Monet painting could evoke melancholy and serenity, whereas the aforementioned Klein piece could evoke confusion and maybe even anger, as to why such a piece of seemingly simple artwork is so important. Both tell a story and can evoke emotion from the viewer.
Art can lean into historical significance and social justice, as per Gonzalez-Torres, or lean into technique and transformation as per Klein. Whether it is to tell a story to a wider audience or to act as a piece of self-expression for the artist themselves, there is above all else, intent and purpose behind these pieces.
Rebecca Do is an Opinion Intern for the fall 2024 quarter. She can be reached at dort@uci.edu.
Edited by Zahira Vasquez and Mia Noergaard