Michelangelo Pistoletto's Art and Its Impact on Life

“One can bring life to art, as Pollock did, or one can choose to bring art into life - but no longer in terms of metaphor” - Michelangelo Pistoletto, Famous Last Words 1967.

To start essay about art and life, firstly, Pistoletto presents the conventionally appraised alongside the “unremarkable” everyday by creating art that reuses classical “high” art iconography and unconventional elements to critique and challenge institutional hierarchical categories that prioritise classical “high”art. By displaying the conventional and unconventional, Pistoletto presents their equal importance for the viewer's experience despite the institutional favouring for the classical element. For example, in Venus of Rags, Pistoletto has reproduced the Callipigia Venus which is surrounded by a heap of colourful rags that slightly obscure her silhouette. As one of Pistoletto's most renowned artworks, many scholars have written about the meaning behind Venus' representation. For instance, Judith Bernstock suggests that Pistoletto uses Venus to comment on the 'the absurd state of contemporary art' due to her burlesque-like, sultry pose that is partially concealed by the mound of rags. However, Pistoletto has elaborated that Venus has always been used to regenerate the present throughout history. Also, considering how this classical icon has been used by other artists before Pistoletto to critique institutional values due to her status as a symbol of beauty and hope, such as Man Ray's Venus Restored, Venus' representation has been used in an attempt to reassess the institutional lens we look through and regenerate a new perspective through his manipulation of this “high” art icon by presenting a cement, readymade Venus covered in luminous mica. This unconventional presentation engages the viewer to notice their institutionally ingrained expectation of beauty and “high” art due to the deviation from traditional presentation for a figure that dominates popular ideas of classical art.

Similarly, his reuse of Michelangelo's Dying Slave in Louvre (Prigione) presents an iconic Renaissance master's “high” art icon as readymade and its display makes no distinction between the tourist also photographed and attached to the mirror, despite the institutional hierarchical categories prompting different treatment. Considering this, as remarked by Kenneth Baker, the fixity of the photographed statue and the changeability of the mirror creates tension between the past and present. Perhaps this can be taken further to refer to the tension between the static, fixed nature of continued institutional values symbolised by the statue, and the fluidity of everyday life and interactions. However, the juxtaposition between the viewer and the photographs interacting on the mirror surface also explores how this interaction changes when the subject is not a conventional one, activating the viewer to notice the difference in their interaction with the photographed statue and the photographed tourist. As summarised by Gianmarco Visconti, Pistoletto's works have a communal approach that focuses on the unrestricted experience of the viewer and promotes a new understanding that liberates them from preconceptions. Specifically, Pistoletto's reimagining of these classical icons activates the viewer to notice the unconventional presentation, and in turn, the expected conventions ingrained into them by institutions, and to instead actually experience the art. In short, Pistoletto's reuse of classical iconography in an unconventional manner activates the viewer to notice their institutionally ingrained preconceptions concerning art and instead encourages them to interact with it through a more personal mode of seeing, similar to how they experience everyday life.

In addition to this reuse of classical iconography, Pistoletto repurposes unconventional materials to challenge the hierarchical categories propagated by the commercial art system that favours “high” art over the everyday. Due to his combination of everyday materials and classical “high” art, Pistoletto physically bridges the divide between art and life and activates a debate as to why they have been separated. As summarised by Rikka Haapalainen, Pistoletto's use of everyday materials allows his work to be experienced as a 'temporal and social process, which resemble common urban experiences in their use and production of events and occasional encounters.' Thus Pistoletto's use of unconventional materials activates the viewer to interact with his art in an everyday-like manner as it is not what they anticipated, activating a mode of seeing liberated from preconceptions in response. For example, Venus of Rags is compositionally dominated by a mound of colourful rags which divert the viewer's attention from the institutionally praised statue due to their bright colours, ruffled nature and large size which contrasts with the statue's muted colours and refined craftsmanship. The rags also encroach on the silhouette of Venus, the everyday consuming the classical icon, prompting a dialogue concerning their institutional separation as despite what institutions favour, the rags are equally as beautiful and more noticeable due to their rich colours. Thus, despite the unconventionality of the rags, Pistoletto is able to activate the viewer to perceive outside of the hierarchical categories and conventions set by institutions and instead, to find beauty in the everyday.

Pistoletto's Louvre (Prigione) also produces a similar dialogue as the mirror reflects the viewer and their experience of the work, bringing the present directly into the artwork to be juxtaposed with the static statue and tourist photographed. As summarised by Alex Coles, the use of a mirror turns the museum into 'a place of live interaction' focusing on a dialogue between the past and present, something which the two photographs of the statue and tourist already begin to explore. However, Pistoletto is also creating a dialogue between the viewer and their reflection, turning the viewer into the subject and creating an embodied experience of the artwork. Haapalaninen also elaborates on Pistoletto's mirror paintings, citing them as situational acts that force the viewer to become active in an act of 'self-observing participation.' Thus, the use of a mirror in Louvre (Prigione) physically brings the viewer into the work and offers no interpretation of the representation, just a reflection of the everyday. Due to this, the viewer is encouraged to interact in an everyday manner, all the while framed by a classical statue and another human who appears similar to the viewer's reflection, prompting a contemplation of what divides art from life, the viewer's reflection from the photographs.

Furthermore, Pistoletto's use of newspapers in Newspaper Sphere again fulfils a similar role of bringing the everyday physically into art. This is elaborated further by the content of the newspapers that reported contemporary news stories about pressing events in late 1960s Italy. Pivotal to this work is how the everyday element, the newspapers, is the entirety of the artwork and therefore firmly situates the work in everyday experience by not alluding to anything from the institutional world of art. Due to this, Pistoletto shows how life and everyday things can be art. In short, Pistoletto's reuse of everyday materials activates the viewer to notice and challenge the institutional divide between art and life due to the juxtaposition of aspects from the everyday and from the repertoire of museums, or the absence of anticipated institutional elements as shown in Newspaper Sphere.

Finally, Pistoletto recreates entire works across the globe to activate the viewer to notice how despite being a replica, his art is situated in the everyday and it is the unique situational interaction produced between the work and viewer that is the art. As aforementioned, Haapalainen's idea that Pistoletto's works can be experienced like a 'common urban experience' is not only expressed through his reuse of unconventional materials but his recreation of entire works. As with each replica, astute differences, like the location, different rags and what people are around, will produce a different interaction each time, similar to how interactions between the same people will change. Moreover, as explored in his writings, when Pistoletto creates multiples he recognises them as 'the product of contingent and isolated intellectual or perceptual stimulus that belongs to one moment only.' Thus, Pistoletto creates art that is situated in the everyday and is intended to be experienced like life. For instance, Venus of Rags has been recreated at Blenheim Palace and the Tate Modern to name a few examples of replicas since its first display at Castello di Rivoli. With each recreation, the work is situated in a new context that blatantly demonstrates to the viewer how art is not static and is part of the changing present. As noted by Haapalanien, the situational nature of Pistolettо's works create a temporal relationship with its surroundings, activating the viewer to transgress traditional ways of looking and instead 'becomes a conscious, interactive, and, above all, situational act.' This liberation from conventional modes of looking is what Pistoletto strives for when he has discussed bridging the divide between art and life. By recreating artworks, Pistoletto challenges institutional ideals for art such as originality and due to this repeated interaction with replicas, the viewer becomes aware of art's situation in the everyday and their active interaction with the work.

Another example of recreation is Newspaper Sphere which has been recreated at the Tate Modern in London and the Philadelphia Museum of Art to note just a few since its first display in Turin. This sculpture encapsulates Pistoletto's desire to liberate art from institutions and reconnect it with life due to it being entirely made from everyday materials as aforementioned, but also, due to its presence in both museums and outside of them during its performance where it is rolled through the streets of a city by the public. This sculpture expresses Pistolleto's goal as stated in an interview with Studio International ‘To use society to create a great work of art, of which we’re all co-authors.' It is clear that for Pistoletto, art is an active part of life that promotes interactions, focusing on inclusion and not exclusion. Thus, Pistoletto challenges institutional conventions, like the hierarchical categories propagated by institutions that divide art from life, by creating art situated in life that produces interactions to complete the work at that moment for the viewer. In short, Pistoletto's recreation of artworks demonstrates the essence of his work, to create art that is the product of the fusion and involvement of everyday people by, as he summarised in an interview with Magazzino Italian Art, introducing common objects into the 'temple of art' and by bringing art from the temple into 'the dimension of common things.' Thus, Pistoletto bridges the divide between art and life by creating art situated in it and for it, producing interactions that become part of the art.

In conclusion, by reusing classical “high” art which has been manipulated to be unconventional, utilising entirely unconventional elements such as everyday materials, and by recreating works inside and outside of institutions physically, Pistoletto is able to bridge the divide between art and life by combining elements which institutions have deemed as belonging to distinct categories that have different values. Due to this manipulated inclusion and not the total exclusion of institutional conventions, the viewer who approaches Pistoletto's work with an institutional lens will notice the juxtapositions and unconventional nature of the work, realising the unnoticed preconceptions of what art is and how it should look that has been instilled into them by institutions. More specifically, his reuse of iconography and deviation from convention alert the viewer to institutional standards they have previously consumed unquestioningly. His reuse of everyday materials physically brings everyday life into art and encourages the viewer to reconsider the institutional hierarchical categories they divide them. His reuse of entire artworks highlights the situational nature of art and the importance of the viewer in each instance to complete the interaction and recognise that art is situated in everyday life. Thus, through reuse, Pistoletto activates the audience to notice how art is not a static object but a moment of interaction that does not need to be inherently restricted by institutions, be that where art can be displayed, how it can look or how the viewer can interact with it. Ultimately, Pistoletto wants the viewer to understand that art is situated in the everyday and it is their experience that is art.