Peopleart, Noon to 5 is a series of readymades that are, well, made from people. Between the hours of noon and five pm daily, one person at a time constitutes the artwork. A desk-chair on a small pedestal is provided for the person to occupy, but the readymades are autonomous---they may read, sleep, do yoga, or even leave the pedestal.
The work seeks to interrogate concepts of readymade and found-object art. Other people (and myself, I might argue) are as little a product of my personal labor as a urinal or a desk-chair, and in some ways as much a product of the (biological) systematic processes that might distinguish manufactured goods from hand-made crafts. In this sense, they constitute "found objects" that I have appropriated for my art work.
Most works involving people comprise performance art, but this work seeks to use people in a non-performative capacity, to render them not artists but art itself. Their role in the art is existential, not performative. Their "presence" in the piece constitutes the work, not their actions. To lie perfectly still and naked would constitute performance. But to deprive the readymades of intention, in spite of the fact that they perpetually perform actions, renders the piece non-performative.
The piece also seeks to explore how the status of "art" is conferred. Are the readymades "art" when they are present as the work? Do they retain the status of "art" when they leave the gallery-space? (This question, from an institutional/economic point of view, is easier to answer for the readymades of Duchamp, whose Bicycle Wheel sold for $1,762,500. People, however, are not saleable commodities. Or so we think.) Are these people art at all?