on practice is a culmination of current critical and academic writing of john ros. the work spans opinion pieces, institutional critique, art historical essays and close readings of contemporary practice. it sits at the intersection of studio, pedagogy and ongoing doctoral research. on practice is published directly on johnros.com — for an archive of writing published elsewhere, including exhibition essays, reviews and interviews, visit the writing archive.
may 2026
working from within: institutional critique as lived practice
a may day essay tracing institutional critique as a condition of labor — from hans haacke’s confrontation with the guggenheim to andrea fraser’s self-implication, through fred wilson, adrian piper, glenn ligon and postcommodity, and into the university, the bargaining table and the picket line. the argument is direct: institutional critique is not a genre of art. it is the daily, embodied work of teaching, organizing and building inside systems whose logic you did not choose and cannot fully refuse. drawing on federici, mcalevey and piper alongside a lineage of artists who refused the institution’s terms while remaining inside it, the essay proposes that critique and building are not opposites — they are the same motion.
april 2026
after the ruin, the commons, or kill everything
a response to josh kline’s diagnosis of the american art world, this essay moves from structural critique to a call for collective rebuilding. taking andrea fraser’s mapping of the contemporary art field as a starting point, it traces the forces — real estate, institutional gatekeeping, social media and the attention economy — that have systematically destroyed the conditions under which meaningful creative work becomes possible. the argument is direct: the art world is not broken, it is working exactly as designed. the essay ends not in elegy but in demand — for the commons, the studio anywhere and the solidarity that makes both possible.
march 2026
beyond the closed loop:
participation, antagonism and the limits of art criticism
a critical examination of the debate between claire bishop and grant kester on participatory and socially engaged art — and where both frameworks fall short. taking bishop’s defense of aesthetic antagonism and kester’s counter-model of dialogical practice as a starting point, the essay argues that art criticism’s tools were built for a different set of problems and carry within them class and racial assumptions that need to be named. drawing on robinson, federici, hersey, freire and others, it proposes care — not as institutional branding but as political category and collective labor — as a more adequate measure of what socially engaged practice actually does in the world.
writing: on practice | writing archive
artist statement | research statement | curatorial statement | teaching philosophy | diversity statement
cv | biography | work