Isabella Hargrave, Relational Aesthetics by paula roush

Isabella Hargrave/Thinking Practices 2007-08

Relational Aesthetics

During this MA arts module a group of like minded individuals met within an established learning environment and sought to promote learning through conversation. This model of distributed learning has covered a variety of theoretical approaches and processes within the arts and has encompassed an equal variety of teaching and learning tools and models ranging from library references and film shows to on-line discussions and interactive sessions. The artistic and theoretical structures and processes studied each week were presented by a team of two students each presenting the given theme through their own ideas, interests, media and pre-occupations. This interpretative approach allowed each artist to reflect on their practice and theoretical concerns. Generally, the presentations were enlightening and thought provoking and affected some re-structuring or re-shaping of the future practice of the artists involved. My own contribution revolved around the shifting roles of artist and audience and in particular how art has made space for what the art critic and theorist Bourriaud calls the ‘social interstice’ or what has become recognised as ‘relational aesthetics’ or, the field of interactive or relational art. Implicit in that consideration was the role of dialogue which can be seen as a necessity for exploration - a way to establish the boundaries of the interaction and a means to structure the reading and interpretation of the transition that I believe has taken place between art and audience.

I will be considering the shift in audience participation within the arts and the changes effected by technological advance, in particular the fluctuation this causes in the relational space: the space that lies between us. I will also consider how the role of dialogue, language and philosophy that now underpins art has developed into a narrative space for reciprocal exchange and how the collaboration between artists and audience has enabled existing forms, aesthetic concepts and user/spectator responses to be conceived as art. Bourriaud (b1965) developed the term ‘relational aesthetics’ in 1996 (1) and the following quote has helped to structure this essay. The development of Relational art ‘…stems essentially from the birth of a global urban culture… It is born of the observation of the present and of a reflection on the destiny of artistic activity. Its basic hypothesis – the sphere of human relations as site for the artwork- is without precedent in the history of art….’ (Bishop. 2006. p:165) (1) Bourriaud curated the now famous ‘Traffic’ Exhibition at the CAPC, Bordeaux in 1996 and while there is some confusion of the actual year that Bourriaud coined the term ‘relational aesthetics’ it was a term in use at the exhibition and appeared in the catalogue identifying a new way of working.

The shifting roles of artist and audience. Moving Away Historically, art has always involved communication. It has striven to illuminate, inform, to promote a shared experience and then later – to comment on the political, social (collective) and domestic (individual) condition. The artist’s role in this has gone from the mediator or vessel (for the translation of belief) to the promoter (of a consensus), the producer (of traditional objects or images), from artisan to craftsman to artist, from artist to commentator. This change in role historically affected an ever increasing distance between producer and consumer. This elaboration of arts role has become with time more refined and, necessarily, with new technologies, more diverse - ever changing to keep up or to reflect the changes in the contexts of our lives and environments. The author Richard Shusterman states that, ‘Art emerged in ancient times from myth, magic, and religion, and that it has long sustained its compelling power through its sacred aura.’ (Shusterman. 2002. p:175) And while this ‘compelling’ power might have been retained like a reflected glow from its religious heyday it has undergone change through time. It has developed an increasing variety of narratives; it has used symbols to affect meaning and it has commented on social, political and domestic situations. As art became more rarefied it was adopted by critical dialogue which sought to explain and explore. Language, in turn, began to shape, define and validate art through its otherness. Art was removed from the everyday and language began to determine and give ‘…form to our experience, providing through narrative a sense of closure and providing through abstraction an illusion of transcendence.’ (Stewart. 1993. p:13) All of this served to distance producer from consumer. Add to this, the element of philosophy; and art can be telescoped into the arms of a developing elite or intelligentsia. The author Susan Stewart further underlines the importance of language when she writes that, ‘....it is only by means of our inherited and lived relation to language that the temporality of our experience becomes organized and even organizable.’ (Ibid)

Stewart is here discussing the expansion of the novel during the time of the Industrial Revolution and the establishment of what she calls ‘fictive worlds that are removed in time and space from the context of situation’. These worlds came about through a desire to escape from everyday existence. This desire for escapism she suggests established a further distance between the producer and the consumer, causing the ‘symmetry of conversational reciprocity’ to be ‘replaced by the specialized values of performer and spectator.’ (Ibid. p:7)

This sense of distance can also be applied to the world of art, and so the notion of (them and us), artist and viewer and the space between them, arose. Escapism became a necessary element of the lives of so many during the Industrial Revolution. This was a time when the security of what Stewart calls the ‘circularity of history’ underwent distortion causing objects to be, ‘detached from the domain of tradition’ allowing art and artists to be ‘emancipated from its dependence upon ritual’. This she says saw an ‘increased mass of participants in the arts’ of both artists and audience which resulted in, ‘…a new mode of participation:’ i.e. ‘technology creates space for eruption’. (Ibid. p:8-9) If the Industrial Revolution was such a huge break with history what of the technological expansion that we see today? While the Industrial Revolution can be seen to have expanded our relational space, with the popularity of music halls, galleries and the great exhibitions, it can equally be seen to have reduced relational space with the mechanisation of the work place replacing people with machines. Cottage industries in the locality transformed into centralised factories. Leisure time was increased and work was separated from play. Today we deal with a similar historical eruption but a different expansion, the ‘mechanization of social functions’ (Bishop. 2006. p:162) for example, automated phone operators, ticket and cash machines, the development of computers and the World Wide Web. These developments can be seen as a break with history that has literally expanded the bounds of our futures to such a great extent that it defies prediction. So again we have ‘space for eruption’ (Stewart. 1993. p:8) ‘the zones of communication that are forced upon us create that space.’ (Bourriaud. 2002. p:16) And this space is infinite. Bourriaud, has said that such mechanization has gradually reduced ‘our relational space.’ (Bishop. 2006. p:162) but it has also, I believe, expanded the space of possibility. Once again man has found himself having to redirect his energies, technology has once again occupied his space and this in turn has created a gap. It could be argued that it is in this space or gap that the idea of relational aesthetics has developed and expanded not only in art but in commerce, business, technology and medicine. (2) 4

(2) The following illustrations are examples of domainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and relational databases used in business and the field of medicine It is interesting to ponder the similarities between them and the analysis used by art critics to describe the processes undergone in the relational field of art.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6938052-0-large.jpg www.medscape.com/content/2001/00/40/67/406728/art_jap4105.02.fig.gif http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20010021932-0-large.jpg 5

It is this momentary chasm, wrest between man and technology that could today ‘be greeted as a necessary step toward a revitalised reintegration of art into life.’ (Shusterman. 2002. p:183) Shusterman argues that if, ‘art, in pursuing its purist path, has lost its ancient existential power and its vital connection…’ then ‘life has lost the sense of its own artistry and potential for beauty.’ He suggests that the, ‘art/reality dichotomy must be overcome…’ that art should take on more life, while reality becomes more aesthetic. He goes onto suggest that we should ‘…develop those arts of living whose aesthetic potential has been philosophically ignored ….’ (Ibid. p:186-187) Taken literally, Shusterman seems to be offering the theoretical basis for a new art form, the art of the living, of everyday life or, in other words ‘relational art’. And so we have gone back to the ‘circularity’ of history, full circle to the idea that art should inform our daily life, should be integral to it and our existence within in it. Back to the awe and the wonder but, can it live up to our expectations? The role of artists and audience is no longer fixed but there are conventions that structure the reading of art whatever that art may be. These conventions are considered part of our socialisation. However, with the cultural melee that is today’s world these conventions are not all encompassing or indeed universal. But with the internet and the World Wide Web a universal language and set of social prototypes have been mooted and trialled and have become set as the basis for a truly universal code of conventions. New words have been invented, new methods of conversation established and the free flow of information and ideas is abundant. There is no doubt that the roles and the space between artist and audience have shifted but what has that shift created - collaborative symbiosis between artist and audience; between them and the ‘relational’ space now shared by the art work and the viewer?

In my presentation I explored key changes in the artistic time-line through the primeval form in this case represented by the jelly baby. This was inspired by my interest in the prevailing primeval form and a relational piece by the Cuban artist Felix Gonzales-Torres (1957-1996) ‘Ross’1991, in which a mountain of sweets was placed in a gallery and the audience could cross over from viewer/spectator to participation by eating or taking the sweets. But first, they had to overcome the social and cultural boundaries of gallery ethics. (3)

Moving Towards. But what constitutes relational art? Before Shusterman published ‘Surface and Depth’ in 2002, Bourriaud had been looking for alternatives and in the glossary of his book ‘Relational Aesthetics’ (1998) he offers this broad definition: ‘Aesthetic theory consisting in judging artworks on the basis of the inter-human relations which they represent, produce or prompt.’ (Bourriaud. 2002. p:107) On relational art he says it is:‘A set of artistic practices which take as their theoretical and practical point of departure the whole of human relations and their social context, rather than as an independent and private space.’ (Ibid)

(3)- Footnote: Much of Gonzalves-Torre’s work has an underlying political basis, in this case the pile of sweets mirrored the weight of his lover dying of AIDS. However, in his involvement and relationship to the audience his work is often regarded as relational. Cited by Bourriaud as an important forerunner to relational art it is interesting to note that the curator and critic Claire Bishop argues that because of this Bourriaud has sacrificed the political dimension of such works in order to stress the relational rather than the ‘antagonistical’ aesthetic. Bourriaud is in danger of implying that relational art work is empty and trivial (Bishop, 2006) whereas, the examples I have studied, raise political, social and economic questions in conception, content and in delivery. Image available from www.saintelizabethstreet.blogspot.com/2007/06/wor... [Accessed 19/03/08]

To have a clearer idea of art that could be considered relational it might be helpful to contemplate a few examples –The examples chosen break down into 3 broad categories, those that provide a service, those that pose a question and those that stimulate interactive action.

SOS: OK 2004. Coleman Project Space, Bermondsey, London. Paula Roush, Portuguese artist, lecturer and founder of msdm (mobile strategies of display and mediation). Founded on the principles of among others openness, access, equality and participation ‘SOS : OK’ created an emergency food relief programme in London. This project brought together artists, local historians, neighbourhood residents and workers from a former biscuit factory, ‘connecting local production with global issues of productivity, emergency and international solidarity.’ (Information and Images available from < http://www.msdm.org.uk/sos_ok/ > [Accessed 19/03/08] )

Rory Macbeth (1965) is a Scottish relational artist who on the 9th December 2006 conducted bogus gallery tours at Tate Britain. In a piece called ‘The Mare’s Nest: A History of Provenance’, Rory Macbeth rearranged the provenance of famous paintings presenting them as truths. Supported by essays these highly amusing talks can be seen on the following link. http://www.tate.org.uk/britain/exhibitions/artnow/liveworks/rorymacbeth/ [Accessed 24/03/08]

Vanessa Beecroft â&#x20AC;&#x201C; (Genoa, Italy 1969), cited as a relational artist she typically uses groups of naked or semi clad women to challenge both the gallery space and our reasons for viewing. The models recline, lean, sit, walk slowly and chat quietly to each other. They invade our relational space and make viewing voyeuristic.

VB 40 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; The Effects of Rules in Aesthetics 1999 MOCA, Sydney. Images (copyright Vanessa Beecroft: Photographs Annika Larson) available from http://www.kaldorartprojects.org.au/pastprojects.asp?idExhibition=34&idArtists=140&idImage=572 [Accessed 19/03/08]

VB35 - Show performance 1998.

VB19 - Piano Americano 1996.

Images (copyright Vanessa Beecroft) available from www.vanessabeecroft.com/performances.html [Accessed 15/04/08] Videos of performances available to view from www.vanessabeecroft.com [Accessed 15/04/08] To view other excellent but protected online images showing the models within the audience: VB 19, Persona. March 10th -April 21st 1996. University of Chicago, visit: http://www.renaissancesociety.org/site/Exhibitions/Images.55.0.0.0.0.html?contentID=750 [Images 750-754 Accessed 15/04/08]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanessa_Beecroft

Danish Artists Henrik Plenge Jacobsen and Jes Brinch work with familiar objects and scenarios that we read about but may have never actually experienced. Their work like Beecroft’s is placed in our relational space.

‘Smashed Parking Ground’ - 1994. The artists install an upturned bus and smashed cars in a Copenhagen square, suggesting the aftermath of a riot. Image- http://www.nicolaiwallner.com/artists/henrik/smashedparking.html [Accessed 12/03/08]

‘Burned Out Hot Dog Stand’ - Arhus, Denmark 1998. Part of the riot series, suggesting an event that you have missed. http://www.nicolaiwallner.com/artists/henrik/hotdogstand.html [Accessed 12/03/08] 10

Christine Hill. ‘Volksboutique Franchaise’1997. A fully functioning second hand clothes store.

Christine Hill is a Berlin based American. A ‘relational artist’ who offers services to the general public. She has worked as a check-out assistant in a supermarket, organised a gym and offered back and shoulder massages to exhibition visitors. Images available from < http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2007/07/interview-with20.php > [Accessed 12/03/08] 11

Santiago Sierra - ‘Persons paid to have their hair dyed blond’-Venice Biennale, 2001.

Image available from < www.santiago_sierra.com/index_1024.php > [Accessed 05/03/08] Sierra (1966) is a Spanish artist whose emphasis is on remuneration for example, for this piece the artist paid naturally dark people to have their hair dyed blond. Those who came were those that needed the money, mostly street vendors. The next day these normally invisible people were made visible by the colour of their hair.

Santiago Sierra. ‘Linea de 250cm’. Dec.1999 (Espacio Aglutinador, Havana.) In this earlier piece, Sierra paid 6 people to have a line tattooed on their backs. Image available from http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4211/883/1600/sierra.1.jpg [Accessed 05/03/08] 12

Rirkrit Tiravanija, (1961, Thai by nationality.) ‘Performance-Installations’: Interactive site available @ < http://adaweb.walkerart.org/context/artists/tiravanija/tiravanija1.html > [Accessed 19/04/08]

Image available from http://nymag.com/arts/art/reviews/31511/ [Accessed 19/03/08]. Tiravanija’s work revolves around the social aspects of eating and he often provides the means for a meal or cooks for people attending museums or galleries. He has also reconstructed his New York apartment and opened it to the public 24 hrs a day so they could cook, wash and sleep as they wished (‘Tomorrow is another day’ Cologne.1996).

Images available from < http://www.guggenheim.org/exhibition/hugo_boss_prize/ > [Accessed 19/03/08] Information from < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_Aesthetics > [Accessed 19/03/08] 13

Jorge Pardo (1963) a Cuban/American artist who is interested in both museum and non art spaces. Pardo’s projects create sociable spaces for interaction.

Untitled Restaurant 1998/2002

Bookshop Project 2000 ( Dia Centre, NY) Paul Lobe Haus, Berlin. Images available from www.diabeam.org/exhibits/pardo/project [Accessed 21/03/08]

House - December 4th 2007 – March 2nd 2008. In ‘House’ Pardo established the framework of a home in a museum. The work arranged in vignettes contained sculptures, installations and paintings. Image available from http://www.socialmiami.com/img2007/Pardo-Reyes-360x277.jpg [Accessed 05/03/08] Image available from http://miami-dailyphoto.blogspot.com/2007_12_01_archive.html [Accessed 05/03/08]

For a Video clip of ‘House’ follow the link. http://vernissage.tv/blog/2007/12/05/jorge-pardo-house-moca-museum-of-contemporary-art-miami/ [Accessed 19/04/08] 14

Jan-Erik Andersson, ‘A Cleaning Art Performance’ Sodertalije Art Hall, Sweden 1995.

By his act of ‘cleaning’ the roof windows Andersson allowed more light to enter the gallery space, symbolically cleaning the art. Image available from < www.anderssonart.com/perfor/p_c2.htm > [Accessed 12/03/08]

Inês Amado ‘Bread Matters’ Amado is an artist who uses bread as a universal medium between people, power and politics. The humble and levelling act of bread making, acts as a relational ground from which memories and reminiscences spring.

Bread Issues - Labirynt 2 - BWA Gallery, Poland

Pane-Partake. Alessandria Italy 2001. Images available from www.ines-amado.com/ia/os/os.html and www.breadmatters.org [Accessed 15/04/00] 15

To provide a definitive definition of relational art today is a complex task. From the examples I have considered, I have identified some common characteristics. For example relational art is considered to be an artistic practice, one that is centred in the lived experience with an emphasis on the social context. The work is usually participatory in nature and may involve the sensory in regard to objects, places and encounters which can be used to question perception. It is work that often questions aspects of social living as well as its supporting structures. The curator and critic Claire Bishop considers relational art to be, ‘open ended, interactive and resistant to closure, often appearing to be a ‘work in progress’ rather than a completed object.’ Art - ‘beholden to the contingences of its environment.’ (Bishop. 2004. [online] p:52-54. Available from http://roundtable.kein.org/files/roundtable/claire%20bishop-antagonism&relational%20aesthetics.pdf [Accessed 19/10/07]

However, one of my favourite analogies is that of the artist Liam Gillick who, announces that, ‘my work is like the light in the fridge….it only works when there are people to open the fridge door. Without people, its not art – its something else – stuff in a room.’ (Gillick. 2000. p:16) But is this true, is it just ‘stuff’ or is it more than that? It must surely be more than that otherwise why do it? Why obsess over it? It is an art form that demands discussion and occupies the mind of the critic and curator. They prod it and poke it into something beyond its own reality. Indeed, to think it is merely offering a service to the viewer is naïve, it is more than eating sweets, indeed it questions the very nature of what and why we do things and it does so in a way that is open to interpretation, open to narrative. And therein lies the challenge, that, ‘there is always the possibility of finding or devising an interpretation that is still more acceptable, more cogent and valid.’ One that might just, ‘oust the interpretation currently established as the valid (or most valid) one.’ (Shusterman. 2002. p:66-67) All of this necessitates language and dialogue.

Relational Aesthetics - Art, Life and Dialogue. Relational arts have arisen around the globe, some say in answer to social breakdown, political change and ‘trauma’, or perhaps, simply from a desire for more face to face interaction. (Weibel. 2005. Tate Britain [online] available from http://www.tate.org.uk/onlineevents/webcasts/spheres-of-action/ [Accessed 25/10/2007] ) It has a variety of titles, relationalism; participation; communication arts; relative performance etc. Some of the artists while recognising the, ‘essentially collaborative nature of their work’ refuse to be categorised within an ‘ism’ which would suggest that they do not recognise their role within a ‘movement’ but see themselves as groups working away from the ‘dialogues of high art’ (Lewis. 2004. [online] available from http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/art-safari1int.shtml Accessed 25/10/2007) Shusterman cites Danto in his argument that all works require interpretation and that ‘arts subordination to philosophy’ created by its partnership with language and dialogue ‘affirms that art has reached its end, is becoming more philosophical and is incapable of further progress.’ (Shusterman. 2002. p:178) in these terms then, to philosophise about art is to bring about its end, (4) so Bourriaud’s attempt to classify and philosophise relational work could be seen as an attempt to preclude or stultify its development and that might explain the artists reluctance to be feted as the new ‘ism’. However, such philosophy is difficult to avoid when the art is played out within gallery situations, as those very situations play into the hands of the critics and curators demanding dialogue and philosophy. It is much harder to do this if the art work is played outside within society. More and more relational art is being played out in the street, on an everyday level. Artists are walking the streets documenting rubbish, leaving notes, having conversations, Sigur Ros – playing a series of concerts that weren’t advertised - artists working for art’s sake. So much of this art is ‘happening’ that the ‘is it life or is it art’ question has become a difficult one to answer. Maybe because finally, life and art have become one?

(4) The philosopher and art critic Arthur Danto (1981,1986) argued the death of art in the 1980,s. Since then he has clarified this position saying it was a story of art coming to an end, ‘we are emerging from the era of art into something else the exact shape and structure of which remains to be understood.’ (Danto. 1997.p:4). So is philosophy now the new art? ‘art seeks not beauty but philosophy’ (G.W.F Hegel. 1993. P:9)

‘Art participates in the organisation and reorganisation of experience… the making and remaking of our worlds.’ – Philosopher Nelson Goodman. (Hall and Metcalf. 1994. p:175)

This has never been more true than today and If we think that art is removed from society then I think we need to think again, – today art is everywhere. Public art is more evident than ever before, references to art works and movements litter advertising campaigns and cartoons, it informs all our visual imagery and provides research material for design ideas that fill our houses and adorn our walls. ‘…the history of art as a tool box.’ Secondary sources have become acceptable to artists and visual referencing; manipulation and re-interpretation have become key concepts. (Stretcher. 2002. [Online] available from < http://www.stretcher.org/archives/il_a/2003_02_25_il_archive.php > Accessed 19/10/2007) Art works are sold in art hypermarkets – museums and galleries abound and try to break down their ‘otherness’ through late night and social events in which the art is the back drop for conversation and discussion. Maybe, we are a truly art centred society in which every nuance of life is mirrored back and forth in a myriad of media. Is relational art an extension of this society? Or is it a re-emergence of the 60’s happenings or a redressing of the balance between high art, that ‘exalted’ in galleries, and the predominance of the visual image all around us, for want of a better description – ‘low’ art, that dependent on borrowed images and references – but set in new contexts and leading to new interpretations? (5) I am of the persuasion that the position of ‘high art’ has been deflected in not what I consider a dumbing down, but in an art explosion based around a re-positioning of high art and a re-interpretation of what is art supported by a wealth of new mediums, materials and methods of production. Shusterman writes that ‘works of art, like miraculous acts of God, transfigure the commonplace and require special interpretation, while ordinary mundane realities do not.’ (Shusterman. 2002. p:185) But what happens when ‘ordinary mundane realities’ are proposed as art? If we consider relational art to be based in the ordinary, the mundane, then is it seeking, ‘...the holy grail of self-reflexive criticality.’ through ‘special interpretation’ (Krauss.1999. p:56) – or is it art made out of a society subsumed by art and seeking to redress the balance, to return art to the centre of daily life and experience? Which position does it occupy – is it breaking down barriers or merely climbing and standing on them saying “look at me”. Does it seek to destroy the aura or merely try to restructure the domestic interface? (5) For further discussion on this see Bourriaud. – (2002). Post Production. – Culture as a screenplay. How Art Re-Programs the world. Bourriaud expands the notion of re-contextualisation of the old, discussing the sampler, the hacker and the programmer as mechanisms for the re- assembly of the toolbox of history within a new context.

I guess the answer will depend on whether you think art is separate, that it is, removed from daily life and experience. However, one thing is apparent; the role of dialogue is paramount to relational aesthetics perhaps more so than the work itself. The work requires, even necessitates, dialogue and documentation in order to occupy the realms of ‘high art’, to validate its position, in order to record that position in the history and development of art, to provide a point of reference. Equally it requires, philosophy, to give its meanings ‘genuine truth and life.’ (GWF Hegel 1993. p:13)

As the relational projects become more elusive and ephemeral the range of documentation and analysis and dialogue seem to grow: proposals, manifestos, description, detailed logs of events, conversations, discussions, arguments, disputes; negotiations; reflections after the event; correspondence; retrospective surveys, 3rd person narratives, catalogues, essays and critical commentary. There is so much written about this form of art, maybe because the experience it produces is fleeting, transitory and personal. There is no evidence of the art, only the feeling that you have experienced something and a photograph or a letter written provides a souvenir of the experience, a memory of last week. And yet who is relational art for, bearing in mind that those that have written about this art form, largely see it as work responding to the lack of connections, trying to repair, ‘weaknesses in the social bond’ . (Bourriaud. 1998. p:37)

Is it for everybody on the street or for an elite that practise a sensibility and a dialogue that maintains the role or at least the dialogue of high art? I would argue that the situations set up by relational artists connect like minded people and that the relations produced are ‘fundamentally harmonious’ because they are ‘addressed to a community of viewing subjects with something in common.’ ; the subject, the environment, the situation, the time of day, the terminology, the language, etc. (Bishop. 2004. p:68 [online] Available from http://roundtable.kein.org/files/roundtable/claire%20bishopantagonism&relational%20aesthetics.pdf [Accessed 19/10/07] So does relational art stem from a social or perceived rootlessness leading to a desire to restructure the domestic interface, or is its art’s equivalent of putting the kettle on? Or to quote Foster ‘Perhaps discursivity and sociability are in the foreground of art today because they are scarce elsewhere.’ (Bishop. 2006. p:194) 19

In conclusion maybe, relational art is ultimately seeking to achieve a feeling of collective spiritual being, such as that achieved through carnival when people of all walks of life come together as one, perform as one and share the same experience: where the interpretation is equally as collective as the experience itself where, ‘Art is a state of encounter.’ (Bourriaud. 2002. p18) We might never know fully but we can talk about it. Like relational art this essay is ‘open ended, interactive and resistant to closure’ (Bishop 2004). Diffident to closure it may be, but I end with the observation that while Bourriaud believes that ‘sacredness is making a comeback, here, there and everywhere’ and whilst he sees this as a ‘regressive fantasy’ and presses for a new synthesis, he suggests that ‘in a muddled way we are hoping for the return of the traditional aura;’ but that the ‘aura’ has slipped from the work to the space of interaction between the audience and the work. (Bourriaud. 2002. p:60-61) Because of this ‘time is used as an art material’ where the work becomes the, ‘...terrain of special experiences.’ (Ibid p:103) ‘…lending itself to the formation of boundaries and to a process of interpretations delimited by our experience with those boundaries.’ (Stewart 1993. p:13) And so I believe, the aura of time is gifted to our works, the viewers left with recollections pieced together in a collective memory, transitory, fleeting; never whole. The technological ‘eruption’ leaves us examining the past, searching for the signposts that indicated this future. Maybe this is the new synthesis that Bourriaud calls for? And while this may or may not be true it is interesting to note that I and many of my colleagues are dealing with time and the spaces in-between and are seeking a reconnection or reconciliation with something, someone, somewhere that may have slipped into the gap created by recent technological upheaval.

Bibliography Books Kenneth L. Ames., (1994). Outside Outsider Art. In: Hall and Metcalf (eds.) The Artist Outsider. Washington and London, Smithsonian Institute Press: pp. 255. Michael Archer, (1997). Art Since 1960. London: Thames and Hudson. Emma Barker, (ed.) (1999). Contemporary Cultures of Display. New Haven and London in association with The Open University: Yale University Press. Claire Bishop ed. (2006) Participation - Documents of Contemporary Art. Whitechapel, London. The MIT press Cambridge, Massachusetts. Nicholas Bourriaud., (1998). Esthétique Rélationnelle. Dijon, France: les Presses du Réel. Nicholas Bourriaud., (2002). Relational Asthetics. (English edition translated by Simon Pleasance and Fronza Woods), Dijon, France: les Presse du Réel. Nicholas Bourriaud (1998) Relational Aesthetics Les Presses du Réel, translated 2002, collection Document sur l’art. Nicholas Bourriaud Relational Aesthetics 1998 in Participation, Documents of Contemporary Art, Bishop (ed), 2006,Whitechapel, London: The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts. Bendetto Croce., (1922) Aesthetic as Science of Expression and General Linguistics. Translated by Douglas Ainslie, Rev. (ed). London: Macmillan. Arthur C. Danto., (1981) The Transfiguration of the Commonplace. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Arthur C. Danto., (1997). After the End of Art, Contemporary Art and the Pale of History – The AW Mellon lectures in the Fine Arts 1995 Bollingen series xxxv:44, Princeton University Press, Princeton New Jersey. Nelson Goodman,.(1984). Of Mind and Other Matters. Cambridge Massachusetts, Harvard University Press. Liam Gillick,. (2000) Renovation Filter – Recent Past and Near Future. Bristol: Arnolfini. p16 Michael D Hall and Eugene W. Metcalf Jr.(eds.) with Roger Cardinal, (1994). The Artist Outsider – Creativity and the Boundaries of Culture. Washington and London: Smithsonian Institution Press. GWF Hegel., (1993). Introductory lectures on Aesthetics. London: Penguin. Rosalind Krauss., (1999). A Voyage on the North Sea: Art in the age of Post-Medium Condition. (Walter Neurath Memorial Lectures). London: Thames and Hudson. ‘the holy grail of self-reflexive criticality’ Berel Lang (ed) (1984) The Death of Art. New York, Haven Publishers. Perin,. (1994) In: Hall and Metcalf (eds.) The Artist Outsider. Washington and London, Smithsonian Institute Press: p:175. 21

Richard Shusterman., (2002). Surface and Depth - Dialectics of Criticism and Culture. New York, Itaca and London: Cornell University Press. Susan Stewart., (1993). On Longing - Narratives of the Miniature, the Gigantic, the Souvenir, the Collection. Durham and London: Duke University Press.

Periodicals, magazines, articles. Art and Design, Anna Harding (guest editor)., (1997). Curating - The Contemporary Art Museum and Beyond. Art and Design Profile no. 52. (part of Art and Design vol.12 ½) Nicola Kearton ed., London, Great Britain: Art and Design an imprint of Academy group Ltd. London. (pp IV-V) ISBN: 1 854 90 236 9(UK) October. Claire Bishop. (Fall 2004) Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics. October ed. 110, October Magazine Ltd and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (pp51-79). TATE ETC. Issue 2/Autumn 2004. What are you looking at? Vanessa Beecroft. (pp33-35)

Online. ‘Apparently’ by Ben Booth, Grant Dale, Laura Hill, Kylie Johnson and Di Klaosen. [online] Available from: < www.inflight.com.au/past/2004/apparently.html > [Accessed 03/11/07]. Art of Post Production and sampling new cultural context. [online] Available from: < http://straddle3.net/context/03/en/2004_02_10.html > [Accessed 03/11/2007]. BBC Four, Interview with Ben Lewis. Is relational art a new movement? [online] Available from: < http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/art-safari1-int.shtml > [Accessed 25/10/2007]. Claire Bishop., (2004). Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics [online PDF] available from: < http://roundtable.kein.org/files/roundtable/claire%20bishop-antagonism&relational%20aesthetics.pdf > [Accessed ? 08] Etay., David Johnston on communications aesthetics. [online] Available from: < www.ciac.ca/.../archives/no-22/en/oeuvre1.htm > [Accessed 03/11/2007]. Rosalind Krauss. 1999. A Voyage on the North Sea: Art in the age of Post-medium Condition – (Walter Neurath Memorial Lectures) Thames and Hudson 1999. [Sections online] Available from: < http://sun3.lib.uci.edu/~scctr/wellek/krauss/ > [Accessed 20/03/08]. Rory Macbeth, Tate Britain. (09/12/2006). The Mare’s Nest: A History of Provenance [online image and video link] Available from < http://www.tate.org.uk/britain/exhibitions/artnow/liveworks/rorymacbeth/ > [Accessed 17/03/08]. P.L.A.C.E. (Partnership learning through art, culture and the environment, introduction to relational art). [online] Available from: < http://place.unm.edu/relational_art.html > [Accessed 19/10/2007] Jaques Ranciere - Frankfurt, August 2004. The Emancipated Spectator (unpublished conference paper), ‘…spectatorship is not the passivity that has to be turned into activity. It is our normal situation.’ [online] Available from: < http://theatre.kein.org/ > [Accessed 18/10/2007]. Relational art from the 90’s to now. [online press release]. Available from: < http://www.sfai.edu/Event/Event.aspx?eventID=850&navID=213&sectionID=7 > [Accessed 03/11/2007]. 22

Jamie Robinson and Peter Lewis. In the wastelands: two artist curators in conversation. [online] Available from: < www.slashseconds.org/.../gbrett/index.php > [Accessed 18/10/2007]. Stretcher. (October 18th 2002). Bourriaud in interview with Karen Moss by Stretcher [online] Available from: < http://www.stretcher.org/archives/il_a/2003_02_25_il_archive.php > [Accessed 19/10/2007]. Peter Weibel,. (10/12/2005). Spheres of Action: Art and Politics seminar Tate Britain. The Political Revolution of the Neo-Avant Garde. ‘Relational aesthetics is a positive expression of trauma, – an impossibility to stop.’ [online] Available from: < http://www.tate.org.uk/online events/webcasts/spheres_of_action/ > [Accessed 25/10/07]. Wikipedia, Introduction to Relational Art. [online] Available from: < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_Aesthetics > [Accessed 19/10/2007]. Relational Data bases Prior Art, Relational Models/Databases. Diagram exploring the relational interface. [online image] Available from: < http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6938052-0-large.jpg > [Accessed 03/11/2007]. Prior Art, Relational Models/Databases. Diagram exploring the relational interface. [online image] Available from: < http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6938052-0-large.jpg > [Accessed 03/11/2007]. Comparison of virtual learning communities and distributed communities of practice. [online image] Available from: < www.cjlt.ca/ca/content/vol29.3/cjlt29-3_art_7-tab1.jpg > [Accessed 03/11/2007]. Relational interpretation.[online image] Available from: < www.rivistadipsicologicalinica.it/english/number1/images/imm1-artCarligif > [Accessed 03/11/2007]. Relational Database < http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20010021932-0-large.jpg > [Accessed 03/11/2007]. Medical relational model [online image] Available from: < www.medscape.com/content/2001/00/40/67/406728/art-jap4105.02.figl.gif > [Accessed 03/11/2007].