Who would think the most transcendental object inside of the world art was going to be an object so common, full of ironic , protest and a possible void representing for the society of the middle of century XX, since the WWI was in its apogee.

Notes of Marcel Duchamp

Giving a resignification, I dare say that it was a performance action since Duchamp secretly carries the urinal, bought? Ordered to do? The combination of silence and absence, emphasized the artist's need to "go under the ground," to work in secret the action, providing false leads and misleading others. The body disappears and with it the word; Only the essence of the object remains when is exposed.





Notes of Marcel Duchamp

The Dadaist sculpture represents what the father of linguistics, the Swiss Ferdinand de Saussure contributed in the twentieth century on normativity and arbitrariness of language, because Duchamp breaks with the traditional values of artistic expression and exposes the arbitrariness of the meaning of a Sculpture as "the fountain", traditional concepts take a completely different turn, converting it from a banal object to an artistic sculpture, from a real author to a fictitious one.

In 1917 the French artist Marcel Duchamp presents in New York in the Salon of the independents a urinal signed with the pseudónimo of 'R. Mutt '; The public showed rejection to see it as a work of art, nevertheless at the same time redefined the concepts of the artistic world that at that time was kept under certain norms that defined artistic values.

Yoshua Okun y Santiago Sierra, “El excusado”, 2016

Duchamp trigger the construction of newflanged means of expression, giving place to a rupture between the artistic values, the creator and the work; like that an ordinary object as the urinary challenge the concept of ordinary. The artist sign as an important thing in the conceptual context of the work.. Is just a gest part of the same sculpture (by means of a handmade object) created by an fictional artist.

Regardless of the origin of the urinal, Duchamp played with the creation of an "artist" who replaced him as the true author of his work. Duchamp's message went beyond what the work provoked the viewer, the history and the emergence of it.


These 100 years of history lead us to question the use and abuse of "ready made" as an artistic expression, because today much of the conceptual work that we continually observe at art fairs and exhibitions is meaningless.

The same gesture is repeated when "trying to give value to the object," but this has led to the abuse and usurpation of language. Being the last gesture of modernity, the artist prefers to give up originality and to misrepresent its content with the abuse of some resources, because it is not involved nor is there a connection between both at the thought level and dialogue.

   Marcel Duchamp, “la fuente”, 1917

By: Luz Adriana Hernández Ayala  (Editorial corrector and writer) and Alda Ardemani

 Translation by: L.Cotten

Fountain (Buddha), Sherrie Levine, 1981


If the "Fountain" generated scandal in both the viewer and the art scene of the mid-twentieth century, what is the resonance of ready-made to artists and spectators of the 21st century, Perhaps we should think that there is a new reception of vanguardist art.



The moment an artist takes an everyday object and adds a "symbolic" detail, in this case the signature, at that moment ceases to be an everyday object to become another meaning


  Marcel Duchamp, Fountain,1917 | Sherrie Levine, Fountain, 1991

 Performer: Rrose Selavy , 2015