Catherine David and Irit Rogoff, “In Conversation”, in Claire Doherty ed., From Studio to Situation, London: Black Dog Publishing, 2004, pp.82-89
Catherine David is artist, curator and Professor who has worked as a curator at the National Museum of Modern Art, Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris during 1981-90 and since 2002 work as curator and director of the Witte de With Centre for Contemporary Art in Rotterdam. Irit Rogoff is a theorist and curator who is also a professor at Goldsmiths College, London University, in the department of Visual Cultures. Nikos Papastergiadis is Deputy Director of the Australian Centre, University of Melbourne.
Through the text, I found term ‘un-belonging’ very interesting. Irit Rogoff mentions the idea of un-belonging. “How can we make un-belonging a kind of active realm by which to somehow relate to place and not through the identifications demanded by the nation state? … constantly trying to think of positionality-one’s constantly contingent, constantly shifting positionality towards place.”1
I see a connection between the idea of ‘un-belonging’ and the idea of the local- cultural artwork, which one could read differently when the artwork is placed in another country. I think this applies not only to site-specific artworks but to all cultural artworks. From my point of view the artworks which include culture, history and the story don’t necessarily have to be shown in the country of creation since the world is becoming more and more globalized. International artists and the way viewers interpret artworks are different from past.
Although their culture and the background could affect or change their ways of understanding, people around the world who live in countries which have a multi-cultural society understand artworks as individualistic. For example New Zealand is also a multi-cultural nation which already has 2 cultures forming one country and added to the bi-cultural background there are many people from another countries which makes New Zealand a multi-cultural country. I think the question what does it mean to have a creative practice in Aotearoa New Zealand is answered to a large extent by this idea- and offers an insight into how we should look at artworks in New Zealand and from New Zealand. Nikos Papasergiais says that “...the artist must develop ‘tricky’ strategies for engaging the attention of the viewer away from the spectacle into a new experiential filed where symbolic and material meaning take new twists.”2 However, I believe that even though art works are shown in the country of creation, not necessarily everyone would be from that country and although the work might be more successful, the understanding will still be differ to individual audiences.
1. Catherine David and Irit Rogoff. "In conversation", in Claire Doherty ed., From Studio to Situation, London: Black Dog Publishing, 2004, pp.84
2. Nikos Papasergiais, ed. ‘Complex Entanglements – Art, Globalisation and cultural Difference’, London: Rivers Oram Press, 2003, pp.6
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm interested in Rogoff's desire to actively try and 'un-belong' herself to a place, to its history and its story. You have pointed out that an individuals experience often influences the way in which an artwork is read (which I agree with), however I find Rogoff's ambition of 'constantly shifting positionality towards place' is an ambition that questions the validity of personal interpretations. It appears that in her attempts at 'un-belonging' she is trying to de-construct her own personality, her story and history as a means to understand another. Rather than just accepting the variety of personal histories attached to a place or country, it appears to me Rogoff is concerned with becoming intentionally displaced from her own knowledge so as to lose herself in a place.
ReplyDeleteJeong you make a good point abut the responses to and artwork differing for individuals of differing cultural descent. I also think that that is not the only thing that influences a reading of a artwork for someone. For example our gender. However our gender differences can also be seen as enculturated. As Amal Kenawy says in Gerald Matt's Interview "Most societies have ideas about gender difference that are incorporated into their values ad codes of conduct.This is one of the reasons that why one can say there are differences between the way women emotionally respond/act to experiences and the way men do."
ReplyDeleteI agree that it is these social ideas that influence a reading but am unsure that many different readings make an artwork more "successful". I think the most successful art work is that which touches and it relateble to many people in a similar way, regardless of ethnicity, location or gender.