Online Artistic Activism: Case-Study of Hungarian-Romanian Intercultural Communication
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
COACTIVITY: Philosophy, Communication 2016, Vol. 24, No. 1, 48–58. ISSN 2029-6320/eISSN 2029-6339 DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/cpc.2016.237 ONLINE ARTISTIC ACTIVISM: CASE-STUDY OF HUNGARIAN-ROMANIAN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION Gizela HORVÁTH1, Rozália Klára BAKÓ2 1Department of Fine Arts (Graphics), Faculty of Arts, Partium Christian University, Primariei str. 36, 410209 Oradea, Romania 2Department of Social Sciences, Faculty of Economics, Socio-Human Sciences and Engineering, Sapientia University, 530104 Miercurea Ciuc, str. Piata Libertatii 1, Romania E-mails: [email protected]; [email protected] Received 29 May 2015; accepted 5 January 2016 Technical reproduction in general, and photography in particular have changed the status and practices of art. Similarly, the expansion of Web 2.0 interactive spaces presents opportunities and challenges to artistic communities. Present study focuses on artistic activism: socially sensitive artists publish their creation on the internet on its most interactive space – social media. These artworks carry both artistic and social messages. Such practices force us to reinterpret some elements of the classical art paradigm: its autonomy, authorship, uniqueness (as opposed to copies and series), and the social role of art. The analysis is aimed at Hungarian and Romanian online artistic projects from Transylvania region of Roma- nia, relevant as intercultural communication endeavours. Our research question is the way they differ from the traditional artistic paradigm. Keywords: artistic activism, Hungarian-Romanian intercultural dialogue, online communication, social media. such as blogs, online photo sharing sites like Introduction Flickr and Instagram, video distribution plat- forms (YouTube or Vimeo), microblogs (such as The age of the interactive online communi- Twitter), and the most popular space, Facebook cation or Web 2.0 – a term coined in 2004 allowed an unprecedented level and intensity of and popularized by Tim O’Reilly (2005) – has participation in the public square. impacted daily life in its most personal and Modern art has developed in an ivory tower professional aspects. Social media platforms of creators, interpreters, disseminators and Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by VGTU Press. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. The material cannot be used for commercial purposes. 48 COACTIVITY: Philosophy, Communication 2016, 24(1): 48–58 49 consumers, from the Renaissance to the end of performance and process art, by the works that the 20th century. In contrast, contemporary art incorporate the ephemeral, by the interactive in the 21st century offers wider spaces for cre- works of art where the artist shares the privilege ation, expression and distribution via informa- of creation with the audience, and by appropria- tion and communication technologies (ICTs). tion art that challenges authorship. While keeping the classical tools of display, A hundred years of technical innovation creators and cultural managers have moved and its impact on art is hard to summarize works of art “from museum walls to Facebook in keywords. However, the reception of art walls” (Perjovschi, cited in Horváth 2014: 73). has been reshaped by the internet, which has Intercultural exchanges have never been enhanced and fueled the relationship between so easy and affordable. Indeed, ICTs connect the artist and his/her audience. Social media regions, countries, groups and individuals in with its interactivity features had catalyzed this various multimedia platforms, from audiovi- relationship even more in contemporary art. sual channels to the media-rich content of the Hans-Georg Gadamer has developed a internet. However, digital divides can hardly be dialogical model on reception of art, in his bridged by mere infrastructural investments. book Truth and Method published in 1960: Intercultural capital (Pöllmann 2013) or the paintings talk to us, ask questions and answer ability to decode the differences among cultures them. Therefore “aesthetics has to be absorbed takes time and educational resources to build. into hermeneutics” (Gadamer 2004: 157), and should deal with the following issue: “How does the work speak and what does it tell us?” Works of art in the age of digital (Gadamer 1986: 30). Such a dialogical model reproduction is still trapped in the museal paradigm of the work of art: paintings are hung on walls and Almost a century ago a major shift has taken engage in “dialogue” with those privileged few place, as described by Walter Benjamin in a who can afford to visit museums and contem- famous text (Benjamin 1936): “The Work of plate them. Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” The visual revolution of the internet chal- deals with the effects of video- and audio recor- lenges this museal approach to art: a plethora of ding, film and radio on art. The conclusion is artistic images, audio- and video content is avai- that the concept of art itself has transformed lable online, and even if such experience does accordingly. Works of art have lost their “aura”, not replace a “museum feeling”, it still stands the “unique phenomenon of a distance, ho- for a valid aesthetic experience. Social media wever close it may be” and got close to their transforms the dialogical model’s metaphor into public. Although Benjamin̕s text has been fact: artists publish their works on Facebook or interpreted mainly from the perspective of lo- Tsu and their networks give them at least the sing “aura”, it would be useful to remember its minimal feedback of a “like”. The metaphorical introductory idea of a greater loss: “creativity “dialogue” turns into effective communication. and genius, eternal value and mystery”. In fact, he refers to the destruction of a major paradigm in art based on the artist’s unique, unreprodu- Online artistic activism cible, talent- and genius-based work of art. We recognize Benjamin’s visionary ideas as reflec- Contemporary artists strive to use the benefits ted in the 20th century’s artistic experiments: of the internet and promote their works online. ready-mades coined by Marcel Duchamp, ti- This statement is even more valid for creators melessness changed to timeliness by action art, who stepped out from museums to the street, 50 Gizela Horváth, Rozália Klára Bakó Online artistic activism: case-study of Hungarian-Romanian... and who react quickly to the social and political Local and global: Perjovschi’s drawings agenda, to daily events. Works of art have lost their aura: activist artists are no longer interes- Perjovschi is an internationally recognized ted in being original; rather, they want to ensure Romanian artist who exhibited works at Tate replicability, wide-scale dissemination and Modern in London (2006), and at the Museum connectivity. All they need is internet access and of Modern Art in New York (2007). He repre- a device to instantly and closely reach their au- sented Romania at the 1999 Venice Biennale. diences. New forms of online activism seem to His drawings made him famous, by using a confirm Benjamin’s thesis: by giving up the ideal special graffiti technique: they are displayed of originality, the role of art changes radically – directly on the exhibition walls and windows “instead of being based on ritual, it begins to be with a black marker. The in situ works of art based on another practice – politics” (Benjamin are then washed from walls and windows: they 1936). A social and political message is more are therefore very ephemeral, and utterly local. effective if it can reach a wider audience, rather Perjovschi’s drawings are simple, minimalist than the privileged few “natives of art”, as Pierre sketches representing people, objects and Bourdieu would put it. often words, in order to make content more accessible. His topics are less concerned with general issues of the human condition, and Social media and artistic activism more so with political statements related to actual events. Some of his word-sketches are Both artists and cultural institutions strive wordplays, featuring letters as both signs and to benefit from the opportunities provided aesthetic elements. by social media (Horváth 2014). The main Perjovschi joined Facebook in 2009 and function of interactive platforms like Facebook, after reaching the 5 000 limit of “friends”, he Instagram, Twitter and YouTube is to promote registered an artist page on 2 September 20111. artistic news: museums inform about their On the latter, he posts works with an English actual exhibitions, art galleries publish sam- headline, or simply publishes visual content ple items from their actual exhibitions, and in photo sets. Album tags show that he con- artists present their new projects. There are ceptualizes art as a tool of social and political several art projects embedded more deeply in criticism. Titles for 2014 speak for themsel- social media, born in and for such media. We ves: “2014 Hong Kong protests”, “European present four such projects: three developed on Parliament election, 2014”, “Putin’s Game”, Facebook, and one on the WordPress blogging “News from Putin”, “Kiev local election, 2014”, platform. Among the three Facebook-projects “protest movements”, “2014 FIFA World Cup”, one connects local and global and it is mo- etc. Drawings posted on his personal page