Bishop discusses artists that are performing, creating, or working as artists whose work falls under the theories of Relational Aesthetics, whose leading theorists is Nicolas Bourriaud. Bishop makes the point that works today can be just as political as works from the 60s, but what is different is the approach. "Social context and human interactions." Relation artworks are for the environment and the community. This moves beyond modernism, because the work is not privitized, not discrete. It is a response to a shift in a goods based economy to a service based economy; because of the internet there is a value to being face to face and DIY approaches. The main difference is the shift in social change. A new attitude, instead of waiting for a better tomorrow it is better to make good relationships today. Provisional solutions instead of change. Many European artists are involved in the movement, the change in mode of address from private to public. Post production came after Nicolas Bourriaud wrote Relational Aesthetics. Beecroft is mentioned in the article as an example of post production. After the initial installation the after math is the art; the video, photo, leave behinds. Collaboration of artworks, reproducing, reexhibiting, other works, ready made. Post production questions authorship, it combines cultural artifacts and creates new meaning. Identifying the structure of a relational artwork is difficult because they claim to be open ended. Viewed as the limits of society. The political aspects of relational arts open the possiblity for a pluralist democracy. Relational set ups are not intrinsically democratic. Idealistic subjectivity, community, togetherness. Members identify with each other because they have something in common. Idealism is unclear.
What will be the new way of critiquing Relational Aesthetics?
Will charity be dissmissed from the Gallery and the theories that show Relational Aesthetics?
No comments:
Post a Comment