-->
A note to remember on the art-activism
article by Sinziana Ravini in DN on the 26th of January 2013.
1) Good article, read it. I would link to it here but haven't been able to find it either in SWE or ENG.
2) The contenta being that the curators of the Berlin Biennale 2012 and Documenta 13 by Carolyn Christov-Bakargiev were least to say inspired by an activist aesthetic/ (strategy?) in the forming of the two events. Ranging from inviting Occupy Wallstreet to occupy the Biennale space (you don't occupy something if you are invited to stay there...) (Berlin Biennale) to social gatherings where the visitors to the biennale could meet and eat couscous with refugees from Sahara and political slogans such as "This is not your museum, this is your action space"..
> Ravini writes [my translation; see original Swe text below] The problem as I see it is that the political art looses its power when comissioned by big organizations like Documenta, as well as biennales and institutions that seek intellectual cred (1). She also writes Personally I got a kick out of it since it was enough to talk to the activists, artists and curators to discover the seriousness and political will behind it all (2).
But then, doesn't this lead back to the same problem as always = there is no bad guy. I personally believe very few people (if any) are innately evil - and we instead have to fight against is the potential disasters caused by our well-meaning desires to do good mixed with general comfortabillity and selfishness. I don't think anyone at either the Berlin Biennale or Documenta would ever say "Yes, actually I don't care much for these issues but right now Occupy Wallstreet is really "in" and I also want some intellectual cred".... I'm quite sure they don't event think like that when they're alone in their villain's lair....
But still. There is nothing new about these forms of activism, so what is the mechanism that
suddenly makes this art? (Is it made art?). What does the artworld get out of it? Is it the
artists, driven by social-political consciousness to "do good" that
decides to renounce art making for activism > but then, why call it art? Why place it in an art context that swallows it up without hesitation? Doesn't
that somehow make it an aesthetic issue?
It seems as if the
ideology and the activism itself becomes the new aesthetic mediums. Is this
really political then? Or new? I would say no since these types of activities
are already established practises and the only thing new about it is that they
take place in a contemporary art environment (that effectively counteracts the
political by "aesthetizising" the events). But is it art then? Yes, but only if
we accept it as purely aestethic events, and its actors as mainly interested in
the aestethics of social relations and politics.
Ideologies and social relations used as (and as interchangeable as) different colours of paint or different expressions of form. The cultural event being the canvas upon which the image is painted, equally other to political struggle and reality as the white cube and the frame. But mindblowing by its sheer nerve and irony.
----------------------------------------------------------------
(1)"Problemet som jag ser det är att den politiska konsten förlorar sin kraft när den betälls av stora organisationer som Documenta, liksom biennaler och institutioner som söker intellektuell kredd"
(2)"Själv fick jag en kick av det, för det räckte att börja prata med aktivisterna, konstnärerna och curatorerna för att upptäcka allvaret och den politiska viljan bakom det hela."
Sinziana Ravini "Radikala konstaktivister på frammarsch"
Note: In the article Ravini also writes about a series of more successful examples of political art/activism like the Yes Men, Pussy Riot, Kultivator, etc. She writes: No, the true art activism functions like a thief in the night, it gets in where it is not welcome and succeeds both in destabilizing and change the order of things where it ends up.(3)
(3)"Nej, den sanna konstaktivismen fungerar som en tjuv om natten, den tar sig in där den inte är välkomnas och den lyckas både destabilisera och förändra ordningen den hamnar i".
Stockholm
13-02-02
