Guilherme Kujawski's remarks suggest a useful way of approaching the
topic about to be suppressed i.e. how to think about 'curating'.
Considering the various functions masked by the word 'curator' in
terms of THE PRODUCTION OF KNOWLEDGE would make sense, because then
the field of enquiry would not be limited to art practice and
criticism. Indeed, avoiding this limitation would seem necessary if
the media one is interested in are not easily confined by the norms
and institutions of art. Such a position means taking theory
seriously, but is hardly extreme. In my opinion it merits further
discussion, especially if 'activism' is going to be acknowledged in
the coming month as anything more than an aesthetic category.
Activists would no doubt be quick to remind us that the distribution
of knowledge is hard to separate from the distribution of power.
Rosanne Altstatt, I hope, will be reassured on rereading my comments
that I did not discriminate between artists and curators. I have been
consistently sceptical of the privileges claimed by and usually
accorded to artists. Arguably, 'curating' carries less of a burden
than 'being an artist' which is supposed to signify some special way
of being, i.e. not just a profession or a function (agency, as
Guilherme might say) in the production of knowledge. One might
therefore expect artists, whose personal identities depend on being
recognised as such, to be more conservative than curators when it
comes to defending the institutions of art (such as connoisseurship).
But I might have underestimated the burden of 'being a curator'.
I am well trained in discerning good art from bad, but I feel that in
my work as a curator, I would not learn very much if I made a
principle of exercising that kind of judgement. I would get bored
looking only for artworks which affirmed my prejudices. That does not
mean I don't know how make up my mind, how to interpret contexts,
explain my reasons, or communicate my enthusiasm.
I'd like to respond somehow to Roseanne's call for examples of new
media art works comparable with Haacke's or Fraser's. The term 'art'
in the conjunction new-media-art is perhaps a distorting and limiting
criterion. Haacke's and Fraser's tactics tend to affirm the role of
the artist as both puppet and teacher. The production and contestation
of knowledge in the field of new media goes on in ways which were not
necessarily rehearsed in the field of art.
With best wishes,
Anthony Auerbach
http://www.video-as.org
|