One of the troubles I am having in my research has to do with identifying contemporary seductive artworks. Vicky Civera’s Sue?ɬ±o Amargo has been the only piece secured in that position. However, having been thinking about for so long has also made it become a little bit of an obsession and I am conscious that the study could become somewhat biased if I don’t find a way out.

The artist that moves the most is still Felix Gonzalez-Torres. His takable sweets and printed papers sparkled my thoughts on precarious art, which then crystallized in the form of an MA dissertation. When I moved away from ideas of transparency, reproducibility and transportability, I also left Felix Gonzalez-Torres behind.

Last night, I had an epiphany, whilst thinking about my forthcoming presentation on seductive objects. I have been looking at Beverly Semmes and E V Day’s works trying to extract contemporary seductiveness out of them. And I wasn’t convinced at all. Where are these works leading me astray from? Where to?

I had resolved to take them out of the talk completely but still felt there was a gap that I wasn’t addressing. It is then when the image of the Perfect Lovers appeared in my head. In the animation played by my brain (lying in bed, my eyes were closed), those 2 clocks were in my office wall. I couldn’t avoid looking at them, waiting for the second-counting hand of one of them to stop while the other carried on.

Google-ing the piece today, I found that Portable Temporary Services had decided to approximately recreate Gonzalez-Torres’ work. Moreover, they give you instructions on how to do it yourself.

Can precariousness be seductive? Can precarious art lead one astray from the art establishment’s right behaviour?

Posted in Blog, Seductive artworks, Seductive things