Aesthetic Object versus Art Object example

Have you taken Desiree's "Dramatic Activities in the Elementary Classroom?"

If you were in my class, you might remember a potent and spectacular performance by Annaleigh and Katie Pelkey concerning a dorky duck in the classroom. That was part of the lesson "Found Objects." In this lesson, students pass around a "grab bag" of goodies and pull out an object. The objects can be anything, such as a roll of tape, a rubber ducky, stapler, etc. The students get in to groups and create dramatic scenes, creating a character for their object. They can personify the object and use it as it is intended, or imagine it is something else all together. In this case, I would think, an aesthetic object becomes an art object. The objects are manipulated by humans, and the materials have been worked on to create a performance art.

So then I ask, what about the tools one uses to create art? Are an artist's paint brushes or an actors props aesthetic objects turned art? A paint brush is a part of the gesture, does it not perform work?

This leads me to discuss gesture. As we know, gesture is a huge part of theatre, especially the theatre we have created for ourselves within this department. Especially concerning, Chekhov's infamous "Psychological Gesture." After splitting with Stanislavski, Chekhov's METHOD is based on the physical and the imaginative. Working from the outside in, Chekhov's work encourages the expression of a character's internal process or desire in a grand gesture. After physcializing the wants on the character, it can then be internalized, provoking a visceral, trained physical recollection of a particular struggle or feeling. This pyscological gesture is a means of work-ing on art - a character, script, play, performance. Just as displaying a piece of "art" in a museum requires work, simply experiencing the gesture is enough for "art" to take place. (If music should be a verb, why not through art in there as well... I arted. Well, now that just sounds silly).