The critique for this project really made me evaluate what it means for art to be “disruptive.” Although I thought our attempt was generally successful, it didn’t really accomplish all that I had hoped. When thinking about why this was the case on my own, it was hard to pin-point a specific reason. During the critique, however, people made poignant contributions that helped unpack what could’ve been done to make this project more impactful.
The goal of the elevator art gallery was to cultivate a community essence within a space that lacks empathy or bonding moments. The elevator is a largely stressful and competitive arena for the going to and coming from places, and not so much about “living in the moment.” The gallery was meant to slow us down, to look around at each other, talk, and appreciate art from our community members.
This concept would have been way more successful in many ways. One way that was mentioned was this if this were an ongoing project, that if every month an elevator gallery was put up, and became something the community has built and sustained. In addition, it was suggested that the names of the artists should’ve been beneath the works within the elevator, so community members may recognize the names of their peers and spark conversation. The next critique was something that I hadn’t thought of at all, but really changed my perception of the gallery; that the elevator was an allegory for the art world (and an artists’ trajectory) as it goes up and down, pulls people in/spits them out, while remaining entirely anonymous (except for a select few). In the future, I think I’d actually like to explore this more. Parsons remains a petri dish of artists that naturally breed anxiety about the future (who will “make it”, what is “making it”, how can I “make it”.) I think in an elevator especially, being forced to view art that challenges the impenetrability and competitiveness of the “art world” will make us turn to each other and hopefully uncover the veil of competition and hopefully restructure the bond of a community by recognizing that the “art world’s” intention is to divide an artistic community into a fragmented diaspora.
In the revised concept, I think more multi-media based art would do well. Instead of art hanging on the walls, there should be something on the walls that seems just beyond reach. A few ideas come to mind:
-Hopper-esque prints that reminds us of self-isolation, things just beyond reach.
-Mirrors, images of artists
-Artists who were brilliant but never “made it” until post-mortem
-Artists who “made it” but maybe didn’t deserve it
-Sound art: reminders of what it means to be in a Parsons elevator, being on the way to class, taking that step to “make it.”
