Discussed in one of the first project was the idea of “subverting the image of youth.” Specifically in this case, POC youth. This resonated because of many reasons. It made me think of what the quote, “normal” image of POC youth qualifies as. Gangbangers? Drugs and violence? According to the media, that is the image that gets portrayed the most. However, just like it was highlighted in The Roof is on Fire, that is not the true image at all. In fact, some of the brightest most inventive artists of today come from these backgrounds. I liked how one of the goals of this project was to highlight that.
Two other ideas that interested me from the text were “the idea of visual pleasure defining the worth of a piece of art” and “the kinds of knowledge aesthetic experience is capable of producing.” I found these two ideas closely related as they both revolve around the idea of physical visible beauty, in my opinion. It makes me think of what we as a society deem as art and how heavily the visual medium is involved with that definition. However, in community work the visual scale seems much larger than a canvas. For example, it’s teenagers in cars on multiple blocks of streets. It becomes more than a visual and even more than an aesthetic I think. I think it becomes an experience of aesthetic, which is what makes works like this so powerful.
I had a lot of questions pop into my mind during the reading, but right at the top I questioned the significance of bringing into context that these works were produced prior to 9/11. It’s safe to say the national tragedy changed our relationship of public trust in America in a dramatic way. Did that affect bleed into the trust of a public art experience? I also questioned the logistical nature of the project. Not “questioned” as in I don’t believe that it happened, but am so genuinely fascinated with how a project of that scale was pulled off with so many participants, especially young ones!
The last question that sparked for me comes directly from the text. “What does it mean for the artist to surrender the security of self-expression for the risk of intersubjective engagement?” (I had to look up ‘intersubjective’ for comprehension of the full thought.) A possible answer came to mind, which was to let go of the ego. The ego plays tricks on us as artists. It makes us feel like our art is the only truth that is real, which I see as a huge danger as it negates other perspectives. I think the real trick is recognizing our own truth is valid and lives amongst others. Truth in itself is subjective in a way, isn’t it?
Comments
Post a Comment