After reviewing the Genealogy of Community Engaged Arts I found that some of the earlier work that was presented, didn't feel to be community engaged art. I wasn't sure of their inclusion to the slides was meant to be that, but for example Fountain by Duchamp feels more as a self interested act of rebellion to take down the art worlds rules and boundaries. The impact that the piece had, did open many doors to artists afterwards, but the intal piece, I wouldn't call it a community engaged piece. After reading the document, I’m not sure if anything I hadn't heard or read in the class already was brought up. Many of the pieces that were made examples, we had already dove deep into during the class. While the point of Site specific vc Site responsive was a nice way of separating the two ideas as they are very different. There is nothing wrong with site specific and that being highlighted was nice as that site specific can function on more of a logistical and economical plane that can open up the world for artists. While Site responsive is a nice highlight on the importance of considering the context and history of the space and bringing those inhabiting the space to the table during creation. I found that the point of collaboration within the process of creation is a nice thing to push for in the fine arts world, while much of the experimental and performative field has already been taking action and has in its DNA collaboration. Overall the document was a nice wrap up on the semester and highlighting many of the key points we covered during the class.
Comments
Post a Comment