What is Post-Theory Art, how does it relate to Theory Art, and is it different from other post-movements in art in some meaningful way? A first documentation of observable elements for critical and academic analysis.
Is Post-Theory Art as to its Precursor, Theory Art, the Same Way that Postconceptualism, Postmodernism, and Postminimalism Were to Their Precursors? Or is Post-Theory Art Somehow Materially Different in Meaningful Ways?
Introduction
Perhaps one way of understanding contemporary art is as seeing new movements build on predecessors, and offer critiques of them, and explore their groundings, and their causes and effects, and in the process introduce new concepts and methodologies, or in art, new ways of seeing, hearing, reading, receiving, and interpreting and understanding that which has been conveyed by the artist, musician, writer, poet, architect. Theory art, which broadly may be said to be theory as art, and which overtly uses theoretical frameworks as artistic expressions, seems already to be resulting in its predecessor, Post-Theory Art. As with postconceptualism, postmodernism, and postminimalism, so too post-theory art: As the art and its practice and its artists, musicians, and writers evolve, explore, propose, and push new boundaries, including critical reflection and deconstruction, post-theory art begins to emerge. Based on what appears to be its distinguishing elements, related to other post-movements, post-theory art may be, in this accelerated time, already co-existing with theory art itself. This essay explores the distinguishing elements of post-theory art, contrasts it with theory art, and places it within the context of historical and contemporary art movements, particularly postconceptualism and neoconceptualism in response to conceptual art; postminimalism to minimalism, and postmodernism to the postmodern.
The Art History, Intellectual History, and Art Theory Backstory of Theory Art
Theory art may be said to integrate theoretical discourse with artistic expression. Rooted in conceptual art, it extends the idea that concepts themselves are the substance of art. Conceptual art, developed in the 1960s (at least in the West; it existed other places too, at other times, including long before) by artists like Sol LeWitt and Joseph Kosuth, prioritized ideas over aesthetic form. It challenged traditional art forms and emphasized the intellectual engagement of the viewer.
Theory art took this arguably a step further by focusing not just on one idea at a time but the relationships and possible connections between many ideas and thoughts — by proposing that theories — human theories — the one thing that humans alone do — are art, and an art form where it does not matter how or where expressed. In the visual art context of theory art, it involves pieces that may be considered to be text-heavy works — even plain text documents, even the formal documents in society, such as legal briefs filed in courts, that, when made by an artist, place into society and culture the conveyance of the artist’s theories, including, but not limited to, the placing into society and culture and governments a given artist’s complex arguments and ideas as to what it all might mean, as a theory, a hypothesis, an observation, a documentation, manifesting, at least in visual art as often integrating visual or performative elements. The theory art approach draws from various intellectual disciplines, not just movements in art history, including philosophy, sociology, literature, linguistics, anthropology, psychology, economics, physics, chemistry, math, and law, among others, to create a palette not of colors but of existing theories to draw upon in creating and proposing new theoretical hypotheses about what the given artist sees, something that academic disciplines often call theories for short — comprehensive hypothetical and theoretical frameworks to understand observed phenomena, in this case, in Theory Art, using the vehicle not of a peer-reviewed academic paper, but instead with execution as some form of art or creative practice. The focus of theory art may be said to be not just on intellectual engagement, but the potential relations and connections that shared intellectual engagement can communicate, prompting viewers to contemplate and interpret the underlying theories about the objective reality we all observe, experience, now and future. Theory Art is not quite the scientific method, but, then again, it’s really not that far from it, either, at least in spirit.
THEORY ART IN RELATION TO ALREADY-EXISTING POST-THEORY ART
1. THEORY ART
Key Elements of Theory Art
Theories themselves as art is the primary element of theory art (and post-theory art, discussed below in comparison), where theories are considered art forms and where they may be considered art no matter where or how expressed, be it through visual art, music, literature, performance, or other ways, tangible and intangible, including, for example, plainly-written documents placed into society in some way. In Theory Art, theories are not just subjects or themes; they are vehicles; they are an artistic medium in and of themselves. Like conceptual part, post conceptual art, and neoconceptual art, this shifts the focus from traditional aesthetic concerns to the intellectual substance of the work, but goes further than just one idea or thought, and goes broader than just western thought systems and western philosophies, as discussed both above and below, and in other related articles.
The Acceptance Of Words Alone As Visual Art is another key element of theory art. In theory art, it has already been recognized, at least in the creative spheres and the creative cultures, in various countries, that when an artist uses even exclusively text — say, plain words on paper — to propose observational theories or, say, argument theories, such as proposals for how things could be not just how they are, such whole-cloth text works can, but need not to be art, integrate visual or performative aspects (painting, installations, performance art). More plainly: Words in sentences and paragraphs can serve as the primary vehicle for expressing ideas, and still be art, even when not just overshadowing but when even exclusive of visual elements. It may be said that Theory Art is art is language is art — a theory that may or may not be true, but consider the dozens of existing theories and observable things it encapsulates. Perhaps more easily seen, for now, is that plain text is pure beauty. Would Baldessari agree? Perhaps another theory, perhaps valid or not. Either way, if you subscribe to it, Theory Art says yes, it is art, and notes that if tradition is needed, look to the traditions of Holzer’s pure-text Truisms to be persuaded that and pure-text Theory Art fits well in the lineage of the traditions of text-based art, or language art, which is not just a feature of art in Europe and the United States in the past century; text art is global, seen in every culture, on every continent, apparently since the start of man, including well before the past five-thousand years.
A Truly Interdisciplinary And Cross-Cultural Approach is another key distinction of Theory Art, which merges different academic and theoretical disciplines — from across cultures and thinking systems and philosophies from around the world, not just Western, to draw upon and create comprehensive interdisciplinary theoretical frameworks within the art. Theory art draws on fields seen in all cultures and societies across human time, including philosophy, ethics, anthropology, psychology, medicine, physics, math, literature, the poetics, and not just law but the philosophy of law and legal systems, as well as political and economic theories, to document, propose, oppose, argue, suggest, and create, including the creation of new proposed theories to explain and comprehend observable phenomena. This blending of disciplines may be seen to enrich the artworks that manifest from Theory Art, providing multiple layers of meaning, and inviting diverse interpretive strategies, as reflected in those Theory Art pieces, be they visual or musical or literature or poetic, that contain layers of material, as most easily imaginable in, say, an oil stick painting of layers and layers of overwritten sentences, a theory with layers of meaning shown by layers and layers of overlapping oil painted text, encapsulating not just one culture’s thinking but rather the theories, collective or composite, of many cultures, across many continents, across many periods of human time. As just one example of what Theory Art can convey through its hallmark interdisciplinary approach.
Conceptual depth is another hallmark of Theory Art, and here clearly like conceptual, post-conceptual, and neoconceptual art; through its conceptual depth, Theory Art focuses on intellectual engagement, prompting viewers or participants to contemplate and interpret, usually but not always within objective parameters, the theoretical underpinnings. The art is designed to provoke thought or reason or interpretation of normative considerations, broadly speaking, rather than provide aesthetic pleasure at the personal and subjective level. This engagement is in many ways dependent upon viewers (or listeners, or readers) to actively participate in the process of understanding, aligning with the traditions of conceptual and neoconceptual art. It also is in many ways dependent upon the viewer, listener, or reader to be open to new ideas and new interpretations (rather than closed), and curious about the world around, the objective exterior. Think active listening is to good communication what active curiosity is to make good Theory Art, active curiosity on the part of both the artist-maker-transmitter and the viewer-listener-reader-receiver-interpreter. Theoretically speaking.
Last, Human-Centric. Increasingly important to understanding one of the deep roots of Theory Art, especially in the current age, it that Theory Art is human-centric, not in the narcissistic sense of always being about humans, but in the ownership and origin sense of always being by humans. Of all the species, it bears true, so far, that the human species is the only one that can make what we call theories, as other articles beyond the scope of this essay discuss. But in the current age of artificial intelligence, machines can now make theories, too. And thereby the perhaps increasingly important element of Theory Art that emphasizes the importance of human theorizing and human-to-human communication. Is Theory Art thereby deeply traditional, even protective? The emphasis is on human intellect and creativity, and arguably the intangibles that only humans can bring to even the most mathematical of theories — intuition and inspiration — and that only humans can bring to theories about other species and ourselves — soul, consciousness, conscience — celebrating, documenting, and perhaps leaving needed evidence of the unique capacity humans to make uniquely human theories, for better or worse, and the unique way that humans communicate with and interpret each other, and each other’s acts and thoughts and beliefs, for better or worse.
2. POST-THEORY ART
Are We Already Seeing Evidence of Post-Theory Art?
Perhaps because of its very nature, a study of available art that fits within Theory Art also seems already to fit within what would naturally follow, Post-Theory Art. Here below seem to be some of the already noticeable objective elements of Post-Theory Art.
Meta-theoretical exploration appears already through some artworks and some artists’ practices to be a significant if not dispositive characteristic of post-theory art. This includes self-referential theories, where art examines the nature of theories themselves, their construction, and their impact on various disciplines and societies. Post-theory art critically engages with the process of theorizing, reflecting on how theories are formed, disseminated, and interpreted, including across academic disciplines, across cultures, across belief systems, and across thought systems worldwide. This self-reflexivity adds a layer of complexity, encouraging viewers to question the foundations of knowledge and belief. If religion can be reduced to the concept of dogma, can post-theory art be reduced to the concept of doubt, or the willingness to doubt, to be uncertain? Consider a 2018 piece first thought to be Conceptual Art, but which might also be Theory Art, but perhaps most accurately be seen as Post-Theory Art: The written sentence, as an idea, never printed or painted, that sold in 2018 on a global artist internet platform, by then-emerging artist Adam Daley Wilson, which written sentence said: “A declarative statement not yet evolved into questions of uncertainty and doubt.”
Critical reflection, including Insight is another element of Post-Theory Art. In calling this critical reflection, consider how other post- movements similarly involve a willingness to take, or at least explore the possibilities from, critical stances towards the validity, limitations, boundaries, meanings, inferences, deductions, causes and effects, and consequential implications of a given theoretical framework. Stated more simply, Post-Theory Art is willing to be critically reflective on the very question of whether theory can be art in the first place. Can the act of theorizing be art? If so, are there any limitations or exceptions? These and related questions, internally critical and doubtful, are the bread and butter, the sweet spot, of Post-Theory Art. And this aspect is not just about Theory Art itself, nor is this element of critical reflection just about the viability of the content of any of the given theories that might be espoused through Theory Art. It is more: It is also critical reflection about the role that Theory Art and its theories could have, or maybe even should have, in relation to not just art but culture, society, economic systems, political systems, legal systems, even thought systems and belief systems — if Theory Art and Post-Theory Art should have any role at all. Does it depend on the quality of the theory? The way it is manifested? Its substantive content? Here, parallels to time, manner, and place restrictions in the First Amendment free speech context, in the American constitutional model, for example, are interesting. In any event, by being willing to interrogate its own assumptions, and the assumptions underlying the foundation of Theory Art, it seems plausible to say that Post-Theory Art is continuing the lineage of gadfly or questioner seen in postminimalism and postmodernism relative to minimalism and modernism before them.
Integration and Remixing across traditional boundaries further distinguishes and identifies Post-Theory art. This can be described as the intentional and unintentional blurring, or integration of arguably artificial categorizations between different art forms and different disciplines, different thought systems and different modalities of theorizing and hypothesizing, and even, to borrow musical terms, remixing or mashing prior theories and prior forms to created hybrid “remixed” or “edit” works that integrate or “mash up” multiple mediums and methods and theories and relations — including relations between two things that might almost never be thought to be compared or placed together. In this respect, Post-theory art both accepts and enables the fluidity and nascent gender-neutrality and position-neutrality of many contemporary cultures, where association with a given group, gender, view, or attitude, or political party or economic system may no longer be relevant, in the process merging, or integrating, or blurring, or remixing, or mashing combinations of visual art, performance, literature, and other forms to create multifaceted works. In some ways one can see parallels between some Post-theory art and Happenings.
Post-humanist and supra-humanist perspectives are also seen to be essential in post-theory art. If it can be said that Theory Art places value on the human element of creating and considering theories, it seems fair to observe that Post-Theory Art values a Decentering of the human — a questioning of the value of the human element in theorizing and proposing, or at least considering, the a shift in focus from human-centric theories to now include non-human perspectives, such the perspectives (or needs) of other species, or ecological perspectives for their own sake, not just as a function of human sustainability, animals that we know are particularly sentient and intelligent, and, with each passing day more and more, machine-centric viewpoints. We are coming to grips with the reality that now something else besides us can theorize — artificial intelligence is forcing us to acknowledge that; and yet for thousands of years it is likely that other species besides us have been theorizing, at least at some level, and we have refused to acknowledge it. As to all of this, Post-theory art by both critique and by curiosity acknowledges the limitations of human-centered thinking and explores alternative ways of understanding the world, whether for better or for worse, and the implications therefor. By incorporating non-human perspectives, or at least exploring them, and certainly by being willing to acknowledge that they exist, and will continue to exist, Post-Art Theory challenges humanity’s current anthropocentric (and now antiquated) assumptions, and thereby through art expands the scope of theoretical inquiry, analysis, commentary, interpretation, and hypothesis about where we are, who we are, what we see, and what we may be seeing soon — all of us, where it is not clear what “us” encompasses, except that we know that “us” encompasses more than humans. These are some of the questions that seem quintessentially the subject matter area of Post-Theory Art.
Anthropocene awareness is a related element. Is Post-Theory Art (and even Theory Art with it) particularly adapted in an evolutionary sense to address planet-scale issues such as climate change, species sustainability, environmental impact, consumption, war, peace, and rights? Post-Theory Art appears to have the ability to form and re-form theories, like molecular bonds forming and breaking and re-combining different ways, to bring such broad areas of knowledge and uncertainty into more digestible pieces of theoretical discourse. Post-theory art seems to be recognized by at least some visual artists, musicians, writers, and thinkers around the world as being able to come at core questions and core assumptions of humanity, across societies, by bring into form perhaps the most relevant of the fundamental questions at this time: “What if we think wrong?” (Adam Daley Wilson, 2021, United States, site-specific installation using large-scale text.) recognizes the urgent need to address the ecological crises facing the planet.
Experiential and sensory engagement may yet be another element of Post-Theory Art. As discussed elsewhere, a tenet of Theory Art appears to be this: If it is true that whatever an artist does can be art, then so too whatever an artist thinks can be art — and it does not matter where or how expressed. Theory Art’s contribution to this idea seemed to manifest with the idea that even seemingly dry documentary works, exclusively of text, could be visual art, and should be protected by the Visual Artist’s Rights Act in the United States (VARA), and were also performance art, if there was an accompanying act of placing the document within society, such as by filing it with a court — a given country’s system of law and justice, to the extent it existed at that time. Post-Theory Art seems to expand this not just in linear fashion, and not just in geometric fashion, but in exponential fashion. Post-Art theory seems to have quickly moved beyond the traditional visual, the traditional textual, the traditional musical, and is practiced by artists in all disciplines to include elements of sound, touch, and other sensory inputs, both actual and virtual in this modern day we are in, creating a holistic theoretical experience. Is it a tenet of Post-theory art that theory-as-art can engage the whole body, not just the mind? Does this blur into Somatic Art, not in the sense of therapy but as a body-felt experience? The theories of Theory Art and especially Post-Theory art may help us find out, or at least give us relations and connections to think about and interpret. Let us see if this multisensory approach described in this paragraph becomes manifested in Theory Art and Post-Theory Art. If it does, it seems to have promise to potentially create fundamentally new immersive experiences that resonate with the viewer-listener-reader-feeler on multiple levels, which would make the theoretical concepts of Theory Art even more accessible across languages, cultures, beliefs, assumptions, ages, and challenges, including physical disabilities, visual disabilities, cognitive disabilities, and other existing barriers that often prevent the full global population from being able to receive, interpret, and experience art.
Related to this, it may be that some variations of Post-Theory Art will focus on so-called Embodied theories that emphasize the physical and emotional engagement of the audience, making the experience of theory art a bodily and emotional journey. Can that be possible? — — Can theory be experienced not just intellectually and cognitively but also emotionally and as the above-referenced body-felt sensation that is referenced universally in cross-comparative study of global mediation techniques? Post-theory art appears to argue yes — or, better said, appears to perhaps be able to make the recipient feel yes — and thereby recognizes that theories are not abstract and only in the head, but perhaps in some way lived experiences. By engaging the viewer’s body and emotions, it creates a deeper connection to the theoretical content. Would this fall back upon itself and leave the realm of pure theory to return to more traditional conceptions of the emotional in traditional heart, the element of the ethereal, of the heart? That is an interesting question and one deserving of curiosity and openness in a future essay about Theory Art and Post-Theory Art.
Temporal dynamics also seem to be a unique element in Post-Theory Art. It seems to be because of this: Both Theory Art and Post-Theory Art include expressly hold that art can be entirely ephemeral and temporal works, creating art that exists only temporarily, or evolves over time, or that changes the moment it is seen and interpreted, reflecting the inherently transient and impermanent nature of theories (and everything) and their continuous evolution — and their inherent disassembly into something else.
That last sentence in describing Post-Art Theory had a lot in it, worthy of a brief digression. Two points:
One, as to Post-Theory Art recognizing that any piece of art changes the instant it is interpreted, one can see parallels to the scientific and philosophical idea or principle that the very act of observing something changes its form or behavior, which is known as the observer effect. It’s a concept rooted in both physics and philosophy, and it has different interpretations depending on the context. In Physics (Quantum Mechanics), the observer effect refers to the phenomenon where the act of observation affects the state of a quantum system. A classic example is the double-slit experiment, where particles such as electrons display different behaviors (acting as waves or particles) depending on whether they are observed or not. This is closely related to the principle of wave-particle duality and the concept of superposition. In Philosophy, the observer effect suggests that the presence of an observer can influence the phenomenon being observed. This can occur in psychological experiments, social interactions, and even everyday situations. For instance, people might alter their behavior if they know they are being watched. Then there is Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle. Often associated with the observer effect, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle in quantum mechanics states that certain pairs of physical properties (like position and momentum) cannot both be precisely measured simultaneously. The more accurately one property is measured, the less accurately the other can be known. Consider all of the above in the context of Theory Art and Post-Theory Art: In this context, the observer effect highlights the complex interplay between observation and the observed phenomenon, indicating that the mere act of observing can fundamentally alter what is being observed. That is, no matter what the artist creates, it changes the moment it is received by the viewer-listener-reader-experiencer. That this might be seems to be core to Post-Theory Art in its considerations and critiques of Theory Art and other movements to date.
Two, as to the idea of inherent transience, impermanence, and disassembly (as opposed to inevitable evolution and improvement), consider Entropy. Entropy is a fundamental principle in the field of thermodynamics, but it also has broader applications in various scientific and philosophical contexts. In Thermodynamics, entropy is a measure of the disorder or randomness of a system. For example, the Second Law of Thermodynamics states that in an isolated system, entropy tends to increase over time. This broadly means that systems naturally evolve from states of order to states of greater disorder or, eventually, even chaos. This law explains why, for example, a hot object will cool down to room temperature, spreading its energy until a state of equilibrium is reached. Is there something to Post-Theory Art in this? Related, in Information Theory, entropy is used to quantify the amount of uncertainty or unpredictability in a set of data or facts. Higher entropy indicates more disorder and less predictability, including measuring the information content passed through — and lost — in communication messages. And related, in Philosophical and Metaphorical Contexts, entropy concepts can be used metaphorically to describe the natural tendency of systems (including social and economic systems, including relationships among individuals, cultures, and countries) to move towards disorder and chaos unless acted upon by an external force. This can be seen in the gradual decay of structures, organizations, or even personal relationships over time. Wouldn’t this be appropriate subject matter for Theory Art and Post-Theory Art’s response to it? Finally, to end this digression, consider Chaos Theory, arguably a cousin of Entropy, which relates to the observation and understanding of behaviors of dynamical systems that are highly sensitive to initial conditions, often described as the butterfly effect. Small differences in initial conditions can lead to vastly different outcomes, making long-term prediction impossible. Chaos theory helps explain complex systems that appear disordered but may have underlying patterns or deterministic laws. If it can be said that the concept of entropy underscores the universal realities of transience, and impermanence, and change, and the universal tendency towards disorder, query whether this is exactly what is happening to any given art — or any given theory — the moment any number of receivers start to interpret it for themselves, in any number of ways entirely dis-aggregate from an intention the artist, musician, writer, poet, or architect might have had.
The above was a long digression, to be sure, but it seems essential to understanding the guts of Theory Art and the responses to it that may be called Post-Theory Art.
Said another way, it seems that Post-Theory art, certainly like other movements in art, but in its own uniquely theoretical way, acknowledges the impermanence of human ideas and the constant flux of human knowledge — including in directions that are not in tune with evolution and improvement, but rather with entropy and decomposing into noise and even chaos. In this context, the particularly fleeting or never-executed temporal and ephemeral works of Theory Art invite “viewers” and “listeners” to consider the fleeting nature of theories and the ongoing process of intellectual discovery and intellectual disassembly. And Post-Theory Art is there to challenge, critique, comment upon, and question the viability of all of it.
3. DISTINGUISHING POST-THEORY ART FROM THEORY ART
With all the above words said, let’s briefly summarize the key distinctions between Theory Art and Post-Theory Art, to the extent they are known and observable so far.
Meta-theoretical focus distinguishes post-theory art from theory art, as post-theory art critically examines and deconstructs the act of theorizing itself. It reflects on the processes and structures that underlie theoretical production, questioning the foundations and implications of intellectual activity. This self-reflexive approach can add additional layers of complexity and nuance to the art, inviting deeper engagement and reflection at cognitive, emotional, and body-felt levels.
Hybrid and interactive elements move beyond interdisciplinary approaches to create highly integrated “remixes” “radio edits” and participatory works. Post-theory art blurs the lines between different forms of artistic and intellectual expression, creating works that are multifaceted, interactive, and accessible across language barriers and other reception barriers, including disabilities. This approach fosters a collaborative dynamic between the artist and the audience — a truly representative audience of humanity, not just the “art person,” democratizing the creation and interpretation of art globally.
Post-humanist themes expand the focus of Theory Art and the human to include non-human perspectives theoretical discourse. Post-theory art challenges anthropocentric views, identifies non-human theories, and acknowledges the reality that there are now, thanks to humans, machine theories and viewpoints.
Sensory and embodied engagement creating multisensory experiences that engage the audience physically and emotionally. Post-theory art moves beyond intellectual engagement of conceptual art, post conceptual art, neoconceptual art, and theory art, in that post-theory art is open to involving the whole body in the experience of “art.”
Temporal and contextual dynamics acknowledging the transient and impermanent nature of theories, reflecting their continuous evolution, and devolution, over time. This is not the contemplation of individual mortality that has been in art since the beginning of human time; this is the contemplation of change, be it evolution or entropy, of knowledge and thinking over time. Post-theory art acknowledges the impermanence of ideas and the uncertainty of evolution-versus-entropy, making no assumptions that seem to have irrationally impacted human thought systems and belief systems.
CONCLUSION
Post-theory art represents a next response to conceptual art, postconceptual art, and theory art, in the context of other movements and historical developments in humanity, which builds on the foundations of theory art but then seems ready to question every theory within it. Like many post- movements, post-theory art responds to the everything-so-far and the everything-to-date by being open and curious to critically interrogate and expand or contract everything. This may be seen to more broadly reflect the age-old dynamic traditional art and modern-contemporary art, continuing the dialogue between theory and practice, creator and recipient, intention and interpretation. With all this said, these distinctions are easy to make on paper. What exactly theory art and post-theory art are, remains to be seen, or thought, if even just for a moment in human time and art time.
