Tuesday, 29 January 2013

Tiff Oben - Notes

Participation art should be bold, affective, troubling (Claire Bishop)

Negation, Division, Disruption, Unease, Discomfort, Embarrassment, Frustration, Fear, Contradiction, Exhilaration, Rupture, Transgression, Ambiguity, Absurdity, Antagonism…

The artist as directorial instigator, creating situations (small interventionist gestures) in the real world that deconstruct contemporary urban society, or aspects of…

The artist as directorial instigator acting as a trigger for events that would otherwise have no existence.

The artist as directorial instigator delegating other artists to create works, outsourcing to others in order to subvert expectations regarding artistic activity.

The audience as subject and focus of art.

The audience visible to itself.

The audience provoked into self-reflexive examination of norms and mores through encounters with alienating, unannounced situations.

The audience playing a central role in art, effectively collapsing the role of viewer and performer into one.

Can participation art and events be effectively documented?
Are spoken reactions of more use than images?
Can witnesses be relied upon?
Is film of use?

Everyday spaces or constructed art spaces?

Knowing or unknowing participants?

Beyond the situation:
Do the works need to result in anything further than the situation/event?
Do we need demonstrable outcomes?

Do we need to judge quality of aesthetics or quality of experience?
How do we define the aesthetic of participation art?

Is it unethical to lie for the greater good?

No comments:

Post a Comment