Šum #4, THEORY – PRACTICE
This time we did not want to affirm the local mantra which never forgets to remind us of the lack of critically and theoretically aspired writing about contemporary art. First of all, because this mantra often forgets that these practices have also something to do with the conditions of (in)visibility or the problem of exclusivity of existing platforms and institutions that are supposed to cultivate critical theory and writing about contemporary art. However, establishing new platforms or magazines for critical thought that is supposed to answer to the calls “not enough!” also turns out as an inadequate strategy, if it is not parallely followed by the problematization of “how” to write.
For this reason we chose for the fourth issue of ŠUM the theme of difference and relation of theory-practice that opens up a classical problematic field in which the starting binarism was already criticized, deconstructed and theoretically disposed of as unproductive, illusory and fictitious for innumerous times. In spite of that it is very useful as a starting point, since its different forms are still actual in their effects in different fields.
If we are speaking about the actuality of the difference between speech and work that is implied by the starting relation in its final form within the Western thought tradition, then we ought to treat it in its concrete occurrences. Here it becomes clear that these are very heterogenous and that they do not produce uniform effects as the historically most manifested paradigm of this relation would make us think. If we limit ourselves to the field of art we can firstly say at least that no artistic practice is mute, but always exists in a certain discursive milieu, it is accompanied and affected by different types of speech, diverse concepts and themes, also rumors and popular discourses.
On the other hand speech is never neutral, universal or non-localized, it never takes a certain art practice as its object in an impartial way in the innocence of knowing, but it does so always from a certain position, which is not necessarily a conscious thing for the speaker, and with many effects of its discursive act, which are also not necessarily his or her intentions. The relation theory-practice is thus not so clear anymore, but painted in many shades, of which some are opened by the articles in this issue. They touch upon this relation in different ways, moving closer or more distantly from it, addressing it directly and explicitly or rather indirectly and implicitly, but in the act of writing itself they are always already practicing a certain form of it.
ŠUM, Journal for contemporary art criticism and theory
n. 4, THEORY – PRACTICE
ISSN printed version: 2335-4232 | ISSN online version: 2536-2194
Editors: Izidor Barši, Kaja Kraner, Domen Ograjenšek, Tjaša Pogačar, Tomo Stanič, Andrej Škufca
Authors: Jože Barši, Pia Brezavšček, Kaja Kraner, Jovita Pristovšek, Tomo Stanič
Design: Ajdin Bašić
Design realisation: Linda Soderholm
Proofreading and translations: Miha Šuštar
Print: Demat, d. o. o.
published by: Društvo Galerija Boks, Marije Hvaličeve 14, 1000 Ljubljana
The publishing of this issue was supported by:
Društvo Galerija BOKS
Koroška galerija likovnih umetnosti (KGLU)
Mednarodni grafični likovni center (MGLC)
Mestna galerija Ljubljana
Moderna galerija in Muzej sodobne umetnosti Metelkova (MG+MSUM)
Umetnostna galerija Maribor (UGM)
Zavod Celeia Celje (Center sodobnih umetnosti)