Paper short abstract:

The urbanization of the city developed areas of domestication of the natural and the uncertain. Hence the appearance of new types of artistic events by which urbanization introduces a degree of freedom. But is that freedom nothing but an extra room in the organization of the city? What role do public and private institutions play on those new types of artistic initiatives?

Paper long abstract:

We can observe the disappearance of public space, that leads to uncertainty (Arendt, 1961).

Hence the emergence of new artistic expressions that appropriate public space in order to create new situations of unpredictability (examples of flash mobs, film screenings in the open air, public performances, ephemeral architecture, etc ...)

Public space revitalizes the social bond (Habermas, 1978). Hence the example of the flashmobs :

This gathering and ephemeral instant of a set of individuals is a tool of transcendence and a way to create new situations of unpredictability, through new contingencies. Through the same way, any public space can be turned into a place of performance art, a place of emancipation, where new social relationships may emerge. Through this shared commitment of art performance new public spaces appear : they offer again the uncertainty in the urban space.

The state takes over some of these public events to minimize their effects and control the unpredictable contingent elements, hence the development of a state funded art.

Example of sponsored events and initiatives :

The "104" art place - which was a successful squat - has become elitist, leading to sterility of the art, the viewer becomes a kinetic in the city. The "Campement Urbain" project cannot find investors, due to the abundance of unpredictable and unexpected elements.

These types of events, when supervised by an institutional logic, sterilize the act of emancipation, because institutions cannot afford to promote the uncertain.