By Filipe - Between the Margin and the Stage: A critique of the legitimization of contemporary art and the limits of institutional recognition

Contemporary art is marked by an expansion of possibilities: a multiplication of languages, a mixing of fields, new forms of relationship with the public, and a shift from the centrality of the object to the process. In this expanded field, what defines a work is not only its form or technique, but also its intention, its context, and, often, its justification. Justification becomes part of the work, and in many cases, what gives it meaning and legitimacy.

The provocation that contemporary art is largely justificatory helps us understand not only how it presents itself, but also how it is perceived, consumed, and promoted. Nicolas Bourriaud, in discussing the idea of post-production, points out that the contemporary artist acts as someone who reorganizes what already exists, re-editing cultural codes. Creation comes to be understood as a relational gesture: the work is valued for the network of meanings and affections it mobilizes.

In this context, the idea and the proposal take center stage, sometimes more so than the materiality of the work. Manuel Castells, in his work The Network Society, also contributes to this debate by showing how contemporary culture is increasingly connected to the logic of networks and the circulation of information and symbols. Art, in this scenario, operates not only as form, but as connection, flow, and its relevance also depends on how it fits into these symbolic and social networks.

But this gesture, which opens space for diverse expressions and peripheral practices, also has its limits. Néstor García Canclini, when discussing hybrid cultures, draws attention to the fact that circuits of cultural legitimation are not neutral. Although contemporary art welcomes plural discourses, not all voices circulate with the same freedom. There are choices about what is promoted, what is celebrated, and what is silenced.

This tension also appears in the way the public relates to art. There is a difference between accepting or legitimizing, exhibiting artists and their works in a museum or festival, and validating the same practice in its territory of origin, with its contradictions and potential. What is consumed as an aesthetic proposal may not be accepted as everyday practice. This is especially true for expressions that arise in marginalized territories: they are sometimes welcomed when translated into more “safe” formats, but face resistance when they try to exist in their original form.

Contemporary art does indeed carry a critical and relational potential. But this potential is realized unevenly, depending on the place, the body, and the audience involved. Justification can open doors, but it does not guarantee that the practice will be legitimized and sustained in everyday life.

The increasingly present risk is that art will become a showcase: visible, celebrated, commented on, but disconnected from the realities that give rise to it. In this scenario, the stage may end up operating as a new margin: a place where artistic expression is permitted as long as it is domesticated, translated, and adjusted. The challenge is to ensure that art does not lose its capacity for presence. That culture is not only what can be said, but also what insists on existing.

By Filipe Sartório - @bocao_sartorio