The textbook for the Art Appreciation class I taught last year offered a chapter on protest art, an umbrella term encompassing artwork related to contestation – from caricatures of the 18th and 19th century to Pussy Riot performances. I asked students: why do the first examples of protest art – according to the textbook, at least – came into existence only a couple of centuries ago? Was conflict not there before, or perhaps it didn’t employ art? While this depends on the definition we choose for conflict and for art, what is normally conserved and transmitted through time is institutionally sponsored art; if it expresses conflict, that will be with other institutions and it would definitely not be considered protest art today. This led to an interesting discussion on how conflict and art intersect and how protest can be even identified in past cultural phenomena.
- RT @LucySoutter: An interesting list of current photographic genres as self-designated by photographers, including "research-based contempo… 1 week ago
- Happy anniversary, Fall of the Berlin Wall! 1 week ago
- I believe that no group of people is inherently evil. But I'll have to admit that Milanese bus drivers come pretty close. #ATM 3 weeks ago
- I believe that no group of people is inherently evil. But I'll have to admit that Milanese bus drivers come pretty close. 3 weeks ago
- Prayers for the Getty! 3 weeks ago
- The Haunted Archive
- Art and Activism (book review)
- Two Italian Masters
- Possible Convergences
- The Museum of Home Touch
- Neighborhoods of the Heart
- Hidden ID at Savignano sul Rubicone, Italy
- Do you collect photos of people you don’t know?
- Disappeared and back again
- Fashion photography in a new light (Bruce Weber at the Dallas Contemporary)