Medina states that “never since the advent of historical relativism at the end of the eighteenth century has the art of the day had a less conflictive social reception.” (Medina) He emphasises the “immediacy” of the relationship between contemporary practice and society.
Without actually discussing any examples to expand this argument, an image of Reclaim the Streets 1997 is positioned adjacent to this thesis in the text. The photograph shows people passing graffiti on the National Gallery of Art in Trafalgar Square. The scrawled writing reads, “Art by all, or none at all.” If this is the sort of model that Medina is referring to, it helps to explain his notion that contemporary art allows individuals from different class and ideological backgrounds to “smell each other in artistic structures.” (Medina) As a critic, curator and historian, writing for an online magazine that targets art professionals, this reference is probably deliberately oblique. Without this example though, Medina’s description of contemporary art as a “form of aristocratic populism” (Medina) is contra to a widely felt view that contemporary art fails to reflect the values of the public. (Jacob & Brenson 30) The public that Medina refers to is likely to be an artistically motivated public rather than a general public.
An explanation that Medina does give for contemporary art’s perceived obscurity is the “density of theoretical discourse on the topic.” (Medina) Medina suggests that contemporary art demands a “double reception” – an understanding of art first in terms of its general legibility within the universal culture, and later “as an attempt at sophisticated theoretical recuperation.” (Medina) In this statement, Medina acknowledges a less informed public who might also desire a context for thinking about contemporary art.
Medina is suggesting that this is a characteristic unique to contemporary art – that it is both immediately appealing to a general audience and also stands up to art world scrutiny. This seems to explain his claims of high legibility, in a way that his claims of “immediacy” and un-conflicted social reception appeared indistinct. The notion that contemporary art can have different levels of understanding, and that all levels could be relevant, certainly indicates a positive interpretation of contemporary art.
References:
Medina, Cuauhtémoc. “Contemp(t)orary: Eleven Theses.” e-flux Journal issue 12 (January 2010)
Jacob, Mary Jane and Brenson, Michael, Conversations at the Castle: Changing Audiences and Contemporary Art, MIT Press, 1998
