The representation of audiences after 1960: An analysis from the perspective of artistic intent versus audience experience and interpretation

In The representation of the audiences after 1960, the question is asked whether we can
consider the representation of the audience after 1960 in relation to artists’ ideas on the
presence of an audience and its meaning giving activity. The focus is both on the
representation of individual audience members or participants as well as on visitor groups.
Since the 1960s the audience for art has grown and museums have seen their attendance
rise. It has led amongst others to a more sophisticated mediation between artwork and
audience. Since the 1960s one can also observe an increased awareness amongst artists of
the fact that the experience of art and the attribution of meaning to art is differential in
nature. But have artists accepted this reality? And can they ever come to terms with a
critical art mediation that invites audiences to relate to art more subjectively? Analyses of
both the representation of audiences and artists’ ideas on the presence of the audience
shows that artists have been and are sometimes still struggling with these issues. In recent
times however we can detect a growing acceptance of a more free and personal
interpretation of art by the audience. Artists such as Michelangelo Pistoletto, Dan Graham,
Bruce Nauman, Thomas Struth, Rineke Dijkstra, and Sophie Calle have represented
audiences in ways that reveal their – positive, negative, worrying… - attitudes towards the
presence of an interpreting, art consuming, desiring audience. These insights are, in
conclusion, related to instances of self-presentation by the audience, marked by play and
freedom.