Miwon Kwon

Reading the text by Miwon Kwon changed my understanding of the term “site specific” art. The relationship between the site and the artwork is a complex and problematic one which extends beyond the physical space to the very community who live there. While certainly complex, this ambiguity surrounding community based art seems to create many possibilities to further our understanding and strengthen the art worlds relationship to the broader urban community.
Through expanding art from a traditional institutional context to a public context, art can become something which actively has a positive impact on relationships within society. There seems to be many approaches to community based art. One particularly emphasised by Kwon are “invented” communities which only exist because of the artwork: its activities or events are specified by the artist. Some invented communities are ephemeral while others are more permanent, continuing to exist beyond the exhibition context.
One influential factor of these community projects is the relationship the artist shares with the collective community group. Some may be considered local artists due to geographical location and past involvement while others may conduct their artwork as an outsider. Kwon identifies advantages and disadvantages of both positions. Local artists with “home-team advantage” tend to have a well grounded capability for communication and trust to pass between themselves and the collective community. Issues can be processed quickly so the day-to-day function of the invented community can operate smoothly. Having said that, the book does raise the point that the work of local artists are not necessarily more or less successful than outsider artists. I find artists who operate from a distance to be more interesting in some ways because, according to Kwon, they are more likely to depend on an outside art institution to sponsor and act as a mediator between the community/artist collaboration. This can be a positive arrangement as there is a middle party which can compromise between the wants of the artist and the wants of the community.
After reading the text I feel the most confusing yet interesting factors are the similarities and differences between the art world, the artist and the participants of the urban community. Each has its own take on the activities of the artwork and each has a different capacity to understand art. Identity is also an important factor and the community artworks seem to merge all participants’ identities into a complex and instable system which proves to be a highly interesting exploration of relationships.