New Patrons

EnglishDeutsch

A Practice Report: Daniela Medina Poch

Mediator, Colombia

Daniela Medina Poch is a-born-in-Colombia, based-in-Berlin visual artist who likes to research and write. She is currently part of the Art in Context MA program at UdK through which she came to learn about the New Patrons Protocol, whose methodology resonates strongly with her practice.

In June 2020, together with local mediator and specialist Felipe Medina and an intergenerational group of 11 people, she sowed the seeds for a commission in Barichara, Colombia. Since then, she has been engaged in thinking with the Protocol, especially interested in the translations of the protocol into new situations it could embrace in order to enable endogenous commissions, or, to trigger a shift from old patrons to new patterns.

For Commissioned by – Art in Relation, international mediators reflected on the significance of the New Patrons Protocol for their work: The Protocol can in principle be put into practice anywhere in the world, as it does nothing more than describe a way in which people can work together. All decisions are made locally by independent actors. Moreover, the protocol enables not only contemporary art projects, but also scientific research commissions, as well as theatre productions, music, architecture, and much more.

But how universal is the protocol, which emerged in European contexts against the background of a French cultural policy around 1989, really? How is it interpreted and possibly adapted not only in different regions of Europe, but also in Cameroon, Colombia, Lebanon and Tunisia? How do different historical, cultural and political backgrounds change the perspectives of art on behalf of citizens and the concrete work of mediators? Can they recommend that the protocol be taken up in societies where it has not yet played a role?

The Mediators have reflected on these questions and their texts are now published in this series.

The New Patrons Protocol as a Pluriversal Rhizomatic Movement

The New Patrons of Barichara

Mediator Felipe Medina with the commissioners during an exercise of creative writing for the development of the commission sentence.

Photo: Alun Medina Barichara, Sept. 2020

In a recent seminar guided by New Patrons Germany’s director, Alexander Koch, we debated whether the New Patrons should aim to become an international institution or rather a movement with multiple smaller or larger independent organizational structures. This question is fundamental when envisioning the future of the New Patrons Protocol. I am personally more interested in the second option: Projects following the New Patrons Protocol as a planetary movement, with its own life and its own possibility of mutating and being integrated. As a movement, they recognize their context of origin but they are also able to delink from it.

It is worth recalling that universality has been a historical tool used to hegemonize certain logics, narratives and hierarchies, reinforcing their perception as objective, natural and therefore unquestionable. Instead I like to think of pluriversality, or as the Mexican Zapatistas declared 27 years ago, “El mundo que queremos es uno donde quepan muchos mundos.” (The world we want is a world in which many worlds fit) 1. Within this vision, there is no hegemonic truth, no objectivity, nor any history; there are rather truths, subjectivities, and histories, all non-hegemonic and plural.

Any movement that aims to become planetary should look upon itself and ask whether it allows other worlds within, and whether the structure can adapt to the local needs, visions and specificities of the places it aims to reach. At the same time, anything that aims to become planetary should also be aware of where and under which conditions and circumstances it emerged.

Aerial view of Colombia – Barichara Santander

Photo: Pablo Andrés Ortega. Barichara, Nov. 2012

The New Patrons Protocol emerged in France in the early nineties, while François Mitterrand served as President, and just after the Berlin wall was torn down. Some of these factors, among others, might have provoked Belgian photographer and artist Francois Hers to imagine an art of democracy, an art that would be reinserted back into society – a significant power shift which 30 years later makes many of our hearts beat in resonance with it.

Now the concepts of art, civil society and democracy do not have the same connotations in France, Germany or Colombia, and in the process of activating The New Patrons Protocol in other locations, these local articulations should certainly be acknowledged and embraced. For instance, in Colombia, due to distrust in the public realm, the notion of citizenship is not a substantial form of collectivity. Networks of affection, comunidades and cooperatives, amongst other expressions of assemblage are rather more present. A regional translation of the Protocol could acknowledge these differences in the articulation of commission groups, when asking for financial support and also when understanding how consensus and dissension function locally.

If we were to understand the Protocol as a movement, maybe we can also conceive it as an open source methodology. As such, there might be less control over it... but wouldn’t this be interesting in some ways? Interpreting the Protocol as a movement and as an open source methodology will probably trigger local agencies and context-specific criteria, basic principles for local processes which are able to respond in resonance to site-specific opportunities and challenges. Furthermore, the appropriation, internalization and possible reinterpretation of the Protocol as a methodology would keep the Protocol alive and resonating, thus enabling various forms of visibility and perhaps activating unexpected funding sources – as well as potential organic and rhizomatic spread of New Patrons’ processes.

A symbolic separation from a blueprint would potentially mean that the Protocol is no longer “exported” but rather “activated” in different contexts. These activations are not derivatives of “an original” but are original in their own specificities. This would be a way to give the Protocol more relevance as an approach, methodology or mindset rather than as an institution. Furthermore, this would enable a horizontal dialogue amongst the activations of the Protocol – an exchange which would certainly nourish the networks.

Barichara, May 2014

Photo: Omar Andrés Díaz Sotomonte

As an institution, the New Patrons is able to gather initiatives together, articulate them and bring them to a broader planetary conversation. This can be strategic in terms of visibility and when requesting funding. In this regard, there is an interesting opportunity for The Protocol to contribute in the redistribution of privileges and opportunities, a necessary labor in an unjust planet. Nevertheless, patronizing approaches should be avoided. Instead, if the Protocol aims to trigger a planetary power redistribution, accessibility in combination with a local sense of agency are fundamental.

Additionally, another question to examine is the possibility to reframe the role of artists in the commissions and examine in which contexts it should be framed as an art project and in which others as a social project. So far the artist, who usually comes from abroad, is in charge of finding an unconventional way to tackle the commission. This is a brilliant opportunity for artists to work directly with communities. The artist listens and negotiates with the community, and in many ways the community decides which artist they need, but, generally, the artist has the last word. Which other roles and forms of artistic interventions can we envision? Under what circumstances should the main goal be making contemporary art accessible and when should it be using art as a tool for social change? Concomitentes, the New Patrons programme in Spain, is framed as a social project that will eventually be led by civilians, for example. Also, in Cameroon for the commission Liberté pygmée in Bifolone the community itself developed the artistic intervention. This opened the possibility to something that wasn't conceived before.

At last, I think the Protocol can become planetary through processes such as the framework of this publication: open dialogues to tackle and be receptive to possibilities, frictions and critiques. This porousness is a way to address its potential blind spots and contemplate options. Porousness is a way of being democratic (by allowing for dissention) and it is a way of being receptive to its variations. It is important to clarify that these explorations do not intend to invalidate or exclude the current and past approaches - rather they are part of an attempt to expand the present possibilities and unveil commission frameworks in which many worlds are able to coexist.

1 Enlace Zapatista. FOURTH DECLARATION OF THE LACANDONA JUNGLE, 1st. January 1996, see https://enlacezapatista.ezln.org.mx/1996/01/01/cuarta-declaracion-de-la-selva-lacandona/

Because now I would feel authorized to do it...

This text by philosopher Isabelle Stengers, available for the first time in German, uses the project The Washhouse of Blessey to illustrate the democratic potential of the New Patrons model. Her contribution describes how, in the process of commissioning and realising artworks, civil society groups empower themselves and become aware of their own capacity to shape their community.

The project The Washhouse of Blessey was commissioned by the citizens of the village of Blessey in Burgundy, France, between 1997 and 2007, in collaboration with the artist Remy Zaugg and the mediator Xavier Douroux. It is considered one of the most impressive projects in the 30-year history of the New Patrons. The documentary film The New Patrons of Blessey, in which the commissioners take a look back on the project, is an essential starting point for Stengers’ reflections.

Isabelle Stengers, a Belgian philosopher born 1949, became known for her work with the Russian-Belgian chemist and 1977 Nobel prize winner Ilya Prigogine. She then turned to the history and philosophy of science. She has written widely about the need to resist the positivist authoritarian model of science, thinking with philosophers such as Gilles Deleuze, Alfred North Whitehead, Donna Haraway and Michel Serres, and with the French philosopher and sociologist Bruno Latour, among others.

Stengers’ text was originally written for the publication Faire art comme on fait société (les presses du réel). Published in 2013, the reader encompassed for the first time a broad field of theoretical perspectives on the programme of the New Patrons. In 2017, the adapted and supplemented English-language edition Reclaiming Art. Reshaping Democracy (les presses du réel) was released.

A Practice Report: Susanne Burmester

Susanne Burmester has been a curator, journalist, and project manager since 1993 and lives and works on the island of Rügen. She joined the New Patrons as a mediator for the German pilot phase in 2017 for the Mecklenburg-Vorpommern region and currently mentors three citizens’ groups. In Greifswald, the commissioners have invited Daniel Knorr to develop a work of art; Antje Majewski is working on designs for the village of Wietstock; and the patrons of Kasnevitz (Rügen) are preparing their commission.

For Commissioned by – Art in Relation, international mediators reflected on the significance of the New Patrons Protocol for their work: The Protocol can in principle be put into practice anywhere in the world, as it does nothing more than describe a way in which people can work together. All decisions are made locally by independent actors. Moreover, the protocol enables not only contemporary art projects, but also scientific research commissions, as well as theatre productions, music, architecture, and much more.

But how universal is the protocol, which emerged in European contexts against the background of a French cultural policy around 1989, really? How is it interpreted and possibly adapted not only in different regions of Europe, but also in Cameroon, Colombia, Lebanon and Tunisia? How do different historical, cultural and political backgrounds change the perspectives of art on behalf of citizens and the concrete work of mediators? Can they recommend that the protocol be taken up in societies where it has not yet played a role?

The Mediators have reflected on these questions and their texts are now published in this series.

A Practice report: Atelier des Jours à Venir

The authors of this text, Claire Ribrault, Maria Pothier and Livio Riboli-Sasco, work at Atelier des Jours à Venir as trainers, mediators and researchers. Atelier des Jours à Venir is a non-profit cooperative company from France, aiming to empower both the research community and local citizen communities by sharing knowledge practices.

It develops trainings for university students and lifelong learning for academic researchers, encouraging them to have an active, creative, reflexive and responsible academic practice. It provides mediation on citizen science projects with a strong social commitment, where sharing the practice and values of research communities empowers citizens, in particular in socially deprived contexts.

For Commissioned by – Art in Relation, international mediators reflected on the significance of the New Patrons Protocol for their work: The Protocol can in principle be put into practice anywhere in the world, as it does nothing more than describe a way in which people can work together. All decisions are made locally by independent actors. Moreover, the protocol enables not only contemporary art projects, but also scientific research commissions, as well as theatre productions, music, architecture, and much more.

But how universal is the protocol, which emerged in European contexts against the background of a French cultural policy around 1989, really? How is it interpreted and possibly adapted not only in different regions of Europe, but also in Cameroon, Colombia, Lebanon and Tunisia? How do different historical, cultural and political backgrounds change the perspectives of art on behalf of citizens and the concrete work of mediators? Can they recommend that the protocol be taken up in societies where it has not yet played a role?

The Mediators have reflected on these questions and their texts are now published in this series.

Art Commissions throughout History

The philosopher and long-time theoretical companion of the New Patrons Bruno Latour and art historian Joseph Leo Koerner illuminate in their conversation the history of commissioned art up to its most current forms, with a special focus on citizens' commissions.

The conversation, which was originally recorded for the publication Faire art comme on fait société (les presses du réel), is available in German for the first time. Published in 2013, the reader covers a broad field of theoretical perspectives on the programme of the New Patrons. The adapted and supplemented English-language edition Reclaiming Art. Reshaping Democracy (les presses du réel) was released in 2017. Bruno Latour (*1947) is a French sociologist and philosopher whose focus is on the history of science. He has taught at various international universities, most recently at Science Po Paris, and is one of the founders of actor-network theory. Latour is an influential thinker of our time. His writings, translated into numerous languages, have become foundational works in various theoretical debates, such as the discourse on climate change. At the ZKM Karlsruhe, he worked as a curator on iconic exhibition projects. Latour has been an important supporter of the New Patrons from the beginning.

Joseph Leo Koerner (*1958) is an American art historian and filmmaker. He is a professor of art and architectural history and Senior Fellow, Society of Fellows, at Harvard University. After studying philosophy and English and German literature, Koerner switched to art history through his work on Caspar David Friedrich and shifted his research focus to European art from the Renaissance to the present. He has collaborated with Bruno Latour on a number of exhibitions at the ZKM Karlsruhe.

No projects details available