This dissertation analyzes the unprecedented phenomenon of autogestión which proliferated in the Argentine contemporary art scene in the aftermath of the economic crisis and popular revolts of December 2001. Premised on the notion that the crisis encompassed significant transformations in all spheres of life, the thesis examines the key role of artists’ initiatives based on autogestión in the reconfigurations within the art field. By focusing on the specific case of Trama – a project for cooperation between artists that evolved into a national and international network of artists’ initiatives (2000–2005) –, the study argues that autogestión became a legitimate artistic practice that gained visibility and strength within the artistic landscape in Argentina in the post-crisis period. As such, it challenges local art historical discourses which, all too often, limit discussions of the political to a rhetoric of art activism or artists’ collectives. Drawing on Henri Lefebvre’s multifaceted conceptualization of autogestión, the study also aims to reinvest the term with its political connotations: autonomy, democracy and self-determination. Relying on Lefebvre’s theoretical framework as an heuristic tool, it examines the ways in which Trama functioned as a political strategy by enacting ethical concerns and values, and by generating a set of conditions within the art field with regard to the social, the subjective and the spatial; these are analyzed in turn in the thesis. Emphasizing these inter-related registers – and guided by an interdisciplinary approach –, this research illustrates the ways in which Trama was not only implicated in, but resonated with the broader socio-political processes and transformations taking place in Argentina at this historical conjuncture. Steering the focus away from the ‘art work’ to ‘artistic practice’, this thesis offers a valuable insight into the discipline as it identifies a new area of investigation – artistic autogestión –, while arguing for the need for more sustained and comprehensive scholarly research on this topic.

Depuis leur origine, la critique et l’histoire de l’art argentines suivent les modèles européens. Les outils d’analyse et d’interprétation, les critères pour évaluer les œuvres, la périodisation et les façons d’organiser le récit historique respectent les normes établies pour l’historiographie française de l’art moderne en particulier. Les auteurs considèrent que l’art local intègre l’espace mondial de l’art de l’Occident, mais ils comprennent qu’il se place dans une région marginale et qu'il suit une temporalité décalée par rapport à la cadence du développement de l’art moderne des régions centrales. L’art argentin est souvent jugé comme provincial et en retard, comme un art qui ne s’adapte pas aux normes du canon français. Cette perception se nourrit dans le contact des Argentins avec la culture française à travers les voyages, les visites des auteurs étrangers et la litérature francophone. Sauf quelques exceptions, c’est la perception dominant la litérature argentine sur l’art jusqu’aux années soixante.À partir de ce moment, les références françaises sont progressivement contestées, associées à d’autres perspectives et puis abandonnées. Ces transformations ont lieu dans le cadre général des révisions disciplinaires propres du passage entre l’ère moderne et la contemporanéité. Celles-ci ne sont pas uniformes ni monolithiques mais le résultat des révisions graduelles de la fonction, la méthodologie et le style de la littérature sur l’art. La crise touche les modèles d’autorité traditionnels et conduit les spécialistes à chercher de nouveaux fondements dans diverses aires de la connaissance comme la psychologie, la sociologie ou les systèmes théoriques proposés par le structuralisme et la sémiotique. La pensée latino-américaine, ravivée à l’époque, contribue à cette remise en question et donne des éléments conceptuels pour le développement de nouvelles perspectives dans la critique et l’histoire de l’art. / From their beginnings, Argentinian art history and critic have followed European models. Interpretation tools, evaluation criteria upon works of art and the standards to organize and cut into periods the historic account, respect the established norms, especially those given by the French modern art historiography. Argentinian authors believe their local art makes part of the western art world space, yet they understand that it is located at a marginal area and that it belongs to a temporariness sufering from lag in relation to the development of the central modern art’s regions. Terefore, Argentinian art is habitually judged as country-like and out-dated since it fails to tackle the imposed standards of the French canon. Such perception is nourished by the interaction of the Argentinians with the French ulture throughout their travels, the foreign authors’ visits and from their specialized French literature available in Argentina. With few exceptions, this perspective has dominated arts writing since the sixties.From that moment on, Argentine authors increasingly question the French references. Te model is re-visited, criticized, mixed with other perspectives and eventually forsaken. Tese transformations occur within the general frame of the disciplinary revisions of the passing from modern to contemporary era. Tey are not uniformly produced, but the outcome of gradual function, methodology and style of art writing revisions. Te crisis afecting the traditional models leads the specialists to look for new foundations in several areas of knowledge such as psychology, sociology, or in the theoretical systems proposed by structuralism and semiotics. Te « Latin-Americanist » discourses, reactivated during the sixties contribute and give such revision conceptual elements for the development of new perspectives on the art criticism and art history.