‘All art invites social
interaction; yet in the case of SEA it is the process itself – the fabrication
of the work – that is social’ (P.Helguera, Education for Socially Engaged Art: 11)
Helguera identifies four types of
participation: ‘Nominal’, ‘Directed’, ‘Creative’ and ‘Collaborative’. During
Seminar 4 we discussed the extent to which SEA has the concept of ‘change’ as a
premise. Whether or not the artist is in control of the nature of that
‘change’, (and one would expect that it might be largely unpredictable), the
artist is engaging with a process that is likely to result in some sort of
change. Perhaps any social interaction results in change, whether it is measurable or not, long or short term.
I particularly like Jeff Kelley’s description of collaboration as
‘mutual transformation’. It would appear that in the most interactive and
engaged SEA the creative process itself assumes control, and a receptive,
open-minded approach by all participants (including the artist), can result in
real transformation on both sides. I am very interested in this apparently
‘magical’ process, as I have sensed it at times while working with children.
The need for the artist to cede control over the outcome is, however, central.
Perhaps aspiring to this kind of ‘collaborative transformation’ becomes more
difficult when dealing with the definite expectations both of a school
situation and of an Art and Social Practice module. There is certainly a
challenge there.
During the Seminar we were offered the quote, ‘participants in dialogue in socially engaged art are willingly engaged,
so they feel enriched by the experience’. Reading Helguera’s chapter
‘Antagonism’, Santiago Sierra’s confrontational work, and the spectrum of
‘voluntary’, non-voluntary’ and ‘involuntary’ participation, I am intrigued by
notion that participation may not be obviously enriching, but perhaps even
destructive. Of course, even the most negative participation is engagement and
part of the art. The artist can meet her ‘aims’. But does it really work for the
participant if it is not in any way ‘transformative’?
The challenge in the work I’m proposing with Resolis Primary School is
that the children are to some extent ‘non-voluntary’ participants, stuck with
whomsoever visits the classroom. They may have no interest in nature or in
Millbuie Forest. Part of my
role as artist is to reach out to them to discover that ‘hook’ that will switch them on to something they are interested in. I am currently exploring the idea of listening with all senses and being aware of the 'stories the forest tells us'. I'd like there to be 'change', but I don't feel I have control over what it might be - I just hope it will be positive and enriching. I think stories may be a good start.
Thinking of all this I researched a number of
projects that involve social exchange, change or the natural environment:
1. Creativity works www.creativityworks.org based in Bath
This ongoing
project works according to a social, not a medical model, to connect people of
all ages with mental health and addiction issues with their creativity.
Projects have included sculpture with ketamine addicts, and long-term creative
outlets for young carers. It does not regard itself as ‘art therapy’, but more
open-ended, using art in a therapeutic way. The process of collectively making
has clearly become central to the creative process, and the concrete ‘art’
produced is less important than the internal ‘transformative’ change on the
participants. The positive impact on the participants is well-documented. It is
quite collaborative; the projects are often run and led by the participants,
and the process is designed to be empowering and to inspire creative and wider
social confidence. I was particularly interested in the interpersonal ‘social
exchange’ and transformative outcomes of this project.
2. Anthony
Schrag http://generationartscotland.org - a socially engaged artist
based in Edinburgh
 |
| A. Schrag: 'A Perfect Father Day' |
Schrag’s
work involves a strong element of fun as the social exchange. His work has
included
‘A Perfect
Father Day’ and ‘Male Roll Model’ where he encouraged people of all ages to
roll down a hill. While the level of participation is apparently ‘directed’ –
ie he is asking people to do a certain thing, I wonder if one can really
predict the level of actual participation. What appears to be clear is that for
certain participants, these activities are quite transformative, and connect
children with their parents through the act of having fun.
I am
interested in the element of ‘fun’ as social exchange, particularly when
engaging with children.
3. Oct 2012
– Can Artists Heal Nature? - http://www.kcet.org/arts/artbound/counties/los-angeles/la-tierra-de-la-culebra-artists-nature.html 10 artists opinions at an open air event in
California
Environmental
art is well-established, and art that highlights environmental concerns
increasingly so. However, socially-engaged art that actually allows people to
experience and be transformed in ways that might have a positive impact on the
natural environment, are less common. I was therefore interested in the title
of this project.
I was interested in what Janet Owen
Driggs, one of the artists, said: The subject is such an enormous one, and one that I am wrestling with a
lot at the moment. Not literally, I mean I am under no illusions that 'art' can
'heal' 'nature'. But because I believe the question, because it is crass,
enables us to access some very important, elusive, other questions. It begins
to pry open:
1)
Access the ways in which we conceptualize, and (attempt to) experience, the
environment as a thing apart from ourselves.
2)
Consider ways of constituting "non-humans" as subjects.
3)
Think about our practices as beginning to not only imagine and represent
difference or change, but to perform it.
In an age
where certain natural environments and monuments are being granted legal ‘personhood’, and in which perceived
self-interest appears to be the ruling motivation, at least in individualistic
developed societies, I am interested in how one attempts, through art, to
bridge the gap between the human species and the environment
4. Zach
Pine, Berkeley http://www.naturesculpture.com and https://vimeo.com/92631547
 |
| Zach Pine project with homeless children, Ursula Sherman village, CA |
Zach Pine describes
himself as a socially engaged nature artist, and sees both nature and people as
his two kinds of medium. He uses nature as a vehicle for allowing people to
connect both with nature and with each other. As an artist he gives them access
to creative experience that ‘connects them to the earth’. He loves working with
younger children, despite the challenges, and says, ‘kids’creativity hasn’t been stifled in a way that some grownups has
been’.
I share some
of his motivations, and was interested to see how he approached his creative
work. I also loved the fun element of the social exchange.
Lessons in all this for Project Wild Millbuie!
No comments:
Post a Comment