odisea magazine by susanna van roessel

magazine

COVER PAGE BY NATASHA LENS Created with Illustrator: Tipografia, calco de imagen, 3D extruir, Fusión línias de fondo, Efecto Granulado. Motivo en esta página interior y en la última trasera

ODISEA International TypoGraphics Magazine

No. 58 Spring

ISSN 0954-9226

www.odiseamagazine.com

Directors

Editor in Chief

Art Director

Creative Director

Managing Editor

Contributing Editors

Emily Grant Henry Pikelson

Franz Richerson

Luna Grande

Peter Whiskelies

Annie Hall

Lemelson & Co

Translations

Cover image

Publisher

Executive Assistant

Pattern

Printing

Leonor Wolf

Joe Pigmond

Caroline Sender

John Bilmuthson

Lola Valls

Nexe Barcelona

Introduction 4 Recommended 7 Review 8 Editorial 11 Opinion 12 Report 16 Interview 20 Theme 26 Biography 32

Distribuation

Barcelona Office

Subscriptions

ODISEA is distributed internationally through art & design bookstores, newsstands, selected boutiques and department stores.

Casanova 238 4th Street, Eixample, Barcelona Click here for the online version:

+93 871 48 28 hello@odiseamagazine.com www.odiseamagazine.com

Introduction

Provided it isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t conceived only as an exchange of mutual favours, or isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t calculated way in advance as a profitable investment, love really is a unique trust placed in chance. It takes us into key areas of the experience of what is difference and, essentially, leads to the idea that you can experience the world from the perspective of difference. 4

Love is a quest for truth. Truth in relation to something quite precise: what kind of world does one see when one experiences it from the point of view of two and not one? What is the world like when it is experienced, developed and lived from the point of view of difference and not identity? That is what I believe love to be.

We shouldn’t underestimate the power love possesses to slice diagonally through the most powerful oppositions and radical separations. The encounter be tween two differences is an event, is contingent and disconcerting. On the basis of this event, love can start and flourish. It is the first, absolutely essential point. This surprise unleashes a process that is basically an experience of getting to know the world. Love isn’t simply about two people meeting and their inward-looking relationship: it is a construction, a life that is being made, no longer from the perspective of one but from the perspective of two. — Henry Clarckson

Recommended GOD SPEED 1900 Even though Burne-Jones had not been one of the founding members of the Brotherhood, and had abandoned the social, militant and realist dimension sought by Hunt, Millais and Rossetti, he became, over time, the most memorable figure in the movement.

LIZZIE SIDDHAL 1867-1868 More than just a simple reaction against academic teaching, the origins of the Pre-Raphaelite movement can only be understood if they are set in the political and intellectual context of the time. In 1848, there were revolutionary movements .

LADY LILITH 1866-1888 Combining rebellion, beauty, scientific precision and imaginative grandeur, the Pre-Raphaelites constitute Britain’s first modern art movement and culture of the century.

THE MIRROR 1896 The exhibition establishes the PRB as an early example of the avant-garde: painters who self-consciously overturned orthodoxy and established a new benchmark for modern painting and design.

AURELIA 1879 It will include many famous Pre-Raphaelite works, and will also re-introduce some rarely seen masterpieces including Ford Madox Brown’s polemical Work 1852–65 and the 1858 wardrobe designed by Philip Webb and painted by Edward Burne-Jones on the theme of The Prioress’s Tale.

A SEA SPELL 1870-1877 Led by Dante Gabriel Rossetti, William Holman Hunt and John Everett Millais, the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood (PRB) rebelled against the art establishment of the mid-nineteenth century, taking inspiration from early Renaissance painting.

THE LADY OF SHALOTT 1832 Well-established in the English artistic landscape, the influence of the Pre-Raphaelite movement continued to spread until the end of the 19th century.

OPHELIA 1852-1853 In 1852, contemporary subjects with social themes began to appear in Pre-Raphaelite painting, which once again corresponded to one of Ruskinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s major preoccupations.

HELEN OF TROY 1882 He also said that nature should be represented from direct observation and with sincerity. Hunt, Millais and Rossetti subscribed fervently to these numerous theories.

CHIVALRY 1885 It was the literary subjects that would bring them real recognition that year though.

VERONICA VERONESE 1872 Combining rebellion, beauty, scientific precision and imaginative grandeur, the Pre-Raphaelites constitute Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s first modern art movement. This exhibition brings together over 150 works in different media, including painting, sculpture, he applied arts, revealing the Pre-Raphaelites to be advanced in their approach to every genre.

CHOOSING 1864

PASSION 1892 Ruskin advocated a highly moral vision of art to which he ascribed a social role. He placed craftsmanship above everything else in response to the flourishing industrialisation of the time and put forward a poetic, mystical concept of nature.

She lifts showy camellias to her face, crumpling the modest but more sweetly scented violets in her hand. Terry acted as muse to both Julia Margaret Cameron and Charles Lutwidge Dodgson.

Review

Niki de Saint Phalle Editor Design Format Extent Images

French sculptor, writer, stage designer and filmmaker. A self-taught artist, on her return to Europe she began to work in a style similar to art brut. She first came to public attention through ironic parodies of Art informel painting, comprising plaster reliefs incorporating pockets of paint, which burst when fired at by visitors to the exhibition, thus staining the surface. Through these works Saint Phalle became associated with Nouveau réalisme. She produced reliefs and sculptures made of objets trouvés and plastic toys; these were always playful and imaginary. Monsters and other fantastic creatures were also among her favourite themes, while other assemblages were in the form of iconoclastic altars. Saint Phalle’s next series were concerned with the representation of women. This led to the Nanas series, begun in 1964; daubed in bright colours, the larger-than-life athletic females glorified an art of play and festivity. The apotheosis was the monumental She: A Cathedral constructed in collaboration with Jean Tinguely and Per Olof Ultveldt, it was a huge shell of a reclining woman, 28 m long, inside which were rooms, including a cinema and a bar. Thereafter Saint Phalle devoted herself mainly to monumental sculptures, sometimes intended more directly for children. Saint Phalle also produced several illustrated books, designed sets for the ballet and made films, including Daddy (1973). In 1986 she published Aids, You Can’t

Marie Rodriguez Nacho Vazquez 225x305 mm 448 pp 735 colour

Catch it Holding Hands (Munich), a combination of words and images. You’ve seen them before. Those colourful stylised ladies with tiny heads and plenty of ass, but many wouldn’t know that these bright, pop characters found in gift shops around the world were created by one of the most inventive female artists of the 20th century. Niki de Saint Phalle was a selftaught outsider who won over the art world with work that was big, loud and uncompromising. As curator Aaron Rose of Alleged Gallery, Beautiful Losers and ANP Quarterly fame recalls, “The first piece of hers that really caught my interest was a giant sculp—ture of a woman, spread eagle, with an entrance through the vagina. The photo I saw showed people pouring out of it! Needless to say, I was hooked.” Saint Phalle always created art that was a slap in the face of the modernist asethetic of the place. Saint Phalle was born in 1930 in France, the daughter of a French aristocratic banker who had lost the family fortune in the 1929 stock market crash. She grew up in New York and Connecticut, often in con vent schools, where she gained a rebellious reputation. At 14, she was expelled for painting the fig leaves on school statues red. After graduating (from another school), she worked as a model, appearing on the covers of Life and Vogue, and in the pages of Harpers Bazaar. By the age of 18, she had eloped with an affluent youth and moved to Paris. After a nervous

breakdown in 1953, she decided to focus all of her energy on art. She became fascinated by outsider and naïve art. For Saint Phalle, it provided a way to make something outside the narrow confines of the Modernist abstraction that was dominating the avant-garde. Instead, she looked at people like Joseph Ferdinand Cheval, a postman who created a fantastical outsider art palace in the village of Drome, and the champion of Art Brut,. After splitting from her first hus band, Saint Phalle met, and began to collaborate with, the Swiss artist Jean Tinguely. He had made his name creating crazy kinetic sculptures out of metal detritus – and inspired her move into sculpture. Within the year he had split from his wife and was living with Saint Phalle. He later became her second husband and it was during this early period that she began to create violent, textured assemblages. She embedded axes, razors and other found objects into white-plastered canvases, later incorporating toys, guns and religious ephemera. The reliefs were thick with objects and dripping with paint. Around this time, she also became part of the Nouveau Réaliste group of artists who were deliberately resisting the heavy, serious Modernism that was dominating the art world. Instead, like their American counterparts Robert Rauschenberg and Jasper Johns, they looked to Dada and Duchamp. In fact, Johns and Rauschenberg helped to install Saint Phalle’s very first solo show. Saint Phalle really made her name in

1961 with her shooting paintings. She would attach containers of coloured liquid paint into her sculptural paintings that would burst when hit by bullets. People would line up to shoot the art at openings, watching as blasts of colour splattered like blood over the work. It was a hugely brave and innovative thing to do. Other people have used guns in art in her wake – but she was the first. “Ever since Surrealist godfather André Breton stated that the simplest surrealist act consists of dashing down the street, pistol in hand, firing blindly, visual art has forged an immanent engagement with the gunshot as a spontaneous, violent and shocking moment of creativity,” enthuses Seventeen gallery curator Paul Pieroni. “Saint Phalle predates a whole line of trigger-happy creators, from the ultra-extreme American performance artist Chris Burden having himself shot in the arm in the name of experimental performance in 1971, to Burroughs’s buckshot and spray-paint shotgun sculptures of the late 80s.” Saint Phalle organised no less than 12 shootings between 1961 and 1963, often dressed in a white allin-one bodysuit and black, shiny boots. “I was shooting at myself, at society with its injustices,” she wrote. “I was shooting my own violence and the violence of the times.” Creation emerged from destruction. She shot a plaster cast of the Venus de Milo while dressed as a Napoleonic army officer metaphorically killing culture and the myth of feminine beauty. Some shootings were overtly

political. 1963’s King Kong was a giant assemblage of the heads of politicians including Kennedy, Castro and De Gaulle with Santa Claus and Donald Duck thrown in. This humorous work was also a brilliant comment on the creators of the Cold War and the ten sion of military (masculine) aggression. In 1964, she moved to NYC, taking a room in the Chelsea Hotel. Her work had increasingly begun to focus on women and female identity. Inspired by her friend Clarice Rivers’s pregnancy, she made a rough papier mâché fi gure of an overtly fertile woman with oversized hips and a tiny head. These plump, stylised women dominated the rest of her career. She called them Nana – after the infamous prostitute invenpockets of paint, which burst when fired at by visitors to the exhibition, thus staining the surface.

Jenny Holzer: Language as Art Editor Design Format Extent Images

David Jury David Jury 225x305 mm 448 pp 735 colour

An American Neo-Conceptualist artist, Jenny Holzer utilized the homogeneous rhetoric of modern information systems in order to address the politics of discourse. In 1989 she became the first female artist chosen to represent the United States at Italy’s Venice Biennale festival. Jenny Holzer was born July 29, 1950, in Gallipolis, Ohio, into a family of two generations of Ford auto dealers. She completed her undergraduate degree at Ohio University in Athens after attending Duke University and the University of Chicago. While enrolled in the Rhode Island School of Design, Holzer experimented with an abstract painting style influenced by the color field painters Mark Rothko and Morris Louis. In 1976 she moved to Manhattan, participating in the Whitney Museum’s independent study program of the world. Holzer’s conception of language as art, in which semantics developed into her aesthetic, began to emerge in New York. The Whitney program included an extensive reading list incorporating Eastern literature and phi losophy. Holzer felt the writings could be simplified to phrases everyone could understand. She called these summa rie her “Truisms” (1978), which she printed anonymously in black italic script on white paper and wheat-pasted to building facades, signs and telephone booths in lower Manhattan. Arranged in alphabetical order and comprised of short sentences, her “Truisms” inspired pedestrians to scribble messages on the posters and make verbal comments.

Holzer would stand and listen to the dialogues invoked by her words. The participatory effect and the underground format were vital compo nents of Holzer’s “Truisms” and of her second series, the “Inflammatory Essays,” which laconically articulated Holzer’s concerns and anxieties about contemporary society. Holzer printed the “Essays” in alphabetical order, first on small posters and then as a manus cript entitled The Black Book (1979). Until the late 1980s, Holzer refused to produce them in any non-underground formats because of their militant nature. Her declarative and powerfull language assumed particular force and violence in the multiple points of view of the “Essays,” ranging from extreme leftist to rightist thinking. Holzer initiated the “Living Series” in 1981, which she printed on aluminum and bronze plaques, the presentation format used by medical and government buildings. “Living” addressed the necessities of daily life: eating, breathing, sleeping, and human relationships. Her bland, short instructions were accompanied with paintings by the American artist Peter Nadin, whose portraits of men and women attached to metal posts further articulated the emptiness of both life and message in the information age. The medium of modern computer systems became an important com ponent in Holzer’s work in 1982, when nine of her “Truisms” flashed at forty-second intervals on the giant Spectacolor electronic signboard in Times Square. Sponsored by the Public Arts Fund program, the use

of the L.E.D. (light emitting diode) machine allowed Holzer to reach a larger audience. By combining a knowledge of semantics with modern advertising technologies, Holzer established herself as a descen dant of the conceptualist and Pop Art movements. She again utilized the electronic signboard with her “Survival Series” (1983-1985), in which she adopted a more personal and urgent stance. The realities of everyday living, the dangers, and the underlying horrors were major themes. Correlating with the immediacy of the messages, Holzer adopted a slightly less authoritarian voice. Her populist appropriation of contemporary “newsspeak” crossed the realm between visual art and poetry and carried a potent expressive force. Review by Marie Gilbert Gilbert is a very important redactor who collaborates every month with several publications and does an extensive investigation of each item.

Editorial

Thus far, Kant’s main focus for the discussion of beauty and the sublime has been nature. He now turns to fine art. Kant assumes that the cognition involved in judging fine art is similar to the cognition involved in judging natural beauty. Accordingly, the problem that is new to fine art is not how it is judged by a viewer, but how it is created. The solution revolves around two new concepts: the ‘genius’ and ‘aesthetic ideas’. Kant argues that art can be tasteful that is, agree with aesthetic judgment and yet be ‘soulless’ lacking that certain something that would make it more than just an artificial version of a beautiful natural object. What provides soul in fine art is an aesthetic idea. An aesthetic idea is a counterpart to a rational idea: where the latter is a concept that could never adequately be exhibited sensibly, the former is a set of sensible presentations to which no concept is adequate. An aesthetic idea, then, is as successful an attempt as po ssible to ‘exhibit’ the ratiownal idea. It is the talent of genius to generate aesthetic ideas, but that is not all. Hans Dier Reichert

Opinion

seen on screen Cosmology is the study of the cosmos in several of the above meanings, depending on context. All cosmologies have in common an attempt to understand the implicit order within the whole of being. In this way, most religions and philosophical systems have a cosmology. Cosmology is a branch of metºaphysics that deals with the nature of the universe, a theory or doctrine describing the natural order of the universe.

The Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind

The eternal sunshine of the spotless mind

Illustrated with Photoshop & Illustrator: Superposición, Transparencia, Símbolos, Spray, Pincel.

A sci fi love story featuring jim carrey · Kate winslet · kirsten dunst · mark ruffalo · ELijah wood · tom wilkinson screenplay by charlie kaufman directed by michel gondry with music by jon brion

In modern astronomy the Big Bang theory is the dominant postulation. In physical cosmology, the term cosmos is often used in a technical way, referring to a particular spacetime continuum within the (postulated) multiverse. Our particular cosmos, the observable universe, is generally capitalized as the According to Charles Peter Mason in Sir William Smith Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, Pythagoreans described the universe. Excerpt from Philolaus Pythagoras book.It appears, in fact, from this, as well as from the extant fragments, that the first book (from Philolaus) of the work contained a general account of the origin and arrange.

The second book appears to have been an exposition synonymously with aion to refer to worldly life or this world or this age as opposed to the afterlife or World to Come with me. Cosmology is the study of the cosmos in several of the above meanings, depending on context. All cosmologies have in common an attempt to understand the implicit order within the whole of being. In this way, most religions and philosophical systems have a cosmology. Cosmology is a branch of metaphysics that deals with the nature of the universe, a theory or doctrine describing the natural order of the universe. The basic definition of Cosmology is the science of

the origin and development of the universe. In modern astronomy the Big Bang theory is the dominant postulation. Cosmology is the study of the cosmos in several of the above meanings, depending on context. All cosmologies have in common an attempt to understand the implicit order within the whole of being. In this way, most religions and philosophical systems have a cosmology items. Cosmology is a branch of metaphysics that deals with the nature of the universe, a theory or doctrine describing the natural order of the universe.

CHARLOTTE

RAMPLING

GABRIEL

BYRNE

9 I, Anna

Edited with Illustrator & Photoshop: Máscara de recorte, Duotono.

EL DESEO S.A. presenta

THE DARKEST SECRETS ARE THE ONES WE HIDE FROM OURSELVES

ANNA A FILM BY BARBABY SOUTHCOME WRITTEN BY ELSA LEWIN · SCREENPLAY BY BARBABY SOUTHCORN · CAST CHARLOTTE RAMPLING GABRIEL BYRNE · EDDIE MARSAN JOD HI MAY · RALPH BROWN · MAX DEACON · HONOR BLACKMAN · HAYLEY ATWELL · BRYAN DICK · NAV SIFHU

TODO SOBRE MI MADRE

CECILIA ROTH

MARISA PAREDES

CANDELA PEÑA

ANTONIA SAN JUAN

PENÉLOPE CRUZ ROSA MARIA SAN JUAN

dsaihkwaiohdiwnxn wuahduwadiwa jxbjakbsbdjkwads ghksqBSHAJBJWKBDMW BDWJABJDBKJQAD dsaihkwaiohdiwnxn wuahduwadiwa jxbjakbsbdjkwads ghksqBSHAJBJWKBDMW BDWJABJDBKJQAD jakbsbdjkwads ghksqBSHAJBJWKBDMW

a film by quentin tarantino

pulp fiction

Todo sobre mi madre

Edited with Illustrator: Pincel, lápiz. Un film de ALMÓDOVAR

8 7 dsaihkwaiohdiwnxn wuahduwadiwa jxb-

Pulp Fiction

Illustrated with Photoshop: Contraste, Niveles, Efecto Pixelizar, Trama de Semitono, Duotono.

BRAD PITT

JESSICA TASTAIN

SEAN PENN

El árbol de la vida Illustrated with Photoshop. Máscara de transparencias, Sueperposición.

Memorias de África Illustrated with Illustrator, Vectorización, Calco de ImagenGranulado, degradado.

EL ÁRBOL DE LA VIDA CNJKNDEJNDJ DNSJNDBE NDJNDEODNE NJQNDNWOW SKMXKWDOEI NSIOWNDONDNWDW MDWOLJDQIKDNWKDNW NDDI3OO3

4 Ácido

Illustrated wiith Illustrator: Formas planas, degradado, pattern.

ane senpop joe barnats mairey dulof

MEMORIAS DE ÁFRICA MERY STREEP ROBERT REDFORD MICHAEL KITCHEN IMAN ABDIJAIL SIONIDNOIWDNIOO3NO3NJN3CNJKNDEJNDJ DNSJNDBE NDJNDEODNE NJQNDNWOW SKMXKWDOEI NSIOWNDONDNWDW MDWOLJDQIKDNWKDNW NDDI3OO3 DNWJNDWOINDQONIDN3I EJISOJIOIS3NINI3OÑWDQN NDS3NDIO3NDIO3NDIONFINFI3NI3ODONI3NDIONDI3 NODIJ3DIO3PDQDLIONI3NOIDN3IODN3D3I3 JDIONO3DNQNO2NDI2ONDINIO2N DEISIOD3WIDNINWIDIOF3JWKSNKN3 DNOANSN3NDI3ONEI3NDN3DN3NDO3NDI3NFOFNIO3SMDO3SJIN3IONSO3NISO3N

ÁCIDO a film by Álvaro Arisó

NJKDEJKDEJDNEK NDQNJWNDJQND NDJQNWJDNWOQ NDOWNDOWNQNODQNWJNDNWQJNDJWNDNQDNWNNDIWND DXQN DIQWND IJDWQPIDQIPQ DMWSMDWNDKWNDL NLWNDKWNDKWND NKWLNKNW NLWNKNDKWNDKWNDKW NSLWNKWND

This is England

A noir thriller told from the point of view of a femme fatale, who falls for the detective in charge of a murder case.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona A noir thriller told from the point of view of a femme fatale, who falls for the detective in charge of a murder case.

Closer

By Steven Heller

Not Yet

Report

A New Yorkers know, Woody Allen is one of its more ubiquitous citizens—at courtside in Madison Square Garden watching the Knicks, at Michael’s Pub on Monday evenings playing the clarinet, on occasion at Elaine’s Restaurant at his usual table. Yet he could hardly be considered outgoing: shy on acquaintance, he once expressed an intense desire to return to the womb—“anybody’s.” In fact, his career is one of prodigious effort in a number of disciplines—literature, the theater, and motion pictures. “I’m a compulsive worker,” he once said. “What I really like to do best is whatever I’m not doing at the moment we first meet.” Allen’s career in comedy began as a teenager when he submitted jokes to an advertising firm. In 1953, after what he called a “brief abortive year in college,” he left school to become a gag-writer for Garry Moore and Sid Caesar. In the early 1960s, his stand-up routines in the comedy clubs of Greenwich Village gained him considerable recognition, and eventually several television appearances. In 1965, shortly after he produced three successful comedy records, Allen made his debut as an actor and screenwriter in What’s New, Pussycat? His 1969 film, Take the Money and Run, was the first project that he not only wrote and starred in, but directed as well. Though many of his early films (Bananas, Sleeper, Love and Death) were critically acclaimed, it wasn’t until 1977 and the release of Annie Hall, which won four Academy Awards, that Allen was recognized as an extraordinary force in the American cinema. Fifteen of his motion pictures have appeared since, which works out at almost a movie a year. He has also written several Broadway plays, the most successful of them, Don’t Drink the Water and Play It Again, Sam, were also made into films and other things. Allen has written three collections of short pieces, many of which first appeared in The New Yorker: Getting Even, Without Feathers, and Side Effects. The major portion of this interview, much of which was conducted by Michiko Kakutani over dinner at Elaine’s Restaurant, was completed in 1985. Since then, the editors—by correspondence and conversations with Mr. Allen over the phone—have brought it up to date. It’s one way of dealing with life. People think it’s very hard to be funny but it’s an interesting thing. If you can do it, it’s not hard at all. It would be like if I said to somebody who can draw very well, My God, I could take a pencil and paper all day long and never be able to draw

that horse. I can’t do it, and you’ve done it so perfectly. And the other person feels, This is nothing. I’ve been doing this since I was four years old. That’s how you feel about comedy—if you can do it, you know, it’s really nothing. It’s not that the end product is nothing, but the process is simple. Of course, there are just some people that are authentically funny, and some people that are funny in any case. I remember the first person I ever laughed at while reading was Max Shulman. I was fifteen. I have a couple of old books of his. The one that I found the funniest was The Zebra Derby funny in a broad sort of way, though you have to appreciate the context within which it’s written, since it’s about veterans returning here after World War II, returning to the land of promise. Then I discovered Robert Benchley and S. J. Perelman, two other very funny writers who were truly great masters. I met Perelman at Elaine’s restaurant one night. I came in with Marshall Brickman and a waiter came over and gave me a card. On the back it said something like, Would love you to come over and join me for a celery tonic. I figured, Oh, it’s some outof-town tourist, and I threw the card away. About an hour and a half later, someone said, You know, it’s from S. J. Perelman, so I retrieved the card from the floor behind me. It said “S. J. Perelman,” and I raced around to where he was sitting around the corner and we joined him. I’d met him before and to me he was always warm and friendly. I’ve read he could be difficult, but I never saw that side of him. Before I could read. I’d always wanted to write. Before that—I made up tales. I was always creating stories for class. For the most part, I was never as much a fan of comic writers as serious writers. But I found myself able to write in a comic mode, at first directly imitative of Shulman or sometimes of Perelman. In my brief abortive year in college I’d hand in my papers, all of them written in a bad (or good) derivation of Shulman. I had no sense of myself at all and this and that.

MOCK UP BY SUZAN ROE Edited with Adobe Illustrator. Formas simples, Color, Degradado.

New Yorkers know, Woody Allen is one of its more ubiquitous citizens— at courtside in Madison Square Garden watching the Knicks, at Michael’s Pub on Monday evenings playing the clarinet, on occasion at Elaine’s Restaurant at his usual table. Yet he could hardly be considered outgoing: shy on acquaintance, he once expressed an intense desire to return to the womb—“anybody’s.” In fact, his career is one of prodigious effort in a number of disciplines—literature, the theater, and motion pictures. “I’m a compulsive worker,” he once said. “What I really like to do best is whatever I’m not doing what I’m supposed to do.

Allen’s career in comedy began as a teenager when he submitted jokes to an advertising firm. In 1953, after what he called a “brief abortive year in college,” he left school to become a gag-writer for Garry Moore and Sid Caesar. In the early 1960s, his stand-up routines in the comedy clubs of Greenwich Village gained him considerable recognition, and eventually several television appearances. In 1965, shortly after he produced three successful comedy records, Allen made his debut as an actor and screenwriter in What’s New, Pussycat? His 1969 film, Take the Money and Run, was the first project that he not only wrote and starred in, but directed as well. Though many of his early films (Bananas, Sleeper, Love and Death) were critically acclaimed, it wasn’t until 1977 and the release of Annie Hall, which won four Academy Awards, that Allen was recognized as an extraordinary force in the American cinema. Fifteen of his motion pictures have appeared since, which works out at almost a movie a year. He has also written several Broadway plays, the most successful of them, Don’t Drink the Water and Play It Again, Sam, were also made into filmarsks hello. Allen has written three collections of short pieces, many of which first appeared in The New Yorker: Getting Even, Without Feathers, and Side Effects. The major portion of this interview, much of which was conducted by Michiko Kakutani over dinner at Elaine’s Restaurant, was completed in 1985. Since then, the editors—by correspondence and conversations with Mr. Allen over the phone—have brought it up to date. It’s one way of dealing with life. People think it’s very hard to be funny but it’s an interesting thing. If you can do it, it’s not hard at all. It would be like if I said to somebody who can draw very well, My God, I could take a pencil and paper all day long and never be able to draw that horse. I can’t do it, and you’ve done it so perfectly done it..

Robert Benchley and S. J. Perelman, two other very funny writers who were truly great masters. I met Perelman at Elaine’s restaurant one night. I came in with Marshall Brickman and a waiter came over and gave me a card. On the back it said something like, Would love you to come over and join me for a celery tonic. I figured, Oh, it’s some out-of-town tourist, and I threw the card away. About an hour and a half later, someone said, You know, it’s from S. J. Perelman, so I retrieved the card from the floor. It said “S. J. Perelman,” and I raced around to where he was sitting around the corner and we joined him. I’d met him before and to me he was always warm and friendly. I’ve read he could be difficult, but I never saw that side of him. Before I could read. I’d always wanted to write. Before that—I made up tales. I was always creating stories for class. For the most part, I was never as much a fan of comic writers as serious writers. But I found myself able to write in a comic mode, at first directly imitative of Shulman or sometimes of Perelman. In my brief abortive year in college I’d hand in my papers, all of them written in a bad (or good) derivation of Shulman. I had no sense of myself at all but it’s alright. No, it was quite accidental. I had given up writing prose completely and gone into television writing. I wanted to write for the theater and at the same time I was doing a cabaret act as a comedian. One day Playboy magazine asked me to write something for them, because I was an emerging comedian and I wrote this piece on chess.

Robert Benchley and S. J. Perelman, two other very funny writers who were truly great masters. I met Perelman at Elaine’s restaurant one night. I came in with Marshall Brickman and a waiter came over and gave me a card. On the back it said something like, Would love you to come over and join me for a celery tonic. I figured, Oh, it’s some out-of-town tourist, and I threw the card away. About an hour and a half later, someone said, You know, it’s from S. J. Perelman, so I retrieved the card from the floor to the sky. It said “S. J. Perelman,” and I raced around to where he was sitting around the corner and we joined him. I’d met him before and to me he was always warm and friendly. I’ve read he could be difficult, but I never saw that side of him. Before I could read. I’d always wanted to write. Before that—I made up tales. I was always creating stories for class. For the most part, I was never as much a fan of comic writers as serious writers. But I found myself able to write in a comic mode, at first directly imitative of Shulman or sometimes of Perelman. In my brief abortive year in college I’d hand in my papers, all of them written in a bad (or good) derivation of Shulman. I had no sense of myself at all. No, it was quite accidental. I had given up writing prose completely and gone into television writing. I wanted to write for the theater and at the same time I was doing a cabaret act as a comedian. One day Playboy magazine asked me to

write something for them, because I was an emerging comedian and I wrote this piece on chess. At that time I was almost married—but not quite yet—to Louise Lasser; she read it and said, Gee, I think this is good. You should really send this over to The New Yorker.Robert Benchley and S. J. Perelman, two other very funny writers who were truly great masters. I met Perelman at Elaine’s restaurant one night. I came in with Marshall Brickman and a waiter came over and gave me a card. On the back it said something like, Would love you to come over and join me for a celery tonic. I figured, Oh, it’s some out-of-town tourist, and I threw the card away. About an hour and a half later, someone said, You know, it’s from S. J. Perelman, so I retrieved the card from the floor. It said “S. J. Perelman,” and I raced around to where he was sitting around the corner and we joined him. I’d met him before and to me he was always warm and friendly. I’ve read he could be difficult, but I never saw that side of him. Before I could read. I’d always wanted to write. Before that—I made up tales. I was always creating stories for class. For the most part, I was never as much a fan of comic writers as serious writers. But I found myself able to write in a comic mode, at first directly imitative of Shulman or sometimes of Perelman. In my brief abortive year in college I’d hand in my papers, all of them written in a bad (or good) derivation of Shulman. I had no sense of myself at all. But this is not a problem.

Report by Steven Heller Lauren Down is a journalist specified in terms of cinematography. His fantastic interviews and film plots have bring to him a fantastic knowledge.

STAMP BY LORA VINE Illustrated with Photoshop: figuras simples, pincel y lápiz.

Interview

A morning with

Keraturre Some nights you can’t put into words. I spent the night of October 5, 2002, in a room set up for me at the top of the Eiffel Tower. In bed. Between white sheets, listening to the strangers who took turns. My room’s window overlooks a prairie. In the prairie there are some bulls with oxpeckers on them. On the left, I can see the branches of a willow tree. Far away, a there is a row of Fraxinus and Tamarix. Sometimes I see an Aigrette, sometimes a white stork. Nothing special. However, somehow, the prairie is ‘glowing’.

PHOTOGRAPHED BY SUZAN ROE Edited with Photoshop: Retoque de brillo y contraste, Efecto Enfocar, Pincel Corrector, Efecto Granulado.

There is an expression in architecture that Le Corbusier used that says l’espace indicible (ineffable space). For me the view is this kind of space. You can explain why such a monument is beautiful, because it is spectacular, because it is rare; you can speak of the beauty of certain things. But the idicible space is a space where there is mystery. There is nothing incredible. It is not a great architecture. It’s kind of banal. It is beautiful but you don’t know why, it’s just this matter of space and miracle of grace.Reading and making notes on Sophie Calle’s new publication, I am trying to be attentive, but am distracted with loneliness. Writing and making are difficult. I am living awkwardly with my parents and concerned about money. and heart As Calle put it in a 2007 interview, emotional moments such as these are “banal”; everyone can identify with them, therefore they are hardly the stuff of art. Yet, on its most directly accessible level, Calle’s work has always been about the pain of the everyday. As in my opening gambit, she often operates within the territory of emotion shared, projected publicly between strangers and acquaintances. Since her early experiments in following strangers around Paris, from 1979 onwards, and photographing friends and visitors sleeping in her bed, documented as The Sleepers (1981), Calle has developed a reputation as a serious conceptual artist, going on to represent France at the Venice Biennale (2007) with an installation processing a recent relationship breakdown curated by her contem-

porary Daniel Buren through the sky. Calle’s status as a respected artist is significant given her attitude to her first works. She claimed in a 2009 interview that The Sleepers became an unintentional work of conceptual art only “when the wife of a critic told him about it. He came along. He said, ‘Is this art?’ and I said, ‘It could be.’” Calle then took notes and photographed the situation, reframing it within critical discourse. Given this tale of stumbling into a prolific performance art practice because she needed “rules”, Calle’s cu—rrent recognition as a photographer equally strikes a tension between the planned and the surprising things of life young life. In “I’m a Photographer!”, the introduction to True Stories (2010), Steidl’s publication celebrating Calle’s reception of the prestigious Hasselblad Award for photography, the artist notes that for her “it is the text that has counted most of the stories.” Stories - have something in common with the project of British poet Gillian Allnutt. In her 2001 collection, Lintel, Allnutt produced a series of stream of consciousness, seemingly semi-autobiographical responses to a group of female portraits by the early expressionist German painter Paula Modersohn-Becker. Allnutt has been praised for the deliberately halting, hesitant quality of these poems that perhaps imitate the broken phrases and awkward silences of trauma victims sharing their stories for the first time. Even Allnutt’s visual arrangements of words on a page are telling, as they alter between sprawling and tight-

ly column-like. Similarly, Calle’s dexterity with the book format allows her to present True Stories as a series of pauses for thought: on the left a perfectly centred paragraph with text describing a memory is surrounded by white space like an enlarged full stop; on the right a photograph displayed as if it had been the trigger for the strange or traumatic story to be uncovered and unplaced. I would never photograph somebody begging in the street. I would be too shy,” she says. “But if my project is to photograph everyone begging, then I would just do it because I don’t have to wonder. I can stop it whenever I want because it’s my own rule. I think I also took it from the nature of my work. If I was only doing photos, it was not clear what I was doing. And if I was just writing, it was not meant to be on the wall. So I think it came naturally, as a necessity. The kind of ideas I have request that I tell the story of the idea, and take photos to show what’s happening now in the house.

MOCK UP BY SUZAN ROE Edited with Photoshop. superposición de imágenes, escalera de grises, Efecto grano, Máscara de transparencia, Efecto Multiplicar, Adición de texto con efecto de transparencia.

When I entered the luxurious suite at the Lowell Hotel, the women were setting up. There were one or two assistants, a publicist, and Sophie Calle, one of the best-known French artists of her generation, dressed in a blue and green smock over a tight black shirt, black tights, and flats. She was shaking out rice from a box onto and around a wedding cake, which was centered on a coffee table in the middle of the sitting room.

POSTER BY SUZAN ROE Edited with Photoshop. imagen + texto, máscara de recorte, transparencias, degradados.

I didn’t want a love letter from Damien Hirst. I happened to be in a show with Damien Hirst. I wrote a text about never receiving a love letter. And Damien Hirst, as a game, said, “Oh, I’m going to send you one.” Or maybe I said, “You should send me one.” This is forty years ago! Who knows what he said or what I said? I mean, maybe not forty years, but many, many years. I was not dreaming about receiving—I did not know Damien Hirst. I met him in that show. He said, “OK, I’m going to send you one.” It was not a need I had that I went to look for Damien Hirst and asked for a love letter to her mother and son. I would never photograph somebody begging in the street. I would be too shy,” she says. “But if my project is to photograph everyone begging, then I would just do it because I don’t have to wonder. I can stop it whenever I want because it’s my own rule of the name of god. I think I also took it from the nature of my work. If I was only doing photos, it was not clear what I was doing. And if I was just writing, it was not meant to be on the wall. So I think it came naturally, as a necessity. The kind of ideas I have request that I tell the story of the idea, and take photos to show what’s happening. I feel that it was maybe the most problematic work I’ve done. It’s the one where I hurt someone. I think maybe I should not have done it but, at the same time, I really like the work. The excitement is stronger than the guilt. I would do it again with the same doubts. But I would do it again. I don’t think what I share is private. My mother is just a lady who’s dying. She doesn’t reveal anything. If people cry while watching my mother, they don’t cry for my mother, they cry for their own mother.

Theme

Fromm presents love as a skill that can be taught and developed. He rejects the idea of loving as something magical and mysterious that cannot be analyzed and explained, and is therefore skeptical about popular ideas such as “falling in love” or being helpless in the face of love. Because modern humans are alienated from each other and from nature, we seek refuge from our aloneness in romantic love and marriage.

However, Fromm observes that real love “is not a sentiment which can be easily indulged in by anyone.” It is only through developing one’s total personality to the capacity of loving one’s neighbor with “true humility, courage, faith and discipline” that one attains the capacity to experience real love. This should be considered a rare achievement . Fromm defended these opinions also in interview with Mike Wallace when he states: “love today is a relatively rare phenomenon, that we have a great deal of sentimentality; we have a great deal of illusion about love, namely as a...as something one falls in. But the question is that one cannot fall in love, really; one has to be in love.

The Art of Loving by Erich Fromm And that means that loving becomes, and the ability to love, becomes one of the most important things in life.” The Art of Loving argues that the active character of true love involves four basic elements: care, responsibility, respect, and knowledge. Each of these is difficult to define and can differ markedly depending on the people involved and their circumstances. Seen in these terms, love is hard work, but it is also the most rewarding kind of work and this and that. One of the book’s concepts is self-love. According to Fromm, loving oneself is quite different from arrogance, conceit or egocentrism. Loving oneself means caring about oneself, taking responsibility for oneself, respecting oneself, and knowing oneself being realistic and honest about one’s strengths and weaknesses. In order to be able to truly love another person, one needs first to love oneself in this way that’s getting hard. Fromm calls the general idea of love in contemporary Western society égoïsme à deux a relationship in which each person is entirely focused on the other, to the detriment of other people around them.

The current belief is that a couple should be a well-assorted team, sexually and functionally, working towards a common aim. This is in contrast with Fromm’s description of true love and intimacy, which involves willful commitment directed toward a single unique individual. One cannot truly love another person if one does not love all of mankind including oneself and other people. It is safe to say that, as a human being, you have spent at least some part of your life waiting for, searching for, experiencing, enjoying, and suffering somehow because of love. Your pursuit of love may have taken place in the context of a family, a relationship with another person, your allegiance to a country, or your understanding of God. For a moment, consider your definition or description of love. How did you know where and how to look for it? How did you know that the love you were searching for would come or had already come to you?

In his book, The Art of Loving, Erich Fromm gives theoretical descriptions and practical applications of love in the widest sense of the word, descriptions and applications that are anything but shallow and trite. He describes the deepest roots of our yearning for love. Understanding these roots makes one’s pursuit of love a purposeful effort with a purposeful result, rather than just hoping to win some “love lottery”. Erich Fromm was a German-American psychologist and philosopher who lived through 80 years of the 20th century. His writings touched on issues that have occupied the minds of thinkers throughout the ages and define the essence of being human: morality, reason, love, among others. The Art of Loving, published in 1956, was his most popular book. His analysis of the roots of love starts with the moment of defines humanity, which is also humanity’s most essential problem: “Man is gifted with reason; he is life being aware of itself; he has awareness of himself, of his fellow man. The problem, according to the author, is that this awareness creates the understanding of one’s separation and isolation from the world and from other human beings. Part of this troubling knowledge is that humans know of their past and understand that a future exists, a future that contains their own death. Understanding and experiencing this isolation causes deep and painful feelings. Whether conscious of it or not, humans, in the very core of their beings, crave relief from these feelings. They spend their lives trying to find something that will solve the root problem of being essentially separated from other people. People today are no different than those who have come before them, trying all kinds of potential solutions for this problem, applying their energies to solutions humanitarian, religious, profane, and creative. Fromm makes a compelling argument that the kind of love that can solve our existential problems can be described both by what it is and what it is not. Describing what love is, he suggests that love is the answer to this problem of human existence, the only answer that is satisfactory and sane. Of course, depending on one’s understanding of love, this answer can sound shallow and trite.

In his book, The Art of Loving, Erich Fromm gives theoretical descriptions and practical applications of love in the widest sense of the word, descriptions and applications that are anything but shallow and trite. He describes the deepest roots of our yearning for love. Understanding these roots makes one’s pursuit of love a purposeful effort with a purposeful result, rather than just hoping to win some “love lottery”. Fromm makes a compelling argument that the kind of love that can solve our existential problems can be described both by what it is and what it is not. Describing what love is, he suggests that love is the answer to this problem of human existence, the only answer that is satisfactory and sane. Of course, depending on one’s understanding of love, this answer can sound shallow and trite. In short, Erich Fromm believes that love is not a noun or object, but a verb or practice. How you practice love with those around you depends on your approach and understanding of the existential problems of your life and, at the same time, determines the wholeness you will experience as a human being. In a more practical sense, reading The Art of Loving can give you tools to help you get out of the rut of disappointment and pain that your previous approach to love has kept you in. Changing your game may be just what you need! Fromm makes a compelling argument that the kind of love that can solve our existential problems can be described both by what it is and what it is not. Describing what love is, he suggests that love is the answer to this problem of human existence, the only answer that is satisfactory and sane. Of course, depending on one’s understanding of love, this answer can sound shallow and trite. In short, Erich Fromm believes that love is not a noun or object, but a verb or practice. How you practice love with those around you depends on your approach and understanding these roots makes one’s pursuit of love a purposeful effort with a purposeful result, rather than just hoping to win some “love lottery”.

Love is a decision, it is a judgment, it is a promise. If love were only a feeling, there would be no basis for the promise to love each other forever. A feeling comes and it may go. How can I judge that it will stay forever, when my act does not involve judgment and make decision? We’ve all dreamt of being a popular author met with worldwide approval and success, but often ignore the practice and rejection that notoriously accompanies such a path. So, too, is our blissful ignorance of our own personal lives. We’ve all faced personal rejection, loss and intense moments of happiness and ecstasy through loving or erotic relationships with former and current flames around the mierda. The natural reaction is to put our successes and failures down to chance, buying into the common notion that there lays ‘The One’ waiting out there for all of us. Essentially, we’re too often tempted to brush over the pains of our history by telling ourselves chance and luck will eventually deliver us to the right person. Although there is nothing inherently wrong with this, what we miss in the process are the barriers and walls we construct around us that limit our growth and understanding of love in all its essential four forms of sharing. a new form of life. Practice by reading and understanding the theory, and then put that theory into application. Whether it be the love (or lack thereof) with our parents and understanding how we look for parental figures in the work place, social scene and family life as a co

nsequence or our search for belonging in everyday life. Fromm covers it all in the predominant section of his book titled the ‘Theory of Love’. Most of all, Fromm distinguishes four key forms of loving that we seek to understand before we can make the jump from immature puppy love to true life-long understanding and ties that bind: care, responsibility, respect and knowledge.

immature love says I love you because I need you. mature love says I need you because I love you. These four areas are identified by Fromm as key areas we eventually come to prioritize when seeking to share ourselves with others and come to a healthy understanding of what makes the people we care about tick t is clear Fromm (as if anyone needed explaining the legacy behind his name, which I did since I knew nothing of Fromm prior to this book) has done the leg work as both a psychologist and as an individual deeply interested in the humanities. Throughout the book, he places his argument within the context of Western capitalist societies, Eastern family-oriented cultures, Biblical and religion teachings and the early family childhood influences that affect our perspective on the world for a lifetime. He also explains links between looking for the next high, be it through

substance abuse or our co-dependency on abusive relationships due to the intense bond and attraction, and how these highs temporarily validate our negative thoughts of how we perceive ourselves in difficult times and many hearts and other things like this. If it sounds long-winded and treacherously tedious it isn’t, as the 140-odd page count will attest to. In fact, his idea that all people open to love are fundamentally affected by a constant understanding of how alone their are in the context of the universe is almost a self-perpetuating one, since the efficiency and artistry with which he covers so many common experiences within such a small pagecount almost makes any reader feel a sense of how small their life seems in the big picture that show in it. Many books can cover the problems and theory, but Fromm rounds out his view of love as an artform with realistic (and hard) solutions to put loving into action. How many times have we heard trivial one-liners about ‘love being an active verb’, love coun ting in actions more than words and a number of other modern day slogans that we (particularly women) are so fond of posting on facebook, twitter or scoulding their boyfriends with? The intention is good but can of love that can solve our existential problems can be described both by what it is and what it is not.

The enigma of Love & the secret behind its triumph have long been the foremost concerns of human kind, men and women alike- falling in love (all perks attached: passion, blindness, butterflies in the stomach)- then falling out of love (all nuisance once again guaranteed: heartache, aloneness, rage, doom and gloom). Why do people fall in then out of love? Is there no middle ground somewhere along the way? Is human kind doomed to keep “stumbling on love” rather than “standing in love”? Poised with class yet practicality, Fromm’s “Art of Loving” is a shocking eye opener, an impeccably written work of art that highlights all different aspects of love, human kind, matters of the heart- in 4 very much enlightening sections.Love as a form of Art (love ought to be treated as a main concern, nourished, developed, etc)The condition of human beings today( ove in theory – Human beings tend to get over their aloneness by resorting to

an orgiastic state- whether through drugs or sexual orgasms which chase away separateness for a while but do not actually bridge the gap between 2 human beings except temporarily. Effect of Capitalism on Human Relationships (demolishing of uniqueness and selfhood- equality in our world today has transformed from “oneness” to “sameness”standardization of men- like productshas reigned over our world and we sadly misinterpret that for equality) Putting love into practice (Love requires 4 fundamental elements: Care, Respect, Responsibility, Knowledge) – It is an action, an activity- to be more accurate, it is an act of freedom by which one gives instead of expecting to receive. Fromm argues, throughout his masterpiece that, while we, humans, are desperately seeking what we call love (in spite of the fact that we are not quite sure what it is, what it entails, the right means to get to it and then stay STANDING there) – our main concern remains “being loved” rather than “loving”. To love is to give, he says, to give from one’s soul, one’s feelings, one’s existence.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Love is the only satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence.â&#x20AC;?

Biography

susanna

van roessel 29.09.1996 barcelona

My biography it’s about this: Mum and best friend, dear father, and sister Kanga. Opa & Ada & Iaia. The rest of the family when it’s all alright. My home. La Garriga, where I started to feel. Barcelona where I found myself. Amsterdam where is supposed to be my luck waiting for me. This flat. My bed. My plants’ life.The single people who have joined my way walking and walking and feeling at the same time: Paula, Sofia, Elena & Nineta. Best heart friend Ferran. Although who emotionally left me. The tradition of Otto’s family: Arnald, Eva, Nil, Germán, Nell, Nil & Aina. The one’s who are made by the same experiencies: Josep, Álvaro, Anna, Mireia, Monica & Albert. Gabriela. The last ones to arrive: Queralt, Cris Paula, Clara, & Oriol, specially, who has took care of me. My housemates: Joan & Albert. Dava himself. Cameras. My computer. Music. Bebe, Sabina, Russian Red, Drexler & Estopa. Roast Beef, carbonara & pizza cooked by Robby. Barri de Gràcia. San Sebastian. The Art. With Joan Antoni, who encourage me to follow this way. Chamo & De Las Heras. Silvia. Helena who disappeared. All my muses, best women who made a better world: Niki, Louise, Camille, Tracey, Pina (until now). My godness, Frida, of course. Lola, my favourite boss. All the teachers who repeat me: “design is not art”, as well. Idem those who instructed me the best way they know. My mind and intelligence. The sensibility that allows me to value all this. Poetry. Vicky Cristina Barcelona. Ricard, the first soul I admired with my heart. And finally, the sun. My last inspiration. Who I want to love more and for whom I’m artistically living this period of my life: Adri. I’m very thanked. For instance the following sentence will sumarize all words above: “only love & art make tolerable existance”. Thank you all.