{"title":"艺术家、机构、公众:对冲突的当代回应","authors":"Kate Warren, Anthea Gunn, Mikala Tai","doi":"10.1080/14434318.2020.1764227","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When contemporary artists respond to situations of war and conflict, the processes of creation and reception can be highly complex, charged, and unpredictable. Cultural institutions play an essential role in facilitating such projects, supporting artists and presenting the final outcomes. Artistic responses to conflict may stretch and challenge established institutional boundaries and conventions, yet in doing so they very often generate some of the most potent considerations of contested histories. As former head of art at the Australian War Memorial (AWM) Ryan Johnston writes, ‘our historians might learn something from our artists when it comes to the practice of public memory’. Too often, art historical discussions around the relationship between individual artists and cultural institutions are positioned within frameworks of ‘institutional critique’, often in an antagonistic or oppositional mode. Johnston highlights the potential for reciprocal learning and sharing between artists and institutions, particularly in contexts where the artistic products are innately connected to wider politics and social histories. The opportunities and challenges afforded to contemporary artists by these different types of institutions also affect the broader reception and interpretation of the artworks produced. This article explores and analyses how different types of institutions can work with contemporary artists in these contexts. As practising arts professionals working in different organisations—a large commemorative museum, a small contemporary art gallery, and a research-intensive university—we reflect on our own institutional settings to consider how different institutional contexts affect the creation and exhibition of contemporary art that approaches topics of war, conflict, and political violence. We offer three key case studies to inform this article. Firstly, we consider how contemporary art at the AWM has expanded the institution’s traditions of presenting the art of conflict, artefacts, and archives alongside a national memorial to those killed in military service. Secondly, we explore how Sydney’s small independent gallery 4A Centre for Contemporary Asian Art has been redefining ways to support contemporary artists engaging with contested","PeriodicalId":29864,"journal":{"name":"Australian and New Zealand Journal of Art","volume":"20 1","pages":"23 - 39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14434318.2020.1764227","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artists, Institutions, Publics: Contemporary Responses to Conflict\",\"authors\":\"Kate Warren, Anthea Gunn, Mikala Tai\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14434318.2020.1764227\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"When contemporary artists respond to situations of war and conflict, the processes of creation and reception can be highly complex, charged, and unpredictable. Cultural institutions play an essential role in facilitating such projects, supporting artists and presenting the final outcomes. Artistic responses to conflict may stretch and challenge established institutional boundaries and conventions, yet in doing so they very often generate some of the most potent considerations of contested histories. As former head of art at the Australian War Memorial (AWM) Ryan Johnston writes, ‘our historians might learn something from our artists when it comes to the practice of public memory’. Too often, art historical discussions around the relationship between individual artists and cultural institutions are positioned within frameworks of ‘institutional critique’, often in an antagonistic or oppositional mode. Johnston highlights the potential for reciprocal learning and sharing between artists and institutions, particularly in contexts where the artistic products are innately connected to wider politics and social histories. The opportunities and challenges afforded to contemporary artists by these different types of institutions also affect the broader reception and interpretation of the artworks produced. This article explores and analyses how different types of institutions can work with contemporary artists in these contexts. As practising arts professionals working in different organisations—a large commemorative museum, a small contemporary art gallery, and a research-intensive university—we reflect on our own institutional settings to consider how different institutional contexts affect the creation and exhibition of contemporary art that approaches topics of war, conflict, and political violence. We offer three key case studies to inform this article. Firstly, we consider how contemporary art at the AWM has expanded the institution’s traditions of presenting the art of conflict, artefacts, and archives alongside a national memorial to those killed in military service. Secondly, we explore how Sydney’s small independent gallery 4A Centre for Contemporary Asian Art has been redefining ways to support contemporary artists engaging with contested\",\"PeriodicalId\":29864,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian and New Zealand Journal of Art\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"23 - 39\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14434318.2020.1764227\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian and New Zealand Journal of Art\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14434318.2020.1764227\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ART\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian and New Zealand Journal of Art","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14434318.2020.1764227","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ART","Score":null,"Total":0}
Artists, Institutions, Publics: Contemporary Responses to Conflict
When contemporary artists respond to situations of war and conflict, the processes of creation and reception can be highly complex, charged, and unpredictable. Cultural institutions play an essential role in facilitating such projects, supporting artists and presenting the final outcomes. Artistic responses to conflict may stretch and challenge established institutional boundaries and conventions, yet in doing so they very often generate some of the most potent considerations of contested histories. As former head of art at the Australian War Memorial (AWM) Ryan Johnston writes, ‘our historians might learn something from our artists when it comes to the practice of public memory’. Too often, art historical discussions around the relationship between individual artists and cultural institutions are positioned within frameworks of ‘institutional critique’, often in an antagonistic or oppositional mode. Johnston highlights the potential for reciprocal learning and sharing between artists and institutions, particularly in contexts where the artistic products are innately connected to wider politics and social histories. The opportunities and challenges afforded to contemporary artists by these different types of institutions also affect the broader reception and interpretation of the artworks produced. This article explores and analyses how different types of institutions can work with contemporary artists in these contexts. As practising arts professionals working in different organisations—a large commemorative museum, a small contemporary art gallery, and a research-intensive university—we reflect on our own institutional settings to consider how different institutional contexts affect the creation and exhibition of contemporary art that approaches topics of war, conflict, and political violence. We offer three key case studies to inform this article. Firstly, we consider how contemporary art at the AWM has expanded the institution’s traditions of presenting the art of conflict, artefacts, and archives alongside a national memorial to those killed in military service. Secondly, we explore how Sydney’s small independent gallery 4A Centre for Contemporary Asian Art has been redefining ways to support contemporary artists engaging with contested