Re: [NetBehaviour] Complexity, uncertainty & scalability: How Assemble's Granby 4 Streets won 2015 Turner Prize

[Tom Keene]

For lots of reasons this thread is of interest, not least of which because of 
my long-term and very personal involvement in housing activism. And i'm 
undertaking artist and activist led PhD research of urban regeneration...

RE: the questions pritchard comes up with I think are really important and 
relevant for artsist and arts organisations. 

I very much agree. However, its important to be nuanced here and to 'really' 
listen to residents who may welcome exposure at times of crisis, no matter the 
size or heritage of the organisation. Unless I've missed something, I can't see 
a residents voice in the article which raises concerns. 

 I'm publicly critical of Pritchard (hi Stephen if you are on this list!) 
because I think his arguments lack this kind of nuance. I think its fair to be 
this public because he is publicly critical of researchers, institutions, and 
individual artists - one of whom (not me I should add) who is living through 
the misery of regeneration. 

If Pritchard's texts recognised contradictions rather than gunning for binary 
right or wrong positions then I would be forgiving. Thats not to say that terms 
like art-washing don't provide a useful lens to look at the problems of 
regeneration. Rather, the realities of working as an artist and residents 
actual experience should be acknowledged. Artists, for example, often set out 
with good intention then only later realise what they've become involved with. 

Much better to critique and support artists in a better understanding of the 
politics of working in that environment rather than going on a which hunt of 
individuals. Or, even better actively campaign and develop a resident-led 
manifesto for arts practice and urban regeneration that institutions adhere to 
- the world of urban studies proves insightful here. 

This is not to say that big money (in resident terms) doesn't follow 
arts/regeneration, or for that matter architecture/regeneration or 
academia/regeneration - I received full funding to undertake my research for 
example. Rather, I encourage more transparency and dialogue with the residents 
directly affected by these urban regenerative processes. 

Tom 


On Tue, 24 Sep 2019, at 3:01 PM, marc.garrett via NetBehaviour wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> 
> Yes, the questions pritchard comes up with I think are really important and 
> relevant for artsist and arts organisations, in respect that they should look 
> behind the hood regarding what's behind the projects/groups, supporting their 
> art ventures.
> 
> I agree with your comments below,
> 
> >'Perhaps if we’re really interested in regeneration then spending enough
> >money on the huge quantity of quality housing that’s needed, under proper
> >public control might be the ticket with durability, sustainability, space
> >and comfort coming well before art, but I’m sure that’s ‘old fashioned
> >thinking’ .Thanks for posting the piece here :)
> 
> I also feel that big organisations such as the Tate, should not hold as much 
> cultural weight and power over art culture as they currently do. I tend to 
> prefer breaking down big art institutions, into smaller, decentralised, 
> varied groups, across what ever region they may exist in. So that the art 
> narrative (hopefully) is less top-down, and more representative of the 
> locality. I think the ideal would be to introduce a more hybrid way of 
> exhibiting where each show includes local people by some ratio/percentage. 
> 
> Wishing you well.
> 
> marc
> 
>> This is a very interesting and useful piece of writing, Marc - I hadn’t come 
>> across Pritchard’s work before. A helpfully clear eyed and sober look at 
>> magical thinking art-world players, neo-liberal wolves in sheep’s clothing 
>> and the many careerists in between! Perhaps if we’re really interested in 
>> regeneration then spending enough money on the huge quantity of quality 
>> housing that’s needed, under proper public control might be the ticket with 
>> durability, sustainability, space and comfort coming well before art, but 
>> I’m sure that’s ‘old fashioned thinking’ .Thanks for posting the piece here 
>> :)
>> michael 
>> 
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 
>> 
>> On Saturday, September 21, 2019, 12:05 pm, marc.garrett via NetBehaviour 
>>  wrote:

>>> Complexity, uncertainty & scalability: How Assemble's Granby 4 Streets won 
>>> 2015 Turner Prize.
>>> 
>>> Stephen Pritchard.
>>> 
>>> "Did Assemble really play such a big part in Granby 4 Streets? How 
>>> 'community-led' was the project? What was the role of the Community Land 
>>> Trust? How did Assemble come to win the Turner Prize 2015? Who were the 
>>> private social investors and what did they do to help make the project 
>>> happen?
>>> 
>>> The intention here is to blow open the façade behind Granby 4 Streets, 
>>> Assemble and the Turner Prize 2015 win.
>>> 
>>> This is a long read and part of my research into art-led regeneration 
>>> projects that are often far more 

Re: [NetBehaviour] Complexity, uncertainty & scalability: How Assemble's Granby 4 Streets won 2015 Turner Prize

[marc.garrett via NetBehaviour]

Hi Michael,

Yes, the questions pritchard comes up with I think are really important and 
relevant for artsist and arts organisations, in respect that they should look 
behind the hood regarding what's behind the projects/groups, supporting their 
art ventures.

I agree with your comments below,

>'Perhaps if we’re really interested in regeneration then spending enough
>money on the huge quantity of quality housing that’s needed, under proper
>public control might be the ticket with durability, sustainability, space
>and comfort coming well before art, but I’m sure that’s ‘old fashioned
>thinking’ .Thanks for posting the piece here :)

I also feel that big organisations such as the Tate, should not hold as much 
cultural weight and power over art culture as they currently do. I tend to 
prefer breaking down big art institutions, into smaller, decentralised, varied 
groups, across what ever region they may exist in. So that the art narrative 
(hopefully) is less top-down, and more representative of the locality. I think 
the ideal would be to introduce a more hybrid way of exhibiting where each show 
includes local people by some ratio/percentage.

Wishing you well.

marc

> This is a very interesting and useful piece of writing, Marc - I hadn’t come 
> across Pritchard’s work before. A helpfully clear eyed and sober look at 
> magical thinking art-world players, neo-liberal wolves in sheep’s clothing 
> and the many careerists in between! Perhaps if we’re really interested in 
> regeneration then spending enough money on the huge quantity of quality 
> housing that’s needed, under proper public control might be the ticket with 
> durability, sustainability, space and comfort coming well before art, but I’m 
> sure that’s ‘old fashioned thinking’ .Thanks for posting the piece here :)
> michael
>
> [Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone](https://yho.com/footer0)
>
> On Saturday, September 21, 2019, 12:05 pm, marc.garrett via NetBehaviour 
>  wrote:
>
>> Complexity, uncertainty & scalability: How Assemble's Granby 4 Streets won 
>> 2015 Turner Prize.
>>
>> Stephen Pritchard.
>>
>> "Did Assemble really play such a big part in Granby 4 Streets?  How 
>> 'community-led' was the project?  What was the role of the Community Land 
>> Trust?  How did Assemble come to win the Turner Prize 2015?  Who were the 
>> private social investors and what did they do to help make the project 
>> happen?
>>
>> The intention here is to blow open the façade behind Granby 4 Streets, 
>> Assemble and the Turner Prize 2015 win.
>>
>> This is a long read and part of my research into art-led regeneration 
>> projects that are often far more complex than is often portrayed.
>>
>> I argue that the media and art world picture of Assemble is overly 
>> simplistic and masks a far more complex and uncertain set of events that, 
>> ultimately, relied on 'mystery' private social investors to force local 
>> government to act in support of the project and to lever money from national 
>> grant funders."
>>
>> http://tiny.cc/dqq4cz
>> ___
>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>> NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
>> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>>>___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

Re: [NetBehaviour] Complexity, uncertainty & scalability: How Assemble's Granby 4 Streets won 2015 Turner Prize

[Michael Szpakowski]

This is a very interesting and useful piece of writing, Marc - I hadn’t come 
across Pritchard’s work before. A helpfully clear eyed and sober look at 
magical thinking art-world players, neo-liberal wolves in sheep’s clothing and 
the many careerists in between! Perhaps if we’re really interested in 
regeneration then spending enough money on the huge quantity of quality housing 
that’s needed, under proper public control might be the ticket with durability, 
sustainability, space and comfort coming well before art, but I’m sure that’s 
‘old fashioned thinking’ .Thanks for posting the piece here :)
michael 

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Saturday, September 21, 2019, 12:05 pm, marc.garrett via NetBehaviour 
 wrote:

Complexity, uncertainty & scalability: How Assemble's Granby 4 Streets won 2015 
Turner Prize.

Stephen Pritchard.

"Did Assemble really play such a big part in Granby 4 Streets?  How 
'community-led' was the project?  What was the role of the Community Land 
Trust?  How did Assemble come to win the Turner Prize 2015?  Who were the 
private social investors and what did they do to help make the project happen?

The intention here is to blow open the façade behind Granby 4 Streets, Assemble 
and the Turner Prize 2015 win.

This is a long read and part of my research into art-led regeneration projects 
that are often far more complex than is often portrayed.

I argue that the media and art world picture of Assemble is overly simplistic 
and masks a far more complex and uncertain set of events that, ultimately, 
relied on 'mystery' private social investors to force local government to act 
in support of the project and to lever money from national grant funders."

http://tiny.cc/dqq4cz
___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour



___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

[NetBehaviour] Complexity, uncertainty & scalability: How Assemble's Granby 4 Streets won 2015 Turner Prize

[marc.garrett via NetBehaviour]

Complexity, uncertainty & scalability: How Assemble's Granby 4 Streets won 2015 
Turner Prize.

Stephen Pritchard.

"Did Assemble really play such a big part in Granby 4 Streets?  How 
'community-led' was the project?  What was the role of the Community Land 
Trust?  How did Assemble come to win the Turner Prize 2015?  Who were the 
private social investors and what did they do to help make the project happen?

The intention here is to blow open the façade behind Granby 4 Streets, Assemble 
and the Turner Prize 2015 win.

This is a long read and part of my research into art-led regeneration projects 
that are often far more complex than is often portrayed.

I argue that the media and art world picture of Assemble is overly simplistic 
and masks a far more complex and uncertain set of events that, ultimately, 
relied on 'mystery' private social investors to force local government to act 
in support of the project and to lever money from national grant funders."

http://tiny.cc/dqq4cz___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour