Project 14th Dec to 21st : Open Containerrr
RELATIONAL ART & OPEN SPACE
Our starting point is the praxis of Relational Art and Open Space where artist, artwork and public loose their meaning towards an unpredictable happening.
The CONTAINERRR project is not only about art and openness, but moreover a project with unfold and not yet definable results, which will emerge from the processes which will take place according to the principles of sharing and collaboration. A process that uses the sphere of human interaction as a place where a workshop and a lecture become an artwork itself, where dialogue and discussion contributes to a reflection about our present sociocultural environment.
It is what springs from this practices what will make the proposal useful and meaningful.
ABOUT RELATIONAL ART
Read the book
Text by Ludmila Ferrari (Universidad Javeriana de Colombia)
Set of artistic practices that set out as his means and purpose of social and human relations, rather than the production of objects in a private art space. Relational Art creates and problematizes the relationship instead of focusing on art objects, seeking to create a “utopia of proximity” (Bourriaud). For this, he uses strategies, disciplines and areas outside the field of art. Also, the Relational Art questions the uniqueness and authority of the artist in the production of artistic truth.
Somehow all art is relational, as any art form starts from the premise of the relationships between the author, the work of art and the public. This ratio exceeds the traditional circuit-message communication-channel transmitter-receiver, and is located more in the Encoding-Decoding structure of Stuart Hall. In this model, the message is always reinterpreted, appropriate and broadcast by a receiver-transmitter. Thus, the relational always existed in art. However what is delimited within the Relational Art specifically addresses those practices that make the link its essence.
The notion of relational art emerges from the book of Nicolas Bourriaud Relationnelle Esthétique (1998). In this work Bourriaud compiles a series of articles published during the decade of the 90 on the art scene at that time. The author, now curator of the Palais de Tokyo in Paris, identified a change in the artistic expressions of the 90’s, a conspicuous change in the flow of visual productions that rely strongly on the generation of space-work, happening-work and time-work, in which the relationship between art, the artist and the public are crucial.
Bourriaud identifies Relational Art in response to late-capitalist society in which what he calls “the highways of communication” restrictes society to paths only designed to ensure consumption without losses. In this way, society flows through the constant craving, generating an individual-consumer consumables which interacts in a standardized space fetishized relations. As resistance to this paradigm, the ultimate intention Relational Art is to transform this parade and space buying and selling in a political space.
Relational artists (cited by Bourriaud): Rirkrit Tiravanija, Mauricio Cattelan, Christine Hill, Nirotoshi Hirawaka, Felix Gonzalez-Torres.
However, the concern for the replacement of centralized political space, on the other purely commercial schizophrenic, was perceived by various artists from the 60’s. So, their strategy of resistance was also relational and collective practice. Artists like Helio Oiticica, Lygia Clark, Cildo Meireles, Studio Orta and the Fluxus group, the performances of Chris Burden and works of Victor Grippo and Alfredo Jaar, belong to the first current-named Relational Art.
The relational art emerges as opposed to the various standards of modern art, to know: the figure of the individual author, the work of art as object of immaculate creation and those spaces which have been naturalized as spaces for art (the museum and gallery). In summary, the relational practices resist to macro-narrations of the avant-garde art, to the ornament proposal of a radical art that is stored in an isolated sphere of worldly society. Relational, built with contemporary art, distrust on the one hand, the great avant-garde art missions and on the other, the division between art and life with the gradual closure of the first.
From these points, Relational Art proposes a collective creation, a community exercise in the construction of truth, replacing the “work of art” for practices, tactics and devices that revolve around an event, in terms Foucault: “an event, not a decision, a treaty, a kingdom or a battle, but a balance of power that reverses, a seized power, a vocabulary taken up and that turns on its users (…) something different that appears in a scene “.
Relational category allows to name the practices that go beyond objectual and move towards questioning and critical processes. It is important to remember that this nomenclature introduced by Nicolas Bourriaud, comes from a very specific context that is the artistic productions of the 1st world. Therefore it is pertinent to ask: how appropriate the term “Relational Art” in Latin America, and what meanings are applied?
As explained above, various relational practices carried out by Latin American artists from the 60’s. Ethics and aesthetics of the performances and installations of Grippo and Oiticica respond directly to a motivation of this type. However, in Latin America Relatonal Art had a radical cut, different to the European or North American, this is an emphasis on the community component, public and confrontational that exceeds the scope of aesthetic pleasure by the way.
This position marks a political-public facing direction towards the examples that Bourriaud slogans in his book. The artists described by the author work in and from the space of the gallery, their works are framed in a theory- artistic discussion refered constantly to the field of art: installations,happenings and performances orchestrate the artistic code and modify it in the museum space.
The Latin American case is interested in breaking this naturalized space for art, and the code that describes it, by setting up new spaces and interaction techniques. Additionally, the community component works directly on the notion of author as an exponent and creator of the work. The power of the production of truth is split between the different members of the projects, be they artists or not.
Here we find a major division between both production spaces. If in the first world context, the role of Relational Art is doomed to gather, to meet to resist the anomie of a developed world, consumerist, post-capitalist and virtualized in their relationships. In the Latin American juncture, the conditions of social inequality, and socioeconomic status of the continent, make the relational aesthetics, not from the hegemonic title of “Art” but from the noun praxis of art practices.
Moreover, Relational Art not only seeks to bring together citizens forced to route and consume. Spatial heterogeneity and promiscuity of our cities is relational in itself. What matters to relational art practices in Latin America is the inclusion of artistic devices already established in society. The instinct is to undermine relational relations and representations established between culture and power.
Article Source: http://www.cecies.org/articulo.asp?id=189
ABOUT OPEN SPACE
Open-space technology (OST) is an approach for hosting meetings, conferences, corporate-style retreats, and community summit events, focused on a specific and important purpose or task—but beginning without any formal agenda, beyond the overall purpose or theme.
Some Guiding Principles (which describe the process of the meeting):
Whoever comes is [sic] the right people …reminds participants that they don’t need the CEO and 100 people to get something done, you need people who care. And, absent the direction or control exerted in a traditional meeting, that’s who shows up in the various breakout sessions of an open-space meeting.
Whenever it starts is the right time …reminds participants that “spirit and creativity do not run on the clock.”
Wherever it happens is the right place. …reminds participants that space is opening everywhere all the time. Please be concious and aware. – Tahrir Square is one famous example.
Whatever happens is the only thing that could have …reminds participants that once something has happened, it’s done—and no amount of fretting, complaining or otherwise rehashing can change that. Move on.
When it’s over, it’s over …reminds participants that we never know how long it will take to resolve an issue, once raised, but that whenever the issue or work or conversation is finished, move on to the next thing. Don’t keep rehashing just because there’s 30 minutes left in the session. Do the work, not the time.
and One Law:
“Law of two feet” or “the law of mobility”, as follows: If at any time during our time together you find yourself in any situation where you are neither learning nor contributing, use your two feet, go someplace else. In this way, all participants are given both the right and the responsibility to maximize their own learning and contribution, which the Law assumes only they, themselves, can ultimately judge and control. When participants lose interest and get bored in a breakout session, or accomplish and share all that they can, the charge is to move on, the “polite” thing to do is going off to do something else. In practical terms the Law of Two Feet says: “Don’t waste time!”