What do we see when we see?

Over the past month I have heard a variety of responses to the winter installation at fieldwork that make me recognize some of the ways people see or don't see.  Questions directed to me have ranged from 'Is the fence protecting something that we can't see?', to 'Where is the art?', to 'We were wondering if you are getting ready to raise elk'.  I usually smile and suggest that they look closer at the fence, think about what they are seeing and read the interpretive sign for some context.  It is surprising, and I guess, not so surprising, how many people don't seem to read the signs (even though they are placed right by the road) - though I realize it is a matter of timing (whether the publlic is willing or able, at that moment, to get out of their car or not), and of the degree of interest or curiosity they feel....

One of the interesting points about this installation is that, as I noted in an earlier blog, at first, it is not so obvious that there is something different or unusual in the field.  There is nothing that looks like what might be commonly identified as 'art'.  There apparently is a fence.  But look a bit closer!  The fence does not surround anything.  It is oversized (except for maybe a fence for deer or elk).  The strands woud be ineffective for keeping anything out or in.  The barbs look like barbs from a distance but has anyone ever seen barbs that big on a fence?  Moreover, on closer inspection, they are made of clay.  Hummmm.

How do we see?  How do our brains interpret something familiar?  It seems like our brains are programmed to try to find patterns of the 'recognizable'.   How different does something need to be before it is noticeably different from the 'standard', or becomes itself something unto its own?

Context clearly has great deal to do with interpretation.  If this fence were erected in front of an office tower, it would immediately be viewed as an art (intervention) work - no?  Due to the rural context within which Henny's fence is located, a fence is normal, if not expected.  Perhaps if the fence had been erected in the center of the field and in a form other than straight line, it may have become interpreted more as 'art'.  Again, choices on the artist's part are made to manipulate the viewer's attention in subtle or not-so-subtle ways.  How much responsibllity for stimulating interpretation should an artist feel?  How much should be expected from the viewer?       -susie