m of care – dec 11

art world – p1 – art communism & artificial scarcity

Our Reading group will start with 1st part of Dubrovsky and Graeber’s essays, “Another Art World: Art Communism and Artificial Scarcity.”


Please, join us this Friday at 20.00 London time

Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/nikadubrovsky/status/1337464170229456897

Join Zoom Meeting https://bit.ly/3iIvreq Meeting ID: 604 596 7588 Passcode: CITY


notes/quotes from meeting (33 at start):

[first 25 min on funding.. and which projects to fund.. et al.. ]

nika: only facil projects that would have wide spread interest.. not that you can’t do others.. but we’re not responsible for fundraising for them.. i had soviet childhood where we were forced to collectivity

dennis idea via rob: put proposal on table for a room.. then can decide if want to fundraise it.. see if as a group it’s an idea to go ahead

dennis: exactly.. i can start that

so basically – not fitting with graeber min\max law

dennis: as far as residency as vocab.. i think we’re going w occupy.. more flexibility

that’s cool

nika: i would vote for that ‘everyone does whatever.. and if goes wrong then get rid of it’..

clive: can let (on discord) anything and then delete ones you don’t want.. can also show ones you want and not show ones you don’t want..

who’s deciding who gets deleted?


nika: on future reading groups.. chart/schedule of suggestions ie: communism by david.. et al.. then also can invite (specific) people in advance for (specific) text.. i would suggest gen/org talk to be 20-30 min.. important to have more time to talk about writings.. than how to arrange future life.. because we are living right now

nika: who’s from the dm group.. who will facil the dm process

decision making is unmooring us law

gabi – took poll – results: reading group and org group alternate weeks

dmitrii: suggesting next read – ch from debt book on morals.. and suggesting paper on modes of production.. very technical/marxist.. but important in overall legacy of david’s thoughts.. so i say everyone look at it then we vote if we have enough people interested

nika: i advocate to read the more technical paper.. in past.. gen reading groups have small amt of people.. allows to go deep.. we have opposite.. so wouldn’t be able to go deep.. so maybe we’ll have guest lecture on it first.. for david that was very important.. he was doing books but also videos.. so level of population was deep.. to find frame acceptable for everyone to join.. even if didn’t read text.. not english.. whatever.. that’s my dream of how reading group would function

chieftan: i could do annotated versions.. highlights.. if it would help

vassily: next week going to read next bits on art world.. 2 weeks takes us to christmas day.. (everyone saying.. i don’t mind.. everyone agreeing) so in 2 weeks.. and have drink together.. next week is org group

1:35 – starting on text

nika: how we write together.. for me it was very personal.. 1st got a bunch of interviews.. i was just putting together of convo of me and david before.. and david would sculpt.. moving pieces of text around.. ideas was not really a critique of art world.. idea was to imagine how another art world.. if it could exist.. for me personal because when i was a child i wanted to be an artist.. idea of art world was.. a romantic idea of changing the world.. of being free.. so m of care is practical realization of what we came up with in this text

chieftan: how does link/connection of finance and contemp art?.. how is it that face of choice to decide value

nika: you can say western world.. but western world is now everywhere.. but russia on commune ness.. when asked about funding.. said.. ‘we didn’t understand.. we don’t fundraise.. we just do the things and help others’.. but in west.. this is same as everything else as far as value creation..

dennis: periodic declaration that art/academia world’s suck.. (from artists/academics).. but somehow.. 2 defn’s of art.. 1\ something able to collapse borders 2\ symbolic store of value.. see this in text beautifully

nika: what is important is not unavoidable.. doesn’t have to be.. shouldn’t be like that.. shouldn’t be these two pictures.. (idea and actual).. art world as it is is a ridiculous place.. we don’t need to destroy it .. we can build something on our own

john w fail: do you think this is cyclic?

nika: i think the great initiatives i want to share/support – ie: prolekurt.. despite brutal dismantle.. not forgotten.. still there.. infra still there.. i believe the infra ideas of collective culture.. whenever they prevail.. nobody would be able to destroy them completely

amy: on art market used to launder ie: beautiful things people made for selves (women/quilts).. now sold high dollar

nika: yeah.. that’s how capitalism works

nika: what is really un understandable for me.. is that if we really can change it.. that was main drive when talking to david about this essay.. we started thinking about anthropology of art world.. diff possibilities.. but then started to get very boring quickly.. exiting was to try to slowly describe very realistic pic of how things can function in existing world..

rob l: is it the society you live in that gives you the art.. or is it the art that can change the society.. (i think you and david are quite critical of the romantics.. but i may have misunderstood..)

nika: i don’t think they’re 2 separate things.. most valuable things are social relationship themselves.. so thing that can change that is art

rob l: do you think artists show us a way forward.. or is it a democratic activity

dmitrii: i’d like to complicate question from diff angle.. one think i liked about text.. it continues meta theme of hierarchy.. art is indeed inherently demo/accessible.. but yet at same time contemp art is very hierarchical.. limited access.. even though form is very demo.. conditioning access.. not only finance.. is hierarchical.. and so on.. so .. can artists show us a way is a very interesting questions.. but i think one of key take aways of text.. art world is also communism for the rich.. so one thing i’m interested in .. my sense is that the art world basically thinks of self as being not about money and usually for a lay person like myself.. i can distinguish between genuine art and something made for money.. that means art world must have some reference not related to market.. however in contemp art.. one of self criticisms.. so tightly connected to market so that it is sole judge.. on aesthetic value et al.. so i was wondering whether or not true.. and if true.. difficult to believe artists can lead us anywhere if embedded in that world.. very much complicates the potential of avantguard role of artist

what we need is to take back defn of artist.. ie: everyone

then ..

let’s do this first

nika: i agree w that.. so need to build something outside system w diff infra..

ie: 2 conversations as infra

dennis: if have to get out of it.. why would you still call it art

tj: one critique of m of care itself.. we adopt this division of labor where we shatter people into (labels/projects).. on quote of *hunting in afternoon, something diff in eve.. i’m trying to level up in art.. because i want to express self in diff way.. how do we define communism.. to each according to ability et al.. make affordances to people.. amplifying them in ways.. i do think we are buying into the focus of shattering people into divisions of labor.. (keeps using word ‘activists’ instead)

david on communism

*mumford non-specialized law – and find the bravery to change your mind .. thru out the day.. getting away from label(s).. using curiosity as only label.. curiosity over decision making et al

vassily: reminds me what we now say to avanteguard.. they were supposed to be ones who start a revolution.. i remember david scoffing at idea that avante guard could be the way.. i want to get back to this idea of art world.. assumptions in text.. one is that art world is at top of hierarchy.. i was wondering why.. many might not agree with this.. was he referring to monolithic of evaluation.. if so.. then talking about a very specific art world.. but not really talking about performance.. can’t really sell it.. there is always a hierarchy of art.. ie: for romantics art was something important.. but there was not something specific.. ie: there was music.. there has always been this hierarchy in history of art

nika: wasn’t about art w fin value.. but about art as rep of society.. beyond fin.. rather .. the desire.. the dream..

vassily: notion of art world comes from howard baker.. coining notion because didn’t want to talk about artists specifically.. basically trying to say it was a collective thing

clive: in uk have strange term.. call one thing art world.. and other ‘outsider art’.. doesn’t seek recognition

dennis: in communist world/art.. what is art.. doesn’t it just become the collective production of life.. i like that..

‘in undisturbed ecosystems ..the average individual, species, or population, left to its own devices, behaves in ways that serve and stabilize the whole..’ –Dana Meadows

amy: art that’s made now by people not considered artists is discounted.. we all make art.. i think market is a better world then world..

john w fail: there’s also the publicly funded art world.. even sadder.. underneath capitalist art market.. that art world is completely obsesses w money.. they just pretend that they’re not

nika: of course all sm if curated.. like a small museum.. but how it’s connected to fin market..

huanyu: in china .. sometimes art used as a medium.. to transfer it to ie: reputation, capital.. even when try to make it for free..

yeah.. red flags ness

clive: i think that’s true all over world.. on wanting claiming recognition.. ie: if making statement on own behalf.. why is it a good social statement.. by being anonymous as artist.. you have more power..

batra hide in public law

dennis: i think it’s nice to think of m of care as an experiment w art communism

commun\ism ness

art – art – being human ness


part 2 was on jan 8


another art world – p 1 2 & 3


museum of care

museum of care meetings