The Room

THE ROOM

Rafael Romero DOGtime 2

2

INDEX

5

Prologue. Participant 1. Participant 2. Participant 3. Participant 4. Participant 5.

7 14 16 17 18

My house.

23

The jungle.

25

The church.

29

3

4

Prologue This article is a collaborative effort amongst the students of the Gerrit Rietveld Academie, at the Fine Arts Class from Dogtime department in the second year. During the last semester an assignment was set to write a text reacting on the book of Claire Bishop ‘’Artificial Hells’’. Each text made by the students deploys a matter involved with the term ‘’The Social’’ and it is germane to social art. In reaction to this assignment I created a consensus about “The Social” through the participation of subjects that submitted the text to me. Five participants with their respective entries, including myself, are involved. This blending is based on the text of the second participant “My flatmate”, that has acted as a catalyst to explore in depth the additional texts. Three different treatments are given to this textual cohesion. I would like to reintroduce this preface with three statements of significant relevance in the following articles: “To conquer a nation, first disarm its citizens.” Adolf Hitler. “There is no such thing as society.” Margaret Thatcher. “Society is a group of people with different groups, ethnics, cultures, languages, life styles but though, they are bounded with each other.” Karl Marx.

5

Society is an ensemble of individuals integrated in the same whole. These individuals are expected to coexist with each other in a neoliberal capitalist economical system, within which the free market operates on an international scale so-called; globalization. Capitalism encourages such individuals to look after themselves breaking up the concept of community conceived by Jesus Christ two thousand years ago. Religious values are still present. In fact, they are used on slogans, advertising campaigns and commercial marketing. It could be said that Jesus Christ was just a great businessman. Given this input, imagine that we have to share a space and make money out of it. How do affect all these religious values to the matter?

“Love your neighbor as yourself.” Jesus Christ.

6

PARTICIPANT 1

Art and the social Prologue This article is inspired by the discussions at the Fine Arts class and after reading the book Artificial Hells by Clare Bishop. The theme that triggered these writings was the assignment called: “The Social.” The idea of the assignment was to write a piece about this theme, which I understand as the relations among persons co-existing in society, this includes the role of artists in society. I first try to contextualise “The Social” into the system in which it exists and then I discuss the role of art in this system. The System We are living in an era of free market economy and great degree of individualism. The tendency in this era is to consume the products that the market offers as much as possible. This becomes a sign of wealth and increases status. This system has shaped our behaviour in relation to society, our way of thinking in relation to what we need and what is important. In the economical system in which we live, the consuming individual has become crucial for the subsistence of the system. The focus on the individual is aimed at finding the best ways of manipulating acquisition desires. There is no focus on the community, because this one can develop its own rules, and those can differ very much from the ones of the big system. Civil society associations without acquisition and investment capacities have less possibilities to survive. Margaret Thatcher said once: “ there is no such a thing as society” in one of her discourses. This speech was, in my opinion, meant to dismantle the troops of civil society, to shut up people’s mouth, to clear the state of its big responsibilities as a protector of people’s rights. These thoughts have become now mainstream, and it seems to govern in the free market economics.

7

It is the market economy who in the end defines our rights and duties as an individual. This leads to great injustices worldwide, to the sacrifice of people’s rights, like in the case when dams flood people’s lands because infrastructure creates energy for industries, or mining companies that have free space to use cancer stimulating chemicals in their operations because their business creates employment at least for a few. State authorities cannot easily go against these destroying enterprises because they promote some capital flow. However they cause great social and economical damage, leading to a physically and mentally ill society because of mass production and consumerism. Since everything has a price in this system, the commodification of the arts has become unavoidable. People acquire art pieces, not only because of the pure love for art, but very much as an investment or as a symbol of status. Some pieces of art have reached extremely huge prices (the current record price was paid for The Card Players by Paul Cezanne, which was sold for more than $250 million in 2011), and this has made of art a big business.

The Card Players by Paul Cézanne (photo of painting)

8

The danger of this situation is that art as a source for critical thinking is not necessarily appreciated by the economical system in which we live, since the tendency of the system is to avoid a critical view of the effects of the economy in society. Besides, art aimed to encourage critical thinking in society employs methods and materials that are not really easy to put on sale. This all may be the reason why a great part of art produced now, is not critically contextualised in society. Therefore, art production can fail to acquire enough significance to stimulate critical thinking. These are politics that also affect the artist, because he or she is in any way priced in these free market economy. The artist cannot scape from the situation, it is not possible to live in complete isolation, because almost nobody can survive in that way. So, the artist needs to take a position about the system that rules society. Art can be socially engaged, provide a critical point of view and if necessary make the pillars of society tremble. I guess that it needs a little bit of interest, a slice of involvement, a feeling of empathy for the other, a need to say something and braveness for an artist to make socially engaged art. Participatory Art: Its problems and its ways There is a legitimate artistic trend that tries to reconnect with the community. It tries to democratise art and make it less elitist. It has an aversion to the focus on the individual only, some try to reinforce the social bond and empower communities. Participatory art can be a way to reconnect the individual to the collectivity and break with the sicking system of consumerism and individualism. Unfortunately some participatory artistic efforts have made only a cosmetic change. Participation with the idea to repair the social bond can lead to a fake result in art. Examples are municipality projects where artists are asked to create a project to increase participation and less criminality.

9

Artists take then a facilitator role to achieve this goal. They congregate people from the neighbourhood to encourage participation of the “excluded” and then develop workshops. These social interventions create expectations in the public, in participants, and neighbours. Participants in these artistic projects get the label of “the disadvantaged” or “the excluded,” this label is not necessarily a good start to empower people. The result is that social groups end being used for artistic activities that will count at the final municipality reports as efforts made for community development. Art workshops emphasise the responsibility of the individual to get a better life, away from alcohol, drugs and unemployment, forgetting the role of the state to empower the most disadvantaged in society. Artists have to get aware of their role in these projects, because the latter can justify state lip service about people’s empowerment, and can even increase social discontent. These type of projects stay on the phase of art for reconnection amongst individuals. But they do not focus in problematic social and political structures, as for example the free market economy and issues related to totalitarian regimes. Real empowerment will happen if projects would start from the bottom up. But then we enter in the realm of the social sciences, which can be used in arts as long as the projects are recognised as art projects and evaluated as such. However, many art participative projects leave aesthetics behind, and do not want art quality to be evaluated in the projects, but request to be evaluated in relation to their social achievements. The problem can be to consider that art goal should be to help the poor, the uneducated, the marginalised, the non included. If this is the aim, what would be then the difference between art and social work? Since both will be aiming for the same and are using the same methods. In this sense art becomes not more than a tool, entering in the realm of the ameliorative, rather than the creation of singular acts that leave other behind with a troubling wake.

10

This kind of art is sometimes driven from good morality, the moral of the good soul has then an important place in it's working. This can be a problem because it can give little space for freedom in art, this morality can be a limitation in the creative process, also for the viewer and for the critic who will not know in which terms this kind of art can be analysed. This type of participatory art conceals and that risks the capacity of art for disruption and absurdity which can be crucial for artistic impact. Art will find itself completely closed and repressed in the discussion about its ethics. Participatory art produced in this way, is forgetting to count on aesthetics, which is a crucial element for determining quality. Art should have an autonomous realm of experience, where perversity, paradox and negation can have a space. This means that some participatory art produced now needs to develop another approach. The Ways for Socially Engaged Art If the goal of participatory art is to make more sustained relationships in the world, then participation as a concept should be also defined. How does this participation happens and how does it contribute to the construction of good art? If it is politically engaged art, we have to ask ourselves to whose policies is it engaged with? The reconnection between the individual and the collectivity is crucial for the survival of the arts as a relevant aspect of society. Socially engaged art, participatory or not, has the capacity to negotiate “the Social:” what is the social? where does it go? which is the direction for society to take? how should we all relate to each other? how do authorities should treat people? which kind of economic system do we need? how can an artist react to the self destruction trend of capitalism? these are some of the questions that artists can research and answer.

11

Probably one of the most ethical ways for the artist art to negotiate “ the social” is according to “ his or her (unconscious) desire than to modify his or her behaviour for the eyes of the Big Other (society, family, law, expected norms). “Such a focus on individual needs does not denote a foreclosure of the social; on the contrary, individual analysis always takes backdrop of society norms and pressures”. In this way, it is important for the artist to follow his or her social curiosity without the incapacitating restrictions of guilt, being true to himself and stimulating the same in the other. Art can be a way for artists to liberate feelings about society, in a way in which the final product becomes a symbol of the social issue in question. If the project has a participatory aspect, the artist does not need to take the role of a self suppressed facilitator but can become a directorial instigator, someone who creates the atmosphere but then allows things to happen without moral restrictions or a feeling of social obligation. When the artist takes this role, he or she will be stimulating the other to take some ownership in the project as well, and some ownership in the message to be presented to the outside world. This participatory process can enrich the final product. Socially engaged (participatory) art needs to have the space and find its ways to disentangle the complexity of inequality, class, political engagement, affect and behavioural protocols, without moral analogies that fail to understand the aesthetic as an autonomous realm of experience. Conclusion We live in a system of free market economics, where consumerism is the rule of the day. In this system the commodification of the arts has taken place. Artists can take a position about it and realise how much they and their communities get affected by this system. One way to it is using participatory art, which is a trend trying to democratise art.

12

However many participatory art projects have taken a concealing role instead of becoming a hub for critical thinking in relation to structural political, social, environmental and economical problems in society. Besides many have forgotten the role of aesthetics in the making and understanding of art. Socially engaged art has a great capacity to negotiate the social. This means that art needs to be contextualised in the society in which we live, so that the artist can take a position. And the most ethical way for the artist to do it is following their social curiosity. Using participatory or non participatory art, but following their instinct with joy, without being afraid to disturb and taking all the freedom necessary to shake sick society structures. It is a challenge for art to scape from the mouth of the big consumers economic system and strive for its significance in our society.

13

PARTICIPANT 2

Social My flatmate is very socially engaged. She holds strong ideals. Lately she performed anthropological research in a city where people are oppressed. She lived amongst them for months in order to understand their struggles and describe as objective as possible the problems and concerns that people are facing. The people there need to get a voice! They need to be heard so that their battle was not an idle one. In that way they can be supported by the international community and continue their life in peace and freedom not having to fear for their lives when they ventilate opinions. My flatmate now is working out all the interviews and combines all the data in a research report. Also, she wants to organize a support meeting here in Amsterdam to send some warmth and support to the oppressed people and show some solidarity and support. I was very moved by her stories on how she only just escaped from the police violence on the streets of the oppressed city and the overwhelming emotions that this brought unto her. I want to help her and the people in the oppressed city and therefore we want to organize a solidarity diner and invite a lot of people from our friends and neighbors. During her stay in the oppressed city my flatmate asked the people what their hopes and dreams are for the future. My flatmate and I were thinking that it would be amazing if we could find some of you (my fellow rietveld students) prepared to make a work or hope-object based on one of those dreams, to send our support to the oppressed people. The oppressed people explicitly asked my flatmate to spread the word and tell the world about their story. These works would be our gesture to them. My flatmate feels strongly about that it should not become an exhibition, because the word has negative connotation to her, but a social gathering. My flatmate has a boyfriend. He is very idealistic to. He travels to countries with political problems to make documentaries and shed light on injustice and create awareness. Right now he is traveling and making one of his films that might be awarded at the IDVA. When he comes

14

back from the shooting, they will be living together in his house. This makes her very happy because she loves him very much and she wants to have children with him. For the room in my house that will become empty when my flatmate leaves it might seem logical that a new person would be moving in. And she already has an idea on who this might be, namely, a friend of hers that is looking desperately for a house in the city center of Amsterdam. Because it is a social thing to house as many people as possible, especially when you have the luck to have a space like ours. We live with 3 people in a 3 bedroom apartment in Oud-West which is quite a nice neighborhood with high rental prices when you are not well connected. We however got very lucky because we used to live in a squad and settled for this anti-squad apartment when the pressure from the owner to leave the old place got stronger. We were beginning to get jobs and did not want to risk coming home one day to find the place neatly cleared by the ME. We live in the new space for years already without any problems which is very convenient. It is not very big, but hey, we pay almost no rent. My room for instance is 8 square meters and I just manage to store my stuff somehow and make my work for the academy. The only problem is when I need something specific that is somewhere in one corner of the room, for instance my blue paint, I need to move a lot of stuff to the hallway and afterwards put it back, but hey, we pay almost no rent. Now that it’s starting to take longer and longer, living and working in such a small room makes me want to have some more space to work and live. Now, a problem is occurring. My flatmate that is leaving the house feels that it is my duty to rent out the room she leaves behind to her friend that is desperately looking for a place in the city center of Amsterdam. She is convinced that it should be in my squatters mentality and idealism to let her friend in the antisquad room, instead of using it for myself to work in. She is using different techniques to convince me of her idealism. She uses different argumentation and tries to talk some of her reason into me. I must be strong.

15

PARTICIPANT 3

Participant 3 on the fuzzy concept. So, there’s a lot to choose from.. If I would choose to react on “Modern uses” , my reaction to the above section from Wikipedia would be that it:…a society ruled over by a government which aim to apply resources in the public interest for example: Social Security - (as it states that in contemporary society “social” often refers to these redistributive policies of a government)-, does not sound too social to me, social security. What is a healthy, sane society? One that is ruled over by few capitalists? One that is spending trillions on war, controlling mainstream media, drugging it’s inhabitants, yes even poisoning fellow earth walkers… and on and on? As Wikipedia states: Karl Marx’ view on the fuzzy concept was that our social characteristic are an objectively given fact, stamped upon us from birth and affirmed by socialization processes. In reproducing their material life, people must necessarily enter into relations of production which are “independent of their will”. Max Weber defines human action as “social” if it takes account of the behaviour of others and is thereby oriented in its course. That is a contradiction. Weber addresses the sociaal-wenselijkheid in my eyes and I cannot really relate to that aangepast gedrag, not so much. What I can relate to is take the others’ feelings into account and to help out, like most of us I guess. Eventhough some social clumsiness lurks around the corner. If one is to belief that all is connected, what is, then- not social? Are introverts anti-social? I do not believe this. Not-social is greed, egotism, remorseless capitalism, destructive at cost of others. And I am not sure about if the number of people should be taken into account: if big it is social, if not not.

16

- Van Dale dictionairy writes this: so·ci·aal (bijvoeglijk naamwoord, bijwoord) 1betrekking hebbend op de maatschappij, op het welzijn daarvan: the relating to the community, to the well-being of society (for the good of the people) And that does not sound fuzzy at all. What kind of “social” does society ask for? What does it ask of us? Instead of projecting, one is in contact. Instead of only talking, one listens. Instead of observing, one is participating. And I believe a first step is to be in contact with one’s self. Do we know what it is that makes us a well-being ourselves in the first place? What longs society for, what does it ask of us. If we don’t know an answer to this question, can we then, be social? Pretending to know what is good for one another? Can we answer what would be good, of wellbeing, for ourselves? So then we have the question rising: what is a sane society? And I will read Fromm on that sooner or later. Social art, it should serve for the good of the people- to try tackle social problems. Art that moves the viewer/participant. It arouses, enhances, it inspires, it lifts, it makes people think.. it communicates through sense -thought ending up in a shared belief, if so: really nice. An exchange in emotion and/or thought. It unites. It bonds. It has got something to offer for the good of the people. And I believe that if artists make what serves themselves honestly they can serve human kind, at least in a way and as a startingpoint. As social is relating to the well being of community/society.

17

PARTICIPANT 4

The Social A Social being belongs to a society. Which in modern times would mean belonging to a corporate company. Modern dynamic and fair. Now, imagine such social being living his life in such environmental structure and ask yourself what real social aspect does such behavior aspire. His job routine will unsurprisingly be seen unnoticed by his colleagues which will act insignificantly vice versa. This all, while the society will run packed with such individuals. Social is a stair leading to interaction. At least I believe fondly. Stairs are architecturally complex but always understandable within our geometry rule. An geometry of interactions, conflicts and encounters. Yet modern individual society has none. As it exists in an impossible geometry.

18

PARTICIPANT 5

De-hierarchisation of participatory art. Let’s start with the affirmation of Margaret Thatcher, ‘’There is not such a thing as Society’’. On the basis that this quote makes Thatcher a radical pupil of Ayn Rand and the Objectivist movement that she consolidated in the 50’s, we could say that participatory art involves a group of individuals, with personal goals, those who interact successfully with the others when the goals they share benefit the individual objective. Personally I would say, as mere viewer, that the individual objective is to integrate the audience into the creators, or into the reproduction of art as well as the art practices, not as viewer standing in front of the item but as part of it, as a material. Also to deal with the idea of art as a not tangible product , nor ending of the reproduction process but a continuous development. Thus, according to the frame of the spectator as the main participant in the game, the game itself needs to be formulated by its own process. Claire Bishop in her book, ''Artificial Hells'', talks about many collectives which are working in this direction, (‘’Collective or Creativity’’, WHW 2005, ‘’Thinking the matter into common hands’’. Maria Lind, 2005, ‘’Democracy in America’’. Nato Thompson, 2008.); they are attached to the idea that the spectator has a new role. We can compare works like the German architect Alexander Beck so called: ‘’Doccupy’’, in which he placed 28 white tents full of ‘’occupiers’’, and he adorned them with words representing the ‘’basic evils’’, greed, profit and pride at the Documenta 13, in 2012. Thereby pronouncing an act of nonconforming statement about the materialization of art. Also another example is the work of Tino Seghal ‘’This progress’’ 2010, in which he placed his participants all over the Guggenheim Museum in New York, from kids to elderly, asking to the audience visiting the

19

museum, what is this progress?. The relationship between the spectator, the partipant, and the creator is still functional, it triggers the participant gesture of the audience in which we based this dialog but it is still commanded in a sense of authority, literally with a previous script. It is again the end of the reproduction process instead of being the procedure generator of the next step.This interaction is still under the orders of the composer, ‘’The man with the plan and his participants’’, when actually what really persuades me about this approach is the sort of individualistic idea coming from the Ayn Rand’s philosophy, autodiligence facing adversity. Individual men with individual goals sharing their efforts for their own benefit. On the contrary, Oda Projesi Collective, the Turkish collective shares this attitude of relational, communalist or situationist group, not only for the idea of co-operation without any profit but for the goals they formulated, they literally say: “We shape, and are shaped by, our surrounding.”. Performing activities in which they are just part of it, and developing relationships in between the neighborhood in just one single room, Oda Projesi girls, sometimes organize just as project space; an exhibition space, sometimes by using the very basic dynamics of the daily life like eating and drinking. It functions as a meeting point and sometimes becomes a multipurpose place used by them and by the neighbours and sometimes it includes all these different usages. These flexibility of the space provides different possibilities, it produces “a third language”, created with and within the space. This non-hierarchical usage of the place offers some new situations and roles which are not well determined, the spectator as a participant, the creator as a spectator, and this whole as the work itself and as development. This new spectatorship developed through an unexpected process, can be called art?, this is the sort of question that calls into question the line between a social and an art project.

20

Ricardo Basbaum and his “Would you like to participate in an artistic experience?” is fascinating, all this researches about the social interaction in between the spectator and the object itself, creating this explorative documentation of it, is a proof that participatory art cannot be finally executed at once, it is a process in which you can always amend, improve and learn in a relative way. Thus, participatory art socially engaged, is creating itself, it is a way of discovering through experimental researches. The reason why I made this comparison is to see the potentiality of participatory art. Believing that politics and arts are twins, the Prime Minister and the Artist have quite some similarities. Both are selected for the Audience. The Prime Minister is selected to be responsible for selecting members of the cabinet or dismissing them in order to evaluate the best out of it, (Ministry of defense, Ministry of health, Ministry of public works, Ministry of urban planning, Ministry of culture...), and the Artist for instance has been selected for a network around him which is crucial to evaluate, execute and present his work to the Audience, as well as the curator, the gallery, the art critic, the collector, the art historian and the professor but on the contrary he is not selecting them he is the one who is selected. Both characters have an important deal with the Audience, there is a purpose of change on behaviour accord with matters that concern them both the Audience and the Artist-Prime Minister. In order to succeed agreeing with the consensus, the Audience has the most important role, they are the ones whom select and agree with the selections, in other terms they are the material. This is the link with Claire Bishop's book I see as essential when it comes to talk about participatory art, instead of using art as an aesthetic language of objects from individuals to illustrate what concerns society, I would rather use society to display what concern individuals, not forgetting the relationships between individuals and society as well as the aesthetic of participatory interventions.

21

22

My house. For this first textual cohesion I will base this discussion on the text of the second participant “My flatmate” . Employing the texts of the other participants in order to react on it under the criteria of Margaret Thatcher and her affirmation, “There is not such a thing as society”. My flatmate is very socially engaged, she holds strong ideals. […] Her boyfriend travels to countries with political problems to make documentaries and shed light on injustice and create awareness. […] Right now he is travelling and making one of his films that might be awarded at the IDVA. […] After this they will be living together in his house and she already has an idea about a new person would be moving in. […] We used to live in a squad, now it’s anti-squat apartment and we pay almost no rent. […] Even though It is a really small apartment. […] Now a problem is occurring. […] My flatmate feels that is my duty to rent out the room she leaves behind. […] Because it is a social thing to house as many people as possible she is convinced that it should be in my squatters mentality and idealism to let her friend in the anti-squat room, instead of using it for myself to work. […] She is using different techniques to convince me of her idealism. […] I must be strong.

23

A socially engaged attitude involves a group of individuals with personal goals. Those who interact successfully when the objective they share benefits the individual goals; as the economic market nowadays works. These are the consequences of living in an era of free market economy and great degree of individualism. There is no focus on the community. The consuming individual has become crucial for the subsistence of the system. Now, imagine a social being living his life in such an environmental structure like this and ask yourself; what real social aspect does such behaviour aspire?. In the other hand, Max Weber, defines human action as “Social” , if it takes into account the behaviour of others and is thereby oriented its course. Weber, addresses the social coexistence. In my eyes I cannot really relate it to adaptive behaviour. What I can relate to is considering the feelings of others, and if possible, help them out. It is then, we reach the point in which we see how economic policies affect individuals. Once again this example, “My flatmate”, proves that the economic system rules relationships between individuals and society as two different members of the same whole. But which sort of ideology does encourage the flatmate to help the community through sacrifice?. Is there any kind of religious values behind it?.

24

The Jungle. Imagine that the room mentioned in the previous chapter could be shared between the five participants. The room would be amortized through any artistic activity. The purpose is to create more anti-squat spaces for disadvantaged people like “The Flatmate” and provide an agreed program by majority. This program would be offered to the neighbourhood for the purpose of helping young artists to develop their work and involve the community. Each member of the organization, (in this case each participant), is in charge of selecting the program in turn already selected by the neighbours from the location. Thus imagine now that all the statements proposed in the paragraphs below, are the policies or philosophies of the five participants, followed by a small speech about it. - Philosophy 1. Art has to be contextualised in the society in which we live. Art as a source for critical thinking is not necessarily appreciated by the economical system in which we live [...] Art aimed to encourage critical thinking in society employs methods and materials that are not really easy to put on sale [...] But we enter in the realm of social sciences, which can be used in arts as long as the projects are recognized and evaluated as such [...]

25

Participatory art is a trend trying to democratise art. Many have forgotten the role of aesthetics in the making and understanding of art[...] What would be the difference between art and social work?[...] Socially engaged art has a great capacity to negotiate the social, arts needs to be contextualised in the society in which we live[...] - Philosophy 2. I must be strong. My flatmate is very socially engaged, she holds strong ideals[...] She performed anthropological researches in a city where people are oppressed [...] They need to get a voice in there [...] My flatmate and I were thinking about to make a work or hope-object based on those dreams, she feels strongly about that it should not become an exhibition, because the word has negative connotations to her, but a social gathering [...] I must be strong. - Philosophy 3. Social is a stair leading to interaction. Social is a stair leading to interaction [...]At least I believe fondly[...] Stairs are architecturally complex but always understandable within our geometry rule[...] An geometry of interactions, conflicts and encounters[...] Yet modern individual society has none[...] As it exists in an impossible geometry[...] - Philosophy 4. Society based on individuals as a group. Social art, it should serve for the good of the people, to try tackle social problems[...] Art that moves the viewer/participant[...] It arouses, enhances, it inspires, it lifts, it makes people think[...] it communicates through sense-though ending up in a shared belief[...] It unites, it bounds[...] It has something to offer to the good of people... As social is related to the well-being of community/society[...]

26

- Philosophy 5. No autonomous art. Society as context. Thinking as an artist or from the artistic production perspective, at the same time we work with objects in a sense of solving shape, contextual or material problems, we could employ the same kind of skills on social matters. Thus as public spaces, social environments or social design [...] Aesthetics in participatory art or art practices are still indefinite, not clearly determined [...] Instead of using art as an aesthetic language of objects made by individuals to illustrate what concerns society, basically autonomous art, I rather would employ society to display what concerns individuals. Thereby not neglecting the relationships in between individuals, society as well as the aesthetics of participatory interventions and the important role of the spectatorship as part of the art reproduction [...] - The next step would be to set up a meeting with the participants and the members of the house in order to discuss how financially will work out and get a democratic election of the matter.



27

Non-geometric society.

28

The Church. There is always a point at which we concur. There are always parts of the arguments that makes us coincide with each others, either for religious, cultural or moral values. Also including economic reasons. The solution that is observed here triggers the consensus unwittingly elaborated by the five participants. It is a review used to match perspectives and create a righteous ending for “My Flatmate” issue. Now there is only one participant, one philosophy, one policy; The Community. We were thinking together with our flatmate about to make a work or hope-object based on those dreams, they need to get a voice in there. We feel strongly about the idea that it should not become an exhibition, because we feel that the word has negative connotations to us, but a social gathering. Instead of using art as an aesthetic language of objects made by individuals to illustrate what concerns society, basically autonomous art, We would rather employ society to display what concerns individuals. Social art, should serve for the good of the people, to try to tackle social problems. Social is a stair leading to interaction. Stairs are architecturally complex but always understandable within our geometry rule, a geometry of interactions, conflicts and encounters. What are the differences between art and social work? Socially engaged art has a great capacity to negotiate the social. Arts need to be contextualised in the society in which we live. Art that moves the viewer or participant, it arouses, enhances, it inspires, it lifts, it makes people think. It communicates through sense-though ending up in a shared belief. It unites, it bounds... It has something to offer to the good of people... As social is related to the well-being of community or society.

29

I would like to thank to those involved in the contents of this document.