23.2.20, Bourriaud vs Bishop, Relational aesthetics and relational antagonism
‘Art is the space that produces a specific sociability.’ (Bourriaud, 1998, p16)
‘..depending on the degree of participation required of the onlooker by the artist, along with the nature of the works and the models of sociability proposed an represented, an exhibition will give rise to a specific ‘arena of exchange’. And this ‘arena of exchange’ must be judged on the basis of aesthetic criteria…by analysing the coherence of its form and then the symbolic value of the ‘world’ it suggests to us, and of the image of human relations reflected by it. … As a human activity based on commerce, art is at once the object and the subject of an ethic…. Art is a state of encounter.’ (ibid. p17,18)
‘Contemporary art is often marked by non- availability. The example of performance is the most classic of all. Once the performance is over, all that remains is documentation that should not be confused with the work itself.’ (ibid, p29)
Definition and critique of Bourriaud’s Relational aesthetics:
https://www.artspace.com/magazine/art_101/book_report/what-is-relational-aesthetics-54164
‘Relational artists rejected making conventional art objects, instead opting to engage audiences by creating situations that call for—and sometimes force—interpersonal interaction.’ (Artspace, 2016)
‘Rather than producing objects for individual aesthetic contemplation, Relational artists attempt to produce new human relationships through collective experiences. These practices have their roots in earlier art movements, namely Dada, Conceptual art, Fluxus, and Allan Kaprow’s “Happenings.”’ (ibid)
‘Relational art has met with criticism, most notably from art scholar Claire Bishop, who, while interrogating the kinds of relationships this art produces, argued that such artists as Tiravanija and Gillick do not so much democratize art as simply reinforce their pre-existing, closed art world and thus ignore its implicit class politics. For Bishop, Relational artist Thomas Hirschhorn (b. 1957) offers an alternative by highlighting underlying social antagonisms. For "Documenta 11," held in Kassel, Germany, in 2002, Hirschhorn worked with locals in a nearby low-income, immigrant neighborhood to erect a temporary structure that served as a site for community debates on the writings of French philosopher Georges Bataille. Composed of cardboard and scrap wood, the Bataille Monument’s “do-it-yourself” aesthetic willfully defied the refinement of museum and gallery spaces. Participants from the neighborhood could, and did, voice their opinions on Bataille in the monument’s makeshift television studio, thus becoming part of the art while viewing it.’ (ibid)
Artspace (2016) What is relational aesthetics? Available at: https://www.artspace.com/magazine/art_101/book_report/what-is-relational-aesthetics-54164 (Accessed 23 February 2020)
Bourriaurd, N. (2002) Relational aesthetics. Paris: Les Presses du Reel
‘Art is the space that produces a specific sociability.’ (Bourriaud, 1998, p16)
‘..depending on the degree of participation required of the onlooker by the artist, along with the nature of the works and the models of sociability proposed an represented, an exhibition will give rise to a specific ‘arena of exchange’. And this ‘arena of exchange’ must be judged on the basis of aesthetic criteria…by analysing the coherence of its form and then the symbolic value of the ‘world’ it suggests to us, and of the image of human relations reflected by it. … As a human activity based on commerce, art is at once the object and the subject of an ethic…. Art is a state of encounter.’ (ibid. p17,18)
‘Contemporary art is often marked by non- availability. The example of performance is the most classic of all. Once the performance is over, all that remains is documentation that should not be confused with the work itself.’ (ibid, p29)
Definition and critique of Bourriaud’s Relational aesthetics:
https://www.artspace.com/magazine/art_101/book_report/what-is-relational-aesthetics-54164
‘Relational artists rejected making conventional art objects, instead opting to engage audiences by creating situations that call for—and sometimes force—interpersonal interaction.’ (Artspace, 2016)
‘Rather than producing objects for individual aesthetic contemplation, Relational artists attempt to produce new human relationships through collective experiences. These practices have their roots in earlier art movements, namely Dada, Conceptual art, Fluxus, and Allan Kaprow’s “Happenings.”’ (ibid)
‘Relational art has met with criticism, most notably from art scholar Claire Bishop, who, while interrogating the kinds of relationships this art produces, argued that such artists as Tiravanija and Gillick do not so much democratize art as simply reinforce their pre-existing, closed art world and thus ignore its implicit class politics. For Bishop, Relational artist Thomas Hirschhorn (b. 1957) offers an alternative by highlighting underlying social antagonisms. For "Documenta 11," held in Kassel, Germany, in 2002, Hirschhorn worked with locals in a nearby low-income, immigrant neighborhood to erect a temporary structure that served as a site for community debates on the writings of French philosopher Georges Bataille. Composed of cardboard and scrap wood, the Bataille Monument’s “do-it-yourself” aesthetic willfully defied the refinement of museum and gallery spaces. Participants from the neighborhood could, and did, voice their opinions on Bataille in the monument’s makeshift television studio, thus becoming part of the art while viewing it.’ (ibid)
Artspace (2016) What is relational aesthetics? Available at: https://www.artspace.com/magazine/art_101/book_report/what-is-relational-aesthetics-54164 (Accessed 23 February 2020)
Bourriaurd, N. (2002) Relational aesthetics. Paris: Les Presses du Reel