By Tom Sellar
By Jennifer Krasinski
By Jennifer Krasinski
By James Hannaham
By Tom Sellar
By Tom Sellar
By Miriam Felton-Dansky
By Tom Sellar
A year ago this week, I published an article in the Voice about art and Occupy Wall Street. Having written for years about art and resistance played out mostly as a theoretical or formal exercise, the occupation in Zuccotti Park felt like a miracle, a genuine efflorescence of nonviolent protest. Inspired by occupations and uprisings around the globe, OWS—despite all its problems—represented a moment in which people came together and created a brief, provisionally utopian community where art and living converged.
It was widely remarked on at the time that the art world—well-known artists and others involved in the institutions of art—did not figure prominently. Instead, many participants came from fields like anthropology, geography, or public medicine. But now that Arab Spring, Occupy, and the global "movement of squares" have receded and art has stepped back into its customary role, analyzing and historicizing events by turning them into objects and showcasing them in exhibitions, a few questions arise:
Is contemporary art politically useless? Does it serve only as a bystander, offering smart academic responses—or worse, packaging revolution into edgier-than-average commodities to sell to the very elites that these movements challenged? Does art lay the ground for future insurrections, or merely undergird a whole system of capitalist thought and institutions that have to be changed before anything else can change?
Let's look at a few local examples.
Occupy Museums at Momenta in Brooklyn (56 Bogart Street, momentaart.org) currently finds one of the best-known OWS art groups, which held general assemblies in major New York museums (and, more problematically, "occupied" the Berlin Biennale this summer), moving into a new phase in an alternative space in Bushwick. The title of the project, "Occupy Your BFF," refers to the Bloomberg Family Foundation, one of Momenta's supporters. A text on the wall, scrawled OWS-style on the inside of a cardboard pizza box, describes how Bloomberg's foundation, set up in Delaware, has drained New York of potential tax revenue and represents "the private takeover of the public sector; part of a quiet corporate revolution: a grab-it-all moment for the 1 percent."
"Occupy Your BFF" obviously retains the rhetoric of OWS and doesn't shy away from critique. But when a group founded on protesting in museums sets up residence in a white cube space, it obviously changes the nature of its mission and message. Occupy Museums in MOMA and the Whitney, both of which I attended, felt spectacular—in all senses of that word—and historically significant. Here, they've reverted to something more familiar and programmed: a combination of social practice and institutional critique.
A longer view of radical history is offered by Hito Steyerl in her first U.S. solo exhibition at e-flux (311 East Broadway, e-flux.com). The video Adorno's Grey (2012) tackles the theory-versus-praxis conundrum, focusing on an episode in the summer of 1969 in which the German philosopher Theodor Adorno fled a lecture hall when female student activists bared their breasts, after what turned out to be his last lecture (Adorno died in August 1969). Did these belligerent "protest breasts" (not sexual, and not maternal) kill Adorno, the video asks? And was this gesture a critique of theory? The theory-praxis dialectic is addressed in an oblique way in the video when a (male) activist recounts using Adorno's Dialectic of Enlightenment—the actual book—as a shield during a protest, protecting him from police brutality.
Steyerl's November (2004) is also couched in the post-revolutionary ethos. (Its title has particular resonance for art folks, since the initially radical American art journal October, named after Eisenstein's film about the 1917 Russian October Revolution, spawned its own, anonymous parody in 2006, titled November.) The video examines how devices in films from Costa-Gavras's State of Seige (1973) to Bruce Lee's martial arts served as actual templates for '70s German radicals—in the same way images moved across the globe last year, often via the Internet, spreading insurrectionary contagion.
"Unrest: Revolt Against Reason" at Apexart (291 Church Street, apexart.org) is more of a cataloging venture—and similar in many ways to the recently closed "Ruptures: Forms of Public Address" at Cooper Union. Both feature(d) artists' renditions of protest signs, videos showing actual protests, and objects that mine the psychology and aesthetics of activism, in which passion and adrenaline contrast sharply to the anesthetized atmosphere of most gallery spaces.
It's hard to say, after spending the past year in the streets and now in Apexart, what Claire Fontaine's protest-style cardboard signs with text imprinted by smoke, or Tomas Rafa's video of European and American protest marches around racism, add to the experience or revolt—or how they might prefigure or inspire actual activism. Mostly, they retool it for art. "Ruptures" was similar, but somewhat more substantial, with the civil rights paintings of Doug Ashford (who was in Group Material in the '80s); Ida Applebroog's wearable sandwich boards with hilarious slogans like "I have a rhinestone uterus and a platinum vulva" or "Stop the music I'm an artist goddammit"; street signs by REPOhistory, which were actually installed in the financial district in the '90s; and videos by Sharon Hayes, Mircea Cantor, and Krzysztof Wodiczko.
I would like to add the following to the list. Thank you. http://romanblog2.blogspot.com/2011/10/images-from-no-comment-exhibition.html?m=1
Political Art is just corporate philanthropic ideology in new clothes, populist rhetoric, bourgeois entertainment and market. Its social function is to freeze social layers through the aesthetization of politics. Political art is part of the corporate agenda and not only has nothing to do with change, but it's just made up to stop change. Political art is opium for the people and leisure time for the 1%.
Political art in the last year or so is mostly cartoons orPhotoshop collages---look on anybody's news feed and the political pictures on it is primarily from the right wing-----The Left has nothing solid to sayThe pics from the left are vapid and transparent and have no solid arguments to stand on--There is no way thaqt the left canshow anything positive about the results of Obamas term in the Whitehouse--And the drug addled OWS only spouts gibberish or avoids answering question as to what their purpose is. The right wing has plenty of solid issues to complain about and offers real solutions to the financial disaster that has been destroying the country during the last four years. No matter who "wins" the election (whoever the Rothschilds install) we are in trouble Israel controlls the US govt., owns everybody in government , the media the worlds counterfeit money and the gallerys of Chelsea. where right wing art is banned.
Good article. You might also find Peter Krashes recent show at Theodore Art (right below Momenta) of interest. Attached is a link to a radio interview in which Peter discusses his art and activism (pictures included). When you opened the link, click on "Thomas", the name of the interviewer:
@ManBartlett @OWSArtsandLabor The work in my UNOCCUPIED exhibition earlier this year were definitely inspired by OWS: http://t.co/3TV1bRH3