In Kester’s seminal text, Conversation Pieces: Community and Communication in Modern Art, countless revelatory concepts were discussed in regards to collaborative encounters and conversations. Kester asserts that performative conversations reframe our understanding of what art can be and what form it assumes. In other words, in a 21st-century context, art is not merely limited to a physical medium such as paint or marble; instead, it can also exist as an organized conversation or interaction. Even though such examples of art assume a markedly different form than that of modernist art, they share similar objectives: to challenge one’s assumptions, subvert expectations, and to offer an alternative point of view. Kester’s text also underscores the power of performative conversations by suggesting that placing people of different backgrounds and viewpoints in these insular contexts, one can facilitate more organic and subsequently less hostile dialogues, which in turn effects positive change.
-If organized conversations like those discussed in the text are understood as artistic performances, can one make the argument that any conversation — deliberately organized or merely organic — is also an art form? In other words, what explicitly separates these types of discussions from others?
-Would the participants in these various discussions classify themselves as artists?
-Given that this trend of performative conversations rose to prominence in a post-9/11 world, what does that say for the future of intangible art? In other words, how will the boundaries of what's considered art continue to expand as we face other crises that reframe our understanding of the world around us?
Comments
Post a Comment