In this extract ‘The Flatbed Picture Press’ taken from his book of essays called ‘Other Criteria’, Leo Steinberg mainly focuses on and discusses the idea of the ‘flatbed picture plane’; ‘the horizontal bed on which a horizontal painting surface rests. Steinberg explains that the way artists conventionally hang their work in art history, usually corresponds with the way the human body stands. “The top of the picture corresponds to where we hold our heads aloft; while its lower edge gravitates to where we place our feet.” This theory is apparent throughout artwork from Renaissance painters to the works of Picasso, Rothko and Pollock. Steinberg goes on to discuss Robert Rauschenberg and heavily focuses on how in the 1950s he began to challenge this ‘norm’. His work no longer followed this ‘head-to-toe’ correspondence but instead created a new approach. I believe Steinberg wanted more artists to be like Rauschenberg and challenge this norm of the ‘flatbed picture plane’ and ‘head-to-foot’ theory. “What I have in mind is the psychic address of the image, it’s special mode of imaginative confrontation, and I tend to regard the tilt of the picture plane from vertical to horizontal as expressive of the most radical shift in the subject matter of art, the shift from nature to culture’. This is why I think he is focusing so heavily on Rauschenberg, as he thinks out of the box and is perhaps the first to ignite this idea of being controversial and creating a non-conventional approach to projects. This is evident his Rauschenberg’s participant in the ‘nature in art’ project, where he presented a square patch of grass hung on the wall.

“My decision early on to, build site-specific works in steel took me out of the traditional studio”. In his Yale Lecture, Richard Serra discusses his site-specific approach to work, explained as creating something influenced by and fitting with the space it will be presented in. He believes that sculptures should be built within that space and not built then altered after moving. Serra then goes on to discuss how his work has maintained a critical presence and was seen as controversial in comparison to traditional workings and corporate created artwork. He believes that artists who submit to these corporate controls are basically giving up their freedom and ability to create meaningful and multi-dimensional work.

Unlike Steinberg, who seems to work in the conventionally studio space, Serra relies upon the industrial sector and is highly influenced by his urban surroundings and environment when creating his work. Steinberg mainly focuses and works with the idea of a flat surface and/or two-dimensional works in the studio. Whereas, Serra breaks from that traditional studio approach and creates multi-dimensional pieces of art. In his text, Steinberg tends to focus on art theory and art history. However, Serra seems very much more contemporary and discusses the more commercial theories and beliefs. Overall, I think Steinberg is very much traditional with his approach and discussions, whereas Serra is more contemporary.