Dissent is predatory. It seeks out and hunts down dogma. Initially tentative, it looks for weak links, scavenging it’s way through the paradigm pack. But as it gets bolder, it becomes capable of bringing down even the biggest of the preconceptions, slicing through thick skin and armoured habit with a purpose that will not be denied.
Absolute values
Fixed views
Entrenched perspectives
Untested facts
Enforced decisions
It’s all prey.
We’re building a new website for CAS, and one of the TVAF Trustees/ CAS Associates, Maija Leipins is doing the building. She’s also very interested in the motivations and practices of each of the other associates, so has decided to interview all of us. Questions bounce around notions of inspiration, method, and purpose as well as inquiring into any personal connections with the core CAS ingredient of Dissent.
What worked well for me today, was being able to re-address familiar topics and discussion points from new access points. It’s always a good idea to re-evaluate from time to time, and especially when doing so through a new lens. Seen as a whole, I think this piece of investigation will become a very important tool in identifying common elements in our collection of artists, and really help us to unify and come together as a group. We all know each already, but the CAS venture is new to everyone, and as usual in such things, we’re all still finding our feet a bit, waiting for roles to clarify themselves.
So, anyway, today was my turn, and I hope Chloe (on camera) caught my best side.
Can an organisation be considered an artwork?
from Stephen Willats:
“- A work of art can itself constitute a societal state, a model of human relationships”
another question here: is the reverse true? Can a social state, a model of human relationships (an organisation) be a work of art?