Please post at least two thoughtful comments on the readings for this week: pages 97-113, 177-194, and 203-224 in the
Fusco book.
Here are some considerations:
•Comment on the usefulness and functionality of some of the alternate labels for work (other than "performance art") mentioned in the Ramos essay. How might some of these terms better describe your own work? How are they useful in the context of
Venezuelan work, or do you find similar problems with all terms?
•Discuss the claim from the 1981
CADA work that "the work of improving the accepted standard of living is the only valid art form/the only exhibition/the only worthwhile works of art." Pay attention to specific implications of words and how they translate for you and your experience, i.e., if this statement is assumed to be valid, what is really meant by "form" and "exhibition"?
•Are you persuaded by Lotty
Rosenfeld's discussion of her work? Why or why not?
•What are the implications of Felipe Ehrenberg's designation of the street happenings between the two galleries as art? If these are pieces, is he the artist of the piece because he identified them as such? Or do the pieces have unwitting artists, or no creating artist at all?