Notes milieu2

Milieu 2: What right for who? Who gives right?
right (belongs) vs justice (in-between)
user / use
++
Milieu 3: users = creators?
A methodology of response-ability
Not because I can, I should
different levels access. 

Référence à des discussions aux discussions dans les mondes de la scène:
opposition entre circulation et réappropriation culturelle
importance de faire circuler certains savoirs ?
right / justice
ref to group that have been historically cutural extrativism
possibility to say you can or you can't do it
inhabiting a practise: who wants to do it, real question would be what's the risk of occupying & neocolonialism

Droit & justice? dans l'appropriation il y a la question de qui pourrait avoir accès ou utiliser qlqchose. Quel peut etre la connection entre droit et justice? 
Personne doit avoir contexte historique pour pouvoir transmettre le savoir
Où localiser le droit et la justice? 
Droit s'inscrit entièrement dans le sujet qui possède le droit

Regardons cette problémathique sous l'angle de l'objet et non de l'auteur.
Partons du cas concret du texte "Decolonial media license" from freeculture.org
https://freeculture.org/index.php?title=About/licence&oldid=20715

quelques exemples:

• festival en Grèce avec auteurs principalement français.

•  performance reappropriation Mapuche's dance during KFDA 2017

Eszter Salamon  MONUMENT 0.6: LANDING (A RITUAL OF EMPATHY)
Depuis quelques années, avec sa série MONUMENT,Eszter Salamon entreprendd’exhumer les impensés de la conscience occidentale : les impensés historiquesmais aussi esthétiques, comme les danses rituelles et folkloriques que la modernitéa bannies de son canon. Pour l’ouverture du festival, elle nous propose LANDING,unrituel  de  groupe  composé  à  partir  d’une  danse  et  de  chants  de  la  tribu  sud-américaine des Mapuches. En plein air, sans aucun artifice technique, elle donne enpartage  une  expression  culturelle  que  l’Occident,  dans  sa  grande  entreprise  denormalisation, a reléguée au rang de « folklore ». Contre le « chantage de l’identité »,la chorégraphe creuse des sillons dans la danse du monde et ensemence de nouveauxchamps symboliques.
- freedom of circulation of knowledge without questioning ourself on showing vs extracting
- legitimity of occupying a space 

• example of the Museum in US who wanted to show 'secret' knowledge transmission of native Americans

- who you share with and who you want to share with
- the knowledge of and for everyone or of and for a community
- nextwork of actants ? talking about the relation between things more than just the objectivity of a thing
- the non normativity of a license is interesting; not saying what you should do or not but making you aware of your own responsibilities

• how to deal with the fact that in most cases of problematic situations, the people touched are not involved in the process. The Mapuches people for instance, didn't have a say from the beginning. 
• talking about responsability instead of talking about property or ownership. The question is not to whom it belongs but who and how the mapuche dance could habited and avoid the subject/object relationship
  • position  of entitlement that you take advantage from 'birth'
• Edouart Glissant: relation-ship: a relation that travels

• both parties have to agree to go into this relationship
• agree on losing privilege (ex. the privilege to make a beautiful performance) → responsability / commitment / engagement
• give back something to the community you took from / sharing / highlight the community you took it from (?)

legitimity (of use) is in the practise, in the case of KFDA; the dance
who is entitled to inhabit the practise and how? with what intention?

Milieu framed by relationship and responsability avoiding cultural extraction

notion of inhabiting a practice instead of the property of a practice - then how do we adress  the question of legitimacy? 
who has the right to decide on legitimity of use
ex yoga - the practise is strong enough to deal with commercialisation & co

licensing should be part of the relationship and so the work not outside of the work
notion of work, 

making space for discussion, make it part of the work

normative tool or education? Do we analyse case by case or this discourse has to be brought in educational contexts beforehand: adressing the problems of extractive culture and power relations in arts practice 

How to adress this commitment to a non human entity? What does it mean to start a relationship with a practice, with an objet, with a milieu

Creating a sort of label (like fair trade label) for a practice, a work where the artist is making clear their intentions, why they feel entitled to make that work, where they're actually taking responsibility for their work [a way of avoiding western naivity-obliviousness maybe... "I did it because it's nice" bs ]

Another term of metaphor than "label" maybe? 
But then, who gives the label? then we're back to asking who's legitimate to what
But maybe it's not a tool, it's a guideline which works more on principles than tools but then there are already big limitations 
Possibility to say: this is a grey area and the responsibility is with those who bring these grey area. 

Having responsability on side of the artist instead of on the tool?
you give certain label to your work, explain why and what the process is, then audience can react
as a way of naitvity-obliviousness

Decolonial license: 'We recognize that private ownership over media, ideas, and technology is rooted in European conceptions of property and the history of colonialism from which they formed.' Being an artist comes with privilege in Europe. Given this privilege, you have this responsability over the grey zone.
Grey zone =  there is no legal framework on this, be aware that every gesture is a decision