Relational art involves many social activity and encounter with the viewer. I can't remember the artist name, but there is an artist whose work deals with the idea of 'encounter' with lots of people or strangers. This artist is placed in middle of no where on street, carring pen and papers on both hands, then she started to ask people on the streets for the direction to certain places. When she asks for the direction, people started to draw a little map on paper helping her how to get to the place. These several different maps has been collected and she displayed every each map on the wall. Her work is an art created by strangers on street, and this randomness has created another way of social activity with group of people. It was not just the map that made art it was the relationship and communication with people that bridge the gap between art work and the audience.
However, I am curious about the broadness of relational, that anything can be achievable to become relational art if it's characteristic is all about social arena/ activity. That means anything that involves with activity or encounters with the audience in the gallery can be relational art. For example, Philippe Parreno's lamp is considered relational because it investigate the way architecture control social activity. In the interview with Ben Lewis, he asked a question on how he evolved the pattern that is on the land and he answered ' it represents nothing'. May be his lamp requires new way of understanding art, and the idea is that art no longer had to mean anything. But here, what is the boundary of relational art? What is exactly that stands for relationl art?