İlişkisel Estetik Bağlamında İlişki Araştırmaları

Abstract

Relational Aesthetics aims to eliminate the lack of relationships by stating that there is a lack of relationship between people in society. Relational aesthetics seeks to eradicate the lack of relationship in society through relational art, that is, through the viewers in the gallery participating in and partaking in works of art. Since the fact that relational aesthetics reproduces human relations in daily life in the gallery contradicts the expectation that art should not be daily and ordinary; The theory of Relational Aesthetics theorized by Nicolas Bourriaud was examined in line with its purpose and examples of works of art, and what actually happens was investigated theoretically and artistically. Accordingly, it was determined why the aim of spontaneity in happenings, which is the basis of relational aesthetics, could not be achieved in such similar formations, and it was concluded that it would be more accurate to call these formations “performance”. Since a relational aesthetics proposal was presented, the words ‘relation’ and ‘aesthetic’ were examined in detail to understand the meanings of the concepts ‘relational’ and ‘aesthetic’. Accordingly, it is understood that relation requires interest, therefore a choice, contact, relatedness, and leaves a trace; At the same time, constantly provides a balance between closeness and distance in a continuous cycle; and that intervals are as crucial as contact and closeness in relation. For the aesthetic phenomenon to occur, the elements of aesthetic subject, aesthetic object, aesthetic value and aesthetic judgment must be present. However, in relational aesthetics, due to the transformation of the viewer into a participant, the subject becomes an object, which mixes-up aesthetic subject and aesthetic object; therefore, relational aesthetics cannot fulfil the requirements of being an aesthetic phenomenon. Relational aesthetics’ reproduction of human relations in daily life by organizing them in the gallery causes it to turn into a spectacle. This situation has been discussed through Debord's definition of spectacle. Since the interpersonal relations established in relational works of art are kept separate from daily life relations and are thought to establish a different bond than daily relations, it is argued that it will be a remedy for the alleged lack of relations in daily life. The word activity has been examined due to Bourriaud’s definition of relational art as activity. In relational art activity, when the meaning of activity is sought, the fact that the active cannot be the work, but the participant, removes the work from being an activity. Therefore, art ceases to be an activity and turns into something inactive. Relational art, as an activity, takes the form of an inactive activity by transforming the viewer into a participant. By talking about the politicization of forms, Bourriaud implies that relational aesthetics, which is a theory of form, has become politicized, that is, it requires compromise. Relational aesthetics reproduces human relations in daily life in the gallery, produces copy relations, and while creating a copy of the real relations, it becomes politicized and compromises with us, hides values, disappears, and becomes a ghostly form. To understand what the activity, that is, the event, is in relational works of art that take place in the form of activity, Deleuze’s definition of event has been taken into consideration. Event is something that is constantly happening but it is never what is. It has been seen that the event of the real relations, that is, the ‘unending existence that wanders on the border’ like the ‘relation event’, cannot be realized since the relation in relational art is not continuous and occurs within a limited time and space. As a result of artistic research applications, it has been understood that the relation is choosing what one is interested in and curious about. It has been determined that the person choosing what one is interested in is the person themselves, that is, the ‘I’, and that they establish a relation to find and develop the I. It is understood that the relation is on a path and that the relation is established to approve the I and to search for the I. When too much relation is established with this search and when one is too curious, the symbolic death of the I occurs. Since the relation is spontaneously realized by choosing what one is interested in and curious about, by being related and by contacting, it is concluded that there is no need for additional formations in galleries to establish a relation, moreover, they anyway cannot establish the relation and relationality that they aim for.