Now in the archives
The fastest way to give us feedback (and high-fives).
POLITICS OF AESTHETICS 2/3
Featuring work by Penny Leong Browne and Lindsay LeBlanc.
Become a subsciber.
Although it should be made clear that KAPSULA is not a platform for exhibiting contemporary art, we do wish to support the emergent contemporary art community by exposing our readership to ideas and images that are fresh, salient and speak to the spirit of our publication.
We look for one new cover image each month. This is an ongoing call, but submitted imagery must relate to the current call for article submissions. The current call can always be found here, on the website homepage.
If you're not already a subscriber, we recommend you acquaint yourself with our past issues in the archives.SUBMISSION GUIDELINES
To submit, e-mail a maximum of 5 images as high resolution .tiff or .jpg attachments to email@example.com
Please make sure your .jpg file is a minimum of 1024 x 768 pixels at 72 dpi, but no larger than 4 MB.
Please include the following information w/ your submission:
- Your full name
- Your current location
- A 50-200 word explanation of how your work relates to our current theme
- Web, blog, or other online presence
- Image information, including:
- Date completed
Current Call for Submissions:
Exploring history in an entirely objective manner is, frankly, impossible. Artists engaging with the past remain firmly planted in the present, with their biases and blind spots inescapable. But while the impossibility of purging subjectivity has formed an ongoing problem for some, certain artists have used these slippery slopes as sources of inspiration and alterity, embracing what might otherwise be maligned as “bad history.” Think of Massacio toying with narrative time in the Brancacci Chapel’s Tribute Money, or the countless paintings that depict historical scenes with characters dressed in contemporary garb and surrounded by contemporary architecture.
This tendency towards anachronism and historical revision continues to emerge in contemporary artworks. However, theorist Hal Foster (in Return of the Real ) notes a distinct shift in artistic engagement with history following the Postmodern turn:
"In order to extend aesthetic space, artists delved into historical time, and returned past models to the present in a way that opened new sites for work. The two axes were in tension, but it was a productive tension; ideally coordinated, the two moved forward together, with past and present in parallax. Today, as artists follow horizontal lines of working, the vertical lines sometimes appear to be lost."
"This horizontal way of working demands that artists and critics be familiar not only with the structure of each culture well enough to map it, but also with its history well enough to narrate it… This move has rendered contemporary art dangerously political" (202).
We welcome proposals and papers that explore “Bad History” in relation to art, and the recent shifts it may have undergone. Potential questions and topics to explore could include (but are not limited to):
- Historical revision in contemporary art.
- Is playing with history in art always a matter of ethics? Is there a realm beyond ethics within the context of art?
- Does the historical depend upon the presentation of 'artifacts'—does it rely on a tradition of museological display?
- Is the revisioning of historical events a decidedly minority-driven tactic?
- Does historical revision, and the rejection of belief in objective history, have emancipatory potential?
- Is, as Hal Foster argues, the move to a more “horizontal way of working” (i.e. artist’s understanding both “discursive breadth” and “historical depth”) a more “dangerously political” method?
- The co-existence of multiple “histories.” (E.g. Modernism and postmodernism occurring simultaneously.)
Electronic submissions (of final papers and more tentative proposals) will be accepted until:
December 6th, 2013,
Exhibition reviews are published according to number and quality of submissions we receive, and in the order that we receive them. Selected reviews are typically sent to subscribers on Thursdays and released two at a time. More may be included if selected shows and/or critiques conceptually relate to one another.
We aim to publish reviews of shows that are still open when we 'go to press', so our readership can potentially visit the exhibition for themselves and reflect on what's been said about the works. This is not a mandatory criterion when selecting a review for publication, but is preferred.
Our call for exhibition reviews is ongoing, i.e. there are no deadlines for submissions. However, for adequate lead time on any line edits that need to be made we recommend submitting your review at least two weeks before you'd ideally like it distributed.
Exhibition reviews also need not address the theme of our current call for feature articles. We encourage reviewers to be experimental in their format, style and voice as well as offering our readers an unconventional, or even radical perspective on the art work.
Lastly—as a solely digital and online publication—we encourage writers to include hyperlinks to related content such as other documented exhibitions or alternate reviews of the selected show when and where applicable. Please consider the flexibility of our online format and take advantage of it to better contextualize your criticism.