Tactical Art in a pretention sauce

            The term “Art Fuck Words” may have been created by anyone.  This article defines “Art Fuck Words.” Although mixed into the masturbatory sense of importance of this article there were some interesting ideas.

            The idea of interfacing with your audience in an interactive way is interesting.  While most art seems to be static, performance art that includes the audience is at least a good way to interest the public. 

            I personally get hung up on the artistic promiscuity of the movement.  Claiming any medium can be in your movement is fine and dandy, even a good idea some would say.  The co-opting of health-care providers who fought to change HIV care policy seems a bit much.  The vague nature of what they are trying to do as well seems super forced.  The way digital is defined as being “about copying, re-combining, and re-representing,” is aggravating at best.  The word they are looking for is derivative.

            The idea that they want to point out ideas taken for granted in a participatory way is lovely.  The way it is described by Stanley Aronowitz almost defeats the purpose because it sounds like it would be hard to reach an audience while congratulating yourself that much.

 I feel that the vernacular of art can sometimes get in the way of having an active audience.  When your primary idea is to have an active audience, how you talk about your work says everything.  If you describe it in a way that seems humble or at the very least thankful for the audience being there as opposed to trying to come off like some ideological superhero you can reach more people.

Having a problem with the lack of ephermerality from people recording your actions or leftover scripts comes off to me as either incredibly anal retentive or complete out of touch.  When you work with participatory experiential art that includes non-artists you should expect them to record it in an attempt to remember it later.  If you cannot let them do that does that mean you believe your idea is ephemeral and lacks the import to be remembered?

What I believe this art movement needs is a healthy does of reality.  Without the humility that comes from living in reality you tend to speak about your work as if it is saving the world; While that may sound grand in a grant, in an introduction to a book about you it kind of turns me off.

Overall I do believe there is a very specific need to educate people through interactive events and get people out into the world and dealing with things and questioning givens.  However by giving yourself a name and co-opting other peoples’ work you defeat your purpose because who is going to believe you?

I would probably go to their events, but I do not think I could make it through this book.