+0

Does the highlighted sentence refer to "self-generated works created by any artist" or specifically "Kaye's self-generated works"?


Context:

The question that now remains is how the sensibility and aesthetic described in this sort of work fits with Kaye’s self-generated artworks... A similar, although better tolerated, example is Roger by Tony Kaye, a living artwork who ‘exhibited’ outside the Millbank Tate Gallery in London in the mid to late 1990s... Kaye for his part, while openly attempting to make an intervention into the art world that would gain him recognition as an artist, was equally clear in his intention that the work was to be socially relevant and that if he was to make his name, it was to be for something worthwhile. In effect, most of the self-generated works that have entered the public realm have addressed serious social themes and the work has met the conditions of an art-engagé both in form and content.

This desire to produce socially relevant artworks is evidenced in Kaye’s consistent attachment to certain themes that raise complex moral debate, for example the way that health issues are perceived and managed in society, dealt with in one way in Provocation and in a completely different way in Don’t be Scared (1996–1997).

Comments  

Specifically Kaye's. "Self-generated works" is a weird usage because it suggests that the works generated themselves.

cattttDoes the highlighted sentence refer to "self-generated works created by any artist" or specifically "Kaye's self-generated works"?

By any artist. The definite article is the giveaway. She would have written "his self-generated works" if she meant that, and the rest of the sentence would be awkward as it stands even so.