it starts here.


We are all Experts
May 10, 2009, 6:05 pm
Filed under: existing

sc000a02bd

Very limited and probably misrepresentative minutes of We Are All Experts Meeting

We talked a lot about the Where/When/How/Who aspects it was a great discursive meeting, we have some big A2 sheets of bullet point thoughts.

We asked things like….

-What Makes An Expert?

-What do we consider ourselves to be experts in?

-How old do you have to be an expert?

-Do there need to be formal qualifications? à Are art tutors ‘experts’?

Is expertise institutionalized? à Are we conditioned by the system to believe that everything that is said by tutors is the absolute right?

Maybe is being an expert a bad thing for artists? do we delve into the context too much? Does everything need contextualisting?

 “Having an opinion on art is like having an opinion on climate change”*, it all needs to be contextualized with back up facts and figures from books and newspapers.

And on the subject of climate change, do we regard Experts in other fields more highly, like the ‘academic’ people?

ESSENTIALLY do we need to feel like there is this definitive RIGHT or WRONG when it comes to human opinion?

Why don’t young people feel like their opinions are informed?

WHY DO ALL OPINONS HAVE TO BE INFORMED?

…and informed by who??

Surely opinion should be informed by human experience and not by someone else’s?

SO. Does an opinion on art need backing? Surely less knowlage on a particular subject means a wider discussion! The manifestation of ideas can only go so far if your bound by the whole ‘right and wrong’ thing.

It means MORE QUESTIONS.

Which can only be a good thing. Right?

But then again, experts have something to teach, because they have made the effort to become one. They have researched and learned and found out…

ACESSABILITY

The art word is an institutution. Don’t institutions only function with the say-so of experts??

What is the value of using the words ‘Like/Dislike’ in front of a piece of art?

Instead of the words of an art dealer contextualizing some piece back to some other renaissance piece…(eg). Why cant we use anecdotes to describe our experience with art?

We went up to the galleries and we found pieces that we knew and one we didn’t and spoke about them independently.

The pieces we didn’t know inspired loads and loads more discussion than ones we did. (makes sense??)

We were thinking practically about the confidence needed to speak about a piece of art without feeling intimidated.

We need to transcend scare factor by believing in your own expertise.

PEOPLE DON’T TEND TO VALUE THEIR OPINIONS ALL TOO MUCH.

‘SPECIALY NOT YOUNG PEOPLE.

So we want to shake things up a bit, ask some people into the gallery that might challenge comfort zones.

NEW VOICES.

Harvi has sent out a list of people we are thinking of inviting to speak for a little bit about a piece that works in relation to their life/world/profession.

> the variety of voices and opinions.

> an opportunity for the ‘expert’ to explore their expertise in the context of art.

Freedom to voices;  PLATFORMS FOR VOICES.

Raw canvassers to speak aswell, and then for the discursive part to start; need to discuss actual formula of the event.

Um. Anyway. Its 2am and I really cant write anymore

 

Advertisements

Leave a Comment so far
Leave a comment



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s



%d bloggers like this: