Bruce Nauman, splays a true message to glare museum visitors in the face. “The true artist helps the world by revealing mystic truths.” He arranges this statement in a swirl. Of course a swirl makes me thing of the perfect Fibonacci sequence, although this does not seem to fit that mathematical form. Already to me that was a revelation- Bruce Nauman actually studied math music and physics before deciding to go into art. Why wouldn’t he make this in perfect form? Because art isn’t perfect- it simply needs to reveal something. Why blue and red lights with a magenta background? To me blue is the color of mystics. Red and pale magenta…I’m not so sure about.
This piece of art to me answers two philosophical questions in a concise, legible manner.
What is art?
Art in my opinion infused with the essence of this installation, is any subtle observation brought alive, made important. Artists always do this. When artists sketch studies of various subject matter it is them absorbing everything about that subject matter enabling them to hyper-focus and make keen observations. This enlightens those who later observe the art by extracting the observation without having to do (or needing the talent brains or philosophy) to have made that observation on their own.
The other question this artwork answers is as follows, is artwork purposeful? Is artwork a good use of money and time?
This bleeds into the question of communal responsibility which i am tempted to touch on but going to refrain from. Let me say it like this- why does the starving artist choose to starve and be an artists- because they believe their insight expands the world metaphysically. Bruce Nauman says it is because the artists has the ability to enrich anyone’s life by sharing observations, by revealing secret truths, by making the hidden accessible and legible.
Something about seeing this artwork in a museum irks me, however. Artwork is splayed everywhere, in nature in the city streets- people are always making insights and had this sign been hanging in a more public location its message, i think would be far more impactful. There is almost hypocrisy and defensiveness in seeing this here in the museum. Does the artist need to justify his seemingly arbitrary exhibition, does it not speak for itself? Can the artists teach for the sake of others or solely for himself? Of course, I don’t actually perceive Nauman the way those questions are phrased but it just got me thinking about it.
