Although I read first the copies we got in class, I looked up the Spanish version of Paz’ essay to understand better the sentence. I can see clearly and hence agree that Duchamp’s imitators have been boring. After such strong reactions that Duchamp’s artwork caused such as Fountain (1917), I think it is difficult to use the same approach to generate reaction in society. Then, Paz’ assertion of art as “a thing of senses” is irreproachable if the concept fails to create a novel reaction.
I see a connection of Paz’ statement with my current view of graphic design. He later in the essay talks about invisibility of modern design. For me that is a positive value and a principle of graphic design (even more in contemporary graphic design). Some designers like Bonsiepe have suggested that graphic design should transform and focus on transmission of knowledge. This means that the graphic objects needs to be created more thinking in the cognitive trajectory from perception to comprehension rather than complex visual elements for the senses. Then, the “invisibility” of the graphic object becomes a value when legibility and comprehensibility are solved.