SotA Anthology 2015-16 | Page 41

PHIL110 representation of the human form as is the case with traditionalist art. (Gormley, 2015). In light of this information, I would like to visit the installation again, and reflect upon the work as a contemplation on Liverpool’s enigmatic history with the world’s oceans. None of the interpretations of ‘Another Place’ I have discussed are false understandings of the work, and the work is not weakened in being open to subjective interpretations. The crucial element is that the work of art invites one, to form an idea, derive a meaning, or feel an emotion. My own experience of, and response to, ‘Another Place’ differed in some ways to the artist’s intentions. This does not result in the work failing as art. Nor does it imply that I have misunderstood the piece. Derek Matravers outlines why the artist’s intention is not necessary for an understanding of a work of art: “Everything that is part of the work will be available to our best critical practices [...]. Things that lie outside the work (including intentions) may not be available. Hence, if criticism draws only on features that are part of the work, it will always have everything that it needs for interpretation” (Matravers, 2013, p.93). With regards to ‘Another Place’, Gormley claims that “the idea was to test time and tide, stillness and movement, and somehow engage with the daily life of the beach.” Yet he admitted that he had been “amazed at how many people have expressed to [me] the consolation or the use that they put Another Place to, either to deal with personal loss or to just as a place that’s there constantly in the changing conditions of the year, the sea, the sky, but also our moods, and that this work can become in a way a foil to or measure of our life course” (Gormley, 2015). Whilst not being his intention behind the work, the work has been functional to (and been enjoyed by) many viewers in different perspectives. Having immersed myself in many experiences with art over the course of the module, my beliefs have gone from complete disorientation to an intuitive understanding. Reflection on ‘Another Place’ helped me to the conclusion that the value of art is decided by not only by what the artist offers us, but also what the viewer can provide in terms of their subjective response. Any interpretation, or emotional response to, or inferred meaning of a work of art can only be reflected on with these two perspectives amalgamated. Using ‘Another Place’ as a tool to examine theories on expressionism and artists’ intentions, it became clear to me that the viewer’s imagination, experiences, and interpretations become central to any understanding of art, and explain the conspicuous subjectivity of the topic. I agree with the anti-intentionalist theory, in which intentions are not required for an interpretation of a work of art, but I do not believe that they should be actively excluded. If I had known that the artist’s intentions were relevant in choosing Crosby Beach as the permanent site for ‘Anot her Place’, my interpretation may have been different. Gormley explains that “the original piece was designed in a way as a meditation on emigration and what drove human beings constantly to expand westwards until finally they reached the Californian Pacific. Liverpool had a strong connection both with New York and America at large, and also the Caribbean in terms of the slave trade, but also the history indeed of bodies at sea, quite tragic history” References Bernstein, J. (1996) The Death of Sensuous Particulars. Radical Philosophy, 76, pp. 7-18. Gormley, A. (1995), http://www.antonygormley. com/sculpture/item-view/id/230 —(2015) http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/whatson/arts-culture-news/antony-gormley-talksanother-place-9533774 —(2016) http://www.visitliverpool.com/things-todo/another-place-by-antony-gormley-p160981 Heidegger, M. (1977) The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays, trans. William Lovitt. New York: Harper Colophon Books. Matravers, D. (2013), Introducing Philosophy of Art: Eight Case Studies, Acumen Press. 41