Library
Artificial Hells: Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship · 12 of 12
Artificial Hells: Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship
ARG Design HIGH

Three Revolutionary Flashpoints: 1917, 1968, 1989

periodisation futurism bolshevism may-68 1989 avant-garde

Key Principle

Participatory art surges at moments of political rupture: 1917 (Bolshevik Revolution), 1968 (coordinated global challenges to authority), 1989 (fall of communism). These "form a narrative of the triumph, heroic last stand and collapse of a collectivist vision of society" (p. 3). Each produces "a utopian rethinking of art's relationship to the social" (p. 3). The contemporary resurgence accompanies the collapse of communism, absence of a viable left alternative, and marketisation of art and education (p. 277).

Why This Matters

Treating participatory art as a recent phenomenon obscures its deep historical roots and recurring failures. Each flashpoint produces distinctive contradictions that recur in later iterations. Understanding these patterns prevents repeating them.

Good Examples

1917: The Historic Avant-Garde (Ch. 2)

Three ideological positions mapped through participatory form:

  • Italian Futurism (from 1910): "Spectatorphilic" provocation; audiences brought cow bells and vegetables. Participation as "total destruction" open to all classes (p. 46). But Marinetti instrumentalised it toward nationalism: "Futurist Theatre will be a gymnasium to train our race's spirit" (p. 47).
  • Post-1917 Russia (Proletkult, mass spectacle): Collective authorship, de-specialisation. By 1927: 5,000+ Blue Blouse troupes, 7,000+ Living Newspaper groups (p. 57). Storming of the Winter Palace (1920): 8,000 participants, 100,000+ spectators (p. 59). But military structures underwrote ostensibly collective creation.
  • Paris Dada (1920-22): Small-scale dissensus. Breton moved Dada from provocation to judgement via the Barres Trial, appropriating real social forms (courtroom, guided tour) rather than theatrical ones (p. 72).

1968: Three Competing Parisian Models (Ch. 3)

  • SI: Sublation of art into life; dogmatic anti-visual Marxism; restricted participation to members only (p. 87).
  • GRAV: Perceptual liberation through kinetic environments; technophilic populism; but "making someone participate undermines the claim to defeating apathy" (p. 89).
  • Lebel: Transgressive collective rites channelling egregore (collective group mind); artist as dispositif (p. 97).
  • All three were exhausted by May '68. None attended to the class composition of their audiences (p. 103).

1989: The Project as Art Form (Ch. 7)

  • The term "project" replaces finite art object: "open-ended, post-studio, research-based, social process" (p. 194).
  • The artistic project fills the vacuum left by collapsed grand political narratives (p. 194).
  • Project-based practice mirrors neoliberal labour: adaptability, flexibility, intellectual mobility are indistinguishable from management literature's ideal worker (p. 216).

Counterpoints

  • Participation's "most immediate heir" from Russian mass spectacle was the Nuremberg rallies, which used the slogan "No spectators, only actors" (p. 74).
  • Under state socialism, the same participatory forms served opposite political ends: privatised individual experience was the radical gesture (p. 4, 129).

Key Quotes

"Participation is not inherently anti-capitalist or collectivist -- its political valence depends on the regime it operates within." -- Claire Bishop, p. 4

"the word chosen to describe these open-ended artistic activities arrives at a moment when there is a conspicuous lack of what we could call a social project -- a collective political horizon or goal" -- Claire Bishop, p. 194

Rules of Thumb

  • Participatory art surges when collective political horizons shift -- map the political context before evaluating the form
  • Each flashpoint generates successors with disturbing implications; trace the lineage
  • Participant identity shifts across the century: crowd (1910s), masses (1920s), people (late 1960s), excluded (1980s), community (1990s), volunteers (today) (p. 277)

Related References