Non-scientific science and non-artistic art: ‘Other’ knowledges in the political practice of Forensic Architecture | Intellect Skip to content
1981
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Art & the Public Sphere
  4. Volume 11, Issue 1
  5. Article
Politicizing Artistic Pedagogies: Disciplines, Practices, Struggles
  • ISSN: 2042-793X
  • E-ISSN: 2042-7948

Abstract

How do the disciplinary boundaries of arts education shape art’s political horizons? Sixty-five years on from CP Snow’s controversial lecture , both his protagonists (on one side the arts and humanities, on the other the sciences, management, finance) have claimed significant epistemological, political and practical ground. The distance that separates them, however, appears greater than ever. Art often stands in opposition to the hegemonic tendencies of positivist forms of knowledge, dismissing them as incompatible with its political goals. Given the formal disciplinary setting of art education, exacerbated in the competitive modern academy, I suggest that such restrictions to art’s epistemological and practical horizons are, in fact, politically counterproductive. I propose that by rejecting an array of knowledges – particularly those based on ideals such as rationalism, evidence and epistemological certainty – as a priori incompatible with artistic practice, artistic education may be doing a considerable disservice to the political and social interventions of art that are shaped by it. To suggest that art could tactically engage with alternative forms of knowledge to expand the political field, I propose artist group Forensic Architecture as an example of a practice that circumvents traditional disciplinary limitations to, in Snow’s parlance, become a bona fide culture characterized by political credibility, albeit at the expense of limiting art’s epistemic influence in the process.

© 2022 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/aps_00073_1
2023-02-07
2024-04-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bailey, S.. ( 2021;), ‘ Art as evidence as art. ’, Art Monthly, 443, February, pp. 6–10.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Ballantyne, N.. ( 2019), Knowing Our Limits, New York:: Oxford University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bishop, C.. ( 2012), Artificial Hells: Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship, London:: Verso;.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Charnley, K.. ( 2021), Sociopolitical Aesthetics: Art, Crisis and Neoliberalism, Radical Aesthetics-Radical Art, London and New York:: Bloomsbury Academic;.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Efland, A. D.. ( 1988;), ‘ Studies in art education: Fourth invited lecture how art became a discipline: Looking at our recent history. ’, Studies in Art Education, 29:3, pp. 262–74.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Esche, C.. ( 2009;), ‘ Include me out: Preparing artists to undo the art world. ’, in S. H. Madoff. (ed.), Art School: Propositions for the 21st Century, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;, pp. 101–13.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Forensic Architecture (ed.) ( 2014), Forensis: The Architecture of Public Truth, London: Sternberg Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Forensic Architecture ( 2020), The Killing of Mark Duggan, London:.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Fuller, M., and Weizman, E.. ( 2021), Investigative Aesthetics: Conflicts and Commons in the Politics of Truth, Brooklyn, NY:: Verso Books;.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Gordon-Nesbitt, R.. ( 2015), Mapping Artists’ Professional Development Programmes in the UK: Knowledge and Skills, London:: Chisenhale Gallery;.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Hayot, E.. ( 2021), Humanist Reason: A History: An Argument: A Plan, New York:: Columbia University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Holert, T.. ( 2020), Knowledge Beside Itself: Contemporary Art’s Epistemic Politics, Berlin:: Sternberg Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Holmes, B.. ( 2009;) ‘ Extradisciplinary investigations: Towards a new critique of institutions. ’, in G. Raunig, and G. Ray. (eds), Art and Contemporary Critical Practice: Reinventing Institutional Critique, London:: MayFlyBooks;, pp. 53–62.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Jelinek, A.. ( 2020), Between Discipline and a Hard Place: The Value of Contemporary Art, London:: Bloomsbury Publishing;.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. McMaster, G.. ( 2020;), ‘ Contemporary art practice and Indigenous knowledge. ’, Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 68:2, pp. 111–28.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Rancière, J.,, McNamara, A., and Ross, T.. ( 2007;), ‘ On medium specificity and discipline crossovers in modern art. ’, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Art, 8:1, pp. 98–107.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. RCA UCU Members ( 2020;), ‘ Letter: Reflection on education from the frontlines. ’, Art Monthly, April, pp. 17–18.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Sholette, G.. ( 2015;), ‘ Delirium and resistance after the social turn. ’, Field: A Journal of Socially-Engaged Art Criticism, 1:435, pp. 95–138.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Smith, H., and Dean, R. T.. ( 2009), Practice-Led Research, Research-Led Practice in the Creative Arts, Edinburgh:: Edinburgh University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Snow, C. P., and Collini, S.. ( 1993), The Two Cultures, e-pub., Cambridge University Press, Canto Classics, ACLS Humanities E-Book;.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Stenberg, H.. ( 2016;), ‘ How is the artist role affected when artists are participating in projects in work life?. ’, International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, 11:1, p. 30549.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Thompson, N.. (ed.) ( 2012), Living as Form: Socially Engaged Art from 1991–2011, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Weizman, E., Bois, Y.-A.,, Feher, M.,, Foster, H., and Weizman, E.. ( 2016;), ‘ On Forensic Architecture: A conversation with Eyal Weizman. ’, October, 156, pp. 116–40.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Wilson, M.. ( 2013;), ‘ Discipline problems and the ethos of research. ’, in M. Wilson, and S. van Ruiten. (eds), SHARE Handbook for Artistic Research Education, Amsterdam:: ELIA European League of Institutes of the Arts;, pp. 203–17.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Wright, S.. ( 2014), Toward a Lexicon of Usership, Eindhoven:: Museum of Arte Útill, Van Abbemuseum;.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. d’Alancaisez, Pierre. ( 2022;), ‘ Non-scientific science and non-artistic art: “Other” knowledges in the political practice of Forensic Architecture. ’, Art & the Public Sphere, Special Issue: ‘Politicizing Artistic Pedagogies: Disciplines, Struggles, Teachings’, 11:1, pp. 115–22, https://doi.org/10.1386/aps_00073_1
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1386/aps_00073_1
Loading
Non-scientific science and non-artistic art: ‘Other’ knowledges in the political practice of Forensic Architecture
Art & the Public Sphere 11, 115 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1386/aps_00073_1
/content/journals/10.1386/aps_00073_1
/content/journals/10.1386/aps_00073_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): artistic knowledge; disciplinarity; evidence; Forensic Architecture; knowledge; Mark Duggan; political art; The Two Cultures

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error