"The art world is something I'm not too interested in. I don't feel as
though I share in its values. But I do feel I'm part of the art
community." - Marcia Tucker
Admittedly, I wasn't very impressed by the concept of Mail Art at first. I wasn't sure what the big deal was with artists collaborating together to make a display by sending in small-scale pieces via the postal service. This may be because I don't live in the art world thus I do not understand the norms and traditional values that form that world. I still don't, but I have a sense of what they are from the common view of how art is supposed to be: majestic with painstakingly-detailed realistic subjects, perfectly composed on a giant canvas. Bonus points if it is an oil painting. At the bottom of the painting is a single signature of a genius - most likely Caucasian male. You had to have make
that kind of work to succeed, and you had to do it all by yourself.
As it turns out, Mail Art
is a big deal because it takes some of those norms and throws them out the window - particularly the idea that art has to be by a singular person. What I have come to appreciate about Mail Art, Dadaism, and similar art forms is the level of interaction the art engages people. With Mail Art, it brings together artists from all around, linking them together in a final exhibition. In a way, Mail Art focuses more on the connections contributors make by sending in their pieces rather than the pieces themselves. I do appreciate the skill and talent of the more "traditional" artists, but there is something more "human"about mail art that puts it on a level above stroke technique and composition.
So yes, Mail Art is pretty impressive. And while technique is something to admire and cherish, I feel that
artists make a greater impact on society by involving many people,
engaging them, and forming a community.
____________________________
John Held, Jr. "The Mail Art Exhibition: Personal Worlds to Cultural Strategies." At a Distance: Precursors to Art and Activism on the Internet. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2005. 89-114. Print.