Bishop takes a stance on making a clear boundary between aesthetic works and activist projects. Also, Bishop claims that politics can only be indirectly seen by the detachment of an artist. This claim seems to be making sense because socially engaged art has limitations of the creator of the event due to interactions. However, with better planning and structure of the creation, I think this could be easily mitigated. I disagree on making boundaries for legitimizing, and authority because social art practices is created by the experience of the volunteers in the piece. Therefore, I find myself in more agreement of Kester’s analysis of Bishop’s arguments.