Ethics of engagement

Highlight 3 insights that your reading has helped bring to the surface. Use specific text evidence to link your insights.

1. "This encounter between artist and co-opted public(s) can often create sites of confrontation and exploitation" helped me learn that sometimes confrontation can be a way of supporting communities. 
2. "Art, in this schema, should be both socially and politically committed and utilize the aesthetic as a symbolic bearer or sorts for such commitment." Making sure that community specific work really fits in community its intended for, so you're not an outsider. 
3. "To this end, we might enquire into the power relations involved in collaborative art practices and the extent to which participants are frequently cajoled into collaborating in projects that often have modalities of conflict at their heart." Not thinking about "community" but about the people as individuals

If you could ask the author 3 questions, what questions might those be?

1. What if a community refuses to engage in a participatory piece? 
2. Could you have written this in a more accessible way so that any artist could analyze your thoughts without feeling polarized? 
3. What is the future of community driven art?

What applications might this work have to your understanding of an ethical approach to community-engaged arts?

I think these points are things that I've considered in the past from seeing and reading about specifically site-specific work. This article helped me understand why the ethics are important to the communities. 

Consider the work we have been exploring this semester thus far. Choose one artist or project that resonated with you. What ethical considerations were in place on this project?

The Roof is on Fire resonated with me. The ethical considerations were to match the socio-political realities of the community as well as the aesthetic.