Fluxus artists often produced objects during performance which were considered artifacts or by-products of the performance (for example, the line drawn by Nam June Paik during his Zen for Head interpretation of LaMonte Young’s Composition 1960 #10). Alternatively, Fluxus artists would often purchase and then redistribute ready-made objects as a statement on the availability of art and as a continuation of earlier Dadaist activities involving the readymade and its status as a new form of art object which could function in much the same way as paintings and sculptures produced originally by artists. Fluxus, however, did not endorse the production of traditional fine art objects to be subsequently utilized as a medium for artistic expression. In the rare cases when more-or-less traditional fine art objects were produced under the name of Fluxus, they tended to be distributed in methods incongruous with those used to distribute the fine art objects they emulate—that is to say, a painting produced by a Fluxus artist as a feature of his/her Fluxus practice would not have been sold in a gallery but, far more likely, would have been part of some performance, whether literally (as a prop in the performance of an Event) or figuratively as part of a statement on the traditions surrounding art production. Johnson’s collages, however, served both this discursive purpose and the purpose of traditional art objects. While Johnson used Janklow’s Palomaized portraits to facilitate the performance of his interactions with Janklow, they also existed as objects which Johnson himself would have considered physical products of his art practice. It is this distinction which separates Johnson’s art most distinctly from that of other artists producing objects while exploring the boundaries of Intermedial art forms.
From Ray Johnson: Performance and the Contractual Art Object
(My term paper for my class on the history of Pop art & Fluxus)