How is this movement of democratizing art evolving even more now in the age of technology? Now that artists have multiple platforms to share their artwork and ways to engage with audiences all over the world, are those interactions having as strong of an impact? Is this aiding in Ericson and Zeigler's intention "to be pragmatic, to deal with pre-existing social systems and to carry on a dialogue with the public"?
Why wouldn't people who reside in a neighborhood have right speak for its needs, management, future direction, and hopes. According to Macdonald, "community is based solely on ownership of property; those who own (or sometimes rent) housing and real estate in the neighborhoods are the only legitimate members of the "real" community" I wonder why he excludes so many people from having a say.
If people are being guided to engage in a process of creating their own art, is it truly theirs? How would the art made in these communities be different if it was organically being created through their own creative processes?
Is art more about the process rather than the outcome?
While making the art, does the process generally unify and strengthen the communities working on them? Or is it difficult and dividing? Must the community already have a strong foundation in order to produce a strong body of work?
Takeaways:
For Lacy's piece, the art seemed to be more the process of developing the project. Not an interaction with an outside group or audience. Which I find extremely interesting and different.
The interactive quality of the art is very interesting to me, making it about so much more than the pieces themselves.
"the Native American women questioned Reichek's proposal with some suspicion, requesting the artist, if she was truly interested in their lives, to spend more time with them on their turf to develop a more intimate relationship before proceeding to represent them in her project" I also get a bit concerned with this process of making art with an artist from an outside community, when does it become exploitation instead of collaboration? That, to me, is the danger.
"does the "creation" of a work mean the actual physical labor of making an art object (or component parts to a larger installation/ event), or does it mean the conceptualization of a project?"
"They relied on preexisting personal ties to many of those who became participants in their respective art projects" This must render the most powerful and impactful works. Because Haha and Mangalano-Ovalle were directly tied, passionate and knowledgeable. But there must be a way that an artist can create impactful, connected work without those same times- perhaps it lies in the passion (if the artist is truly involved/dedicated in the issue at hand in some way.)
No comments:
Post a Comment