Difference between revisions of "Precarity: A Participatory People's Tribunal - ICA, March 20, 2011"

From Critical Practice Chelsea
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 2: Line 2:
<td valign="top" style="padding-right: 20px;">
<td valign="top" style="padding-right: 20px;">
Return to [[Main Page]] * [[CoLab]]<br>
Return to [[CoLab]]<br>
I worked with Precarious Workers Brigarde to realise this session at the ICA (Institute of Contemporary Arts)<br>
I worked with Precarious Workers Brigarde to realise this session at the ICA (Institute of Contemporary Arts)<br>

Revision as of 17:38, 2 October 2020

Return to CoLab

I worked with Precarious Workers Brigarde to realise this session at the ICA (Institute of Contemporary Arts)

otherwise called: Precarity: A Participatory People's Tribunal - scroll down for a few reflections, including reference to the project's amorphous name

Precarity Tribunal proceedings HR 20 03 11.jpg

Tribunal 2.jpg Tribunal ICA.png

25_03_11: Reflections in advance of debrief

  • Confusion around the name - at some point it shifted from being a "people's tribunal" to being a "participatory people's tribunal" - But aren't all tribunals participatory?
  • This was the first iteration - process ongoing - "the tribunal" is an appropriate, flexible and fascinating format through which to explore precarity as a systemic problem. One reason for this: this format moves between the personal and particular (testimonies) to the generalizable (verdicts).
  • Formal Considerations: As an artwork/intervention, this tribunal raised evergreen concerns around participation. There's consensus it was a rich process of research, organizing and enactment for those directly involved: the PWB (the Precarious Workers Brigade). And those who attended on Sunday gave positive feedback. However, there were significant gaps between the constituencies' experience. How to bridge these? Or rather: How might they be more knowingly negotiated in the tribunal format? This connects to exteriorisation and/or externalisation - learning to share inclusively, by which I mean sharing knowledge in ways that are accessible and interesting to all those present. It's not enough to say, "There's no audience in this tribunal; we're all judge and jury and we're all being held to account". We need modalities for enacting this. It is interesting to note that some non PWB attendees wanted more "drama/performance"; others wanted less. Brecht's alienation effect springs to mind as a possible model for future iterations...
  • Narrative of Agency: I'm fascinated by the tribunal as a narrative of agency. As a spatio-temporal matrix (chronotope), it's a co-authored story about empowerment that (can) also be empowering. For example, I was chatting to someone yesterday about her experience and she said: "I hadn't anticipated the impact of having someone else read out my story of stress-related illness. It was empowering because from this distance, I was able to better appreciate its relevance more generally--to others similarly effected."
  • It's also about us as subjects recognizing the sociality of (the) law. This affirms an absolute relation between collective authority and justice. Power is a process. And as a context that supports the redistribution of power, the tribunal could offer such a model...

More reflections forthcoming...

Return to CoLab BWB PT 1.jpg
PWB PT 2.jpg
PWB PT 3.jpg
PWB PT 5.jpg
PWB PT 6.jpg
PWB PT 7.jpg
PWB PT 8.jpg
PWB PT 9.jpg

Return to Main Page * User:Marsha * CoLab