It seems to me the ideal of the art making, ideal of an artist and idea of the benevolent, kind and good doing art has made the perfect shell on this thing called the art world who are those who protect and support artist on their way, that critiquing it, is close to blasphemy and an act of negative feelings. As it is a business one must behave businesslike and a scandal is truly risky, most scandals nowadays are about what kind of financiers there has been, where the money has come from. One true art scandal lies there, how about that social justice when you are taking money from oil companies and pharmaceutical corporations, not good. In fine art know the right people, right places, the ways of penetrating awareness, know the language, making awe, know the style of contemporary art, you will recognise it and then do it. Put your sign up there, so you will be seen. This is my suggestion. It is a con, a perfect place for a con artist and con art experts who do not do their homework, art institutions to con, copy in search for originality and a hit. Too much shock is too much, but this is preposterous and to talk about good things happens among friends, professionality is about cleanliness, order, finance and hygiene.
Capitalism the word is here and there a villain or an all giving and all solving godlike apparatus. Smashing it is what many yearn or wait to happen. What does the making of change in places of art mean for art, what does art do when it makes change or eventually evolves, and for the public, for the society as a whole, not just for those who consume art? Does change, a reform of any kind, and of anything, understanding, enlightenment, begin to happen after when media tells you about the game changing revolutionary art since places of art are nevertheless and regardless exclusive and they must be visible. Many people don’t dare to go in and/or are not interested, aren’t even aware of?? What is the intimidation, what is the scare? Million dollar question and acknowledging how much power lies in the art world. Making social change is very tricky in an arrogant expensive place, what does it even mean? Arrogance rejects extremes, unfamiliar, not fitting the aesthetics, the people, the interior, removing unclean noticeable flaws which makes irritating and appall laughably easy and fun. Carry your work in a common mall plastic bag does it as does choice of clothing. So much for fitting in. Trying to fit in is against art. Fitting in is design.
Question is for one who is interested in contemporary art and why, by what does this weird thinking and making get fuelled, philosophy and science? How well do places of art and artists take risks when it comes to choosing art for a show, safe bets for cashflow guaranteed? It is reputation that is on the line and financial support which has meant sanitary art is in sanitary places, safe. Trauma is behind the corner, what horror on the wall, is that art. Oftentimes art world likes to identify with social justice movements, which is interesting as the art world is known to be a place of unjust and nonmovement, progress is on the surface and in the technology, are gimmicks progress? I like to think not. Closed doors, tied down/shut up-culture, bring justice forward here is not understanding what the environment is and what is just, not seeing the problem there within or doing anything about it knowingly. I believe all happens knowingly, manipulation is in the visual, it is so strict. Social justice which is a well-meaning, good thing to have and be for: progress is that we will all be united one day, right? Well, it is truly progress. We all want seas be rid of pollution, right? Concepts like capitalism, it clearly is a concern, unity and what does it mean in capitalism, but to my mind not enough a concern. Art is probably not even touching the problems it must face, just petting them, it is there, we know it, we know but most we look at problems of others. Money is so good, isn’t it and there is never enough of money (artists are rated by money, money makes an artist) and art is never big enough… size matters as it dazzles, gives an experience. White walls are luxurious, stylish and everywhere in clean places where order is appreciated.
Art work which critiques capitalism in designer-like fashion for example by saying “Capitalism will collapse from within” conceptual artwork by Elmgren & Dragset, 2003, a painting represented by internationally recognised galleries, which is always important to mention for value, strikes as a slogan from a t-shirt. Work is placed on a wall casually hanging from one corner in front of a safe, so maybe it is simulating a demonstration and hiding a robbery, (constantly in mind to go to the streets but then run) turned into a luxury object. Hmm, so it is critiquing itself, the artists and telling what artists really want (what is in that safe)? What is in this picture that is untrustworthy? Maybe nothing but definitely something. It is funny and irritating at the same time, when I noticed the safe on the wall it dawned on me it is about the structure. Biggest joke is the white wall and all that whiteness around the work. Is it the price tag that is odd, that it is for sale, of course (you can find it on Artsy-application which is for selling art).Is this critique towards those who believe in capitalism as the work is on show in a grandiose tiptop place for art or just mere hopelessness in front of choices artists must make, place of warning of a burning world, burning from within?? Is art world a place for social justice with sense of style, a functioning one? Isn’t it biting its own leg as art world is very depended on capitalism, the system created for creating wealth and art being a very strong signifier of wealth, an asset? What does art world think of critique which is targeted on them and most importantly what does the art world do other than go on as it ever was? Only thing that moves it is the market and financial depression, where the money goes and is. What happens in this future collapse we are facing and who will go running from within, which is the place where art is, the within, and comes from, I hope. Walls and built things are the within, the within is something we rely on the most, the safe place we are afraid of losing?
I am sceptical of the amount of benevolence and altruism there. A constant concern for me when it comes to art is what are the motives there. As said art is a business and in business one does not play too much with fire, does one? Although when looking at finance world taking risks is essential and we pay for it. So it is good and safe to take risks in finance but not in art? Art world taking risks is an interesting issue as for instance those who collect art are known for not making risky choices. What does “Capitalism will collapse from within” say to a collector? How to make more money with it? How to hide when destruction strikes? How the art work will grow more valuable as there will be more banking crises, homelessness, unemployment, poverty, insecurity etc.? Is it a prophesy or lookalike hotel in a wall? Are artists functioning as oracles who know something about the system we rely on? One essential question is how does an artist work outside the art world? That is called outsider artist which is really funny. Is it even possible as the system is so tightly framed to be an artist outside? Many question that, still. You are not accepted by the right people, you are not an artist. You do not have money, you are not an artist. These rules are some I have come by and are a result of the current art system, which is fanatic for stars, visibility, greatness and excess. Massive and working in a strict manner simulating openness, an intellectual con which appears for example when art English aims to impress and experts create interesting sentences without much content: it looks good, what is it, did you bake it?
Quote from Michel de Certau, Practice of everyday life