what did Harold Rosenberg mean by "spectator vs view"

Harold Rosenberg, an American art critic, used the phrase "spectator vs view" to explore the relationship between the viewer and a work of art. He believed that traditional modes of viewing art were inadequate and proposed a shift from a passive spectator to an engaged participant.

To understand what Rosenberg meant by "spectator vs view," it is important to consider his broader ideas about art criticism. He argued that the traditional approach to art, where the viewer passively observes and interprets a work, is limited. According to Rosenberg, art cannot be fully understood from a purely objective standpoint but requires an active and subjective engagement from the viewer.

Rosenberg believed that simply looking at a work of art does not provide a complete understanding. He emphasized the need for viewers to seek a more immersive and personally involved experience. He proposed that the viewer should be an active participant, bringing their own experiences, emotions, and interpretations into the encounter with the artwork.

In essence, "spectator vs view" refers to Rosenberg's notion that the viewer should transcend the role of a distant onlooker and instead actively engage with the artwork. Rather than simply observing, the viewer should involve themselves and contribute their own perspective in order to fully appreciate and comprehend the work. Rosenberg advocated for the idea that art is not only about what is seen, but also about the personal meaning derived from that encounter.