Similarily, not every text that proclaims an interest in finding out how "artistic imagination and poetic practices can help us accelerate the entry into a post-capitalist society" (Amen Avanessian) manages to instill in its readers an understanding of basic concepts like contemporary art, practice, capitalism, society or, in fact, a grasp of how these concepts might inter-relate. To quote Nina Power quoting Alberto Toscano on a similar discussion: "... it doesn't necessarily translate into anything that would be recognisably a theory."
Let's cast aside theory for now and think about politics. Many will agree that art works can contribute to the analysis of the status quo and possibly even express a desire for another form of sharing this planet, one that does not deny "the difference of conflict, contradiction, competition, privilege, or antagonistic political views or interests."(Antke Engel) But are these tools political in themselves? A politics needs practical ways of changing power relations and modes of governance and for this, it needs people willing and able to act jointly upon them.
This exhibition does not proclaim itself political. Nor do its art works conform to an idealist accelerational paradigm. Where the artists consider contemporary forms of production, distribution and consumption, they do so with concrete instances of injustice, exploitation and alienation in mind. But an equal emphasis is placed on modalities: What do crisis, currency and consumption imply, beyond their capitalist meaning? What kind of materials are they and how can they be transformed?
Tina Gverovic has produced a new work for the show, reacting to art by Gerd Arntz, Ai Weiwei (in absentia), Lili Dujourie (in absentia), George Osodi, Koen Theys, Wu Dandan, Willem Oorebeek and Ines Doujak.