...the point is that the direction of the art turns 180 degrees from a production or sending to that of a reception and viewing, a kind of audience with the “right” eyes. The gesture of placing a plain, or less manipulated object for viewing seems designed put the burden on the viewer to see things outside of a codification. Since ones insight as a subject gazing upon things can hardly be transferred as a sensation to another subject the emphasis turned from an elaborate production to that of an “elaborate” reception is I believe the most radical gesture in the history of art.

Thanks for intriguing comment. I do not agree with your statement that Duchamp "...ignores the perception...." I've always admired his declarations (decisions) of the everyday, and even seemingly purely functional, designs as deserving of appreciation. After all, the emotional value and meaning of our repetitive daily routines comprise our general satisfaction, or lack there of. If I remember correctly, by encouraging an aesthetic of the mundane, Duchamp elevated industrial design.

You see, Duchamp is conveying the repetition of our daily day life cycles as we continue and pass forward through our time, hence making us come to the conclusion that we are represented by the objects we see with our naked eyes in order to obtain our worth. They represent social classes and convey meaning of hierarchy

yoo same

Same

Yeah, Mr Gupta looks really upset about that. Very disrespectful.