Archive for the 'artprize' Category

Proposal made

Published
by
paul
on August 1, 2009
in artprize and studio site
. 1 Comment

I heard from a few folks and went with submitting the proper info before the deadline. So we can proceed with determining the feasibility and appropriateness of doing the project on the Bridge. It is still open and the course can be changed as a result of impossible practical issues or a determination that it is not a good move. Please weigh in on your thoughts and concerns. In the proposal I left the project very open and right away spoke to the idea of process and the importance of longer experience with the situation. The statements can evolve as we move forward.

Here is the description of the work: “Civic studio is in session with a project that runs from late August to late December 2009. The studio’s projects emerge from extended engagement in particular situations and contexts. The process is public. During Artprize the studio will present our ongoing studio work to the public. Visitors are invited to keep in touch with the studio throughout the project to see continued results.”

Here is the current work statement: “Since 1999 Civic Studio has worked to develop methodologies and contexts for the creation and presentation of art in public. This work is based in a commitment to expand the relevance and utility of art to everyday life in both practical and imaginative ways.”

The next step is securing the venue. The deadline for that is August 15. Once an agreement is signed we’re on the line to do the project there. Until then it is open for discussion and consideration.

Gillette again? (How studio work transpires)

Published
by
paul
on July 30, 2009
in artprize, studio concept, studio project and studio site
. 1 Comment

It is strange how studio work transpires. It operates between concept and material in ways that are full of strange possibilities. It is critical to engage ideas and to put them into actualities. Studio work is the most flexible (plastic) - it can be anything, it is also totally about specifics because that is what defines experience - those specifics are form (plastic too). It is our job to work the space between the conceptual and the actual. Energy and action are require all along that spectrum.

This process began with a vague focus on the River. It also involved an inquiry as to whether to engage artprize. When these came together the Gillette Bridge came into focus as a brash, public, potential space for the project. When I inquired about using it - I found out is was being otherwise organized. MOve on to other spaces.

Today I got a call to see if we might be interested in using Gillette bridge as our project site. This was from Artprize folks. This is not a done deal, but a possibility. The deadline to sign up as a project is tomorrow - Friday, July 31st at midnight. So that option is back on the table with lots of contingencies. It is highly visible and would put a different kind of pressure on the studio. I definitely would not do it if I thought there was pressure for us to do something not true to the project. I don’t think this would be the case, but it is difficult to tell the impact that context can have on the dynamic of cultural and creative work.

Some of what is unclear is:

What kind of structure could we get to inhabit the space with. (city, GV, codes, costs)

Could we stay there for longer than art prize. LIke the whole semester - or 2 months or so.

Would participation in ArtPrize be a requirement for us to do a project on Gillette Bridge during Artprize?

Would we need to predetermine what our project is? I’m pretty sure we would not- we could focus on the river or even focus on Artprize research. There would need to be some integrity to the structure of the project and the ideas we engage. (i.e. it makes sense to do the river as subject if we’re over the river - we could also trust the civic studio method of letting the project emerge from our experience with the situation - which might include responding to artprize).

Artprize concept 2: Research Artprize

Published
by
paul
on July 21, 2009
in artprize, resources and studio concept
. 0 Comments

(this idea could be done as an artprize project or just happen along side of it)
Another option for engaging Artprize would be to do a research project on Artprize. With such projects especially in the cultural realm there is not much attention paid to actual research about the context for the event and what the ramifications of that might be. Civic Studio is interested in the relationship between art and public life. It seems there is a lot to learn through looking at artprize in depth. It also seems that ARtPrize is open to change and interested in making adjustments as things progress. There is potential in informing this process through doing some serious research.
What are the historic and current precedents for Artprize (documenta, spolleto, south by southwest, american idol)? What are the theoretical and economic models that undergird using a prize structure for the generation and presentation of culture? What are the details of the experiences of the participants: artists, venues, public? What kinds of art are called for in this structure?

There is scarily little research about the nature of culture and how it is presented and consumed. The most significant to date was done by French sociologist PIerre Bourdieu. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Bourdieu. It was based on empirical research and concluded that taste is a product of social class and that it is largely formed by those in power. While lower classes have their own aesthetic, they are always defined in terms of the aesthetics of the higher classes. So while they are separate they are also subordinate. This was published in 1968 as “Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste”. That was a long time ago. (Full text of Distinction on Google books)

The surrealists set up a research office called the Bureau of Surrealist Research.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureau_of_Surrealist_Research
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/174115.html

The surrealists project was a bit of a performance with researchers dressed and operating in an office environment. We might take a cue from that and have the studio in a downtown office setting. (I’ve checked into a few such facilities).

Hans Haacke has done lots of work that operates in the “research” mode.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Haacke
This includes projects that expose the relationships between money, power, art, and property.

Chicago Art Institute Prof. Adelhaid Mers does some great work that begins with research and results in info-graphics type drawings and charts of the way things work behind the scenes.
http://adelheidmers.org/

This research project would be the focus of the first 1/4 of the course (during which we would also be learning about our site). It would be a nice lens through which to engage ARtprize and provide an opportunity to share our results. And learning more about these things would be beneficial. Especially empirical research would allow us to share data with others who might like to interpret it. It might also lead to some different studio projects for the remainder of the project. Alternately, one could say that we should not spend 1/3 of the project focussed on ARtprize.

Artprize concept 1: Civic Studio as process

Published
by
paul
on July 16, 2009
in artprize and studio concept
. 0 Comments

We could proceed as we normally would with Civic Studio and be an artprize project. We could make our process visible and do our best to document and present what we are working on to the public. We would not have a finished project, but we would participate, and present “process” as a viable product of art.

One of the possible weaknesses in the Artprize design is the lack of provision for process and context in the works presented. By participating and presenting our method we could give comparative context to the other projects that are focussed on fixed objects.

This would work best with a focus like the river and in a place that is visible. It could also though work anywhere. One of the primary ideas that undergird civic studio is that everywhere is interesting. It just takes a way of looking to begin to see that. The idea too is that everywhere is cultural and historical and full of possibilities.

Artprize’s aim to reset the relationship of art and public is at curious odds with the lack of focus on context as being significant in art. Comparatively Civic studio takes a slow approach because we situate ourselves for 4 months and engage the site and put effort into the work emerging from the site and our situation there. Artprize projects may have contextual relationships between the work and the site, but they are established quickly by artists who are here - then - gone. We’ll read more about this in the Finklepearl and Kwon texts. Kwon says that artists are a new kind of placeless specialist. Civic Studio does not totally get off of the same critique. 4 months is a short time too, but at least we are not glossing over the importance of working with context.

Practical issue: To do this we would need to focus on some quick parameters for our project and figure out how to present them. On one hand I would not want the pressure of having something presentable to rush the studio’s work (which takes time), but I also think it is appropriate to think about how whatever is there in the studio is a “presentation”. In the past we’ve had people whose job it is to “curate the whole project”. This role would be even more important. This might work really well to engage visitors by gathering information from them. For instance stories of the river that could be collected and used, or even just stories or information about wherever we are.

There are rules about how often Artprize venues need to be open to the public. Someone might check into that.

So we would be presentable, but just present our process as our product. We could invite people back for the concluding presentation later. If helpful we could present work from past studios.

There is precedent for this work. Mark Dion has done many projects in which the process is going on and is part of the “work” Rirkrit Tiravanija as well.

One of the pedagogical strategies in Civic Studio is that the projects are emergent. We don’t figure out what they are going to be until the ideas emerge from our experience on site. Another strategy is that the results of our work are required to be presented publicly. Determining ahead of time to be an artprize project - and be public in that context is a bit more constrained and I think has the potential to impact the outcomes and learning possible. There is a danger in deciding ahead of time when and in what context the presentation will be made. These factors would need to be balanced in whatever we do.