Are artist collectives collaborative?
Collaboration has become a buzzword among contemporary art’s cultural bureaucrats and market operatives.
Collaboration has become a buzzword among contemporary art’s cultural bureaucrats and market operatives. This officialdom appears out of step with the non-institutional forms of collaboration suggested by the term “collectivity.” And yet artist collectives, as closed-loop systems, are antithetical to the collaborative wellness mantra we are used to hearing in the global high-end culture industry. In this world, “collectives” of cultural, corporate, and market partners collaborate with artist collectives — often awkwardly, as seen at documenta fifteen, curated by Indonesian-based ruangrupa. Without centralised curatorial power, the mega-exhibition’s bureaucratic structures were not prepared for democracy in practice, despite their virtue signalling.
Exclusive to the Magazine
Are artist collectives collaborative? by Lévi McLean is featured in full in Issue 2 of Memo magazine.
Get your hands on the print edition through our online shop or save up to 20% and get free domestic shipping with a subscription.
Related
Kim Gordon’s rock-star body is an object of projection—vacuuming, sleeping, wielding a Jazzmaster in Airbnb limbo. From Sonic Youth to No Home Record, she performs middle-class blankness, but what’s staged, what’s real, and who’s the audience for her disembodied domestic rebellion?
Tim Burns’s art blurs fiction and reality, often staging disasters before they happen. His 1972 Ghost Train redesign eerily foreshadowed the 1979 Luna Park fire, just as his 1977 film Why Cars? uncannily prefigured 9/11. Through rupture, collision, and shock, Burns’s work remains less prophetic than provocatively attuned to history’s unfolding disasters.
Melbourne’s art scene is fertile ground for Tall Poppy proliferation and carnage.
