Art on the other hand, can change the world, and often does pose a significant threat to the rules. When made part of the spirit of a work of art, humor can form the initial agitation that ignites a thought-rupture --a first break or incongruity with the real and the sensible-- that helps the aesthetic and political qualities of the work take flight, inspiring us to reflect seriously on new ideas.
Which reminds me of a story:
Urs Fischer had been invited by a Swiss art museum to suggest a work of his that it could purchase for its permanent collection. The invitation was not to include a work of Fischer in a specific exhibition, but to buy it and commit to preserving it as part of the museum's collection. The artist considered the request and the told the museum that he would like to offer a new piece for them to acquire, rather than recommend an existing work. He told them he had conceived a new piece for the occasion: a cat*.
*In order to own a work by Urs Fischer, the museum would need to commit to caring for, feeding, maintaining and protecting a living cat. Security guards might have to race down museum hallways, motion-sensors might trigger night alarms, and a litter bob might tip over and spill on a Giacometti sculpture. With this simple gesture, the artist exposes and short-circuits not only the realities inherit in the institutionalization of art, but the nature of art itself. Perhaps he also did it because he was curious to see how the museum would handle it. After much internal deliberation, the museum rejected his proposal, citing technical and administrative reasons.
(2010) For the blind man in the dark room looking for the black cat that isn't there. Contemporary Art Museum St. Louis: Washington and Culture Gest: Lisbon
