There is a link in one of the comments above by theoh. There is reasonable evidence to suggest the urinal was not even his work, but of a friend of his for whic

There is a link in one of the comments above by theoh. There is reasonable evidence to suggest the urinal was not even his work, but of a friend of his for which he (eventually, much to her dismay) took credit. Edit: And also.. I see the comment put forward quite often that the urinal was about the primacy of the artist or the message in defining art. But what i think is often overlooked is it is also about the context (the gallery and the viewer) and the recursion of meaning inherent in the contextualisation. Ie. The meaning created in the viewers mind that 'found' objects can be art. And the subsequent finding of art-meaning in everyday life.