Eastern European Contemporary art

National research policies in Europe have, in recent years, increasingly encouraged public-private collaboration, commodification of research results and have made public funding increasingly competitive. Such moves blur the boundaries between public and private sectors and could subject research in higher education institutions (HEIs) to European Union (EU) primary law. This might lead to unintended consequences. In particular, the application of economic provisions of EU primary law might require even further commodification. To explore this perspective, the article analyses national research policies of three countries (Germany, the Netherlands, and England), which have moved towards commodification of HEI research as to the potential of spill-over from EU competition law into these national policies. In doing so, it employs an interdisciplinary approach combining policy and legal analysis.

Сотрудница Латвийского центра современного искусства (LCCA), сокуратор павильона Латвии на LVIII Венецианской биеннале, организатор и соорганизатор ряда выставок, посвященных современному искусству Латвии, Инга Лаце рассказала Валерию Леденёву об официальном и неофициальном искусстве страны в период СССР, проблемах русскоязычного комьюнити в Латвии, о том, как в этом году будет выглядеть национальный павильон — и почему она решила делать выставки об искусстве диаспоры.

Мы хотим проверить, возможно ли путём нарративного анализа доказать, что Пелевин пишет один мегатекст, как утверждает, например, Яворник. Нас интересует, насколько Пелевин схематичен в нарративной конструкции своих текстов. Кроме того сборник рассказов П5 вышел на пятнадцать лет позже романа Жизнь насекомых, что позволяет нам сравнить произведения раннего и позднего периода.  При анализе мы используем методы Альгирдаса Жюльена Греймаса, опираясь прежде всего на его концепции актантной схемы в глубине текста и акториализации актантов на поверхности текста.

Цей посібник — збірка різних практичних історій та викли­ ків, які постають перед кураторами й кураторками в Україні. Тут зібрано історії професіоналів з різними досвідами — від роботи
в музейному просторі до низових ініціатив та онлайн­виставок,
які стали справжнім викликом 2020 року. У своїх розповідях вони порушують питання перерозподілу обов’язків, фінансування, етики, цензури, викликів, пов’язаних зі специфікою матеріалу, як­то робо­ та з архівами чи авторськими правами. Обраний формат публікації у вигляді коментарів до виставкових проєктів дозволяє нам бути гнучкими і представити різні позиції кураторів та кураторок.

Мета цього посібника і полягає в артикуляції різних, часто проблемних аспектів роботи, а водночас це можливість поділитися досвідом з іншими.

Кураторський посібник / за редакцією О. Погребняк, Д. Чепурного,
К. Яковленко. — Київ : ІЗОЛЯЦІЯ. Платформа культурних ініціатив, 2020. — 160 с.

The paper explores gender and sexual dissent in contemporary Ukraine and Russia, turning to the space between feminist art and activism. It focuses on three feminist art projects, Zhinochyi Tsekh (Women's Work Unit, Kyiv, 2012), Feministskii Karandash (Feminist Pencil, Moscow, 2012) and Feministskii Karandash‐II (Feminist Pencil‐II, Moscow, 2013). It is argued that these events mark a shift in contemporary art, where feminist artists and activists engaged in projects that explicitly dissented against patriarchal societal norms and the neo‐traditionalist turn in the state politics of both countries. The paper examines curatorial strategies, the artworks produced and the broader networks of dissent that influenced (and were influenced by) the art projects themselves.

Образът на жената във всяка една култура е
производен на цялостното конструиране на
разбирането за пола – неговата бинарност или
не-бинарност, неговата йерархичност и проекциите на тази йерархичност във всяка една сфера на обществените отношения.
Затова конструкциите на пола са неотделима част от всяко изкуство и от властовите
структури, които то проповядва, не само чрез
образи, но и чрез инфраструктурата, която реализира художествената продукция (критици, галерии, музеи, дилъри, пазар, история на изкуството). Мястото на жените художнички и тяхното творчество в тези йерархии преминава през
тези властови структури. Въпреки че често се
говори за „универсални теми“, които автоматично се смятат за теми „извън пола“, всъщност всички те функционират в половата йерархия на своето време. В художествените среди и пазар дори абстрактното изкуство е оце-
261
нявано в зависимост от това кой го е създал –
мъж, жена, човек с хибридна идентичност, животно или робот. Това изкуство е поставено в
прогресивна стълбица, в която традиционно
най-често и най-високо е ценен мъжът и това,
което той е сътворил. Необходимо е тази оценъчна система да бъде разгледана в конкретния социално-политически контекст, който я
е породил, за да може да се разбере защо образът на жената придобива определени параметри, защо половите проблеми са отразявани по
определен начин или защо работата на жените
художнички е оценявана различно от тази на
мъжете. Тогава ще видим, че образите на жената и половите взаимоотношения, които ги
пораждат, са също и в пряка зависимост и от
категории като класа, национална, етническа
и расова принадлежност, физически възможности, както и процесите в икономиката и
политиката.
В този текст разглеждам някои примера от българското изкуство (с частични препратки към киното) от края на зрелия социализъм (краят на 80-те) и през цялото време на
т. нар. преход към капитализъм. Чрез тях ще се
опитам да скицирам еволюционните процеси
в темите, посветени на жената, пола и донякъде взаимоотношенията в художествената
йерархия, които определят това, което виждаме в съвременното българско изкуство. Този
текст няма за цел да изгради пълен спектър
на това, което виждаме в изкуството, или да
262
бъде справочник за имена, а да нахвърля идеи за
това как може да се гледа на женските и феминистки теми и работата на жените художнички в наши дни.
Чрез тези няколко примери ще се опитам
още да покажа до каква степен социалистическата женска еманципация, макар и не идеална,
всъщност е дала възможност на жените, формирали се по време на социализма, да изградят
сравнително стабилен еманципиран образ за
себе си, което се отразява на начина, по който те реагират на регресивните процеси в
отношението към жените по време на прехода, на тяхното самоопределение (като не-феминистки) и идентичностната рамка, в която
работят, както и на набора от теми в тяхното изкуство. Много от женските права, получени по време на социализма, са до такава степен интегрални в техния живот, че дори поставянето им под съмнение е трудно да бъде
въобразено. Нещата стоят различно при художничките, формирали се през 90-те и по-късно, към които аз принадлежа. Тези художнички
се срещат с ескалиращи проблеми като сексуална експлоатация на жени и деца, увеличаващо
се домашно насилие и отричане на правото на
жената на професионална реализация, както и
повторното ù „привързване“ към дома. Тази деградация на позицията на жената в обществото и увеличаването на дисбаланса в отношенията между половете е новата ситуация, в която поколенията от прехода са принудени да се реализират. Заедно с увеличеното внимание
към еманципаторните борби на куиър хората,
както и високо технологизираната унисекс
култура, появила се през 90-те, тази ситуация
помага да се формират нови образи в изкуството, но и нови йерархии и пътища за реализация
на художествена мисъл и продукция, както и
нови самоопределения (по-често като феминистки и куиър) на художничките, работещи с темите на пола.

This project suggests readings of contemporary performative artworks from the South Slavic region that look beyond the ethno-national identity of the artist to examine intersectional identities in play, expressions of war memory and trauma, and repudiations of the often essentializing gaze of the international art market on artists currently working in the post-Yugoslav space. While issues of ethno-nationalism are certainly a part of identity construction in post-Yugoslav society, and a result of the identity politics of the globalized art world that these artists entered into after the end of socialism in Eastern Europe, it is reductive to relegate the works thusly without addressing the intersectional nature of both self- and social-identities. Whether rejecting or reifying signifiers of identity from the Yugoslav period, recalling family histories and traditions, celebrating or lamenting reinvigorated religious practices, or examining hybrid cultures and life in the diaspora¬– the performative practices of artists from the South Slavic region are indicators of the identity work being taken on by the artists themselves, as well as their publics. This project proposes a methodology that could be employed to study the contemporary art production of regions that do not have a unifying culture, but that have been understood to have a monolithic cultural identity by the essentializing gaze of the art world in the former West. 

Art historians have tended to frame late-socialist Central European art as either 'totalitarian' or 'transitional'. This bold new book challenges this established viewpoint, contending that the artists of this era cannot be simply caricatured as dissident heroes, or easily subsumed into the formalist Western canon. Klara Kemp-Welch offers a compelling account of the ways in which artists in Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary embraced alternative forms of action-based practice just as their dissident counterparts were formulating alternative models of politics - in particular, an 'antipolitics' of self-organisation by society. Drawing on Vaclav Havel's claim that 'even a word is capable of a certain radiation, of leaving a mark on the 'hidden consciousness of a community", the author argues that all independent artistic initiatives in themselves served as a vehicle for opposition, playing a part in the rebirth of civil society in the region. In doing so, she makes a case for the moral and political coherence of Central European art, theory and oppositional activism in the late-socialist period and for the region's centrality to late-20th century intellectual and cultural history.Spanning a period punctuated by landmark events - the crushing of the Hungarian Revolution of 1956; the Warsaw Pact troops invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968; the signing of Charter '77 by dissident intellectuals in 1977; the birth of the Polish Solidarity movement in 1980 - while presenting powerful new readings of the work of six key artists - Tadeusz Kantor; Julius Koller; Tamas Szentjoby; Endre Tot; Jiri Kovanda and Jerzy Beres - Antipolitics in Central European Art anchors art historical analysis within a robust historical framework. It traces the passage from a modernist commitment to 'disinterest', through successive waves of doubt, dissent, ironic disengagement and reticent engagement, to the eventual exhaustion of antipolitics as a strategy in the 1980s as imperatives to engage in direct political dialogue gained ground. This richly illustrated study reveals the struggle of Central European artists to enjoy freedom of expression and to reclaim public space, from within a political situation where both seemed impossible.

The twenty years since the fall of the Berlin Wall should have sufficed to make the Eastern European context painfully familiar, at least to the European public. Nevertheless, some aspects of the way this context acquired publicity during the transition period have cast doubt on the effectiveness of this familiarity.
The geopolitical approach to the interpretation of Eastern European art, which gives priority to its geographic location and to the “totalitarian-Socialist legacy” as an explanation for trends in the visual arts is not relevant for me. In this discourse, very little attention has been paid to the contents and the aesthetics of the artworks, which could easily find their place beyond geopolitical regionalism, on the basis of the thinking behind them. These were sidelined
as unimportant in comparison with identity (tacitly understood as national
identity) and with post-totalitarian trauma. I do not wish to underestimate the
importance of the issue of identity, especially in the context of unification in
Europe. But the priority given to this factor on a local and international level
has led to the exclusion or under-representation of artists who work not
primarily on geopolitical themes in the art process.
Numerous clichéd works appeared along with new strategies for success
in the area of “identity”. In this context, it was rarely possible to achieve
meaningful communication at the roots of problems which would turn out to be
common to both Eastern and Western Europe. On the basis of these common
problems, they could be more easily unified, or at least could communicate
more easily, instead of bending under the weight of their painful historical and
political burden. Accordingly, before beginning this short review of some video
works, mainly from Bulgaria, with some from Russia, I would like to suggest
another approach to researching them, which would seem to me to be more
appropriate.

Участници: Боряна Росса, Станимир Панайотов, Леда Екимова, Виктор Янков.
Дискусията води Стефка Цанева

През ноември 2012-та година се състоя първият София Куиър Форум,
който за мен, като човек, който живо се интересува от джендър и куиър стъдийс, беше меко казано изненада. Тъй като не живея в България, нямах възможността да го посетя, но дори само фактът на неговото присъствие на българската фестивална сцена породи у мен множество въпроси и емоции, които станаха и основа за статията ми „На кого му пука за Джудит Бътлър?”, публикувана в списание „Блистер”. Разбира се, аз не бях единствената, която прояви особен интерес към събитието и тогава с мен се свърза Леда Екимова, която постави много интересен въпрос – защо и по какъв начин джендър и куиър тематиките и артистичната им прояви са обвързани с политика – и по-точно: защо ляво, а не дясно? Безспорно изключително интересна тема, която искахме да отразим по някакъв начин, но не чисто фактологически и безлично, не просто с интервюта с организаторите, целта ни беше да създадем поле за продуктивен диалог между различни точки. Точно поради тази причина се спряхме на формата на панелната дискусия (в случая в писмена форма). Според принципите на формата в първата фаза участниците представят тезите си в синтезиран вид – в конкретния случай една печатна страница, в която всеки се опитва да постави и обоснове позицията си. Във втория етап участниците, вече запознати с „стейтмънтите” на останалите, започват открит диалог със
задаване и отговаряне на въпроси.
В настоящата дискусия участват кураторите на София Куиър Форум, Боряна Росса и Станимир Панайотов, Леда Екимова, артист и моден дизайнер, на която благодарим за повдигнатия въпрос, и Виктор Янков, политолог. Първите резултати са вече на лице – изключително интересни и добре аргументирани мнения по темата за политика-арт-джендър/куиър – комбинация между лично и емоционално, теоретичен и емпиричен опит. Списание Блистер благодари на всички за участието!
С тази дискусия не целим да търсим правилно и грешно, добро или лошо. Искаме да събудим интерес към теми, не особено популярни в българската общественост, да подтикнем към размисъл и диалог.

Decadence, deviation and exoticism are notions that now stand as mythical constructs of East European art of the 1980s, comparable to those of heroism, dissidence and originality that are regularly applied to the neo-avant-garde generation that preceded it. In attempting to account for the diffuseness of that decade, a number of common threads and questions arise. What impact did the different political circumstances in various countries of the region have? How did individual states appropriate, seize on or ignore the new art of the time? And how did the new generation of artists deal with the legacy of the socially-engaged and politically critical neo-avant-garde art of the previous decade?

Straipsnyje dalyvavimo ir bendradarbiavimo aspektu analizuojamas menininkų Nomedos ir Gedimino Urbonų inicijuotas projektas „Pro-testo laboratorija“ (nuo 2005 m.). Sukurtas kaip judėjimas už viešųjų ir kultūros erdvių išsaugojimą Vilniaus mieste, projektas tuo pačiu siekė tyrinėti galimas ir negalimas pilietinio protesto formas konkrečiame socialiniame kultūriniame kontekste. Straipsnyje projektas analizuojamas šiuolaikinio meno kontekste, teigiant, kad jame pasitelkta bendradarbiavimo strategija įgalino „Pro-testo laboratoriją“ ne tik kalbėti apie problemas, susijusias su viešąja erdve ir viešuoju interesu, bet juos sukurti – o tai lėmė projekto įtaigumą ir šiuolaikinio meno, ir politinio aktyvizmo kontekste. Remiantis ir kartu abejojant Rudi Laermanso meninės kolaboracijos idėja išanalizuojama kompleksiška projekto bendradarbių ir dalyvių tipologija, išryškinant nuolatinės dialektikos tarp aktyvizmo ir pramogos kuriamas reikšmes. Taip pat aptariama, kaip projektas funkcionuoja šiuolaikinio meno institucijų kontekste, iškeliant anonimiškumo ir autorystės, kolektyviškumo ir vienbalsiškumo problemas ir apibrėžiant autorystės atkūrimo gestą.

The article deals with participatory and collaborative aspects of the Pro-test Lab project, initiated by artists Nomeda and Gediminas Urbonas (started in 2005). Founded as a movement for public and cultural spaces in Vilnius City the project was seeking to research possible and impossible forms of public protest in a highly specific social and cultural context. The project here is being approached from the art theoretical perspective, assuming that the collaborative strategy was the means that enabled the Pro-test Lab to actually found and perform public space and public interest, rather than merely raising problems around them – which subsequently led to its success and compelling status in the context both of contemporary art and political activism. Founding on and at the same time questioning the notion of artistic collaboration by Rudi Laermans the article analyses a complex typology of collaborators and participants in the Pro-test Lab, foregrounding the dialectics between activist and entertaining characters of the project. The article concludes with defining the gesture of restoring the authorship and issues of anonymity and authorship, collectivity and unanimity, brought up by the contradictory way in which the project operates in contemporary art institutions.

About the series

In Eastern Europe of the 2010s and early 2020s, the notion of gender became the focus of social debates and political actions. Art performances, interactive exhibitions, pedagogical projects, poetry interventions and other multimedia projects has been and are not only an essential part of the intellectual boom of feminist (sub)cultures and queer communities today. They are also a major crossroad and a mirror of other current discussions: on social inequality, political repressions, ecology or the suppression of collective memory. At the same time, the topic of gender provides an important impetus for the formation of communities with shared identities that run counter to the ideological mainstream and the politics of populism and propaganda.

In this lecture series, academics, activists and artists from different countries and various research fields will analyze peculiarities of aesthetic gender landscapes in Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Poland. The focus will be on the recent and most recent periods (2010-2020s), when in a number of regions of Eastern Europe conservative and sometimes even patriarchal-sexist laws has been adopted, which discriminated sexual minorities and legalized domestic violence.

We will be interested in the following questions: What is the most topical agenda of artistic gender practices today? What is post-feminism, ecofeminism or digital queer? How does gender relate to other social and political issues in Eastern Europe? What does the culture of art participation look like today from a gender perspective (for example, within the framework of the so-called aesthetics of motherhood and care)? How are these practices mediatized and what public spaces do they engender?

https://tu-dresden.de/gsw/slk/slavistik/das-institut/professuren-und-lehrbereiche/litwi/news/ringvorlesung-doing-gender-in-eastern-european-art-sose2022

The fall of the Iron Curtin ignited not only the interruption in a history but also a vacuum in the contemporary art space in Eastern and Central Europe. Already in 1992 the grassroots initiatives that supported local contemporary art scene were taken over by the international foundation - The Soros Centers for Contemporary Arts Network (the SCCAN) that established a chain of twenty institutions all over the post-communist Europe. It used the Ford’s Foundation archetype formula of the management policy, similar to global corporations management style. The SCCA aimed to construct a contemporary art institution franchise that was meant to be recreated anywhere in the very same form, structure, and with the identical art policy whatever the local circumstances and needs. Furthermore, the SCCAN accepted the formula of coercive philanthropy under the guise of struggle to incorporate Eastern European art to the grand narrative of Western cannon. As the Network took the dominative position over the region at the time, it had a power to establish a new elite of curators and artists who focused on the “brand new art” - a “contemporary” in form, “eastern European” in content. The SCCAN patronising and protectionist activities responded to global art market needs with its tendencies towards colonisation of margines. Implicit in the Third Text idea where curators act as cultural mediators as yet it is the core and it’s art that express universal normative values, whereas peripheral art represents particular. Therefore, it embodied the bimodal world-system, where the heteronymic post-communist countries undergoing a process of modernisation [understood as  a universal model of development of (semi)periphery towards “normalisation”] have institutionalised cultural capital in aim to balance deficit of economic capital. Ultimately, the SCCAN shared the characteristic ideology for the semi-periphery with its strive to join the core by coercion of discourses, new art, youth and “eastern essentialism” and created a new brand: the new art from the New Europe.

An exhibition at the Wende Museum explores the art and culture of socialist-era Hungary and offers a chance to consider relationships beteween art and politics during the Cold War. https://hyperallergic.com/456570/art-and-culture-in-cold-war-hungary-wende-museum/

The Common European Asylum System (CEAS) experienced significant developments during the Tampere programme (1999 – 2004). This article analyses how security is constituted or viewed by the European Union in the area of asylum policy; more importantly how the European Commission, in the face of the emerging discourse on the ‘war on terror’ decided to push for a more inclusive agenda. Thus, the European Commission can (though not always does) play a significant role in this process - the role of a supranational policy entrepreneur that enables the normative construction of a policy. The article analyses the high-profile case of the first phase of the CEAS, particularly the four main directives, its legal and political construction, and suggests the significance of the Commission in the political and normative process. Despite the challenges of the ‘war on terror’, the Commission managed to keep the CEAS within the limits of the Geneva Convention.

Performance art documentation and its significance for the evaluation
of artistic work have been widely discussed, not only among performance
art historians but also among artists. Debates have included issues of
copyright and sales, questions concerning how artworks or artists are
represented in art history and how art mythologies are created. At the same
time, rapid developments in video, digital imaging and distribution
technologies have impacted the formal and communicative qualities of
documentation. With the aid of technologies, visibility was given to topics
that otherwise have been silenced or put at the margins of the art system.
The power of representation, traditionally concentrated in the hands of art
critics, collectors, curators and historians, and their monopoly over stories
and mythologies about artists’ works, became a more accessible territory
to artists, and even to the audience, similar to the phenomenon of how
blogging culture changed contemporary journalism and writing more
generally.
This chapter will examine the specificities of performance art
documentation in the era of the mobile Internet. I will reflect on two major
questions. First, in what way does technology empower the audience as an
art mythology producer? Second, does technology help to undo the
patriarchal hierarchies established between the so called an active artist
and the passive audience? These major questions will be addressed
through a review of Central and Eastern European performance art, and in
particular, drawing on the examples from Russia and Bulgaria. I will also
draw on my own practice as a performance artist, born in Bulgaria, but
also living and working between Bulgaria and the USA for the last nine
years. By focusing on representation of gender in performance art, and
Chapter Four
90
discussing how documenting technology affects this representation, the aim
of this chapter is to contribute to the context in which these hierarchies of
artists and audience are perceived.
I will argue that the opportunity afforded by the digital age for
recording and distributing the so called personal memories has turned the
public into a collective subject, acting as a mythology producer rather than
as a reader. Over the last ten years, digital photography, video, blogs and
social networks have facilitated access for an audience to what has been so
far edited for the public eye by the powerful agents in the art world,
including curators, historians, and sometimes the artists themselves. This
liberalization of technology led to the ‘queering’ of the relationship
between the artist and the audience. At the same time, art institutions
started to generate mythologies that suited them, through the use of the
same, yet more democratic means of media and information technologies.
These complex, intertwined processes have also had an impact on the
formal quality of documentation and the constructed myths about
document authenticity.
I am not going to discuss the differences of the use of technologies in
Central and Eastern Europe by comparing them to the rest of the world,
but instead, will concentrate on the appearance of a new social layer, an
international one, created by social networks, both virtual and real. This
layer actually generated a new geography of its own that is virtual in
nature. Some scholars define this layer as a new class, privileged not so
much by material possessions, but by connectedness and access to
technology. This new privilege helps exchange of intellectual capital and
generates new identity, which is more global in nature or at least
international rather than local (Ong, 2006; Gapova, 2006).

This article argues that the conceptualisation of private police in current academic literature requires expansion to accommodate the role of the regulated sector in the Anti- Money Laundering (AML) framework. Firstly, it evaluates the literature on ‘private police’ and argues that its current parameters are too narrow to accommodate the ‘policing’ role of the regulated sector. Secondly, it lays out the legislative framework that has developed to deal with the problem of money laundering. Thirdly, it contextualises the role of the regulated sector, examining the domestic inter-agency policing relationships within the suspicious activity regime as operationalised in Scotland. Finally, it takes a closer look at how the courts have interpreted the ‘failure to report offence’ under s330 of the Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA) 2002 and its consequential effect on the engagement of the regulated sector with the SARs regime.

The period of 1988–1992 in the Belarusian art field was characterised by the highest level of student expulsions from the Academy of Arts and the Art College, which were followed by two student protests. Against the backdrop of dominating methods of teaching, the protesters criticised the specific constitution of the pedagogical process and academic education, forms and methods of training, as well as the fetishisation of traditional art
forms – painting, drawing and sculpture. The protests concluded with the exhibition Lessons in Bad Art in 1992.

Pages 94-96
Farrah Karapetian interviews Roxana Marcoci, Senior Curator of the Department of Photography at MoMA, soon after the 2019 renovation of the museum, but with primary interest in issues Marcoci has been pursuing since the beginning of her tenure at MoMA, including especially her role in building transboundary thinking between nations, regions, genders, and disciplines.

Following Hito Steyerl’s thinking, Papčo is suspicious of today’s vertical visuality, and his work traces it back to its origins, to the “modern obsession” it once was, and simultaneously questions it. Rooted in the cultures and techniques of climbing, his practice uses their body-based strategies; from the pool of performative modernities described in Hansen’s book, he recovers apocryphal elements and different ideas of verticality. Notable among these is his adoption of the way mountaineers perceive the vertical. This “climbers’ verticality” that Papčo activates in his work is contradictory, unstable, and performative. It rejects the god’s-eye perspective and opts for an individually lived experience of the “vertical” and its discontents.

This book addresses the art historical category of "contemporary art" from a transregional perspective, but unlike other volumes of its kind, it focuses in on non-Western instantiations of "the contemporary." The book concerns itself with the historical conditions in which a radically new mode of artistic production, distribution, and consumptioncalled "contemporary art"-emerged in some countries of Eastern Europe, the post-Soviet republics of the USSR, India, Latin America, and the Middle East, following both local and broader sociopolitical processes of modernization and neoliberalization. Its main argument is that one cannot fully engage with the idea of the "global contemporary" without also paying careful attention to the particular, local, and/or national symptoms of the contemporary condition. Part I is methodological and theoretical in scope, while Part II is historical and documentary. For the latter, a number of case studies address the emergence of the category "contemporary art" in the context of Lebanon,

Podsetnik na istoriju institucionalne kritike u Srbiji (verzija druga) dematerijalizacijaumetnosti.com/podsetnik-na-istoriju-institucionalne-kritike-u-srbiji/ Institucionalna kritika kao "ispitivanje društvenih ili institucionalnih uslova uokviravanja" podrazumeva epistemološki karakter jer "analizira", otkriva i izlaže svet umetnosti kao objekat svoje kritike. Institucionalna kritika je specifičan odnos umetnosti i društva u kojem su "strukture i logike sveta umetnosti otkrivene" tako što je preispitivan illusio, Burdijeov termin za kolektivno investiranje i verovanje u čitav vrednosni sistem neke strukture. Polazna tačka institucionalne kritike je potencijal umetnosti da postane javna diskusija o društveno-političkim problemima, koja će stimulisati relacije koje do tada nisu stimulisane kroz (re)artikulaciju sopstvene pozicije. Ona je kanonizovana unajmanje tri istorijska talasa u poslednjih četrdesetak godina, pošto je kreativni subjekat moderne estetike bio zamenjen institucijom, tj. njenim uslovima i parametrima izlaganja, kao temom i objektom dekonstrukcije. Ivana Smiljanić, Uređivanje (u domaćinstvu i umetnosti), fotografija na papiru, 2012. (1) (2) (3) (4)