In her book Artificial Hells (2012), Art historian Claire Bishop concentrates on what she calls participatory works, where constitute the central artistic medium “people and material, in the manner of theatre and performance” (2). Rather than looking at work that is she looks at work that is participatory as a politicized working process. “relational” She also concentrates on Europe, and on the relationship between participatory art and and post-Marxist writing on art as a de-alienating endeavor that should not be “Marxist subject to the division of labor and professional specialization” (3). Bishop refers to the social turn as a turn back to the social and the historic avant-garde, positing that the fall of communism in 1989 was a major of transformation” in this turn. “point Art historian Claire Bishop critiques what she participatory art, favoring provocation and relating participatory art to the historic avant-garde and performance art. For Bishop, participatory art or socially engaged art is defined as art fused with social praxis. Through the lens of participatory art, Bishop examines, tensions between “the quality and equality, singular and collective authorship, and the ongoing struggle to find artistic equivalents for political positions” (3). Bishop looks at theatre primarily as she believes that theatre and performance are crucial in the encounter that takes place in participatory art. This position sets Bishop apart in that she is most interested in participatory art that is provocative again a return to the historic avant-garde. – In part 1, Bishop The Social Turn: Collaboration and its Discontents, reference to Kwon’s idea of site-specific art practice and social engagement, or rather the itself as social engagement, the paradigm that her thesis arrives at. Socially “site” engaged art is today’s avant-garde, the carrying out of the modernist goal to blur art and
In her book Artificial Hells (2012), Art historian Claire Bishop concentrates on what she calls participatory works, where “people constitute the central artistic medium and material, in the manner of theatre and performance” (2). Rather than looking at work that is “relational” she looks at work that is participatory as a politicized working process. She also concentrates on Europe, and on the relationship between participatory art and “Marxist and post-Marxist writing on art as a de-alienating endeavor that should not be subject to the division of labor and professional specialization” (3). Bishop refers to the social turn as a turn back to the social and the historic avant-garde, positing that the fall of communism in 1989 was a major “point of transformation” in this turn. Art historian Claire Bishop critiques what she participatory art, favoring provocation and relating participatory art to the historic avant-garde and performance art. For Bishop, participatory art or socially engaged art is defined as art fused with social praxis. Through the lens of participatory art, Bishop examines, “the tensions between quality and equality, singular and collective authorship, and the ongoing struggle to find artistic equivalents for political positions” (3). Bishop looks at theatre primarily as she believes that theatre and performance are crucial in the encounter that takes place in participatory art. This position sets Bishop apart in that she is most interested in participatory art that is provocative – again a return to the historic avant-garde. In part 1, The Social Turn: Collaboration and its Discontents, Bishop reference to Kwon’s idea of site-specific art practice and social engagement, or rather the “site” itself as social engagement, the paradigm that her thesis arrives at. Socially engaged art is today’s avant-garde, the carrying out of the modernist goal to blur art and