QUESTION: I want to use this quote, which I am quite taken with, to pose the question: what video pieces have you seen in a gallery which have stuck with you? How long did you sit with the piece? What about it made it a successful video work to you?

CONNECTION: This past weekend I saw an arena show which relived heavily on multi-screen installations (the 1975 "Still...At Their Very Best). The set design of the stage is based on a messy yet meticulously designed cross-section of a house. Scattered throughout this illusion is a number of vintage televisions whose content often changes based on the songs played and the city in which the band is performing. A lot of the themes of the show deal with similar subjects as the article (although with a heavier focus on our social media age). However, in this show the connection between "distraction, separation, and difference" is supposed to be through the music, not the arena (stand in for the museum in this case). To read an interview with the set designer, check out this article: https://www.hungertv.com/editorial/conceptual-designer-tobias-rylander-on-bringing-the-vision-of-the-1975-to-life/

COMMENT: This pessimistic damnation reminds me of current conversations surrounding definitions and practices of labour. The way we characterize things as "emotional labour" which were once normalized parts of our life - now they are extra. If the spectator is now a worker as well what is the labour they are performing? Is it placemaking, social, emotional ... perhaps most importantly - is Steyerl claiming this is voluntary or involuntary?

COMMENT: I find this quip about sound to be perfectly representational of this author's clear elitist views of art and how it is consumed.

QUESTION: I find this white cube/black cube gallery/cinema dichotomy very interesting. Do we thing these separations still hold?

QUESTION: Is a multiplicity of spectators not the entire point of a gallery?

SUMMARY: With a focus on the movement of time, bodies, and class, this article uses the site of the factory to investigate how political cinema and the space of the museum have become deeply intertwined. As true industrialism has waned in North America (with workers being retrained for remote jobs etc), buildings that were once factories have since been converted to "public" art spaces like cinemas and museums. Yet where the populous of the factory is disciplined, that of the museum/cinema is dispersed leading to a class based tension. Political cinema has largely moved within the confines of the "white cube" museum. Here, the spectator becomes sovereign; able to choose what to watch and for how long. This represents a distinct departure from the form of the cinema. The volume of video content in museums, especially with political tones, thus becomes un-consumable (at least for the individual - a multiplicity of spectators is called for by the author). For me, the quotes which most effectively summarizes the ideas of the article is: "cinematic politics are post-representational. They do not educate the crowd, but produce it." As "social factories" museums lack "an exit" and the political cinema need to revolutionize this state "is currently missing, of course."

QUESTION In this dichotomy of artist/curator where is the space for the duality of artist/curator?

Annotating this line to make sure everyone looks at it

QUESTION In the age of highly a commercialized art world, have we lost the way of meaningful spectatorship?

CONNECTION The story of the art gallery being connected to the opening of the palace during the French revolution has always fascinated me. Further, it reminds me of the insane scope of the modern art collection at the Vatican Museums, which celebrated its 50th anniversary earlier this year. In terms of the discussion on the contract between artists and galleries, here is an interesting quote form the occasion: “I was very surprised to be invited,” artist Andres Serrano told the New York Times. In 1987 Serrano debuted the photograph Piss Christ, depicting a plastic crucifix against a red background floating in a vat of urine. Conservatives and religious organizations lambasted Serrano for presumed blasphemy. But many years have passed since then, and the Church has broadened its patronage of all types of art, including the controversial. In fact, Pope Frances even blessed Serrano and gave him a “cheery thumbs up,” which the artist said surprised him even more than the invitation. https://www.artnews.com/art-news/news/50th-anniversary-of-the-vaticans-museums-modern-and-contemporary-art-collection-1234672533/

Once again I am fixating on the archive! In one of my other classes we focus on memory and the archive. Recently, we read an article called Venus in Two Acts by Saidiya Hartman. On our discussion board I will share the collage I made based on the reading for Dr. Tuer's class, and here I will share a relevant quote from the article: "So what does one do in the meantime? What are the stories one tells in dark times? How can a narrative of defeat enable a place for the living or envision an alternative future? Michel de Certeau notes that there are at least two ways the historiographical operation can make a place for the living: one is attending to and recruiting the past for the sake of the living, establishing who we are in relation to who we have been; and the second entails interrogating the production of our knowledge about the past."

I love this, and I believe it an important sentiment for us to take forward in our work. No matter what official credentials you are awarded the learning never stops. A degree is not solely a pathway to employment, nor is that the primary purpose of a degree like ours in my opinion. We are here to begin exploring, not to give ourselves permission to stop after two years

For me, this is an apt summarizing point of the conversation. This work is undoubtedly important, but without recognition and dispersion (and credentials) who sees it? Whose minds are being changed, being opened. Yet, there remains a tension of expecting this work from marginalized people to the point of their own exhaustion. despite the evident passion from bother interviewer and interviewee here, it is framed in this "sense of urgency" for opportunity and guidance. I find it interesting and perhaps a pseudo solution that Fatona has " a community of folks outside of the arts whom I am accountable to and who hold me accountable, so that I still grasp the material realities of life, so that I don’t go off into the rarefied space that both academia and the arts can take." We are on a path of diversifying academia, but do we have the support to make this project sustainable?

Connection: Here, I would like to bring up the example of the mural festival in Montreal as a public art initiative which is pragmatic. Each year the festival puts up new murals along St Laurent blvd. It is both catered to "up and coming culture" and to the idea of city beautification. https://muralfestival.com/about/

Comment/summary?: I think this is such a simple, brilliant, and pithy summary of the state of public art outlined in the article. Not only does it speak to the issues of the over commercialization and sponsorship of public art - because who in the public finds that pleasing unless they are making money from it - it also brings the narrative back to the historic role and community importances of the commons, the ancient publics. I can't help myself from finding similarities to the classic art historical tension of "art for arts' sake," or to match this language, pleasing - because it brings up the question of whether art, public or not, has to be pleasing, leading to an assumption which carries over into the decisions of what art gets to be public.

Challenge: I feel there is an argument here that our current "publics" have become online spaces, which lends a privacy to any radical or challenging art which courtyards and parks do not allow for. As a result the physical public space has become more sanitized and more interested in providing a comfortable background for digital lives. The article touches on this briefly, although it was written in the early nineties and points to tv, radio, the personal computer as giving rise to new civic sites. In modernity however, these attachments to the home have only become stronger.

SP: This simple question gets to the heart of one of the greatest ideological challenges facing museums today: what does the exhibit do? At a time when major art galleries in the world have become pseudo synonymous with tourist traps - its a valid question for our field to grapple with. Filipovic makes a strong case for the importance of the exhibition as a framework, but does not fully answer the question of functionality outside of the art world.

CP: This is why I am so interested in Fred Wilson and mining the museum. Mining the museum as a curatorial practice allows us to bring to light objects which made the art and its producing society possible and examine them side by side in the theatre of the gallery. https://bmoreart.com/2017/05/how-mining-the-museum-changed-the-art-world.html

CP: This footnote reminds me of this piece by Kent Monkman http://casualtiesofmodernity.com/our-facility.html "In Casualties of Modernity Kent Monkman invites us to enter a room in the Modern Wing of a hospital specializing in the treatment of conditions afflicting Modern and Contemporary Art."

CH: Me too, Elena. But, how do we find this art? How do we recognize it without running contrary to curatorial ethics? (this is how we got Banksy)

CM: I am interested in this theme of temporality throughout the article because I do not believe that exhibitions are fleeting, at least not anymore. Records and archives of their makeup will now exist not only through museums themselves, but through online monuments as well. Further, I believe permanency can actually help an exhibition to an extent. Art work in permanent collections is not temporal; however, the ideology with which curators present these works to us is not.

Q: Is there an exhibit you have seen which has had this effect on you? For me - I so clearly remember the photography exhibit at the AGO in spring of 2016 OUTSIDERS: AMERICAN PHOTOGRAPHY AND FILM, 1950-1980S. I was 16 and had just found my mother's old 35mm camera. She drove me into the city to see the show and then struggled greatly to get me to leave. The narrative of this exhibit began in the 1950s and finished in the 80s, showing how counter culture across North America consistently built upon itself creating a true sense of alternative homes for ones expression. This feeling was cemented through the use of physical space in the AGO, leading exhibit goers through the hallways of the sprawling second floor, I could feel these waves and echos of time - their weight, their influence - building into something eternal and special. It was the first time I saw true honesty in art (it was the first time I saw a Nan Goldin photograph). It could be that this is the innate magic of photography, but I chose this exhibit as an example because when Filipovic coupled together "impassioned thinking and visceral experience" I instantly remembered the feeling I had upon leaving outsiders, that everything I knew was changed.

SP: I think this quote is important as a summarizing point because it captures the essence of the overall argument: even as the art world changes and the public which works are shown in/to, an exhibition is an important, grounding concept. A good exhibition is one which allows for meaningful experience of art rather than passive absorption.

Q: perhaps this is the obvious question, but given the subject of our degree I do think it is important to ask. So, based on our course materials so far, what is an exhibition to you ?

Q: For those in the class who grew up outside of Canada, I am curious to know your impression of our art scene. Additionally, do you know about "can-con" and the rules surrounding the proliferation of Canadian works domestically?

Connection: I wrote a paper in my undergrad comparing the American Girl franchise to its Canadian counterpart, Maplelea Girls. During my research, two quotes stuck with me which I think add to the context of this article. One is from Andre Siegfried in 1947: "that there should be a country called Canada distinct from the United States is a mere accident of history, in fact, a political paradox. Nature has not conferred upon Canada any particular personality of her own" The other is from my dad, no specific date: "Americans go home and watch TV. Canadians go home and watch American TV"

I was quite taken with this imagery of "connective tissue" as an allegory for artists run centres and artist communities. So, for my summarizing point, I made a digital collage based on this, the importance of video in forming a Canadian art identity, and this sardonic chorus which echoes throughout the article: "Bureaucratic tendencies and the protestant work ethic". The image can be found in the class discussion board.

QUESTION: I would like to explore updated data on inclusion in these institutions and also take a look at the availability of these statistics locally (i.e. at the AGO)

QUESTION: I would be interesting in class to together come up with curatorial "strategies of resistance"

CONNECTION: Made what could be considered a meme but what could also be considered a suitable fashion crime for the guilty/an experiment in art world public shaming. Those committing curatorial malpractice should have to wear this shirt with a Guerilla Girls piece on it to their opening (will post photo on discussion board because I can't here!)

SUMMARIZING POINT: I think this idea of deconstructing greatness is very important to consider within the art world and the museums mentioned. A lot of these museums, and the ones we study at large are not only keepers and preservers of art (they can be taste makers too), but a lot of their purpose and revenue comes from tourism. the "greats" thereby sell and this problems extends past the art world itself. even when a museum like the MoMA can be seen as empirically improving their representation - I'd like to take a look at what is being sold in the gift shop. A large section of visitors to these museums are passive enjoyers of the art world rather than active participants like curators and critics who decide what's hung on the walls. Which ties into a point raised in the previous paragraph "if we cannot help others to see the structural/systemic problems, then we can't even begin to fix them" In summary, what I believe this article is asking is how do we educate a passive audience so that diversity in the art world is not novel but sustainable?

CONNECTION: Here I want to bring in an article from the spring 2020 issue of C Magazine (which we all received a copy of in our lovely little welcome to grad school tote bags at orientation). The issue of decolonization has so far been tackled by museums through adding more works by diverse artists to their collection, yet as Merray Gerges points out in C Magazine, there is little critical engagement with these works outside of mentioning the identity of its creator. He writes, "The demographics of criticism and journalism— and who edits it and how—shape the reception and historicization of cultural production. The above are worst-case scenarios of what can go awry when white critics and journalists don’t bother to engage with their subjects with care. But is the lesson here that critics should never cross identity lines? When does that turn into an excuse for writers from certain subject positions to avoid developing the necessary literacy to critique work by artists from different subject positions, especially given the tendency to criticize work by such groups in private rather than in public?" https://cmagazine.com/articles/editorial-2-3

QUESTION: This idea of temporality in museums is very interesting as it does come up a lot in their respective advertising and promotional material. Institutions will try out diverse programming surrounding a certain date or month where it is seen as a social and moral obligation to run these programs. But rarely are exhibits like these permanent fixtures. This raises an important logistical question to us as potential curators: if we take decolonization as the theoretical "tabula rasa" where do put the already collected pieces? Can they even be sold or stored?

SUNNARIZING POINT: I think this passage gives a good overview of the main tension running through the article, which really is the question: what does decolonization look like? I use italics here to mimic the brilliant use in this paragraph when talking about acquisition policies. When Alain Bonilla says there are programs being set up "in order to be as inclusive as possible" the use of italics gets at the main critique of the article, that inclusion does not have a causal relationship to acceptance.