ON PEDRO REYES ’ THE PEOPLE ’ S UNITED NATIONS ( 2013 – 2014 )
doing so , the installation stressed the habitual position of the viewer vis-à-vis the UN : her lack of involvement .
The Politics of Representation
This leads me to the relation between pUN ’ s form and subject . I will argue that the combination of playfulness and shared action allowed the project to inhabit — rather than to criticise from a distant position — the UN ’ s foundational antagonisms and exclusions .
As an exhibition and a participatory , cheerful practice that aimed to suggest , in a playful manner , alternative institutional and global possibilities , pUN was similar to the type of practices that are described by Nicolas Bourriaud in Relational Aesthetics ( 1998:13 ). However , central to the latter ’ s argument is the idea that artists aim to elaborate meaning “ collectively rather than in the privatised space of individual consumption ” ( Bishop 2005:116 ) as a way to respond to the Marxist critique of the reproduction of hegemonic ideology . That is , underlying Bourriaud ’ s theory lies a belief in the emancipatory power of art as a site of ( seemingly ) equal , democratic relations . On the contrary , pUN did not share such an emancipatory intention . Rather , it aimed to playfully expand the political space ( i . e . the debates that take place within the UN and its institutional framework — with which it experimented ), which it did by stressing that which it usually excludes . This said , despite this fundamental difference , both Bourriaud and Reyes are united by their interest in nurturing the transition between the individual visitor and a shared symbolic space .
To better understand how this movement was at play in pUN , it is helpful to consider in more detail the significance of pUN ’ s appropriation of the emblem / flag of the UN . I will do so through a brief comparative discussion of the reception of Reyes ’ work and Dread Scott ’ s What is the Proper Way to Display a US Flag ? ( 1989 ). Doing so reveals that , although seemingly unremarkable , the absence of an overly negative reception to pUN ’ s appropriation of the UN flag is revealing of a crucial difference between its symbolic power and that of the flags of nation states . Scott ’ s installation ( 1989 ) consisted of a shelf with an open book in which the visitors were invited to write , a montage of photographs of American flags draping the coffins of military personnel combined with protestors burning an American flag in response to the Vietnam War , and another flag in which the viewers could stand as they expressed their thoughts . Its reception was characterised by widespread criticism ( see Scott , no date ). The fact that the appropriation of one of the key symbols of the UN by Reyes was uncontested ( to the best of my knowledge ) is significant to an extent that cannot be explained by the difference between standing on or modifying a flag . Indeed , one can induce that a similar appropriation of the UN flag would have been unlikely to lead to the same level of criticism as Scott ’ s . Conversely , one can imagine that an art piece based on a similar formal strategy to that of pUN but , rather , about the American democratic system would be the object of public debate . This
37