Briefly put, perhaps the main issue raised by those actions from the perspective of art was how to articulate them beyond formulating statements on public participation —relation— which artists have promoted for the past fifty years, from the happenings of the 50s and 60s to Bourriaud’s theorizing on “relational aesthetics” a few years ago. (2) That is why, although the concept of relationship plays a key role in Rodrí­guez’s theoretical toolbox, it also includes others that help to cast greater light on the explicit aim of his art project, which is to incorporate the horizon of meaning of the other, the community, into the process of shaping and carrying out artwork.

Rodrí­guez calls the incorporation of “voices” outside the field of art into the construction of “the work” relative self-representation, a notion that identifies the strategy (and procedure) whereby players that are “not sanctioned” by the institutional art system become the co-authors of artists’ proposals whose experiences are then transferred to the field of art. As Rodrí­guez points out, this procedure “questions the idea of authorship in the field of art, while also enabling other horizons of meaning to be visualized” (p.32). While it destabilizes the operating logic of this field —by raising issues on the idea of the autonomy of art and stressing the reduction of an artist’s status from genius to a producer of meanings—it offers the possibility of bringing those outside voices under its wing through acts of mediation.

Rodrí­guez links his ideas and art practice to the theories of the Spanish psychologist, philosopher and theologian Alejandro Moreno, who has conducted extensive research on barrio individuals and communities in Venezuela. Moreno’s concepts, such as experiencing within (reflection on the experience of sharing the life of a community); the world of life (the world of meanings produced by the community); and involvement (a state that indicates one forms part of the world of life of a community as a result of experiencing it from within), are taken up by Rodrí­guez, who defines his executive artistic involvement in Don’t Take Your Health Seriously as “trans-disciplinary creative practices based on involvement” (p.25). In fact he views this involvement as opening an alternate path for art from a relational concept of “I”, whereby the “artwork” is interwoven with “voices in dialogue”.

The content, theoretical depth and methodological approach of Don’t Take Your Health Seriously provide a significant contribution to discussions on contemporary art and, in particular, to one of the riskiest, most productive and controversial avenues in current international art practice: the art of social involvement. It is a form of art that intervenes directly in the life of society and stems from a relational dialogue between artists and communities, human groups or specific individuals. It is an art that —as I have stated elsewhere and that Don’t Take Your Health Seriously seems to confirm— “opens up the possibility of generating unpredictable relationships between collective social experiences and imaginary invention, which is perhaps where its relevance lies”. (3)

NOTES:

(1) In Venezuela the term “barrio” (neighborhood) is only used to refer to low-income urban areas. Middle and upper-class districts are known as “real-estate developments”, “residential areas” and the like.

(2) Nicolás Bourriaud. Estética relacional. Adriana Hidalgo editora S.A., Buenos Aires, 2006.

(3) José Antonio Navarrete. “Accionar la comunidad: arte de intervención social”. In: Futuro do presente. Itaú Cultural, Sí£o Paulo, 2008, unpublished (catalogue).