After I read the article about Duchamp’s work and how he was thinking about art, I started to question myself, Why are some people consider Duchamp work, expanding the boundaries of art? I also have a question about, what is the difference between an art object and a design object? Who gets to design that? After i read about useful object articles.
First, What i’m interested in about the object is its purpose. What designers aim this object to be. With this concept, this is how I value each object. For example, If the designer designs a car to be as fast as possible, i will value this car based on how fast it can be. It all depends on the designer intention for me. Now, this statement might start another question which is, How can we know the designer’s intention? Personally, I think the good design is supposed to be able to reflect the design by itself, In Duchamp’s case it’s clear for me that he didn’t design his work to be functional, he just wants to question the art industry and our society as a whole. This is why I think Duchamp is a good designer because he is able to reflect his intentions.
This comes down to another elephant in the room, What is the difference between an art object and a design object? After I read an article given, the line between the art and design object is so blurry. I try to observe the definition and the definition of art, I come to a conclusion that everything can be an art, as long as one person in the world claims it to be, even that person is the artist himself. Thus, the question art or not is an individual preference. You are the one who designs and defines the definition yourself.
In conclusion, who gets to decide is the object is worth or not is an individual opinion; it depends on yourself. The value of the object depends on each person’s preference but we can still try to find a common ground from each person by trying to understand the artist’s intention and look at the object or the art, is it serves the artist’s purpose or not.