OPEN SOURCE ARTMAKING ӿ let’s make art!

let's make art!

What is the content of the work and who is creating it?

Our crowd-sourced art consists of a Google Excel sheet ‘painting’. We asked participants to ‘fill in as many squares as you like’. Using the colour fill tool in Google Sheets, people filled up the cells in the document with a myriad of hues.

Our team–Qing Yan, Yuan Xin and I–watched as anonymous icons entered and exited the document, leaving a few coloured cells as a mark of their virtual visitations.

In a way, even though our team came up with the rubrics, we did not fully create the artwork that emerged from our crowd-sourcing.



Where does this work take place?

In the virtual collaborative space that was our Google Sheets document.


How does this work involve social interaction?

In a weird way, our participants didn’t fill in each other’s squares and were mindful to give space to people who were trying to create recognisable motifs using the cells.

One example of this was the rabbit face that appeared in the right of the main mass of filled in cells.  It was surprisingly intact by the end of the collaboration. Some participants went as far as to fill and colour the rabbit face in.



How is your crowd-sourced project different from one that is created by a single artist/creator?

The artwork that was produced by our crowd-sourced participants didn’t have a cohesive aesthetic.

Many of our participants were our family and friends that we recruited to help us with our project. Many of them do not have any artistic inclinations whatsoever and they filled the cells in with random colours with no clear vision for the finished product.

There was also kitschy images like the pixelated Mario incorporated into the artwork that didn’t match the rest of the document which was mainly abstract colours and bars of cells.

Many of the elements in the artwork such as the gradients were created as standalone elements and were not added in response to the artwork as a whole.

All in all, there was no creative art direction with this artwork and all the artists were bored people tapping at random on their phones.

Only our crowdsourced chaos could create such a mess of a masterpiece! 🙂



ending note: Our artwork kind of reminds me of Outsider art where artists that managed to avoid any sort of artistic influence or training whatsoever make their own form of bizarre artworks. 😮 i thought that was kinda interesting!


Why did you choose this space or object to photograph?

I love looking at plants! Plants are like living artwork; the structure of plants are sometimes really super cute! And I find that I recognise so many elements of art in nature itself– the collective movement of leaves as they grow towards the sun or the intricate crown of a tree letting patterns of light flit on the ground.

I often take a slow morning walk to ADM from my hall and look at the nature living in NTU. One of my favourite plants to admire on my morning walk is the plants outside of ADM!! The leaves are really very cute– they are rounded like little paddles and they grow upwards towards the sun.  the colours on the leaves are also very interesting and I looove the colour gradation in its crowns! The flowers from this plants is also charming as heck­– little balls of tightly curled waxy petals that hid a delicate stamen. Absolutely ADORABLE.

As such, I took a photo of the plants because they are one of things I love most about ADM.

What are some of the characteristics of this alternative virtual space you had created collectively?

The virtual space that we created was architectural where most photos were of the architecture of the space.

A lot of the spaces submitted were also located in ‘in-between’ spaces– spaces that were in-between destinations of interest. These ‘in between’ spaces consisted of corridors, walkways, vending machines and staircases.

Lastly, the virtual space we created was not documentary in nature but rather curated ‘culturally’. This is meaning to say that most spaces submitted was significant to the culture of ADM students– the corridor before the dreaded foundation drawing class, the revered social waterhole of the vending machine or the beautiful façade of our building.

Under what circumstance will this alternative virtual space change?

As the architecture and culture of our campus changes, so will this virtual space.

How does this project relate to what we discussed in the lecture regarding co-creation, the concept of Do-It-Yourself (DIY), Do-It-With-Others (DIWO)?

I think this space cannot be curated without the input of multiple perspectives of different people. We experience adm differently; each individual had unique experiences that when combined will showcase a more holistic expression of adm’s space.


How does it change the viewer’s relationship to the work?

Yoko Ono staged Cut Piece five times in her whole career. In the various iterations of Yoko Ono’s Cut Piece, the different context of each performance actually changed the relationship between participants and the work itself.

  In her performances in Tokyo, the work held a cathartic relationship with viewers.

Japanese audience members took out their frustrations at America by destroying Ono’s western clothing. At that time, the Japanese public resented America because of their occupation and control over Japan after WW2.

With Ono, as a Japanese woman wearing western clothes, the Japanese audience cutting her clothes off could be seen as their desire to see Japan liberated from America’s oppressive authority.

  With her performances in America, the relationship between the viewer and the artwork becomes one of voyeurism.

Yoko Ono in Cut Piece positions herself in a state of vulnerable intimacy; she gives up her identity as a person and plays into the idea of the sexual objectification of woman.

In this context, Ono’s body becomes a sexualised art object as opposed to one of political statement.

The artwork then becomes an experiment of voyeurism where the main goal of the audience interacting with the work is to indulge their voyeuristic pleasures; to see how much skin they can expose, to see how much body Ono will allow them to gawk at.

In this case, when it was staged in New York, we can see the public laughing and applauding as a man cut away at her clothes.

Cut Piece was received as an exotic striptease."
 ­–Jieun Rhee, Art Historian
  Lastly, in all her performances, the viewer’s relationship to the work changes from passive to active.

Yoko Ono’s work often exists as instructions or scores­­ – In her score for Cut Piece, Ono writes: “Cut Piece, First version for single performer: Performer sits on stage with a pair of scissors in front of him. It is announced that members of the audience may come on stage—one at a time—to cut a small piece of the performer’s clothing to take with them. Performer remains motionless throughout the piece. Piece ends at the performer’s option.”

As such, this often gives people other than the artist the opportunity to decide what happens within the duration of the work.


Let people copy or photograph your paintings. Destroy the originals.

— 1964 Spring



Leave a piece of canvas or finished 
painting on the floor or in the street.

— 1960 winter

The artist becomes a passive artist whereas the audience becomes the active body.

The relationship between the audience and the work becomes an inverted relationship of giving and taking, where the audience becomes the contributor while the artwork turns into a recipient.