Jaén (Spain) 19 to 21 april 2012
Knowledge has come to us from a Eurocentric approach which has progressively colonized a homogenizing dominant discourse imposed on and from a globalizing economic model. Art hasn’t escaped this limiting view of things which has gradually left minor, marginal, eccentric realities outside its field of vision and far from its concerns, sometimes realities that are just different, only tolerable in their condition of irreducible “otherness”. Lots of these realities were “hidden”, “avoided”, yet today many minorities have acquired the capacity of self-representation and made them more visible.
We must look beyond and see reality with creative, innovative, unorthodox eyes to overcome the invisibility of everything emerging from centers of power. We must fight for a change of view which will bring us the necessary epistemological change of direction that, by identifying and defending different interests, will help us position ourselves on the edge, in the periphery orbit from where we are obliged to challenge the structures that uphold the eternal centripetal mechanisms which have instilled in us not only obedience to respect them but also the fear to question them.
The harsh tradition of western conscience which maintains the superfluity of art firmly contributes to the fact that activity in this field has been formed in closed universes in which everyone has their own particular orbit, centre and satellites; to such an extent that what the performers of art really long for is to gain a place in an “artistic planetarium” to protect themselves from the voracious of the “rest of the world”.
A line of thought that has contributed to the consolidation of the field of artistic power from which, far from favoring the circulation of universally diverse, enriching thought, is constructing unique thinking and is battling for the crown of the kingdom.
Sufficient literature has already been produced to firmly support a dialogue illustrating our position, from María Rodríguez Magda, Enrique Dussel, García Canclini, Lipovetsky, Bauman to Beck and Zizek, and for that very reason, what we want to offer is a space for debate which will reveal to what extent we are a conscious structure or a mediated mass, and to what point we consider ourselves part of a society we must contribute to from the field of art and its education using practices to dismantle the centripetism of the economy of the global market in whose orbit we move whether we like it or not.
For us, philosophy of the periphery is a philosophy that makes one’s view more flexible and allows us to grow and take in more. If the philosophy of the centers of power is no more than an ontology that announces “sameness”, the philosophy of the periphery is “otherness”, other realities, those that are hidden, those that are avoided, and those that can’t be seen.
Let’s be brave enough to look and see if, without noticing, we have converted to conventionalism and to begging for social acceptation. Let’s be brave enough to check that we haven’t joined the elite of the eccentrics or those that look at the finger that points to the moon.
Let’s be radical and draw art and its education out of the mechanisms of indoctrination and place them not in the hegemonic, static centre but in the peripheral activism which facilitates movements of thought and cultural exchange.
Let’s be radical in our way of understanding art, not because we are modern but because we are brave enough to question the inertia of power.
Let’s be radical when we think about our participation-action in society.
Let’s be radical when we consider our professional responsibility and let’s not be afraid to share “our truth” with our students; truths which may not be the “real truth” but at least helps us rattle the “official truth”.
Topics and themes of the Congress: CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE PERIPHERY
- Politicization of culture.
- Visibility of minority groups, excluded, marginal, etc.
- Artistic intervention and social reconstruction.
- Other didactic, another pedagogy