Readymades and the Value of Art

For many people, when they visualize art they think of grand marble sculptures or renaissance paintings. However, the boundaries of art are constantly being tested and expanded upon, and even canvases with nothing but a single stripe on them can be considered art. In the early 20th century an artist named Marcel Duchamp created a series of artworks he called ‘Readymades’. These pieces were mass-produced products such as wheels, shovels, and hat racks, that were available to anyone and were regularly used as household appliances. Most were not altered in any way except for a signature or inscription by Duchamp. This series sparked great controversy over what could be considered ‘art’, and it led to many influential works from other artists who were inspired by Readymades to push the boundaries in the art world. Considered to be the first ‘true’ Readymade, as it was left unaltered save for a phrase written on the inside, Bottle Rack, 1914 by Marcel Duchamp was a significant piece of artwork. It emphasized and reinforced the importance of art evoking intellectual appreciation, and not just aesthetic pleasure. While Sontag suggests that viewers should value how a work makes them feel more than what it makes them think about, Duchamp’s act of taking visually unappealing, ordinary objects and declaring them art exemplifies an oversight in Sontag’s argument (10). 

The purpose of Bottle Rack was to spark thought in viewers about the meaning of the work and how it changed their view of art as a whole. Duchamp did not find substance in artwork made purely for viewing pleasure (what he called ‘Retinal art’), so he created these pieces of art that were not pleasant to look at- they were ordinary and dull, sometimes even offensive- but that sparked contemplation in viewers that could be evaluated and appreciated. Prior to the creation of the Readymades, Marcel Duchamp was a painter, but he grew tired of what he viewed as the “unnecessary adoration of art” (qtd. In Smith), and drastically changed his art style. He explored forms of art that were emerging at the time such as cubism and conceptual art, which were initiating conversation about what art was defined as, similar to his Readymades. Duchamp was interested in “ideas- not just in aesthetic products”, so when he was in the process of creating the readymades, he had set requirements for which items could be chosen (qtd. In Marcel Duchamp’s Readymades). He made sure that the object he selected each time didn’t stand out for “its beauty or its ugliness” and instead induced a “point of indifference” in the observer (qtd. In Smith). This lack of aesthetic that art was so often well known for causes viewers to wonder why exactly these specific products were chosen to be displayed, and provokes intellectual curiosity and conflict. When Duchamp submitted one of his first readymades, Fountain, under a pseudonym to the Society of Independent Artists which he himself had helped found, they rejected it. Going against their policy of never turning a piece of art away from being displayed in their gallery show, the board denied that the urinal submitted was art at all, as it was not only just an ordinary object, but because of its purpose, it was too vulgar and crude to be displayed (Howarth). This belief that art should please the senses in order to be valued, or as Sontag states, “in place of a hermeneutics we need an erotics of art”, constricts art to visual perception (10). Although Bottle Rack is not pretty or necessarily pleasing to the eye, it still holds value intellectually to observers, which is just as important as aesthetically. 

Marcel Duchamp did not spend hours toiling over the physical creation of Bottle Rack, welding and shaping the iron spikes, but he is the artist nonetheless. He bought the object in question at a local department store, and the only physical alteration he made was an inscription on the inside. While Sontag believes that “how it is what it is” should be more critically examined than “what it means”, in the case of Bottle Rack, there are no composition choices or brushstrokes to inspect (10). However, the content, or lack thereof, does invoke an intellectual response from the viewer, making them contemplate what exactly it means to be an artist, when one doesn’t necessarily need to be able to create visually pleasing pieces of work. Sontag suggests that criticism should focus on what the artist did to create a piece of art, but Duchamp referenced to his readymades as “a work of art without an artist to make it”(qtd. In Roberts). Although the form of the pieces can’t be analyzed, they still hold value in the sense that the act of declaring them art was a significant gesture and could be analyzed intellectually . 

Although Duchamp’s work does challenge Sontag’s argument that the aesthetic value of art is more important than the intellectual value, there are some aspects of his pieces that do agree with her beliefs. Sontag claims that since the time of Plato and other Greek philosophers, people’s view of art has been limited to thinking about it as either “mimesis or representation”, suggesting that artwork either mimics reality, or doesn’t resemble reality but has a meaning or interpretation that relates to it (2). However, Bottle Rack  does neither. Duchamp’s readymades were not made so that people could pull a hidden meaning from them about his lifestyle or the political climate, as has historically been attempted, and they don’t just resemble reality, they are reality. Instead of depicting those objects through a form like drawing or painting, Duchamp chose to buy real, readily available versions of those items, just like the ones being used everyday, and place them in front of viewers as art. By denying the chance for interpretative rules to be applied so that viewers can pull a meaning from the piece about the ‘real world’, Duchamp’s work challenges the conventional ideas of interpretation. 

Another similarity is in the way that Duchamp defended his readymades, stating that the ordinary objects were elevated simply by his selection of them to be displayed, and that he had altered the context of the pieces (Marcel Duchamp’s Readymades). Many of these items are used everyday and no one pays special attention to them. However, when they are in an art gallery, isolated and outside of their normal environment, people no longer only see them for their purpose, but think about them in the context of the art world: are those works actually art? Why? If they are, what else could be considered art? Since context can be considered part of the form of an artwork, Duchamp manipulated the form of his readymades and the result was intellectual stimulation in the observers. The reason why an artist chooses to display or create a piece of art is important, because while some people may look at a piece of art and not understand it, knowing the context surrounding the work and the artist provides enlightenment and insight into the piece’s purpose or meaning. However, even though some pieces of Sontag and Duchamp’s viewpoints do align when examining the Readymades, his pieces demonstrate that Sontag’s thesis still overemphasizes the value of aesthetics instead of the intellectual aspect of art, since his works were not visually pleasing, but stimulated the mind and provided experience in that way. 

Despite these differences both Sontag and Duchamp want us to rethink our relationship to the world around us and the value of it. Duchamp’s innovative, controversial art inspired other artists, like Andy Warhol, to expand their idea of art and how it should be appreciated. Some may even credit Duchamp with being the pioneer of the modern art movement, creating a new mindset about design and what it is to be an artist with his readymades. Although Duchamp and Sontag had different perspectives on what should be valued most highly regarding pieces of art, they were both interested in trying new approaches and being critical, and wanted the rest of the world to try as well.