In a landscape marked by growing inequality and the exhaustion of liberal promises, contemporary art finds a critical compass in Art After Liberalism. Published in 2022 in the United States, Nicholas Gamso’s book offers a profound and insightful analysis of the transformative role of art.
In the face of the collapse of liberal narratives and the rise of far-right populist movements, Art After Liberalism presents an original and provocative analysis. By exploring how art can offer alternatives in a crisis-ridden landscape, Gamso goes beyond the limits of aesthetic criticism, proposing a new understanding of artistic creation as a field of political and social experimentation.
With a background in American Studies, Gamso provides an innovative interdisciplinary reading that connects visual arts with political and social issues. By transcending formal analysis, the author invites us to think of art as a field of symbolic dispute, where battles are fought for a fairer and more equitable future.
The book is based on the premise that liberalism is in collapse. For Gamso, the model that promised equality, progress, and individual freedom has proven incapable of dealing with the contemporary world’s deep crises. Events like the 2008 financial crisis, the rise of populist leaders like Donald Trump, and the growth of global inequality are signs that the liberal system has failed to provide the conditions for a fairer society. Art, in this context, gains relevance as a place of contestation and possibility.
Gamso argues that contemporary art needs to go beyond merely representing reality and become an active agent in social transformation. In this sense, he distances himself from modernist approaches that treat art as an autonomous sphere, isolated from political issues. His view is clearly influenced by theorists like T.J. Demos and Ariella Aïsha Azoulay, who also work at the intersection of art, politics, and human rights, advocating for art as a tool for intervention in the present.
One of the central concepts the author develops throughout the book is what he calls the “phenomenology of relation.” Gamso suggests that art should turn towards collective experience, encouraging interaction between the public and the artwork, and fostering the construction of shared meanings. In other words, by proposing a ‘horizontal and popular agency,’ the author breaks with the individualist logic of liberalism, advocating for a redistribution of power by subverting hierarchies and promoting collective participation.
The Monument sculpture by Manaf Halbouni, with its overturned buses evoking resistance in Aleppo, is an emblematic example of art’s capacity to generate collective participation. Displayed in a public square, the work promotes debates on urgent topics like war, immigration, and the occupation of public spaces. For Gamso, this piece demonstrates how art can be a catalyst for political reflection and action, transforming the place of art into an arena for narrative disputes.
This concept is close to Fred Moten’s ideas about the “de-individualization” of creative expression. Both Gamso and Moten argue that for art to be truly transformative, it must challenge the power structures that shape artistic production and consumption, promoting a greater democratization of culture.
Another crucial aspect of the publication is Gamso’s critique of artistic institutions, such as museums, galleries, and biennials. For him, these institutions reaffirm the same liberal power structures that art should challenge, imposing a dilemma on contemporary artists: how to maintain their critical and transformative force in a context where we are all constantly co-opted and instrumentalized by commercial and political interests?
To illustrate his response, Gamso uses the example of the Whitney Museum, where critical artwork is financed by the institution itself. This apparent contradiction reveals the sophisticated dynamics of co-optation: dissent is absorbed by the system, neutralizing its transformative force. This reality exposes the fragility of artistic autonomy in a context marked by commodification.
For this reason, the author proposes that art should free itself from the constraints of the market and institutions, seeking new spaces for creation, experimentation, and exhibition. From this position, the author praises initiatives that promote artistic production outside conventional circuits, as a way to strengthen the autonomy and social relevance of art.
Gamso’s writing is marked by a balance between accessibility and theoretical depth. Although the author is immersed in complex academic debates, his prose is fluid and engaging, making the reading easy without sacrificing the seriousness of his analysis. Excessive theoretical jargon is avoided, and the approach privileges concrete examples, with direct dialogues with contemporary art.
Gamso’s methodology is effective in showing how specific works of art can illustrate and even challenge the crises of liberalism. The choice of artists — Wolfgang Tillmans, Tania Bruguera, and Forensic Architecture, among others — is carefully thought out to offer a representative sample of the most engaged artistic practices of the moment.
On the other hand, it should be noted that while Gamso’s analysis of established artists is relevant, we might accuse the author of the risk of overshadowing the importance of more marginal and experimental artistic practices. These latter ones, often relegated to the periphery of the artistic field, offer completely different perspectives from those of the mainstream, responding more incisively to contemporary crises.
When comparing Gamso with other critics, a clear affinity with the thinking of Judith Butler and Jacques Rancière is observed. In line with Butler, Gamso demonstrates a deep interest in unraveling how power manifests and shapes bodily experiences, especially in marginalized contexts. When analyzing the work of artists like Wolfgang Tillmans, for example, Gamso uses the concept of the bodily indexical force to explore the construction of identities and relationships in queer spaces.
As for Rancière, we see that both authors recognize the political dimension of art, but they differ in how it manifests. While Rancière argues that art already has an intrinsic capacity to question the status quo, Gamso defends the need for explicit and directed engagement of art with contemporary social issues. For Gamso, art should not be limited to disrupting consensus but should actively participate in political struggles.
Art After Liberalism is a book that challenges both the reader and artistic practice itself. While diagnosing the failures of liberalism, it offers a vision of how art can contribute to creating a fairer and more solidaristic future. Its focus on collaborative practices and a “phenomenology of relation” is a creative and critical response to the collapse of the liberal project.
The author does not ignore the difficulties faced by art in a context dominated by capital. On the contrary, he warns us of the dangers of co-optation and instrumentalization. However, instead of abandoning the struggle, Gamso invites us to rethink the role of art as a space of resistance and the construction of new possibilities.
For those seeking a deep reflection on the relationship between art and politics in times of crisis, Art After Liberalism is a must-read. Gamso shows us that even in a post-liberal world, art still has a vital role to play — not as a passive reflection of our failures, but as an active space of resistance and transformation.
Victor T. Murari
Art History, Education & Artificial Intelligence | PhD | Advancing Educational and Cultural Narratives through AI Integration