The revolution was televised, after all.

Raunig had me at the moment he acknowledged "the significance of the relative failures, in particular those failures that are experienced in the full knowledge that the outcome of persistence is neither fatalistic futility nor an absolute revolution." In other words, by concentrating on the subtle gestures of the flow between art and politics, we can achieve change. It is about focusing on the here and now rather than the stricter, more linear 'before & after' which suggests that change is necessarily a clear-cut state.

Ranciere had me up until he dismissed "contemporary artists engaged in relational aesthetics for being merely derisive of power and turning art on itself." Specifically because as Papastergiadis suggests, this view "obscures a more complex process of negotiation", an arena where possibilities rather than set outcomes can proliferate.