• 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 6 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 6 | Winter 2017 > FIELD Issue 6 Editorial
Issue 6 | Winter 2017Editorial

FIELD Issue 6 Editorial

Share

Editorial | Winter 2017

Grant Kester

Welcome to issue #6 of FIELD. This issue includes several essays that explore the theme of communism, as both a historically specific mode of political power and as a mythos that might be used to orient ongoing forms of resistance against capitalism. One could argue that we are still, almost thirty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, coming to terms with the loss of communism as a concrete referent for political transformation. Certainly the broader history of avant-garde art, extending back to the early twentieth-century, has unfolded against the ground of a perceived alternative to bourgeois capitalism, embodied initially by the U.S.S.R. At some points this connection was quite direct, as in Andre Breton’s alliance with Leon Trotsky, Diego Rivera’s vexed relationship with the Mexican Communist Party, or John Heartfield and George Grosz’s (equally vexed) membership in the KPD. In other cases the relationship was more attenuated, as with Adorno’s belief that compositional experimentation in avant-garde art constitutes a decanted form of revolutionary “consciousness”. This connection is so pervasive that it can be difficult for us to fully recognize its implications, not simply at the level of specific formal strategies or institutional affiliations, but in the deeper continuities between the figure of the avant-garde artist and the van guard revolutionary, and the modes of agency, autonomy and political transformation implicit in these subject positions. With the demise of the  U.S.S.R., and the transition of China into a mode of state capitalism, the tension between the actuality of communism and its imaginary form, which has constituted the preconscious horizon for several generations of avant-garde artists, has vanished. I would argue that we have yet to fully grasp the impact that this transition has had on the nature of contemporary art.

If history teaches us anything it is that the modality of revolution itself informs the society that emerges in its wake. Given the record of actually existing communism I believe few people are likely to be moved by yet another call for a violent communist revolution that doesn’t also give us some sense of whether the replacement for capitalism will be any better than the system it negates. I also believe that this same question animates a range of artistic practices in the post-’89 period that have experimented with new forms of affinity, solidarity and collective action. These processes are central to the aesthetic quality of new artistic practice, and to a re-configuration of the meaning of the aesthetic itself. But this work, in its often pre-figurative, scalar “modesty,” in its abjuring of rhetorical hyperbole, in its integration with the lives of communities engaged in acts of resistance for which “communist revolution” is an alien and even alienating concept can, easily enough, appear naively reformist. This essential question is taken up in my exchange with Danish art critic and historian Mikkel Bolt Rasmussen. In his essay “A Note on Socially Engaged Art Criticism,” Rasmussen outlines a set of critiques of socially engaged art and art criticism associated with this work, using FIELD as an example. After completing his essay Mikkel sent FIELD a copy and invited us to respond, with the two essays being jointly published in FIELD and the Nordic Journal of Aesthetics (http://nsae.au.dk/). This seemed like an excellent opportunity to open up further dialogue around issues that are clearly central to FIELD. We very much appreciate Mikkel’s generosity in reaching out to us.

This issue also features an essay by FIELD editorial collective member Carlos Garrido Castellano on Hangar: Centro de Investigação Artística, the first artist-run space in Portugal. Hangar is located in the Graça neighborhood of Lisbon, an Afro-Portuguese immigrant community that is facing gentrification. Arts spaces are, of course, often complicit in the gentrification process but Hanger is attempting to resist this tendency by directly engaging the existing community in Graça. The space has developed long-term residencies and exchanges with artists and curators throughout Lusophone Africa (Mozambique, Cape Verde, São Tomé, etc.), who often work in conjunction with neighborhood residents. We are also publishing an interview by FIELD editorial collective member Paloma Checa Gismero with Jorge Fernández Torres. Torres was the director of the 2012 and 2015 iterations of the Bienal de La Habana and is currently Director of the National Museum of Fine Arts in Cuba. In his interview Torres explores the unique role of the Bienal de La Habana as the only global biennial staged in a socialist country, and the complex ways in which Cuba’s unique cultural and social ecology inflects the normative biennial model evident in Venice, Documenta, Gwangju, Sahrja, Berlin, Sydney and elsewhere. Finally, we’re pleased to publish a ”Re-Post” of a fascinating essay by curator Alexander Bortolot on artistic cooperatives in revolutionary Mozambique. The essay reflects on the role of art in Mozambique during the 1960s and ‘70s, as the tourist-oriented traditions of Makonde blackwood carving were re-framed as a form of revolutionary art by the FRELIMO or the Mozambican Liberation Front. This entailed the creation of craft collectives, and a formal re-articulation of Makonde carving traditions towards norms of socialist realism, emphasizing “the strong, well-formed bodies of . . . Mozambicans” as an implicit contrast to the “puny capitalist”. The next two issues of FIELD (#7 and #8) will feature a two-part special issue focus on socially engaged art in Japan, guest-edited by Justin Jesty of the University of Washington. We’d also like to acknowledge the new on-line resource SEACHINA (Socially Engaged Art in Contemporary China), launched by Bo Zheng, FIELD’s Contributing Editor for China. The site includes a digital archive and on-line course materials for a MOOC that introduces researchers to sixteen socially engaged art projects in China. It can be reached at: http://seachina.net/.

 

TAGGED:Editorial
Share This Article
Facebook X Email Copy Link Print
Previous Article School in Hangar Program. Ghosts Exhibition. Visit of the Curator Organization, Engagement, Coloniality—Hangar: Centro de Investigação Artística in Lisbon
Next Article Acknowledgements

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 17 | Winter 2021Editorial

Ascribing an advocatorial role to the work of Zambian artist Agnes Buya Yombwe

Andrew Mulenga

50 Min Read
Issue 6 | Winter 2017

Artesãos da Nossa Pátria: Makonde Blackwood Sculptors, Cooperatives, and the Art of Socialist Revolution in Post-Colonial Mozambique

Alexander Bortolot

67 Min Read
Issue 16 | Spring 2020Editorial

On the Relational Transformation of Law through Common Sense, via Objects and Movements

Marc Herbst

65 Min Read
Issue 20 | Winter 2022Editorial

Images of Protest: Hong Kong 2019-2020

Mai Corlin Frederiksen

27 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?