From Network to Meshwork Executive Summary | Page 12

During the research we encountered debates and disputes about terms
and definitions. Definitions involve drawing borders. For example, Francis
Matarasso (2019: 46) writing about participatory arts practice, argues for
tight definitions, as
“… without a clear definition, it is impossible to
distinguish good practice from bad, or to protect
ethical principles and ways of working from external
pressures, such as institutionalisation or
appropriation.”
At the same time Alison Jeffers (2017: 18) cautions that
“… the person who holds the ‘umbrella’ [of definition]
is implicitly allowed to shape the narrative,
they maintain control over definitions and frames,
getting to say what makes up the umbrella and what
is allowed to shelter under it.”
How then to make judgements about quality and ethics without excluding
difference?
When beginning this research, we used the term ‘socially engaged art’
(SEA) as an umbrella for a wide range of artistic social practices. It was later
suggested that SEA can imply the use of art to provide social fixes — an interpretation
we resist. We have chosen ‘social practice’ as our umbrella term
instead, defining this as follows:
Social practice artists work closely with participants and/or audiences. They
make social relationships and structures the primary medium of their work, instead
of, or in addition to the use of material and digital media.
The solution is imperfect. We envisage social relationships and art
practice as reciprocally and materially entangled and we want to challenge
binaries. But to some, social practice implies the exploitative use of people as
art materials in artworks.
Taking control of the definitions raises further questions of visibility and
power.1 The reduction of complex practices to a word or phrase is fraught with
potential misunderstanding; critical responses and live debate are needed to
counter this. It is for this reason we advocate a move from network to meshwork,
in which connections appear not as rigid points in a grid, but ever emerging
‘thread-lines’ out of which relationships occur.
1 Jeffers and Moriarty, (2017: 18)