Conceptual Art and Theories

1. On page 169, Hopkins writes, “In line with the thought of French post-Marxist thinkers such as Louis Althusser and Michael Foucault, ideology increasingly came to be seen as all-pervasive, at work in the very institutions in which humans beings are socialized.” In what ways did these new theories about ideology shape the thinking of conceptual artists and thus their work?

First, a quick definition of ideology is “a system of ideas, beliefs, or concepts that organize and structure reality.” In other words, we have systems of beliefs, etc. that cause us to see the world in a certain ways, and since we can’t perceive and represent reality without preconceived ideas, we can’t experience reality outside of ideologies. For example, a common ideology in the U.S. is a two-party system ideology that assumes that two political parties represent all positions, and thus by talking to someone on the “left” and someone on the “right” you will have covered all views. The implication of this theory that resonated with artists is that their own assumptions about areas such as gender, politics, race, and ecology come from ideological apparatuses such as the government or the media (Althusser) rather than themselves. This led many artists to directly question not only mainstream societies ideologies about gender, race, and the environment, but also to question their own assumptions For example, Burgin “explored his own gender position in works which double back on their dominant ‘masculinist’ cultural viewpoint.” Feminist artists, meanwhile, focused more on society’s gender ideologies as a whole.

2. The British Art & Language group argued, “theory about art could in itself be considered art.” Is this position on art a total departure from traditional art, or is it actually a continuation of a fundamental idea that has existed for much of art history since often artworks are judged by their dialogue with previous works and their embedded “theories” about art?