I don't have any new art to post this week, but this afternoon I went to an exhibition opening at the Slought Foundation. The exhibition is by the artist Braco Dimitrijević, called "The Casual Passer-By I Met at 3.01 pm, Philadelphia, April 9, 2007." Although the artist and his work pose interesting questions about anonymity, fame, and artist-subject relationships, I was much more interested in Slought's attempt to move outside the traditional gallery setting. The mega-sized portrait was hung outdoors on the side of the Fresh Grocer building, which in itself takes the art outside of the gallery, available to the public. But there were a series of "conversations" that went along with it, as well. Today's opening did not have wine and cheese inside the gallery, but was composed of 4 gatherings of people at various sites near the Foundation. The one I went to was with the artist, and someone from Slought recording what he was saying on an iPod. About 15 people huddled around him in the cold and asked questions, although it was difficult to hear.

"The Casual Passer-By I Met at 3.01 pm, Philadelphia, April 9, 2007" by Braco Dimitrijević

Particularly in the context of works that are attempting to interact with the public, it makes sense that any relevant discourse should also be available to the public. And it was, but the same problem still remained. Although people walking by noticed a group swarming around in a circle on the sidewalk, unless you already knew about this and had the map of where to go, how many random people just stopped to listen? And if they did, were they intimidated and left? How can you integrate art more fully into public life than having a conversation about it on a park bench? But this still does not seem like enough. There are still people that are alienated, and it still gives off an intellectual air of superiority.

"Conversation" sites in University City

Despite these complaints, I am continually impressed with Slought's dedication to broadening contemporary art's audiences. The fact that artistic discussions came out to the sidewalk is in itself fascinating and in my mind becomes its own form of art. The idea of placement inside or outside of dividing walls to define our behavior is very interesting. Certain spaces have somehow been deemed the most appropriate to present, view, celebrate, and discuss art, but why can't that happen elsewhere? Although public works like Dimitrijević's begin this process by broadcasting to the public, it does so by attempting to transform a public space into an "art-appropriate" space. It ends up taking the elite and intimidating aspects of the art world and pasting it on a public space. Public conversations may also be trying to transform theater steps and park benches into "art-appropriate" spaces, but they also create a platform in which anyone could potentially participate, and at least begin to break down the walls between galleries and the outside. If we are going to hang giant artworks for the public in public places, we should also allow for a more intimate interaction with this work; the only way we can successfully do this is to discuss its penetration of our everyday lives, not just look at it.