Joseph Kosuth’s “One and Three Chairs” is possibly one of the most ingenious works of conceptual art on the planet. I can’t believe I haven’t blogged about it before. It’s my favorite piece of art ever, namely because it evokes one of the most influential philosophical theories to ever emerge i.e. that of Plato’s Allegory of a Cave. That a single work of art can basically convey a profound and complex philosophy is something that I happen to find extraordinary. But, as usual, I’m getting way too ahead of myself here.
First, let me briefly explain Plato’s cave parable. I might fail miserably at this as I am no philosopher, but bear with me. Plato presents the following scenario: Imagine someone who has been imprisoned in a cave from the day of his birth. He is chained so that his back faces the opening of the cave. All that remains within his line of vision are the passing shadows created by the sun’s rays from behind him. He thinks that those shadows are all there is until one day, he escapes and he is able to see the world as it really is for the first time. He realizes then that what he had taken to be the world were merely shadows on a wall. So it is, says Plato, with us and the world we sense with our five senses. The empirical, solid world is just a shadow. So if we see many different kinds of trees, we shouldn’t fool ourselves. What’s real is not the various trees we see, but the one idea, concept, form of a tree. Whether or not you agree with the philosophy is one thing. Whether or not you think it’s a paradigm shift in thought, which it is, is another. Thus Plato.
Now we move on to Joseph Kosuth. I’m not sure whether or not he had Plato in mind when he created his “One and Three Chairs” back in 1965, but maybe that’s irrelevant. Either way, the exhibit, pictured below, was this: A chair, a photograph of the chair as it appears in the room, and a dictionary definition of the word “chair.” The way I see it, Kosuth is challenging the viewer to think on an extremely philosophical level. He titles the piece “One and Three Chairs” but how that title is interpreted is entirely up to the viewer. As in, the “one chair” he refers to could either be the physical chair or the definition of the chair or even (if you’re really ambitious) the picture of the chair. That all depends on what you think is real, on what you think you are looking at (which is where Plato comes in). There is a way, obviously, to support all three opinions, but maybe that just points to one profound observation: To accurately represent a chair, you need all three representations. If you were trying to explain a chair to someone who had never heard of one before, what would you need? An actual chair (or a picture of a chair, in case you haven’t a physical one) and a definition of what a chair is. Without these, you cannot be expected to give a proper explanation. Thus Kosuth.
Now, I am certainly willing to acknowledge that I am reading way too far into Kosuth, ergo I am attributing more ingenuity to his work than it merits. But isn’t it a crazy thing? A work of art can be powerful enough to elicit philosophical discourse. I know of no other medium that can claim to do that so effortlessly. But that’s art for you, I guess.
I learned about the Cave Theory of Knowledge (or the Allegory of the Cave) in my high school Philosophy of Life class, and so I can tell you that you did a very good job of explaining what it is all about. In fact, I’d say that you did a better job than my teacher did, but that’s a whole different story. I can definitely see how you made the connection between Joseph Kosuth and Plato. But even if that connection was not the artist’s initial intention in creating the piece, I don’t think that really matters. All that matters is that the piece makes YOU think about what you are seeing and what it can possibly mean. It makes you think about Plato and philosophy and the connections between the ancient Greek and the art that is appearing in the modern day. I believe that this component, this “making you think about what you’re seeing” is fundamental to defining what art is!
This piece of art is one of my favorite artworks that I have seen in a long time. It gives a new meaning to the age old question of what is art. As Kathy mentioned, you did a great job explaining the definition of the Cave. I think you propose an interesting theory that the artwork by Joseph Kosuth is Platoesque. Again, to agree with Kathy, I am not sure if that was the artists intent. I think this work is a great critique about society today. The fact that we have three different things that can be defined as a chair, and that we must contemplate what the true meaning of a chair is interesting. The fact that this thought is displayed in a museum is fascinating. Our world has become so entwined with the world of art that it is difficult to see the distinction sometime. The Three Chairs makes us wonder what is art (again). For starters, it is funny that a chair would be placed in an art museum to begin with. Typically we think that we sit on the chairs or benches to look at the artwork, not that the benches and chairs are the works of art. But that argument aside. Three Chairs makes us contemplate what is considered a chair in a more visual way than has ever been done before. What constitutes a chair? An image of a chair, the physical chair, or the definition of a chair. Again, these thoughts are being had in a museum, and not in an academic setting with philosophers. Artists are becoming the new philosophers causing the general population to contemplate the meaning of their work more so than ever before. It is not taxing to stand in front of a painting done by Frans Halls and consider the subject. His subjects are easy to recognize and do not require much thought. It is enough to appreciate the mastery of the painting. Joseph Kosuth causes us to stand infront (ironically not sit) of his work and contemplate the meaning of a chair. It may make your head spin enough that you may want to sit down!