Publication: Una bibliografía de las formas. A propósito de Primer PROFORMA.
Loading...
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2020-07-03
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
En el año 2010 se realizó en el MUSAC Primer PROFORMA con el objetivo de responder a las siguientes cuestiones: “¿Sería posible una historia de los procesos propios del arte? ¿En qué lenguaje se plasmaría esa historia?”. El proyecto, a cargo de Txomin Badiola, Jon Mikel Euba y Sergio Prego, suponía un intento por situar la técnica en el centro de la producción, el análisis y la recepción del hecho artístico.
Partiendo de la propuesta de que solo a través de la técnica sería posible conocer el arte, o “el funcionamiento y potencial de los procesos creativos en el arte”, pretendo cuestionar las formas de comunicar ese saber artístico por medio del lenguaje discursivo y el texto. Un TFM sobre escribir las prácticas artísticas. ¿De qué modo hay que violentar el texto para que pueda reflejar algo sobre la naturaleza del hecho artístico? ¿Se puede describir la técnica?
Para dar respuesta a estas preguntas, planteo un estudio de los modos en los que PROFORMA se ha dicho, se ha registrado o se ha explicado, poniéndolo en relación con los debates sobre investigación artística en el ámbito académico y las categorías que los atraviesan.
Planteo, ante todo, un estudio sobre cómo yo digo Primer PROFORMA, situando la técnica de la investigación en el centro de la misma.
The project Primer PROFORMA took place as part of the MUSAC program in 2010. It started out trying to give an answer to the following questions: Is a history that accounts for the specific processes of art possible? Which language should be used to compose it? Led by Txomin Badiola, Jon Mikel Euba and Sergio Prego this project tried to put technique at the core of the production, the analysis and the reception of the artistic event. On the basis that only through technique one can get to know what art is, or “the functioning and potential of creative processes within art”, I want to question the possible ways in which this artistic knowledge can be communicated using text and discursive language. A Master’s Thesis on writing about the artistic practice. In which way should one agitate a text so it can communicate something about the nature of the artistic event? Can the technique be described? I want to propose a study of how PROFORMA has been enunciated, registered or explained; addressing it concerning Academia and the ongoing debates around artistic research. But foremost I want to present a study on how I voice Primer PROFORMA; situating the investigation technique at the core of the research.
The project Primer PROFORMA took place as part of the MUSAC program in 2010. It started out trying to give an answer to the following questions: Is a history that accounts for the specific processes of art possible? Which language should be used to compose it? Led by Txomin Badiola, Jon Mikel Euba and Sergio Prego this project tried to put technique at the core of the production, the analysis and the reception of the artistic event. On the basis that only through technique one can get to know what art is, or “the functioning and potential of creative processes within art”, I want to question the possible ways in which this artistic knowledge can be communicated using text and discursive language. A Master’s Thesis on writing about the artistic practice. In which way should one agitate a text so it can communicate something about the nature of the artistic event? Can the technique be described? I want to propose a study of how PROFORMA has been enunciated, registered or explained; addressing it concerning Academia and the ongoing debates around artistic research. But foremost I want to present a study on how I voice Primer PROFORMA; situating the investigation technique at the core of the research.