ABSTRACT
By the 1960s, visual art was no longer expected to be beautiful or skilfully rendered. Critics, viewers and artists valued works of art that were ‘interesting’. Minimal art, one of American art’s most influential but also most controversial developments, was based on large and simple forms and smooth, blank surfaces. If it was successful, the work’s singular shape, scale and assertive presence in space elicited the beholder’s interest. Yet, no modern development was more often accused of being ‘boring’. In his defense, Minimalist Donald Judd stated:
I can’t see how any good work can be boring or monotonous in the usual sense of those words. And no one has developed an unusual sense of them. This negative characterization is glib; it’s another label and one not even concerned with what the work is.
