Pitting one form of art against another may not be productive. Allowing a multiplicity of working methods to exist simultaneously without a need to negate one or the other may be a more productive area for exploration. It could be a separate field of exploration. “The problem was no longer the expansion of the limits of art, but testing art’s capacity for resistance within the social field as a whole.” Also the idea that this kind of work is an “insertion” into the social fabric but does not take inspiration from it is appealing.

I think with work of this type (relational, participatory etc.) the indeterminate aspect is what is most appealing to me. I think working with groups of people, the unknown public, could introduce at the very least confusion, if not chaos and/or outright mayhem. This is good thing. I think that setting up a only partially planed event can lead to the most interesting results. I don’t think these event should be planned down to the last detail. I think giving up control or at least letting go of attachments to a particular outcome can be freeing.