A.I.R.-polemics
- Is there a limit to the amount of residency programs world wide?
- Should we worry about the growing popularity of the artist-in-residence phenomenon?
- Or should we let the hype be the hype, and instead focus on the merits and benefits of residency opportunities?
Dutch art critic Domeniek Ruyters wrote a provocative article in Metropolis M, the Dutch bimonthly magazine on contemporary art, in which he stresses his concerns with some negative effects of the growing popularity of artist-in-residence programs. Trans Artists reacted with an equally provocative answer.
A.I.R. polemics: No Simple Concept!
Recently the Dutch magazine for contemporary art Metropolis M posed some ‘discerning questions about artist-in-residence programs as a present-day phenomenon’. Trans Artists welcomes the editor-in-chief’s thoughts on this issue. But the magazine's rendition of the facts is misleading, putting the artists involved and above all the hosts, in an unfavorable light, and needs to be rectified.
[General]: Read more
AIR polemics: Commentator or Tourist?-II
Domeniek Ruyters: "Recently I contributed an article to Metropolis M about the current rise in popularity of the artist-in-residence. I suggested that there is a hype among artists and organizations, and that the residency is increasingly pushing aside other activities in the art world, such as ordinary exhibitions. Residencies are shooting up like mushrooms, as a result of which thousands of artists are currently sojourning elsewhere in the world. (...)"