[-empyre-] the art of artlessness

[Simon Biggs]

Hi Julian

Here's the sort of project I think makes a difference and is a model for how
new media artists can engage both intellectually challenging ideas and
socio-political space as part of that.
http://www.megafone.net/

This work is also of interest here.
http://folksonomy.co/

Here is another which engages the issues from a scientific angle, seeking to
understand the physiological basis for why we appreciate certain activities
and, in the process, shifting our apprehension of where creativity is.
http://www.watchingdance.org/

Here's an old favourite for how an individual artist might make a
difference.
http://www.naimark.net/projects/zap.html

The Escape from Woomera project, which you were involved with, could also be
mentioned in this context.
http://www.ljudmila.org/~selectparks/archive/escapefromwoomera/

There are numerous examples of artists resisting the corporate art world.
The ever present danger, as you observe, is that alternate activity will be
appropriated by the art world and end up in the poisonous space that is the
commercial gallery, art fair or biennale.

Thirty years ago we were concerned about how art could be appropriated by
the military-industrial complex and sought strategies against that. Now the
worry is how creativity might be appropriated by a corrupt art world (part
of the military-entertainment complex - Lenoir).

The question now is how to remain a creative practitioner without becoming
an artist?

Best

Simon


On 13/03/2011 21:49, "Julian Oliver" <julian at julianoliver.com> wrote:

> ..on Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 04:58:41PM +0000, Simon Biggs wrote:
>> Certainly, in an art world where marketing is so much part of practice then
>> your suggestion that artists should seek to ensure we don't forget them is
>> the mantra. I'd rather not work that way...
> 
> Great. It's a rare attitude.
> 
>> I am not from an underprivileged background nor live in an especially
>> oppressive environment (although that is debateable) but nevertheless I do
>> think people (including artusts) are obliged to try and make a difference.
> 
> This is a risky imposition I think.
> 
> Artists are, almost by contemporary definition, assigned with a social
> /irresponsibility/; by escaping obligations, social utility, behavioural and
> cultural norms, even laws, they supposedly widen our cultural and intellectual
> scope, demanding new definitions whilst undoing others, affording greater
> movement for the group as a whole.
> 
> That's the idea, a romance still prevalent today. How many actually do - and
> how
> transformative their efforts are - is another thing. The reality is that most
> art is now made in the interests of excelling within the group rather than
> excelling the group as a whole.
> 
> An obligation to "make a difference" is perhaps more clearly delineated and
> easily asserted where public arts funding is concerned - a common polemic
> between tax payers and state commissioned public artworks, for instance.. I
> don't see how else "making a difference" as a priori for the arts can
> otherwise
> be imposed (or whether it should). The change here should better happen with
> audiences, of which and why work is valued.
> 
> I'm personally increasingly drawn to making less 'solipsistic' work, work that
> reaches into the world with change in mind. At the same time I fear that art
> audiences comprise a poor context for effecting change; the art world is
> naturally more interested in the transformation of its own narrative than the
> world around it. And so, like numerous others, I'm interested in strategies
> like
> direct distribution and public intervention.
> 
> I do think we use the word 'art' far too often, especially to describe
> projects
> that are not explicitly works of entertainment, politics or science and have
> no
> overt utility, hence committing them to a frame (and culture) of reflexive
> discussion and abstract value generation, limiting their reach.
> 
> The art world will tell us we're making art anyway. We don't always need to do
> it ourselves!
> 
>> But that can come in many shapes and sizes. I agree a simplistic approach is
>> not desirable. One reason I'm not with Badiou. Deleuze is far more
>> interesting. Somebody mentioned Nietzsche, which is interesting territory in
>> this respect. So is Marcuse, who seems out of fashion at the moment but
>> offers a model of action that allows for a dystopian view.
> 
> Marcuse (esp Study on Authority) is great to read with this topic in mind
> indeed, but far from dystopian in my opinion!
> 
> Cheers,


Simon Biggs
simon at littlepig.org.uk
http://www.littlepig.org.uk/

s.biggs at eca.ac.uk
http://www.elmcip.net/
http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/



Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201