Here is our 'critical organ' !! | | I.We could use a map like this as the overall image.
Each of the below images would be inserted into the map to show each process.
We should have the
A The Cartagena process:
a. The Horizontal Chamber, aka "the Couch Hearings"
b. The Charter Chamber
B. Manifesta AA
a. Applying the Charters from Cartagena
C. Post-Manifesta Newspaper-Publication and Launch.
| | | |
| | i. In the middle, i guess
| | | ii. the analysis,
destruction, reconstruction,
discussion,
evaluation, etc
of the work
| | | |
| | iii.maybe this should come before the previous one?
| | | iv. This is what happens at biennale's, right?
Perhaps we should use this as a way of
visualising the theory of
THE RAW,
THE COOKED
AND
THE PACKAGED
which we are going to use in the charter chamber in cartagena.
| | | Could you make an image of this, when it is coming out? it could be at the end of the process..
|  Step 1: Artist/s tries to explain their work to a panel. The panel
is composed of different people and they have different priorities:
some art practitioners, some curators, critics, thinkers, lay-persons,
etc. Then this panel discusses the work with the artist. The panel decides how valuable the work is, but not just in terms of market (capital) value.
That's a relatively tiny part of the picture. There might be 50
categories for valuing the work, or 14, or 700, whatever works best and
is practicable. These categories ranged from 'Revolutionary potential'
to 'Appeal to Children', from 'Distance from point of Origin' to
'Poshlost' or failed irony, trying to embrace as many artistic aims and
achievements as possible. The process was documented: recorded, photographed/filmed, and written up. |
|  Step 2: The artists(s) gets the chance to tell the panel what they
think of the process, of their evaluations, of whether they 'got' the
idea, and even if they are just stupid beings. It's the artist's chance
to fire back, especially at the constraints of traditional
dialogue/rhetoric/dialectic which unavoidably fuel part of the panel
analysis.
This is really important,
it balances out the deconstruction of the artist's work in Step 1 which
some artists would justifiably say is inherently anti-art. Should it be
fed back into the panel's evaluations and re-influence the outcome?
This
is also to be documented as outcomes and emergent properties of the
Arts Assembly might crop up and influence future procedure. |
| | | |
|
|
