After considering Roland Barthes' theory "The Death of the Author" regarding how we interpret art, I intend to apply the theory to various forms of art to see how we make meaning. In particular I will be looking at art which contains a certain kind of humour. 

An artist duo who focus on video that can be considered to derive humour from the everyday are John Wood and Paul Harrison. In their video installation 10x10 (2011), they focus on the routine of an everyday office job, and obscure the common perception of office work as bland. They experiment in the video with everyday office objects such as tables, chairs, paper shredders and various other equipment. They also physically experiment with the environment by interacting with the surroundings, e.g. in one moment of this video installation a man is standing in a room with a table and chair, where lighting is placed on the floor. The man then moves the table that knocks over the chair to smash one of the lights that is on the floor, thereby creating a comedic sequence out of the mundane.

              10x10, John Wood and Paul Harrison, 2011

By experimenting physically with the everyday environment, they bring forth various interpretations which may have not been associated with office work. By capturing the performance on video we can watch the action unfold rather than merely seeing a photograph of the end results. Perhaps the beauty of Harrison and Wood's work comes from the unexpected- finding humour in the unlikely sphere of the world of desk based work. Repetition is a key comedic device employed in their work and also arguably a factor of day to day work in an office environment.  

Another artist who focuses on sculpture that can be considered to derive humour from the everyday is Jeff Koons. His sculpture piece Michael Jackson and Bubbles (1988) is inspired by the reproduction of banal objects. This particular sculpture is inspired by kitsch ornaments which are used to decorate domestic interiors and homes. On the left hand side of this sculpture we first focus on the gold leaf plated porcelain shoe, then along Michael Jackson's leg to his hip where we focus on the monkey Bubbles with gold leaf plated porcelain flowers scattered around them, and then our eyes are lead up to Michael Jackson's face.

Michael Jackson and Bubbles, Jeff Koons (1988)

By making the sculpture on a large scale this potentially banal object is exaggerated, making a humorous or ironic statement on the value we place on ornament.

“The type of adulation, the type of support that’s given to pop artists -- this was the contemporary type of support that I thought that Christ would have received in his time,” explains Koons, who says he executed the sculpture in a Renaissance style, its triangular shape reminiscent of Michelangelo’s “Pieta” (www.bloomberg.com).

Chapel of Pieta, Michelangelo (1475-1564)

When considering the intertextuality of this piece it raises the debate as to whether famous people such as celebrities are idolised like religious figures.This can be interpreted as distasteful - Koons has recycled what we know to be a holy, religious piece into something ironic and possibly blasphemous. However when comparing Koon's interpretation of a Pieta to David LaChapelle's Pieta with Courtney Love(below) it can be argued that Koon's interpretation is more humorous and light hearted when compared to LaChapelle's. 

Pieta with Courtney Love, David LaChapelle, (2006)

This piece can be considered inappropriate in its appropriation  of the "Pieta", as the original Chapel of Pieta (1475-1564) depicts St Mary cradling her dead son, Jesus.  

Looking at this image it is apparant that LaChapelle has referenced the death of Kurt Cobain in this piece which can be taken to be offensive in a religious context when considering idolism but mainly be offensive due to the fact that Kurt Cobain took his own life and by depicting him in this way in this image can be interpreted as an inappropiate way to respond to a issue such as suicide. For example at the bottom of this picture is a line of building blocks which spell out the sentence "Heaven to Hell", which can be interpreted to be religious connotation as suicide is believe to be one of the deadliest sins which condemns you to hell. However when considering this insight about the piece from LaChapelle it can be considered that this piece is about the ultimate loss. 

"DLC Pieta is the strongest image in art. It represents the ultimate loss. So for me Catholics don’t own that idea. A mother losing a child is the ultimate loss. When I did the book [Heaven to Hell] with Courtney [Love], it was about my friend Brett, who was a bike messenger. He was addicted to heroin and had overdosed. He became a really good friend I met when I worked at Interview. That picture was haunting. I wanted to commemorate that loss. We have not progressed. That’s why we still need gimmicks. We decided to worship the painter. I like the shepherd image of Jesus. Condemning the Church, it’s like condemning a country. I will not let fundamentalists destroy what I know to be be a beautiful guide. I believe in love and forgiveness" (www.bombsite.com).

Comparing this piece to Koon's interpretation makes this work become a darker piece and resembles no obvious humour.