Friday, April 13, 2012

More Edgar Arceneaux

I'm so glad to hear from a number of you that you loved Edgar Arceneaux' talk!  I wanted also to share these links with you.  I didn't want to circulate these before his visit so as not to overshadow his time here.  It was clear from his talk that Arceneaux' work is conceptually complex and invites prolonged, thoughtful engagement.  And he didn't even talk about other critically acclaimed recent works, including "Alchemy of Comedy...Stupid" (that I saw at the 2008 Whitney Biennial) or "The Algorithm Doesn't Love You.

Anyway, you might be interested to learn about the current situation at the Watts House Project, as told in an LA Times story dated April 8.  But also be sure to read the articulate response by Sue Bell Yank that puts in perspective what might be going on.  Artists engaged in social practice can take risks and have much more at stake than a solitary individual accountable only to oneself; the WHP involved negotiating with powerful people and bureaucracies, as well as gaining the trust and involvement of residents.

 http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-ca-watts-house-project-20120408,0,117418.story


http://suebellyank.com/2012/04/09/in-defense-of-watts-house-project/

6 comments:

  1. His talk was the most unique and purposeful from today's stand point of view of a working artist. Edgar really showcased the workings of his social practice and involvement with the community. The bones and blood of his project were cohesive with his vision and mission of the Watts House Project, but I felt it would've worked out smoother if precautions were taken to prevent problems rising from potential litigation and legality of certain renovations. The consequences led to the community to think not much was done with the funds Edgar had received for the project, but in reality it was forming into a complex issue. Ultimately, if there's no trust and support from the environment, there's no involvement and the social practice would go downhill. Putting everything in global perspective though, I felt that the artist still definitely made art more active within the community.

    ReplyDelete
  2. After reading both the LA times article and the response article in defense of the Watts house project, it seems as if Edgar bit off more than he can chew. The complexity of both legal and moral obligations of this community social practice project wasn't thought out as much as it should have been before starting the project. Although not of the issues could have been foreseen some could have been prevented. For example when the tax law came into question the answer was to have contracts signed by the homeowners, but obviously none of the homeowners wanted to become obligated for the gift of renovation that Edgar had been doing the past 3 years. The problem Edgar faces is the unforeseen issues that have come about and the distrust that's been building within the homeowners because of the back and forth and unfinished renovations. The Watts project will probably make it out the other side as long as they finish in a timely manner and can figure out the legal part. Obviously this project was brought about for the betterment of a community and as long as he meets his obligations everyone will be happy. It's unfortunate when something positive becomes jaded with negativity. If the Watt's project works out for everybody involved it will open up the door's for other cities to help out communities in the same way. Hopefully everyone will come to a mutual understanding and figure out a way for the project to finish and the taxes associated with each property to be worked out legally and the true responsible party will become responsible. If I was the homeowner of one of this homes I too would feel frustrated and deceived but there should be some way to work this out.

    ReplyDelete
  3. First and foremost, I have seen an increasing lack of objectivity in today's media. Thanks to Sue Bell Yank's post, this is clearly evident in the article written by the LA Times. Yank's post rings true to me it lies directly address omissions and misleading statements in the LA Times article. I think Edgar went into this with the best of intentions; however, like Jenny stated, he may have bit off more than he could chew or he just didn't get the right mixture of experienced people on his board. Zoning, permits, building codes, etc. are such that they drive even the most experience architect crazy. I think that this project has a wonderful, heartfelt foundation that just needs to work out the kinks and figure out how to deal with both the homeowners and the public. I'm crossing my fingers for them because if they can figure out the model, then maybe this can spread to other communities/cities (also like Jenny said.)

    ReplyDelete
  4. If this was intended to be just a conceptual project done to bring awareness, then the problems and delays are nothing to worry about. The social practice aspect, the direct impact this has on these individuals and the lack of results, is problematic. I remember hearing of controversies surrounding “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition” where those who received renovated homes could not afford the upkeep and faced larger mortgages, taxes, and insurance. Finances in a charity situation like this needs to be closely monitored and realistic plans need to be proposed. Any home improvement show I have ever watched had unexpected expenses that resulted in the modification of plans and California building codes are tough. The WHP learning from their mistakes and overcoming unforeseen circumstances is good, but being a part of an experiment is probably more than these homeowners signed up for as well.

    ReplyDelete
  5. After reading the two articles it seems as if Edgar is dealing with too many projects at once, he is working on his own personal career and with the problems that arise with non profits. I know from experience from volunteering with housing projects, that it is a long tedious process as are all projects that have to get city permits. It does seem unfair that the residents have to deal with so many delays, but Edgar seems positive in working with them, it was an experimental project, and those take time to jump start, and money. It seems like everyone needs to extend some patience in receiving all the benefits that were promised, and maybe Edgar should have more communication with the community, or at least a newly appointed spokes person.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It does seem that Arceneaux was perhaps a little too ambitious with the Watts House Project. When he gave his artist lecture he seemed sincere and passionate about the project, but I did get lost when he started talking about the financial part of things, and I am sure that this is how the residents of Watts House feel. In reading the LA article stating that the WHP is to not be trusted, I thought that this article was skewed in view and really biased. Of course there are two sides to every story and while there might be some issues happening with the project right now does not mean it is all bad and the concept is not there. I believe that Arceneaux wants WHP to work and I think his vision is there, but these things don't happen overnight. Reading the article, there are many legal issues the board of WHP needs to deal with before going any further with the project. This must be frustrating for the residents, having strange people come to their door asking them to sign contracts, but I think that the residents need to be understanding as well and see that the project has potential, it just needs more time to grow.

    ReplyDelete