• Home
  • Issues
    • Issue 28 | Fall 2024
    • Issue 27 | Spring 2024
    • Issue 26 | Winter 2024
    • Issue 25 | Fall 2023
    • Issue 24 | Spring 2023
    • Issue 23 | Winter 2023
    • Issue 22 | Fall 2022
    • Issue 21 | Spring 2022
    • Issue 20 | Winter 2022
    • Issues 19 – 10
      • Issue 18-19 | Spring 2021
      • Issue 17 | Winter 2021
      • Issue 16 | Spring 2020
      • Issue 15 | Winter 2020
      • Issue 14 | Fall 2019
      • Issue 12/13 | Spring 2019
        • Editorial and Introduction
        • Far East and Australia
        • Middle East and Africa
        • Near East and Russia
        • North America
        • Northern Europe
        • South America
        • Southern and Eastern Europe
      • Issue 11 | Fall 2018
      • Issue 10 | Spring 2018
    • Issues 9 – 1
      • Issue 9 | Winter 2018
      • Issue 8 | Fall 2017
      • Issue 7 | Spring 2017
      • Issue 6 | Winter 2017
      • Issue 5 | Fall 2016
      • Issue 4 | Spring 2016
      • Issue 3 | Winter 2016
      • Issue 2 | Fall 2015
      • Issue 1 | Spring 2015
  • About
  • Submit
  • Contact
Reading: FIELD Issue 28 Editorial
Share

FIELD

A Journal of  Socially-Engaged Art Criticism

FIELDFIELD
Font ResizerAa
Search
  • Home
  • Issues
    • Issue 27 | Spring 2024
    • Issue 26 | Winter 2024
    • Issue 25 | Fall 2023
    • Issue 24 | Spring 2023
    • Issue 23 | Winter 2023
    • Issue 22 | Fall 2022
    • Issue 21 | Spring 2022
    • Issue 20 | Winter 2022
    • Issue 18-19 | Spring 2021
    • Issue 17 | Winter 2021
    • Issue 16 | Spring 2020
    • Issue 15 | Winter 2020
    • Issue 14 | Fall 2019
    • Issue 12/13 | Spring 2019
    • Issue 11 | Fall 2018
    • Issue 10 | Spring 2018
    • Issue 9 | Winter 2018
    • Issue 8 | Fall 2017
    • Issue 7 | Spring 2017
    • Issue 6 | Winter 2017
    • Issue 5 | Fall 2016
    • Issue 4 | Spring 2016
    • Issue 3 | Winter 2016
    • Issue 2 | Fall 2015
    • Issue 1 | Spring 2015
  • About
  • Submit
  • Contact
Have an existing account? Sign In
Follow US
© 2024 FIELD. All Rights Reserved.
FIELD > Issues > Issue 28 | Fall 2024 > FIELD Issue 28 Editorial
Issue 28 | Fall 2024Past Issues

FIELD Issue 28 Editorial

Grant Kester

Share

Editorial | Fall 2024

Welcome to FIELD’s Fall 2024 issue. We are publishing this issue on the cusp of a momentous presidential election, with our country poised on the brink on incipient fascism. Following the recent catastrophic hurricanes in the southeast, rescue efforts were hampered by reports of roving bands of armed, white supremacists “hunting” for federal relief workers. This is symptomatic of a much broader assault on the structures of government in the U.S., encouraged and facilitated by Donald Trump. These attacks are the logical culmination of efforts by the Republican party to dismantle forms of state infrastructure that seeks to support the broader public, beyond the mechanisms of the private market (public education and libraries, voting rights, disaster relief, workplace protections, welfare, social security, etc.). These systems of public provision were achieved through decades of working-class struggle. Beginning in the 1980s the single-minded goal of conservatives in the U.S. has been to reverse these achievements, demonize government, and “drown it a bathtub” as Grover Norquist famously observed. Driven by right wing ideologues serving at the behest of capitalist economic elites, this strategy was intended to unravel the redistribution of wealth that followed the New Deal and that was carried forward by the Great Society programs of the 1960s. Over the past four decades that redistribution has been almost entirely reversed through regressive tax policies and cuts in government programs, with $50 trillion moving from the bottom 90% of the population to the top 1%. As a result, economic inequality in the U.S. today rivals that of the Gilded Age over a century before. The economic elites who benefit from this process are able to circumvent political solidarity among the working class by appealing to the racism of white workers and pathologizing non-European immigrants through an Americanized version of Renaud Camus’ Great Replacement Theory. What the first generation of neoconservative “thinkers” were too purblind and historically ignorant to realize is that the forces they unleashed with the “Reagan Revolution” in order to enrich their donor class, led, almost inevitably, to the consolidation of a neo-fascist movement in the United States. The rise of Donald Trump marks the apotheosis of that shift, with his attacks on human “vermin,” his mobilization of SA-like gangs, his threat to unleash the military on his political enemies, his attempts to censor and control the media, and his eagerness to create internment camps for undesirable immigrants. At the same time free speech on U.S. campuses is being throttled by conservatives working to suppress dissent regarding U.S. military support for the Gaza genocide. This is, no doubt, intended to lay the foundation for a more general attack on free speech, especially at universities, should Trump return to power. Meanwhile, Elon Musk and the super wealthy are pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into Trump’s presidential campaign, not in order to prevent a communist revolution that might end with them strung from a light pole, but simply because they don’t want to pay a slightly larger marginal tax rate.

This situation is hardly unique to the U.S., of course, as evidenced by the recent election of Björn Höcke, leader of the far-right Alternative for Germany, in the eastern state of Thuringia. The rise of the neo-fascist Rassemblement National party in France this year was only narrowly averted by a center/left alliance of the Nouveau Front Populaire and Emmanuel Macron’s Ensemble coalition. In this respect, France has pointed the way towards one possible response to the global rise of neo-fascism; a new “Popular Front,” echoing the original movement of the 1930s, that will bring together a broad confederation of political actors to challenge right wing authoritarianism. Over the past decade fascism has joined climate change as one of the most significant political challenges facing us today. Engaged art can play a role here, as documented by Greg Sholette’s special double issue of FIELD (Winter/Spring 2019: https://field-journal.com/category/issue-12-13/). Its role, of course, is not to serve as a singular catalyst for change, but rather, as one element within a broader mosaic of oppositional practices. The coalitional nature of a Popular Front movement requires us to move beyond the Manichean oppositions that are often encountered in contemporary left cultural theory. Here any form of resistance that fails to measure up to a prescribed model of revolutionary purity is dismissed as complicit or reformist. In the absence of any meaningful form of political action today, all that remains for art is to explore its own immanent conditions in an endless, recursive loop, modeling a properly self-reflexive criticality for future revolutionaries to emulate. In this manner, as Walter Benn Michaels’ writes, “[artistic] form in itself becomes the bearer of a class politics.”[1] The engaged art practices documented in FIELD suggest a very different paradigm. In this view we must acknowledge the necessarily pragmatic and imperfect nature of all political change, as well as its immense autopoietic potential. This doesn’t mean abandoning our ability to critically decipher processes of political appropriation and cooption, but rather, recognizing that these can be minimized, but never entirely eliminated. They must always be weighed in the balance with the contribution that any single gesture, however imperfect, might make to concrete and sustainable forms of emancipation now and in the future.

This “pragmatic” orientation, as Rodrigo Nunes argues in his essay in this issue of FIELD, allows us to multiply our efforts through collaborative interaction and alliance building, establishing “transversal relations where the composition between the two sides serves to transform them, increasing the power to act on both”. Our fall issue also features Paloma Checa-Gismero’s analysis of the various artistic and cultural interventions that were generated in response to the massive 2002 oil spill off the Galician coast of Spain. Like Nunes, Checa-Gismero points to the importance of a diversity of activist gestures. “Far from classifying and evaluating art forms as more or less appropriate in the unfolding catastrophe,” as she writes, “my hope here is to show how a multiplicity of art practices can constitute a choral ecocritical consciousness through which to document and denounce crisis, transform commonsensical narratives about our relationship to oil extraction.” This issue also features the first part of Sreejata Roy’s important analytic survey of socially engaged and public art in India, focusing on the period since the 1990s. Although often neglected in Anglophone literature, India has been an important hub of new activist and engaged art practices. The second part of Roy’s essay, based on extensive field research, will appear in our Winter 2025 issue. We are also pleased to publish Hande Sever’s interview with the Armenian artist, researcher and curator Ruben Arevshatyan. Here Arevshatyan explores the complex cultural politics of Armenia across the tumult of the twentieth century, as Armenia sought to define itself against the grain of Ottoman, Russian and Soviet imperialism. Finally, this issue includes David Guttierez’s review of Eva Marxen’s new book, Deinstitutionalizing Art of the Nomadic Museum: Practicing and Theorizing Critical Art Therapy with Adolescents (Routledge, 2020), which documents an innovative, decade long project that Marxen developed with the Museum of Contemporary Art in Barcelona (MACBA) between 1999 and 2009. Marxen was also the guest editor of FIELD #25 (Winter 2020), which was devoted to the analysis of recent engaged art practices in Latin America (https://field-journal.com/editorial/introduction-to-learning-art-and-resistance-from-the-south/). In her new book she explores the ways in which, as Guttierez writes, we might “build another political territory for Museums.” It is my hope that when the next issue of FIELD is published, we will no longer be living under the ominous cloud of neo-fascist Trumpism, or at least that we may have eluded it for a while longer as the struggle continues.

FIELD is available at: www.field-journal.com.

Grant Kester

  1. Walter Benn Michaels, The Beauty of a Social Problem: Photography, Autonomy, Economy (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2015), p.70. ↑
Share This Article
Facebook X Email Copy Link Print
Previous Article For a Political Economy of Counterpimping
Next Article Austria on the Far-right Frontline

Other Issues

More Reading

FIELD Issue 29 Editorial
Issue 29 | Winter 2025
2025 Global Update
Issue 29 | Winter 2025
Socially Engaged Art in India: Three Case Studies (Part 2)
Issue 29 | Winter 2025
Diagrams and Dreams: Stephen Willats’ Utopia
Issue 29 | Winter 2025
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!

You Might Also Like

Issue 28 | Fall 2024

Socially Engaged and Public Art in India: A Chronology from 1990 to the Present (Part 1)

Socially Engaged and Public Art in India: A Chronology from 1990 to the Present (Part 1) Sreejata Roy Introduction This…

80 Min Read
Issue 2 | Fall 2015Past Issues

Response to Noah Fischer

Sebastian Loewe

17 Min Read
Issue 28 | Fall 2024

Through the Nomadic Museum: Artistic Practice and the Committed Museum

Through the Nomadic Museum: Artistic Practice and the Committed Museum Dr. David Gutiérrez Castañeda A review of the book Deinstitutionalizing…

20 Min Read
Issue 2 | Fall 2015Past Issues

Agency in a Zoo: The Occupy Movement’s Strategic Expansion to Art Institutions

Noah Fischer

62 Min Read

FIELD

© 2024 FIELD. All Rights Reserved.
Developed by eStudio131

Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?