Conceptual Art: A Critical Anthology - uncopy

fact eliminated the artist’s “expression,” since whoever produces one of these is not expressing
himself. If there were any self-expression, the work could only be imitated, but if in addition
to Buren and Toroni, absolutely anyone can produce the “same” canvas, this means that the
painter never expresses himself on any level, whether his name is Buren, Toroni or Any One
Else. If the canvas is always identical, it is because it is, immutably. The artist is insignificant.
Thus the system of references which constitutes the language of art is no longer acceptable.
This contention supports—and is supported by—the fact that the very concept of art
is fundamentally questioned and in the course of being replaced by a new proposition. Because,
let us not forget, these pictures existed before we came to talk about them. Logically (according
to their own lights), they have painted innumerable copies of one canvas for nearly two years.
Logically, because if they limited themselves to a single copy each this would have to be considered
as a unique work, as the masterpiece, a concept they have also rejected. We do not have to
consider their future. We can limit ourselves to what they show us, to their canvases. Their
existence-in-themselves could be related to formalist mathematics.
We are no longer in the domain of art. But we are faced with a questioning of the whole
basis of art.
Since this article was written, Buren in particular has been able to demonstrate at what
point his action was coherent. He continues to prove that it is possible to elaborate a practical
theory in art, on condition that one ceases to be just an artist or, in other words, that one has
a total and specific vision of the innumerable problems posed by the work and its communication.
Using the same material, Buren has, since March 1968, produced the same stripes printed
on paper. In April he pasted pieces of paper on advertisement hoardings in Paris, showing
nothing but the stripes themselves. At “Prospect ‘68’” in Dusseldorf he pasted similar pieces
of paper on a surface 26 by 32 ft. (September 1968). In October, in an article in Galerie des
Arts, Buren, discussing specific and marginal problems of art teaching, described the mechanics
of creation as a social act. In the same month he had an exhibition at the Galerie Apollinaire in
Milan, and used the gallery as a kind of background support rather than as an exhibition space.
This text first appeared in Studio International, 177:907 (January 1969), pp. 47–49.
michel claura paris commentary 87