Conceptual Art: A Critical Anthology - uncopy

interview with daniel buren: art is no longer
justifiable or settingthe record straight
georges boudaille
(...)
Georges Boudaille: Before any discussion, we should agree on the meaning of certain terms.
First, what is art?
Daniel Buren: I agree with Rosenberg’s text that says anything is art as soon as it is put
in a museum. And that is why artists are such appalling things, since they are responsible for
this state of affairs in art. Duchamp realized that there was something false in art, but his
limitation was that, rather than demystifying, he amplified it. By taking a manufactured object
and placing it out of context, he quite simply symbolized art. His actions tended to “represent”
and not “present” the object. Duchamp, like all artists, could not “present” anything at all
without “re-presenting” it. And if he symbolized art in this way, it was because as soon as he
exhibited a bottle rack, a shovel, or a urinal, he was really stating that anything was art as soon
as you pointed at it. By extension, and this is very important, that means that a cow in a field
becomes art in a painting, a tree by Courbet becomes art, anda woman by Rubens becomes art; now
this cow, this tree, and this woman exist in another way. Duchamp dismantled this process
supposedly to take away its sanctity, but he went about it in such a way that by being against
art, he was in art. Let’s clarify an important point right away: Duchamp is not anti-art. He
belongs to art. The art of extolling the consumer society. Reassuring art. Putting a shovel in a