Art vs Reality

In looking at this unit as a whole i came to a similar conclusion to Luke, the stuff (whether you want to catagorise it as art or not) that we have dealt with in this class is linked very closely to, and in some cases cant be separated from, every day life, or as Rosalyn Deutsche puts it "reality".

With this move away from categorising and separating art and life, the idea that art is non-functional disappears. By this i mean that the notion that art is able to speak about or represents real things, or even use real things (Marcel Duchamp) but cannot be worn, eaten, or used to sit on is not relevant in the forms of art we have been looking at.

What interests me is the fact that by becoming a part of "reality" art becomes more interactive, accessible, and less dependent on institutions, however, it also becomes less distinguishable as art or noticeable. This may not be a bad thing as art doesn't always need a title or named artist/s to make it valid. However, there is the growing possibility that only the art world know about these works as they are so integrated into everyday life, and an exclusive dialogue between the work and the people of the art world begins to appear in some cases.

So how do we blend art and life without excluding the public?