The political dimension of Minimalism

Traditional historiography has ignored the underlying ideological motivations in Minimalist art, focusing instead on a problem of style and form. However, artists such as Carl Andre bring out the democratic potential of their work by reconsidering the traditional relation between spectator and object, the participatory aspect, by a rethinking of the ways of presentation, abolishing the barriers that distance the work from the spectator, who is addressed directly. André repeatedly claims that his work reflects his experience and that although formally there is no apparent political content, there is a commitment. One of the central questions he tackles is the material and its connotations.

In an interview with Jeanne Siegel,(1) Carl Andre set out his position, almost as an ideology: "I have been subject to politics as long as I’ve been alive, thirty-five years, starting with the New Deal, going into the Second World War, the Cold War, Korea, the whole thing. So, I’ve been affected by it and hence since I’ve made my art, my art must reflect my political experience. I could not possible separate them, I mean, art for art’s sake is ridiculous. Art is for the sake of one’s needs and I don’t think one has a distinct art need; rather art is an intersection of many human needs. My art will reflect not necessarily conscious politics but the unanalysed politics of my life. Matter as matter rather than matter as symbol is a conscious political position, essentially Marxist."

(1) Jeanne Siegel, Artwords. Discourse on the 60s and the 70s. Nueva York: Da Capo Press, 1992.

http://www.bampfa.berkeley.edu/exhibits/minimalism.html
http://www.artlex.com/ArtLex/m/minimalism.html
http://members.aol.com/mindwebart3/page12.htm
http://www.artincontext.com/listings/artist/genre/minimal.htm

Carl Andre, Sand-Line instar, 1995