Three key ideas discussed in the text:
1. The new public art draws, both consciously and unconsciously, from the history of progressive urban reform. This is clear in its concern with ameliorating problems typically associated with the city (e.g. homelessness, gang culture, "atrisk" youth, etc.), as well as in the relationship that the community-based public artist takes up with various constituencies and communities.
2. Too often community artists imagine that the very real differences that exist between themselves and a given community can be transcended by a well-meaning rhetoric of aesthetic 'empowerment'.
3. The collaboration between the community and artist would be characterized by a more equitable process of exchange and mutual education, with the artist learning from the community and having his or her own presuppositions (about the community, specific social, cultural, and political issues, etc.) challenged and expanded.
Questions:
1. How will the artist cooperate with the community without gentrification?
2. How does the community engaged art changes with the political changes?
3. Is the community only picking the artist inside their community? or they will cooperate with other community’s artist?
Comments
Post a Comment