As art theories with far-reaching influence in modern and contemporary times, relational aesthetics theory and surrealism respectively focus on social interaction and subconscious liberation, attempting to subvert traditional art paradigms. However, these two theories still expose many limitations in the new contemporary cultural context.
In the theory of relational aesthetics, Boucheux argues that art should construct “social gap” through temporary communities, but this vision is too idealistic and ignores the hidden authority behind participatory art. Even if the audience is invited to “co-create” the work, the curators and artists still control the space rules and the allocation of resources; Some participatory art may be commercially funded, which makes the emotional sharing in its connotation a marketable commodity; Some marginalized groups are often excluded from participatory art because of technical barriers or cultural barriers (for example, people with disabilities may not be able to experience some participatory art that requires vision). The trend towards commodification also appears in surrealism. With the rise of consumerism, the subversive aesthetic presented by surrealism was labeled a “niche aesthetic,” and the melting clock in Dali’s painting was printed on handbags by luxury brands. Surrealism, on the other hand, pursued irrational beauty. But when modern academic institutions included surrealism in the classic school of art history, the rebellious spirit contained in it was domesticated by the “white box” space of the museum, and it became an empty and seemingly empty avant-garde art.
Do we still dream when our dreams are data, goods, weapons, or other things? There is no standard answer to this question. But through this exhibition, I want to lead the audience to think about this question and give their own answers. By stripping away the romanticized illusion of the “dream” created by power and capital, we can approach the true dream self.
