2. In general, the work of art and architecture even the kind that is perceived as critical, continues to remain an isolated metaphor of the conditions of crisisŠeven if the work allows revealing forgotten socio-political histories, becoming an instrument of awarenessŠ It always seems to stop there, a sort of reminder, a memorial site, a poetic gesture, a cage, a game. It is ultimately unable to translate itself into actual procedures of intervention that can generate the conditions for transforming institutionsŠ very seldom art construct the conditions from which new ways of intervention in the city can emerge
4. The challenge at this moment is to pull things apart, to critically understand the way certain institutions operate, only then we can propose counter procedures that can generate new models of possibility. Traditionally, though, the notion of the avant-garde has proposed the opposite: that the artist keeps a 'critical distance' from the institutions in order to critique these spheres of power from the outside. Today, what's important is what I would call a 'critical proximity,' which in fact is the opposite: it's about us tactically entering the institutions in order to mobilize their resources and logics of organization. It is a very different agenda, less this sort of fake protest or rebellion.