Week Three Reading Response

102-109
Rirkrit Tiravanija
Providing Free Food

"The transgression that first earned his renown in the art world involved eating." FOOD ARTISTS FOR THE WIN. I saw this and even though I know Rirkrit's work and it's not exactly the type of food art that I do I still got excited. Art always seems to come back to food and the figure. And basically, that's the same for Rirkrit, though he's focusing more on social relationships than the actual physical figure. I guess the only thing about this reading and about Rirkrit's "Art" is that it really starts that conversation of what is art. Is making food for people really art? Is the social interaction the art? Is the performance the art? Is it all the art? Is it really art at all? I feel as though whether his pieces can be argued as art all day long but it doesn't really matter to him, because that's not the point. I agree with the book when it points out that he's not feeding the hungry, he's feeding peoples' need for interaction, for socialization. He's creating these situations for them. I personally think that's the art. But I don't think many others would agree with me that would fall into the realm of art. (But performances are creating social interaction and performances are art and that is what he is doing.)