REVIEWS 565 increases in relation to the number of locales that they inhabit (p. 7). He further helpfully cites Alexei Yurchak’s explanation of the Russian concept of vnye, which Yurchak interprets as being simultaneously inside and outside a given setting (p. 18). In chapter two, Bidgood asserts that ‘Czech bluegrass, while part of a globalized discourse on bluegrass music, is nevertheless uniquely Czech’ (p. 21). He traces the development of bluegrass from the tramping tradition to the present day, and points out that music has been a key part of Czech Americanism.Hiscommentsonnormalization,cottagingandaccommodation elucidate the context in which Americanism (including bluegrass as one of its principal manifestations) operated and developed during late Communism — ‘a space between dissent and complicity’ (p. 41). Bidgood’s account of the negotiation of musical, cultural, geographical and temporal boundaries, in the context of bluegrass, is accompanied by Notes on language (pp. 125–30) and Recommended media (pp. 153–60). While these may not be of relevance or interest to everyone, they provide useful supplementary information, which will assist the uninitiated. There will be comparatively few readers who will find all aspects of Bidgood’s study equally illuminating and stimulating,notleastbecausethereishardlyanyonewhoshareshisexperiential and knowledge base, but many will be able to take at least something from this well-considered publication. University of Wolverhampton Tom Dickins Tupitsyn, Margarita; Tupitsyn, Victor and Morris, David (eds). Anti-Shows: APTART 1982–84. Exhibition Histories, 8. Afterall Books, London, in association with the Center for Curatorial Studies, Bard College, New York, 2017. 256 pp. Illustrations. Selected bibliography. Notes. Index.£14.95: €16.80 (paperback). Anti-Shows: APTART 1982–84, edited by Margarita Tupitsyn, Victor Tupitsyn and David Morris, is a new addition to Afterall’s Exhibition Histories series. The book is the first comprehensive publication devoted solely to APTART, an artist-run gallery located in a private apartment of the conceptual artist, Nikita Alekseev. Alongside opening essays by the editors, the volume features rare photographic documentation of each of the APTART events and critical texts produced by APTART artists throughout the 1980s. The book has a twofold aim. First, it offers a new insight into what exhibition-making of the late-Soviet period might have looked like. Second, it contributes to the broader discussion of the influential, albeit understudied, phenomenon of the artistcurator , setting a Soviet case-study in an international context. SEER, 96, 3, JULY 2018 566 Tupitsyn traces the tradition of apartment exhibitions back to the early 1960s, considering APTART as a high point in that tradition. Emphasis is placed on the Bulldozer show, 1974, as the first attempt by alternative artists to organize a public display on a piece of waste land in the Moscow suburbs. This gesture and its consequences led to a split in the artistic community between those who were willing to negotiate the conditions imposed by the authorities in order to exhibit in public venues, and those who preferred to avoid such compromises at all costs. While the activities of the former were characterized by growing disputes and antagonistic relations, the practices of the latter were becoming excessively esoteric and exclusive. APTART was conceived as both a means of escape from the redundant elitism and seriousness of Moscow Conceptualism and as an alternative to the ‘blatant control’ of official venues. Through detailed descriptions and photographs of APTART events, the volume conveys their experimental, often sarcastic and humorous nature. However, can these events be defined as exhibitions? As contributors highlight, participating artists purposefully avoided this term, referring instead to ‘working expositions’, ‘anti-shows’ or ‘exhibition-nonexhibitions’. One of the major achievements of APTART was its ability to challenge understandings of what constitutes an exhibition. AnotherimportantcontributionofAPTARTwasitsattempttorethinkmodels of relations between artists and viewers and develop new ways of creating and addressing the public since the Western dichotomy between public and private spheres can hardly be applied in Soviet Russia. As the book illustrates, the APTART artists distinguished themselves from the previous generations of Moscow Conceptualism with ‘their anti-isolationist inclinations and projects concerned with social issues’. Their exhibitions required ‘less gazing and more reading and touching’ and attempted to ‘emancipate the viewer and provoke a new way of thinking’. The book raises a lot of important...
Read full abstract