Web of Scientific Journal

The collective book Modos de hacer: Arte crítico, esfera pública y acción directa (Salamanca, 2001) focuses on art as a tool for questioning, reflecting on and transforming the public sphere. Its texts have been a milestone in the field of artistic reflection and experimentation, and have promoted dialogue between art and society, a point of reference for artists who began their careers at the turn of the century.

On the occasion of its upcoming 25th anniversary, AusArt would like to pay homage with a monographic issue that explores the intersections between critical art and the public sphere in a world of changing social and political dynamics. We hope to bring together diverse and innovative voices and perspectives that propose an updated revision of the contents of Modos de hacer.

We look forward to receiving your contributions as researchers, academics and/or artists to explore how critical art can influence the public sphere and foster a meaningful dialogue between art, culture and society.  Suggested themes are:

• The relationship between critical art and contemporary social movements.

• Artistic strategies that challenge dominant narratives in the public space.

• The relationship between the public sphere and contemporary artistic practices.

• The role of cultural institutions in the promotion of critical art.

• Reflections on the legacy of Modos de hacer and its impact on art and culture.

Your proposals (original and unpublished) will be submitted through the Open Journal Systems platform (www.ehu.eus/ojs/index.php/Ausart) before 16 March 2025. The file with the article will not include either the name or any element identifying its author(s) and must include:

• the title of the article (+ English translation);
• summary (a single paragraph ± 150 words) + summary in English (idem);
• up to five key words and their English translation,
• text (± 3000 words) with optional images and graphics; bibliographical references according to the Chicago author-year format.
• If possible, it is recommended to suggest the names of TWO REVIEWERS (name, 2 surnames, affiliation and e-mail address) who are specialists in the subject addressed, for the evaluation of the article. Such reviewers should not belong to the same institution as the author, nor to UPV/EHU, nor imply any conflict of interest, and may not necessarily be assigned in the review phase.