Intelligentsia catalog 48 by Intelligentsia Gallery

INTELLIGENTSIA GALLERY 智先画廊

NOT A STATE, BUT AN ARTISTS’ COLONY 一个不是政府, 而是艺术家的,领地 LI TINGWEI 李亭葳 SIMONA ROTA LENA TSIBIZOVA SERGIO CALDERON MENG ZHIGANG 蒙志刚

23 August 2015 2015 年 08 月 23日

Not a State, but an Artists’ Colony Intelligentsia Gallery is excited to present ‘Not a State, but an Artists’ Colony’, a group exhibition with works by Li Tingwei (b.1989 Yantai, China), Simona Rota (b. 1979 Mäcin, Romania), Sergio Calderon (b. 1978 Santander, Spain), Meng Zhigang (b. 1975 Guilin, China), and Lena Tsibizova (b. 1988 Moscow, Russia). Oscillating between the topos of space and the ungraspable territory of time, through centuries Utopia has remained dangerously elusive. In this never ending cycle, the role of the artist consists in understanding, shaping and envisioning the utopian project, its shortcomings, possible outcomes, materials, concepts, wreckages and standing structures. Challenging Rem Koolhaas’ diagnosis on the desires of the 20th century, the exhibition reformulates his ‘Utopia is a State, not an artists’ colony’, and questions if utopia is, in reality the ambition of a total work of art. In the midst of a struggle between an architecture of the mind, and the superstructure of sublime objects, dialectical methods haven’t been able to fully determine the coordinates of utopia. Co-curated by Garcia Frankowski and Hao Chen, the group exhibition presents installation, painting, video, photography, and publications dealing with the possibility, the fragments, and the remains of utopian projects, inviting the public to join the artist in the colonization of transcendental territories. Intelligentsia Gallery

一个不是政府, 而是艺术家的,领地智先画廊激动呈现群展“一个不是政府，而是艺术家的，领地”，参展艺术家包括李亭葳, Simona Rota, Sergio Calderon, 蒙志刚， Lena Tsibizova。摇摆于空间与不可捕捉的时间两个传统主题之间，几个世纪以来，乌托邦一如既往的危险而难以捉摸。在这永无止境的循环中，艺术家的角色在于理解、塑造并设想乌托邦计划，以及它们的弊端、可能的结果、材料、概念、残骸、屹立的结构等。为挑战库哈斯对20世纪欲望的诊断，展览重述了他的论断“乌托邦是一个政府，而不是艺术家的领地”，并质疑乌托邦的实质是否全然就是一种艺术创作。抗争于建筑思维和上层建筑的崇高客体之间，辩证法并未能够完全决定乌托邦的坐标。由Garcia Frankowski和陈昊联合策展，此次群展展示了装置、绘画、影片、摄影、出版物等关于乌托邦计划的可能性、碎片以及残余，邀请公众与艺术家一起占领超验领域。

智先画廊

Notes on Utopian Revival Guido Tesio

I. Coined by Sir Thomas More in Greek - ὐ “not” and τόπος “place” - for his 1516 book “Libellus vere aureus, nec minus salutaris quam festivus, de optimo rei publicae statu deque nova insula Utopia” describing a fictional island society in the Atlantic Ocean, the term Utopia has usually come to identify any non-existent – not yet as well as not any more - society that is intended to be considerably better than the contemporary one. II. But what an Utopia really is? A mirroring critique of current state of affairs? A prescriptive model working as a reference for a revolutionary transformation of reality? A moral call to a metaphysical ideal of

“goodness”? A consolatory prophecy? How is Utopia to be understood? Literally or allegorically? What is Utopia’s core? Its form or its wish? III. As Frederic Jameson as written: “we would do better to posit two distinct lines of descendency from More’s inaugural text: the one intent on the realization of the utopian program, the other an obscure yet omnipresent utopian impulse finding its way to the surface in a variety of covert expressions and practices.” As its title unveils, by overturning Rem Koolhaas’words, the 48th exhibition of Intelligentsia Gallery is devoted to the exploration of the double nature of the concept of Utopia, endlessly oscillating between the programmatic and the prophetic. IV. Despite Utopias can be extremely different from each other, something about their deeper and common nature can be said. As a project of harmony and perfection, every Utopia is a project of autonomy, of autarchy, of absolutness. In fact, every Utopia involves a certain committment to enclosure. The founding act of More’s Utopia is the removal of the isthmus that connects the island to the mainland. Therefore, “whatever can be imagined as Utopia, this is the transformation of the totality.” What differentiates Utopias from dreams - for example the most commercially acclaimed of them: the American dream - is exactly this claim toward the wholeness of reality. Its universal, non-particular nature. Yet in the increasingly plural and interconnected world of today is there any room for such a monolithic plan of enclosure and autonomy? As a specific byproduct as well as a formative trope of Modernity, are Utopias the strictly european outcome of a strictly euro-centric world that does not exist anymore? Hasn’t the fall of the Berlin Wall decreed the end of Utopias and paved the way to a new era of diversity and individaulity? Karl Popper, who foresaw in the systemic, pervasive nature of Utopias an insidious prefiguration of totalitarian regimes would have no nostalgia for the revival of the egemonic radicalism of Utopias. Nevertheless - despite and because of its pluralism - our world is challanged by increasingly common problems and threatened by a common destiny. To recover a common, wider perspective is not any more a metter of ideology; it has become a matter of sheer necessity. V. Bringing togheter different and conflicting visions of current and past Utopias “Not a State, but an Artists’ Colony” is a concerted effort to critically reposit utopian thought under our contemporary lens to envision the possibility of a new a project of totality without enclosure; a different form of Utopia. -Fredric Jameson, Archaeologies of the Future: The Desire Called Utopia and Other Science Fiction, Verso, London and New York 2005

Theodor W. Adorno in, Something is Missing: a Discussion between Ernst Bloch and Theodor W. Adorno on the Contradictions of Utopian Longing. 1964 from Ernst Bloch, the Utopian Function of Art and Literature. Selected essays. 1988

SUCCESSIVE ATTRIBUTES OF ART AS STATE Christopher Rey Perez

Ascending Vibration CHILDHOOD, OR FIRST PHASE Simple Germ..................................Exclusive art, or monogamy. Compound Germ............................Patriarchal art, or verticality. PIVOT.............................................Autonomy of the work of art. Counterpoise..................................Artist alliances. Tone...............................................“Post” illusions. ADOLESCENCE, OR SECOND PHASE Simple Germ..................................Social art and privilege. Compound Germ...........................Cultivation of scientific art. PIVOT............................................Emancipation of art by those who work. Counterpoise.................................Representational art. Tone............................................. “Libidinal” illusions. APOGEE, OR PLENITUDE Germs...........................................Navigation, relational art. Attributes......................................Decoloniality, bail outs. Descending Vibration VIRILITY, OR THIRD PHASE Simple Germ................................Mercantile art. Compound Germ.........................Conceptual companies. PIVOT..........................................Institutional monopoly. Counterpoise.............................. Militancy, or 3rd Worldisms. Tone........................................... “Fundamental” illusions DECREPITUDE, OR FOURTH PHASE Simple Germ................................Art pawn-shops. Compound Germ.........................Artist debt and occupational art. PIVOT..........................................Credit. Counterpoise...............................Atopic non-arts, or rhetoric. Tone.............................................“Climatic” illusions.

Shapes, Ladders, and Concrete Butterfiles Garcia Frankowski

This exhibition is about Utopia, or better said, about blueprints, fragments, dreams, indifferent aspirations, celebrated and unknown failures of utopian ideas. Since it doesn’t have a single definition, Utopia is said to be several things at once. Utopia can be found in the (im)perfect shapes and (in)complete missions. It can be pursued as intentional goal, or as involuntary tradition. Utopia can be discovered in platonic shapes effortlessly meeting in Euclidean compositions, as if suggesting sublime forms of historical relevance. A square turned into a circle, a corner piece bringing walls together, a sphere decoding space in its own mirrored interpretation, are all fragments of an ongoing utopian project of geometry. Geometry focuses on formal manifestations of utopia. Pure shapes occupy post-humanist territories. Every attempt to reclaim geometry, is an effort to bring back fragments from utopian worlds. In history, Utopia can be seen on the spoiled wings of stranded concrete butterflies. Always trying to take flight. Always stuck to the ground, unable to lift the unbearable lightness of all solids that melt into air. Concrete can’t fly. Utopian concrete is doomed to fail. Like the palace crashing down. Like the kingdom of the proletariat. Like a platonic shape unable to reach its pure perfection. Like the utopias of the 20th century. Utopia is said to be also at the end Jacob’s ladder. An archetype of mythical proportions. Each step closer to utopia. Each step itself utopian. It promised to open up a clear view to a dreamscape. Flawless, beyond our current imperfections. For every dreamscape, there’s a soundscape. Sounds travel in utopian waves. Minimalist anthems, songs of utopia. Music orchestrates utopian experiences through blueprints and notes. In the form of spheres, that like the mirror ball, reverberate inside the body, occupying the impossibility of interior space, liberating experience from any physical context. Utopia is phenomenological. Metaphysical. Utopia is complete unachievable human experience. Spiritual embellishment. Impossibility in disguise. Utopian colonies inhabit contrasting territories. From the ruin of the unknown on the scale of personal ambition, to the still standing muscular monuments and effigies of collectivized leaping ambition. A small unfinished structure that displays the scars of fleeting time in abandonment is the other face of the monumental coin of the Ostalgic. Concrete is utopia. So it’s a broken sphere, music in the air, steps leading nowhere, a leap into the infinite.

NOT A STATE, BUT AN ARTISTS’ COLONY 一个不是政府, 而是艺术家的,领地

Li Tingwei 李亭葳 Turning Wood, Plastics, Metal Wire, Aluminium Ball Dimensions Variable 2015

Lena Tsibizova Kalmykia Pigment Print on Paper 80 x 80cm 2015

Simona Rota Missbehave Editor: Paula Ă lvarez Publisher: Vibok Works, EKTAS Collection Publication date: 05 | 07 | 2013 ISBN: 978-84-939058-9-7 Number of pages: 80 15x22 cm Illustrations: color Language: English Limited edition of 100 copies numbered and signed by Simona Rota

Meng Zhigang 蒙志刚 Jacob’s Ladder Oil on Canvas 150 x 200cm 2008

Sergio Calderon Stereo 2008, 2015 Two Channel-Video and Sound Installation Sound by 無 Recorded live in London in 15th August 2015. Duration 47’20” Performed, recorded and produced by 無. The recording has been edited and mastered, but no overdubs or other post-manipulation were added. 無 are: Sergio Calderón — guitar, effects Céli Lee — guitar, efffects

Map to Utopia Garcia Frankowski

Utopia is a state not an artistsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; colony. 1 Utopias are sites with no real place. They are sites that have a general relation of direct or inverted analogy with the real space of Society. They present society itself in a perfected form, or else society turned upside down, but in any case these utopias are fundamentally unreal spaces.2

Utopia is thus by definition an amateur activity in which personal opinions take the place of mechanical contraptions and the mind takes its satisfaction in the sheer operations of putting together new models of this or that perfect society.3 Yet with Baudelaire, in the ‘death-loving idyll’ of the city, there is decidedly a social, and modern, sub-stratum. The modern is a main stress in his poetry. As spleen he shatters the ideal (Splee et Ideal). But it is precisely the modern which always conjures up prehistory. That happens here through the ambiguity which is peculiar to the social relations and events of this epoch. Ambiguity is the figurative appearance of the dialectic, the law of the dialectic at a standstill. This standstill is Utopia, and the dialectical image therefore a dream-image. The commodity clearly provides such an image: as fetish. The arcades, which are both house and stars, provide such an image. And such an image is provided by the whore, who is seller and commodity in one. 4 So far as a society producing under capitalist conditions is concerned, the commodity has not become any cheaper, the new machine signifies no improvement. The capitalist is therefore not interested in the introduction of this new machine. And since its introduction would make his present and not yet worn-out machinery simply worthless, would make old iron of it, would mean a positive loss for him, he takes good care not to commit such a utopian mistake.5 What can undoubtedly be said is that the model of society proposed by William Morris certainly would not be utopian in a world where all men were like William Morris. 6 He called it “Utopia,” a Greek word which means “there is no such place.”7 Utopia leaps beyond time..., using means whose existence was determined from the beginning within a given reality, it desires to achieve a perfect society: paradise, a fantasy dependent on its time.8 Utopia was not built for those who exist. It was built for those who come later. In order to create the new man it was necessary to destroy the old. 9 Utopia has two fields of possible realization. 1. Existing power, whatever it is, assimilates the means, the criticisms, and the project of utopia, therefore, in a certain measure, its goals, by rejecting them. But, if there had not been a fundamental modification of the existing order, a share of utopia nevertheless passed into reactionary praxis. 2. The revolution that destroyed the topos theoretically permitted a total realization of utopia, which becomes a (revolutionary) topos. In advance, one cannot determine what will constitute the revolutionary praxis of this topos and what will remain theoretical and reintegrated in theory. The realized utopia is a new topos, which will provoke a new critique, then a new utopia. The installation of utopia passes through a (total) urbanism. And that is the complete process.

Topos(conservative) —critique/utopia/revolution— urbanism / topos (revolutionary and conservative)/new utopia…etc. We call that Dialectical Utopia. Utopia is the phase of theoretical construction, but it is absolutely indissociable from the other planes and can only exist as part of dialectical utopia. It is only through dialectical utopia that we can elaborate, outside and within the present system, an urban thought.10 Above and beyond this one could perhaps say in general that the fulfillment of utopia consists largely only in a repetition of the continually same “today.”11 But I believe that we live not very far from the topos of utopia, as far the contents are concerned, and less far from utopia. At the very beginning Thomas More designated utopia as a place, an island in the distant South Seas. This designation underwent changes later so that it left space and entered time. Indeed, the utopians, especially those of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, transposed the wishland more into the future. In other words, there is a transformation of the topos from space into time. 12 In fact, when I think of the fair and sensible arrangements in Utopia, where things are run so efficiently with so few laws, and recognition for individual merit is combined with equal prosperity for all—when I compare Utopia with a great many capitalist countries which are always making new regulations, but could never be called well-regulated, where dozens of laws are passed every day, and yet there are still not enough to ensure that one can either earn, or keep, or safely identify one’s so-called private property—or why such an endless succession of never-ending lawsuits?—when I consider all this, I feel much more sympathy with Plato, and much less surprise at his refusal to legislate for a city that rejected egalitarian principles.13 Republics are very easy to found, and very difficult to maintain, while with monarchies it is exactly the reverse. If it is Utopian schemes that are wanted, I say this: the only solution of the problem would be a despotism of the wise and the noble, of the true aristocracy and the genuine nobility, brought about by the method of generation—that is, by the marriage of the noblest men with the cleverest and most intellectual women. This is my Utopia, my Republic of Plato. 14 The entire life of a nation—beyond the formal sum of individuals standing for themselves, that is to say, living and struggling for their land, their place, their Da-sein—carries within itself (concealed, revealed, or at least occasionally caught sight of) men who, before all loans, have debts, owe something to the neighbour, are responsible—chosen and unique—and in this responsibility want peace, justice, reason. Utopia!15 A map of the world that does not include Utopia is not worth even glancing at, for it leaves out the one country at which Humanity is always landing. And when Humanity lands there, it looks out, and, seeing a better country, sets sail. Progress is the realisation of Utopias.16 One of the “proofs” of my practice of fetishist disavowal is the alleged “perverse paradox” of me rejecting utopias and then nonetheless claiming that today “it is more important than ever to hold this utopian place of

the global alternative open” - as if I did not repeatedly elaborate different meanings of utopia: utopia as simple imaginary impossibility (the utopia of a perfected harmonious social order without antagonisms, the consumerist utopia of today’s capitalism), and utopia in the more radical sense of enacting what, within the framework of the existing social relations, appears as “impossible” - this second utopia is “a-topic” only with regard to these relations. Utopia as simple imaginary impossibility (the utopia of a perfected harmonious social order without antagonisms, the consumerist utopia of today’s capitalism), is not utopia in the more radical sense of enacting what, within the framework of the existing social relations, appears as “impossible” - this second utopia is “a-topic” only with regard to these relations.17 We must therefore admit that the refusal to legitimize murder forces us to reconsider our notion of utopia. In that regard, it seems possible to say the following: utopia is that which is in contradiction with reality. From this point of view, it would be completely utopian to want people to stop killing people. This would be absolute utopia. It is a much lesser degree of utopia, however, to ask that murder no longer be legitimized. What is more, the Marxist and capitalist ideologies, both of which are based on the idea of progress and both of which are convinced that application of their principles must inevitably lead to social equilibrium, are utopias of a much greater degree. Beyond that, they are even now exacting a heavy price from us. 18 “Now,” he said to me, “you are going to see something you have never seen before.” He carefully handed me a copy of More’s Utopia, the volume printed in Basel in 1518; some pages and illustrations were missing. It was not without some smugness that I replied: “It is a printed book. I have more than two thousand at home, though they are not as old or as valuable.” I read the title aloud. The man laughed. “No one can read two thousand books. In the four hundred years I have lived, I’ve not read more than half a dozen. And in any case, it is not the reading that matters, but the re-reading. Printing, which is now forbidden, was one of the worst evils of mankind, for it tended to multiply unnecessary texts to a dizzying degree.”19 The language of the Image-repertoire would be precisely the utopia of language: an entirely original, paradisiac language, the language of Adam -- “natural, free of distortion or illusion, limpid mirror of our sense, a sensual language (die sensualische Sprache)”: “In the sensual language, all minds converse together, they need no other language, for this is the language of nature.20 The poverty of a civilization which, avowedly destroying every kind of constrained to the most practical the basest necessities, those of the mechanical and industrial type! The poverty of a period that replaces

divine luxury of architecture, the highest crystallization of the material liberty of intelligence, by “engineering”, the most degrading product of necessity! The poverty of a period which has replaced the unique liberty of faith by the tyranny of monetary utopias!... 21 All efforts to describe permanent happiness, on the other hand, have been failures. Utopias (incidentally the coined word Utopia doesn’t mean ‘a good place’, it means merely a ‘non-existent place’) have been common in literature of the past three or four hundred years but the ‘favourable’ ones are invariably unappetising, and usually lacking in vitality as well. (...) Nearly all creators of Utopia have resembled the man who has toothache, and therefore thinks happiness consists in not having toothache.22 “That’s it, Fukada was supposedly looking for a utopia in the Takashima system,” the professor said with a frown. “But utopias don’t exist, of course, anywhere in the world. Like alchemy or perpetual motion. What Takashima is doing, if you ask me, is making mindless robots. 23 The search for Nirvana, like the search for Utopia or the end of history or the classless society, is ultimately a futile and dangerous one. It involves, if it does not necessitate, the sleep of reason. There is no escape from anxiety and struggle.24 All utopias are depressing because they leave no room for chance, for difference, for the ‘miscellaneous’. Everything has been set in order and order reigns. Behind every utopia there is always some great taxonomic design: a place for each thing and each thing in its place.25 Life in More’s Utopia, as well as in most others, would be intolerably dull. Diversity is essential to happiness, and in Utopia there is hardly any. This is a defect in all planned social Systems, actual as well as imaginary. 26 If Communism is Utopia it is indescribable because Utopia, being no-place, cannot have any definite form. Every attempt to describe Communism necessarily functions as a projection of the personal prejudices, phobias and obsessions of the writer or artist who tries to undertake such description.27 I would like to say (perhaps as a final thought), what conclusion can be drawn from this exhibition or even from this conversation. You could say this. While mankind still lives, each of us produces a utopia. Creating projects is as natural to man as the discharge of secretions. People always fantasise. We make plans, programmes, compose something or other. But when the plans are implemented in reality, especially by those in power, who have climbed quite high up the ladder of power, all these projects end in catastrophe, blood, destruction or chaos. This produces a terrifying arc: projects are inevitably devised, but inevitably end in failure and death. The question arises: what to do with these projective and productive components? The answer is: divert them, channel them into special ‘utopia-receivers’. Maybe build a ‘Museum of utopias’, or many such museums.28

-1 Rem Koolhaas Utopia Station 2 Michel Foucault Of Other Spaces: Utopias and Heterotopias 3 Frederic Jameson Archaeologies of the Future: The Desire Called Utopia and Other Science Fictions 4 Walter Benjamin Paris: Nineteenth Century Capital 5 Karl Marx Capital: A Critique of Political Economy 6 Michel Houellebecq The Map and The Territory 7 Quevedo 8 Max Horkheimer 9 Emilia Kabakov 10 Jean Baudrillard Dialectical Utopia 11 Theodor W. Adorno 12 Ernst Bloch 13 Thomas More, Utopia 14 Arthur Schopenhauer 15 Emmanuel Levinas The Other, Utopia, and Justice 16 Oscar Wilde

The Soul of Man under Socialism 17 Slavoj Zizek The Liberal Utopia: The Market Mechanisms for the Race of Devils 18 Albert Camus Neither Victims nor Executioners 19 Jose Luis Borges A Weary Man’s Utopia 20 Roland Barthes A Lover’s Discourse: Fragments 21 Salvador Dali The Sectret Life of Salvador Dali 22 George Orwell Why Socialists Don’t Believe In Fun 23 Haruki Murakami 1Q84 24 Christopher Hitchens Love, Poverty, and War: Journeys and Essays 25 Georges Perec Species of spaces and other pieces 26 Bertrand Russell 27 Boris Groys Installing Communism 28 Ilya Kabakov

Bio Simona Rota (b. 1979 Mäcin, Romania) Simona Rota studied Political Sciences in Bucharest and Barcelona and Photography in Madrid where she currently lives. By Commission of the Vienna Architecture Museum, she carried out a mission of documentation for the Museum of Architecture in Vienna, developed between 2010 and 2012, in the former Soviet republics. Her work has been exhibited at the Kursala, the Sevastopol Art Museum, the StadtMuseum Graz, the Architektur Zentrum Wien, the Museum of Modern Art of Medellín in Colombia and the Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofia in Madrid. The work of Simona Rota has been selected and exhibited in Fotonoviembre 13, Arles Photobooks 13, Art Week Vienna 12, and SCAN 12 among others. Her work has been distinguished in national and international contests such as PHotoEspaña Descubrimientos, the Photography Award Purificación García (2012), the International Festival of Photography Emergent Pati de la Llotja, Fotonoviembre Biennial (2011), the IVth Prize for Plastic Arts of the Foundation María José Jove, the award Emergent of the Foundation Sorigué (2010), the Photography Award of the Museum of Architecture in Vienna (2009). She has also published two books entitled “Ostalgia” (Fabulatorio - Kursala, Cádiz, 2013) and Missbehave” (Vibok Works Sevilla, 2013). www.simonarota.es Meng Zhigang (b. 1975 Guilin, China) Meng Zhigang is an artist Born in Guilin in 1975. After graduating from the environmental Design Department in Guilin University of Technology Meng Zhigang relocated to Beijing where he currently resides and creates his work. His work has been featured in solo exhibitions in 798 Daku Museum and Today Art Museum in Beijing and in group exhibitions in Beijing, Guangzhou, Shanghai, Wuxi, Hong Kong, Xian, Milan, London and New York. Deeply rooted in philosophical foundations, the paintings of Meng Zhigang create psychological dissections of the space that surrounds us, from the fictional landscapes of his early works, to the ethereal architectural interiors and Institutional Buildings scraped of context and depicted in his recent paintings. http://mengzhigang.com/ Lena Tsibizova / Troyka Union (b. 1988 Moscow, Russia) Lena Tsibizova is part of Troyka a creative union formed in 2012 together with artists Olga Rodina (Moscow, Russia, 1982), Anastasia Soboleva (Kostroma, Russia, 1989). Created as a cultural and ethnographic research project, Troyka Union explores Russia and post-Soviet territories, eager to solve the issues of cultural and epoch interaction in present context (both from Russian and global perspectives).

简介 Simona Rota （Mäcin，罗马尼亚，1979） Simona Rota在布加勒斯特和巴塞罗那学习政治学，在马德里学习摄影并生活至今。受维也纳建筑博物馆委托，她在2010至2012年间承担了为维亚纳建筑博物馆在前苏联提供文献记录的任务。她的作品曾于the Kursala, the Sevastopol Art Museum, the StadtMuseum Graz, the Architektur Zentrum Wien, the Museum of Modern Art of Medellín in Colombia, the Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofia in Madrid展出。其作品还被收录和展出于Fotonoviembre 13, Arles Photobooks 13, Art Week Vienna 12, SCAN 12。她的作品曾在各大国内国际竞赛中脱颖而出，诸如PHotoEspaña Descubrimientos, the Photography Award Purificación García (2012), the International Festival of Photography Emergent Pati de la Llotja, Fotonoviembre Biennial (2011), the IVth Prize for Plastic Arts of the Foundation María José Jove, the award Emergent of the Foundation Sorigué (2010), the Photography Award of the Museum of Architecture in Vienna (2009)。出版书籍包括“Ostalgia” (Fabulatorio - Kursala, Cádiz, 2013) 和 Missbehave” (Vibok Works Sevilla, 2013)。 www.simonarota.es 蒙志刚（桂林，中国，1975）孟志刚是1975年生于桂林的艺术家，自从毕业于桂林工业大学的环境设计系，蒙志刚就迁移到北京居住并创作至今。他曾在798大库画廊和北京今日美术馆个展，并在北京、广州、上海、无锡、香港、西安、米兰、伦敦、纽约群展。深植于哲学根基，蒙志刚的绘画作品创造出对我们周围空间的心理学解剖，从他早期作品的虚构地景，到缥缈的建筑室内，到他近期作品中描绘的被剥离环境的机构大楼。 http://mengzhigang.com/ Lena Tsibizova / Troyka Union （俄罗斯, 1988） Troyka是成立于2012年由艺术家Olga Rodina (莫斯科, 1982), Anastasia Soboleva (科斯特罗马, 1989), and Elena Tsibizova (莫斯科, 1988)所组成的创意团体。致力于文化及人种学研究项目，Troyka Union探索俄罗斯及后苏联领域，积极解决当下语境中文化与时代交互的问题（同时从俄罗斯和全球化的视野出发）。近期的展览包括，由Triumph画廊支持，在St. Petersburg，Rizzordi艺术基金会所举办的“位于天堂与地球之间”；在New South Wales，55 Sydenham Road举办的“俄罗斯出口”；在Castelfranco Veneto Museo Casa Giorgione所举办的“我们的墙”；以及在Moscow, Artplay设计中心所举办的Troyka私人展览。 http://troykaunion.org/

Recent exhibitions include Between Heaven and Earth at the Rizzordi Art Foundation in St. Petersburg with the support of Triumph Gallery, Russian Export at 55 Sydenham Road in New South Wales, Le nostre mura at Museo Casa Giorgione in Castelfranco Veneto and Troyka Personal Exhibition at Artplay Design Centre in Moscow. http://troykaunion.org/ Li Tingwei (b.1989 Yantai, China) Li Tingwei is an artist working in a broad range of mediums including painting, sculpture and installation . She studied at Berlin University of the Arts, Hunter College of the City University of New York, and Tongji University in Shanghai. Recent exhibitions include Anti-Physis, Kreuzberg Pavillion, Berlin; Neue Sinnlichkeit, Ehem, JVA, Magdeburg; Second Thought, Flowers Gallery, New York; O.C.D.,EGG Gallery, Beijing; and Perched In the Eye of a Tornado, Ying Space, Beijing; Migrant I, Zhong Gallery, Berlin; MACHT,Wals.Gallery, Munich; Museum FLUXUS+, Potsdam; PHSIS 2013, Goethe Institut Athens; Moments of Encounter, Confucius Institute Berlin; INSPIRED BY THE UK , UK Pavillon of EXPO, Shanghai. http://litingwei.de/ Sergio Calderon (b. 1978 Santander, Spain) Sergio Calderón is London based visual artist, musician and filmmaker. Sergio’s practice focuses on combining different media in order to create a new language to express the artist’s experience of specific spaces, situations, and memories. Many of his works are conceived in collaboration with artists and musicians, to name Céli Lee, Okkyung Lee, Attila Csihar, and Stephen O’Malley as a few. Calderón has exhibited and performed internationally including at Barbican centre in 2014, at the Gazelli Art House London, 2012-2013-2015, Centre Pompidou, Paris, 2012; at Short & Sweet, London, 2010; and during BAC! (Barcelona Arte Contemporanea), Barcelona in 2004. Sergio Calderón also works with Céli Lee as artist duo. Together they have been directing and creating a wide range of distinctive works including interactive installations, film, photography and drawings to major events and galleries internationally. The pair founded the avant garde band 無. Which provides the soundtrack of some of their artworks such as CHIMERAS, STRANGELOVE and Stereo. http://www.sergiocalderon.net http://www.sergiocalderonandcelilee.com

李亭葳 (b.1989 烟台, 中国）李亭葳艺术创作的媒介多种多样，包括绘画、雕塑、装置等。她曾就读于柏林艺术大学自由艺术专业，纽约城市大学亨特学院，同济大学。近期展览包括 ”反自然“ ，Kreuzberg馆，柏林，德国； “新意义” 文化艺术节，前马格德堡监狱，德国；“再想“ ，Flowers画廊，纽约，美国；“强迫症“ ，EGG画廊，北京；“气旋栖息者“ ，应空间，北京；“异地而生 I” ，中画廊，柏林；“权力” ，Wals画廊，慕尼黑；“LUXUS+”，激浪美术馆，波茨坦，德国；“Physis 2013”，歌德学院，雅典，希腊；“相遇的瞬间”，柏林孔子学院，德国；灵感来源于万国博览会英国馆的艺术竞赛/ „Inspired by the UK“，上海 http://litingwei.de/ Sergio Calderon 塞乔卡尔德隆（西班牙，1978）塞乔卡尔德隆是一位生活在伦敦的视觉艺术家、音乐家和电影制作人。他的创作重心结合了各种媒介形成的语言，从而表达特定空间、情况和记忆下的不同经验。同时他也于许多艺术家和音乐创作人一起合作创作，例如Céli Lee, Okkyung Lee, Attila Csihar和 Stephen O’Malley。Calderón曾在国际上展览并表演于Barbican Centre（2014），伦敦 Gazelli Art House（2012，2013，2015年），巴黎蓬皮杜艺术中心（2012），伦敦的Short & Sweet (2010) 和在巴塞罗那当代美术馆 (2004)。 Calderón同时也与Céli Lee 以艺术家双人组的形式活动。他们一同创作了许多独具特色的作品，包括互动装置、电影、摄影和绘画，在国际众多活动和画廊里展出。他们的先锋乐队“無” 为其作品“CHIMERAS”, “STRANGELOVE”和“ Stereo” 创作了原声带。 http://www.sergiocalderon.net http://www.sergiocalderonandcelilee.com

Intelligentsia Intelligentsia explores the relationship between art and life, between concepts and creation. Intelligentsia is a space for the conception and diffusion of ideas and their manifestation in the realm of contemporary art. Intelligentsia presents ideas in the form of texts, publications, images, pictures, photographs, paintings, performances, videos, objects, events. Intelligentsia offers collectible materials that communicate the ideas of artistic production. Intelligentsia creates a space for positions and oppositions, for dialogue and contradictions. Intelligentsia is a platform for converging projects, juxtaposing narratives, and conflicting art. Intelligentsia recognizes that diversity of projects create an intelligence of contemporary art. Intelligentsia is concerned with artistic production and artistic process. Intelligentsia is fueled with the intellectual discourse of art. Intelligentsia presents events as artistic production. Intelligentsia is an independent art space in Beijing. 智先画廊智先探索艺术与生活，观念与创作的关系。概念在这一空间中孕育和传播，并以当代艺术的方式得以展现。智先的思想通过文本、出版物、影像、图片、摄影、油画、表演、视频、物体、活动的形式呈现。智先提供具有收藏意义的素材，传播艺术生产的理念。智先的空间兼容了立场与对峙，对话与矛盾。智先作为开放的平台，兼有趋同的项目、并置的叙事、冲突的艺术。智先认识到当代艺术的智慧源于项目的多样性。智先关注艺术生产及其产生过程。智先以艺术的思辨讨论为驱动。智先将活动作为一种艺术生产。智先是位于北京的独立艺术空间。

www.intelligentsiagallery.com intelligentsia.gallery@gmail.com

Acknowledgements / 致谢 Intelligentsia Gallery would like to thank everybody involved in the realization of this exhibition. 智先画廊感谢以下诸位对实现此次展览的帮助： Michelle Garnaut; Geisel Cabrera; Hao Chen / 陈昊; Ophelia S. Chan, Jacob Dreyer, Zhang Yanping / 张燕平; Ronald Frankowski, Joao Dias Pereira, Christian Melz; Li Shan, Amanda Zhang / 小静; Nan Kai / 南开; Guido Tesio; Annie Wang; Natasha Qin / 覃美律; Xu Ruiyu / 徐瑞钰

Intelligentsia Supporter: