In this excerpt of Kester's writing, the first concept that resonates with me is Peter Dunn's idea of "context providers" versus "content providers". I am fascinated by the idea of utilizing art practices and their very processes to engage specific circumstances and situations in an active manner, one that calls upon group involvement and communal participation. In this way, we as creators, viewers, and participants, are confronting, physically, verbally, and mentally, our "context" in the present moment, not merely being presented/shown an object and indirectly prompted to reflect afterward. In my mind, "context provider" implies the creating of an experience, whereas "content provider" implies the creating of a presented "thing".
The second concept that resonates with me is the example of WochenKlausur's Intervention to Aid Drug-Addicted Women. Specifically, I am interested in how the lack of media presence and, thus, public scrutiny, opens an environment which fosters safe, open conversation between different demographics, an environment which is otherwise not necessarily open for this type of leveling/ equalizing civil discourse in everyday life. I am interested in how this is largely what makes this an "art" practice and what the potential affects of incorporating this into other art practices would be.
The third concept that resonates with me is Kester's emphasis on "... a cumulative process of exchange and dialogue rather than a single, instantaneous shock of insight precipitated by an image or object". Dialogical art is ongoing, and catalyzes ongoing experience, involvement, and communication, rather than art that produces a more presentational and immediate effect which inspires a review, rather than engagement and action after it takes place.
Regarding my questions, I am interested in further exploring the following question Kester raises, regarding identity and expression in this dialogical art practice: "Is it possibly to develop a cross-cultural dialogue without sacrificing the unique identities of individual speakers? And what does it mean for the artist to surrender the security of self-expression for the risk of inter-subjective engagement?" Especially in an art form such as this, what is the role of the artist as a mediator, as a prompt, as a guide in these crucial discussions and experiences? How do we ensure that the voice of one is not necessarily taken for granted and assumed to be the voice for all in a specific community within the realm of these conversations? How much of what takes place within these artistic dialogues is the responsibility of the artist, and where is the line between artist and viewer/participant?
I am also interested in confronting institutionalized critique methods/systems, because as Kester states, "When contemporary critics confront dialogical projects, they often apply a formal, pleasure-based methodology that cannot value, or even recognize, the communicative interactions that these artists find so important." What is the role and relevance of critics in this context? Is there a purpose that can provide learning for both the critic and the critiqued? Is there a way for these methodologies to adapt, or is this disconnect indicative of a type of schism?
I do not yet fully understand and am curious about the concept of "discourse ethics" and how this can potentially influence the dialogical art practice from a critical position.
The second concept that resonates with me is the example of WochenKlausur's Intervention to Aid Drug-Addicted Women. Specifically, I am interested in how the lack of media presence and, thus, public scrutiny, opens an environment which fosters safe, open conversation between different demographics, an environment which is otherwise not necessarily open for this type of leveling/ equalizing civil discourse in everyday life. I am interested in how this is largely what makes this an "art" practice and what the potential affects of incorporating this into other art practices would be.
The third concept that resonates with me is Kester's emphasis on "... a cumulative process of exchange and dialogue rather than a single, instantaneous shock of insight precipitated by an image or object". Dialogical art is ongoing, and catalyzes ongoing experience, involvement, and communication, rather than art that produces a more presentational and immediate effect which inspires a review, rather than engagement and action after it takes place.
Regarding my questions, I am interested in further exploring the following question Kester raises, regarding identity and expression in this dialogical art practice: "Is it possibly to develop a cross-cultural dialogue without sacrificing the unique identities of individual speakers? And what does it mean for the artist to surrender the security of self-expression for the risk of inter-subjective engagement?" Especially in an art form such as this, what is the role of the artist as a mediator, as a prompt, as a guide in these crucial discussions and experiences? How do we ensure that the voice of one is not necessarily taken for granted and assumed to be the voice for all in a specific community within the realm of these conversations? How much of what takes place within these artistic dialogues is the responsibility of the artist, and where is the line between artist and viewer/participant?
I am also interested in confronting institutionalized critique methods/systems, because as Kester states, "When contemporary critics confront dialogical projects, they often apply a formal, pleasure-based methodology that cannot value, or even recognize, the communicative interactions that these artists find so important." What is the role and relevance of critics in this context? Is there a purpose that can provide learning for both the critic and the critiqued? Is there a way for these methodologies to adapt, or is this disconnect indicative of a type of schism?
I do not yet fully understand and am curious about the concept of "discourse ethics" and how this can potentially influence the dialogical art practice from a critical position.
Comments
Post a Comment