Stephen Willats: surfing with the attractor. South London Gallery 1/6-15/7/12.
Mixed feelings about this show. Is it a rigid (male) structure, a system that isn’t really saying anything about the world today? Is it ‘socially engaged’?
He originally showed at SLG in 1998, interested in art institutions and how they operate in society. He set up models of ‘socially interactive practice’ that celebrated community, with public meetings in the local kicking and punching club, Baptist Church, Children’s centre etc. The meetings served to attract participants who would take part in workshops that involved a set walk in the local estate. Participants were given Super 8 cameras and were free to record anything they felt that had symbolic reference to the area. It seems that the process used to collect ‘data’ (and defining the framework) involved time and open negotiation, where participants were collaborating equally and using their own sense of meaning and language in creating the work. He encouraged people to create their own journeys and to engage in dialogue with visitors to the gallery: connecting the gallery and the outside context/community.
By contrast, for the current show he invited 14 artists (not local community) to create the work that is shown in the gallery. He defined two walks (Peckham Rye and Oxford Street) and each artist was given recording equipment and a brief or ‘data stream’ (eg facial expression, signs of order, space between people). The mosaic structure used to present the work looks similar to the show 14 years ago, but is this social engagement?
Thinking about my three words for the Summer of Love Project (hierarchy, equality and access) it scores pretty low. But I’m still curious and going along to the discussion on 19th July ‘From one thing into another’, which explores the influence of his work on a younger generation of artists.
‘Bookmare’ at Camberwell Space (12-13 July)
Curated by Susan JohanKnecht and Finlay Taylor
Seeing this show reminded me of an article in Art Monthly a few months ago, about participation. The last paragraph of the article gave a nod to participation as a private experience, rather than the olympic crowd-pleasing spectacles that are appearing everywhere. I associate the experience of reading a book (for pleasure) with intimacy; a gentle unfolding slow discovery. Encountering the works in this show felt like reading a great book – both private and connecting to a bigger whole.
The physical exhibition space was small and contained but like great poetry, each piece had clearly been thoughtfully positioned; relationships and juxtaposition carefully considered. The work required effort to engage, and interpretation material was minimal, but the rewards were rich and long-lasting.
The curators’ gave a talk and there were a series of performances/talks; opportunities to pose questions, share thoughts and open-up. This, for me, felt like meaningful participation. A real contrast to the rigid (closed) structure of the Stephen Willat’s show next door at SLG (report coming soon).
4/7/12 Down your toolkits!
SLG workshop with Sophie Hope and Alison Rooke.
Shared experiences of evaluation, to be collated in blog/book.
10 steps to critical evaluation:
Evaluation involves the development of a critical framework that’s transparent and honest (to you, organsiers, funders) and backed-up with evidence. It’s not a sales pitch.
Evaluation is a generative practice that is integral to the creative process.
Discuss the language you are using and have clarity from the start about what you expect the evaluation process to be.
Evaluate your funders. Offer ‘kite marks’ for best practice.
Record the unexpected and incidental, failure (where you learn), not-knowing.
Evaluation needs to be protected, paid, planned time and space for reflection. Needs to be a sense of safety and trust for all.
Invite those who don’t know the process of evaluation.
Build in learning conversations; Curators club, critical friends, use social media
Share resources and approaches with colleagues.
Where does the evaluation go? Be inventive about the evaluation ‘product’. How do you share it?
12/7/12 Sonia Boyce and Barby Asante: Towards a Hybrid Gallery Space
Talk at Chelsea College. With Emily Druiff (Peckham Space and hosted by Paul Goodwin.
People as the palette that artsists work with. Is it relational aesthetics, political (Claire Bishop, Thomas Hirschorn) or is it about dialogue (Grant Kestler)? Difficult for institutions, so need a new curatorial framework: hybrid, as in Peckham Space, where curatorial and education are equal. Rather than curators as selectors and education as crowd-pleasers. Work over long time period with artists, developing the brief.
Barby: wanted dialogue about issues around identity. ‘Wig therapist’ in Brixton hairdressers. Open, responsive, receptive. South London Black Music Archive: listen, share, contribute. ‘Do this sort of work because I want to’.
Authorship: who is being used?
Work to be valued as art or social outcomes: a false separation?
Art to be valued as a transformative experience
10/7/12 Camden Arts Centre
Get the message 2012. In conversation with artists Georgie Manly and Judith Brocklehurst, with Jeremy Deller.
A heartwarming 10th-year celebration of work with kids from three SEN schools.
Interesting juxtaposition with Bruce Lacey Experience (curated by Jeremy).
Collaboration discussion: use simple language, you’re an artist, not a teacher, psychologist etc, you never really know what’s going to happen when working with people, art as an equalizer, a space to dream, a free space, offer guidance – can’t tell people what to do – trust their judgement. Reassuring to hear the familiar.
GTM set up a framework and pre-planned (experience from previous years) show structure, allowing process to evolve.
