The exhibition for two weeks in community settings came to and end last weekend.
The time went so quickly that I didn’t have enough chances to stay in all of the venues to see the work in place and gauge how people responded, so I am reliant on feedback coming from the venues and individuals – If anyone did manage to see anything, do let me know – contact me via one-and-all.org.
What I’ve been doing is as I understand it quite different. Its not been about engaging people in the process of making art – so it goes against all the rules of community arts or participatory projects that these venues are familiar with and have come to expect. I didn’t leave a whole lot of information to read about the work – just some basic info about the project and a few lines to explain each artists approach – perhaps the kind of thing you'd find in a gallery. The map/guide had more text and some context. So the idea of an “experiment” was an apt one. How would people respond to a piece of contemporary art appearing in their places (though they are public places too) and importantly how would a contemporary art audience react to the work in those places. The works weren't site specific either. But certainly the sites added something to the work I believe.
What was I trying to do? On the one hand, the aesthetic experience of the places seemed an untapped issue. How did community practice (lets use that term instead of regeneration) actually look and feel. And what would placing these art works in those contexts do to the meaning of the work. And would the work mean anything to the people passing by – do we perhaps do people a dis-credit by assuming they need to be spoonfed their culture? Perhaps people are more sophisticated than some may like to think..
