I found it incredibly interesting to see the dynamic among the visiting artists of Floating Lab. As a group of collaborating artists it was evident that they all have a clear voice in the pieces they make and an opinion on what and how the projects are/should be developed and produced. Art as social justice takes on a whole new meaning when put in the context of organized collaborations. Not only does the work have the power of one person's passion, energy and commitment behind it but it is supported and strengthened by the thoughtful presentation of the work by the collaboration. Having multiple sets of eyes critique, review and restructure the project enhanced its clarity and message, allowing (I feel) more viewers to experience the piece in connection with an artist, i.e. there is more of a chance that the viewer will see the piece in the same way one of the collaborators did. I think this is partially why the collective has such success in their work.
The ideas they showed us in class were creative and inspiring. I liked that although they each took charge in certain projects, they were all clearly versed and knowledgeable on what was being produced and who had been working on its inception and what roles each person was taking. I should have asked at the time if there are (or ever were) any conflicts of ego among the members? Is it possible to selflessly create art? I also thought it was interesting that people that initially turned down the opportunity to be a part of the collective were now active members. I wonder if there is any resentment from the founding members who took the risk?
