Cultural Measurement on Whose Terms? Critical Friends as an Experiment in Participant-Led Evaluation

  • Sophie Hope
Part of the New Directions in Cultural Policy Research book series (NDCPR)

Abstract

This chapter explores an alternative approach to evaluating participatory public art projects involving the people that such projects seek to empower. It explains the concept of ‘critical friends’, the Critical Friends project and reflects on the findings of research carried out on two art commissions in North Greenwich, London, in the United Kingdom from 2008 to 2011. In the process of establishing a group of Critical Friends, participants became interviewers, researchers and evaluators, acting as ‘productive parasites’ to a process of socially-engaged, public art. Developed as an alternative approach to evaluation, the group sought to understand the qualitative experiences of other participants and to interrogate the motives, targets and politics of the commissions. Underpinning this inquiry are questions about the commissioning of participatory forms of art. Following an introduction to the context in which the Critical Friends project took place, the chapter goes on to focus on how the group reflected on the repeated or reluctant experiences of participation; their challenges to co-authorship; the uncertain relationship between the commissions and local democracy; and the shared, or not, sense of the absurd in the projects.

Keywords

Burning Marketing Dispatch Lost Metaphor 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Braden, Su (1978) Artists and People (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd).Google Scholar
  2. CF 1 (2009) Critical Friends+Now Hear This. (E-mail). Message to: S. Hope. 6 November 2009.Google Scholar
  3. CF 2 Stream (2009) Interview about ‘Peninsula’. Stream, Greenwich, with Critical Friends. 12 August 2009.Google Scholar
  4. CF 3 (2009) Notes from final project evaluation meeting (Unpublished).Google Scholar
  5. CF 4 (2008) Notes on interviews with neighbours about ‘In a League of Our Own [Interviews]. December 2008 (Unpublished).Google Scholar
  6. Costa, Arthur, and Bena Kallick (1993) ‘Through the lens of a critical friend’, Educational Leadership, 51(2), 49–51.Google Scholar
  7. Critical Friends (2011) Final meeting of Critical Friends (Notes) Pilot Inn, Greenwich, 14 March, 2011.Google Scholar
  8. Critical Friends (2009a) (Discussion Transcript) Stream, Greenwich, 4 February 2009.Google Scholar
  9. Critical Friends (2009b) (Discussion Transcript) Stream, Greenwich, 4 March 2009.Google Scholar
  10. Critical Friends (2009c) (Discussion Transcript) Stream, Greenwich, 30 April 2009.Google Scholar
  11. Critical Friends (2009d) (Discussion Transcript) Stream, Greenwich, 16 July 2009.Google Scholar
  12. Critical Friends (2008) (Notes) Stream, Greenwich, November 2008.Google Scholar
  13. Cruikshank, Barbara (1999) The Will to Empower: Democratic Citizens and Other Subjects (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press).Google Scholar
  14. Deveron Arts (2014), Shadow Curator — A critical methodology: the agonistic way. Accessed 18 August, 2015. Available at: http://www.deveron-arts.com/about/shadow-curator/.Google Scholar
  15. Freire, Paulo (1978 [1972]) Pedagogy of the Oppressed (London: Penguin).Google Scholar
  16. Gray, John (1993) Beyond the New Right: Markets, Governance and the Common Environment (London: Routledge).Google Scholar
  17. Holy Mountain (2010) ‘Now Hear This’. Accessed 12 November 2014. Available at: http://streamarts.org.uk/projects/now-hear-thisGoogle Scholar
  18. Holy Mountain (2009) Proposal for Peninsula (Unpublished).Google Scholar
  19. Kester, Grant (2004) Conversation Pieces. Community and Communication in Modern Art (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press).Google Scholar
  20. Levitas, Ruth (2005) The Inclusive Society? Social Exclusion and New Labour (Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Meridian Delta Limited (2007) Our Vision Greenwich Peninsula (London: Meridian Delta Limited).Google Scholar
  22. Miessen, Markus (2010) The Nightmare of Participation (Crossbench Praxis as a Mode of Criticality) (Berlin: Sternberg Press).Google Scholar
  23. Mouffe, Chantal (2006) Articulated Power Relations — Markus Miessen in conversation with Chantal Mouffe. Accessed 27 June, 2014. Available at: http://roundtable.kein.org/node/545.Google Scholar
  24. Murray, Jayne (2008a) Proposal for Peninsula (Unpublished).Google Scholar
  25. Murray, Jayne (2008b) Interview in Greenwich with CF. 26 November 2008. Unpublished.Google Scholar
  26. Murray, Jayne (2008–2009) In a League of Our Own. Pub Quiz. Commemorative Booklet (London).Google Scholar
  27. Slater, Josephine Berry, and Anthony Iles (2009) No Room to Move: Radical Art and the Regenerate City (London: Mute Books).Google Scholar
  28. Stream (2009) ‘Stream Performing Social Space’ Brief (Unpublished).Google Scholar
  29. Stream (2008a) Project summary (Unpublished).Google Scholar
  30. Stream (2008b) Stream Sense of Place Brief (Unpublished).Google Scholar
  31. Temple-Morris, Boz (2009) Interview with Holy Mountain by Critical Friends, 19 August 2009.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sophie Hope 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sophie Hope

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations