Transparency.

In contemporary art transparency is a kind of foil overlaying secrecy; it does not work. From the hidden bling of the rich to the routine self-critical utterances of the artist or museum; the power grouping makes everything transparent except its own key relationships. For example Liam Gillick, a figure from the 90s who prefigured some of the problems discussed here. His aluminium and plexiglass structures embody notions of discursive space and democratic negotiation, yet these are shown in galleries and institutions whose direction he influences through long term friendships with curators. These synergies are not transparent but invisible. And the same could be said about the not fully publicised friendship between myself and Isabelle Graw of Texte zur Kunst. This phenomenon exists in the top levels of government and the media as well. Conservative journalist Peter Oborne's recent book The Political Class argues that a professional elite has embedded itself in UK government circles and "the broadcasting and newspaper media - which so often talk of transparency - [and] are institutionally more opaque than parliament".(5) A language of transparency is used but, under a populist front, a small group holds all the cards. This network is often based on friendships, at the crossroads between everyday life and work, and what Oborne describes as " the emergence of a marketplace of influence and access".(6) Having a closed groupuscle, previously the Baader-Meinhof or Situationist cell model, can also be seen as a potential maffia and deeply conservative.

The Tail that wags the Dog.