45 | 2024 – From Intermediate Cultural Spaces to Cultural Third Places: Continuity, Overtaking, or Fracture?
Plan
Haut de pageNotes de la rédaction
Within a landscape shaped by thirty years of developing intermediate cultural spaces, a new generation of places, commonly referred to as "cultural Third Places," is emerging, proliferating and gaining significant enthusiasm, particularly from public authorities who support their creation through incantatory speeches, presenting them as "solutionist" devices for all crises. This thematic issue from Culture & Musées aims to initiate a reflection on the diversity of denominations and forms taken by these Third Spaces in arts and culture, viewed through the prism of the movement of proliferation of cultural Third Places. The objective is as follows: to identify lines of continuity or fracture but also to grasp the singularities and capacities of these spaces in revealing the changes at play within the worlds of art (Becker, 1992). Providing an account of the continuity or rupture of certain questions that were raised 20 years ago, traces of which can be found in a previous issue of Culture & Musées titled "Friches, squats et autres lieux : les nouveaux territoires de l'art ?", is an attempt to initiate a diachronic analysis and, thereby, a critical perspective towards contemporary utopian discourses circulating around these third spaces of arts and culture.
Directed by Émilie Pamart, Maud Pélissier-Thieriot and Franck Renucci
Call for papers for a thematic issue
In the context of burgeoning initiatives, projects, or cultural schemes in France since the mid-1980s , experimental cultural spaces called "intermediary" have emerged in urban territories. These spaces include cultural spots in post-industrial areas, squats, and "new territories of art" (Lextrait, 2001) embodied by collectives committed to challenging and transforming the established cultural regime. Simultaneously, they seek to initiate a critical reflection on the role of art in society (Maunaye, 2004) and on new forms of artistic expression (Henry, 2011). In the continuation of this dynamic, we are witnessing the emergence today of a new generation of cultural spaces, covering diverse realities and identified by various names. The most widespread among them are called "cultural Third Places," thus demonstrating a direct lineage with the hybrid spaces known as "Third Places" (Lévy-Waitz, 2021). The concept of a "Third Place," originally developed by sociologist Ray Oldenburg and imported to France in the 2000s in the context of the development of working from home and digital entrepreneurship, is now enjoying real success, especially among local authorities and the state, which support and encourage their expansion through calls for expressions of interest .
The current enthusiasm for "Third Places" should not lead to overlooking the "overabundance of interpretations where the concept of a Third Place embraces all the fantasies, desires, and collective needs of a generation of individuals/workers in search of a reference point" (Burret, 2015: 72). Similarly, this enthusiasm should not obscure the political, social, and economic issues at the center of these spaces, as well as the expectations, tensions, and conflicts they crystallize regarding urban development and the management of its transformations. Despite the fact that "Third Places" emerged in the context of urbanization starting in the 1980s, today it is also considered by public and private actors as a tool for revitalizing rural areas in response to issues such as isolation, the decline of public services, the digital divide, or cultural deserts. By occupying former industrial buildings, agricultural structures, or old buildings, these Third Places play a role in the conversion, revaluation, and patrimonialization of neglected or destined-to-be-destroyed locations. Among these Third Places, some are dedicated to developing projects related to art and culture. According to the report "Nos territoires en action" by France Tiers-lieux (2021), 27% of Third Places define themselves as cultural fabrication labs or cultural spaces in post-industrial areas, and 15% of third places claim to belong to the movement of intermediary and independent spaces. This data not only highlights the importance of the phenomenon of "cultural Third Places" (Aroufoune, Magkou, Pamart, 2023) within the broader landscape of "Third Places" but also underscores the interest, for this thematic issue, in narrowing focus by highlighting those spaces for which a primary activity is hosting artistic and cultural activities and practices.
In addition to the term "cultural Third Place", other terminologies – equally fluid – exist and contribute to the emergence and dissemination of these types of places that exist "in deviation" (Joanny, 2012: 21) from cultural institutions: "artistic eco-places," "artistic and cultural workshops," "project spaces," "intermediary and independent spaces," or even "places for artistic and civic imagination." This "Prévert-style" inventory, not claiming to establish an exhaustive list of existing denominations, consists of places that are not easily grasped at first glance due to the plasticity of their present forms, the composite nature of projects and services deployed, the diversity of actors animating them, their trajectory and the territory they occupy. These varied denominations do not describe the same situations and finalities; they cannot be understood as interchangeable. The choice of one designation over another is far from a trivial; it is indicative of a strategic and identity-based positioning on the part of actors, project leaders responding to issues of visibility and legitimacy (Idelon, 2018): "words qualify places" and "also situate them in an environment and a project" (Gellereau, La Broise, 2004). This thematic issue aims precisely to open up reflection on this diversity of denominations, on what connects or separates them, the ruptures, continuities, or overtakings of which they may be a trace.
Despite the protean nature of these "cultural Third Places," we hypothesize that they take up, extend, arrange, reformulate, and sometimes even deconstruct, in a renewed context, some of the questions that arose regarding the "new territories of art," as evidenced by Issue 4 of Culture & Musées on “Friches, squats et autres lieux”, published in 2004 and directed by Emmanuelle Maunaye. Thus, nineteen years after this issue, we propose to reexamine these spaces such as post-industrial areas, artistic squats, emerging or alternative places, and intermediate places (Maunaye, 2004) in light of the proliferation of cultural Third Places, identifying lines of continuity and fracture to better grasp the singularity of these forms of "project places" (Henry, 2022) and their ability to express ongoing changes that traverse the art worlds (Becker, 1992). Accounting for the continuity or rupture in certain questions posed 20 years ago is also a desire to initiate a diachronic analysis, and thereby a critical one, towards certain contemporary utopian discourses presenting the category of "cultural third places" as a "solutionist" device to all crises—ecological, environmental, democratic, economic. Through case studies or comparative and/or longitudinal approaches, on a national, European, or international scale, authors are invited to examine these intermediate cultural places, their projects, ways of qualifying them, putting them into discourse, and bringing them to life.
This issue will aim to gather proposals structured around the following three lines of inquiry:
1: Artistic Creation and experimentation
For this first line of inquiry, the focus is on the question of artistic creation processes, and more broadly, what is new and unpredictable. These places, where arts and culture come to life, provide frameworks from which artistic creation, research, research-creation, experimentation, and projects for the community emerge. What do these third spaces of society reflect? What do they reveal? What are they symptomatic of, and in what ways do they provide answers? Could they be "the new hinterlands of democracy" where the exchange of words, invention, and creation are the catalysts? At a time when activity increasingly shifts to virtual online platforms where flesh-and-blood bodies disappear (Martin-Juchat, 2020), could these spaces be places of vitality where life continues its individuation work through encounters (Renucci, 2017)? While Sherry Turkle writes Alone Together (2015), do these spaces not offer fortifications against "interactive solitudes" (Wolton, 2012)? As individual singularities sometimes tend to fade in order to label each person, could these living spaces allow these singularities to assert themselves anew through processes of creation and sharing? Could collective efforts and communal activities allow each individual to invent themselves?
In a world where the unexpected and improvisation are enemies of protocol and procedure, can't we find, through interactions, the wonderful sources of serendipity and the “capacity to be surprised" (Catellin, Loty, 2013)? In an era where continuity is increasingly favored, and a user manual for creativity is sought after, could what emerges, offering discontinuity and novelty, be a form of resistance to the logic of predictability? In the binary age, what does a third tell us? Is it a commonplace or does it allow us to take time, to rediscover that every phenomenon takes time? Does valuing the third mean wasting time or creating a point of resistance to the immediacy algorithms that govern cultural consumption practices? Could these artistic or other creation processes be a resistance to the logic of the excluded third, which only admits the opposition of two values, with the third creating the interval, the passage, the interstice, and freedom?
2: Audiences, outreach and participation
From the emergence of the first forms of third spaces, the desire to renew the forms of relationships with audiences has been at the forefront of the concerns of cultural actors leading these project spaces, with a strong social and political objective: to build a more interactive, participatory, and symmetrical relationship with "audiences," "users," "populations," and "citizens" (Pamart, Quidu, Vilatte, Schall, 2022). For this second line of inquiry, the question of audiences will be addressed in a context marked by a major evolution of the reference framework of public policies with the implementation of the laws NOTRe, in 2015, and LCAP (Liberty, Creation, Architecture, and Heritage), in 2016, reinforcing the societal or territorial dimension of cultural projects and integrating audiences as full-fledged actors in the artistic or cultural process (Saez, 2017). This concept, driven by the notion of "cultural rights," which is not a new idea, aims to "transform" the relationship between a place and the audiences that experience it, compared to a weakened ideal of cultural democratization (Bordeaux, Liot, 2012), based on an elitist and diffusionist conception of culture. In other words, these places aim to accompany the transformation of established cultural hierarchies embodied by cultural institutions that "largely remain, in France, the alpha and omega of public policies" (Gonon, 2017). These transformations also impose themselves on professionals in cultural institutions who express a certain perplexity about how to address and engage audiences at a time when observed cultural behaviors are redistributed due to the effects not only of digital diffusion, the internet, and cultural industries but also a questioning of the prescriptive role of cultural institutions in matters of values and aesthetic and artistic choices (Donnat, 2016-2017).
This project of renewing the traditional reference framework of cultural policies operates through the role granted to audiences, in the sense that it is not so much the artist or the work that will occupy a cardinal place in the project, but rather the situation of interaction between a work, an artist, and audiences (Henry, 2022), as well as a territory, a population, a space, and a diversity of actors (i.e., its environment). In other words, it is about experiencing the time and spaces of art and culture differently by placing the search for an experience (Dewey, 2010), characterized by engaged and supportive relational quality (Magkou, Lambert, 2021), at the heart of the practices of actors and audiences.
Around the theme of audiences, a series of questions emerge: how is the issue of audience formulated in these places? What categories are used to describe them? Who are the audiences of these places? How can we observe and measure practices in action in these places? What is the relationship they have with these spaces and the people who animate them? How do actors embrace the notion of cultural rights? How do they translate it into actions? What are the different forms of engagement, participation, and mediation implemented there? How do these experiences relate to the inherent logics of cultural outreach processes and devices?
3: Cultural Third Spaces and Transitions
In the 2004 issue, the "new territories of art" embodied a strong critique of consumer society. Often occupying former industrial spaces illegally, they expressed their opposition to the urban consequences of a growing commodification dynamic in cities (Lextrait, 2004), embodied in Europe by cultural policies elevating art and culture as levers of a new creative economy (Liefooghe, 2010) from a territorial marketing perspective. Today, the rise of third places occurs in a different context, marked by a world in transition, facing three major crises—environmental, democratic, and socio-economic—that cut across our societies. Within them, unprecedented and pioneering experiments are being developed to address the challenges of environmental and social transition. On a local scale, third places are experimenting with new ways of inhabiting neighborhoods, rethinking mobilities, and consumption patterns. They are touted as tools for attracting territories, creating wealth directed towards a more sustainable economy, imbued with greater social justice, to invent the world of tomorrow in the face of climate challenges (Martin, Pélissier, 2023). It is therefore not surprising that, for public authorities, they embody a promise of renewal (Pignot, Saez, 2018), established as a "model for exiting a crisis" capable of accompanying these transitions at the territorial level (Idelon, 2022). However, the reality of cultural third places is complex and varied. Consequently, the responses they provide to the challenges posed by these transitions do not necessarily follow a uniform path. Nevertheless, there is a certain enthusiasm within the cultural third places movement for the commons-based thinking as a heuristic model to think and act in a transitioning world (Pélissier, Magkou, 2023). This, especially, is the path taken by intermediate and independent spaces, which define themselves as modes of community organization guaranteeing not only the right to access a shared resource but also the exercise of a common management right based on a principle of self-organization (Desgouttes, 2019). But this is not the path taken by all.
From this perspective, several questions arise: on what foundations and in what ways does the public actor accompany cultural Third Places on the path of transitions? From the perspective of cultural Third Places, how does this willingness to actively participate in the challenges posed by these transitions manifest concretely? What are the resulting social innovations? How does commons-based thinking provide concrete answers for cultural third places facing the challenges of transitions? Are we witnessing the emergence of a new cultural political economy as a response to these transitional challenges?
Bibliography
Aroufoune, B., Magkou, M., Pamart, E. (sous la dir.) Tiers lieux culturels. Penser, expérimenter, travailler autrement ? Tome 2, L’Harmattan, coll. Communication et civilisation, (à paraître fin 2023)
Auboin, N. (2018). « Dynamiques organisationnelles, modes de gestion et institutionnalisation de différents tiers-lieux culturels ». Dans : Pignot, L. & Saez, J.-P. (dir.). Tiers-Lieux un modèle à suivre. L’observatoire, la revue des politiques culturelles, 52 (2), p. 39-42.
Aufrère, L. & Coler, P. (2022). « Les lieux intermédiaires et indépendants au cœur de la mise en œuvre des droits culturels ». Dans : (collectif). Droits culturels : Les comprendre, les mettre en œuvre. Éditions de l'Attribut, coll. Culture & société, p. 164-171.
Bazin, H. (2013). « Les figures du tiers espace : contre-espace, tiers paysage, tiers-lieu ». Dans : Caullier, J. & Bruce, M. (dir.). Edifier le commun, I. Filigrane, 19. URL : https://revues.mshparisnord.fr/filigrane/index.php?id=717
Becker, H. (1992). Les Mondes de l’art, Flammarion, Coll. Champs arts.
Burret, A. (2015). Tiers lieux et plus si affinités, Editions FYP.
Catellin, S. & Loty, L. (2013). « Sérendipité et indisciplinarité ». Dans : Besnier, J.-M & Perriault, J. (dir.). Interdisciplinarité entre disciplines et indisciplines. Hermès, La Revue, 67, p. 32-40.
Desgoutte, J. (2019). « Les communs en friche ». Métropoliques, 13 juin 2019. URL : https://metropolitiques.eu/Les-communs-en-friches.html
Dewey, J. (2010). L’art comme expérience, Gallimard, Coll. Folio Essais.
Donnat, O. (2016-2017). « La question des publics, d’un siècle à l’autre ». Dans : Donnat O. (dir.). Les publics in situ et en ligne. Culture et recherche, 134. URL : https://www.culture.gouv.fr/Thematiques/Enseignement-superieur-et-Recherche/La-revue-Culture-et-Recherche/Les-publics-in-situ-et-en-ligne
Galli, D., Galiano, C., Lambert, V. (sous la dir.) Tiers lieux culturels. Comment se le dire ? Tome 1, L’Harmattan, coll. Communication et civilisation, (à paraître fin 2023)
Gellereau, M. & La Broise P. de. (2004). « De l'atelier à l'atelier : la friche industrielle comme lieu de médiation artistique ». Dans : Maunaye, E. (dir.). Friches, squats et autres lieux : les nouveaux territoires de l'art ?. Culture & Musées, 4, p. 19-35.
Gonon, A. (2017). « Les « nouveaux territoires de l’art » ont-ils muté ? ». Entretien avec Catherine Trautmann. Nectart, n° 4 (1), p. 107-119.
Henry, P. (2022). « Les lieux culturels intermédiaires : une identité collective spécifique ? ». Rapport de recherche, auto-édition en accès libre. URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03685452
Henry, P. (202). Les groupements culturels coopératifs. Presses universitaires de Grenoble.
Idelon, A. (2018). « Tiers-lieu culturel, refonte d’un modèle ou stratégie d’étiquette. Observatoire des politiques culturelles ». Dans : Pignot, L. & Saez, J.-P. (dir.). Tiers-Lieux un modèle à suivre. L’observatoire, la revue des politiques culturelles, 52 (2), p. 27-30.
Jeanneret, Y. (2014). Critique de la trivialité : les médiations de la communication, enjeu de pouvoir. Éd. Non Standard.
Joannyn J. (2012). Entre inscription et subversion, les lieux culturels intermédiaires. Des expériences au creux des villes. Sociologie. Université de Grenoble, 2012. Français. NNT : . tel-01295413
Levy-Waitz, P. (2021) (Introduction). « Rapport Tiers-lieux. Nos territoires en action. Dans les tiers-lieux se fabrique notre avenir ». France Tiers Lieux. URL : https://francetierslieux.fr/rapport-tiers-lieux-2021/
Lextrait, F. (2001). Friches, laboratoires, fabriques, squats... et autres projets pluridisciplinaires. Une nouvelle époque de l'action culturelle. La Documentation française.
Lextrait, F. (2004). « Les nouveaux territoires de l'art ». Dans : Maunaye, E. (dir.). Friches, squats et autres lieux : les nouveaux territoires de l'art ?. Culture & Musées, 4, p. 95-102;
Lextrait, F. (2021). « Les tiers-lieux culturels, métaphores du commun. Rapport France Tiers-lieux. p.116-119.
Liefooghe, C. (2010). « Économie créative et développement des territoires : enjeux et perspectives de recherche », dans Innovations, Vol1, n°31, pp. 181-197
Magkou, M. & Lambert, V. (2021). « Communication et tiers lieux culturels pendant et après le COVID-19. Vers une communication solidaire ». ESSACHESS. URL : https://www.essachess.com/index.php/jcs/article/view/531
Martin-Juchat, F. (2020). L’aventure du corps. La communication corporelle, une voie vers l'émancipation. PUG.
Martin, C. Pélissier, M. (2023). (coord.) « Les tiers-lieux, espaces d’expérimentation des transitions ? », colloque RIODD, octobre 2023, Lille.
Maunaye, E. (2004). « Friches, squats et autres lieux : les nouveaux territoires de l'art ? ». Introduction. Dans : Maunaye, E. (dir.). Friches, squats et autres lieux : les nouveaux territoires de l'art ?. Culture & Musées, 4, p. 13-17.
Oldenburg, Ray (1989). The Great Good Place : Cafes, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community. Marlowe & Coe.
Pamart, E., Quidu, P., Vilatte J.-C. & Schall C. (2022). « Tiers-lieux culturels et participation : étude de cas de trois tiers-lieux culturels luxembourgeois ». Colloque Tiers-Lieux Culturels, Regards croisés entre chercheurs, professionnels et artistes. Colloque pluridisciplinaire, labellisé SFSIC, Toulon.
Pélissier, M., Dechamp G. & Magkou M. (2023). « Les Tiers-lieux culturels comme des communs. Réflexions ouvertes autour des fondements conceptuels », Revue de l’organisation responsable, en cours de publication.
Pélissier, M., Magkou M. (2023). « Les tiers-lieux culturels comme laboratoires d’expérimentation des communs en faveur des transitions ? », colloque SFSIC, juin 2023, Bordeaux. Disponible en ligne : https://www.sfsic.org/wp-inside/uploads/2023/05/programme-congres-sfsic-bordeaux-2023-15052023v2.pdf
Pignot, L. & Saez, G. (2018). « Présentation ». Dans : Pignot, L. & Saez, G. Tiers-Lieux un modèle à suivre. L’observatoire, la revue des politiques culturelles, 52 (2), p. 7-8.
Raffin, F. (2004). « L'initiative culturelle participative au cœur de la cité : les arts de la critique sociale et politique ». Dans : Maunaye, E. (dir.). Friches, squats et autres lieux : les nouveaux territoires de l'art ?. Culture & Musées, 4, p. 57-74.
Raffin, F. (2007). Friches industrielles. Un monde culturel européen en mutation. L’harmattan.
Rasse, P. (2017). Le musée réinventé. Culture, patrimoine, médiation. Cnrs Éditions.
Renucci, F. (2017). « La recherche entre écoles d’art et universités : des rencontres qui cessent de ne pas s’écrire ». Dans : Pélissier M. & Pelissier N. (dir.). Métamorphoses numériques. Art, culture et communication. L’Harmattan, coll. Communication et civilisation, p. 213-230.
Saez, J-P. (2017). « Les dessous des droits culturels». Dans : Saez, J-P. (dir.) Droits culturels et horizons d’action, L’observatoire, la revue des politiques culturelles, 49 (1), p. 4-8.
Turkle, S. (2015). Seuls ensemble : De plus en plus de technologies, de moins en moins de relations humaines. Éditions L’échappée.
Wolton, D. (2012). Indiscipliné, 35 ans de recherche. Odile Jacob.
The issue’s guest editors
Émilie Pamart (MCF, CNE, UMR 8562, Avignon Université)
Lecturer in Information and Communication Sciences at the University of Avignon. A researcher at the Nobert Elias Center (UMR 8562), she is co-chair of the theme Cultures. Her research focuses on the evolutions of culture and the processes of institutionalization of cultural forms, with a particular interest in hybrid cultural spaces, cultural policy and audiences and the territoriality of their practices (cultural participation, evaluation of cultural action, etc).
Maud Pélissier-Thieriot (MCF HDR, IMSIC, EA 4262, Université de Toulon)
Lecturer in Information and Communication Sciences at the University of Toulon in the laboratory IMSIC (Mediterranean Institute for Information and Communication Sciences). Her research focuses on the socioeconomics of culture and cultural industries. Her most recent research is on the political economy of cultural commons in a digital environment on a local level.
Franck Renucci (PR, IMSIC, EA 4262, Université de Toulon)
Franck Renucci is a Professor of Information and Communication Sciences at the University of Toulon. In a time when the delimitation between humans and machines are becoming increasingly blurred, his research questions human communication and the figures of creative continuity and discontinuity. For him, cultural organizations, in all of their diversity as environments conducive to creation, are spaces of study and meeting between individuals and territories transformed by the digital age.
Sending proposals
Please send in proposals (between 5,000 and 7,000 characters) by email before January 15th, 2024 to:
Émilie Pamart: emilie.pamart[at]univ-avignon.frMaud Pélissier-Thieriot: maud.pelissier[at]univ-tln.fr
Franck Renucci: franck.renucci[at]univ-tln.fr
CC: eric.triquet@univ-avignon.fr et pauline.grison[at]univ-avignon.fr
Formatting for proposals
- 5,000 to 7,000 characters including spaces
- The .docx document should be named as follows: C&M-N°45-PC-Author’s last name (or principal author if more than one).
- The document should be written in 12-point Times New Roman justified
In order, it should have the following:
- LAST and first name of author 1
- Email address
- Status: Position and institution (university, research lab)
- Title
- Biography (maximum 600 characters)
The same is applicable for any other authors of the proposals.
- Proposal title
- The body of the proposal should include details of the disciplinary or interdisciplinary approach adopted, the issues at stake, the field or corpus studied, the methodology employed and preliminary projection of results.
- 5 keywords
- 5 references used in the article.
Timeline
January 15th, 2024: Deadline for proposal submission.
January 30th, 2024: Acceptances and refusals of proposals are sent to authors.
April 29th, 2024: Deadline for finished articles.
May-June 2024: Double-blind peer-review.
June 30th, 2024: Feedback to authors (acceptance or rejection on the basis of peer-reviews).
September 30th, 2024: Deadline for 2nd versions of articles.
November 30th, 2024: Deadline for final changes including metadata.
December 2024 — May 2025: Translation, correction, layout.
June 2025: Issue publication.
Culture & Musées, the Journal
Culture & Musées is a double-blind peer-reviewed bi-annual journal devoted to publishing new research on cultural audiences, institutions and outreach. It aims at a wide readership of researchers, students as well as museum and cultural heritage professionals. Culture & Musées is a recognized journal in the field of Information and Communication Sciences (71st CNU section).
The journal is supported by Avignon University et UGA Éditions. It is published with the support of France’s Ministry of Culture, the Région Sud, the Institute of Human and Social Sciences at the CNRS and the Centre Norbert Elias (CNE).
The journal is indexed by the INIST and the Arts and Humanities Citation Index and Current Contents/Arts Humanities (Thomas Reuters), Mir@bel - Isidore.science - Web of science – Scimago - Scopus.
Culture & Musées is open access and published on OpenEdition: https://journals.openedition.org/culturemusees/
Head of publication
Publication Directors: Isabelle Brianso & Éric Triquet (Avignon Université)
Editors-in-chief: Dominique Poulot (Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne) & Éric Triquet (Avignon Université)
Assistant Editor-in-chief: Gaëlle Crenn (Université de Lorraine)
Publication and Editorial Coordination: Pauline Grison (Avignon Université)
Editorial Board
Pascale Ancel, Université Grenoble Alpes
Florence Andreacola, Université Grenoble Alpes
Arnaud Bertinet, Université Paris 1
Isabelle Brianso, Avignon Université
Marie-Charlotte Calafat, Mucem
Marie Cambone, Université Grenoble Alpes
Sandra Costa, Université de Bologne
Saskia Cousin, Université Paris Nanterre
Gaëlle Crenn, Université de Lorraine
Catherine Cuenca, AGCCPF, Université de Nantes
Manuelina Maria Duarte Cândido, Université de Liège
Jacqueline Eidelman, École du Louvre
Daniel Jacobi, Avignon Université
Emmanuelle Lallement, Université Paris 8
Joëlle Le Marec, Université Sorbonne Nouvelle-Paris 3
Jean-Marc Leveratto, Université de Lorraine
François Mairesse, Université Sorbonne Nouvelle-Paris 3
Anik Meunier, Université du Québec à Montréal
Dominique Poulot, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne
Vincent Poussou, Réunion des musées nationaux-Grand Palais
Lise Renaud, Avignon Université
Eva Sandri, Université Paul Valéry Montpellier 3
Olivier Thévenin, Université Sorbonne Nouvelle-Paris 3
Eric Triquet, Avignon Université
Fabien Van Geert, Université Sorbonne Nouvelle-Paris 3
Mathieu Viau-Courville, OCIM
Jean-Christophe Vilatte, Université de Lorraine





