SwePub - sökning: onr:"swepub:oai:gup.ub.gu.se/2...

Numrering	Referens	Omslagsbild	Hitta
1.	Phillips, Andrea (författare) Who is the We? Race and inequality in Contemporary Art : Who is the We? FormerWest Symposium 2015 Ingår i: Former West conference. Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract I would like to open up the issue of who the 'we' is in contemporary art by broadly outlining issues of inequality based on a (violent) misunderstanding of 'cultural diversity' that still pervades UK culture. On the one hand we have Peter Bazalgette (Chair of the ACE) making standard policy claims for a generalised spread of funds for 'diversity', on the other we lose (or about to lose) spaces for a more complex, Stuart Hall-like approach to issues of race and identity. This is done within the framework of the rise of UKIP and its dangerous rhetoric of reasonableness, the marketisation of the arts and its embedded meritocracy (I will use Paul Gilroy here). Of course the issue of Iniva is contradictory, as it has also been 'dumbed down' through processes of curatorial and funding bureaucracy over the last 10 years, not withstanding some important projects that have occurred within it). Since we are the first panel my aim would be to locate the debate in the UK context and be quite pragmatic.

Phillips, Andrea (författare)
Who is the We? Race and inequality in Contemporary Art : Who is the We? FormerWest Symposium
2015
Ingår i: Former West conference.
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- I would like to open up the issue of who the 'we' is in contemporary art by broadly outlining issues of inequality based on a (violent) misunderstanding of 'cultural diversity' that still pervades UK culture. On the one hand we have Peter Bazalgette (Chair of the ACE) making standard policy claims for a generalised spread of funds for 'diversity', on the other we lose (or about to lose) spaces for a more complex, Stuart Hall-like approach to issues of race and identity. This is done within the framework of the rise of UKIP and its dangerous rhetoric of reasonableness, the marketisation of the arts and its embedded meritocracy (I will use Paul Gilroy here). Of course the issue of Iniva is contradictory, as it has also been 'dumbed down' through processes of curatorial and funding bureaucracy over the last 10 years, not withstanding some important projects that have occurred within it). Since we are the first panel my aim would be to locate the debate in the UK context and be quite pragmatic.

Träfflista för sökning "onr:"swepub:oai:gup.ub.gu.se/231182" "