A c t 5 E p i l o g u e
When embarking on this project I was interested to know what the action of curating could tell me about the action of self-advocacy, and if by bringing the two into dialogue there were practices and discourses which could cross over and move in between. What emerged through the curation of Auto Agents were questions of autonomy and authorship, and furthermore, the individual versus collective, author versus observer, ‘real life’ versus art. But rather than advocating for one over another, we wanted to explore how these polarities can sit in relationship to each other.
Throughout this thesis, I have explored the ways in which autonomy is a contested idea and then demonstrated how this complexity became lived and visible during the curation of Auto Agents. Autonomy is “touted as the hallmark of personhood” (Kittay, 2002, p. 248), yet is a state both sought after and treated with suspicion. As we have seen in the literature, autonomy has been desired in the context of self-advocacy, now with more relational models of interdependence now emerging. Equally, the relationship between artists and curators indicates how ideas of autonomy relates not simply to the right of curators to act themselves but how they are tied into the careful negotiation with artists. But as indicated in Act 3, Scene 1: But We Chose Him? this negotiation is complex and I experienced first hand the blurred lines of autonomy and authorship between artists and curators. For me, this presented an opportunity for an intervention; to investigate how approaches used in self-advocacy could be carried over into curatorship in an effort to make the authorial boundaries more explicit and tangible for everyone. In self-advocacy, these approaches are devoted to support learning disabled people to identify and utilise their networks (e.g., PATH’s), recognising autonomy in life is enabled through collective support and action. However from undertaking this research, I believe they could be as useful for curators in making explicit the intricate linkages that enable complex collaborations that underpin the making of exhibitions. Equally, self-advocates and their supporters could learn from curators. Through the commissioning process and final installation of the work, this research enabled us to experience and reflect on the importance of risk and experimentation, which we found to be more common place in the work of curators and artists than self-advocates. On this, British artist Cornelia Parker (Buck and McClean, 2012, p.81) commented;
When embarking on this project I was interested to know what the action of curating could tell me about the action of self-advocacy, and if by bringing the two into dialogue there were practices and discourses which could cross over and move in between. What emerged through the curation of Auto Agents were questions of autonomy and authorship, and furthermore, the individual versus collective, author versus observer, ‘real life’ versus art. But rather than advocating for one over another, we wanted to explore how these polarities can sit in relationship to each other.
Throughout this thesis, I have explored the ways in which autonomy is a contested idea and then demonstrated how this complexity became lived and visible during the curation of Auto Agents. Autonomy is “touted as the hallmark of personhood” (Kittay, 2002, p. 248), yet is a state both sought after and treated with suspicion. As we have seen in the literature, autonomy has been desired in the context of self-advocacy, now with more relational models of interdependence now emerging. Equally, the relationship between artists and curators indicates how ideas of autonomy relates not simply to the right of curators to act themselves but how they are tied into the careful negotiation with artists. But as indicated in Act 3, Scene 1: But We Chose Him? this negotiation is complex and I experienced first hand the blurred lines of autonomy and authorship between artists and curators. For me, this presented an opportunity for an intervention; to investigate how approaches used in self-advocacy could be carried over into curatorship in an effort to make the authorial boundaries more explicit and tangible for everyone. In self-advocacy, these approaches are devoted to support learning disabled people to identify and utilise their networks (e.g., PATH’s), recognising autonomy in life is enabled through collective support and action. However from undertaking this research, I believe they could be as useful for curators in making explicit the intricate linkages that enable complex collaborations that underpin the making of exhibitions. Equally, self-advocates and their supporters could learn from curators. Through the commissioning process and final installation of the work, this research enabled us to experience and reflect on the importance of risk and experimentation, which we found to be more common place in the work of curators and artists than self-advocates. On this, British artist Cornelia Parker (Buck and McClean, 2012, p.81) commented;
|
If you like an artist, have faith in them! Even if the end product is not necessarily something you like as much as something they’ve done before, it might be a very interesting point in their development that you helped to facilitate and 10 years down the line you’ll think, ‘Wow, that was an amazing leap!’ All the great patrons of the arts, the ones people write books about, were those who had the nerve to allow the artists to be themselves.
|
This comment stayed with me throughout my time on this project. Whenever I read it, instead of artists, I imagine Parker is really talking about self-advocates, and I hope this research demonstrates that curatorship and self-advocacy do have practices and ideas to learn from each other.
Auto Agent's Launch Event, 2016
Through curating Auto Agents, I also learnt that an inclusive and relational approach to curating facilitates an active experience, providing audiences a space within the process to be integrated, often helping to materialise or to activate the works. In Auto Agents this is literally the case through James’ mechanical sculpture or Mark’s interactive ‘reading’ experience. Auto Agents became a site for social interactions and exchanges catalysed by the artworks and engagement events such as the group’s drawing tours. This engagement highlights possibilities of curatorial practice as an alternative realm of knowledge production, through its ability to establish wide reaching connections between people, disciplines and counterpoints. This becomes politically potent for learning disabled curators as the ability to affect change in their own lives requires the engagement of diverse fields. Claire Bishop asserts that “at a certain point, art has to hand [responsibility] over to other institutions if social change is to be achieved: it is not enough to keep producing activist art” (2011, 55 mins). Auto Agents brought together learning disabled people and their support networks, learning disability professionals, self-advocacy groups, local authority workers and local councillors, artists and artist studios, artwork fabricators, Bluecoat’s programming, curation, front of house, press, marketing and engagement staff, external press, social media, the University of Leeds, academics, students and of course, the exhibition visitors. Through this collision of people, disciplines, institutions and viewpoints, new networks were forged, new conversations took place, and ultimately new meanings were made. Therefore we need to recognise curating as an experimental activity overlapping with the world, able to lend support towards a political cause through making experiences and methodologies visible though artistic imagination.
And finally, a frequent question I encountered during this study was ‘do you think anyone can be a curator?’. From undertaking this research I would say yes, most people can. But to engage ‘anyone’ with this practice, it must be underpinned by a rigorous process which I have worked to develop during this study and plan to continue to refine in the future. During this project’s very first workshop, outlined in Act 2 Scene 1: So, What Is A Curator Anyway?, Eddie draws attention to the opacity and mysteriousness of the curator’s role. However this research demonstrates that curating is not mysterious and can be broken down into actionable parts. By interrogating curatorship and breaking it down in ways as demonstrated in this research, it allows curating to be more usable for more people, challenging the perception that it is an exclusive job for the privileged few. At the same time, this new attention to process explicitly evidences curatorial decisions and ways of working, making curating more rigorous and transparent. By enabling this greater rigour and transparency regarding how exhibitions are curated, it is therefore hoped that this research contributes to understanding the process and practices by which our cultural spaces can become democratised.
And finally, a frequent question I encountered during this study was ‘do you think anyone can be a curator?’. From undertaking this research I would say yes, most people can. But to engage ‘anyone’ with this practice, it must be underpinned by a rigorous process which I have worked to develop during this study and plan to continue to refine in the future. During this project’s very first workshop, outlined in Act 2 Scene 1: So, What Is A Curator Anyway?, Eddie draws attention to the opacity and mysteriousness of the curator’s role. However this research demonstrates that curating is not mysterious and can be broken down into actionable parts. By interrogating curatorship and breaking it down in ways as demonstrated in this research, it allows curating to be more usable for more people, challenging the perception that it is an exclusive job for the privileged few. At the same time, this new attention to process explicitly evidences curatorial decisions and ways of working, making curating more rigorous and transparent. By enabling this greater rigour and transparency regarding how exhibitions are curated, it is therefore hoped that this research contributes to understanding the process and practices by which our cultural spaces can become democratised.
Overview of process
In summary, it is this rigour in the curatorial process, which I developed using self-advocacy tools, that enables more people to curate. This rigour is vital as it firstly makes curating more transparent, useable, and therefore democratic, and secondly, it enables risk taking and experimentation. Furthermore, this keen attention to the curatorial process enabled myself and the curators to experience and reflect upon ideas of autonomy. We discovered that autonomy is not always about being independent, but is in fact enabled through our interdependence, whether you are a self-advocate or a curator.
