Difference between revisions of "Odd Thoughts on Collaboration"

From Critical Practice Chelsea
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
 +
<tr>
 +
<td valign="top" style="padding-right: 20px;">
 +
 +
----
 +
Return to [[Threads and Quotes]] * [[Annotations]] *  [[Practice Literature]] * [[Main Page]]
 +
 +
 +
</td>
 +
<td width="250px" valign="top" style="padding-left: 20px; border-left: 1px dotted #69c;">
 +
Return to [[Threads and Quotes]] * [[Annotations]] *  [[Practice Literature]] * [[Main Page]]
 +
 +
comments:
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 
<blockquote>''The issue of 'ownership,' too, became less easy either to quantify or resolve when working with a flexible concept of collaboration. From the point of view of the issues explored in this paper, the most significance aspect of the process was that the knowledge framework--that is, the expectations, roles and tacit 'rules' that are usual in such situations - was undermined from the start. This produced an unstable situation that had to be negotiated by all those involved, because no single perspective appeared to dominate as different cultural practices intersected.(JW and EGS: RCP, 3)''</blockquote>
 
<blockquote>''The issue of 'ownership,' too, became less easy either to quantify or resolve when working with a flexible concept of collaboration. From the point of view of the issues explored in this paper, the most significance aspect of the process was that the knowledge framework--that is, the expectations, roles and tacit 'rules' that are usual in such situations - was undermined from the start. This produced an unstable situation that had to be negotiated by all those involved, because no single perspective appeared to dominate as different cultural practices intersected.(JW and EGS: RCP, 3)''</blockquote>
  

Revision as of 17:37, 21 August 2010


Return to Threads and Quotes * Annotations * Practice Literature * Main Page


Return to Threads and Quotes * Annotations * Practice Literature * Main Page

comments:



The issue of 'ownership,' too, became less easy either to quantify or resolve when working with a flexible concept of collaboration. From the point of view of the issues explored in this paper, the most significance aspect of the process was that the knowledge framework--that is, the expectations, roles and tacit 'rules' that are usual in such situations - was undermined from the start. This produced an unstable situation that had to be negotiated by all those involved, because no single perspective appeared to dominate as different cultural practices intersected.(JW and EGS: RCP, 3)


Questions raised by John Robert's paper:
Is collaboration essentially a post-autonomous condition? Is it a means by which art is able to dissolve its use value into everyday practice? Or is it a space for autonomy - and if so, what does this autonomy entail?


Return to Threads and Quotes