Ok, well, good question. Why did you set up a collaboration? Break it down .. . . .
Call and Response: A curators invitation.
The initial catalyst for TAC came from an invitation to make a new work for a group show that Melanie Oliver was putting together for Enjoy which was later titled Every Now, and Then. The curatorial premise of the show focused on the nature of the relationships formed when artists invite varied kinds of participation to realise their artwork. Melanie was particularly interested in foregrounding the problems and politics involved in the claims made by and for relational practices as being (among other descriptions) inclusive, participatory and democratic artforms; “Rather than designing happy, harmonious projects, the artists featured in Every Now, and Then develop and maintain social tension within their work, addressing the political aspects of communication that are often overlooked” - Melanie Oliver quoted in the press release for Every Now, and Then.
I’ve been making projects that contain relational elements since art school, experimenting with various tropes and degrees of participation to provide subject matter for, enact, and demonstrate concerns and propose questions through my work. I was particularly interested in the critical context that Mel was creating because I have experienced the challenges inherent to these encounters – both as an artist, participator and critic of these works.
These challenges have included questions like: who is the author of this work? Are artists exploiting a participating audience for their own proffesional gain? Are artists prescribing the audiences participation in a way that prevents their role from having any real affect on the work? How can the audience see the results of their efforts? Isn’t the artists role always priveleged in any exchange that they have set up? What is the role of an artist in this kind of work? What is the role of the institution in this kind of work?
These kinds of questions have always been present in my practice but only existed in my work in a backgrounded way, so it was exciting to be given the opportunity to make work for a show that had this very pointed focus.
The following text is a piece of writing I sent to Melanie Oliver during the idea proposal process;
“The politics of human communication are at their most perceptible in group dynamics.The desire to create a project that utilises the structure of collaboration to address these politics is also a desire to imbed the project in a practical and collective experience of a structure which operates by working decision making processes through the problematics of human interaction.
Imbedded in the value system of collaborative structures is the belief that a common goal can be found and achieved in a group setting. Their ability to operate effectively is reliant on the productivity of human interaction, participation and goodwill”.
In retrospect I think part of the motivation for the initiation of the collaboration and its attendent values was to respond to the tone of the show. I felt the critical framework had a slight but perceptibly pessimistic edge, that its review of contemporary relational projects was proposing to be a more ‘realistic’ view and that this de-romanticised de-throning of relational practices presented a challenge to their potential to do more good than harm.
Every Now, and Then’s curatorial framework and the platform of Enjoy’s institutional support provided me with an opportunity to engage a selected part of Enjoy’s ‘audience’ (those that had previously responded to an open call through email) at a much deeper and more generative level than my projects had previously allowed for, and in the continued life of The Association of Collaboration I am able to ask the questions I am most interested in within a group that is similarly interested in discovering the answers - together. (sorry ending is cheese factor high!)
Hope that this goes some way to answering your question Andie! and please respond to any of the ideas raised every one, Im sure you have some questions/challenges of your own too. . .
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Thinking about our goals, I am interested in whether our main focus is the relationships within the groups and how things work out or what we can encourage people to do in terms of participation with the group. Guess maybe it's both. Should we be somehow documenting what processes we use and what is sucessful or less sucessful? I agree that good will and similar interest in the group is paramount, and I think it is interesting how the group seems to just flow quite smoothly. Is that because we are all committed? All similar? All have fluid egos which allow us to move and change ideas?! Also it's fascinating how from the group the ideas which emerge seem like they come organically like everyone can see the point of say the trolley and can agree quite easily on things. Like with the colour yellow / orange. Are we just psychically in tune?!?!?! (talking of cheese.....) And does that mean that we are too nice nice?
In response to some of the question too;
Artist exploiting audience ; I think of performances which are uncomfortable or challenging to an unprepared audience. But the alternative is audiences who are all art savvy and knowing of thinking and discussion around x performance / collaboration so that it becomes an insider club with not 'real' responses.
Seems to me like collaboration and participation in a sense exploits audience to bring new life into an art world which has gotten a bit self-referential and boring. Same with role of the institutionas. Loved the reading/ not a reading and so relevant to what we are doing. The Prospects show needs to seem relveant and exciting and we are maybe one of the groups which are coopted into that project by being 'the naughty ones'.
Reading the audince stuff from Sarah made me think it would be great to try and expose some of the curatorial decisions and storied behind the show which may be bogus but are what we see by being in and part of the show. I thought this could be an interesting culumative experiment.........what are the connections between the works etc. I feel like'curating' is a word which is pretty opaque, it would be nice to unravel it a little.
Artist prescribing roles;
My favorite project recently was that one in UK where the group set up the internet TV channel in a housing estate. That felt like the artists role was as a facilitator to create somethign which would genuinely have an effect on people lives in terms of making them better and giving them a creative voice, while allowing them heaps of affect in the final project. And then the artist letting go of the project so that it is wholly owned by the participants.
Yay Sian those were some really good comments. Hey do you think we should run a parallel "advertising" campaign for our project? I mean as opposed to aligning ourselves with City Gallery? eg stencils/flyers etc? I would say word of mouth, except aren't we try to reach the uninitiated/art gallery viewers unversed in contemporary art practice?
Maybe we should talk to the hosts and get them on our side, or at least educate them about what we are trying to do...hosts can be subversive too!
*cough cough* says she the city gallery weekend supervisor
Bringing new life into the artworld - whats the benefits for the participants though? I'd like to think it was some kind of experiential understanding - like an art version of adventure tourism (dodgy metaphor).
The question of communicating to a specific audience, ie the uninitiated/art gallery viewers unversed in contemporary art practice, is aren't we then setting ourselves up as the experts, the authorities on the matter. I remember we were keen to avoid this. I think its important to keep the potential for two way communication as open as possible - it will be tricky for this project not to come accross as educational and benevolent - readings which i think will make alot of people wary...
I was thinking about our idea for the ribbon badges and how the association with a charity function could be played up - perhaps by asking for donations in the form of peoples responses to the artworks... perhaps this might help avoid the didactic spin?
I think we are going to need the help of the hosts for sure - and the peopling of the trolley could be a great place for some lateral solutions...
Post a Comment