In Relational Aesthetics, Bourriaud says that the aim of his relational artists is to facilitate a "culture of interactivity which posits the transitivity of the cultural object as a fait accompli".
It seems to me that if the artwork is supposed to be found purely within an intangible relationship amongst the audience (that, according to Rirkrit Tiravanija in the video linked by Alex, needs not be documented), then I ask: why is there a need for the artist to intervene at all? Take the artist out of the equation and you still have a framework (the world) within which people "relate" to each other. I would sooner call this phenomenon life rather than art.
something to think about is that these events occur in the context of an art gallery. usually food, social relations etc dont occur in this space. usually we have quiet contemplation of a singular and eternal object (such as a painting). Perhaps it is the institution that takes these happenings out of the everyday and places them into the realm of art. (note: you will find in week 3 and onwards that i agree with you)
ReplyDelete