[-empyre-] Process as Paradigm

[susanne jaschko]

hello,
i am following the discussion which has taken so many directions now 
that it is becoming increasingly difficult to choose which thread to 
response to. but in a way this nonlinearity and branching-out goes very 
well  with the idea of process as paradigm :-)
i regularly look at warren sacks' conversation map featuring our empyre 
discussion here this month to see the complexity of our conversation  
and who is talking to whom ...http://hybrid.ucsc.edu/ConversationMap/

baruch and raquel were discussing about ways to exhibit works/ ' 
incorporate some of the process that are being generated in these new 
centers? There are many groups developing very good work that are not 
reduced to a piece or have their process as the main thing in their 
work. Is it really possible to have it in a exhibition in a way that can 
be revealing and stimulating to the visitors or we should always have 
"complete" pieces to be shown as usual? Could this new scenario be 
incorporated in what we´re discussing in terms of process being a new 
paradigm for arts?' (raquel)

in theory this should be not too difficult-  and some contemporary art 
centers already have built a useful structure (residency programs, 
workshop modules, wikis)  that could be expanded or adjusted to the 
production and presentation of research orientated, process-based, 
work-in-progress art. however it seems to be a question of a critical 
mass of audience if these kind of platforms are 'successful' in terms of 
generating some attention, interest and debate locally and in the 
network. the Interactivos workshop for Process as Paradigm generated a 
fair amount of local attention - given that Gijon is not a big town 
where there is a natural crowd for this specific field of experimentation.

however when i hear how the man on the street perceives art and what 
s/he expects from a museum or art center visit still (beauty, 
entertainment, painting, photography, decorativeness, big names, spell, 
fascination of the visual) i understand why museums and art centers 
remain hesitant to be more radical and heterogeneous in their choice and 
implementation of production facilities and presentation formats. there 
is certainly a public/political pressure to hold on to classic formats 
of presentation - so other methods and experiments are often seen as 
'additions' (and treated like those financially) instead of becoming the 
core business.

smaller institutions like eyebeam with a clear agency and focus are able 
to build a more flexible and production orientated environment 
apparently. but those centers again support the segregation of  the 
technology-based art  - which i find obsolete and disturbing nowadays.

LABoral, so we learned, is willing to try to become a place for art 
production instead of building a collection (which was discussed at some 
moment in the past). it will be interesting to observe their steps 
toward becoming a production facility in the next years.  and to answer 
baruch's question: yes, visitors can enter our show 3 times with one 
ticket and apparently there are people to use this service to our great 
pleasure.

i believe more in more in the implementation of such smaller research 
and production spaces in the fabric of the city and everyday life, maybe 
as extensions of larger institutions - than in turning around big 
museums and art centers. i also believe that it is possible to 'educate' 
the audience in the long-run to accept various forms of presentation of 
art - including documentation/ representations of projects that have 
been conducted somewhere else. in my next project i will certainly 
experiment with this.

su

-- 
susanne jaschko
www.sujaschko.de