Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship - autonomous ...
Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship - autonomous ...
Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship - autonomous ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
introduction<br />
<strong>and</strong> troubling forms <strong>of</strong> participatory art <strong>and</strong> criticism. Breton’s analysis<br />
also suggests that work perceived by its makers to be an experimental failure<br />
in its own time (like <strong>the</strong> Dada Season <strong>of</strong> 1921) may never<strong>the</strong>less have<br />
resonance in <strong>the</strong> future, under new conditions. This model <strong>of</strong> delayed reaction<br />
has been foundational to my selection <strong>of</strong> examples, whose inclusion is<br />
based on <strong>the</strong>ir relevance to <strong>the</strong> present day, ra<strong>the</strong>r than for <strong>the</strong>ir signifi -<br />
cance at <strong>the</strong> time <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir making.<br />
From a disciplinary perspective, any art engaging with society <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
people in it dem<strong>and</strong>s a methodological reading that is, at least in part, sociological.<br />
By this I mean that an analysis <strong>of</strong> this art must necessarily engage<br />
with concepts that have traditionally had more currency within <strong>the</strong> social<br />
sciences than in <strong>the</strong> humanities: community, society, empowerment,<br />
agency. As a result <strong>of</strong> artists’ exp<strong>and</strong>ing curiosity in participation, specifi c<br />
vocabularies <strong>of</strong> social organisation <strong>and</strong> models <strong>of</strong> democracy have come to<br />
assume a new relevance for <strong>the</strong> analysis <strong>of</strong> contemporary art. But since<br />
participatory art is not only a social activity but also a symbolic one, both<br />
embedded in <strong>the</strong> world <strong>and</strong> at one remove from it, <strong>the</strong> positivist social<br />
sciences are ultimately less useful in this regard than <strong>the</strong> abstract refl ections<br />
<strong>of</strong> political philosophy. This methodological aspect <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ‘social turn’ is<br />
one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> challenges faced by art historians <strong>and</strong> critics when dealing with<br />
contemporary art’s exp<strong>and</strong>ed fi eld. <strong>Participatory</strong> art dem<strong>and</strong>s that we fi nd<br />
new ways <strong>of</strong> analysing art that are no longer linked solely to visuality, even<br />
though form remains a crucial vessel for communicating meaning. In order<br />
to analyse <strong>the</strong> works discussed in this book, <strong>the</strong>ories <strong>and</strong> terms have been<br />
imported from political philosophy, but also from <strong>the</strong>atre history <strong>and</strong><br />
performance studies, cultural policy <strong>and</strong> architecture. 10 This combination<br />
differs from o<strong>the</strong>r interdisciplinary moments in art history (such as <strong>the</strong> use<br />
<strong>of</strong> Marxism, psychoanalysis <strong>and</strong> linguistics in <strong>the</strong> 1970s). Today, it is no<br />
longer a question <strong>of</strong> employing <strong>the</strong>se methods to rewrite art history from<br />
an invested political position – although this certainly plays a role – so<br />
much as <strong>the</strong> acknowledgment that it is impossible adequately to address a<br />
socially oriented art without turning to <strong>the</strong>se disciplines, <strong>and</strong> that this interdisciplinarity<br />
parallels (<strong>and</strong> stems from) <strong>the</strong> ambitions <strong>and</strong> content <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
art itself. 11<br />
At <strong>the</strong> same time, it must be emphasised that one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> goals <strong>of</strong> this<br />
book is to show <strong>the</strong> inadequacy <strong>of</strong> a positivist sociological approach to<br />
participatory art (as proposed, for example, by cultural policy think- tank<br />
studies that focus on demonstrable outcomes) <strong>and</strong> to reinforce <strong>the</strong> need to<br />
keep alive <strong>the</strong> constitutively undefi nitive refl ections on quality that characterise<br />
<strong>the</strong> humanities. In <strong>the</strong> fi eld <strong>of</strong> participatory art, quality is <strong>of</strong>ten a<br />
contested word: rejected by many politicised artists <strong>and</strong> curators as serving<br />
<strong>the</strong> interests <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> market <strong>and</strong> powerful elites, ‘quality’ has been fur<strong>the</strong>r<br />
marred by its association with connoisseurial art history. More radical<br />
options have tended to advocate a confusion <strong>of</strong> high/ low boundaries or to<br />
7