Rv: Re: [-empyre-] For whom is art "made"?

Eduardo Molinari archivocaminante at yahoo.com.ar
Mon May 12 02:28:33 EST 2008


 
Hello Bill!
hello all!
 
thank you very much for your answer.
I'm happy to see that -at last- the idea of Raoul of
expanded space
(also I like to think about "expanded time") is
working!
We are for sure expanding our space and time.
 
I'm agree with you Bill, I have also an education
background.
I was for 12 years teaching at schooll, for kids between 7
and 15 years old. And I'm in the art university since
1997. The state artistic education.  That's mean in
Argentina, that the students there no pay for this. This
last character of our system is very important for me in
our reflection.
 
You say, "but why?"
 
When I put art and education in contact is because I think
that the challenge of the idea of "expanded space (and
time)" is to create a new simbolic universe, together,
that "negate, destroy or change" (Valie Export
first quotation) the national state one, but also the
capitalistic one. We need to do this in our education
systems. 
I like to use with the students (young persons, but all of
them) the idea of "glocal" from the begininng of
our work together. 
Again, not "your" history, not "my"
history, but "our" history.
 
Then, education is also in the middle of a big mutation. We
have the chance to talk in a new language, Brian. If we
don't do it, we are loosing our chance. 
 
We need new maps, or maybe we don't need maps. We need
new real spaces, new real temporalities for our
experiences. Not more chonology (Paolo Virno talks a lot
about the potence of rememberings).
 
I know, is not easy. But... is the heart of cultural and
social fights,
to do impossible things.
 
I'm really optimist -instead of the disaster of my
country now- because 
the point also is not to have an "audience" but
to create real actors, real responsabilities.
 
Is very important Brian to think together what it means for
us
this fucking idea of representation and its aesthetic side
also.
If we can imagine, create a new relation with this it will
be great!
 
Is not a question of technologies (new or old, you can
imagine that in our countries technologies are the first
symptom of our dependence) but is a question of
vulnerability (again, Suelly Rolnik words are incredible
strong about this!)
 
At last, co-optation is only possible if we say: yes.
But negation is an strong weapon in this desequilibrated
relation.
we must be clear in a "public" way. We say NO to
this, this and this.
 
In these megaevents that you say, we have -again- the
chance to say NO in a public way. And for me one of the
central questions (Brian W. ask to me a lot about central
questions) is how to show clear signals that not only
artists are able to say no. We need to ocupate (not only
infiltration) these spaces with a different way of
autoorganization and work.
 
Is impossible to do this if we don't destroy the
hierarchies (also economical hierarchies) that the
neoliberal culture proposes. We need that curators, art
historical writers, teoretical writers, artists and social
movements put clear signals that we don't need and we
don't want to work anymore like this. 
 
On the other hand, we will have the re-creation or
reproduction of more capitalistic organization of work.
 
I don't want to be cartografiado, mapeado, historizado
by persons in the top of this pyramid. I want to create
"our" history together.
 
thank you very much, you make me think more!
un abrazo,
eduardo
> 
> 
> 
> Eduardo Molinari / Archivo Caminante
> Aramburu 880, Dto.1 (1640) Martínez
> Provincia de Buenos Aires – Argentina
> 0541 1 47 98 48 35
> 
> 
> --- El dom 11-may-08, Bill Kelley Jr.
> <bkelleyjr at gmail.com> escribió:
> 
> > De: Bill Kelley Jr. <bkelleyjr at gmail.com>
> > Asunto: Re: [-empyre-] For whom is art
> "made"?
> > Para: archivocaminante at yahoo.com.ar,
> "soft_skinned_space"
> <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> > Fecha: domingo, 11 de mayo de 2008, 3:15 am
> > Hello all,
> > 
> > I'm so glad to be reading these ideas.
> > I've been thinking about what Jennifer and I have
> been
> > sharing over  
> > that last few months, particularly after the 
> Transitorio
> > Publico  
> > project she spearheaded and I have to say that many
> > comments here  
> > point to a similar direction.
> > 
> > I was asked to share some of my thoughts on the
> > collaborative project  
> > I shared with Maria Fernanda Cartagena and with
> collectives
> > Bulbo  
> > (Tijuana) and Colectivo Cosas FInas (Otavalo) for the
> IX
> > Cuenca  
> > Biennial last year.
> > 
> > I will bore you with those details shortly, but want
> to
> > jump into this  
> > conversation by responding briefly here to Eduardo
> > Molinari's email:
> > 
> > Dear Eduardo, (saludos!) I like very much what you are
> > saying:
> > 
> > > In Argentina, during the crisis, some fissures
> were
> > open on this  
> > > herarchies on the art field. The first was the
> context
> > of art.
> > > Artists could create their context, we are not
> remote
> > control robots  
> > > going to the market, only.
> > > Another intense fissure was the idea of
> > representation. The artists  
> > > and the images don't pretend to be a
> > representation, they are  
> > > presences.
> > >
> > > After 11-9 (the same year of our big crisis) we
> > can't continue with  
> > > representation.
> > 
> > 
> > But I have a question and a concern.
> > I come to art form a pedagogical background. ( I used
> to
> > teach art to  
> > elementary school kids in Los Angeles) and so I have a
> > tendency to see  
> > the public in ways that very much includes a mandate
> that
> > the term  
> > "public" be as open as possible. So yes, I
> agree
> > with you. Education  
> > and art is something that is being considered in new
> and
> > important ways.
> > 
> > But why?
> > 
> > Representation (and its aesthetic politics) as a
> privileged
> > area in  
> > art is being questioned. Education/pedagogy  is
> increasing
> > in  
> > importance.
> > These tendencies point to a much anticipated crises
> where
> > art takes on  
> > a more pluralistic position.
> > I think that's a welcome development. I hope you
> all
> > agree.
> > 
> > I also believe that the institutional push (biennial
> and
> > new  
> > curatorial policies) to adopt new forms of working
> > collectively is a  
> > sign that the neo-liberal and privatizing policies
> that we
> > are all  
> > wary of is coming under scrutiny. That is a positive
> sign
> > and I hope  
> > it continues.
> > 
> > I wish to see this not as a for of co-optation but
> rather
> > as a form of  
> > infiltration where collectivity and collaboration
> become
> > key terms  
> > that become more critical points of discussion.
> > 
> > Does anyone agree?
> > 
> > I hope to be participating in these discussions more
> > frequently and  
> > look forward to your feedback.
> > 
> > -Bill
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On May 9, 2008, at 6:35 PM, Eduardo Molinari wrote:
> > 
> > > Dear friends,
> > >
> > > I decide to begin with this line of discussion.
> > > I was out of internet for some days, and when I
> > return, I have close  
> > > to 50 mails! Sorry, but I didn't have the
> chance
> > to answer everyday.
> > >
> > > the first mail (of Megan) introduce a very hard
> > question,
> > > but... is not clear for me what he understands is
> art.
> > >
> > > I mean, the question about for whom is
> "art"
> > made, is interesting  
> > > because also ask for me about this human
> dimension
> > today.
> > >
> > > when we say "art", are we talking about
> > visual arts?
> > >
> > > I think that is better to define this. My answer
> is
> > trying to think  
> > > about this: manufacturing images today.
> > >
> > > I put on the table this "stupid"
> commentary
> > because, if we talk in a  
> > > general way, I prefer to say "culture"
> and
> > not art.
> > >
> > > For me, to create images today is a hard work,
> because
> > postmodernism  
> > > (neoliberal culture) in my country (like always,
> a
> > mimetic,  
> > > colonialistic gesture) pretends to fight against
> a
> > particular  
> > > universe of images.
> > >
> > > Visual language is talking, that's the first
> > reflection. Is not  
> > > silence.
> > > Each artist, each group, each movement, have his
> own
> > develope, his  
> > > own discurse, his own text. One singular (not
> > invididual) voice.
> > >
> > > Then, is not a question that has one answer.
> > >
> > > The voices (the ideas world) that live on each
> art
> > praxis are -in  
> > > this sense- like a tongue talking, singing,
> making
> > poetry, making  
> > > questions, but... we need an ear on the other
> side, of
> > course.
> > >
> > > Art (visual language) is not "made",
> for me.
> > > Art (visual language) is a political experience,
> > because is putting  
> > > in the real time and space the "not yet
> existing
> > worlds". And this  
> > > potence of art is an interaction from the
> begining.
> > > Is not a question of "audience". Also
> is not
> > a question of supports.
> > > These status are part of a cultural vision that
> work
> > in a consume  
> > > society.
> > > But our challenge is to built new relations, new
> ways
> > of putting in  
> > > contact the differents subjectivities.
> > >
> > > In Argentina, during the crisis, some fissures
> were
> > open on this  
> > > herarchies on the art field. The first was the
> context
> > of art.
> > > Artists could create their context, we are not
> remote
> > control robots  
> > > going to the market, only.
> > > Another intense fissure was the idea of
> > representation. The artists  
> > > and the images don't pretend to be a
> > representation, they are  
> > > presences.
> > >
> > > After 11-9 (the same year of our big crisis) we
> > can't continue with  
> > > representation.
> > >
> > > A big challenge now is how not to close these
> fissures
> > and to open  
> > > them more and more.
> > >
> > > One of the friends talks also about education.
> The
> > connection  
> > > between the idea of research and education.
> That's
> > good for me.
> > > Is not an isolated work of artists that
> > "made" art for whom...
> > > is also a social work (and education - art
> education
> > is a big  
> > > question today also), a social compromise to
> create
> > more and  
> > > different bridges between the persons. Is, a big
> fight
> > against the  
> > > capitalistic culture that only creates a logic of
> art
> > consumers.
> > >
> > > all the best,
> > > eduardo
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Eduardo Molinari / Archivo Caminante
> > > Aramburu 880, Dto.1 (1640) Martínez
> > > Provincia de Buenos Aires – Argentina
> > > 0541 1 47 98 48 35
> > >
> > >
> > > --- El mié 7-may-08, sdv at krokodile.co.uk
> > <sdv at krokodile.co.uk>  
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > >> De: sdv at krokodile.co.uk
> > <sdv at krokodile.co.uk>
> > >> Asunto: Re: [-empyre-] For whom is art
> > "made"?
> > >> Para: "soft_skinned_space"
> > <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> > >> Fecha: miércoles, 7 de mayo de 2008, 3:04 pm
> > >> Helen/Brad/All
> > >>
> > >> I suppose the problem with your understanding
> of
> > artist and
> > >> audience is
> > >> that I cannot see exactly why should I regard
> your
> > >> understanding of your
> > >> proposed audience, as being any better than a
> > >> professionally curated
> > >> art-institution such as Tate-Modern or
> > Whitechapel. Where
> > >> you propose a
> > >> difference between new media workers as
> creators
> > and oppose
> > >> this to one
> > >> that art-institutions support,  is this
> difference
> > real ?
> > >> Perhaps only
> > >> an artist might imagine that the former is
> more
> > democratic
> > >> and public
> > >> than the latter.
> > >>
> > >> s
> > >>
> > >> Helen Thorington wrote:
> > >>> Wow, Brad.  Yes, too much art is made for
> > >> art-institutions, and it
> > >>> saddens me to see it as a direction some
> of
> > the
> > >> artists we have dealt
> > >>> with over the years are
> > >>> taking. But if you check out the
> > networked_performance
> > >> blog -- an
> > >>> archive of networked
> > >>> projects since 2004, you'll see that
> > thousands of
> > >> creative people are
> > >>> in fact creating
> > >>> work for themselves and for others like
> > themselves --
> > >> not for
> > >>> art-institutions. A lot of it is
> > >>> "open" work.  Many of the
> people
> > doing this
> > >> do not identify as
> > >>> artists,  So question: can
> > >>> academics open to the change that has
> brought
> > >> thousands into the new
> > >>> media field as creators
> > >>> of open, participatory work. Or will they
> > stick with
> > >> an older idea of
> > >>> artist -- the one the art institutions
> > >>> support?
> > >>>
> > >>> BTW, many of the projects I'm
> thinking
> > about make
> > >> use of  familiar
> > >>> objects and things
> > >>> from everyday life. They thus "offer
> a
> > return to
> > >> the connection of art
> > >>> and life.." [Landy],
> > >>> which for many is most welcome.
> > >>>
> > >>> Helen
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On May 6, 2008, at 2:42 PM, { brad brace
> }
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> That's the problem Megan... AArt
> is
> > >> determinately-made for
> > >>>> art-institutions and the plethora of
> > art-minyons
> > >> and
> > >>>> acolytes who profit-from-it and
> > >>>>
> > >>
> > say-everything's-ok-as-long-as-they-get-paid...
> > >> Basically,
> > >>>> if it's called Art it's
> really
> > not.
> > >> I'm sorry but you have
> > >>>> no viable future... maybe that's
> > called
> > >> 'AArt-History.'
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> /:b
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Tue, 6 May 2008, Megan Debin
> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> First of all, thanks to Jennifer
> and
> > to all
> > >> for introducing me to an
> > >>>>> interesting community of
> discussion. 
> > I would
> > >> like to introduce a
> > >>>>> new topic
> > >>>>> about audience and the public in
> > general.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> For a long while, I have, for
> reasons
> > >> unbeknownst to me, been
> > >>>>> resistant to
> > >>>>> Jennifer's urges to check out
> > >> errorista's work.  I hadn't quite
> > >>>>> figured out
> > >>>>> why I felt this resistance until
> > today.
> > >> *Light bulb!** * I am
> > >>>>> afraid of not
> > >>>>> understanding.  I have an intense
> fear
> > of
> > >> being wrong – a truly
> > >>>>> anti-errorista sentiment – that
> what
> > these
> > >> artists do will be beyond my
> > >>>>> mental grasp.  As I have learned
> from
> > >> errorista, there is no wrong
> > >>>>> answer.  There
> > >>>>> is right in the mistake.  All
> this
> > >> self-doubt... and I'm in academia!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> So, this got me to thinking about
> an
> > >> often-forgotten segment of our
> > >>>>> population: the general public. 
> The
> > everyday
> > >> person, when asked
> > >>>>> about their
> > >>>>> thoughts on art, usually thinks
> things
> > such
> > >> as, "I don't understand
> > >>>>> anything
> > >>>>> about art," or "Maybe
> if
> > someone
> > >> explained it to me, I might get
> > >>>>> it.  But
> > >>>>> probably not."  How have we
> lost
> > touch
> > >> with the audience?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> My questions to the empyre
> community
> > are
> > >> these: How does current art
> > >>>>> production relate to the general
> > public, to
> > >> the Joe Shmoe on the
> > >>>>> street?  How
> > >>>>> is the public *really *involved? 
> 
> > Shall we
> > >> sit in our ivory towers
> > >>>>> and wax
> > >>>>> philosophical, using complicated
> > terminology
> > >> that most of the
> > >>>>> general public
> > >>>>> does not understand?  That *is*
> our
> > job,
> > >> right?  How can artists and
> > >>>>> critics
> > >>>>> reclaim a true relationship with
> the
> > people?
> > >> Why do we have these
> > >>>>> discussions?  How does it relate
> to
> > the larger
> > >> population? And a
> > >>>>> critical
> > >>>>> one: For whom is art made?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> P.S. By the way, I checked out
> > errorista.
> > >> It's witty, ingenious,
> > >>>>> all right
> > >>>>> and wrong all at once. I love it.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -- 
> > >>>>> Megan Lorraine Debin
> > >>>>> M.A. Latin American Studies, UCLA
> > >>>>> meganldebin at gmail.com
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> "Art is not a mirror held up
> to
> > reality,
> > >> but a hammer with which to
> > >>>>> shape
> > >>>>> it" -Vladimir Mayakovski
> > >>>>
> > >>
> >
> <gip2.txt>_______________________________________________
> > >>>> empyre forum
> > >>>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > >>>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > _______________________________________________
> > >>> empyre forum
> > >>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > >>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> _______________________________________________
> > >> empyre forum
> > >> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > >> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> > >
> > >
> > >      Yahoo! Encuentros.
> > >
> > > Ahora encontrar pareja es mucho más fácil,
> probá el
> > nuevo Yahoo!  
> > > Encuentros
> > http://yahoo.cupidovirtual.com/servlet/NewRegistration
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > empyre forum
> > > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> 
> 
>       Yahoo! Encuentros.
> 
> Ahora encontrar pareja es mucho más fácil, probá el
> nuevo Yahoo! Encuentros
> http://yahoo.cupidovirtual.com/servlet/NewRegistration


      Tarjeta de crédito Yahoo! de Banco Supervielle.
Solicitá tu nueva Tarjeta de crédito. De tu PC directo a tu casa. www.tuprimeratarjeta.com.ar 


More information about the empyre mailing list