Reciplaya

.

11.7. / 26.7. reciplaža / reciplaya      

 

 

     

.

11.7. / 26.7. reciplaža / reciplaya

Kaoru Izima fotografira modele u haute coutureu u kojemu bi željele biti odjevene u trenutku smrti i fotografira ih kao sofisticirane prekrasne leševe na padinama prekrivenima rasutim rajčicama ili na rubu pejzaža vreća s otpadom (za usporedbu, cadavre exquís je bila kolaboraciona, uglavnom kavanska, igra crtanja nadrealista). Lijepo jukstaponirano ružnom, kako bi bilo naglašeno lijepo, legitimno je lukavstvo umjetnosti i dizajna . i . stoljeća. Ipak, prisjetimo se, s modernizmom avangarde otvorila se pukotina između umjetnosti i ljepote prezrene kao pukog mamca, te je lijepo zamijenjeno estetikom uzvišenog u umjetnosti. Gotovo istodobno, svakodnevno iskustvo, pa i neugodno (primjerice viđenje prizora koji izaziva gnušanje), biva estetizirano prema načelu „prelijevanja“ umjetnosti u život. Uvjeti recepcije i značenja umjetničkog djela, odnosno društveni uvjeti postojanja djela postaju bitnim dijelom umjetničkog djela, često ga zamjenjujući kao događaj, proces ili iskustvo.

Izložba Reciplaža nastala je suradnjom Valerije Jurjević (fotografije), Sande Hančević

Reciplaža  

2

 

(tekstovi) i Darka Fritza (koncept izvedbe i grafičko oblikovanje) kroz neformalnu mrežu kor::net (korčula network). Prvobitni koncept, čije autorstvo potpisuju Sanda Hančević i Valerija Jurjević, predstavila je udruga Bašćina iz Lumbarde u svojoj galeriji VOLTA još . godine. Okosnicu izložbe činilo je smeće koje more zimi naplavi po plažama, a autorice su ga iskoristile kao medij komuniciranja temeljnih ekoloških pitanja današnjice – recikliranja materijala te pohrane smeća i otpada. Fotografije Valerije Jurjević pratili su tekstovi Sande Hančević iz kojih se moglo iščitati što se sve o smeću i otpadu može, a vjerojatno i treba naučiti, uključujući i sekundarne informacije poput povijesnog razvoja pojedinih vrsta materijala. Izložba je bila edukativnog karaktera i uključivala je radionice s djecom. Prema konceptu Darka Fritza, . izložba je oblikovno izmijenjena. Aplicirajući fotografije otpada na sedam ležaljki za plažu, Fritz je u konačnici ostvario, uz novi postav; i proizvod kojemu je moguća multiplikacija i praktična primjena na plažama, u želji da ne djeluje tautološki – slikom otpada na zagađenoj obali. „Prirođeni osjećaj

za ispravnost i prikladnost, što nas dovodi do prvih pokušaja u umjetnosti, nikada ne smije napustiti umjetnika“, kazao je već Goethe.

Radi se, dakle, o djelima umjetnosti koja koriste strategije i objekte dizajna te fotografije na način primijenjene umjetnosti – u doba postpikturalnog slikarstva, piktorijalna fotografija stvara svojevrsnu tenziju reprezentacije i komunikacije. Svaka je fotografija pritom barthesovska svjedodžba o prisutnosti ili iskaz priželjkivane izočnosti (smeća na plaži). Aplicirajući fotografije s prizorima otpada, pa i medicinskog (prizora koji izaziva gnušanje) na ležaljke za plažu, Fritz propituje strategije empatijskog dizajna koji stvarima pripisuje karakter. Tako će promjena od nekoliko stupnjeva u nagibu oboda vinske čaše učiniti da se doima arogantnom, da posegnemo za već postojećim banalnim primjerom, dok su objekti koje smatramo lijepim za nas verzije ljudi koje volimo.

Korištena strategija redizajna pritom se tiče samog mjesta fotografije i takav prijenos iz jednoga medija u drugi, iz izražajnih sredstava jedne umjetnosti u izražajna sredstva neke druge umjetnosti (ili dizajna koji je upisan u povijest umjetnosti, ali je i sve potenciranije u novijoj znanosti zasebna disciplina), jedan je od postupaka koji često odvode u banalnost ili fašizam kiča. Stoga ovdje radije govorimo o transformaciji, s jedne strane transformaciji materijala (prijevodu otpada u krajobraz, potom u sliku pa u tkaninu), s dru3

 

ge strane transformaciji predmeta-proizvoda (njegovoj resemantizaciji) i posredno - samog društva čiji je proizvod. Naime, kada se neki znak (slika ili riječ) izmjesti iz izvornog konteksta, to će mu ponekad dati novu snagu i značenje ritualnosti. Na ritualan je način Beuys, primjerice, svjesno izbjegavao materijale koji imaju ikakvu materijalnu vrijednost, koristeći one za koje buržujsko društvo nikada ne bi pokazalo interes; odnosno koristeći dadaističku strategiju épater la bourgeoisie, odgovarajući svoju publiku od komodifikacijskih društvenih procesa (život kao roba). U happeningu s kojotom, u prostoru posutom slamom, pustom, rastrganim primjercima Wall Street Journala i različitim ostalim materijalima koje je umjetnik donio sa sobom, osobito vrijedi spomenuti par rukavica koje je obojio u smeđe i koje je opetovano bacao na kojota. Njihova je boja predstavljala “želju za skulpturalnom formom”, a njihov je oblik bio onaj njegovih vlastitih ruku.

Iako naizgled polaze od oprečnih premisa u odnosu na Beuysa, onih reifikacije ili opredmećivanja društva; autorice i autor Reciplaže, nazvavši izložbu na način humorne hibridizacije imperativnog oblika glagola s asocijacijom na estetski turizam i industriju slika u značenju „recikliranja“ slika kroz mehanizam sjećanja, franc. souvenira, zanemaruju estetsku, potencirajući etičku vrijednost izloženih predmeta. Dizajn danas, također, prije ukazuje na probleme

društva nego što služi njihovom rješavanju.

Iako su umjetnost i dizajn dva nužno odvojena i zasebna područja ljudskog djelovanja i znanja, zajednička im je upravo proizvodnja smisla. Umjetnost nas uči da stvari sagledamo na nov način, stabilizirajući repetitivne životne situacije i stoga mala razlika između stvarnosti po sebi i stvarnosti umjetničkog djela leži upravo u pripisivanju značenja. Za Freuda, umjetnost, kao i neuroza, znače neuspjeh prilagođavanja društvenoj stvarnosti. Njoj na svojevrstan način oponira i Reciplaža, aksesoari za plažu koji su svojevrstan wishful-thinking svojih autora (iskazuju želju, žudnju, za nezagađenom prirodom), a koji može biti nadograđen funkcionalnim detaljima, poput džepova u koje se umetnu utezi da ležaljke ne odnese vjetar.

Novi koncept Reciplaže prvi put je predstavljen u Gradskom muzeju Korčula te u Galeriji moderne i suvremene umjetnosti Centra za kulturu Vela Luka, koji su dio mreže kor::net. Također je gostovao u Galeriji Brna, dakle višestruko je prikazan diljem otoka Korčule, gdje je projekt i nastao. Kao u radu Josepha Kosutha Jedna i tri stolice, na izložbi su u staklenoj vitrini predstavljeni eksplikacijski, kvazi-leksikografski tekstovi koje je uredila Sanda Hančević, a u drugoj je vitrini instalacija napravljena od otpada i naplavina sakupljenih na plažama Korčule. Kao što Mark Dion propituje način na koji dominantne ideologije i institucionalizirane konvencije oblikuju naše znanje o svijetu, izlažući naplavine naizgled taksonomijski, u kvazi-muzeološkim vitrinama, ili bolje rečeno kabinetima kurioziteta. Analitička kreacija (konstrukcija), kroz dekonstrukciju ili vlastitu oprečnost, inherentna arhitekturi dekonstruktivizma te dizajnu dekonstrukcije – za to su primjer majice poprskane lažnim urinom Vivienne Westwood; jednom aproprirana od masovne kulture biva svedena na svoju estetiku, očišćena od ideje koja će je učiniti razložnom, izašle iz Derridine filozofijske misli. Ideja dekonstrukcije leži u promatranju i analizi postojećeg djela, materijala od kojeg je načinjeno, odnosa kako pojedini komadi 4

 

funkcioniraju zajedno, ali ne na cjelovitoj, već na fragmentalnoj razini te njihovim premještanjem na mjesta koja im naizgled ne odgovaraju. Stoga Reciplažu možemo odrediti kao neo-dekonstrukcijsku.

Bez imalo zebnje položit ćemo na plaži svoja razodjevena tijela na slike gomila smeća na ležaljci, kao što smo prije nekoliko godina svoj identitet rado proželi modom ubikvitetnih mrtvačkih glava Alexandera McQueena, kao suvremene interpretacije teme vanitas, memento mori, omiljene u baroku (lubanja, zrcalo, razbijeno posuđe uslijed naglog ustajanja od stola motivi su koji te podsjećaju na prolaznost tvojih užitaka i postignuća). Ovakav primjer izmaka djela umjetnosti u vizualni jezik empatijskog, odnosno etičkog dizajna može biti i potržišten, poprimiti novi (ne)uzvišeni status turističkog proizvoda, suvenira.

      .         - ,            .         ,   .           , , .

 

5

 

The exhibition Reciplaya is a result of collaboration between Valerija Jurjević (photography), Sanda Hančević (texts), and Darko Fritz (exhibition layout and graphic design), and has been accomplished through the informal network kor::net (Korčula network). The original concept, authored by Sanda Hančević and Valerija Jurjević, was presented in  by Bašćina association from Lumbarda in its gallery VOLTA. It was inspired by garbage accumulating on beaches throughout the winter, and the authors used it as a medium for communicating the fundamental ecological issues of today – the recycling of materials and the disposal of garbage and waste. Photographs made by Valerija Jurjević were accompanied by texts written

by Sanda Hančević, which revealed all that could and probably should be learned about garbage and waste, including some secondary information such as the historical evolution of specific types of materials.

The exhibition was educational in character and included workshops with children. In , it was modified in terms of design, according to a concept by Darko Fritz. By applying photographs of garbage to seven

.

Kaoru Izima photographs his models in haute couture that they would like to wear at the moment of their death, presenting them as sophisticated, exquisite corpses (in terms of comparison, cadavre exquís was a collaborative sketching game practised by the Surrealists, mostly as they were hanging out in bars) placed on hillsides strewn with tomatoes or on the edge of landscapes made of garbage bags. Beauty and ugliness are juxtaposed in order to emphasize beauty, which has been a common trick of art and design throughout the th and st centuries. Nevertheless, one should recall that avantgarde modernism opened up a gap between art and beauty, the latter being discarded as mere bait, and substituted beauty through the aestheticism of eminence in art. Almost at the same time, all experience of everyday life, even if unpleasant (such as witnessing something repulsive) was aestheticized according to the principle of art “spilling over” into life. The circumstances of reception and the meaning of an artwork, that is, the social conditions of its existence, have thus become an essential part of the artwork itself, often taking its place as an event, a process, or an experience.

Reciplaya

sun beds, Fritz eventually, besides the new layout, created a product that could be multiplied and used in practice, on beaches, without intending to create a tautology by using images of garbage on a coastline full of waste. As Goethe used to say, the innate feeling of what is right and appropriate, which has led us to the earliest attempts at creating art must never leave the artist.

Thus, these artworks use strategies and objects of design and photography in the manner of applied arts – in the age of postpictorial painting, pictorial photography creates a sort of tension in representation and communication. Each photograph is a Barthesian testimony of the presence or expression of a desired absence (garbage on the beach). By applying photographs showing garbage, some of them medical (which causes repulsion), on sun beds, Fritz has explored the strategies of emphatic design, which attributes a specific character to things, and thus a change in the sloping angle of a wine glass may may make it seem more arrogant (a banal example), while objects that we experience as beautiful are versions of people whom we love. The strategy of redesign thereby concerns the very place of photography and the transfer from one medium into another, from the tools of expression typical of one form of art into those of another (or perhaps those of design, which is still part of art history, yet has been increasingly treated as a separate discipline in recent scholarship), belongs to those procedures that can easily lead into banality or the fetishism of kitsch. Therefore we prefer to speak of transformation: on the one hand, the transformation of material (the translation of garbage into a landscape, then into an image, and eventually into the fabric), and on the other hand the transformation of the object-product (its resemantization) and indirectly of the very society that has produced it. For when a symbol (image or word) is displaced from its original context, it sometimes gains new power and a ritual significance. Thus, it was for the sake of ritual that Beuys consciously avoided materials that had any 6

 

.

, , ./ , , 

7

 

  , , ./  , , 

material value, preferring those in which the bourgeois society would never show any interest, or rather: by using the Dadaist strategy of épater la bourgeoisie, he drew his audience away from the social processes of commodification (life as commodity).

In his coyote happening, in a space strewn with hay, felt, torn samples of Wall Street Journal, and various other materials brought by the artist, one should especially mention a pair of gloves painted in brown, which he was repeatedly throwing at the coyote.

Their colour represented the “desire for the sculptural form,” while their shape was that of the artist’s own hands.

Even though seemingly starting from the opposite premises with respect to Beuys, those of reification or objectification of the society, the authors of Reciplaya have given a name to the exhibition that is a humorous hybrid of an imperative verbal form on the one hand, and the connotations of aesthetic tourism and the industry of images in terms of “recycling” images

8

 

through the mechanism of memory (Fr. souvenir) on the other, thereby neglecting the aesthetic value of the exhibits and enhancing the ethical one. Today’s design also indicates social problems rather than aiming at their solution. Even though art and design are two necessarily different and separate fields of human activity and knowledge, their common feature is precisely the production of meaning. Art teaches us how to look at things in a fresh way by stabilizing repetitive situations in life, and thus the small difference between the reality as such and the reality of an artwork resides precisely in the attribution of meaning. For Freud, both art and neurosis signified failure in adapting to the social reality. In a way, Reciplaya also opposes that reality by using beach accessories that are a sort of wishful thinking of their authors (expressing wish or desire for unpolluted nature) and that can be upgraded with various functional details, such as pockets for weights that serve to keep the sun beds in place in case of windy weather.

.

 , , . /  , , 

The new concept of Reciplaya was first presented at the Municipal Museum of Korčula and the Gallery of Modern and Contemporary Art, Cultural Centre Vela Luka, both part of the kor::net network.

It has also been shown at Gallery Brna, which means that it has toured around various places on the island of Korčula, where the project was launched. As in Joseph Kosuth’s artwork One and Three Chairs, the exhibition included explicatory, quasi-lexicographic texts edited by Sanda Hančević in one glass case, while in another there was an installation consisting of garbage and debris brought by the sea to the beaches of Koručula. It is reminiscent of the way in which Mark Dijon has explored the way in which the dominant ideologies and institutionalized conventions shape our knowledge of the world, namely by exhibiting the waste brought by the sea in an almost taxonomic manner, in museumlike glass cases reminiscent of the curiosity cabinets.

9

 

Analytical creation (construction) by means of deconstruction or its own opposite, as an integral part of the architecture of deconstructivism or deconstructive design - as manifest in T-shirts sprinkled with the false urine of Vivienne Westwood - once appropriated by the mass culture becomes reduced to its aestheticism, cleansed of the rationalizing idea originating in Derrida’s philosophic thought. The idea of deconstruction resides in the observation and analysis of an artwork, the material it is made of, and the way in which its individual segments function together, not on the level of the whole, but on that of fragments, for example in their translocation to places that may seem inadequate. In this respect, Reciplaya may be defined as neodeconstructivist.

With not a touch of anxiety, we will lay down our almost nude bodies onto a heap of garbage (shown in a picture placed on a sun bed) just as some years ago we were gladly merging our identity with the fashion

         ,  , . /      ,  , 

of Alexander McQueen’s ubiquitous skulls as a contemporary interpretation of the themes of vanitas and memento mori, so much preferred in the Baroque (the skull, the mirror, and broken dishes that looked as if someone suddenly got up from the table were motifs that reminded man of the transience of all pleasures and achievements).

This example of transferring an artwork into the visual language of empathic or ethical design can also be marketed, thus acquiring a new and (non-)eminent status of a tourist product, a souvenir.

10

 

       .                .      ..              .           ,   .               ().

    .  .        .        .     ,  .    .     :: (::)   ,     .     ,    ,         ( , .).        .

  (.   )       .           .     ,         .     .        ,     :: (::).           ,            ( , ).

          .        .   ,    .    ,            ,         :: (::).            ( , .).

         .           .   , ,   .    ,                   :: (::).            ( , ).

    ,    , ,     .               .            .             .           ) (    .     :: (::) .      ( ),  ()   ( ). ..

     ,   - , ,  ,    .               .             .               .   ) (            ).  ,      :: (::).      ( ),  (),   ( ). ..

.

Biografije / Biographies

:   

11

 

/

  /    /   /   /     /   /      /    /  /      /       :   /        /           /  





 

12

 Hrvatska udruga likovnih umjetnika primijenjenih umjetnosti, Preradovićeva /, / Croatian Association of Artists of Applied Arts, Address: Preradovićeva /, Zagreb, Croatia Ivana Bakal, predsjednica -a /  president Darko Fritz i/and Maša Štrbac Silva Kalčić Marina Miladinov Darko Fritz, Valerija Jurjević Sani Sardelić kuna zlatica Printera grupa, Zagreb, .  primjeraka/ copies Sanda Hančević

Darko Fritz Gradski ured za obrazovanje, kulturu i sport Grada Zagreba. / Zagreb City Council for Culture

Emil Brčić Ars kopija, Zagreb CIP zapis dostupan u računalnome katalogu Nacionalne i sveučilišne knjižnice u Zagrebu / A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the National and University Library in Zagreb ----

a / Tkalčićeva , Zagreb, Croatia P/F / + ()   E / galerija-ulupuh@zg.t-com.hr w / www.ulupuh.hr  

 

.

¡Vamos a la reciplaya!

 

 