theanyspacewhatever. Emphasis on the whatever.
The only thing worse than superficial conceptualism is superficial conceptualism that poses as social activism...not for a specific socio-political cause, mind you, but rather for the very soul of the social itself. That sounds abstract enough to be defensible, right? The phoney-baloney, egotistical nonsense that the art world tolerates and validates under the various descriptors of "participatory", "relational", "social sculpture" et. al., stands as a sad indictment of art's disconnection from the actual social sphere, which is more participatory, interconnected and vibrant than it has ever been. The sad contrivances of 'theanyspacewhatever' read more as the pathetic efforts of an out-of-touch parent trying to "get hip" with their kids--the kids in this case being an actual, healthy culture of social relationships which extends far beyond the networks on display in this circle-jerk of all exhibitions. What's more, the continued insertion of the individual artist's ego and authorship among these 'social sculptures' kind of deflates the entire overly-self-important exercise, doesn't it?
"How can art be used to connect people and experiences?" seems to be less the question than "how far up its own ass can the artworld crawl?" The radical democratization of practice that followed in the wake of conceptualism has resulted in a deregulation of all aesthetics; a new kind of hell of images, but without the production values. The artists who adopt the mantra of "anything is art" should be reminded that this is more interesting as a critical metaphor rather than adopting it as an operational practice. And while all this is fine, and works in a lot of cases, if you are going to ask people to fork over $20 and their time then you should give them something to look at. Give them something to do. Because the best form of institutional critique is to not show in an exalted, if troubled, museum like the Guggenheim.
The sphere of the 'social' does not need these artists to save its soul, it is doing perfectly well. Better than ever, in fact. Roberta Smith, paraphrasing the goals of relational aesthetics, writes in her too-forgiving review:
"The larger point is to resensitize people to their everyday surroundings and, moreover, to one another in a time when so much — technology, stress, shopping — conspires against human connection."
People in the city, unfortunately, or fortunately, are forced to interact with each other pretty much non-stop. Relational aesthetics mostly offers a critique in the form of interaction--it's an illusion of participation. It strikes me as delusional, and more than a little condescending. A good experience with art will naturally make your senses a little more acute, your mind a little more receptive. Nothing in this show even comes close. If you want to get all aesthetically relational, guys, quit pretending and go open up a bar, or join a band, or just throw a really big, awesome party. If you invite me, I'll come.
