CAA Today

I was glad to see Tom Wagner and Tim Murphy toward the end of the day. I'm hopeful that we can convene a UArts caucus at the Pour House tomorrow. I was especially happy to see them because the panel today was such a surreal experience. The speakers were engaged with the subject of ruins in the age of global violence in a number of ways, but when the Q&A started, a number of people in the audience (some of whom admitted they hadn't been present for all the presentations!) expressed disappointment that the panel wasn't "political" enough -that it hadn't spoken to their specific concerns, be they with the Falun Gong or opposition to the war in Iraq or what have you.
It was very strange, and reminded me of a class in which students expect to be taught something which is not really on the agenda. I found myself wondering - as some complained that we'd focused exclusively on "objects" instead of the phenomenon of global violence - what it is that one expects to learn in any situation and how that meshes (or fails to mesh) with what others have to teach.
I don't know. I have avoided CAA for a while out of apprehension about its academic credibility. At one point, a panelist expressed the belief that artists are the the conscience of the world, a view with which I couldn't agree as I can only see artits as opportunists whose ideas reach or fail to reach a public based on circumstances beyond our control. Many of the comments would have made sense had this been a public policy meeting - but art is not public policy. In fact, the best way to devalue a work of aggressively political art is to emphasize its status as "art".
I ramble. Often. But more later...after tomorrow's panels