From Site to Community / Jocelyn Dimaya

questions:

When working site/community specifically, and collaboration is taking place amongst many people, is there a way/is there an importance in keeping the group very specific? Does this help or hurt the cause?

What is more important, engaging in a meaningful dialogue with the people among the respective area in which the art is taking place or extending the work to a wider range of places and potentially influencing more people?

Should there be a distinction that in site specific work, the role of the audience is considered to be a part of the art piece?

What type, if any specifications (dos or don'ts) of relationship should an artist have with the people of the community involved?

What are some very small scale ways to begin this type of work. (Baby steps into community engagement/site specific work?)

thoughts:

Something that intrigues me most about community involved art is that there are so many tactics that can be used to engage people in the work. There is also such an immense vocabulary. Educational programming.

Site specific. Community specific. Issue specificity. Art in the public interest. 

Though at their core, this type of work is about making change. 

Jacob stated, "you're a fool if you think that seeing a sculptor weld two pieces of steel together, somebody has a sense of what art making is." I am really interested in this idea of "shifting roles" from passive spectator to active art maker. I feel very much called to put myself in a position in which I can support and encourage young people to pursue their passions. This statement made by Jacob reminded me of the importance of doing. Action. A community will created change  when action starts. Though a cliché e expression, talk is surely cheap. Going into a place to make this art without any involvement of the community can result in far less investment in the community though so much more is possible.

I loved Christopher Spernandio's take on site vs. community. He states, "site registers as neutral and implies it belongs to someone else, e.i., am institution. A community is more specific and self determined." This is definitely making me rethink projects I have done in the past. More so on the community side. Work, in the context of its audience and the background of the individuals matters.

All of this talk of specificity, gave me the idea to think back to circumstances in which having this information could have resulted in more intentional choices throughout my work. However, reflecting on my more naive perspective, it was very important for me to acknowledge my initial raw thoughts of the work before coming from a perspective of "artist-who-has-read-the-books-on-community-and-art-in-the-public-interest." The fact is, work is meant to be seen and experienced by an audience. That audience will not necessarily have that type of analytical perspective.