Heterotopias- Diego and Lucas's project at SCA.

At first I was judgemental of Diego and Lucas's example of 'Relational Aesthetic' gardening, especially as they cited Bourriard. I am not particularly impressed by the premise put forward by Bourriard which foregoes any possibility of socio-political change - revolution - and opts instead for 'micro-utopias'. I see this as maintaining a cynical distance to the ruling ideology of late-capitalism, that is, we know the system is corrupt but we are going to ignore that and adopt a pragmatic approach and make 'small changes'. This soft Left approach props up the hard right and is reliant on the ruling ideology for its survival. The garden is within the Institution of Sydney University which is deeply complicit in the machine of the neo-liberals. The SCA funding is severely limited, teachers positions are being 'restructured' and there is the threat of losing the Art Theory component to the main campus to remove the 'redoubling' of subjects offered by the University. Furthermore, if the project was indeed a 'social interstice' -as promoted by Bourriard in the interest of following the Marxist concept of a space free of Capitalist exchange - then there needs to be a dialogue which reaffirms this. Thus, no selling of the produce through the Campus Cafe!

The environmental sustainability of such a project needs to be thought through in regards to water consumption and possibly utilising the now defunct water pump and drainage system. (Apparently some of the columns are hollow and divert water from the roof to an underground storage area).

As I pondered the space of the garden and the possibilities it does offer - the possibility of an improved well-being of the students and staff and the opening up a more participatory democratic space in which to inter-act, I found a short essay written by Foucault which refers to the space of a garden as a 'heterotopia'. Foucault refers to a heterotopia as a place which is 'outside of all places, even if it may be possible to indicate their location in reality',' a contradictory site in which the real sites that can be found within the culture, are simultaneously represented, contested and inverted.' The traditional garden of the Persians, according to Foucault, is one of the oldest examples of a heterotopia. This garden was a space which 'was supposed to bring together inside its rectangle four parts representing the four parts of the world' and was considered to be a sacred space. It was then that Diego and Lucas' project gained my favour as I thought of the existence of such a space within the confines of the panoptic architecture of SCA.

A space in which time may be lost and the sacredness of everyday life may be appreciated. I only question does the heterotopia thence become a fetish within the confines of the Institution?

Rambling on Ranciere and The Emancipated Spectator

Contemporary art practice is engaged in intersubjectivity which calls for interaction, participation, collaboration and co-authorship.
The definition of the relationship between art and politics is through 'the transformation that occurs through inter-subjective relations.'

Ranciere seems to be threatened by the artist's role, his/her intentionality as opposed to the spectator in contemporary practice.He sees this in the master/servant dialectic which places the spectator in the passive role. According to Ranciere, 'the emancipatory potential of art does not come from the locus of the artist's intentionality' but rather through a process he defines as 'the distribution of the sensible'. Ranciere is interested in the emancipatory potential of the spectator who he claims has 'the capacity of anybody' - the necessary universality that politics is all about.He 'defines the logic of transformation through the interplay between the rise of the new subjects and the re-articulation of the common'. The emancipated spectator is able to see a new narrative rather than the one being presented and thus does not need to rely on the agency of the artist.

However, Ranciere defends the 'passive, ignorant spectator' as the spectator who is somehow outside of the art system.He champions the unlearned against the educated, attributing agency to the disruptive potential of the untrained intelligence. This seems to run counter to the idea of the 'spectator as a repository of established ideologies and cultural practices - as the specific body adapted to art's institutionalisation.' Ranciere defends the spectator's capacity to 'observe, select, compare, interpret' but does not invoke any other mode of subjectivity other than that of the aesthetic onlooker.It seems as if the critical discourse of Post-Modern Theory has passed him by and certainly bypasses the agency given to the spectator- an empowered subject- through the discourse of Barthes. In fact, it seems as though Ranciere is championing and seeking to emancipate the 'privileged spectator who has occupies a central and powerful role within the ideology, economy and knowledge of art'.

If it is truly an spectator outside of the art system which Ranciere is seeking to emancipate then it would be that of the philistine, someone who is outside of the aesthetic regime.To attribute 'the distribution of the sensible' as an emancipatory concept and giving agency to the re-articulation of the common is a task which, in my view, requires more than the disruptive potential of the untrained and uneducated. This common spectator would incorporate subjects with fetishes, cynicism, and embedded ideologies irrespective of education and being outside of the art structure. One can not assume this emancipatory potential being realised by popular fundamentalists who are manipulated in their ignorance by the dominant ideology of the Neo- Liberals. If a pan-universalism is what Ranciere is seeking then it is only through the collaboration and agency of the spectator, artists, activists, trade unions and intellectuals that any emancipatory potential can be realised.

Spaces, Places, non-places....Wk 8 Art and Community

Michel de Certeau :- A place is the order in accord which elements are distributed in

relationships of co-existence. It implies an indication of stability.

- A space exists when one takes into consideration, velocities and time variables. Thus space is composed of intersections of mobile elements. Space occurs as the effect produced by the operations that orientate it, situate it, temporalize it....

A space is a practised place. It has none of the stability of a proper place.

Marc Auge : - super-modernity produces non-places,spaces which are not themselves anthroplological places and which do not integrate the earlier places.

Place and non-place are rather like opposed polarities. The word 'space'

is used to describe the frequentation of places.There are spaces in which the individual feels himself to be a spectator without paying much attention to the spectacle.As if the position of the spectator were the essence of the spectacle....The traveller's space thus is the archetype of the non-place.

Lucy Lippard: - Place is a portion of land/town/cityscape seen from the inside, the resonance of a specific location that is known and familiar...the external world mediated through human subjective experience. a sense of place is the geographical component of the psychological need to belong somewhere, one antidote to a prevailing alienation.

Space is not a neutral container or void within which social interactions take place but rather an ideological product and instrument in itself.

Miwon Kwon: - The site is now structured intertexually rather than spatially, and its model is not a map but an itinerary, a fragmentary sequence of events and actions through spaces, that is, a nomadic narrative whose path is

articulated by the artist. This transformation of the site textualizes spaces and spatializes discourses. The definition of the site has been transformed from a physical location to a discursive vector -ungrounded, fluid, virtual.

The site becomes more than a place: - a repressed ethnic history, a

political cause, a disenfranchised social group.

It is not only the artwork that is not bound to the physical conditions of a place anymore, it is the artist-subject who is liberated from any enduring ties to local circumstances. Qualities of ambiguity and impermanence are taken as desired attributes.

James Meyer: - The functional site is a process, an operation occurring between sites, a mapping of institutional and discursive filiations and the bodies that move between them. It is an information site, a locus of overlapping text, photographs and video recordings, physical places and things....It is a temporary thing; a movement; a chain of meanings devoid of a particular focus.

NSK and Zizek challenging the ruling order.

There are artists who are finding that the only way out of the neutralising effect of the art world and all its related institutions is to over-identify with the ideology of the ruling order. These are artists who are interested in challenging the forces of capitalism and questioning the pragmatic apathy of other art practices which seem to rely on the ruling order for their existence.

The underlying premise of this particular art practice lies in the strategy which subverts the ideology of the "father state" by abolishing the subjects necessary ironic distance towards the system.This ironic distance is necessary for the state to function.Thus, by taking the ideology of the state more seriously than the state itself these artists succeed in revealing the shadow- side, the "obscene super-ego underside of the system ."

NSK - Neue Slowenische Kunst - are a Slovenian art collective who have been active since 1987 who are known fot their provocative installations, performances and interventions which combine "retrogardism and a radical ambiguity".

NSK are made of of three different components: - Laibach ( a musical group who take their name from the German name given to Ljubijana during the occupation in WW2.

- Cosmokinetic Cabinet Noordung ( a theatre group).

- IRWIN ( a five men art collective).

NSK were a part of the Slovenian opposition movement to the Tito regime in the 1980's and were heavily influenced and supported by the philosopher Slavoj Zizek. Zizek's writing is based on a combination of Marxist politics, Hegelian philosophy and Lacanian psychoanalysis.

One of the component groups of NSK , the art collective IRWIN, received an award in 1987 for their poster celebrating the day of youth and Tito's birthday. This resulted in a scandal when it was revealed that IRWIN had submitted an old Nazi poster with slight alterations. ( NSK unashamedly appropriate images from the past- a pastiche of pre-existingmaterials- in order to 'reveal connections between seemingly unrelated entities').NSK succeeded in revealing the discomforting possibility that Slovenia, a communist country, was more aligned with Fascism than it would want to reveal and the posters were subsequently torn down.

Kestner's Dialogical art and Wochenklauser

Dialogical Art, according to Kestner involves the shift from the idea of the aesthetic tied to a moment of 'creative plenitude.." to a social and discursive realm of shared dialogue. Instead of a notion of art which is tied to a future Utopian community Dialogical Art suggests the possibility that art is able to enact a community here and now.

Kestner is interested in artists who work outside the traditional institutional frameworks of galleries and art Institutions and sets a historical framework from which dialogical art draws its influences. Kestner cites artists such as APG and Helen and Newton Hanson - artists working since the 1960's and 1970's - as important precursors to current Dialogical practice and who were interested in the durational and dialogical and whose practice of collaboration and consultation was derived from the aesthetic.

Kestner is interested in developing an analalytic framework for dialogical art - " a Dialogical Aesthetic". In particular, a notion of art through its function as a democratic space within contemporary culture and the aesthetic analysis of works according to their characteristics - a critical time sense, a spatial imagination - and achieving these through a dialogical and collaborative encounter with others.

The outcome of emancipatory insights through this dialogue is of utmost importance. Thus, the emancipatory model of dialogical interaction - a process of open-ended discourse - is itself the work of art. Kestner calls for a more nuanced account of the resulting dialogue and the recognition of the work of art as the process of communication and collaboration rather than a fixed object. He cited the Austrian group Worchenklauser as following in the tradition of previous avant-garde artists who sought to challenge the perceptions of the viewer yet differ dramatically in their conception of the relationship between the viewer and the work of art.WK see the work of art as " a decentering, a movement outside self through dialogue extended over time". WK see themselves as following in the tradition of The Situationists, APG and Joseph Beuys yet differentiate themselves as capable of producing 'concrete interactions' which produce a pragmatic outcome. They are not concerned with changing the world but are more interested in the use of the 'potential of art to manipulate social circumstances and employ concrete strategies of effecting change'.Their interventions are based on ideas from the discourse of art - the capacity to think critically and creatively across boundaries, and the facilitation of unique forms of discursive interaction.

Clash of Ideologies

Cultural institutions such as The National Museum in Canberra are intrinsically linked to the prevailing governing ideology. The Museum was conceived in order to portray an Australian identity through the creation of a national past. Dawn Casey was the Director of The National Museum for four years (1999 - 2003) and played a pivotal role in the creation of the Museum.
Casey questioned the prevailing authoritarian legitimation of the nation, in particular the way our history had been previously constructed by a colonial, white, framework.

Casey did not just rely on the white written history of the colonial majority but through a long and involved process of consultation with academics and people of different socio-economic and cultural backgrounds provided a history and identity which was more inclusive and representative of the Australian Post-Colonial nation-state. Casey included the oral histories of Aboriginal people and a history which was inclusive of the frontier violence and general black and white colonial interactions. Casey also represented the voices and stories of The Stolen Generation, the Aboriginal people who were and are still affected by various racist policies perpetuated by the Australian Government. Casey was also inclusive of aspects of The Australian Immigration Policy which discriminated against potential immigrants - the White Australia Policy - and thus represented a more truthful account of immigrant's experiences and their cultural backgrounds.

This democratic construction of our nation's history did not reflect the ideological agenda of the conservative Howard Government. The social control and oppression of Howard's ideology became apparant as the battle of contested histories was waged. The Howard Government instigated a review into Casey's management of The Museum and although accusations of political and cultural bias were shown to be unfounded, Casey's position as Director was not renewed by the Government.

The forming of the national cultural identity and the construction of histories in a Cultural Institution needs to be legitimized by a democratic framework not subject to the political mandate of the prevailing governing body. If we are ideally living in a democratic society in which we are all included then our Cultural Institutions need to reflect this reality.

Thoughts from Philip.k. Dick

1.Those who agree with you are insane.

2.Those who do not agree with you are in power.

3.Some of those in power are insane.

4. And they are right.

The Consciousness Industry

Art Institutions and museums continue to be challenged in regard to the blatant incongruity between their theoretical ideal as a 'neutral cultural experience' and a place of democratic exchange and the reality which is inherently ideological and fraught with a plethora of political, social and cultural elements.

According to Adorno, the Institution of art is intimately linked to the governing ideology of society. Thus it reflects the 'very mechanisms of social control and oppression that ideology performs."

The artistic practice of Institutional critique since the late 1960's has been engaged in revealing the fundamental and largely hidden machinations and ideology of the art industry. Artists, such as Marcel Broodthaers and Michael Asher, have been involved in projects which reveal the political and economic realities of the administration and organization within the art industry and the way that our consciousness has subsequently been shaped and controlled by the prevailing ideology.

By utilizing the existing structure of the ready-made Broodthaers created a fictional museum in 1968 in order to illustrate the fact that 'the museum was born, not via a concept, but by way of circumstance, the concept came later.' Broodthaers questioned the ideological frame of the museum, who determines their organization and the social, political and economic underpinnings of the institution.He also observed the capacity of the art industry to absorb and transform art into the commercial cycle regardless of the original intent.

Asher's work also calls into question the spaces and practices of the art institution and how we are conditioned by its methods of interpreting and presenting art. He uses various techniques which focus on the architectural, design or administrative strategies of the organization that presents art and shapes and controls its significance in the social and economic context.

In the project at MOMA, " The museum as a muse" Asher focused on the deaccessioned object. he dealt with the transfer of objects into and out of the museum's collection. Asher's approach created greater transparency in the custodial operations of the institution and how the museum constructs a canon, manipulates the market and constructs history.

The continued practice of institutional critique remains an important practice which is vital to the creation of a space of unrepressed artistic expression and a democratic space of public exchange and representation. As institutions and museums embrace the idea of a cultural institution as an increasingly viable commercial entity in a late capitalist democracy, it remains intrinsic that their frameworks are continually questioned and measured against the theoretical ideal in which they were conceived.

The Machine is (Changing) Us: YouTube and the Politics of Authenticity

Jodie Wiggins

The Necessity of Antagonism.

"Without antagonism there is only the imposed consensus of authoritarian order - a total suppression of debate and discussion, which is inimical to democracy" Bishop

Bishop may be subject to inaccuracies in reporting facts, scathing of the idea of microtopias and she just doesn't seem to get the concept of 'open-endedness' and the unnecessary presence of an 'auratic signifier' but she remains an important and intelligent voice in the discourse surrounding Relational Aesthetics. Hers is the voice of antagonism which dares to question - along with Hal Foster - the artistic practice and theoretical discourse of Relational Aesthetics.

As the artistic praxis of Relational Aesthetics is increasingly adopted by artists and curators and sanctioned by institutions such as The Palais de Tokyo there has been a need to invite a sustained critique of the validity of such a practice and to evaluate the effectiveness and quality of such work.

Both Bishop and Foster question the autonomy of the curator, who are 'maestros of large shows..' and whose status is enhanced by the orchestration of the "laboratory experience". According to Foster, "the institution becomes the spectacle, it collects the cultural capital..."and in doing so contradicts the artistic intention of creating a social interstice which transcends the capitalist agenda of a service economy.

The leading theorist of Relational Aesthetic artists, Nicolas Bourriaud, is also co-director of an institution which has embraced Relational Aesthetics as its specific theoretical program.

Gillick claims, in his reply to Bishop, that he also questioned the role of curator as art-star in a letter to Bourriaud.

Bishop states she does not suggest Relational works need to develop a greater social conscience

but it is undoubtedly the work of two such artists - Sierra and Hirschhorn - that she promotes as contributing to the democratic premise of Relational Aesthetics much more than Gillick and Tiravanija, who she sees as being promoted by Bourriaud. It was Bourriaud who positioned Relational Art as the new avant garde of political practice by stating that Relational Artists were taking up the legacy of the Twentieth Century avant gardes..." Yet Bourriaud deflates and deflects this claim by stating that the new artists are relieved of any idealistic claim for antagonism and social change as they are "concerned with negotiation, bonds, and co-existences". He states that the artists he is concerned with are not motivated by any utopian ideals of social change but accept the 'existing real" and "learn to inhabit the world in a better way". Bourriaud's ideal of a microtopia is questioned by Bishop as one in which does not invite the antagonism necessary for a healthy functioning democracy and one in which does not represent a community outside the safe confines of the gallery system. Indeed it is difficult to envision an effective social movement or collaboration within the institutionalised space of the gallery, which is hardly separate from the capitalist system of social relations. Harder still to engage in politically relevant and effective models of change when the Director encourages the adoption of a pessimistic and limiting philosophical framework.

Social Interstice or capitalist collusion?

Relational Aesthetics, as put forward by Nicolas Bourriaud, is a theoretical premise which seeks to locate contemporary art practice within the era of late capitalism. As the result of all human relationships becoming defined within a capitalist society - Bourriaud cites Debord's "Society of The Spectacle" -m the artist seeks to shift his/her practice to event based manipulations in which the object is abandoned. Instead, a set of practices which are concerned with the inter-human relations and their socio-poloitical context has been adopted.

The relational artist as proposed by Bourriaud, no longer seeks to transform society or believes in the Western construct of a future Utopia. Instead, the artist is "learning to inhabit the world in a better way" and in doing so sets up micro-utopias in which an 'interstice' is created. This interstice is sought by the artist in order to transcend the capitalist context of most human interactions and create a space of co-existence which is assessed by the quality of the relations produced.

Rirkrit Tiravanija is a socially engaged artist whose artistic praxis has been embraced by Bourriaud as one in which comes under the umbrella of Relational Aesthetics. For Tiravanija, it is the whole situation which constitutes the work, not just one element and certainly not an object. Tiravanija's practice aims to erode the distinction between artist and viewer and also between the rarified space of the gallery and that of 'everyday' social space. He is interested in extending the notion of the Duchampian "un-art object" by putting the concept of everyday life into an art context. Thus, in works such as "Untitled" 1992 in Gallery 303, the gallery becomes a social space in which the everyday running of business becomes transparent and where the involvement of the audience as they are served food, becomes the focus of the work.

One may ask whether Tiravanija has succeeded in creating a successful interstice - according to the principles of Marxist theory - or whether he is colluding with the intrinsically mercantile nature of the commercial gallery by allowing for and profiting from the sale of empty crates of beer bottles as Duchampian readymades through the Gavin Brown Enterprises Gallery. Tiravanija makes the claim that his aim is to 'extend the notion of the everyday as the subject and his medium is rawlife' yet we are left with the notion that however noble his intentions, the outcome is definitely within the framework of capitalist trade. The commodification of the object is certainly part of an outcome of practice which had proposed the abandoning of the object. A further limitation of his work is the institutionalised space of the gallery which does restrict the audience, as Bishop suggests, to a certain socio-demographic background. We may extend this limitation to the questioning of the validity of an artistic practice when it becomes part of the specific theoretical program of an institution such as The Palais de Tokyo. Does it retain its avant-garde impetus and are we being asked to be pragmatists who no longer seek to transform and change a society but are " condemned to create a series of minor modifications..."?