Copenhagen’s Biggest Art Exhibit Gets It Wrong
by Ed Morris
[...] I loved every piece in the ReThink show in some way. But as an enterprise, as a totality, it fails to live up to the moment. This was an exhibit explicitly designed to contribute to the discourse around the Climate Conference and to “offer its interpretation of the colossal challenge the globe is facing.”
I did not find this aspiration fulfilled in the complacency of the exhibit’s overall organization for any number of reasons: Its predominantly gentle tone. Its predilection for name-brand artists. Its inclusion of so many gee-whiz projects (twirling lights, hanging raindrops, and so forth.). The general lack of participatory projects (People Speak and Superflex provided two notable exceptions). The cliché of investing art with the “power” of “questioning,” yet steering that questioning energy—which is not to say criticality—to such corny artspeak topics as “the implicit,” “relations,” and “kakotopia.”
-from GOOD.is
–
i often like to think that art and social change go hand in hand, that art can be a useful vehicle for not just raising awareness, but for proposing innovative alternatives to existing structures. mini-utopias, or perhaps less ideologically, social experiments.
at the same time, being immersed in an environment in which artistic practice is highly regarded, i have to constantly remind myself to not get sucked too deep into thinking that art has real power to enact social change – there are many obvious limitations. the above extract is from an article that gives a review of the art exhibitions currently on show in time with COP15 (you can read Part I here, where the author makes a list of artistic ‘possible errors’). while i understand very much the need for urgency and physicality, i certainly don’t agree with the ‘violence’ as suggested at the beginning of the article, unless if interpreted metaphorically. why is it that we need this to happen before people really take notice?













