ART / WORK

ART

/

WORK

3

ART / WORKCura ted by Anna May K i rk

Mi tche l CummingDara Gi l l

A lex Gawronsk i110%

Cooper Michae lMar ian Tubbs

Make or BreakJD Reforma

Thank you to the ar t i s ts ,Luke Le tourneau, Kate Stodar t and June Miske l l fo r your inv is ib le labours and unwaver ing suppor t .

Kudos Gal lery6 Nap ier S t , Padd ing ton18 May - 28 May 2016

4

Defining the relationship of art to work and the conditions of artistic production has long remained a contested area of discussion. Social, cultural and economic transformations over the last century have raised many questions about art and work. What is work today and what is its relation to art? What is the economic position of the artist if creativity has become a commodity? How are artists and artworks given value? How can the conditions and invisible labours of artistic production be described? Is the artist the ideal model for the Post-Fordian worker; creative, flexible and cheap? Is work an activity, or is it a spatial designation, a place or site? And among others, to count as work do the “efforts” need to be paid? This segmented essay attempts to address each of these questions.

‘Work’ is a broad concept, the meaning of which has drastically changed over the last century as a result of technological and social transformations. One of the forefront attempts to understand these significant 20th century cultural and economic shifts, was the ‘Experience Economy’ theory1. The pop-philosophy term ‘Experience Economy’ is characterised by corporations producing cultural or memorable ‘experiences’ to assist selling goods and services. These ‘experiences’ becoming the centre of value instead of the product or service. Coined by Joseph Pine and James Gilmore in the 1998 Harvard Business Review, the Experience Economy can be used as a lens to analyse how and why artist and artwork can be commodified. Making visible the affective invisible labours implicit in modes of artistic production. As each artist creates ‘experiences’ for an audience through the commodity of their artwork, the parallels between this theory and modes of artistic production become apparent. In this exhibition artists critically use the creation of unique audience ‘experiences’ to consider questions about the interplay of value in their work and their own economic participation as creators of cultural and financial value.

What is the position of the artist in this ‘experience economy’ if creativity has become commodified? Can the artist be seen as the ideal model for the Post-Fordian worker; creative flexible and cheap, a creative entrepreneur within an advanced service economy?2 Pine and Gilmore’s ‘Experience Economy’ theory is a product of Post-Fordism. Emerging from the 1970’s when mass production gave way to flexible specialisation, Post-Fordism workplaces were characterised by their increasingly mobile, flexible and informal qualities. Pascal Gielen characterises this shift from Fordism to Post-Fordism as a transition from “material to immaterial labour and production”3 These shifted values facilitated the shift in labour practices. Work times and places were no longer fixed variables, wages and rates fluctuated as employees negotiated their personal terms and conditions on an individual level. The resulting flexibility sees work shift outside of the traditional nine to five and into the arena of social and personal time and space. What begun outside of work, is assimilated into the economy. This ambiguous ‘worker’ position of the artist raises a series of questions about both art and work: how can art be a profession if there is no employer? To count as work need the effort be paid? Or is work simply, as Studs Terkel stated in 1972, “what people do all day”?4

Dara Gill acts within and reflects upon his position as a Post-Fordian worker within an experience economy. Stepping into the video’s frame of Untitled (To Roll), 2009, Gill unpackages and drops a rectangular lump of clay onto the studio floor. The next 16 minutes see Dara Gill roll, back and forwards, this lump of clay until it is transformed from a rectangle into an easily rolled ball. The physical labour required for this effort is evident, as the piece progresses, Gill’s breathing gets heavier, and the glisten of sweat evident on his brow. Through presenting to an audience the transformation of a material, metaphorical of the poetic transformation of material into an artwork, Gill makes the invisible labours of the artist visible and quantifiable in time, space and effort. This work was created by Dara Gill whilst he was still an undergraduate at the University of New South Wales Art & Design (formally COFA). Passing on these instructions to the curator of ART / WORK Anna May Kirk, whom is also an undergraduate at the University of New South Wales

5 Untitled (To Roll) 2009, HD Video stillsDara Gill

6

Art & Design, the work was recreated, and the resulting ball of clay exhibited in the gallery space as a physical testimony of the ongoing invisible labours of the artist, and the curators contribution to these labours.

To count as “work” need the effort involved to be paid? Free labour, particularly the ‘unpaid internship’ and volunteers are fast becoming a structural necessity in the arts. This landscape of unpaid work offers both a solution and a threat, filling the ever widening gap between ambition and cash5, yet also legitimising the exploitative and unsustainable nature of cultural work – serving as a reminder for those employed in the arts that someone is always ready and willing to do their job for free. As a result many arts workers in Australia take on a multitude of unpaid arts work whilst financially countering this time and resource loss with paid work, regularly in fields unrelated to the arts. 110% embody this ‘busy’ state of being in their performance Your dreams, our reality 2016 – 2020 for the opening night of ART / WORK, engaging in conversation with gallery visitors about how “busy, busy, busy” they are whilst adorned in t-shirts printed with the dates of their upcoming exhibitions, similar to a band tour t-shirt. ‘Busy’ in this case becomes the apex achievement and a symbol of success. Expressing it in the gallery space a means of gaining social capital where financial capital is missing and placing a critically positive façade on the time heavy burden of artistic success.

Mitchel Cumming’s video work ‘Do Art Do-Gooders Do Artists Any Good’ or “Interior Decorating (For John)” 2013, sees the artist perpetually paint, and repaint a room. Cumming was hired as an assistant/ performer in the recreation of John Baldessari’s 13 Colourful Inside Jobs, presented as part of Kaldor Public Art Projects #27 13 Rooms in 2013. The video work splices together promotional time-lapse footage of the performance from the Kaldor archive with self-filmed footage recorded during Cumming’s shifts. Baldessari’s original work 13 Colourful Inside Jobs speaks to the associations between artistic practice and wage labour, yet in the recreation of this work, Kaldor Public Art Projects chose not to pay participants. Citing the value of ‘industry experience’ as an adequate form of reimbursement for their time and labour. Mitchel Cumming’s work literally puts the lens in front of the financial realities of the art worker. Exposing the terms and conditions in which artists and art workers are encouraged to labour for future success, experience and social exposure as apposed to financial gain.

From this free economy, emerges an interesting and community based ‘favour economy’ in the arts. The favour economy can be defined as a performance or receipt of gestures, services and kind acts often with the implicitly expectations of reciprocity6. The ‘I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine’ mind frame fills that gap between ambition and money with a labour that is financially free, yet comes with reward. Mitch Cumming employed the opportunity to exhibit in ART / WORK at Kudos Gallery in order to promote an exhibition running concurrently at Knulp, an independent gallery in which Cumming Co-Directs with Shane Haseman and Alex Gawonski. A poster designed by Cumming and Maria Smit for Knulp’s exhibition ‘This Winter’ by J Daniel Hud, Lewis Miles and Paul Saint, running from the 12th until the 29th of May, will be advertised within the Kudos gallery space for the duration of the exhibition. Mitchel Cumming agreed to exhibit in the Kudos show without the incentive of an artist fee, as he gains in social capital for his gallery. 110% similarly take the exhibition opportunity as a platform for capitalist self-promotion. Setting up a ‘merch’ stand as part of their artwork, Piece of the Action 2015-2016, they present and sell the brand of ‘110%’ on mugs and t-shirts, to the willing gallery audience. These artists gain social capital in exchange for exhibiting in ART / WORK, two favours are exchanged, and everyone benefits.

As the differentiation between “life” and “work” collapses, artists are posed with the challenge to situate themselves within this new economic environment. Talk of the economy is seemingly endless, particularly as we go into the next election in latter 2016 with politicians throwing about

8

A. Gawronski’s space. Do NOT take it!

9

A. Gawronski’s space. Do NOT take it!

10

rhetoric time and again of ‘growing’, ‘sustaining’, ‘stabilising’ and ‘managing’. Yet at the time of writing this essay, the Australian cultural sector is suffering cruel and detrimental financial cuts. Friday the 13th 2016, a day now to be known as ‘Black Friday’ saw the Australia Council for the Arts cut funding for over 65 previously funded national art organisations. The decline in the number of organisations funded is a result of the loss of $60 million over four years from the Australia Council budget. The regression in cultural funding has been a recurring trend in Australian politics over the past decade and has cause great collective anxiety in the arts community. With times so uncertain, it seems it is every man for themselves. Alex Gawronski’s work No Relief (After V. Tatlin), 2015, sections off a corner of the Kudos gallery space. Comprised of a brown string and a cardboard sign reading “A. Gawronski’s place. Do Not Take It!”, Gawronski evokes the particular working methodology of famous Russian Constructivist Vladimir Tatlin. When exhibiting in the seminal exhibition ‘0.10 The Last Futurist Exhibition of Pictures’ in Petrodrad during 1915, Tatlin was rumoured to have cordoned off his designated exhibition area with a had written sign reading ‘V. Tatlin’s Space. Do Not Take It!’. Tatlin resorted to this territorial gesture to prevent any of his rivals, particularly the Suprematists and Kasimir Malevich, from ‘stealing’ his ideas. Responding to this anecdote, Gawronski frames Tatlin’s actions as art. Presenting the anxiety of an artist within an arts community as a work in and of itself. This speaks to the collective anxiety of the Australian arts community in its current time. In a time of drastic economic cuts with gallery and alternate spaces shutting down by the handful and the steep increase of unpaid labour to compensate the ever widening leap between ambitions and financial capability, this anxiety is highly justified.

The collective anxiety extends to artists desire and financial ability to continue their artistic practice. Sustaining a practice as an artist is a highly expensive activity, in time, money and emotions. Within the current toxic financial environment of the Australian art scene, it is no wonder artists are dropping like flies. Marian Tubb’s works Massage 2010 and teeth whitening (here for a good time…) 2010, are both works recreated from when the artist was still an undergraduate at university. Consisting of two stainless steel studio shelves with spay paint, one mangled and twisted, the other adorned with a superhero mask over a brain submerged in liquid inside a oven bag. These works see Tubbs recreate past works in place of creating new works, making the political statement of refusing to make anything new. The mangled bodies of the studio shelves figuratively point to the artist’s body. Reintroducing the artist’s figure from a past time into the context of a 2016 exhibition, underlining the recurring anxieties of the artist through time.

If creativity has become a commodity, how are artists and artworks now given value? And how is the making of an artwork any different from the making of some other kind of commodity? Artists inherently have a means of creating value financially and culturally. As stated in the 1998 Harvard Business Revew “It is our good fortune that all is not yet couched in terms of purchases and sale. Things have value which are emotional as well as material; indeed in some cases the values are entirely emotional. Our morality is not solely commercial.”7 Pine and Gilmore extrapolate on different means of valuing art, financially but also emotionally. Marian Tubbs in Massage 2010 and teeth whitening (here for a good time…) 2010, takes studio shelves, everyday objects in which hold deep emotionally value due to their familiarity in daily life. She then physically transforms these objects, spray painting, twisting, contorting and adorning. Tubbs plays with these objects original significance and questions their transformed value as they undergo the poetic process of becoming art.

Cooper Michael’s ebay series Ebay Items - live - www.ebay.com/usr/opportunity-shopping, 2016, similarly investigates the shifting value of the art object through the lens of Postproduction Capitalism. Michael introduces an assemblage of art and non-art objects to the rarefied context of the gallery space. A yellow towel, an Eels supporter scarf, a record, nick-nacks, two preserved snakes in a jar and modified children’s toys. Whilst existing within the gallery space, these items

11

are simultaneously up for live auction on eBay with prices starting at $0.01. The synergy of art and eBay audiences into one site-specific location gives audience members the chance to engage with art, and accidentally, with non-art through these listed sale products on eBay. Cooper Michael creates a dichotomy of high and low value systems. Illustrating an ontological shift of high art into generic sales commodity, determined by the value systems of the audience and the domain in which it is placed. Michael additionally places a silent auction in the Kudos gallery space for his work preserved 2-minute noodles w play doh frame, 2016, bringing questions of artwork valuing back from the digital into the physical exhibition space. Through creating these opportunities for the viewer to have active financial contribution to the value of his works, Cooper Michael attempts to reveal and potentially undermine the underpinning capitalist structures of the contemporary art institution and market. These artworks are not only seen as ideological objects, but items of value in which question the value and systems of valuing placed upon them.

With the multitude of questions on the relationship of art to work and the conditions of artistic production in mind, it leaves us with the final burden of asking, how do we move forward? The economy is important in art and life, as U.S President Bill Clinton stated in 1992 “It’s the economy, stupid”8. Artists are posed with the challenge to navigate these pre-existing economic structures and create strategies to redefine the contexts and processes of their production. In doing so, recreating the economies in which they operate and reshaping what economic value is in relation to art. Through exhibiting the work of artists whom are actively communicating these possible fu-ture strategies in their processes of artistic production, ART / WORK attempts to make visible the invisible labours of these artists to a broad audience. JD Reforma’s performance installation Work 2016 reveals the invisible labour forces of the artist through a lyrical exercise of both endurance and self-indulgence. Reforma deploys the recent record of the same name by Rhianna (featuring Drake) as a soundtrack for a lip sync performance. Yet unlike conventional musical performance, Reforma’s takes place underneath a stage, where he uses the popular image message applica-tion Snapchat to record and broadcast his performance in short, 10-second video uploads.

Where the original song is an intimate dialogue between two lovers in a fragile relationship, for whom ‘work’ produces both existential meaning and emotional discord, this ‘work’ is a narrative of self-love and reflection of an artist to an audience. Reforma presents the artist as an invisible labour force, performing first and foremost to himself. Always implicit in this performance howev-er, is an awareness of each video’s secondary audience of anonymous and unknown voyeurs. Reforma will continue to produce and upload new performances of the song over the course of the two-hour opening, enacting the repetition of the chorus – “work, work, work, work, work, work” – in a endured lyrical activity, that from it’s obscured visibility highlights the artistic necessity of being ‘seen’. Making the unseen artistic labour visible to an audience and forcing the viewer to confront the realities of this labour.

The process of participation and interaction of an audience can become a point of power in com-municating issues of art and work to a viewer. Participation as a means of materially or immaterial-ly ‘creating’ a work of art, but also as an educational tool of exchange between artist and audi-ence. This strategy of employing dialog with an audience through artwork is utilised by Make or Break. Make or Break is a live art project by Sydney artists Rebecca Gallo and Connie Anthes that explores the role of audiences and collectors in the generation of art works and art market value. The first presentation of this project took place in December 2015 at Firstdraft Gallery in Sydney. A temporary exchange economy was set up whereby audiences ‘invested’ in the project by providing materials for the artists to work with. The artists engaged in a daily art-making relay, continuing or destroying the work that the other had made during their previous session, as if it were their own. Gallo and Anthes seek to provoke genuine curiosity about process, collaborating and engaging with an audience as an opportunity to challenge the value of art objects and artist labour.

12

For ART / WORK Gallo and Anthes have created Make or Break Library 2016, a temporary site for research into studio and post-studio theory, immaterial labour and alternative economies, inviting the audience to take a seat, have a read and leave a note. They additionally will expose to the audience the inner administrative workings of the artist in their performance Life Admin 2016 on the opening night of ART / WORK. Unveiling to the public the immaterial labours and ‘behind the scenes’ of artists ‘work’, Gallo and Anthes engage an audience in dialog around these invisible la-bours. Creating an environment that facilitates questions of how and why we should move forward in dialog around artistic labour.

- Anna May Kirk, 2016

References

1. Pine II, J. & Gilmore, J. H. 1998 “Welcome to the Experience Economy”. Harvard Business Review, July – August 1998.

2. Edited by Cecilia Widenheim, C. Rosendahl, L. Masucci, M. Enqvist, A. Engqvist J, H. “Work, Work, Work: A Reader on Art and Labour”. 2012. p2

3. Gielen, P. “The art scene: An ideal production unit for economic exploitation?” Open. 19. 2009.4. Studs Terkel, Working: People Talk about What They Do All Day and How They Feel about What They Do (New York: Pantheon Books, 1972).

5. Carrot Workers Collective, “Surviving Internships: A Counter Guide to Free Labour in the Arts”. 2015. p3.

6. Bellafante, G. “A Favour Economy Which Kind Acts Come With Expected Reciprocity”. 2013. p1.

7. Pine II, j. & Gilmore, J. H. 1998 “Welcome to the Experience Economy”. Harvard Business Review, July – August 1998.

8. Bill Clinton 1992 – U.S President

13

Artists

Alex Gawronskihttps://alexgawronski.com/

Mitchel Cumminghttp://cargocollective.com/mitchelcumming

Marian Tubbshttp://www.mariantubbs.com/

Dara Gillhttp://www.daragill.com/

Cooper MichaelCoopermichael.com

110%http://www.110percentcollective.com/

Make or Breakhttp://connieanthes.com/

https://rebeccagallo.com.au/

JD Reformahttp://jdreforma.blogspot.com.au/

Curator

Anna May Kirkannakirk.com

14

Your dreams, our reality2016 - 2020

110%

15

Your dreams, our reality2016 - 2020

110%

16

48 hours in the life of three busy bees. They barely found the time to write this110%

17


18


19


20


21


22


24

numbers don’t make senseMARIAN TUBBS

Form is a weapon, it’s something you can’t argue with.[1] / The thing can never be translated into knowledge of the thing. It is not words.[2] / We fill pre-existing forms as when we fill them we change them and are changed.[3] / Eyesores are oppositional, rather than a nice alternative.[4] / Philosophy today is a super-workout for communicative energies capable of finding points of contact throughout the entire world.[5] / Art materials have no spirit, and they cost money.[6] / The savages of Cuba regarded gold as a fetish of the Spaniards. They celebrated a feast in its honour, sang in a circle around it, and then threw it into the sea.[7] / You can’t buy me. That is the whole point. To buy is to buy oneself off. You can’t buy yourself off from me. You can buy me only with the whole sky in yourself. The whole sky in which, perhaps, there is no place for me.[8] / [To] make the transition from the mass media era to the post-media age, in which the media will be re-appropriated by a multitude of groups ca-pable of directing its resingularisation. Despite the seeming impossibility of such an eventuality, the current unparalleled level of media-related alienation is in no way an inherent necessity.[9] / With emotional chaos by reinventing sculpture through aesthetic insubordination, playing with worthless material amid the industrial ruins of a defeated nation that, only two decades earlier, would have murdered her without a second thought.[10] / I don’t want to be aware of my body.[11] / There is therefore no re-turn to “things in themselves,” but rather to the in-itself seen as indifferent to what is given to us, because indifferent to our opening-the-world.[12] / The unpretentious thing evades thought most stubbornly.[13] / If you’re in poverty and enjoy it and can laugh at it, then you have no allegiance to anything and you’re pretty much free.[14] / Money leads to money, or for a taste for it. Easy money leads to a taste for easy money. Big money to a taste for big money. Old money gets in your bones as old money.[15]/ She didn’t have friends, children, sex, religion, marriage, success, a salary or a fear of death. She worked.[16] /

25

[1] Bernadette Corporation[2] Quentin Meillassoux[3] Frank Bidart[4] Gayatri Spivak[5] Peter Sloterdijk,[6] David Hammons[7] Karl Marx[8] Marina Tsvetaeva[9] Félix Guattari[10] Arthur C. Danto on Eva Hesse[11] Rachel Harrison[12] Quentin Meillassoux[13] Martin Heidegger[14] David Hammons[15] Bernadette Corporation[16] Thea Djordjadze (Installation detail)

27Connie Anthes & Rebecca Gallo,

Make or Break

28

An incomplete bibliography for exploring alternative economies, studio and post-studio theory, social practice and invisible labour Make or Break is an experimental, process-based art project by Connie Anthes and Rebecca Gallo. So far this project has encompassed an exhibition where the audience provided materials for the artists to work with live in the gallery space; undertaking personal art admin in front of a live audience; making books and contributing to other publications; and facilitating conversation as an alternative to traditional forms of research.

Bahtsetzis, Soririos (2012). Eikonomia: Notes on Economy and the Labor of Art. In e-flux journal #35, May 2012.

Bennett, Jane (2010). Vibrant Matter: A political ecology of things. Durham & London: Duke University Press.

Bishop, Claire (2006). Antagonism and relational aesthetics. In October Magazine, Fall 2004. Cam-bridge: October Magazine, Ltd. and MIT Press. Blackwell, Adrian & Lee, Chris (2013). Editorial Note: Currency. In Scapegoat 04.

Bourdieu, Pierre (2011, first published 1986). The Forms of Capital. In I. Szeman & T. Kaposy (Eds.) Cultural Theory: An anthology. Milton QLD: Wiley-Blackwell.

Bourdieu, Pierre (1984). The Market of Symbolic Goods. In The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature. New York: Columbia University Press.

Bueti, Federica (2011). Give Me The Time (for an aesthetic of desistance). In http://www.artandeduca-tion.net, 26 August 2011.

Buren, Daniel (2010, first published 1971). The Function of the Studio. In Jacob, M. J. & Grabner, M. (Eds.) The Studio Reader. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.

Buren, Daniel (2010, first published 2007). The Function of the Studio Revisited: Daniel Buren in Conversation. In J. M. Jacob & M. Grabner (Eds.) The Studio Reader. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.

Coles, Alex (2012). The Transdisciplinary Studio. Berlin: Sternberg Press.

Davidts, Wouter (2009). “My Studio is the Place where I am (Working)”: Daniel Buren. In W. Davidts & K. Paice (Eds.) The Fall of the Studio: Artists at Work. Amsterdam: Antennae.

de Certeau, Michel (1988). The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Eckersall, Peter; Gray, Dominic; Menon, Jisha & Van Graan, Mike (2013). Valuing Ecologies of Performance: Culture and capital in a neoliberal world. In Performance Research: A Journal of the Performing Arts: 18(2).

Empson, Erik (2008). Art Work or Not Work? In The Free Art Fair 2008 Catalogue.

Fraser, Andrea. There’s No Place Like Home (2012). In J. Sanders & E. Sussman (Eds.) Whitney Biennial 2012. New York: Whitney Museum of American Art.

Incomplete BibliographyMake or Break

29

Gill, Rosalind & Pratt, Andy (2008). In the Social Factory?: Immaterial Labour, Precariousness and Cultural Work. In Theory Culture Society 2008: 25(1).

Gilligan, Melanie (2012). Affect & Exchange. In A. Hirsch (Ed.) Intangible Economies. Vancouver: Fillip Folio Series, Fillip Editions.

Goehler, Adrienne (2013). Basic Income Grant — The Cultural Impulse Needed Now! In On-Curating.org - Precarious Labour in the Field of Art, 16(13).

Hirsch, Anotonia (2012). Intangible Economies: An Introduction. In A. Hirsch (Ed). Intangible Econo-mies. Vancouver: Fillip Folio Series, Fillip Editions.

Jordan, Mel; Beech, Dave & Hewitt, Andy (2012). When work is more than wages. In On-Curating.org - Precarious Labour in the Field of Art, 16(13).

Kester, Grant (2012). In Steedman, Marijke (Ed.) Gallery as Community: Art, Education, Politics. London: Whitechapel Gallery Ventures Limited.

Lippard, Lucy R. (1995). The Pink Glass Swan: essays on feminist art. New York: The New Press.

McRobbie, Angela (2004). ‘Everyone is Creative’: artists as new economy pioneers? In On-Curating.org - Precarious Labour in the Field of Art, 16(13).

Marks, MaryJo (2009). Seeing Through the Studio: Bruce Nauman. In W. Davidts & K. Paice (Eds.) The Fall of the Studio: Artists at Work. Amsterdam: Antennae.

Morris, Robert (1993). Continuous Project Altered Daily: The Writings of Robert Morris. Cambridge & London: The MIT Press.

Multiple authors (2012). To Have and to Need (Haben und Brauchen) Manifesto. Berlin: habenund-brauchen.de.

North, Peter (2013). Money as Anticapitalist Praxis (2013). In Scapegoat 04.

O’Doherty, Brian (1999; originally published 1976). Inside the White Cube. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press.

O’Doherty, Brian (2007). Studio and Cube: On the Relationship Between Where Art Is Made and Where Art Is Displayed. New York: Buell Center/Forum Project, Columbia University.

Paice, Kim (2009). Continuous Project Altered Daily: Robert Morris. In W. Davidts & K. Paice (Eds.) The Fall of the Studio: Artists at Work. Amsterdam: Antennae.

Pigrum, Derek (2007). The ‘ontopology’ of the artist’s studio as workplace: researching the artist’s stu-dio and the art/design classroom. In Research in Post-Compulsory Education Vol. 12, No. 3, October 2007. University of Bath, UK, and Vienna International School, Austria.

Radok, Stephanie (2005). Gleaning Relational Aesthetics. In Artlink, 25(3).

Raubenheimer, Landi (2015). Secret/Wish, the problem of the object in relational aesthetics. In Criti-cal Arts: 29(3). London: Routledge.


30

Reijnders, Frank (2013). The Studio as Mediator. In R. Esner, S. Kisters & A. Lehmann (Eds.) Hiding Making - Showing Creation: The Studio from Turner to Tacita Dean. Amsterdam: Amsterdam Univer-sity Press.

Ross, Andrew (2013). The New Geography of Work. Power to the Precarious?. In On-Curating.org - Precarious Labour in the Field of Art, 16(13).

Seymour, Benedict. Short Circuits: Finance, Feedback and Culture (2013). In Art and Education, 26 August 2013. Retrieved from: http://www.artandeducation.net/paper/short-circuits-finance-feedback-and-culture/

Simon, Joshua (2010). Neo-Materialism, Part Two: The Commodity and the Exhibition. In e-flux jour-nal #20, November 2010.

Simon, Joshua (2011). Neo-Materialism, Part Three: The Language of Commodities. In e-flux journal #28, October 2011.

Singerman, Howard (2010). A Possible Contradiction. In J. M. Jacob & M. Grabner (Eds.) The Studio Reader. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.

Storr, Robert (2010). A Room of One’s Own, a Mind of One’s Own. In J. M. Jacob & M. Grabner (Eds.) The Studio Reader. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.

Tims, Charlie & Wright, Shelagh (2013). The Invisible Hand: Art in the Transition to Another Economy. In Fresh Perspectives 2, April 2013. p. 3. Retrieved from: www.theinvisiblehand.eu

Thomas, Morgan (2009). Studio Vertigo: Mark Rothko. In W. Davidts & K. Paice (Eds.) The Fall of the Studio: Artists at Work. Amsterdam: Antennae.

Ursprung, Philip (2009). Narcissistic Studio: Olafur Eliasson. In Wouter Davidts & Kim Paice (Eds.), The Fall of the Studio: Artists at Work. Amsterdam: Antennae.

Verwoert, Jan (2007). Exhaustion & Exuberance: Ways to Defy the Pressure to Perform. In Dot Dot Dot 15, 15 December 2007.

Vidolke, Anton (2013). Art Without Market, Art Without Education: Political Economy of Art. In e-flux journal #43, March 2013.

Vishmidt, Marina (2013). “Mimesis of the Hardened and Alienated”: Social Practice as Business Mod-el. In e-flux journal #43, March 2013.

Voorhies, James & Bureau for Open Culture (2011). A Manual for the Immaterial Worker: The Way We Work Now. In Artists & Activists Series. New York City: Printed Matter Inc.

Wood, Jon (2009). Where is the Studio?: Jan De Cock. In W. Davidts & K. Paice (Eds.) The Fall of the Studio: Artists at Work. Amsterdam: Antennae.


32

www.ebay.com/usr/opportunity-shoppingCooper Michael

33

www.ebay.com/usr/opportunity-shoppingCooper Michael

ART / WORK

Documents

Transcript of ART / WORK