Commentary
KWCM invited people to record their responses to three questions prior to the conference. You can also record your response – follow the instructions on the right.
These were the questions:
Who believes that “Great Art for Everyone” is problematic? Funders and policymakers aspire to engage more people in the arts, and yet socially engaged practice is perceived by many to be marginalised within the Visual Arts sector. Why is there a real or perceived hierarchy of value between work which sits in a gallery context and socially engaged practice?
What is at stake? Who is seriously critiquing socially engaged arts practice? Are debates about process versus product still relevant? If a piece of work delivers on social outcomes, is that enough? What academic discourse is taking place in relation to Socially Engaged Arts Practice and how can this have an impact on the sector?
Who defines quality? Most SEAP is realised through a complex series of relationships between funders, commissioners, arts organisations, artists and the public. How do you navigate these partnerships? Can you satisfy the demands for risk-taking high quality visual arts practice against the need to deliver against social agendas, and keeping participants feeling safe?
[show video pieces under three headings as they currently appear on home page; when click on piece, it goes to new individual page as now, with name of person and says ‘recorded prior to the conference’ or ‘recorded after conference by someone who was / wasn’t there’]
