艺术家、机构、公众:对冲突的当代回应

IF 0.1 0 ART
Kate Warren, Anthea Gunn, Mikala Tai
{"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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

当当代艺术家应对战争和冲突的情况时,创作和接受的过程可能是高度复杂、充满活力和不可预测的。文化机构在促进此类项目、支持艺术家和展示最终成果方面发挥着重要作用。对冲突的艺术回应可能会延伸和挑战既定的制度界限和惯例,但在这样做的过程中,它们往往会引发对有争议历史的一些最有力的考虑。正如澳大利亚战争纪念馆(AWM)前艺术负责人瑞安·约翰斯顿所写,“在公共记忆实践方面,我们的历史学家可能会从我们的艺术家那里学到一些东西”。围绕艺术家个人与文化机构之间关系的艺术历史讨论往往被置于“制度批判”的框架内,通常处于对立或对立的模式。约翰斯顿强调了艺术家和机构之间相互学习和分享的潜力,特别是在艺术产品与更广泛的政治和社会历史有着内在联系的情况下。这些不同类型的机构为当代艺术家提供的机会和挑战也影响了对所创作艺术品的更广泛接受和解读。本文探讨和分析了不同类型的机构如何在这些背景下与当代艺术家合作。作为在不同组织工作的执业艺术专业人士——一家大型纪念博物馆、一家小型当代美术馆和一所研究密集型大学——我们反思自己的制度环境,以考虑不同的制度背景如何影响当代艺术的创作和展览,这些艺术涉及战争、冲突和政治暴力等主题。我们提供了三个关键的案例研究来为本文提供信息。首先,我们考虑AWM的当代艺术是如何扩大该机构的传统的,即在国家纪念服兵役者的同时,展示冲突艺术、文物和档案。其次,我们探讨了悉尼4A当代亚洲艺术中心的小型独立画廊如何重新定义支持当代艺术家参与有争议的活动的方式
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信