A common thread in projects like this, and one that is also central to this project, is the challenge to traditional understandings of temporality in the arts. Developing a place or growing a garden is not a project with a defined endpoint; it is an ongoing act of care, consideration, and maintenance. In a funding and application system that revolves around clearly defined projects, many artists face challenges in formulating and developing sustainable life forms that remain true to their artistic vision and potential. Nature follows its own pace, and a forest cannot be grown in a year.
Many artists in this field also question ideas around productivity, impact, and time. The goal is often to develop new conceptions of time that focus on building relationships rather than delivering immediate effects, learning outcomes, or tangible products. As art, a garden or a place is interesting not necessarily because of its design, but because of the continuous care it receives.
Another aspect of temporality arises from the repetitive and ongoing tasks required to care for nature. This natural rhythm of living is something many artists seek to explore through practices like these. They nurture more humble and gentle approaches as sustainable ways of interacting with the natural world, in tune with the climate, weather, and seasons. These practices often involve long-term commitment and responsibility.
Thus, we aim to bring the discussion of temporality to the forefront — how we talk about it and how we think about it. As it is one of the longstanding discussions in art history, we seek to make it more hands-on and relatable to these practices by exploring ideas for ensuring the long lifespan of projects. How can one engage in dialogue with project-based structures while working with practices like these? What strategies can be used to address the challenges posed by traditional assumptions of art temporality and project-based models in the arts?