to the artists, designers and craftspeople who think I call their work kitsch... this is NOT the case, it refers to my own work

Mar 3, 2011

repurposed lighting at AAF + update

My kind of thing ... turning objects into something different than their original purpose.

Old and new gardenhoses (still working) turned into lights and furniture.

Sander Bokkingabok. hosepipe furniture collection (have a look at his other series with more nice designs) 

A few funny 'aliens' by ...

These two artists at the Affordable Art Fair remind me of remarks I get occasionally on my work; a work of art is not supposed to have a function (as here it is lighting and furniture and thus it is more design than art). 

A few days ago I got a very interesting reaction of the second artist, Tanguy de Le Hoye, and I totally agree with his point of view:

This negative kind of definition seems to be a logical error such as: art does not have a utilitarian function (true) so that a utility function is not (or less) art.

The light that I put in some of my works is my way to add movement and therefore life into it. The use of it as a lamp is only one consequence. It is somehow like a chair, developed to sit on, can serve as a stepladder or its back as a coat rack.
If we followed the reasoning function the non-illuminated fish also present on the stand at the AAF would have a higher artistic value than the "lights", as if illuminating devalued the object. A chair is not less a chair because one hangs a coat on it...
That being written, I have trouble accepting being told that I am an artist (what is it? where do we the draw the line? Is it important? ...), I do not work like this. All this seems ambiguous, it could be summed up: "I do not like people to tell me what I am, as I do not like being told what I am not, what is important for me is what I do. "

I tried to explain my point of view on the subject in this previous post:

the remark about the chair reminded me of this one I made years ago


more AAF, click label below

No comments: