Kathryn and I supped together last night and while her employment issues are entirely different than mine—she has a job for which she gets paid to do work, whereas I do work outside of any sort of job structure and then, who knows? get paid? maybe!—we hit upon some disturbing similarities in our recent most frustrating work-related experiences that I’m sure will become a central theme of the writing done here on this site.
My recent frustrations, stem, I don’t mind telling you, from a massive art project I was working on with two individuals, both men, both white, one definitely straight. The other maybe but also maybe not. Both somewhat well-known in the world of art, one moreso than the other, although both strive toward that kind of renown. Or, I should say, both are well-known in the emerging world of activist art, this world I find myself more and more immersed in, where potential solutions to issues of social justice are proposed via participatory art-making practices.
Now I should state right now that I am of the mindset that the aims of social change are in direct opposition to the aims of personal achievement, and that I believe it is fundamentally impossible for branding to be a part of any new world order. Or disorder. Whatever your pleasure. In short: branding does not fit into my utopia. Take for example Bono’s Project: Red, which attempts to unite the Gap, Apple, and the music of U2 into a force strong enough to fight the evils of the world. And in so doing participates in the evils in the world, but gives everyone who buys in the sense that, well, they’ve bought in to change. And in the end, what’s changed? More things are red, and all the related brands look better because of it.
And Kathryn’s issues, well, are the same. She’s working with an entirely different sort of man, granted, although straight and white and male nonetheless, but he has a remarkably similar approach to social change. Which is: I will do this humungous action, and everyone will see it and love it, and then we will win.
But the question of who “we” is never really enters the discussion. Is “we” a genuinely inclusive term, meant to refer to all individuals implicated in this action? Because if so then they should get a voice in it. They should be able to make the victory their own too.
Well, I can tell already that I’m not going to be able to explain this all to you right now. I’m going to eat some breakfast and take another stab at it later.
Tags: art, branding, gender, secret project, social justice
