I guess that what kind of art makes one laugh depends on what makes you laugh generally. I laugh at situations that appear to me absurd delivered in a deadpan way. So lots of the work of Harrison and Wood does that for me, but only for one or two viewings. Once I know what’s going to happen, it’s not funny any more, which is disappointing. Yet my preference for that kind of humour remains; I continue to be primed to laugh at another instance, which is good.
Lastly, I think that an artwork must have that shadow of something serious you mention in order for it not to be merely a joke.
Laughter can be a means of dealing with acute discomfort. We (people) often laugh at jokes we don't understand. Duchamp's readymades were challenging. (Even today, apparently.) Context is everything, the date, painted on the side in black paint, gives the urinal its only significance. Imagine how one would understand it if it had been produced in 1912, the year of Kandinsky's piece; or (here's a tricky one) produced in 1929 (the year Graves published "Good-bye to All That"), but dated 1917. The urinal is an anti-war piece. Duchamp aspired to condemn the culture that produced or allowed the war, even all war. Not a laughing matter.
Definitely not a laughing matter, but most 21st century viewers new to this piece would never connect it with his condemnation of the meaningless slaughter of WWI. Context, as you say, is everything.
I'm 95% sure it was an MFA student at the university, so I doubt it. I just texted one of my classmates from grad school and she said she often thinks about it too! We are going to sleuth this out!
I also don't see much art that makes me actually laugh, although I can see the humour in lots of it. I think probably like your students I am looking for the deeper meaning, and maybe a bit anxious that I haven't seen it. Love the Martin Creed video. That did make me laugh!
The funniest artwork I have ever seen was at a student exhibition at James Madison University in Virginia. It was a single sheet of paper that had lines of graphite scribbled all over it and then erased. Across the top of the paper was a little holder with a standard #2 yellow pencil that had a comically long pink eraser. The pencil was horizontal and the eraser was hanging down flacidly, the length representing how much eraser was used to remove the graphite on the paper below. It struck me as hilarious and I couldn’t stop giggling. I still think about that work from time to time, and it’s been probably 15 years. I also find a lot of the supporting characters/subjects in renaissance and classical paintings to be pretty funny, almost like the artists were just fatigued or disinterested by the time they had to work on those faces.
I absolutely love art that makes me laugh when I come across it.
Unfortunately I don’t. I will see if I can figure it and report back. I’d love to ask them if they intended for it to be funny, or if I just brought my own ridiculousness to the party.
I guess that what kind of art makes one laugh depends on what makes you laugh generally. I laugh at situations that appear to me absurd delivered in a deadpan way. So lots of the work of Harrison and Wood does that for me, but only for one or two viewings. Once I know what’s going to happen, it’s not funny any more, which is disappointing. Yet my preference for that kind of humour remains; I continue to be primed to laugh at another instance, which is good.
Lastly, I think that an artwork must have that shadow of something serious you mention in order for it not to be merely a joke.
Agree with all you say here Martin!
Laughter can be a means of dealing with acute discomfort. We (people) often laugh at jokes we don't understand. Duchamp's readymades were challenging. (Even today, apparently.) Context is everything, the date, painted on the side in black paint, gives the urinal its only significance. Imagine how one would understand it if it had been produced in 1912, the year of Kandinsky's piece; or (here's a tricky one) produced in 1929 (the year Graves published "Good-bye to All That"), but dated 1917. The urinal is an anti-war piece. Duchamp aspired to condemn the culture that produced or allowed the war, even all war. Not a laughing matter.
Definitely not a laughing matter, but most 21st century viewers new to this piece would never connect it with his condemnation of the meaningless slaughter of WWI. Context, as you say, is everything.
I'm 95% sure it was an MFA student at the university, so I doubt it. I just texted one of my classmates from grad school and she said she often thinks about it too! We are going to sleuth this out!
I also don't see much art that makes me actually laugh, although I can see the humour in lots of it. I think probably like your students I am looking for the deeper meaning, and maybe a bit anxious that I haven't seen it. Love the Martin Creed video. That did make me laugh!
Check out his instagram account, Helen. It's got loads of these little videos on it. I just love his work. It's sort of a bit bonkers.
The funniest artwork I have ever seen was at a student exhibition at James Madison University in Virginia. It was a single sheet of paper that had lines of graphite scribbled all over it and then erased. Across the top of the paper was a little holder with a standard #2 yellow pencil that had a comically long pink eraser. The pencil was horizontal and the eraser was hanging down flacidly, the length representing how much eraser was used to remove the graphite on the paper below. It struck me as hilarious and I couldn’t stop giggling. I still think about that work from time to time, and it’s been probably 15 years. I also find a lot of the supporting characters/subjects in renaissance and classical paintings to be pretty funny, almost like the artists were just fatigued or disinterested by the time they had to work on those faces.
I absolutely love art that makes me laugh when I come across it.
I love it when art stays in your memory like that. Do you remember who made the artwork with the pencil?
Unfortunately I don’t. I will see if I can figure it and report back. I’d love to ask them if they intended for it to be funny, or if I just brought my own ridiculousness to the party.
Ha! Yes, that's a good question! It wasn't John Baldessari was it?
What was the piece?
I prefer your reading of the work too! More feminist.