Body, Philosophy, Art II. (Non)Movement and Public Space

9

7€

139-140

771318 050001

POLETJE/SUMMER

2011

TELO, FILOZOFIJA, UMETNOST II. / BODY, PHILOSOPHY, ART II

(NE)GIB IN JAVNI PROSTOR /

U VO D N I K / E D I TO RI AL 1

2 UVOD NIK / ED ITO RI A L

TELO, FILOZOFIJA, UMETNOST II. (NE)GIB IN JAVNI PROSTOR

MAJA MURNIK

P

oletna številka Maske, ki je pred vami, nadaljuje z mišljenjem transdisciplinarnih presečišč sodobnih umetniških praks, filozofije, družbe, kulture, znanosti in tehnologij. V njej nadaljujemo s temo »Telo, filozofija, umetnost«, ki je imela svoj prvi, obsežnejši del že v prejšnji številki Maske. Ob konkretnih umetniških projektih (iz območja tako performativnih kot intermedijskih umetniških praks) se dva prispevka osredotočata na mejna področja – tematizirata korenite spremembe sodobnejšega razumevanja telesa in telesnosti v primerjavi s preteklimi, še pretežno modernističnimi pogledi. Tomaž Toporišič se v svojem prispevku ukvarja s performativnimi revolucijami v delih slovenske gledališke neoavantgarde in teoretiziranega performansa iz zadnjega desetletja, pri čemer se posebej posveti spremenjenemu, destabiliziranemu odnosu med telesom gledalca in igralca oz. izvajalca. Prispevek Polone Tratnik pa posega na področje povezovanja umetnosti in znanosti. Skozi primere umetniškega tematiziranja in uporabe orodij ter tehnik genskega profiliranja v delih sodobnih umetnikov Paula Vanouseja in Špele Petrič analizira pojavnost telesa in njegovih odtisov v tehnologiji DNK profiliranja. Posebno pozornost zastavlja vprašanju možnosti znanstvenega dostopa do resnice.

Poleg omenjenih pričujoča številka Maske prinaša prispevke, ki bi jim lahko nadeli krovno ime »(Ne)gib in javni prostor«. Prispevka Katje Čičigoj in Pie Brezavšček se lotevata razmisleka o gibu in njegovi dekonstrukciji: razmišljata o subverzivnosti negiba in počasnosti, o njunih političnih implikacijah, ter ju postavljata v širši kontekst zahodne (hiper)moderne, pa tudi v kontekst fotografske in filmsko mišljene časovnosti. Deloma z drugega konca se teme giba v javnem prostoru lotevata tudi prispevka Patricka Primavesija in Jasmine Založnik, ki v navezavi na konkretne projekte flash moba razgrinjata strategije in kontekste tega pojava.

Tema »(Ne)gib in javni prostor« pa ima na straneh revije pred vami še eno artikulacijo: posebej za pričujočo številko Maske je bil s pomočjo tehnologije terestričnega laserskega skeniranja (TLS) posnet performans Zelena luč Mateje Bučar, ki daje svoj umetniški odgovor na omenjeno temo. Projekt, ki neustavljivo mestno koreografijo sodobnega časa nadgrajuje na semaforiziranih prehodih Ljubljane, je bil posnet s tehnologijo, ki v zadnjem času prodira na številna področja zajema in evidentiranja oblike in spremembe zemeljskega površja ter antropogenih objektov.

U VO D N I K / E D I TO RI AL 1

BODY, PHILOSOPHY, ART II (NON)MOVEMENT AND PUBLIC SPACE

MAJA MURNIK TRANSLATED BY POLONA PETEK

T

he Summer issue of Maska continues its reflection on transdisciplinary intersections of contemporary artistic practices, philosophy, society, culture, science and technologies. Again, it takes up the topic of “Body, Philosophy, Art”, whose first, more extensive part was published in the previous issue of the journal. In addition to specific artistic projects (from the fields of both performative and intermedia artistic practices), two articles focus on peripheral areas – they thematise the radical changes in the more contemporary understanding of the body and corporeality compared to previous, still predominantly modernist conceptions. In his contribution, Tomaž Toporišič deals with performative revolutions in the works of the Slovenian theatrical neo-avantgarde and the theorised performance art of the last decade; he pays special attention to the changed, destabilised relation between the spectator’s and the actor’s or the performer’s bodies. In her text, Polona Tratnik explores the field of linkages between art and science. Using the examples of artistic thematisations and use of the tools and techniques of genetic profiling in the works of contemporary artists Paul Vanouse and Špela Petrič, she analyses the manifestations of the body and its offprints in the technology of DNA profiling. Special attention is given to the question of the possibility of scientific access to truth.

In addition to these texts, the present issue of Maska contains contributions that could be grouped under a joint heading “(Non)Movement and Public Space”. The articles by Katja Čičigoj and Pia Brezavšček consider movement and its deconstruction; the authors ponder the subversiveness of non-movement and slowness and their political implications, and they position them within the broader context of western (hyper)modernity as well as within the context of photographically and cinematically represented temporality.

The texts by Patrick Primavesi and Jasmina Založnik tackle the topic of movement in public space from the other end of the spectrum; they draw on the concrete examples of flash mob to lay out the strategies and the contexts of this phenomenon.

The topic of “(Non)Movement and Public Space” receives yet another articulation in this issue of Maska. Specially for this issue, the event Green Light (Zelena luč) by Mateja Bučar, which offers an artistic response to the topic, was recorded using the technology of terrestrial laser scanning (TLS). The project upgrading the irresistible urban choreography of the contemporary time at traffic lighted Ljubljana’s crossings was filmed using the technology which has recently been penetrating a number of fields. It registers the forms and changes of the landform and the anthropogenic objects.

2 UVOD NIK / ED ITO RI A L

ZELENA LUČ / GREEN LIGHT Lokacija / Location: Križišče Roška/Poljanska, Ljubljana | Datum / Date: 22. 6. 2011 | Produkcija / Production: DUM – Društvo umetnikov / DUM – Association of Artists, www.dum-club.si/zelenaluc | Avtorica / Author: Mateja Bučar | Soustvarjalci in izvajalci / Performers and creators: Maja Kalafatić, Nataša Kos Krizmančič, Duško Teropšič, Bojana Mišič, Mateja Bučar | Zasnova terestričnega snemanja / Concept of terrestrial recording: Miha Turšič | Izvedba terestričnega snemanja / Realization of terrestrial recording: Andreja Anžur in Gregor Novaković za DFG Consulting d.o.o. Ljubljana, www.dfgcon.si

U VO D N I K / E D I TO RI AL 3

PHRASE NET Povezave med najbolj pogosto uporabljenimi besedami v Maski, št. 139–140 The frequency of words used in Maska, No. 139–140

FLASH

ESTABLISHED MOB

CRITIQUE SOCIAL

DISCUSSED EVENT

THEATRICAL

RADIO EXPERIENCE SPACE

ARTISTIC

PUBLIC

PRACTICES POLITICAL

CONTEMPORARY

ACTION

PROJECT SPHERE CRITICAL

PERFORMATIVE

DANCE

PERFORMANCE CALLED

BALLET ART BODY

THEATRE

TIME

SPECIFIC

REAL AVANTGARDE

BARTLEBY

REMAINS

MEDIA

GROUP

LANGUAGE

4

ARTAUDIAN

LIGN

9

7€

139-140

771318 050001

POLETJE/SUMMER

2011

TELO, FILOZOFIJA, UMETNOST II. / BODY, PHILOSOPHY, ART II

6 / PERFORMATIVNE REVOLUCIJE IGRALČEVEGA IN GLEDALČEVEGA TELESA / PERFORMATIVE REVOLUTIONS OF THE ACTOR’S AND THE SPECTATOR’S BODY / Tomaž Toporišič 24 / ODTIS – UVID – PROJEKCIJA (GENSKO PROFILIRANJE, GENOTIPIZACIJA) / PRINT – INSIGHT – PROJECTION (GENETIC PROFILING, GENOTYPING) / Polona Tratnik (NE)GIB IN JAVNI PROSTOR / (NON)MOVEMENT AND PUBLIC SPACE

38 / POČASNOST OSVOBODITVE. DEKONSTRUKCIJA GIBANJA IN REKONSTRUKCIJA NJEGOVE PERCEPCIJE V PREDSTAVI DRAGANE ALFIREVIĆ ARE MADE OF THIS / THE SLOWNESS OF LIBERATION. THE DECONSTRUCTION OF MOVEMENT AND THE RECONSTRUCTION OF ITS PERCEPTION IN THE PERFORMANCE OF DRAGANA ALFIREVIĆ ARE MADE OF THIS / Katja Čičigoj 42 / RAJE BI, DA NE. PREVPRAŠEVANJE PARADIGME NEGIBANJA KOT REVOLTA V SODOBNEM PLESU / I WOULD PREFER NOT TO. AN INTERROGATION OF THE PARADIGM OF NON-MOVEMENT AS REVOLT IN CONTEMPORARY DANCE / Pia Brezavšček 58 / PRENOS GEST. SITUACIJA IN INTERVENCIJA V RADIJSKIH PERFORMANSIH SKUPINE LIGNA / TRANSMITTING GESTURES. SITUATION AND INTERVENTION IN LIGNA’S RADIO-PERFORMANCES / Patrick Primavesi 72 / FLASH MOB / FLASH MOB / Jasmina Založnik

MASKA Časopis za scenske umetnosti / Performing Arts Journal Ustanovljen 1920 / Since 1920 Letn. / vol. XXVI, št. / No. 139–140 (poletje 2011 / summer 2011) ISSN 1318-0509 Izdajatelj: Maska, zavod za založniško, kulturno in producentsko dejavnost / Published by: Maska, Institute for Publishing, Production and Education | Metelkova 6, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia | Telefon / Phone: +386 1 4313122 | Fax: +386 1 4313122 | E-pošta / E-mail: info@maska.si | www.maska.si | Za založnika / For the publisher: Janez Janša Odgovorna urednica / Editor-in-chief: Maja Murnik | Uredniški odbor / Editorial Board: dr. Janez Strehovec, dr. Tomaž Toporišič, dr. Polona Tratnik | Stalni sodelavci revije / Permament Contributors: Katja Čičigoj, Janez Janša, dr. Bojana Kunst, Jana Pavlič, dr. Mojca Puncer, Monika Vrečar | Mednarodno uredništvo / International Advisory Board: Inke Arns, Maaike Bleeker, Eda Čufer, Ivana Ivković, Ana Vujanović, Marko Peljhan, Nataša Petrešin-Bachelez, Luk Van Den Dries Vizualizacija vsebine / Content Visualisation: Miha Turšič | Slovenska lektura / Slovene Language Editors: Melita Silič, Maja Murnik | Angleška lektura / English Language Editors: Eric Dean Scott, Eva Erjavec | Tisk / Print: Cicero | Naklada / Copies: 400 Cena dvojne številke (za Slovenijo): 7 € / Price of double issue (international): 8 € | Letna naročnina za posameznike: 21 €, letna naročnina za institucije: 31 € (v ceno je vključen DDV, poštnina ni vključena v ceno) | Annual international subscription: Individual rate 47 €, Institutional rate 60 € (Package and postage not included) | Poslovna sekretarka / Secretary: Ana Ivanek | Distribucija in naročnina / Subscription and distribution: ana. ivanek@maska.si | Transakcijski račun / Account number: 02010-00165250861 Masko leta 1920 ustanovi Ljubljanski pododbor Udruženja gledaliških igralcev Kraljevine SHS. Leta 1985 Zveza kulturnih organizacij Slovenije obudi njeno izdajanje pod imenom Maske. Leta 1991 Maska ponovno dobi izvorno ime in soustanovitelja: Institutum Studiorum Humanitatis.

Dosedanje glavne in/ali odgovorne urednice in uredniki: Rade Pregarc (1920–21), Peter Božič in Tone Peršak (1985–90), Maja Breznik (1991–93), Irena Štaudohar (1993– 98), Janez Janša (1998–2006) in Katja Praznik (2007–2009). Maska je članica mreže mediteranskih gledaliških revij. Druge revije, članice Mreže: PRIMER ACTO, REVISTA DE TEATRO DE LA UNIVERSIDAD DE ALCALA DE HENARES, REVISTA GALEGA DO TEATRO, ART TEATRAL, ESCENA (vse Španija), ISAD (Tunis), PUBLICATION DU THEATRE NATIONAL DE TIRANA (Albanija), SEMNAL THEATRAL (Romunija), THE MANOEL (Malta), FRAKCIJA (Hrvaška), PRIMA FILA (Italija), SCENA (Jugoslavija). Maska je članica Društva Asociacija nevladnih organizacij in samostojnih ustvarjalcev na področju umetnosti in kulture ter članica mreže Team Network (Transdisciplinary European Art Magazines). Druge revije, članice Mreže: Alternatives Théâtrales (Belgija), Art’O (Italija), Ballet-Tanz (Nemčija), Danstidningen (Švedska), Highlights (Grčija), Mouvement (Francija), Obscena (Portugalska), Scènes (Belgija), Stradda (Francija). www.team-network. eu. Po 7. točki 25. člena ZDDV je davek na časopis obračunan po stopnji 8,5 %. Revijo sofinancira Javna agencija za knjigo RS. / The journal is supported by the Slovenian Book Agency.

5

180 IN / 115 V / 98 JE / 71 KI / 65 KOT / 53 DA / 41 SE / 38 NA / 34 Z / 28 OZIROMA / 28 S / 27 TAKO / 25 GA / 25 GLEDALIŠČE / 23 IZ / 23 PA / 22 ALI

PERFORMATIVNE REVOLUCIJE IGRALČEVEGA IN GLEDALČEVEGA TELESA PERFORMATIVE REVOLUTIONS OF THE ACTOR’S AND THE SPECTATOR’S BODY see page 15

TOMAŽ TOPORIŠIČ PREVOD / TRANSLATED BY POLONA PETEK

ABSTRACT

T

azprava se usmerja v posebno obliko estetske revolucije (v smislu Jacquesa Rancièra), performativni obrat šestdesetih in sedemdesetih let 20. stoletja, kot ga definira Erika Fischer-Lichte. V dialogu z Artaudom, ki je trasiral pot, po kateri so hodile neo- in postavantgarde, sledi tem performativnim revolucijam, obratom od referencialne k performativni kulturi v delih slovenske gledališke neoavantgarde in pomilenijskega teoretiziranega performansa (Dušan Jovanović, Janez Janša, Via negativa Bojana Jablanovca, Maja Delak, Sebastijan Horvat …). Ugotavlja, da v vseh naštetih primerih naletimo na Rancièrov paradoks, v katerem sama želja emancipirati gledalca proizvede zavest, da prav želja po tem, da bi ukinili distanco, proizvede še večjo distanco. Če jim uspe preseči ta paradoks in ukiniti opozicijo med gledanjem in igranjem, utelešajo začasne zmage artaudovske revolucije, v kateri stopata v dialog in se stapljata fenomenalno in semiotično telo performerjev, predstave, gledalcev. Performativna revolucija tako rezultira v preseganju fizičnih in psihičnih limit v telesih igralk in gledalk, igralcev in gledalcev.

he discussion is directed towards a special form of aesthetic revolution (in the sense described by Jacques Rancière), the so-called performative turn of the 1960s and 1970s, as defined by Erika Fischer-Lichte. In a dialogue with Artaud, who blazed a trail for the neo- and post-avantgardes, the discussion follows these performative revolutions, or turns from a referential culture towards a performative one, in the works of Slovenian theatrical neo-avantgarde and the postmillennial theorised performative art (Dušan Jovanović, Janez Janša, Via negativa by Bojan Jablanovec, Maja Delak, Sebastijan Horvat …). It establishes that, in all mentioned examples, we encounter Rancière’s paradox, according to which the very desire to emancipate the spectator produces the awareness that it is precisely this desire for the abolishment of distance that produces an even stronger distance. Insofar as they succeed in transcending this paradox and abolishing the opposition between looking and acting, they embody the provisional victories of the Artaudian revolution, in which the phenomenal body and the semiotic body of the performers, the performance and the spectators enter into a dialogue and merge. The performative revolution thus results in transcending the physical as well as the mental limitations of the actors’ and the spectators’ bodies.

Ključne besede: PERFORMATIVNI OBRAT, ESTETSKA REVOLUCIJA, EMANCIPIRANI GLEDALEC IN PERFORMER, SEMIOTIČNO IN FENOMENALNO TELO

Key words: PERFORMATIVE TURN, AESTHETIC REVOLUTION, EMANCIPATED SPECTATOR AND PERFORMER, SEMIOTIC AND PHENOMENAL BODY

POVZETEK

R

6 T E LO, FILOZOFIJA, UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, AR T II

/ 22 TELO / 21 BI / 20 GLEDALIŠČA / 20 PREDSTAVE / 20 TUDI / 19 BO / 18 GLEDALCA / 17 MED / 16 KAR / 15 OD / 15 TO / 14 G / 14 HKRATI / 14 LAHKO

N

aše zanimanje bo usmerjeno v posebno obliko estetske revolucije (v smislu Jacquesa Rancièra) tako imenovanega performativnega obrata šestdesetih in sedemdesetih let preteklega stoletja, kot ga znotraj uprizoritvenih in vizualnih praks definira in analizira Erika Fischer-Lichte v knjigi Ästhetik des Performativen. V dialogu z Artaudom, ki je z gledališčem krutosti pionirsko trasiral pot, po kateri so hodile neo- in postavantgarde, bomo skušali slediti tem performativnim revolucijam, obratom od referencialne k performativni kulturi, katerih rezultat so bile raznolike raziskave, odkrivanja in preseganja tako fizičnih kot psihičnih limit v telesih igralk in gledalk, igralcev in gledalcev.

Janez Janša, Spomenik G Foto: Tone Stojko

Zanimali nas bodo odtisi tega vmesnega, liminalnega položaja na obeh straneh gledaliških in negledaliških dvoran, v publiki in na odru; položaja, ki je povzročil destabilizacijo in novo osrediščenje gledalčeve in akterjeve percepcije samega sebe, drugih in realnosti nasploh. Zanimalo nas bo, na kakšen način in s kakšnimi nameni ta estetska revolucija skozi različne predstave vzpostavlja odnos do visoko mediatizirane današnje družbe. Zanimalo nas bo, kaj se je štirideset let po performativnih preobratih in lomih zgodilo z verjetjem oziroma credom, da živa, performativna umetnost uteleša avtentične oblike provokacij oziroma upora proti tradicionalnim družbenim vrednotam? Ali danes sploh še obstaja verjetje v provokativni značaj t. i. uporniškega uprizarjanja (resisting performance)?

Ali, še bolj radikalno, dubito ergo sum, povedano z besednjakom Jacquesa Rancièra in njegovega Emancipiranega gledalca: Lahko danes (v nasprotju z večinskimi interpretacijami performativnega obrata) res emancipiramo gledalca in igralca zgolj tako, da relativiziramo oziroma postavimo pod vprašaj »nasprotje med gledanjem in delovanjem«, tako da razumemo sicer samo po sebi samoumevno dejstvo, da »očitnosti, ki tako strukturirajo razmerja med povedati, videti in narediti, tudi same pripadajo strukturi gospodovanja in podvrženosti.«1

SKRAJNA FIZIČNOST TELESA

V

fenomen telesa igralca in gledalca, ki ga utelešajo predstave po performativnem obratu, bomo vstopili s pomočjo rekonstrukcije enega najbolj eminentnih primerov performativnega obrata v slovenskem prostoru oziroma uveljavitve telesa kot središčne točke kulture slednjega: se pravi s predstavo Spomenik G Dušana Jovanovića in Jožice Avbelj, izvedeno leta 1972.2 Samo Gosarič, dramaturg rekonstrukcije, druge ali ‘popostavitve’ dogodka v rokah Janeza Janše, v zapisu Iskanje Spomenika G, ki je izšel kot del gledališkega lista rekonstrukcije tega prelomnega performansa leta 2009

1 2

Jacques Rancière, Emancipirani gledalec, Ljubljana: Maska (zbirka Transformacije), 2010, str. 13.

Dušan Jovanović, Spomenik G, Viteška dvorana, produkcija: Gledališče GLEJ, 1972.

TELO , FILOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 7

/ 14 NE / 14 TELESA / 14 ZA / 13 JEZIK / 13 PERFORMATIVNEGA / 13 SO / 13 TEM / 13 VEČ / 12 ČE / 12 O / 12 PO / 11 TER / 10 NEKAJ / 9 NI / 9 PRAV

V

»originalni predstavi« Spomenik G telo igralcev oziroma performerjev noče biti razumljeno kot nosilec pomena, kot semiotično telo-teksta, sestavljenega iz znakov za karakter, ki ga izvajalka ali izvajalec igra. Razumeti ga je treba v njegovi posebni materialnosti, ne več primarno kot označevalec oziroma semiotično telo, ampak realno telo igralcev, njihovo telesno bitina-svetu. Pomeni, ki se pojavljajo znotraj procesa predstave, izvirajo in nastajajo primarno iz tega procesa predstave same.

v soavtorstvu Janeza Janše in Dušana Jovanovića,3 natančno analizira novonastalo stanje tega močnega performativnega obrata od teksta k telesu: »Izhodišče Spomenika G ni bila drama oz. ‘satirični happening’ Spomenik Bojana Štiha, temveč odločitev režiserja Dušana Jovanovića, da želi izhajati iz igralca in pripeljati vsebino predstave iz telesnega – zvoka, gibanja, igralčevega občutenja telesa in sebe. Ključna novost je bila, da je vodil delovni proces sam material oziroma igralčevo delo. Skozi njegov tok se je 70 strani dolgi tekst sčrtal na 15 stavkov ali izjav, zasedba pa se je z začetnih dvanajstih igralcev skrčila na eno samo igralko, 20-letno študentko drugega letnika AGRFT Jožico Avbelj. Kot celota je predstava skozi minimalizem in preciznost povezala drobce v organsko celoto. Pri tem je zanimivo, da je Štihov Spomenik kljub redukciji ostal rdeča nit predstave, se je pa povezoval z drugimi elementi uprizoritve na enakovredni ravni.«4 Podobno, nenavadno blizu tega, kar ob sodobnikih Spomenika G raziskuje Erika Fischer-Lichte, je razmišljal že dramaturg originalne predstave Igor Lampret: »Predstava Spomenik G v celoti temelji na igralkinem dihu. /…/ Notranja struktura predstave temelji na dvojnem gibanju kakor samo dihanje: vdih in izdih. /…/ Zato ima dih dvojno funkcijo: fiziološko in vsebinsko. S fiziološkim dihom igralka nenehno odkriva nove dimenzije igranja (emocije, situacije itd.) in ga transformira v vsebine, ki se popolnoma oblikujejo v izraz za posamezne metafore.«5 Oba poudarjata dejstvo, da je predstava rezultat performativnega obrata oziroma zanikanja literarnega avtorja kot artaudovsko razumljenega Boga, ki usmerja jezik gledališča in proti kateremu se je treba upreti. Tekstualno kulturo, ki jo uteleša besedilna predloga, na kateri v dramskem gledališču temelji predstava, je zamenjal igralkin dih oziroma telo, ki je bil poglavitni oblikovalec strukture performansa, tako da je povezoval fiziološko in vsebinsko, duha in telo, istočasno pa je izpostavil telo kot hkrati semiotično in fenomenalno. Skozi dih kot dejavnost igralkinega fenomenalnega telesa se je razkrila tudi dvojna narava igranja.

To je vzporedno ali hkrati a) instrument igralkine avtorske izpovedi (pogojno rečeno reprezentacije oziroma predstavljanja) in b) fizične vzdržljivosti njenega telesa.

Povedano v terminologiji Erike Fischer-Lichte: telo igralke oziroma performerke ni bilo več razumljeno kot nosilec pomena, kot semiotično telo-teksta, sestavljenega iz znakov za karakter, ki ga izvajalka ali izvajalec igra. Postalo je predvsem fenomenalno 3 4 5

8 T E LO, FILOZOFIJA, UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, ART II

Janez Janša, Dušan Jovanović, Spomenik G, Mala scena MGL, 2009.

Samo Gosarič, »Iskanje Spomenika G«, v: Spomenik G, Gledališki list MGL, letn. LIX, sezona 2008/2009, št. 9, 2009, str. 9–10.

Igor Lampret, »Spomenik G«, v: Spomenik G, Gledališki list MGL, str. 19.

/ 9 RANCIÈ / 9 TEGA / 8 GLEDALIŠČU / 8 KRUTOSTI / 8 OBRATA / 8 SKOZI / 7 AMPAK / 7 JO / 7 K / 7 SPOMENIK / 7 SPOMENIKA / 7 STA / 7 TA / 7 TAKO /

telo, nekaj materialnega, ne več primarno označevalec oziroma semiotično telo, ampak realno telo igralcev, njihovo telesno bitina-svetu. Pomeni, ki se pojavljajo znotraj procesa predstave, izvirajo in nastajajo primarno iz tega procesa predstave same.

Veno Taufer je v sicer drugačni, zato pa nič manj natančni terminologiji svojo zaznavo in refleksijo te situacije, ob premieri leta 1972, zapisal takole: »Na prazni sceni je bilo eno samo, popolnoma civilno dekle in v kotu muzikant. /…/ Ni bilo nobene literature /…/ in vendar je bilo to absolutno /…/ gledališko doživetje totalnega teatra. /…/ človeškega telesa, njegovih gibov, plesa tega telesa, njegove spretnosti, ekspresivnosti, njegovih mišic, udov, prstov, obraza, ustnic, njegovih glasov in zvokov /…/.«6 Povedano v argumentaciji Antonina Artauda: Dušan Jovanović je ukinil kartezijanski ratio kot posrednika med igralčevim telesom in njegovo igro. Hkrati pa je pustil odru, da spregovori skozi svoj lastni jezik, ki je bil tokrat izpostavljen in realiziran skozi vzpostavitev avtonomne govorice igralkinega telesa, ki seveda ni bila več literarna.

Tako se je telo, povedano v terminologiji Bojane Kunst, vzpostavilo kot »ekskluzivni nosilec estetskih strategij, vrednot in znakov.«7 Telo igralke je tudi tokrat neposredno nagovarjalo gledalstvo in fizično vstopalo v prostore teles gledalcev.

Artaud bi rekel: Razbiti jezik, da bi se dotaknili življenja …

Jovanović in Avbljeva pa (podobno kot v svoji teoriji magijskega gledališča nekoliko kasneje Rudi Šeligo) to povežeta z nujnostjo doseči, da bi človeško telo, tako kot predmeti in druga fizičnost odra, karseda neposredno delovali na gledalca. Da bi gledališče zaživelo kot fizičen in stvaren prostor, v katerem lahko spregovori artaudovski stvarni jezik. Gre jima za to, da bi v prostoru gledališča artaudovsko zaživela poezija v prostoru, se pravi »glasba, ples, upodabljajoča umetnost, pantomima, mimika, gestikuliranje, intonacija, arhitektura, osvetljava in dekoracija.«8 Tako kot v Šeligovem magijskem gledališču ali v artaudovskem gledališču krutosti nastane resnično fizični jezik, ki temelji na znakih in ne več besedah v običajnem, reprezentacijskem smislu. Magijski jezik rituala zaživi kot edinstveni jezik, ki bo (rečeno z Artaudom) »na pol poti med gibom in mislijo« ali (rečeno s Šeligom) »evokacija tistega, česar ni, kar ‘manjka’«.

Pri obeh pa je jasno, da bo slovnico tega novega jezika treba šele na novo iznajti. Če je Artaud verjel, da bo gledališče, ki ga je nameraval udejanjiti, tako zelo malo podobno temu, kar imamo navado imeno6 7 8

Veno Taufer, Odrom ob rob, Ljubljana: DZS, 1977, str. 49–50.

Bojana Kunst, Nemogoče telo, Ljubljana: Maska (zbirka Transformacije), 1999, str.

167.

Antonin Artaud, Gledališče in njegov dvojnik, Ljubljana: Knjižnica Mestnega gledališča ljubljanskega, 1994, str. 69.

vati gledališče, kot je predstavljanje kakršne koli obscenosti podobno starodavnemu religioznemu misteriju,9 je slovenska neoavantgarda tistega časa (Pupilija, Pekarna, Gledališče Glej, Rudi Šeligo, Lado Kralj, Dušan Jovanović, Milan Jesih, Ivo Svetina …) prepričana, da je mogoče gledališče s pomočjo poiesisa spremeniti tako, da bo oživilo oziroma priklicalo potopljeno, pozabljeno in izgubljeno na način rituala.

Gledališče krutosti, kot ga je v različnih vizijah videla slovenska gledališka oziroma uprizoritvena neoavantgarda, naj bi postalo nekaj, kar (povedano z besedami Rudija Šeliga) imitira tako principe magije kot tudi ritual, generira oziroma simulira magijsko-mitski čas, predstavlja avtonomno cono, nekakšno ‘oazo ali hram ali u-topos znotraj našega časa’. Obenem pa bo to gledališče zavezano temeljnim postulatom Artaudovega gledališča krutosti: bo antiimitativno gledališče, gledališko gledališče, torej samostojna umetnost, ki razpolaga z lastnimi sredstvi in načini izražanja; gledališče, ki sooča gledalca z resnico, vseobsegajočo in enotno; integrativno gledališče, torej tisto, ki ukinja dihotomijo prizorišče – dvorana in prebija oklepe ‘individuacije’; gledališče ustvarjanja – tu in zdaj – nekega samostojnega sveta, ki ni ‘transkripcija’ že prej ustvarjenega logosa, temveč ‘skripcija’ lastnih pomenov.

Tako kot za Artauda je tudi za omenjene ustvarjalce gledališče predstavljalo več kot zgolj umetniški medij. Povezano je bilo z globalno situacijo kulture. Toda te kulture ni negiralo kot celoto, ampak je ponujalo obnovo gledališča, s pomočjo katere bo jezik gledališča pridobil vitalnost. In ta jezik ne bo več zavezan logo- in skriptocentrični tradiciji, ampak bo hkrati jezik besede in odra, semiotičen in fenomenalen.

Primer Spomenika G nas napoti na šestdeseta leta dvajsetega stoletja v Evropi in ZDA, na najbolj eklatantne primere performativnega obrata, npr. dunajske akcioniste, Rudolfa Schwarzkoglerja in njegovo nasilje nad lastnim telesom, Hermana Nitcha in njegove rituale žrtvovanja v Gledališču orgij in misterijev.

Jovanovića, Schwarzkoglerja in Nitcha lahko interpretiramo kot akterje performativne umetniške revolucije, v kateri so umetniki dejavno vklapljali gledalce v performativna dejanja in jih uporabljali kot izvajalce. Toda če so dunajski akcionisti vse udeležence v nekakšnem ritualnem dejanju poskusili okužiti z nasiljem, da bi prebili meje tabujev znotraj javne sfere, se Jovanovićev Spomenik G ukvarja z drugačno naravnanostjo performativne revolucije, ki gledalca aktivira na način, bližji Rancièrovemu emancipiranemu gledalcu.

Tudi Spomenik G vzpostavlja začasno skupnost med izvajalci in publiko, ki pa ni participativna v smislu ukinjanja gledalčeve pasivnosti in vklapljanja njegovega fenomenalnega telesa v dejanje predstave, ampak gre za veliko mehkejšo obliko začasne skupnosti, ki nastane med igralko in gledalci. Ne gre za preseganje ali kršenje velikih tabujev, ampak za skupno osvoba9

Robert Abirached, La crise du personnage dans le theatre moderne, Pariz: Gallimard, 1994 (1978), str. 334.

TELO , FI LOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 9

7 V / 7 ZATO / 7 ZNOTRAJ / 6 BILO / 6 IGRALCA / 6 IGRALCEV / 6 JIH / 6 KAKO / 6 KATEREM / 6 KATERI / 6 LETA / 6 NAČIN / 6 NAJ / 6 NOVE

janje od bistvenega elementa nacionalne kulturne tradicije, zasnovane na literaturi in literarnem.

Telo, ki ga skupaj raztelešajo performerja in gledalci v Spomeniku G, je tisto teksta, za katerega je Veno Taufer (paradoksalno) zapisal: »Toda Jovanovič je ohranil obe plati teksta. /../ Le da je tekst zanikal kot literaturo, ga kot takega uničil, ga spet ustvaril kot gledališče. Tako Štih ostaja soavtor Spomenika, ki mu ga je režiser vrnil kot osebno doživetje totalnega teatra.«10 Ali, kot to osvobajanje od peze literarne tradicije slikovito opiše v svoji interpretaciji predstave veliki transformator slovenske dramatike in proze, avtor prvih antiromanov in antidram, Peter Božič: »Dušan Jovanović je v tej predstavi ukinil tistega posrednika med igralčevim telesom in njegovo igro, ki mu pravimo intelekt oziroma ratio. /.../ Dušan Jovanović in Jožica Avbelj sta /.../ dosegla izključitev racionalnega ali pa zavestnega dela, /.../ pri čemer jima je bilo v največjo pomoč ravno besedilo, reducirano na pomenske znake oziroma na zvočno maso, ki sta jo glede na spremenjeno strukturo tudi pomensko zvočno interpretirala.«11 Če se zdaj vrnemo k Janševi rekonstrukciji Spomenika G kot posebni obliki odrskega eseja ali teoretiziranega gledališča, lahko ugotovimo naslednje. Predstava doseže učinek, ki bi ga Jacques Rancière interpretiral kot združevanje in semplanje dveh paradigmatičnih odnosov, kot jih utelešata Brechtovo epsko gledališče in Artaudovo gledališče krutosti. Gledalec in gledalka v njem postaneta »hkrati distancirana gledalca in aktivna interpreta predstave, ki se jima ponuja.«12 Ta povezava je najlepše razvidna ob primerjavi s Spomenikom G iz leta 1972. Gledališče neoavantgarde je gotovo stremelo k temu, kar Rancière označi s sintagmami gledališče kot estetsko oziroma čutno vzpostavljanje kolektivnosti oziroma k temu, kar označi »skupnost kot način zasedanja istega časa in prostora, kot delujoče telo, ki stoji nasproti zgolj aparatu zakonov.«13 Zdi se, da tudi neoavantgarda še vedno povezuje gledališče ali to, kar sama pojmuje kot novo, artaudovsko gledališče kot nekaj, kar je »estetska revolucija, ki ne spreminja več mehanizmov države in zakonov, ampak čutne oblike človekove izkušnje.«14 In prav v tem, da noče več spreminjati mehanizmov države in zakonov, kar je počel Brecht in kar je za njim počel tudi Oder 57 kot eksperimentalno in hkrati politično gledališče petdesetih in šestdesetih let, se politika performansa in gledališča neoavantgarde razlikuje od klasičnega brechtovskega političnega gledališča v različnih reinkarnacijah.

10 Taufer, Odrom ob rob, str. 50.

11 Peter Božič, »Razvoj gledališke literature in gledaliških sredstev v slovenskem gledališču«, Maske, št. 1, 1986, str. 37.

12 Rancière, Emancipirani gledalec, str. 13.

13 Prav tam, str. 10.

14 Prav tam.

1 0 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA, UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, A RT II

Če je »originalni« Spomenik G v času performativnega obrata v nasprotju z Brechtom stremel k temu, da bi se oddaljil tako od aristotelovskega kot od brechtovskega gledališča in se karseda približal artaudovskemu gledališču krutosti, se Janševa rekonstrukcija poslužuje povezave Brechta in Artauda v dejanje percepcije, ki od gledalca hkrati zahteva, da vzpostavi kritično distanco in se vživi v rekonstrukcijo avtopoetične zanke med akterji na odru in občinstvom, v kateri naj bi se (tako vsaj zgodovina) izgubila vsakršna distanca in naj bi gledalci popolnoma zapustili oziroma opustili svoj položaj oddaljenega motrenja in razmišljajočega gledanja. Gledanje je tako hkrati distancirano in aktivno.

V »originalni predstavi« telo igralcev oziroma performerjev noče biti razumljeno kot nosilec pomena, kot semiotično teloteksta, sestavljenega iz znakov za karakter, ki ga izvajalka ali izvajalec igra. Razumeti ga je treba v njegovi posebni materialnosti, ne več primarno kot označevalec oziroma semiotično telo, ampak realno telo igralcev, njihovo telesno biti-na-svetu.

Pomeni, ki se pojavljajo znotraj procesa predstave, izvirajo in nastajajo primarno iz tega procesa predstave same.

Janez Janša v rekonstrukciji to situacijo podvoji, telesu Jožice Avbelj in telesu Matjaža Jarca kot telesoma originalne predstave doda dve novi telesi, ki sta hkrati podvojitvi in že tudi razloki od inkarnacije originalnih teles v prostoru in času krstne uprizoritve Spomenika G – telo mlade plesalke Teje Reba in glasbenika Boštjana Narata. S tem rekonstrukcija postane nekaj, kar je hkrati podvojitev, kopija in pa samostojni, neponovljivi dogodek, odrski esej o možnostih emancipacije skozi performativno dejanje gledališča, aktivno participacijo ter enako aktivno interpretacijo.

REARTIKULACIJE (NEO)AVANTGARDNIH ESTETSKIH REVOLUCIJ: TELO OZNAČEVALEC IN REALNO TELO

N

a podoben način delujejo tudi predstave nekaterih drugih predstavnic in predstavnikov slovenskih uprizoritvenih praks zadnjih nekaj let, ki skozi različna preverjanja, semplanja, dekonstrukcije in rekonstrukcije pričajo o vztrajnem vračanju umetniških revolucij zgodovinskih in neoavantgard. Ob Pupiliji (2006) in Spomeniku (2009) Janeza Janše, dveh rekonstrukcijah kultnih predstav neoavantgardnega performativnega gledališča, je treba omeniti še nekaj zanimivih primerov.

I. Jablanovčevi projekti Vie Negative, ki v dialogu s široko paleto neoavantgardnih, bodyartovskih in drugih umetnikov estetike performativnega poskušajo poiskati nove gledališke oblike, ki bodo dosegle »reaktivacijo udeležbe gledalcev« (Lehmann).

Predstava OUT15 tako npr. pod konceptualnim geslom »Oder je 15 Via Negativa, Out, Gledališče GLEJ, 2008.

/ 6 PERFORMANSA / 6 SEMIOTIČNO / 6 ŠE / 6 TEMU / 5 GLEDALCEV / 5 GLEDALCI / 5 JASNO / 5 JOVANOVIĆ / 5 KOT / 5 LET / 5 MORA / 5 NAS / 5 NIČ

moč. To moč mu podeljuje gledalec«, izhaja iz jasnega konceptualnega izhodišča, ki se nanaša na analizo oziroma preizkušanje ustaljenih vlog igralca in gledalca:

Via Negativa: OUT Foto: Marcandrea

»Out je igra s predvidevanji izvajalca in s pričakovanji gledalca. Ko zasedeta svoje mesto v gledališču, so njune vloge jasno razdeljene: izvajalec je tukaj zato, da nekaj pokaže, gledalec zato, da nekaj vidi. Izvajalec pričakuje gledalčevo pozornost in razumevanje; gledalec pričakuje fascinacijo. Out preizkuša, kako bosta svoje vloge odigrala v situaciji, ko ni več jasno, kaj lahko drug od drugega pričakujeta.«16 OUT je performans, ki preizkuša logiko napuha v razmerju med gledalcem in izvajalcem ter hkrati vzpostavlja nove povezave zasebnega in javnega, intimnega in odprtega, ki so odsev raziskav, kako se igralec uglasi v razmerju z gledalcem. Zato hipertrofira procesnost in performativnost, tako kot Janša v Spomeniku G negira fiksirano umetniško delo, s tem pa se zavestno vključuje v verigo performativnih akcentov, v to, kar Fischer-Lichtejeva poimenuje »estetika performativnega«, Marina Gržinić pa »reartikulacija zgodovine performansa«.

Via Negativa: OUT Foto: Marcandrea

V projektu Incasso17 skupina poskuša artaudovsko osvoboditi gledališče od reprezentacije, ga odrešiti služenja jeziku besede in njene logične diskurzivnosti. Povedano z besedami Rolanda Barthesa, ki govori o Antoninu Artaudu: Jablanovec skuša radikalizirati gledališko izkušnjo tako, da bi dosegel popolno preobrazbo naših načinov percepcije gledališča (in življenja?) za ceno novih pravil, ki bodo v veliki meri pravila avantgarde: »Misel mora biti popolnoma absorbirana v sami fiziki dramske akcije: nič notranjosti, nič psihologije, in celo /.../ nič simbolizma. /.../; in temu gledališču antikulture /.../ je potreben prav tako osvobojen jezik: ne samo, da mora biti beseda ‘poetična’ (se pravi neposredna, odvezana od vsake racionalnosti), temveč mora jezik brez vsakršne hierarhije vključevati krike, gibe, hrup in akcijo, katerih mešanica mora na odru povzročiti splošen masaker; ali če povemo z eno sintagmo: ‘gledališče krutosti’, ki je postalo Artaudova najslavnejša formula.«18

Sebastijan Horvat, Utopija 1 Foto: Petra Veber

Hkrati pa poskuša Jablanovec poiskati nove gledališke oblike, ki bodo tako kot postdramsko gledališče nasploh dosegle »reaktivacijo udeležbe gledalcev«19 , nove povezave zasebnega in javnega, intimnega in odprtega. Povedano nekoliko drugače: igralca skuša na novo uglasiti v razmerju z gledalcem s pomočjo igralčevega fenomenalnega telesa oziroma realnega telesa performerja, ki ni več primarno označevalec.

Zanimiv primer tega avtentičnega telesa je prizor iz predstave Incasso, v katerem performerka Katarina Stegnar prepoji ban16 http://vntheatre.com/projekti/predstave-2002-2008/out/predstava/ 17 Via Negativa, Incasso, Gledališče GLEJ, 2004.

18 Roland Barthes, Ecrits sur le théâtre, Pariz: Editions du Seuil, 2002, str. 300.

19 Hans Thies Lehmann, Postdramsko gledališče, Ljubljana: Maska, 2003, str. 234.

TELO , FILOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 1 1

/ 5 NPR / 5 OBLIKE / 5 ODRU / 5 POMOČJO / 5 PRIMARNO / 5 REČENO / 5 REKONSTRUKCIJE / 5 SAMO / 5 SVOJE / 5 SVOJO / 5 TELESOM / 5 TREBA

T

ako sodobni umetniki ukinjajo binarno opozicijo, ki jo ob Brechtu in Artaudu postavi Rancière: osvobajajo gledalca njegove pasivnosti s tem, da mu ponujajo spektakel teles, ki je nekaj nenavadnega, enigma. Vse zato, da bi se (spet rečeno z Rancièrom) spremenil iz pasivnega gledalca v aktivnega znanstvenika, ki opazuje fenomen ter v njem išče vzroke in posledice. Hkrati pa, paradoksalno, stremijo k temu, da bi gledalec zapustil položaj pasivnega gledalca, ki se ga na stolu v dvorani ne dotakne prav nič in nihče. Iz te na videz elegantne pozicije nedotakljivosti in moči ga je treba potegniti v vrtinec magične moči gledališke akcije, v kateri bo privilegij racionalnega gledalca zamenjal za razpolaganje z lastnimi vitalnimi energijami.

1 2 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA, UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, ART II

kovce s kapljicami lastne krvi, jih zavije v plastične vrečke in jih kot umetniško delo prodaja občinstvu. Prav ta prizor je v novi seriji performansov Via Nova Katarina Stegnar razvila v samostojno predstavo. Stegnarjeva uveljavi fenomenalno telo s pomočjo variacije umetniških akcij Fluxusa, npr. italijanskega konceptualista Piera Manzonija, njegovega projekta Umetnikov drek (1961), v katerem je napolnil devetdeset škatlic s svojimi izločki in jih postavil na prodaj po ceni zlata.20 Pri tem naj bi proizvedla temeljno razliko: če se je Manzoni poigraval z gledalcem tako, da ga je opozarjal, kako bo škatlica, če jo odpečatimo, izgubila svojo umetniško vrednost, Katarina Stegnar v Incassu v svoji akciji gledalca napade, ga destabilizira z izpostavljanjem svoje fizične bolečine, hkrati pa s svojim besednim napalmom, oziroma ga, kot to opiše Blaž Lukan, »v skladu z neusmiljeno logiko predstave – do kraja (lahko bi rekli do krvi) razgali, zastavi niz temeljnih vprašanj, zaradi katerih se nenadoma znajde pred njo bolj gol, kot je ona sama.«21 Toda, vprašajmo se sedaj, na kakšen način in v kolikšni meri ga zares razgali? In v kakšnem smislu zares proizvede razliko?

Odgovor nikakor ne bo enoznačen.

II. Sebastijan Horvat: Utopija 1 in Utopija 2. Kot svojevrstno popotovanje po gledaliških in uprizoritvenih taktikah lahko razumemo tudi plesno-gledališki raziskavi Sebastijana Horvata Utopija 1 in Utopija 2.22 Prva črpa iz konkretne preteklosti, točneje šestdesetih let prejšnjega stoletja, npr. schechnerjevsko-kraljevske Pekarne, jovanovićevske Pupilije Ferkeverk in zgodnjega Gleja ter njihovega ukinjanja časovnih, prostorskih, zvrstnih in formalnih omejitev. Druga pa iz mitskega materiala o Adamu in Evi, drobne mitološke zgodbice, kako je iz rebra prvega Bog ustvaril drugo (»To je končno kost iz mojih kosti in meso iz mojega mesa«), pri tem pa se zavestno omejuje s sicer iz same sebe izhajajočo formo, ki jo včasih zavestno pripelje do skrajnosti. Diptih dionizično-kaotičnega in apoliničnoformaliziranega tako v izjemni vezljivosti plesa in gledališča v spoju postbrechtovskega in postschechnerjevskega uprizarja novodobni uprizoritveni hibrid performativnega plesa in gledališča ter hkrati tudi učnega komada, v katerem postane jasno, »da je tudi gledanje akcija, ki potrjuje in preoblikuje porazdelitev položajev«23 med akterji in gledalci, med performativnostjo in interpretativnostjo.

III. Bara Kolenc: Atelje. V nenavadni življenjski zgodbi slovenske kiparke Karle Bulovec Mrak, njeni povezavi in navezavi na boemsko življenje neoavantgarde se navdihuje predstava Atelje24 Bare Kolenc, ki izhaja iz biografskih fragmentov oziroma ostružkov slikarkinega življenja ter jih skuša vpeti v nove gledališke pokrajine, ki bi skozi premene fenomenalnega 20 Originalni naslov akcije je bil Merda d’artista, prvič jo je izvedel 12. avgusta 1961 v Galeriji Pescetto, Albisola Marina.

21 Blaž Lukan, »Nataša in Katarina«, Delo, Ljubljana, 29. december 2004, str. 10.

22 Sebastijan Horvat, Utopija 1 (30. 12. 2008) in Utopija 2 (11. 2. 2009), E.P.I. center, Plesni teater Ljubljana.

23 Rancière, Emancipirani gledalec, str. 13.

24 Bara Kolenc, Atelje, premiera: 11. oktober 2008, Stara elektrarna, Ljubljana.

/ 4 ARTAUD / 4 ARTAUDOVSKO / 4 AVBELJ / 4 BILA / 4 BITI / 4 BODO / 4 DO / 4 DUŠAN / 4 FENOMENALNEGA / 4 FENOMENALNO / 4 FISCHERLICHTE

in semiotičnega telesa odra ter vezljivost medijev (z besedami avtorjev projekta) odslikale »ustvarjalnost kot gon ali nenehno slo, ki je tako divja in rušilna, da včasih premaga celo željo po biološki izpolnitvi – zanika fizično lakoto in je končno lahko tudi smrtonosna.« Skozi tovrstno politiko uprizarjanja poskuša ukiniti relativnost umetnosti ter jo vzpostaviti kot absolutno in nujno, ne glede na to, kako je in bo ocenjena, razvrščena, analizirana, mitizirana ali objektivizirana, kar pa je seveda svojevrstna utopija oziroma upanje v to, da lahko uprizoritev razpolaga s tem, kar FischerLichtejeva označi kot transformativni potencial.

IV. Maja Delak: Serata artistica giovanile. Z avantgardo se v predstavi Serata artistica giovanile25 spopada ali stopa v ustvarjalni dialog tudi Maja Delak. Kot izhodišče projekta, ki so ga premierno uprizorili na odru Linhartove dvorane v Cankarjevem domu, vzame ekspresionistične klavirske kompozicije Bagatele slovenskega skladatelja Marija Kogoja, polne fragmentov in kompleksne dinamike. Vzporedno s tem se (kar je razvidno že iz naslova) navezuje še na enega predstavnika slovenske zgodovinske avantgarde: Ferda Delaka in njegov projekt Serata artistica giovanile, ki ga je razumel kot »koreografično skico o odrskem življenju« in izvedel v Gorici leta 1926 (v dokumentaristični obliki in rekonstrukciji, ki je bila nekakšna predhodnica rekonstrukcije Pupilije pa ga je v okvirjih Čezmejnega laboratorija na goriškem gradu pred desetletjem uprizoril Emil Hrvatin s sodelavci, med katerimi je bil tudi eden od današnjih Janezov Janš). Delakova v dialogu z zgodovinsko avantgardo ustvari sedem dinamičnih odrskih pokrajin, ki hkrati raziskujejo načine artikulacije telesnosti in njene zaznamovanosti s hrupom političnega.

PO SLEDEH EMANCIPIRANEGA GLEDALCA

N

ašteti primeri so vsekakor zanimive politike odra, ki pričajo tako o skominah performativnega kot tudi o tem, da v sodobnem gledališču in performansu neizpodbitno velja dejstvo, da bo vsakokrat proizvedena neka druga uprizoritev, da je tako vsaka uprizoritev enkratna in neponovljiva, a ta neponovljivost paradoksalno vzrašča prav iz dialoga s tradicijo, pa četudi je prav ta tista, ki je v osnovi (tako kot zgodovinska in neoavantgarda) zanikala zgodovino in tradicijo. Če so umetniki neoavantgardnega performansa zares verjeli, da s svojimi akcijami utelešajo avtentično provokacijo proti tradicionalnim vrednotam v družbi ter so tako nadaljevali romantično idejo o estetski revoluciji, smo bili v zadnjih desetletjih priča vse očitnejšim dvomom v karkoli avtentičnega in v radikalni izstop iz reprezentacije. Vedno bolj jasno je postajalo, da – povedano z Rancièrom – je stremljenje gledališča, »da 25 Maja Delak, Serata artistica giovanile, 7. maj 2008, Cankarjev dom, Ljubljana.

svoje gledalce nauči, kako naj nehajo biti gledalci in postanejo dejavni nosilci neke kolektivne prakse«,26 postalo v mediatizirani družbi nekaj iluzornega.

Tako je npr. Philip Auslander v svoji izvrstni knjigi V živo ugotovil, da mediatizirane oblike, kot sta video in film, razpolagajo z enakimi ontološkimi značilnostmi kot predstave v živo. Zato lahko danes po benjaminovsko ugotovimo, da je performans izgubil vso svojo avratičnost in avtentičnost.

Hkrati pa nas lahko (rečeno z Oliverjem Frljićem) »zanima prav to, zakaj večina gledaliških predstav ne problematizira te podedovane ideje o gledalcu, ki si z vstopom v gledališče, z nakupom vstopnice ali s kakšnim drugim postopkom zagotovi, da njegova telesna integriteta ne bo ogrožena. Artaud je z govorjenjem o analogiji med gledališko recepcijo ter kačami, ki skozi telo vpijajo glasbene ritme, pripovedoval prav o tej telesni kvaliteti, ki je pregnana iz zahodnega gledališča.«27 Zdi se, da je dialog z avantgardnimi akcenti ploden prav zaradi ukinjanja dihotomije med semiotičnim telesom (Körper) in fenomenalnim telesom (Leib) igralca, zaradi telesne soprisotnosti igralcev in občinstva, performativne interakcije med odrom in občinstvom, med subjektom in objektom, opazovalcem in opazovanim, fizično prezenco elementov, ki so predstavljeni, in njihovim semiotičnim karakterjem, materialnostjo in referencialnostjo, označevalcem in označencem, učinkom in pomenom.

Horvat, Maja Delak, Jablanovec, Janša, Bara Kolenc, Irena Tomažin in njihove kolegice ter kolegi so dediči performativnega obrata. Zato je zanje značilna sprememba poudarka od gledališča kot umetniškega artefakta h gledališču kot izvajanju, performativnosti. Kot režiserji in koreografi ali enostavno soustvarjalci predstav nočejo delovati več kot avtorji v tradicionalnem pomenu. Pri njih zato ne moremo več govoriti o institucijah avtorja in umetniškega dela. Koncept gledališča kot besedne umetnosti oziroma tekstualni model je zamenjal performativni model, znotraj katerega sta tako tekst kot referencialna funkcija izgubila svojo prevlado. Če terminologijo Erike Fischer-Lichte prevedemo v poststrukturalistični žargon Rolanda Barthesa, njegovo kritiko sistema jezika, lahko postavimo tezo, da Janša, Delakova in njune kolegice/kolegi spodnesejo tla jeziku, ki uteleša logiko dominantnega diskurza, podreja s svojo klasifikativnostjo in normativnostjo. Zavedajo se dejstva, da je jezik v skrajni konsekvenci lahko celo »fašističen«.

Uprizoritvene prakse morajo zato preseči dominantni diskurz jezika kot sistema. Iz njega morajo izstopati oziroma (če parafraziramo poznega Saussura) govoriti mimo avtorja oziroma 26 Rancière, Emancipirani gledalec, str. 11.

27 Oliver Frljić, »Umetniški interesi, če jih je še kaj ostalo, se prepletajo s političnim kontekstom, v katerem delam«, intervju (Pia Brezavšček in Katja Čičigoj), Maska, št. 133–134, jesen 2010, str. 8.

TELO , FI LOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 1 3

/ 4 GLEDALCEM / 4 GLEDALEC / 4 GLEDALIŠKE / 4 GLEDALIŠKO / 4 HKRATI / 4 JANŠA / 4 JIMA / 4 JOVANOVIĆA / 4 MU / 4 NEOAVANTGARDA

(po Jakobsonu) kazati nezavedno. Kot avtor po performativnem obratu sta zato kot barthesovski pisar, ki ne reprezentira, ne obnavlja, njegov akt je produkcija, proizvodnja, performativnost.

V primerih iz slovenske neoavantgarde in njenih reinterpretacij, renovacij iz zakladnice sodobnega slovenskega performansa smo vsaj delno vstopili v domeno Artaudovega gledališča krutosti, v katerem odzvanja njegov stavek: »Če hoče gledališče spet postati nepogrešljivo, nam mora posredovati vse, kar imajo v sebi ljubezen, zločin, vojna in norost. Vsakdanja ljubezen, osebna častiželjnost in običajne težave, vse to dobi vrednost le kot reakcija na strahoviti lirizem, zaobsežen v mitih, v katere so privolile velike skupnost.«28 Tako kot Artaud tudi našteti umetniki verjamejo, da gledališče lahko izvede posebno obliko utelešene transgresije, znotraj katere postane telo nosilec restrukturiranja sistemov prepričanja v kulturi. Da bi razkrili kruto gledališče, pri tem uporabljajo lucidno telo: telo, ki je dovzetno za možnost sprememb.

Literatura Abirached, Robert, La crise du personnage dans le theatre moderne, reed., Pariz: Gallimard, 1994 (1978).

Artaud, Antonin, Gledališče in njegov dvojnik, A. Berger (prev.), Ljubljana: Knjižnica Mestnega gledališča ljubljanskega, 1994.

Auslander, Philip, From Acting to Performance: Essays in Modernism and Post-Modernism, London, New York: Routledge, 1997.

Barthes, Roland, Ecrits sur le théâtre, Pariz: Editions du Seuil, 2002.

Božič, Peter, »Razvoj gledališke literature in gledaliških sredstev v slovenskem gledališču«, Maske, št. 1, 1986, str. 37–42.

Fischer-Lichte, Erika, Ästhetik des Performativen, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2004.

Frljić, Oliver, »Umetniški interesi, če jih je še kaj ostalo, se prepletajo s političnim kontekstom, v katerem delam«, intervju (Pia Brezavšček in Katja Čičigoj), Maska, št.

133–134, jesen 2010, str. 4–16.

Gosarič, Samo, »Iskanje Spomenika G«, v: Spomenik G, Gledališki list MGL, letn. LIX, sezona 2008/2009, številka 9, 2009, str. 7–16.

Gržinić, Marina, »Rearticulation of the history of performance art«, Maska, poletje 2005, letn. 20, št. 3/4 = 92/93.

Kunst, Bojana, Nemogoče telo, Ljubljana: Maska, zbirka Transformacije, 1999.

Lampret, Igor, »Spomenik G«, v: Spomenik G, Gledališki list MGL, letn. LIX, sezona 2008/2009, številka 9, 2009, str. 17–21.

Lehmann, Hans Thies, Postdramsko gledališče, Ljubljana: Maska, 2003.

Tako sodobni umetniki ukinjajo binarno opozicijo, ki jo ob Brechtu in Artaudu postavi Rancière: osvobajajo gledalca njegove pasivnosti s tem, da mu ponujajo spektakel teles, ki je nekaj nenavadnega, enigma. Vse zato, da bi se (spet rečeno z Rancièrom) spremenil iz pasivnega gledalca v aktivnega znanstvenika, ki opazuje fenomen ter v njem išče vzroke in posledice. Hkrati pa, paradoksalno, stremijo k temu, da bi gledalec zapustil položaj pasivnega gledalca, ki se ga na stolu v dvorani ne dotakne prav nič in nihče. Iz te na videz elegantne pozicije nedotakljivosti in moči ga je treba potegniti v vrtinec magične moči gledališke akcije, v kateri bo privilegij racionalnega gledalca zamenjal za razpolaganje z lastnimi vitalnimi energijami.

Lukan, Blaž, »Nataša in Katarina«, Delo, Ljubljana, 29. december 2004, str. 10.

Rancière, Jacques, The Emancipated Spectator, Artforum, marec 2007, str. 271–280.

Rancière, Jacques, Emancipirani gledalec, prev. Suzana Koncut, Ljubljana: Maska, zbirka Transformacije, 2010. Šeligo, Rudi, Identifikacija in katarza, Ljubljana: Knjižnica Mestnega gledališča ljubljanskega, 1988.

Taufer, Veno, Odrom ob rob, Ljubljana: DZS, 1977.

Toporišič, Tomaž, »Ranljivo telo teksta in odra: performativni obrat in njegove sledi v slovenskem gledališču po letu 2000«, v: Bojana Kunst in Petra Pogorevc (ur.), Sodobne scenske umetnosti, Ljubljana: Maska, zbirka Transformacije, 2006, str.

142–155.

Lahko bi tudi rekli, da v vseh naštetih primerih vedno znova naletimo na bistveno Rancièrovo alternativno perspektivo, na paradoks, v katerem sama želja emancipirati gledalca, ga prisiliti ali zapeljati v to, da bo preskočil sotesko, ki ločuje aktivnost od pasivnosti, proizvede zavest, da prav želja po tem, da bi ukinili distanco, proizvede še močnejšo distanco. Če jim uspe preseči ta paradoks in ukiniti opozicijo med gledanjem in igranjem, utelešajo začasne zmage artaudovske revolucije, v kateri stopata v dialog in se stapljata fenomenalno in semiotično telo performerjev, predstave, gledalcev. Gledalec in gledalka lahko postaneta aktivna tudi tako, da performans »po svoje predelujeta, da se, na primer, izmikata vitalni energiji, ki naj bi jo ta prenašal, in ga spreminjata v čisto podobo, to čisto podobo pa povezujeta s prebrano ali sanjano, doživeto ali izmišljeno zgodbo. Gledalec in gledalka sta torej hkrati distancirana gledalca in aktivna interpreta predstave, ki se jima ponuja.«29 ..

28 Antonin Artaud, Gledališče in njegov dvojnik, str. 108.

29 Rancière, Emancipirani gledalec, str. 13.

1 4 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA, UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, ART II

Tomaž Toporišič (1962) je dramaturg, esejist, teatrolog in kritik. Magistriral in doktoriral je na Filozofski fakulteti v Ljubljani. V zadnjem desetletju se je intenzivno ukvarjal s teorijo in prakso sodobnega gledališča, med letoma 1997 in 2003 bil programski direktor SMG. Soustanovil je festival sodobnih odrskih umetnosti Exodos. Je dramaturg Slovenskega mladinskega gledališča in docent za področje literarnih in uprizoritvenih ved na Fakulteti za humanistične študije Univerze na Primorskem v Kopru. Toporišič je avtor treh znanstvenih monografij o gledališču, dramatiki in scenskih umetnostih: Med zapeljevanjem in sumničavostjo, razmerje med tekstom in uprizoritvijo v slovenskem gledališču druge polovice XX. stoletja, Maska, 2004; Ranljivo telo teksta in odra: kriza dramskega avtorja v gledališču osemdesetih in devetdesetih let dvajsetega stoletja, Knjižnica MGL, 2007; Levitve drame in gledališča, Aristej, 2008. S Petro Pogorevc je souredil zbornik Drama, tekst, pisava, Knjižnica MGL, 2008.

555 THE / 269 OF / 199 AND / 117 IN / 107 TO / 102 A / 79 AS / 77 IS / 73 THAT / 63 THEATRE / 61 WHICH / 58 S / 48 PERFORMANCE / 46 OR / 45 BODY

Janez Janša, Monument G Foto: Tone Stojko

PERFORMATIVE REVOLUTIONS OF THE ACTOR’S AND THE SPECTATOR’S BODY TOMAŽ TOPORIŠIČ TRANSLATED BY POLONA PETEK

O

ur interest will be directed towards a special form of aesthetic revolution (in the sense described by Jacques Rancière) of the so-called performative turn of the 1960s and 1970s, whose definition and analysis in the field of performative and visual practices are offered in Erika Fischer-Lichte’s book The Aesthetics of the Performative (Ästhetik des Performativen). In a dialogue with Artaud, whose theatre of cruelty blazed a trail for the neo- and post-avantgardes, we will endeavour to follow these performative revolutions, or turns from a referential culture towards a performative one, which resulted in a variety of investigations, discoveries and excesses as regards both the physical and the mental limits of the actors’ and the spectators’ bodies.

We will be interested in the imprints of this intermediate, liminal position on both sides of theatrical and non-theatrical halls, in the audience and on stage, the position which caused a destabilisation and a new centralisation of the spectator’s and the actor’s perception of self, others and reality in general. We will be interested in how and for what purposes this aesthetic revolution, through various performances, establishes a relation to the highly mediatised contemporary society. We will be interested in what happened – forty years after the performative turns and breaks – to the belief, or credo, that live, performative art embodies authentic forms of provocation and rebellion against traditional social values. Does faith in the provocative nature of the so-called resisting performance still exist?

Or, even more radically, dubito ergo sum, to use the vocabulary of Jacques Rancière and his “emancipated spectator”: (In contrast to the prevailing interpretations of the performative turn) is it really possible today to emancipate the spectator and the actor merely by relativising or questioning “the opposition between looking and acting”, by understanding the otherwise self-evident fact that what structures the relations between speaking, looking and acting is itself “part of the con-

TELO , FILOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 1 5

/ 42 BY / 41 IT / 35 THIS / 33 AN / 32 PERFORMATIVE / 32 THE / 30 WAS / 29 FROM / 26 BE / 25 WITH / 24 SPECTATOR / 21 BETWEEN / 21 TIME / 20 ITS

I

n the “original performance” Monument G (Spomenik G), the actors’ or the performers’ body does not want to be understood as the bearer of meaning, as the semiotic body-of-the-text, composed of signs signifying the character that the performer is playing. It has to be understood in its specific materiality, no longer primarily as the signifier or the semiotic body, but rather as the real body of the actors, their bodily being-in-theworld. The meanings that emerge within the process of the performance spring primarily from this process of the performance as such.

figuration of domination and subjection”.1

THE ULTIMATE PHYSICALITY OF THE BODY

W

e are going to enter into the phenomenon of the actor’s and the spectator’s body, which is embodied in the performances following the performative turn, by means of a reconstruction of one of the most eminent instances of the performative turn in Slovenia, that is, a reconstruction of the assertion of the body as a central point of culture in Slovenia – the performance Monument G (Spomenik G) by Dušan Jovanović and Jožica Avbelj, which was performed in 1972.2 Samo Gosarič, the dramaturge of the reconstruction, that is, the second or post-staging of the event in the hands of Janez Janša, analyses with great precision the new state of this strong performative turn from the text towards the body in his text “Looking for Monument G” (“Iskanje Spomenika G”), which was published as part of the playbill for the reconstruction of this performance in 2009, which was co-authored by Janez Janša and Dušan Jovanović:3 “The starting point of Monument G was not the drama or the ‘satirical happening’ Monument [Spomenik] by Bojan Štih, but rather the decision of the director Dušan Jovanović to take the actor as the starting point and to draw the content of the performance from the body – from bodily sounds, movement, the actor’s perception of the body and herself.

The key novelty was the fact that the working process was guided by the material itself, that it, the actor’s work.

Through the course of the latter, the text, which was 70 pages long, was reduced to 15 sentences or statements, while the cast was reduced from the initial twelve to a single actor, the 20-year-old second-year AGRFT student, Jožica Avbelj.

As a whole, the performance, through its minimalism and precision, combined the fragments into an organic whole.

However, it is interesting that Štih’s Monument, despite the reduction, remained the guiding principle of the show, while it also connected to the other elements of the staging on an equal level.”4 Similar, unusually close to what Erika Fischer-Lichte explores in relation to the contemporaries of Monument G, were the thoughts of the dramaturge of the original performance, Igor Lampret: “The performance Monument G is based entirely on the actor’s breath. […] The inner structure of the performance rests on a double movement, like breathing: inhale, exhale.

1 2 3 4

1 6 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA, UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, A RT II

Jacques Rancière, “The Emancipated Spectator”, Artforum, March 2007, p. 277.

Dušan Jovanović, Spomenik G, Viteška dvorana, 1972 (production: Gledališče GLEJ).

Janez Janša, Dušan Jovanović, Spomenik G, Mala scena MGL, 2009.

Samo Gosarič, “Iskanje Spomenika G”, in: Spomenik G, Gledališki list MGL, Vol. LIX, Season 2008/2009, No. 9, pp. 9–10.

/ 20 LANGUAGE / 20 WHAT / 19 ON / 18 AVANTGARDE / 18 HIS / 18 MONUMENT / 18 STAGE / 18 THEIR / 18 THEY / 17 FOR / 17 WE / 16 ACTOR / 16 ART / 16 G

[…] This is why breath has a double function: a physiological one and one related to the content. The actor is continually discovering new dimensions of acting (emotions, situations, etc.) with her physiological breath and she transforms it into contents that fully shape the expressions for specific metaphors.”5 Both authors emphasise the fact that the performance is a result of the performative turn, that is, the negation of the literary author as God in the Artaudian sense, who guides the language of the theatre and who must be resisted. Textual culture, embodied in the text that this performance is based on in dramatic theatre, was replaced by the actor’s breath or body, which was the key agent in shaping the structure of the performance by connecting the physiological and the content, the mind and the body, while at the same time it laid bare the body as a semiotic as well as a phenomenal entity. Through breath as an activity of the actor’s body, the double nature of acting was also revealed.

The latter is simultaneously a) an instrument of the actor’s authorial declaration (we could, provisionally, say: an instrument of representation or representing) and b) an instrument of her body’s physical endurance.

To use Erika Fischer-Lichte’s terminology, the actor’s or the performer’s body was no longer understood as the bearer of meaning, as the semiotic body-of-the-text, composed of signs signifying the character that the performer was playing. It became, first and foremost, the phenomenal body, something material, no longer the primary signifier or the semiotic body, but rather the actor’s real body, her bodily being-in-the-world. The meanings that emerged within the process of the performance sprang primarily from this process of the performance as such.

Veno Taufer used a different, but no less precise terminology to describe his perception of and reflection on this situation, when he wrote the following after the opening night in 1972: “On an otherwise empty stage, there was a single, perfectly civil girl, accompanied by a musician in the corner. […] There was no literature, […] and yet, this was the absolute […] theatrical experience of total theatre, […] the human body, its movements, its dance, its skills, expressiveness, its muscles, limbs, fingers, face, lips, its voices and sounds […].”6 Or, to use Antonin Artaud’s argumentation, Dušan Jovanović abolished the Cartesian ratio as the mediator between the actor’s body and her acting. At the same time, he let the stage speak its own language, which was this time revealed and realised through the establishment of the autonomous speech of the actor’s body, which, of course, was no longer literary.

The body was thus, as Bojana Kunst would put it, established as “the exclusive bearer of aesthetic strategies, values and signs”7 . This time, too, the actor’s body directly addressed the audience and even physically entered the spaces of the spectators’ bodies.

Artaud would say, break language to touch life… (Not unlike Rudi Šeligo in his theory of magic theatre a little bit later) Jovanović and Avbelj relate this to the urgency of reaching the goal to make the human body, as well as the objects and other physical aspects of the stage, affect the spectator as directly as possible. To make the theatre begin to live as a physical and material space, in which the material Artaudian language can begin to speak. What Jovanović and Avbelj are after is to make it possible, in the theatrical space, for the poetry in space – that is, “music, dance, plastic art, pantomime, mimicry, gesticulation, intonation, architecture, lighting and scenery”8 – to begin to live in the Artaudian sense.

Just like in Šeligo’s magic theatre or in the Artaudian theatre of cruelty, in this performance, there emerges a truly physical language, which is based on signs and no longer on words in the usual, representational sense. The magic language of ritual begins to live as a unique language, which will be (to pafraphrase Artaud) “half-way between movement and thought” or (to cite Šeligo) “an evocation of what does not exist, what is ‘missing’”.

It is clear, however, as regards both authors, that the grammar of this new language is yet to be discovered anew.

While Artaud believed that the theatre, which he intended to create, would hardly resemble what we usually call theatre, like representation of any obscenity hardly resembles an ancient religious mystery play,9 the Slovenian neo-avantgarde of that time (Pupilija, Pekarna, Gledališče GLEJ, Rudi Šeligo, Lado Kralj, Dušan Jovanović, Milan Jesih, Ivo Svetina…) was convinced that, by means of poiesis, the theatre could be transformed so that it would revive or evoke the sunken, the forgotten and the lost in the manner of a ritual.

The theatre of cruelty, as it was seen in various visions of the Slovenian theatrical or performative neo-avantgarde, should become (as Rudi Šeligo would describe it) something that imitates the principles of magic as well as ritual, something that generates or simulates the magic-mythical time, something that represents an autonomous zone, a kind of an “oasis or a house of God or utopos within our time”. At the same time, this theatre will be committed to the fundamental postulates of the Artaudian theatre of cruelty: it will be an anti-imitative theatre, a theatrical theatre, that is to say, an autonomous art, which has its own means and its own modes of expression at its disposal, a theatre that confronts the spectator with truth, the all7 8

5 6

Igor Lampret, “Spomenik G”, in: Spomenik G, Gledališki list MGL, p. 19.

Veno Taufer, Odrom ob rob, Ljubljana: DZS, 1977, pp. 49–50.

9

Bojana Kunst, Nemogoče telo, Ljubljana: Maska (the Transformacije collection), 1999, p. 167.

Antonin Artaud, Theatre and its Double, transl. Mary Caroline Richards, New York: Grove Press, 1958, p. 39.

Robert Abirached, La crise du personnage dans le theatre moderne, Paris: Gallimard, 1994 (1978), str. 334.

TELO , FI LOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 1 7

/ 16 NO / 15 AT / 15 HAS / 15 INTO / 15 NEO / 15 WILL / 14 ARE / 14 HER / 14 IN / 14 THEATRICAL / 13 CAN / 13 NEW / 13 SAME / 12 MUST / 12 NOT

encompassing and unified truth; an integrative theatre, that is, a theatre that abolishes the dichotomy between the stage and the hall and that breaks through the armour of “individuation”; a theatre that – here and now – creates an autonomous world, which is not a “transcription” of an already extant logos, but rather a “scription” of its own meanings.

For Artaud as well as for the aforementioned artists, the theatre was more than a medium of art. It was related to the global condition of culture. Yet, it did not repudiate this culture on the whole; rather, it offered a renewal of the theatre, by means of which the language of theatre would gain vitality. And this language will no longer be bound by the logo- and scripto-centric tradition; rather, it will be the language of the word and the stage, a semiotic and phenomenal language.

The case of Monument G directs us to the 1960s in Europe and the United States of America, to the most striking examples of the performative turn, for instance, the Viennese actionists, Rudolf Schwarzkogler and his violence against his own body, then Herman Nitch and his ritual sacrifices in The Orgies Mysteries Theatre. Jovanović, Schwarzkogler and Nitch can be interpreted as the agents of the performative artistic revolution, who actively included the spectators in performative acts of this revolution and used them as performers. However, while the Viennese actionists, in a ritual act of sorts, attempted to infect all participants with violence in order to break through the limits of the taboos within the public sphere, Jovanović’s Monument G deals with a different orientation of the performative revolution, which activates the spectator in a way which is closer to Rancière’s emancipated spectator.

Monument G, too, establishes a temporary community of the performers and the audience; however, this community is not participatory in the sense of abolishing the spectator’s passivity and including his phenomenal body in the action of the performance; rather, the temporary community of the actor and the spectators established here is much softer. What we are dealing with here is not the transcendence or transgression of great taboos, but rather the joint liberation from the key element of national cultural tradition, which is based on literature and the literary.

The body, which is being disembodied collectively by the performers and the spectators in Monument G, is that element of the text, about which Veno Taufer (paradoxically) wrote: “But Jovanović retained both sides of the text. […] He merely repudiated the text as literature; he destroyed it as such, and then re-created it as theatre. Therefore, Štih remains a co-author of Monument, which has been returned to him by the director in the form of the latter’s personal experience of total theatre.”10

10 Taufer, Odrom ob rob, p. 50.

1 8 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA, UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, ART II

Or, as the great transformer of Slovenian drama and prose, the author of the first anti-novels and anti-dramas, Peter Božič, beautifully describes this relief from the burden of literary tradition in his interpretation of the performance: “In this performance, Dušan Jovanović abolished that mediator between the actor’s body and her acting, which we call the intellect or ratio. […] Dušan Jovanović and Jožica Avbelj […] accomplished the exclusion of the rational or conscious part, […] and they were most valuably assisted in this endeavour precisely by the text, reduced to semantic signs or rather the sound mass, which they, according to the changed structure, interpreted in a semantic-sonic way.”11 If we now return to Janša’s reconstruction of Monument G as a special form of a stage essay or a theorised theatre, we can establish the following. The performance has the effect that Jacques Rancière would interpret as the merging and sampling of two paradigmatic attitudes, embodied by the Brechtian epic theatre and the Artaudian theatre of cruelty. As a result, the spectators become “distant viewers and interpreters of what is performed in front of them”.12 This connection is most evident if we compare the reconstruction with the 1972 Monument G. The neo-avantgarde theatre certainly aspired to what Rancière describes as the theatre as an aesthetic or sensory constitution of the community, or to what he describes as “the community as a way of occupying time and space […]; community as a performing body instead of an apparatus of forms and rules.”13 It seems, too, that the neo-avantgarde still understands the theatre, or what they consider a new, Artaudian theatre, as something that constitutes an “aesthetic revolution”, however, a revolution that no longer wants to change laws and institutions, but rather “transforms the sensory forms of human experience”.14 And it is precisely this fact – that the neo-avantgarde theatre no longer wants to change laws and institutions, which is what Brecht was doing, and following him Stage 57 (Oder 57) as an experimental and at the same time political theatre of the 1950s and 1960s – that distinguishes the politics of performance art and neo-avantgarde theatre from the classic Brechtian political theatre in various reincarnations.

While the “original” Monument G, at the time of the performative turn and in contrast to Brecht, aspired to distance itself from the Aristotelian as well as the Brechtian theatre and to come as close as possible to the Artaudian theatre of cruelty, Janša’s reconstruction makes use of the connection between Brecht and Artaud in the act of perception, which demands from the spectator to establish a critical distance and, at the same 11 Peter Božič, “Razvoj gledališke literature in gledaliških sredstev v slovenskem gledališču”, Maske, No. 1, 1986, p. 37.

12 Rancière, “The Emancipated Spectator”, p. 277.

13 Ibid., p. 274.

14 Ibid.

/ 12 RECONSTRUCTION / 12 SPECTATORS / 11 ABOUT / 11 JOVANOVIĆ / 11 LONGER / 11 PHYSICAL / 11 RATHER / 11 TEXT / 11 THEM / 11 WOULD / 10 ARTAUD

time, to identify with the reconstruction of the autopoetic loop connecting the actors on stage and the audience, in which (according to history) every distance is lost and the spectators completely abandon their position of distant observation and reflective viewing. Viewing is thus simultaneously distant and active.

Via Negativa: OUT Foto: Marcandrea

In the “original performance”, the actors’ or the performers’ body does not want to be understood as the bearer of meaning, as the semiotic body-of-the-text, composed of signs signifying the character that the performer is playing. It has to be understood in its specific materiality, no longer primarily as the signifier or the semiotic body, but rather as the real body of the actors, their bodily being-in-the-world. The meanings that emerge within the process of the performance spring primarily from this process of the performance as such.

In the reconstruction, Janez Janša redoubles this situation; Jožica Avbelj’s and Matjaž Jarc’s bodies as the bodies of the original performance are now accompanied by two new bodies, which duplicate and, at the same time, already differ from the incarnation of the original bodies in the time and space of the first staging of Monument G – the bodies of the young dancer Teja Reba and the musician Boštjan Narat. With this intervention, the reconstruction becomes duplication, a copy and, at the same time, an autonomous, unique event, a stage essay about the possibilities of emancipation through the performative act of the theatre, active participation and equally active interpretation.

Sebastijan Horvat, Utopia 1 Foto: Petra Veber

REARTICULATIONS OF THE (NEO) AVANTGARDE AESTHETIC REVOLUTIONS: THE BODY-SIGNIFIER AND THE REAL BODY

S

imilar effects are produced in the performances by some other representatives of Slovenian performative practices in the past few years; their various verifications, samplings, deconstructions and reconstructions bear witness to the persistent returning of the artistic revolutions of the historical and neo-avantgardes. In addition to Pupilija (2006) and Monument (2009) by Janez Janša, reconstructions of cult performances of the neo-avantgarde performative theatre, a few other interesting examples should be mentioned.

Maja Delak, Serata artistica giovanile Foto: Nada Žgank

I. The projects of Via Negativa by Bojan Jablanovec, in dialogue with a broad spectrum of neo-avantgarde, bodyart and other artists of the aesthetics of the performative, try to find new theatrical forms that would “activate the audience through its provocation” (Lehmann, p. 66).

The performance OUT,15 for instance, with its conceptual motto 15 Via Negativa, Out, Gledališče GLEJ, 2008.

TELO , FI LOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 1 9

/ 10 ARTAUDIAN / 10 SEMIOTIC / 10 THROUGH / 10 TURN / 9 ACTOR / 9 BODIES / 9 HE / 9 PHENOMENAL / 9 PRECISELY / 9 REVOLUTION / 9 SHE

C

ontemporary artists thus abolish the binary opposition

identified by Brecht and Artaud as well as Rancière: they liberate the viewers from their passivity by offering them a strange, enigmatic spectacle of bodies. And they do so (if we, again, refer to Rancière) to make the viewer transform from a passive spectator into an active scientist, who observes phenomena and seeks their causes and effects. At the same time, paradoxically, they aspire to make the viewer abandon the position of the passive spectator, touched by nothing and nobody in his seat in the theatre hall.

The viewer must be drawn from this fictitious, elegant position of untouchability and power into the maelstrom of the magic power of theatrical action, in which the viewer will exchange the privilege of the rational spectator for the experience of possessing the theatre’s true vital energies.

“The stage is power. This power is bestowed upon the stage by the spectator.” has a clear conceptual starting point, which refers to the analysis or testing of the established roles of the actor and the spectator: “Out plays with the performer’s anticipations and the spectator’s expectations. When they take their positions in the theatre, their roles are clearly divided: the performer is there to show something, the spectator to see something.

The performer makes a claim on the spectator’s attention and understanding; the spectator expects fascination. Out is testing how the spectator and the performer will act out their roles in a situation in which it is no longer clear what they can expect from each other.”16 OUT is a performance that puts to the test the logic of pride in the relation between the spectator and the performer and, at the same time, it establishes new connections between the private and the public, the intimate and the open, which reflect the investigations into the ways in which the actor fine-tunes herself in relation to the spectator. This is why processuality and performativity hypertrophy, just like Janša in Monument G rejects a fixed work of art and, in so doing, he consciously inserts himself into the chain of performative accents, into what Fischer-Lichte calls “the aesthetics of the performative” or what Marina Gržinić refers to as a “rearticulation of the history of performance art”.

In the project Incasso,17 the group tries to liberate the theatre from representation; in an Artaudian manner, it tries to deliver the theatre from serving the language of the word and its logical discursivity. In Roland Barthes’s words (referring to Antonin Artaud), Jablanovec is trying to radicalise the theatrical experience in order to achieve a complete transformation of our modes of perception of the theatre (and life?) at the cost of new rules, which will be, to a great extent, the rules of the avantgarde.

“The thought must be completely absorbed in the very physics of dramatic action: no interior, no psychology, and even […] no symbolism. […] [A]nd this theatre of anti-culture […] needs an equally liberated language: not only that the word must be “poetic” (that is to say, direct, free from any rationality), but the language, too, must include screams, movements, noise and action without any hierarchy, and their combination on stage must result in a general massacre or, to use the phrase that became Artaud’s most famous formula, it must result in a ‘theatre of cruelty’”.18 At the same time, Jablanovec is trying to find new cal forms, which would – like post-dramatic theatre eral – accomplish “an atmosphere of intenyse and participation”19 , new connections between the private

theatriin gencordial and the

16 http://vntheatre.com/en/projects/performances-2002-2008/out/about/ 17 Via Negativa, Incasso, Gledališče GLEJ, 2004.

18 Roland Barthes, Ecrits sur le théâtre, Paris: Editions du Seuil, 2002, p. 300.

19 Hans Thies Lehmann, Postdramatic Theatre, transl. Karen Jürs Munby, Taylor &

2 0 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA, UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, ART II

/ 9 SLOVENIAN / 9 THIS / 8 BUT / 8 EVEN / 8 IT / 8 OWN / 8 PERFORMANCES / 8 PERFORMER / 8 SO / 8 SOMETHING / 8 WELL / 7 ACTING / 7 AESTHETIC

public, the intimate and the open. To put it somewhat differently, he is trying to fine-tune anew the actor in relation to the spectator by means of the actor’s phenomenal body or the performer’s real body, which is no longer primarily a signifier.

An interesting example of the authentic body is the scene in the performance Incasso, in which the performer, Katarina Stegnar, soaks banknotes with drops of her own blood, then wraps them in plastic bags and sells them to the audience as if they were a work of art. It is precisely this scene that Katarina Stegnar has developed into an independent performance in the new series of performances Via Nova. Stegnar asserts the phenomenal body by means of a variation on the artistic actions of Fluxus, for example, the Italian conceptualist Piero Manzoni and his project Artist’s Shit (1961), in which Manzoni stuffed ninety cans with his own excrement and offered them for sale by weight at gold’s daily market price.20 In her project, Stegnar wants to produce a fundamental difference: whereas Manzoni played with the spectators by warning them that the cans, once opened, would lose their artistic value, in her action in Incasso Stegnar attacks the spectators, she destabilises them by revealing her own physical pain, while at the same her verbal assault, as Blaž Lukan has described it, “consistent with the logic of the performance, completely (we could say, to the last drop of blood) exposes the spectator; she poses a series of fundamental questions, because of which the spectator is suddenly there before her even more naked than the performer herself”21 (Lukan, p. 10).

However, let’s ask ourselves now: in what way and to what extent does she in fact expose the spectator? In what sense does she actually produce a difference? The answer is far from unequivocal.

II. Sebastijan Horvat: Utopia 1 (Utopija 1) and Utopia 2 (Utopija 2).22 Sebastijan Horvat’s dance-theatrical investigations Utopia 1 and Utopia 2 can also be interpreted as a peculiar journey through various theatrical and performative strategies.

The first performance draws on a concrete period of the past, more precisely, the 1960s, for instance, on the magnificently Schechnerian Pekarna, the Jovanovićesque Pupilija Ferkeverk and the early GLEJ with their abolishment of temporal, spatial and formal limitations. The second performance draws on the mythical material about Adam and Eve, the miniature mythological tale about God creating the latter from the rib of the former (“This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh”); in so doing, the performance deliberately limits itself by the self-derived form, which, occasionally, it wilfully takes to extremes. The diptych of the Dionysian chaotic and the Apollonian formalised is thus staged, in the remarkable connectivity Francis, 2006, p. 120.

20 The original title of this action was “Merda d’artista”; it was first carried out on 12 August 1961 at the Pescetto Gallery, Albisola Marina.

21 Blaž Lukan, “Nataša in Katarina”, Delo, 29 December 2004, Ljubljana, p. 10.

22 Sebastijan Horvat, Utopija I (30 December 2008) and Utopija 2 (11 February 2009), E.P.I. center, Plesni teater Ljubljana.

of dance and theatre in the union of the post-Brechtian and the post-Schechnerian, by a novel performative hybrid of performative dance and theatre as well as a textbook play, in which it becomes clear that “looking is also an action that confirms or modifies that distribution [of positions]”23 between the actors and the spectators, between performativity and interpretivity.

III. Bara Kolenc: Studio (Atelje).24 Bara Kolenc’s performance Studio was inspired by the extraordinary life of Slovenian sculptress Karla Bulovec Mrak and her connection with and attachment to the bohemian life of the neo-avantgarde; the performance takes as its starting point biographical fragments of the artist’s life and tries to integrate them into new theatrical landscapes, which would – through the transformations of the phenomenal and semiotic body of the stage and media connectivity – reflect “creativity as an urge or an incessant desire, which is so wild and destructive that it sometimes overcomes even the desire for biological fulfilment – it denies physical hunger and, finally, it can even be lethal”.

By means of a representational politics of this kind, the performance tries to abolish the relativity of art and establish art as absolute and urgent, regardless of how it is, and will be, judged, classified, analysed, mythologised or objectivised – which, of course, is a peculiar utopia or hope that the performance can freely use what Fischer-Lichte describes as transformative potential.

IV. Maja Delak: Youthful artistic evening (Serata artistica giovanile).25 Maja Delak, too, engages with the avantgarde, or rather she enters into a creative dialogue with it, in her performance Youthful artistic evening. The starting point of the project, which was first performed on the stage of the Linhartova hall in Cankarjev dom, are Bagatelles (Bagatele), expressionistic piano compositions by Slovenian composer Marij Kogoj, which are full of fragments and complex dynamics. In addition to this, the performance (as its title suggests) refers to another representative of the Slovenian historical avantgarde, Ferdo Delak, and his project Serata artistica giovanile, which Delak himself understood as a “choreographic sketch about stage life” and he performed it in Gorizia in 1926 (a decade ago, the project was staged at the Gorizia Castle in a documentarist form as a reconstruction, which foreshadowed the reconstruction of Pupilija; the performance by Emil Hrvatin and his collaborators, among which there was one of the artists now called Janez Janša, was staged as part of the Laboratory Across Borders [Čezmejni laboratorij]). In dialogue with the historical avantgarde, Maja Delak creates seven dynamic stage landscapes, which simultaneously explore various modes of articulating corporeality and its being marked by the noise of the political.

23 Rancière, “The Emancipated Spectator”, p. 277.

24 Bara Kolenc, Atelje, first performed on 11 October 2008, Stara elektrarna, Ljubljana.

25 Maja Delak, Serata artistica giovanile, 7 May 2008, Cankarjev dom, Ljubljana.

TELO , FI LOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 21

/ 7 ARTISTIC / 7 ARTISTS / 7 AUDIENCE / 7 AUTHOR / 7 CRUELTY / 7 CULTURE / 7 DELAK / 7 DIALOGUE / 7 DUŠAN / 7 FACT / 7 JANŠA / 7 LIKE / 7 MEANS

FOLLOWING THE TRAIL OF THE EMANCIPATED SPECTATOR

T

he examples mentioned above certainly display interesting politics of the stage, which bear witness to the desires of the performative as well as to the unquestionable fact that, in contemporary theatre and performance art, every time a performance is staged it is a different performance, every staging is unique and unrepeatable; however, paradoxically, this unrepeatability grows from a dialogue with tradition, although it is precisely tradition that (like the historical and neo-avantgarde) originally denied history and tradition.

While the artists of the neo-avantgarde performance art truly believed that their actions embodied authentic provocation directed against traditional social values and, in so doing, they continued the romantic idea about aesthetic revolution, over the past few decades we have witnessed increasingly noticeable doubts about anything authentic and about the possibility of a radical departure from representation. It has become increasingly clear that, to quote Rancière, the aspiration of the theatre “to teach the spectators how they can stop being spectators and become performers of a collective activity”26 has become illusory in contemporary mediatised society.

In his excellent book Liveness: Performance in a Mediatized Society, Philip Auslander, for instance, establishes that mediatised forms, such as video and film, have the same ontological characteristics as live performances. This is why we can now establish, in a Benjaminian manner, that performance art has lost its auratic value and authenticity.

Yet, at the same time, we can be (to cite Oliver Frljić) “interested precisely in why most theatre performances do not problematise this inherited idea about the viewer, that is, the viewer who makes sure – by entering the theatre and purchasing the ticket or with another method – that his or her physical integrity will not be jeopardised. When he drew an analogy between theatrical reception and snakes, which imbibe musical rhythms through their bodies, Artaud spoke precisely about this physical quality, which has been banished from the Western theatre.”27 It seems that the dialogue with the avantgarde accents is fruitful precisely because of the abolishment of the dichotomy between the semiotic body (Körper) and the phenomenal body (Leib) of the actor, because of physical co-presence of the actors and the spectators, because of performative interaction between the stage and the audience, between the subject and the object, between the observer and the observed, between physical presence of the represented objects and their semiotic character, materiality and referentiality, between the signifier and the signified, between effect and meaning.

26 Rancière, “The Emancipated Spectator”, p. 274.

27 Oliver Frljić, “Artistic interests, if there are any left, are intertwined with the political context in which I work”, an interview (Pia Brezavšček and Katja Čičigoj), Maska, Fall 2010, Vol. 25, Nos 133–134, p. 9.

2 2 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA , UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, A RT II

Horvat, Maja Delak, Jablanovec, Bara Kolenc, Irena Tomažin and their colleagues are the heirs of the performative turn. This is why their work is marked by the shift of emphasis from the theatre as an artistic artefact towards the theatre as performance or performativity. As the directors and the choreographers or simply the co-creators of performances, they no longer want to act as the author in the traditional sense of the term.

This is why it is impossible to relate them to the institutions of the author and the work of art. The concept of the theatre as the art of words, that is, the textual model of the theatre, has been replaced by the performative model, in which both the text and the referential function have lost their primacy.

If we translate Erika Fischer-Lichte’s terminology into Roland Barthes’s poststructuralist jargon and his critique of the language system, we can put forth the thesis that Janša, Delak and their colleagues thwart language, which embodies the logic of the dominant discourse and whose classificatory and normative nature makes it an agent of subordination. These artists are aware of the fact that language, in the final instance, can even be “fascist”.

Therefore, performative practices must go beyond the dominant discourse of language as a system. They must retire from language or, to paraphrase the late Saussure, they must speak past the author or, according to Jakobson, they must show the unconscious. Like the author after the performative turn, they are thus like a Barthesian writer, who does not represent and who does not repeat; his act is production, output, performativity.

In the examples of the Slovenian neo-avantgarde and its reinterpretations or renovations from the wealth of contemporary Slovenian performance art, we have at least partially entered the realm of Artaud’s theatre of cruelty, in which this Artaud’s statement echoes: “If theatre wants to find itself needed once more, it must present everything in love, crime, war and madness. […] Everyday love, personal ambition and daily worries are worthless except in relation to the kind of awful lyricism that exists in those Myths to which the great mass of men have consented.”28 Like Artaud, the aforementioned artists believe that the theatre can accomplish a special kind of embodied transgression, in which the body becomes the bearer of reconstructing the systems of belief within a culture. To reveal the cruel theatre, they use the lucid body – the body that is susceptible to the possibility of change.

Contemporary artists thus abolish the binary opposition identified by Brecht and Artaud as well as Rancière: they liberate the viewers from their passivity by offering them a strange, enigmatic spectacle of bodies. And they do so (if we, again, refer to Rancière) to make the viewer transform from a passive spectator into an active scientist, who observes phenomena and seeks their causes and effects. At the same time, paradoxically, they aspire to make the viewer abandon the position of the passive 28 Artaud, Theatre and its Double, p. 85.

/ 7 NOW / 7 RANCIÈRE / 7 SENSE / 7 USE / 7 WHO / 6 ACT / 6 ACTION / 6 ALSO / 6 COMMUNITY / 6 DOES / 6 FISCHER / 6 FORMS / 6 INSTANCE / 6 LIFE /

spectator, touched by nothing and nobody in his seat in the theatre hall. The viewer must be drawn from this fictitious, elegant position of untouchability and power into the maelstrom of the magic power of theatrical action, in which the viewer will exchange the privilege of the rational spectator for the experience of possessing the theatre’s true vital energies.

Bibliography

We could also say that, in all examples mentioned above, time and again, we encounter Rancière’s key alternative perspective, that is, the paradox in which the desire to emancipate the spectator, to force or seduce him into crossing the gap that separates activity from passivity, produces the awareness that it is precisely this desire for the abolishment of distance that produces an even stronger distance.

Barthes, Roland, Ecrits sur le théâtre, Paris: Editions du Seuil, 2002.

Insofar as they succeed in transcending this paradox and abolishing the opposition between looking and acting, they embody the provisional victories of the Artaudian revolution, in which the phenomenal body and the semiotic body of the performers, the performance and the spectators enter into a dialogue and merge. The spectator thus becomes active also in that she “is able to undo the performance – for instance, to deny the corporeal energy that it is supposed to convey the here and now and transform it into a mere image, by linking it with something she has read in a book or dreamed about, that she has lived or imagined. These are distant viewers and interpreters of what is performed in front of them.”29 ..

29 Rancière, “The Emancipated Spectator”, p. 277.

Abirached, Robert, La crise du personnage dans le theatre moderne, reed., Paris: Gallimard, 1994 (1978).

Artaud, Antonin, Theatre and its Double, transl. Mary Caroline Richards, New York: Grove Press, 1958.

Auslander, Philip, Liveness: Performance in a Mediatized Society, Taylor & Francis, 2008.

Božič, Peter, “Razvoj gledališke literature in gledaliških sredstev v slovenskem gledališču”, Maske, No. 1, 1986, pp. 37–42.

Fischer-Lichte, Erika, Ästhetik des Performativen, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2004.

Frljić, Oliver. “Artistic interests, if there are any left, are intertwined with the political context in which I work”, an interview (Pia Brezavšček and Katja Čičigoj), Maska, Fall 2010, Vol. 25, Nos 133–134, pp. 5–13.

Gosarič, Samo, “Iskanje Spomenika G”, in: Spomenik G, Gledališki list MGL, Vol. LIX, Season 2008/2009, No. 9, 2009, pp. 7–16.

Gržinić, Marina, “Rearticulation of the history of performance art”, Maska, Summer 2005, Vol. 20, Nos 92–93, pp. 45–47.

Kunst, Bojana, Nemogoče telo, Ljubljana: Maska (the Transformacije collection), 1999.

Lampret, Igor, “Spomenik G”, in: Spomenik G, Gledališki list MGL, Vol. LIX, Season 2008/2009, No. 9, 2009, pp. 17–21.

Lehmann, Hans Thies, Postdramatic Theatre, transl. Karen Jürs Munby, Taylor & Francis, 2006.

Lukan, Blaž, “Nataša in Katarina”, Delo, 29 December 2004, Ljubljana, p. 10.

Rancière, Jacques, “The Emancipated Spectator”, Artforum, March 2007, pp. 271–280.

Rancière, Jacques, Emancipirani gledalec, transl. Suzana Koncut, Ljubljana: Maska (the Transformacije collection), 2010. Šeligo, Rudi, Identifikacija in katarza, Ljubljana: Knjižnica Mestnega gledališča ljubljanskega, 1988.

Taufer, Veno, Odrom ob rob, Ljubljana: DZS, 1977.

Toporišič, Tomaž, “Ranljivo telo teksta in odra: Performativni obrat in njegove sledi v slovenskem gledališču po letu 2000.” In: Bojana Kunst and Petra Pogorevc (eds), Sodobne scenske umetnosti, Ljubljana: Maska (the Transformacije collection), 2006, pp. 142–155.

Tomaž Toporišič (PhD) is a dramaturge, translator, theatre theorist and critic. His primary research interests are contemporary performing arts and literature, specifically the interaction between the two fields. From 1997 to 2003, he was the artistic director of the Mladinsko Theatre, Slovenia. In 1995, he co-founded the Exodos Festival of Contemporary Performing Arts. He has published papers on literature and performing arts. Currently, he is a dramaturge at the Mladinsko Theatre in Ljubljana and an assistant professor in the Department of Cultural Studies at the University of Primorska in Koper. He is the author of the following books: Between Seduction and Suspiciousness (Slovenian Theatre of the Second Half of the 20th Century), Ljubljana: Maska, 2004; The Vulnerable Body of Text and Stage (Crises of the “dramatic author” in the theatre of the 1980s and 1990s), Ljubljana: Knjižnica MGL, 2007; Ecdyses of Drama and Theatre, Maribor: Aristej, 2008; reader Drama, Text, Scripture, reader coedited with Petra Pogorevc, Ljubljana: Knjižnica MGL, 2008.

TELO , FILOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 23

104 IN / 102 JE / 93 V / 67 KI / 55 KOT / 47 SE / 41 NA / 41 Z / 33 ZA / 30 NE / 26 S / 25 TUDI / 24 DNK / 24 NI / 22 PA / 17 BI / 17 DA / 16 TEMVEČ / 15 IZ

ODTIS – UVID – PROJEKCIJA (GENSKO PROFILIRANJE, GENOTIPIZACIJA) PRINT – INSIGHT – PROJECTION (GENETIC PROFILING, GENOTYPING) see page 31

POLONA TRATNIK PREVOD / TRANSLATED BY EVA ERJAVEC

POVZETEK

ABSTRACT

G

G

Ključne besede: GENOTIPIZACIJA, GENSKO PROFILIRANJE, GENETSKA UMETNOST, MEDIJ, DIFERENCIRANI ZNAMEK, PERSPICERE, PROICERE

Key words: GENOTYPING, GENETIC PROFILING, GENETIC ART, MEDIUM, DIFFERENTIATED MARK, PERSPICERE, PROICERE

ensko profiliranje ali t. i. genski »prstni odtis« v družbi prek forenzične znanosti uživa veliko zaupanje in se ga, rečeno s peircovsko terminologijo, razume kot indeksikalni znak, tj. kot znak, ki je neposrednem vzročno-posledičnem odnosu s svojim objektom (telesom), kot njegov odtis, zato lahko služi kot neizpodbitni dokaz za njegov obstoj in kvaliteto. Sodobni umetnik, Paul Vanouse v svojem delu izpodjeda avtoriteto DNK profiliranja s tem, ko dekonstuira genske znamke.

Avtorica v prispevku v tej navezavi analizira dva nasprotujoča si režima, perspicere in proicere, s čimer pokaže, da genskega profiliranja ne moremo preprosto razumeti kot režim perspicere (režim prosojnosti, uvida v resnico), temveč prej kot režim proicere (režim projekcije), pri katerem je možna manipulabilnost znamka in celo njegovo konstruiranje. Konstruktivni potencial poudarja in celo presega golo komunikabilnost znamka ter odpira prostor za poljubno poseganje v kodifikacijo. Na ta način se genski znamek vzpostavlja kot simbol, s čimer koncepta pristnosti in verodostojnosti DNK profiliranja povsem izgubita smisel. Avtorica z vidika perspicere in proicere razmišlja tudi o postopku genotipizacije, ki se izkazuje kot sodobna, s tehnologijo podprta različica prerokovanja prihodnosti.

24 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA, UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, A RT II

enetic profiling, or so-called genetic “finger printing”, enjoys a high level of confidence in society through forensic science and is, using Peirce’s terminology, understood as an indexical sign, that is, as a sign which is in direct causal-consequent relationship with its object (body), as its print, therefore it can serve as an indisputable evidence for its existence and quality. Contemporary artist Paul Vanouse in his work undermines the authority of DNA profiling by deconstructing genetic marks. The author in her paper in this connection analyses two contradicting regimes, perspicere and proicere, by which she shows that genetic profiling cannot simply be understood as a regime perspicere (the regime of transparency, the insight into the truth) but rather as a regime proicere (the regime of projection) where the manipulability of the mark and even constructing it is possible. The constructive potential stresses and even exceeds the sole communicability of the mark and opens space for arbitrary interference into codification. In such way, the genetic mark is reestablished as a symbol and by that the concept of genuineness and the credibility of DNA profiling completely lose their meaning. The author is, from the aspects of perspicere and proicere, also considering about the process of genotyping which turns out to be the contemporary, technologically supported version of clairvoyant fortunetelling.

/ 15 PO / 15 ŠE / 14 TEM / 13 OD / 13 SO / 12 PRI / 11 ČE / 11 SAJ / 11 TELESA / 10 GA / 10 JO / 10 LAHKO / 10 NAJ / 10 PROICERE / 10 TO / 10 ŽE / 9 BILA / 9 K

V

delu Paula Vanouseja se kaže kontinuiran interes za genetiko in DNK človeški profil, ki ga skuša umetnik kritizirati. Pri projektu Relative Velocity Inscription Device (2002) uporablja DNK profiliranje, prek katerega se usmerja v kritiko rasizma. A čeprav naj bi projekt po razlagah avtorja jamajškega rodu, ki prihaja iz večetnične družine, postavil pod vprašaj genotipizacijo, ki podpira rasne genske razlike, se sama kritika tu izpeljuje predvsem iz igre z besedo »race«, ki v instalaciji postane tekma med družinskimi člani, v kateri se zmaguje hitrostno, in sicer glede na hitrost izrisa profila v gelu elektroforeznega aparata. S svojimi projekti skuša Vanouse sistematično degradirati avtoriteto DNK profiliranja. S projektom Latent Figure Protocol (2007) ustvarja vizualne »podobe« z uporabo znanih DNK vzorcev – z znanimi vizualnimi izidi, ki jih v elektroforeznem gelu izoblikujejo DNK-ji bakterij, avtor sestavlja nove vizualne kompozicije, ki v preprosti digitalni likovnosti (z osvetljenimi in temnimi mesti te kot-da-pikselne površine) reprezentirajo motive, kot so: kokoš in jajce, pirat-

ski znak lobanje s kostmi, ID, 01 in simbol ©. »Reprezentacija«, končni vizualni izid, ki na osnovi podobnosti nekaj predstavlja (npr. kokoš), tu nima nobene zveze s samim materialom, torej z biološkimi vzorci, katerih DNK profili tvorijo vizualno reprezentacijo. Material je zdaj uporabljen po enakem principu, kot slikar uporablja barve, tj. za izgradnjo vizualne površine, ki ni motivirana po svojih gradnikih, snovnih elementih, temveč po optični podobnosti naslikanega z upodobljenim. Če bi bila slika motivirana po svojem materialu, potem rdeča ne bi postala barva žlahtnega kardinalovega oblačila in slikarstvo ne bi bilo umetnost transsubstanciranja, temveč bi postala slika, narejena iz organskih pigmentov, polje masakra in bi slikati pomenilo mesariti; podobno kot danes, ko so organski pigmenti postali redki in je tu odprto vprašanje skoraj postalo odvečno zaradi »nepristne izvornosti« materialov, ki so prevečkrat posredovani in kemijsko hibridizirani za zahtevo po substancialni transparentnosti, Jan Fabre predlaga perverzne nove smernice glamurja (za Heaven of Delight je strop in druge elemente

Paul Vanouse, Latent Figure Protocol

TELO , FILOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 25

/ 9 KAR / 9 PERSPICERE / 8 ALI / 8 POMENI / 8 SKOZI / 8 TELO / 8 UMETNOST / 8 VEČ / 7 DO / 7 KO / 7 MED / 7 OZIROMA / 7 PERFORMANS / 7 ZNAK

dvorane kraljeve palače v Bruslju okrasil z 1,6 milijoni hroščev nezaščitene vrste Buprestidae). Kiparstvo je principu motiviranega rokovanja s substanco bližje, kar je eden od temeljev za bližino kiparstva s konceptualizmom, saj je David z Michelangelom David-v-marmorju, je podoba Davida in je marmor, je živ in vselej mrtev, hladen, organski in neorganski, domač in odtujen, je hkratnost, ni prevara; pri ready-mades se izvorno ne transformira, artefakt ready-made ne zastopa nečesa drugega od sebe, temveč stoji točno in samo namesto sebe oziroma je kar on sam, je tisto, kar naj bi predstavljal – odstranitev principov nadomeščanja in napotovanja ter izenačenje znaka z referentom zagotovita pogoje za takojšen prestop iz umetnosti transformiranja v umetnost miselnega snovanja (Duchampov pisoar se, kljub temu da uveljavlja zahtevo po umetniški artefaktičnosti in kandidira za preobrazbo v fontano, oblikovno ni spremenil, je torej formalno še vedno pisoar, pa vendar to esencialno ni več – zaradi tega, kar Duchampova umetniška gesta opravlja konceptualno, se dogaja trans-esenciacija pisoarja v umetniško delo in v fontano; ne pa trans-formacija ali trans-substanciacija nečesa v nekaj drugega od samega sebe1 ).

Izvirni postscriptum k tradiciji umetnosti transsubstanciranja, ki pravzaprav spremlja celotno slikarstvo moderne dobe, prispeva sodobno zagovarjanje slikarstva kot alkimije, kot pri Sigmarju Polkeju. Magijska praksa transsubstanciranja predstavlja tako vrhunec tradicije preobražanja materialov kot tudi povratek na predzačetek slikarstva, v čas pred umetnostjo, v srednji vek in še nazaj v grško antiko, ko je chymeia označevala zaposlenost z zlivajočimi se materiali, tehnološko zlivanje metalurgije in barvnih tehnik, ter v neevropske kulture, zlasti arabsko-islamsko zlato dobo znanosti, ko je al-kimyá pomenila sožitje eksperimenta in traktata (teoretične razprave).

Sodobni arheolog medijev, Siegfried Zielinski, v bežišču evropskega srednjeveškega programa alkimije, ki je iskala pot od fizičnega (čutnega) izkustva k metafizičnemu zrenju, prepozna idejo projekcije.2 Zielinski razmišlja o konceptu projekcije po Vilému Flusserju, ki jo je razumel kot dejavnost mišljenja in jo povezoval z gesto skice. V jedru gre za magijsko tradicijo, ki ji v filozofiji najdemo genealoške korenine v predsokratskih časih. Projekcija stoji v nasprotju s prosojnostjo; lat. proicere (nem. Aufsicht) iz lat. proicio (lat. pro – od, za, namesto; lat. iacio – vreči) je nasprotno kot lat. perspicere (nem. Durchsicht) iz lat. perspicio (vidim skozi nekaj, pa tudi zaznavam, jasno razločujem). Med dvema skopičnima režimoma je bil v modernosti prioritetni režim perspicere – režim prosojnosti

oziroma vidljivosti, ki podpira logiko prodiranja pogleda skozi površine in ki so ga utemeljili pričetniki moderne znanosti Johann Kepler (Dioptrika), Galileo Galilei, René Descartes, Isaac Newton z velikim naravoslovnim izpeljevanjem »fizike vidljivosti« sedemnajstega stoletja, ki je bila zelo zainteresirana za problem prosojnosti (videnja skozi), katoptriki pa so se zanimali predvsem za proicere (nem. Aufsicht – nadzor, pogled od zgoraj) oziroma za optiko zrcal in refleksij. Perspicere, videnje skozi stvarnost kot razsvetljevanje, je bil v znanosti podprt z razvojem optičnih tehnologij, mikroskopa in teleskopa, v umetnosti s študijem perspektive, v raziskovanju telesa pa je režim podprla anatomija kot tehnologija razkrivanja nevidnih ovojnic oziroma tudi vsa iz nje izhajajoča medicina, ki je »medicina nevidne vidnosti«, kjer se vednost odvija po načelu »igre ovojnic«, kot ugotovi Xavier Bichat v devetnajstem stoletju in je še vedno na delu v sodobnem medicinskem diskurzu (izrazit projekt, ki podpira to načelo, je sodobni anatomski projekt Visible Human Project).3 Že projekt Latent Figure Protocol odpira staro semiološko vprašanje razmerja znaka do njegovega objekta in interpretanta, s katerim se je na začetku dvajsetega stoletja ukvarjal Charles Sanders Peirce, še bolj neposredno pa ga preizprašuje zadnji Vanousov projekt Suspect Inversion Center (2011). Z njim, kot ocenjujeta kustos Jens Hauser in avtor sam,4 je avtor dosegel svojevrstno kulminacijo kritike DNK profiliranja, saj je metodo, ki jo je razvijal že prej, prepletel z afero v zvezi z O. J. Simpsonom.5 Vanouse v svojem projektu tematizira nezanesljivost metode z DNK analizo, v katero forenzična znanost polaga kar največje upanje in zaupanje; toda Vanousovi pomisleki o metodi in mediju se ne nanašajo na delo preiskovalcev in tudi ne na možnost kontaminacije bioloških vzorcev, ki lahko, kot pokaže prav ta primer, povsem omaje verodostojnost DNK profiliranja, kar je ne nazadnje Vanousov namen. Avtor se sicer z izbranimi članki navezuje na ugotavljanja neverodostojnosti DNK profiliranja v slovitem primeru, a sam jo, še zlasti glede na referenčni primer, izpeljuje na nepričakovan način. Izvede namreč svojevrstno dekonstrukcijo DNK znaka: genski profil O. J. Simpsona, vizualiziran na elektroforeznem gelu, v času trajanja razstave avtor z asistentko izdeluje iz lastnega biološkega materiala. Za laičnega opazovalca je ta možnost presenetljiva, saj so genski »prstni odtisi« (angl. genetic fingerprints) družbeno razumljeni kot sledi telesa, kot indeksikalni znak, če se zatečemo v peircevsko terminologijo. Indeks ima z objektom, ki ga zastopa, 3

1

2

Vendar se s tem označevalec ne izenači z označencem, ki bi postal kar referent sam; semiološki sistem je v tem primeru bolj zapleten – na mesto označenca pisoar se vrivata vsaj še dva druga označenca, in sicer: 1. fontana kot arhitektonsko zasnovan in plastično okrašen vodnjak in 2. umetniško delo. Poleg tega sta funkciji nadomeščanja in napotovanja, ki tvorita pogoje za semiološki red, tu s snovnostjo v posredni zvezi – snovnost je podrejena večji celovitosti, ki je stvar-nost pisoarja, je keramika v svoji razsežnosti, obliki, je pa tudi keramika z neko funkcijo. Zato je v to stvarnost vključena tudi orodnost (kot jo analizira Heidegger; Martin Heidegger, »Izvir umetniškega dela«, v: Izbrane razprave, Ljubljana: Cankarjeva založba, 1967). A ravno orodnost je v tem primeru subvertirana, saj pisoar po svoji esenci tu sploh ni več pisoar, zato je torej ključen dogodek tega umetniškega dela proces transesenciacije, ne dogaja pa se tudi proces transformacije, ki bi pomenil spreminjanje forme, niti transsubstanciacije, ki bi pomenil spreminjanje substance.

Siegfried Zielinski, Entwerfen und Entbergen. Aspekte einer Genealogie der Projektion, Köln: Walther König Verlag, 2010, str. 19.

2 6 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA , UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, A RT II

4

5

S tem sem se precej ukvarjala v knjigi In vitro. Živo onstran telesa in umetnosti, poglavje »Odprimo telo, da ohranimo življenje. K transživljenju in transtelesnosti«, Ljubljana: Horizonti, 2010, str. 104–148.

Razstava vseh treh projektov s skupnim naslovom Fingerprints … je bila med 27. januarjem in 26. marcem 2011 na ogled v Schering Stiftung, Unter den Linden 32– 34, Berlin.

Sloviti temnopolti športnik naj bi umoril svojo ženo in njenega ljubimca; osrednji dokaz pa naj bi priskrbeli prav rezultati DNK analize bioloških vzorcev, ki bi morilca postavili na prizorišče zločina. V prostoru, kjer se je zgodil dvojni umor, ter na hodniku, so preiskovalci našli biološki material, katerega DNK analiza je pokazala istovetnost z biološkim vzorcem O. J. Simpsona. Vendar pa je bil zvezdnik oproščen kazenske odgovornosti, saj je skupina njegovih pravnih braniteljev dokazala utemeljeni dvom, da je bil material na prizorišču prisoten v času zločina predvsem na osnovi ugotovitve, da je material s prizorišča vseboval še dodatno kemijsko snov kot sredstvo proti strjevanju krvi, ki je ni vseboval vzorec krvi, odvzet zvezdniku, kar je ustvarilo dvom o tem, kdaj naj bi bil vzorec prinesen na prizorišče.

/ 6 CELO / 6 MEDIJ / 6 PROFILA / 6 RESNICE / 6 SICER / 6 SPOZNANJE / 6 TA / 6 VPRAŠANJE / 6 ZNAKA / 5 GENSKI / 5 INTERES / 5 KATERIM

V

anouse v svojem projektu tematizira nezanesljivost metode z DNK analizo, v katero forenzična znanost polaga kar največje upanje in zaupanje; toda Vanousovi pomisleki o metodi in mediju se ne nanašajo na delo preiskovalcev in tudi ne na možnost kontaminacije bioloških vzorcev, ki lahko, kot pokaže prav ta primer, povsem omaje verodostojnost DNK profiliranja, kar je ne nazadnje Vanousov namen. namesto katerega se pojavlja, odločilen in neposreden odnos, in sicer ne more obstajati brez njega, saj je ta njegov vzrok, neposredni povzročitelj, kot je ogenj povzročitelj dima ali poškodba vzrok bolečine in je stopinja sled stopala. Na podoben način naj bi bil tudi DNK profil sled telesa, njegov zastopnik.

Vanouse, kot izjavljata s kustosom, naj ne bi skušal trditi, da metoda z DNK analizo ni učinkovita in da je bila v primeru O. J. Simpsona zlorabljena, temveč hoče opozoriti na posredovanje med telesom in prikazom DNK profila, na medijskost biološkega materiala oziroma DNK profila kot znaka. Medijskost pa odpira prostor za manipulacijo in s tem izpodbija funkcijo dokazovanja resnice. Kot katerikoli medij lahko tudi tega dekonstruiramo in pokažemo, kako je zgrajen in kako funkcionira; lahko ga tudi skonstruiramo iz gradnikov neke druge razgrajene celote, kot bi sliko razgradili v barve in jih uporabili za tvorjenje nove barvne kompozicije po želji. Umetnika pri tem projektu najbolj fascinira spoznanje, da je biološki material in z njim povezano DNK profiliranje tako odprto za manipulacijo, da pravzaprav ni razlike med tem ali katerim drugim medijem, še posebej digitalnim, kjer lahko komponente ekstrahiramo in vnovič vkomponiramo, ne da bi se pri manipulaciji poškodovale ali se nepovratno spremenile, ter na ta način tvorimo poljubne celote in postopek ponavljamo v nedogled. Svet postane računalniška igra, telo ni več materialnost, snov, zasedanje prostora, teža, čvrstost in minljivost, res extensa, smrtnost, pa tudi ne edinstvena subjektiviteta, temveč datoteka v grafičnem programu, neskončno manipulabilna, risba v photoshopu, poljubno odprta, junak z nešteto življenji, deljiva in povratno zgradljiva nematerialnost, nasprotje entropiji, popolna povratnost, mnoštvo, avatar za kogarkoli, identiteta VanouseSimpson, kdorkoli in karkoli, neskončno spremenljivo nekaj – človek ali črv, človek-bakterija, čista izmuzljivost, pobeg, eksodus lastnika iz svojega genskega profila – čigavega, česa?

Z omajanjem indeksikalne avtoritete, ki DNK profil kot znak tesno veže na lastni objekt, na človeka, ki je profiliran, ki mu je biološki material pripadal, se znak premika na drugi pol, na

katerem ni bistvena vez z objektom, objekt lahko celo ne obstaja, pomembna pa je interpretacija znaka, ki temelji na konvenciji, torej je pri tem bistvena družbena kodifikacija. Na tem polu DNK znak postaja simbol. Simboličnost v DNK profiliranju zanima tudi Vanouseja, in sicer jo veže na rasno motivirane klišeje in predsodke. »Kontroverzni kriminalni primeri kažejo, da današnja osredotočenost na genski bazen odpira vrata rasno motiviranim klišejem in predsodkom, ki so zmešani z osumljenčevim genskim profilom,« je zapisano v spremni besedi k razstavi Fingerprints … Če je na eni strani v družbi uveljavljena absolutna avtoriteta DNK profiliranja, ki se kaže kot prava prosojnost, skozi katero uzremo resnico, tj. režim perspicere par excellence, se na drugi, če verjamemo Vanouseju in Hauserju, izkaže diametralno nasprotno – da je namreč vez DNK znaka z osumljencem vprašljiva, s čimer se odpira prostor za proicere, predvsem projekcije družbenih ideologij. Suspect Inversion Center tako združuje oba skopična režima, perspicere in proicere. Kot stroji za vidljivost: mikroskop, teleskop in televizija, nam tudi genski zapis pomaga videti tisto, kar je prostemu očesu nevidno, a je vendar že tukaj; lahko ga razumemo kot prediranje površine, prodiranje v notranjost, tukaj celo k najbolj notranjemu bistvu, k prav substancialnemu telesa. Obenem pa je genski zapis značilni primer projiciranja, pod katerim Zielinski razume stroje za ustvarjanje slik (nem. bild maschinen), kot so camera obscura, laterna magica, dio-/panorama6 , kino.7 DNK vizualni prikaz profila je namreč oblika prenosa, prevod, projekcija na drug nosilec, v drug material. A režim projiciranja ne pomeni samo tehničnega prenosa slike, temveč tudi aktivno prenašanje, ki je več kot po-sredo-vanje; je »metanje naprej«, je konstruiranje; kot se konstruira drama in kot deluje magija.

Namesto centralne perspektive je proicere prelom, je odboj, 6

7

Diorama je tehnika slikanja velikih formatov na napol transparentnem materialu, tako da je možno ustvarjati efekte s spreminjanjem svetlobe; najpogosteje so bile pri tej tehniki izkoriščene spremembe v dnevni oz. nočni svetlobi. Panorama je velika slika, ki obsega 360°; poslikavam so bili včasih dodani tridimenzionalni elementi, kasneje fotografski. Opazovalec je običajno nameščen v center, tako da se doseže potopitveni učinek v sliko (pojasnila Zielinskega v pismu z dne 12. 3. 2011).

Siegfried Zielinski, Entwerfen und Entbergen. Aspekte einer Genealogie der Projektion, str. 13.

TELO , FILOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 27

/ 5 NAMESTO / 5 NEKAJ / 5 NJEGOV / 5 O / 5 PETRIČ / 5 PRAV / 5 PROFIL / 5 PROFILIRANJA / 5 PROJEKT / 5 REALNOST / 5 REŽIM / 5 SEBE / 5 TAKO

Špela Petrič, CTCAG – spoznanje Foto: Miha Fras

refleksija. Proicere je zato tudi kritika kartezijanskega perspektivizma, hladnega geometrovega zrenja sveta od zunaj na svet kot mrežo razmerij med predmeti; v proicere sem na točki nič prostorskosti, prostor se začenja pri meni, sem v svetu in sem z njim zlita,8 še več, vanj projiciram. Tudi Vanouse noče biti hladni opazovalec, ki skozi elektroforezno pomagalo v genskem diagramu uzre košček, celo esenco očesu prikrite, a tu razkrite resnice telesa. Njegova vloga je aktivna, njegov poseg konstruktiven, namesto razgrinjanja kot odstiranja tančic, ki zastirajo predmet opazovanja, uporablja tehniko ustvarjanja, ne ravno kot stvarjenja iz nič, saj tudi princip proicere to ni, temveč kot postopek lomljenja in razgradnje ter nato sestavljanja, spajanja, hibridiziranja in celo alkimistično tehniko transsubstanciiranja.

DNK profil kot znak, ki nadomešča svoj objekt (telo), ga zastopa, stoji namesto njega, nastopa kot njegov odtis, zato vzpostavlja funkcijo dokaznosti. Ta znak naj bi dokazal prisotnost nečesa, kar je v znaku odsotno. Odsotno naj bi s tem postalo prisotno.

Re-prezent-acijskost, ponovno predstavljanje, pomeni še enkrat, znova pokazati; v drugo mora biti predstavljanje istovetno prvemu, znamek mora biti pristen in verodostojen. Takšen znamek se razteza v dimenziji resničnost/neresničnost, ki pa je brezpredmetna,9 saj semiološke ravni (formalne, izrazne, po8 9

Nanašam se na fenomenologijo Merleau-Pontyja; Maurice Merleau-Ponty, »Oko in duh«, v: Polona Tratnik (ur.), Horizonti, letn. 1, št. 1, 2, 2004, str. 41.

Ko je razmišljal o govornih izjavah, je britanski filozof jezika John L. Austin sredi petdesetih letih dvajsetega stoletja ugotovil (Kako napravimo kaj z besedami?, 1955), da je vprašanje resničnost/neresničnost, ki si ga je zadajala starejša šola v zvezi z jezikom, nesmiselno, saj vprašanje ni, ali res zunaj dežuje, ko rečem: »Zunaj dežuje«, temveč, zakaj sem to dejala in kaj sem s tem dosegla. Za Austina se vprašanje od konstativnih izjav premakne h govornim dejanjem. Ob tem pa Austin podpre spoznanje, da je realnost proizvedena s samo semiološko ravnjo, v mediju in z njim, zato ne moremo razlikovati med »navideznostjo« in »dejanskim« nanašanjem na zunanjo realnost. Po Austinu se vprašanju razsežnosti resničnost/neresničnost eksplicitno posveti John R. Searle z odpiranjem vprašanja fikcijskega diskurza (»Logični status fikcijskega diskurza«, 1975). Če se fikcija »pretvarja«, da se nanaša na neko realnost zunaj sebe in tako uporablja fikcijske reference, pa tudi pri »realističnem« diskurzu ne vidimo realnosti, ki naj bi obstajala tam zunaj, temveč imamo vselej opraviti zgolj s to, ki je pred nami. Primera realističnega in fikcijskega diskurza pokažeta, da imamo pravzaprav vselej pred seboj zgolj realnost samega diskurza, ne pa tudi zunajdiskurzivne realnosti, četudi se kateri diskurz prikazuje kot verodostojen v razmerju do

2 8 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA, UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, A RT II

javne), ki se lepi na semantično raven (raven pomena, vsebine, smisla), ni moč spojiti z zunajreferenčno ravnjo (stvarnost),10 ker je med njima prelom, razpoka, razlîka. Bistveni predikat znamka je iteracija.11 Vsak znamek je v istem hipu, ko je skonstruiran, ločen od svojega izvora, pa tudi od sprejema, zato ne more biti nikoli istoveten z izvorom, niti s samim seboj, saj je vselej podvržen interpretaciji, kot Nietzschejevo spoznanje o neobstoju dejstev in nujni podvrženosti interpretaciji utrjujejo poststrukturalistični filozofi in sodobni hermenevtiki.12 S tem je pri znamku bistveno poudarjena komunikacija. Ni naključje, da se je vprašanje znamka in medijskosti diskutiralo prav na ozadju razvoja digitalnih tehnologij, v času digitalne revolucije, na pragu digitalne dobe. Pa vendar so bila tla za to razpravo pripravljena že s pričetkom modernizma – vprašanje medija je angažiralo že zgodnje umetnike modernizma, simboliste, pesnike in slikarje v drugi polovici devetnajstega stoletja.13 realnosti tam čez, kot njen dokaz, za kar pa nimamo nobenega pravega zagotovila, razen samega izjavljanja medija. Zato med njima ni bistvene razlike – realnost se vselej vzpostavlja na nivoju diskurza.

10 Na tem mestu je potrebno omeniti še Saussurov prispevek (Ferdinand de Saussure, Predavanja iz splošnega jezikoslovja, izdana posthumno leta 1916) z zahtevo po uvedbi koncepta, označenca, ki ga je ločil od zunajjezikovnega referenta (beseda drevo se zato ne nanaša na drevo v stvarnosti, temveč na idejo drevesa, označevalec se zlepi z označencem, ne pa z referentom, ki stoji zunaj jezikovnega znaka in zato Saussura sploh ne zanima). Ravno na Saussurovi zapuščini je konec petdesetih in v šestdesetih letih francoski semiolog Roland Barthes gradil semiološko analizo medija, ki se je nato v sedemdesetih letih prenesla na diskurze vseh vrst (zlasti vezane na množične medije) prek birminghamske šole kulturnih študijev (Stuart Hall, Culture, Media, Language: Working Papers in Cultural Studies, 1972–79) in iz nje izpeljanih medijskih študijev (John Fiske, Television Culture, 1987). Še v sodobnejši filozofiji družbe avtorje fascinira ugotavljanje o prevladi proicere na mestih, kjer naj bi deloval perspicere – leta 1996 pravi Bourdieu: »In tako je televizija, ki naj bi bila sredstvo beleženja, postala sredstvo ustvarjanja resnice.« (Pierre Bourdieu, Na televiziji, Ljubljana: Krtina (zbirka Krt, 119), 2001, str. 19). Sicer pa v zadnjih letih vse bolj popularni kanadski teoretik Marshall McLuhan že sredi šestdesetih let (Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, 1964) jedrnato ugotovi: »Medij je sporočilo«.

11 Sklicujem se na Derridaja, ki je v kritiki Austina (1972) opozoril, da je jezikovni oziroma vsak znamek zavezan iteraciji in da nič ni nikoli istovetno z ničimer, niti s samim seboj, temveč je vselej na delu razlîka. (Jacques Derrida, »Signatura dogodek kontekst«, v: Aleš Pogačnik (ur.), Sodobna literarna teorija, Ljubljana: Krtina, 1995).

12 V hermenevtiki s spoznanji Hans-Georga Gadamerja, predstavljenimi zlasti v delu Resnica in metoda iz leta 1960.

13 Barthes prvo pripoznanje pripiše Mallarméju, ki je videl in predvidel nujnost vstopa samega jezika v vseh njegovih razsežnostih (Roland Barthes, »Smrt Avtorja«, v:

/ 5 TER / 5 TOREJ / 5 UMETNOSTI / 5 VANOUSE / 5 ZASTOPA / 5 ZATO / 5 ZNANOSTI / 4 A / 4 AVTOR / 4 BITI / 4 DEJANJE / 4 GENOTIPIZACIJE / 4 JIH /

G

enotipizacija ne razkrije bodočnosti, podaja verjetnost, ki pa zgolj še naprej dopušča obe možnosti (tudi če test pokaže, da oseba ni gensko nagnjena k obolenju, to ne pomeni, da ne more zboleti), ki sta bili odprti že pred testom. Genotipizacija, ki naj bi zagotovila uvid, perspicere v telo in telo-bodočnost, je zgolj navidezni perspicere – resnica ostaja nespoznavna, kot je bila prej. Informacija, ki jo prinese genotipizacija, ni nikakršna informacija in ničesar ne spremeni.

Po sto letih vprašanje medija dobiva nove razsežnosti z genetiko, ki je močno zaznamovala tudi sodobno dojemanje telesa in življenja, ki pa se sklada s konceptom telesa in življenja, kot se sklada z računalniško paradigmo. Na tej osnovi se je v polju umetnosti vzpostavila usmeritev v digitalno oziroma elektronsko umetnost, včasih v povezavi z video umetnostjo, poimenovano tudi umetnost novih medijev ali medijska umetnost (ta termin je tavtološki, saj je bila umetnost tudi prej vselej vezana na medij), ki, jedrnato rečeno (kot piše v motu Ars Electronice, festivala za umetnost, tehnologijo in družbo, ustanovljenem leta 1979), zasleduje posledice digitalne revolucije in ki se pričenja v šestdesetih (v jugoslovanskem prostoru je zgodnji interes za digitalno kulturo kazalo gibanje Nove tendence), vzpne v sedemdesetih in še posebej uveljavi v osemdesetih in devetdesetih letih dvajsetega stoletja (leta 1988 je sprva kot video-filmski festival ustanovljen Transmediale, danes eden največjih festivalov za umetnost in digitalno kulturo). Okolja, ki gradijo na tej usmeritvi, imajo izrazit interes za sodobnost in prihodnost ter že v svojih pričetkih pokažejo na pomen medijske posredovanosti in sodobne fenomene komunikacije, kar jih kmalu privede do osrednjega interesa za družbo in družbena vprašanja (sočasno, s padcem berlinskega zidu, postanejo aktualni taktični mediji,14 ki jih še danes močno zastopa Transmediale), biopolitiko in tudi biotehnologijo. Špela Petrič, podiplomska študentka biomedicine, ki je pričela delovati tudi v polju umetnosti, s projektom CTCAG – recognition / spoznanje (2011) tematizira starogrški imperativ s preročišča v Delfih: Spoznaj samega sebe! ob možnostih sodobnih znanosAleš Pogačnik (ur.), Sodobna literarna teorija: zbornik, str. 20). Zgodnjo teoretsko razlago modernizma, kot jo skoraj stoletje kasneje predstavi vplivni ameriški likovni kritik Clement Greenberg, poda simbolistični slikar Maurice Denis leta 1890, ko pravi: »Treba si je zapomniti, da je slika, preden postane bojni konj, gola ženska ali anekdota, esencialno ploska površina, pokrita z barvami, urejenimi v določenem redu.« 14 Predstavila sem jih v: Polona Tratnik, Transumetnost. Kultura in umetnost v sodobnih globalnih pogojih, poglavje »Ne plavati s tokom: sodobne taktike odporništva«, Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut, 2010, str. 99–104. <http://www.pei.si/ Sifranti/StaticPage.aspx?id=78>, 20. 2. 2011.

ti o življenju, specifično genetike, ki omogoča »soočanje s seboj« prek spoznavanja osebnega genskega zapisa in posledic, ki naj bi iz njega izhajale. Tako komercialno podjetje GenePlanet, s katerim umetnica sodeluje, zastopa pravico posameznika do genskega testiranja in omogoča dostop do osebne genotipizacije, promocijsko tudi dvema obiskovalcema predstavitve.

Interes umetnice je usmerjen v poznavanje etiologije bolezni, konkretno v informacijo o verjetnosti lastnega obolenja za rakom, ki ga je dobila njena mati. Projekt se javnosti predstavlja kot performans, izveden v medicinskem laboratoriju, kjer so obiskovalci ne le obiskovalci, temveč lahko tudi laboranti, ki se avtorici po navodilih profesionalnega osebja pomagajo dokopavati do »resnice«. Če so performerji v šestdesetih letih izpostavili interes za telo kot medij umetniškega raziskovanja in eksperimentiranje z lastnim telesom kot nosilcem družbeno konstruiranih pomenov in osebnih ekspresij že kmalu privedli do skrajnosti, pa interes za telo v performansu še vedno ostaja. Zato lahko performans Špele Petrič razumemo kot izvirni prispevek k liniji v telo usmerjenih performansov, ki jo zastopajo Carolee Schneemann, Gina Pane, Chris Burden, Marina Abramović z Ulayem, med sodobnejšimi pa Stelarc, Franko B, pogojno Orlan (saj njene operacije dejansko ne potekajo v živo pred gledalci), Ron Athey, Kira O’Reilly idr., in še posebej nadaljuje tradicijo ekspresivnih uprizarjanj s telesom. Telesni performansi so se konec šestdesetih in v sedemdesetih letih pojavili kot kritika reprezentacijskega gledališča, kartezijanskega sveta in pa z namenom preizkušanja meja zmogljivosti telesa kot medija in vzdržljivosti telesa z izpostavljanjem bolečini in tveganju.15 Performansi so po svojem predikatu naravnani nasproti reprezentaciji in četudi se v nekaterih primerih telo pojavlja kot predstavnik, reprezentant družbenega telesa, npr. družbenega spola (ta poudarek je posebej prisoten v feminističnih angažmajih), se s performansom dekonstruira sama reprezentacija, in sicer v živo, s čimer je zagotovljena de15 Kako se vrši ta kritika, lepo predstavi Maja Murnik v prispevku »Body art prakse: nekaj misli«, v: Polona Tratnik (ur.), Art: Resistance, Subversion, Madness, Koper: Monitor ZSA, Annales, 2009, str. 175–184.

TELO , FILOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 29

4 KAJ / 4 KRITIKA / 4 LETIH / 4 MEDIJA / 4 NJEGA / 4 NOVE / 4 ODPIRA / 4 POSEBEJ / 4 POVRŠINE / 4 PRED / 4 PREDVSEM / 4 PREJ / 4 PROJEKTU

janskost. Ko je Austin nasprotoval klasičnemu izjavljanju (konstativu), ki sporoča dejstva in je zato lahko bodisi resnično bodisi neresnično, je poudaril izrekanje, ki pomeni dejanje. Uvedel je pojem performativa, ki pomeni rečeno-storjeno oz. ki se zgodi tedaj, ko rêči kaj pomeni napraviti kaj oz. ko kaj napravimo tako, da to izrečemo in s tem, ko to izrečemo. S tem je premaknil koncept medija od poročanja h komunikaciji, od zastopstva, reprezentacije, perspicere k proicere, saj performativ pomeni delati nekaj z izrekanjem tega. Performativ ni poročilo, prosojno okno, skozi katero zremo tja skozi na resnico, ki je oddaljena, ločena, diferencirana (prostorsko ali/in časovno), temveč je konstrukcija, akcija, dejanje, dejanskost. Če se razsežnost resničnost/neresničnost povezuje z lokucijo, tj. lokucijskim pomenom (smislom in referenco), se ilokucija, tj. ilokucijska sila, veže na razsežnost posrečenost/ponesrečenost. V hoji po kitajskem zidu, ki jo uprizorita Abramović-Ulay, je morda reprezentirana njuna partnerska pot, usklajenost in ločenost, celo njuna ločitev, vendar je vse to tudi dejansko z njuno ločeno in hkratno hojo po zidu, predvsem pa je njuno srečanje in slovo veliko več kot zaigrano, reprezentirano – je prav zares dejansko. Partnerja sta svoji življenji prenesla v performans in šele skozenj dosegla dejanje njune ločitve. Učinek slovesa, ki se zgodi na zidu, je dejanski za njuni življenji, realnost zareže v umetniški medij oziroma narobe – »medij zareže v realnost« –, prav tako kot Burdenov strel v roko pusti neizpodbitno rano na njegovem telesu in je Orlan od operacije dalje telesno transformirana. Zato pa performans ni več medij, saj njegova funkcija ni nikakršna mediacija, posredovanje, zastopstvo, temveč dejanje; realnost ni nikjer onstran (v drugem prostoru in drugem času), temveč vselej že tukaj, zato pa umetniška poteza ni nobena fiktivna, predstavljajoča, temveč življenjska, realna.

Performans ukine razliko med medijem in zunajdiskurzivno realnostjo; bistvo torej ni več v tem, da se realnost konstruira že s samim diskurzom, ker ne moremo seči prek in doseči resnice onstran, temveč se je diskurz še razširil in nič več ne obstaja zunaj njega; smisel je zdaj v sili, spremembi, dejanju, ki ima za učinek perlokucijo, a na vse udeležence – ni le perspicere postal moten in viden (kot slika v modernizmu), temveč je bila zadeta, zarezana sama realnost, stvarnost, ideologija in prihodnost.

Smo v režimu proicere. Če se pri Vanouseju uprizarja kritika DNK profila kot diferenciranega znamka, kot režima perspicere, Petrič tematizira prerokovanje iz gena, njegov potencial proicere. V svojem performansu se seznani z lastno gensko nagnjenostjo k raku, pred očmi prič, v živo. Odtlej umetnica ve, ali obstaja verjetnost, da dobi raka, in če da, kolikšna je. Toda kaj pove odgovor na to vprašanje, in sicer ne glede na to, kakšen je. Če bo izid dopuščal verjetnost obolenja, bo morebitno obolenje sodilo v odstotek verjetnosti in morebitno neobolenje v preostali odstotek. Če izid ne bo pokazal genske verjetnosti, lahko pride do obolenja iz drugih vzrokov. »Spoznanje« torej ničesar ne spremeni v poznanju. Obolenje se še naprej kaže kot odstavljena grožnja v prihodnosti, ki pa jo CTCAG – recognition / spoznanje prikaže kot morebitno spodaj ležečo resnico,

3 0 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA , UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, A RT II

ki naj bi jo genska tehnologija zmogla razkriti tukaj in zdaj.

Tehnologija genotipizacije, ki je uporabljena tudi v projektu, potrjuje koncept medicine »nevidne vidnosti«, ki razkriva ovojnice, tj. v tem primeru razkrivanje gena kot izvorne datoteke – na delu je postopek odkodiranja lastnega telesa, ki pomeni branje vzrokov za nastanek dejanskosti, odšifriranje genotipa za razumevanje fenotipa. Pri tem Petrič ne kritizira niti načela verjetnosti, s katerim operira naravoslovna znanost, ki pri tem sočasno zatrjuje, da se ukvarja z zagotavljanjem resnice, niti ne kritizira načela vzročnosti, na katerem stoji medicinski diskurz.

Prav v kombinaciji teh dveh načel je obljuba genotipizacije, pri kateri pa perlokucijski učinek ni dosti drugačen kot pri jasnovidnih prerokbah. Genotipizacija ne razkrije bodočnosti, podaja verjetnost, ki pa zgolj še naprej dopušča obe možnosti (tudi če test pokaže, da oseba ni gensko nagnjena k obolenju, to ne pomeni, da ne more zboleti), ki sta bili odprti že pred testom. Genotipizacija, ki naj bi zagotovila uvid, perspicere v telo in telo-bodočnost, je zgolj navidezni perspicere – resnica ostaja nespoznavna, kot je bila prej. Informacija, ki jo prinese genotipizacija, ni nikakršna informacija in ničesar ne spremeni.

Zato tudi performans, ki ga izvede Petrič, ni nikakršen performans. Performerka iz dogodka prihaja nepoškodovana, »spoznanje«, ki ga je prinesel dogodek, ni nikakršno spoznanje, ni razkritje esencialnega sebe, temveč je prihodnost odprta, kot je bila prej (čeprav sam performans tega skoraj ne sporoča, temveč obiskovalce zgolj seznanja z rezultati genotipizacije).

Prav s tem se avtoriteta naravoslovne znanosti, ki naj bi bila v zagotavljanju trdnih dokazov, neizpodbitnih dejstev, resnice, omaje. Izkaže se za špekulativno prakso, ki pri genotipizaciji celo ni drugačna od jasnovidnega prerokovanja. ..

Dr. Polona Tratnik je znanstvena sodelavka na UP ZRS ter docentka za filozofijo kulture na UP FHŠ. Je predsednica Slovenskega društva za estetiko, članica svetovalnega telesa Society for Phenomenology and Media in direktorica zavoda Horizonti.

Je avtorica monografij In vitro. Živo onstran telesa in umetnosti (2010), Transumetnost. Kultura in umetnost v globalnih pogojih (2010) in Konec umetnosti. Genealogija modernega diskurza: od Hegla k Dantu (2009).

350 THE / 198 OF / 133 IS / 117 AND / 100 A / 84 IN / 76 TO / 70 AS / 62 WHICH / 61 IT / 44 WITH / 37 FOR / 35 THAT / 32 BY / 26 FROM / 26 NOT / 23 BODY

Špela Petrič, CTCAG – recognition Foto: Miha Fras

PRINT – INSIGHT – PROJECTION (GENETIC PROFILING, GENOTYPING) POLONA TRATNIK TRANSLATED BY EVA ERJAVEC

I

n the work of Paul Vanouse the continuous interest for genetics and DNA human profile is shown, which the artist tries to criticize. In the project Relative Velocity Inscription Device (2002) he uses DNA profiling through which he directs himself into the critique of racism. But although the project, so explains the author of Jamaican origin who comes from multiethnic family, puts under question the genotyping, which supports racial genetic differences, the sole critique here, above all, derives from the word-game “race” which in the installation becomes a competition between the family members in which winning is measured in velocity, namely by speed of plotting the profile in the gel of electrophoresis apparatus. With his projects Vanouse tries to systematically degrade the authority of DNA profiling. With the project Latent Figure Protocol (2007) he creates visual “images” by using known DNA patterns – with known visual outcomes which are formed in electrophoresis gel by DNA’s of bacteria, the author puts together new visual compositions, which in simple digital visual design (with lightened and dark spots of this as-if-pixel surface), represent motives as: chicken and egg, the pirate sign of a skull with bones, ID, 01 and a symbol ©. “The representation”, the final visual outcome, which on the basis of similarity represents something (for example a chicken) has here nothing in common with the sole material, that is, with biological samples, whose DNA profiles form the visual representation. Material here is used in the same principle as a painter is using colors, that is, for building the visual surface which is not motivated after its constituents, material elements, but after the optical similarity of the painted with the portrayed. If the picture was motivated by its material, then red wouldn’t become the color of the precious cardinal’s garment and painting would not be the art of trans-substantiation, but it would become a painting made out of organic pigment, a field of massacre, and to paint would mean to massacre; similar as today when organic pigments become rare and here opened question became almost superfluous because of “inauthentic origin” of materials, which are too many times mediated or chemically hybridized

TELO , FI LOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 3 1

/ 22 DNA / 21 BUT / 20 OR / 19 ALSO / 19 ART / 19 INTO / 19 THE / 19 THIS / 17 ITS / 17 WAS / 16 EVEN / 16 ON / 15 BE / 14 GENETIC / 14 HE / 14 IF / 14 SIGN

for the demand for substantial transparency, Jan Fabre suggests perverse new guidelines of glamour (for Heaven of Delight he embellished the ceiling and other elements of Royal Palace in Brussels with 1,6 million bugs of unprotected species Buprestidae). The sculpture is closer to the principle of motivated handling with substance which is one of the foundations for closeness of statuary art and conceptualism, for the David is with Michelangelo David-in-marble, it is an image of David and it is marble, it is alive and always dead, cold, organic and inorganic, homely and alienated, it is simultaneity, not a deception; in ready-mades the origin doesn’t transform, the artifact ready-made does not represent anything else but itself, it stands exactly and just instead of itself or it is itself alone, it is what it is supposed to represent – the removal of the principles of substitution and of referring and equalizing the sign with the referee, assure the conditions for instant transition from the art of transforming to the art of thought conceptualization (Duchamp’s urinal, despite putting into force the demand for artistic artifactivity and standing as a candidate for the change into a fountain, has not changed its shape therefore, formally, it is still a urinal however in its essence not anymore – because of that what Duchamp’s artistic gesture does conceptually the trans-essentiation of urinal into a work of art and into a fountain takes place; and not a trans-formation or trans-substantiation of something into something else than itself1).

1

However here the signifier is not equalized with the signified, which would become the referee itself; the semiologic system is in this case more complicated – in the place of the signified “urinal” are interpolating at least two other signified: 1. the fountain as an architectonically designed and plastically decorated well and 2. the work of art. Besides, the functions of substitution and referring which are forming the conditions for semiologic order are here in indirect connection with materiality – materiality is subordinated to a greater totality which is thing-ness of the urinal, it is the ceramic in its extensiveness, in its form, and it is also a ceramics with a function. Therefore this reality as thingness also includes tool-being (as Heidegger analyzed in: Martin Heidegger, “Der Ursprung des Kunstwerkes”, 1935). But just the tool-being is in this case subverted as a urinal here in its essence is not a urinal anymore, therefore the major event of this work of art is the process of transessentiation, while the process of transformation that would mean the changing of the form is not taking place, as well as the process of trans-substantiation, which would mean that the changing of the substance is not happening either.

I

The original post-scriptum to the tradition of art of transsubstantiation, which in fact accompanies the whole painting of modern era, contributes contemporary advocacy of painting as alchemy, as with Sigmar Polke. The magical practice of trans-substantiation represents the peak of the tradition of transforming of materials, as well as the return to pre-beginning of painting, in the time before art, in Middle ages and even back into Greek Antiquity when chymeia denoted occupation with alloyed materials, technological blending of metallurgy and color techniques and into non-European cultures, especially Arab-Islamic golden age, when al-kimyá meant coexistence of experiment and treatise (theoretical discussions). At the vanishing point of European medieval program of alchemy, which was searching for a way from physical (sensual) experience towards the metaphysical gaze, the contemporary archeologist Siegfried Zielinski recognizes the idea of projection.2 Zielinski is thinking about the concept of projection after Vilém Flusser who understood it as an activity of thinking and was connecting it with the gesture of a sketch. In the essence this is about a magical tradition to which we find its genealogical roots in pre-Socratic philosophy. Projection stands in opposite to transparency; Lat. proicere (Ger. Aufsicht), from Lat. proicio (Lat. pro – from, for, instead; Lat. iacio – to throw) is the opposite from Lat. perspicere (Ger. Durchsicht) from Lat. perspicio (to see through something and also: to perceive, to distinguish clearly). Between two scopic regimes in modernity the prior regime was perspicere – the regime of transparency or visibility, which supported the logic of penetrating view through surfaces and which was established by the beginners of modern sciences: Johann Kepler (Dioptrics), Galileo Galilei, René Descartes, Isaac Newton with his big natural sciences accomplishment of “physics of visibility” of the 17th century, that was very interested in the problem of transparency (seeing through), while catoptrics were mostly interested in proicere (Ger. Aufsicht – control, view from above) or in the optics of mirrors and reflections. Perspicere, seeing through 2

Siegfried Zielinski, Entwerfen und Entbergen. Aspekte einer Genealogie der Projektion, Köln: Walther König Verlag, 2010, p. 19.

n his project Vanouse thematises unreliability of the method with DNA analysis into which the forensic science is laying a great deal of hope and trust; but Vanouse’s doubts about the method and the medium are not referring to the work of investigators and also not to the possibility of contamination of biological samples which can as just this case shows completely undermine the credibility of DNA profiling, which is in the end, Vanouse’s intention.

32 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA, UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, A RT II

/ 14 TRUTH / 14 WE / 13 MEDIUM / 13 PROJECT / 12 PROFILE / 11 AN / 11 ARE / 11 CAN / 11 NO / 11 SOMETHING / 10 HERE / 10 IN / 10 PERFORMANCE

Paul Vanouse, Suspect Inversion Center Foto: Axel Heise Courtesy: Schering Foundation

reality, as an enlightenment, was in science supported by the development of optical technologies, microscope and telescope, in the art by studying of the perspective, in researching of the body the regime was supported by anatomy as the technology of uncovering invisible membranes or also all the science of medicine originating from it, which is the “medicine of invisible visibility” where knowledge is developing by the principle of “the game of membranes”, as was established by Xavier Bichat in the 19th century and is still working in the contemporary medical discourse (a distinctive project that supports this principle is contemporary anatomical project Visible Human Project).3 Already the Latent Figure Protocol project opens the old semiologic question of the relationship of the sign towards its object and interpretant with which was dealing Charles Sanders Pierce in 3

I have written a lot about this in my book In vitro. Živo onstran telesa in umetnosti, “Odprimo telo, da ohranimo življenje. K transživljenju in transtelesnosti” (In Vitro. Live beyond the Body and Art. Chapter “Open the Body to Preserve Life. To Trans-life and Trans-corporeality”), Ljubljana: Horizonti, 2010, pp. 104–148.

the beginning of the 20th century and is even more directly requestioned by the last Vanouse’s project Suspect Inversion Center (2011). By it, as it is evaluated by the curator Jens Hauser and the author himself,4 the author has reached unique culmination of the critique of the DNA profiling, as he intertwined the method that he was developing before with the actual affair concerning O. J. Simpson.5 In his project Vanouse thematises unreliability of the method with 4

5

The exhibition of all three projects with joint title Fingerprints … was opened to public between 27th of January and 26th of March in Schering Stiftung, Unter den Linden 32-34, Berlin.

5 Famous coloured athlete supposedly murdered his wife and her lover; the main proof was provided by the results of the DNA analysis of the biological samples which would put the murderer on the place of the crime. In the room where the double murder happened and in the hallway the investigators found biological material and its DNA analyses showed proof of identity with the biological sample of O. J. Simpson. However against the celebrity all the criminal charges were dropped when the group of his legal representatives showed a reasonable doubt that the material on the scene was present at the time of the crime, above all on the basis of finding that the same material contained an additional substance, as an expedient against the coagulation of blood, which was not present in the blood sample taken from the celebrity and that created doubt about when the sample was brought to the crime scene.

TELO , FI LOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 3 3

/ 10 PROICERE / 10 THROUGH / 9 CONTEMPORARY / 9 DIGITAL / 9 HAS / 9 PERSPICERE / 9 THEIR / 9 VANOUSE / 8 ABOUT / 8 DOESN‚ / 8 INTEREST

T

he world becomes a computer game, body is no longer materiality, substance, occupying space, weight, firmness, and transitoriness, res extensa, mortality and also not a unique subjectivity, but a file in a graphic program, infinite, manipulative, a photoshop drawing, optionally open, a hero with innumerable lives, divisible and reversely constructed nonmateriality, the opposition of the entropy, the complete reversibility, multiplicity, avatar for anybody, identity Vanouse-Simpson, whoever and whatever, infinitely changeable something – a human or a worm, humanbacteria, pure evasiveness, escape, exodus of the owner from its own genetic profile – whose, what?

3 4 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA , UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, ART II

DNA analysis into which the forensic science is laying a great deal of hope and trust; but Vanouse’s doubts about the method and the medium are not referring to the work of investigators and also not to the possibility of contamination of biological samples which can as just this case shows completely undermine the credibility of DNA profiling, which is in the end, Vanouse’s intention. With chosen articles the author is referring to discovering un-credibility of DNA profiling in the famous case, but he himself is, especially in relation to referential case, carrying it out in an unexpected way. Namely, he carries out a unique deconstruction of the DNA sign: the genetic profile of O. J. Simpson, visualized on the electrophoresis gel, is being constructed from the artist’s own biological material, during the time of exhibition, by the author and his assistant. For a laic observer this possibility is surprising as the genetic “fingerprints” are socially understood as body traces, as indexical sign, if we resort to Peirce terminology. Index has with an object which it represents, for which it stands for, crucial and direct relationship for it cannot exist without it as it is its cause, direct inducer, as fire is the inducer of a smoke or an injury is a cause of pain and a footprint the trace of a foot. In a similar fashion also DNA profile is supposed to be the trace of a body, its representative. Vanouse, as he and his curator claim, doesn’t try to say that DNA method of analysis is not efficient and that it was abused in the case of O. J. Simpson, but also tries to point out the interposition between the body and the display of the DNA profile, to the mediality of biological material or DNA profile as a sign. Mediality is making space for manipulation and by that rebuts the function of proving the truth. As any medium this as well can be deconstructed and it can be shown how it was built and how it functions; we can also construct it from constituents of some other disintegrated whole, as if we would disintegrate a painting into colors and, use them for forming a new color composition by our desire. The artist is in this project most fascinated by cognition, that biological material and with it connected DNA profiling is so open to manipulation that in fact there is no difference between this or any other medium, especially digital one where we can extract the components and in-compose them again without damaging them during the manipulation or irreversibly changing them, and by doing so we can create any entireties and repeat the procedure over and over again. The world becomes a computer game, body is no longer materiality, substance, occupying space, weight, firmness, and transitoriness, res extensa, mortality and also not a unique subjectivity, but a file in a graphic program, infinite, manipulative, a photoshop drawing, optionally open, a hero with innumerable lives, divisible and reversely constructed non-materiality, the opposition of the entropy, the complete reversibility, multiplicity, avatar for anybody, identity Vanouse-Simpson, whoever and whatever, infinitely changeable something – a human or a worm, humanbacteria, pure evasion evasiveness escape, exodus of the owner from its own genetic profile – whose, what?

Shaking the indexical authority which ties the DNA profile as a sign tightly to its own object, to a human being who is being profiled, to whom biological material belonged, the sign moves to the other pole, where the connection with the object is not essential, the object might not even exist, important is the interpretation of a

/ 8 ITSELF / 8 JUST / 8 MATERIAL / 8 PROFILING / 8 REALITY / 8 VISUAL / 7 AUTHOR / 7 CASE / 7 GENOTYPING / 7 HER / 7 HIS / 7 MARK / 7 MORE

sign which is based on convention, therefore here the social codification is important. On this pole the sign is becoming a symbol.

The symbolism in DNA profiling is of interest to Vanouse, namely he connects it to racially motivated stereotypes and prejudices.

“Controversial criminal cases show that today’s focus on genetic pool opens the door to racially motivated clichés and prejudgments that are mixed together with the suspects’ genetic profile” is written in the foreword of the exhibition Fingerprints … If on one hand, in society is established absolute authority of DNA profiling which shows itself as true transparency, through which we can see the truth, that is the regime perspicere par excellence, on the other hand, if we believe Vanouse and Hauser, a diametrically opposite proves to be the case – that the bond of the DNA sign with the suspect is questionable, thus the space opens for proicere, above all for the projections of social ideologies. The Suspect Inversion Center so combines two scopic regimes, perspicere and proicere. As machines for visibility: microscope, telescope and tele-vision, also the genetic inscription helps us to see what is invisible to the naked eye, but is however already here; we can understand it as piercing the surface, penetration into inwardness, here even to the utmost inner essence, to the really substantial of the body. At the same time, the genetic inscription is a typical case of projection under which Zielinski understands machines for creating pictures (Ger. bild maschinen), as are camera obscura, laterna magica, diorama/panorama6, cinema.7 DNA visual display of the profile is namely a form of transfer, translation, projection on to other carrier, into other material. But the regime of projection does not mean just the technical transfer of the picture, but also the active transfer which is more than inter-vent-ion; it is “throwing onward”, is constructing; as drama is constructed and as magic works. Instead of the central perspective the proicere is a breaking point, is a rebound, a reflection. Proicere is therefore also a critique of the Cartesian perspectivalism, of a cold, geometer’s gaze over the world from the outside as at a network of relations between objects, such as it would be seen by a third party, witnessing my vision; in proicere I am at the null point or degree zero of spatiality, the space is starting from me, I live it from the inside, I am immersed in it,8 even more, I project into it. Vanouse as well doesn’t want to be the cold observer who through electrophoresis expedient in the genetic diagram sees a piece, even to the eye concealed essence, but here the uncovered truth of the body. His role is active, his intervention constructive, instead of un-covering as removing the veils, which are obstructing the object of observation, he uses the technique of creating, not exactly as the creation from nothing, as not even the principle of proicere is, but as a process of breaking and decomposing and then composing, joining, hybridization and even the alchemical technique 6

7 8

Diorama is a technique of painting large format images on semi-transparent material, so that it is possible to create effects by changing the light; in this technique the day and night changes were most often used. Panorama is a large format of 360 degrees image, the painted surfaces were sometimes expanded with 3D-elements, later photographic. The observer was usually positioned in the centre so that immersion effect in the picture could be achieved. (Explained by S. Zielinski in his letter on 12th of March, 2011.)

Siegfried Zielinski, Entwerfen und Entbergen. Aspekte einer Genealogie der Projektion, p. 13.

I am referring to the phenomenology of Maurice Merleau-Ponty, “Eye and Mind”, in: Galen A. Johnson (ed.), The Merleau-Ponty Aesthetics Reader. Philosophy and Painting, Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1993, p. 138.

of trans-substantiation.

DNA profile as a sign which substitutes its object (body), represents it, stands for it, occurs as its print, this is why it restores the function of proofability. This sign is supposed to prove the presence of something that is absent in the sign. The absent is so supposed to become present. Re-present-ativity, repeated presentation means to show again, once more; the second time the presentation must be identical to the first, the mark must be genuine and credible. Such a mark expands in the dimension of truth/non-truth that is superfluous,9 as the semiologic level (formal, expressive, occurring) which is tying to the semantic level (the level of meaning, content, sense) is not possible to join with the outside-referential level (reality as thingness),10 as between them is a breakage, a crack, a différence. The essential predicate of a mark is iteration11. Every mark is at the same moment when it is constructed, separated from its source and also from the reception, therefore it can never be identical with the source nor with itself, as it is always submitted to interpretation as Nietzsche’s cognition about un-existence of the facts and the necessary submission to interpretation is consolidated by post-structuralist philosophers and contemporary hermeneuticians.12 In such a manner, the communication is essentially stressed considering 9

When he was thinking about utterances, the British philosopher of language John L. Austin (How to do Things with Words?, 1955) in the middle of the 50’s of the 20th century discovered, that the question about truth/non-truth, which was the Old School’s eternal question concerning the language, is meaningless, as the question is not if it really rains outside, when I say: “It rains outside” but why I said it and what have I achieved by that. For Austin the question shifts from constative statements to speech-acts. While Austin supports the cognition that the reality is produced with the sole semiologic level, in the medium and with it, therefore we cannot distinguish between “fictitious” and “actual” referring to the outside reality. After Austin, John R. Searle was explicitly devoted to the question of truth/ non-truth by opening the question of the fictional discourse (“The Logical Status of Fictional Discourse”, 1975). If the fiction “pretends”, that to refer to some reality outside itself and so uses the fictional references, also in the “realistic” discourse we don’t see the reality that supposedly exists out there, but we always have to deal just with the one that in front of us. The examples of realistic and fictional discourse show that we actually always have in front of us just the reality of the very discourse and not also of the outside-discourse reality even though some discourse presents itself as credible in the relationship to the reality over there, as its proof, for which we have no guarantee what so ever, except the sole expressing of the medium itself. Thus there is no difference between them – the reality is always established on the level of the discourse.

10 Here it is necessary to mention the Saussure’s contribution (Ferdinand de Saussure, Course in General Linguistics, edited posthumously, 1916) with the demand for the implementation of the concept, the signified, which he separated from the external-linguistics referee (the word tree therefore doesn’t refer to the tree in reality, but to the idea of a tree, the signifier therefore blends with the signified and not with the referee, which stands outside the language sign and therefore, to Saussure, is of no interest at all). Precisely on Saussure’s legacy, at the end of 1950’s and in the 1960’s, was the French semiologist Roland Barthes building a semiologic analyses of medium, which was then in the 1970’s transferred to all kinds of discourses (especially to those connected to mass media) with Birmingham School for Contemporary Cultural Studies (Stuart Hall, Culture, Media, Language: Working Papers in Cultural Studies, 1972–79) and with Media Studies derived from BSCCS (John Fiske, Television Culture, 1987). Even in more contemporary philosophy of society the authors are fascinated by finding out about the dominance of proicere in places where perspicere is supposed to be operating – in 1996 Bourdieu says that “television, which claims to record reality, creates it instead.” (Pierre Bourdieu, On Television, New York: The New Press, 1998, p. 22). Otherwise, in the recent years increasingly popular Canadian theoretician Marshal McLuhan already in the middle of 1960’s (Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, 1964), concisely established: “The medium is the message”.

11 Here I am referring to Derrida who in his critique of Austin (1972) noted, that language or any mark is liable to iteration and that nothing is never identical with anything, not even with itself but there is always a différence at work (Jacques Derrida, “Signature Événement Contexte”, in: Marges de la philosophie, Paris: Minuit, 1972).

12 In hermeneutics, by recognitions of Hans-Georg Gadamer presented particularly in the work Truth and Method (Wahrheit und Methode, 1960).

TELO , FILOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 3 5

/ 7 OBJECT / 7 OTHER / 7 OWN / 7 PAINTING / 7 PRINCIPLE / 7 QUESTION / 7 REGIME / 7 STILL / 7 TIME / 7 TRANS / 6 ALL / 6 AT / 6 BETWEEN

G

enotyping doesn’t reveal the future, it conveys a probability which still only just allows both possibilities (even if a test shows that a person is not subjected to a disease, that doesn’t mean that s/he cannot get ill), that were opened even before the test. Genotyping which would assure an insight, perspicere into the body and body-future is only fictitious perspicere – the truth remains unknowable, as it was before. The information which genotyping brings is no information whatsoever and it doesn’t change anything. the mark. It is not a coincidence that the question of a mark and mediality were discussed exactly on the background of development of digital technologies, in time of digital revolution, on the threshold of digital era. But still, the grounds for that debate were already prepared with the beginning of modernism – the question of a medium has engaged the early modernist’s artists, symbolists, poets and painters in the second half of 19th century.13 After one hundred years the question of a medium is getting new dimensions with genetics, which strongly marked also the contemporary perception of the body and life, which corresponds to the concept of the body and life, according to the computer paradigm.

On this basis has in the field of art restored orientation towards digital or electronic art, sometimes in connection with video art, also called the new media art or media art (this term is tautological, as art has always been related to the medium), which tersely said (as it is written in the motto of Ars Electronica, a festival for art, technology and society, founded in 1979) follows the consequences of digital revolution and which begins in the 1960’s (in the Yugoslav area early interest for digital culture was shown by the Nove tendence (New tendencies) movement), ascended in the 1970’s and reaches its peak in 1980’s and 1990’s of the 20th century (in the year 1988, Transmediale was established, first as a video-film festival, today one of the biggest festivals for art and digital culture). Environments which build on this direction have a distinctive interest for contemporaneity and future and even in their beginnings point to the meaning of media intervention and the contemporary phenomena of communication which soon takes them to the main interest in society and social questions (simultaneously with the fall of the Berlin wall, tactical media14 13 Barthes the first recognition attributes to Mallarmé, who saw and foresaw the necessity of entering the sole language in all its extensivenesses (Roland Barthes, “The Death of the Author”). The early theoretic explanation of modernism, which is almost a century later presented by the influential art critic Clement Greenberg, is given by the symbolist painter Maurice Denis in 1890, when he says: “Remember that a picture, before being a battle horse, a nude, an anecdote or whatnot, is essentially a flat surface covered with colors assembled in a certain order.”

14 I have presented them in: Polona Tratnik, Transumetnost. Kultura in umetnost v sodobnih globalnih pogojih, “Ne plavati s tokom: sodobne taktike odporništva” (Trans-art. The Culture and Art in Contemporary Global Conditions. Chapter: “Not to Swim with the Flow: The Contemporary Tactics of Resistance”), Ljubljana:

3 6 TE LO, FILOZOFIJA, UMET NO ST II. / BO DY, PHILO SO PHY, A RT II

become actual and are today still strongly represented by Transmediale), bio-politics and also bio-technology. Špela Petrič, a postgraduate student of biomedicine, who started to act in the field of art, by the project CTCAG – recognition (2011), thematizes ancient Greek imperative from the oracle in Delphi: Recognise Yourself!,15 along with possibilities of contemporary sciences about life, specifically genetics, which enables “facing with yourself” through recognition of personal genetic inscription and consequences which should supposedly derive from it. In such a manner, commercial company GenePlanet with which the artist collaborates, defends the individual’s right to genetic testing and enables access to personal genotyping, as a promotion also for two visitors of the presentation. Artist’s interest is oriented towards knowing etiology of the disease, more concrete into information about probability of her own possibility of having cancer, which happened to her mother. The project is shown to public as a performance taking place in a medical laboratory, where the visitors are not mere visitors, but can also be laboratory assistants who help the author, by instructions of medical staff, to dig up the “truth”. If the performers of the 1960’s exposed the interest for the body as a medium of artistic research and experimenting with one’s own body as a carrier of socially constructed meanings and personal expressions soon brought to the extremes, the interest for the body in performance art still remains. That is why we can understand the performance of Špela Petrič as an original contribution to the line of body art performances, represented by Carolee Schneemann, Gina Pane, Chris Burden, Marina Abramović with Ulay, and amongst more contemporary ones Stelarc, Franko B, conditionally Orlan (as her surgeries in fact do not happen live in front of the observes), Ron Athey, Kira O’Reilly and others, and especially carries on with the tradition of expressive body performances. Body performances emerged at the end of the 1960’s and in the 1970’s as a critique Pedagogical Institute, 2010, pp. 99–104. <http://www.pei.si/Sifranti/StaticPage. aspx?id=78>, 20. 2. 2011.

15 The original translation into English language is “Know Yourself”, but due to the word play of the author, with words recognize and -cognize, I decided to use the verb recognize instead of the verb know. Translator’s note.

/ 6 BIOLOGICAL / 6 CRITIQUE / 6 DISEASE / 6 FUTURE / 6 MEANS / 6 NON / 6 OUT / 6 POINT / 6 PROBABILITY / 6 REPRESENTATION / 6 SO / 6 SUPPOSED

of the representational theatre, of the Cartesian world and with an intent to test the boundaries of endurance of the body as a medium and of endurance of the body by exposing it to pain and risk.16 Performances are, according to their predicate, oriented against representation and even though in some cases the body appears as a representative of the social body, for example gender (this is specifically present in the feminist engagements), the sole representation is deconstructed namely a-live, with which the facticity is ensured.

When Austin opposed the classical utterance (constative) which announces facts and is therefore either real or unreal, he stressed the utterance which means action. He imposed the concept of performative, which means said-done or which happens when to say something means to do something, or when we do something so that we utter it and by uttering it. By that he shifted the concept of the medium from reporting to communication, from representation, perspicere to proicere, for performative means to do something by uttering it. The performative is not a report, a transparent window through which we gaze over on the truth that is distant, separated, differentiated (spatially and/or temporally) but it is a construction, action, act, facticity. If the dimension truth/non-truth is connected with locution, that is with locutional significance (sense and reference), then illocution, that is illocutional force, is connected to the dimension of felicitous/infelicitous. In the walk on the Wall of China, performed by Abramović-Ulay, their partnership path, harmony and separation, even their divorce, may be represented, but all of that is also a fact, with their separated and synchronous walk on the Wall, and above all their meeting and parting is much more than just acted, represented – it is truly a facticity. The partners have transferred their lives into the performance and only through it they achieved the act of their divorce. The effect of a farewell which takes place on the Wall is for their lives actual, the reality cuts into the artistic medium or vice versa – “the medium cuts into reality” – , just as Burden’s shot in the arm leaves an indisputable wound on his body and Orlan is from the operation onwards physically transformed. Therefore performance is no longer a medium as its function is no mediation, transmission, representation, it is an act; reality is nowhere beyond (in different place or different time), it is always already here and because of that no artistic gesture is fictitious, representational but of life, real. The performance abolishes the difference between the medium and the non-discursive reality; the essence is not in the constructing of reality by the sole discourse, since we cannot reach over and attain the truth beyond, but the discourse itself has already expanded and nothing anymore exists outside of it; the point is now in the force, change, act which as its effect has a per-locution but for all participants – it is not just that perspicere became blurred and visible (as a painting in modernism) but the reality, thingness, ideology and future themselves were hit, cut into. We are in the proicere regime.

If at Vanouse, the critique of DNA profile as a differentiated mark, as a perspicere regime, is performed, Petrič thematizes the divination from the gene, its proicere potential. In her performance she in 16 How this criticism is performed is well presented by Maja Murnik in “Body art prakse: nekaj misli” (Body Art Practices: Some Thoughts), in: Polona Tratnik (ed.), Art: Resistance, Subversion, Madness, Koper: Monitor ZSA, Annales, 2009, pp.

175–184.

live, in front of the witnesses, becomes acquainted with her own genetic predisposition to cancer. Thereafter the artist knows if there is a possibility of her getting cancer and if there is, how big is the chance of her getting it. But what does the answer to this question, no matter what it is, tell? If the outcome allows the probability of getting ill the supposed disease will belong in the percentage of probability and the possible non-disease in the remaining percentage. If the outcome will show no genetic probability, something else may cause the disease. “Recognition” therefore changes nothing in knowing. The disease still shows itself as a deposed threat in the future, which CTCAG – recognition – pictures as a possible, underlying truth which could be here and now uncovered by genetic technology. The technology of genotyping which is also used in the project confirms the concept the medicine of the “visible invisibility”, which uncovers membranes, that is in this case the uncovering of the gene as the original file – the process of decoding of one’s own body is taking place which means reading the causes for the formation of facticity, decoding of the genotype in order to understand phenotype. In this, Petrič doesn’t even criticize the principle of probability with which the natural sciences operate and at the same time argues that it is engaging with ensuring the truth, nor does she criticize the principle of causality upon which the medical discourse is based. Precisely in the combination of these two principles lies the genotyping promise, but by which the perlocution effect is not much different as in clairvoyant prophecies.

Genotyping doesn’t reveal the future, it conveys a probability which still only just allows both possibilities (even if a test shows that a person is not subjected to a disease, that doesn’t mean that he/she cannot get ill), that were opened even before the test. Genotyping which would assure an insight, perspicere into the body and bodyfuture is only fictitious perspicere – the truth remains unknowable, as it was before. The information which genotyping brings is no information whatsoever and it doesn’t change anything. Therefore also the performance carried out by Petrič is no performance. The performer comes from the event unharmed, “recognition”, that the event brought is no recognition, is not a revelation of essential self, but the future stays opened as it was before (even though the sole performance almost doesn’t transmit this, but it just informs the visitors about the results of genotyping). Precisely this undermines the authority of the natural sciences which is supposed to be about assuring solid evidence, indisputable facts, and the truth. It turns out to be a speculative practice that in genotyping is even no different as a clairvoyant fortunetelling. ..

Polona Tratnik, PhD, is a research associate at the Science and Research Centre and docent for philosophy of culture at the Faculty of Humanities, University of Primorska, Slovenia. She is the president of the Slovenian Society of Aesthetics, a member of Advisory Board of Society for Phenomenology and Media, and the manager of Horizonti Institute. She is the author of In Vitro. Live Beyond Body and Art (2010), Transart. Culture and Art in Global Conditions (2010), The End of Art. Genealogy of Modern Discourse: from Hegel to Danto (2009).

TELO , FILOZO FIJA, UM ETN O ST II. / BO DY, P H I LOS OP H Y, A R T I I 37

80 IN / 65 V / 44 NA / 38 JE / 35 KOT / 32 KI / 32 PA / 23 TUDI / 22 NE / 21 Z / 20 PRAV / 19 S / 19 ZA / 18 ALI / 12 OD / 12 PO / 12 TO / 11 MORDA / 10 SE

Foto: Darko Radanović

POČASNOST OSVOBODITVE1 DEKONSTRUKCIJA GIBANJA IN REKONSTRUKCIJA NJEGOVE PERCEPCIJE V PREDSTAVI DRAGANE ALFIREVIĆ ARE MADE OD THIS (17. 12. 2010, PTL) KATJA ČIČIGOJ

1

Naslov je parafraza Viriliojevega dela Hitrost osvoboditve.

3 8 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUBL IC S PACE

»Hodi sa mnom u mitologiju, propada sav moj dosadašnji rad neću da budem umetnički predmet.

Razbijam okove, stvoritelj nema već nada mnom moć.

Nemam nikakvih izgleda. Dakle, ja sam aktuelno.« (Katalin Ladik) **

P

esem, iz katere je vzet gornji odlomek, je v Beogradu rojena srbska koreografinja, teoretičarka in performerka Dragana Alfirević navedla za opis svoje predstave Mozaik (19.

5. 2009, Gledališče Glej). Z drobno, a ključno premeno pa si jo lahko prisvojimo tudi za opis njenega najnovejšega projekta – Are Made of This (Soiztega) (17. 12. 2010, PTL). Kot zgovorno priča že naslov, v njem namreč ni najti nič aktualnega, nič dejansko prisotnega ali obstojnega; nejasnost, dvoumnost naslova kvečjemu nakazuje obstoj nekega nedoločnega je, biti kot take v vsej njeni abstraktni mnogoznačnosti. Aporetični naslov dogodka odvzame klasični logični stavčni strukturi tako subjekt kot predikat in jo s tem spremeni v (nerešljivo) uganko.

Obravnavani scenski dogodek s specifično tehniko giba, ki temelji na improvizaciji, a deluje skrajno kontrolirano in precizno, tudi dejansko deluje sorodno kot ugankarska igra ugotavljanja razlik na dveh, navidez enakih sličicah. Komaj zaznavno, skrajno upočasnjeno gibanje štirih performerjev namreč izdatno aktivira gledalčevo pozornost in uri njegovo zaznavo detajlov, drobnih premikov in vzgibov prav s tem, ko ju otežuje. Če za nekaj trenutkov odvrnemo pogled od določenega performerja, bomo kasneje zaznali spremembo položaja; zaznava giba v njegovi prezentni izvedbi pa nam vseskozi uhaja. In če je nekaj takega kot zaznava gibanja v trenutku sedanjosti vselej nemogoče, kot nas uči Zenonov paradoks o gibanju, predstava Dragane Alfirević te probleme časa, gibanja in predvsem njune zaznave naredi povsem eksplicitne. Prav tovrstno eksplicitno

/ 9 GIBANJA / 9 SMISLU / 9 TAKO / 9 ŽE / 8 DA / 8 DELA / 8 DOGODEK / 8 OBRAVNAVANI / 8 SO / 8 ZGOLJ / 7 BI / 7 ČE / 7 KAR / 7 MED / 7 TEMVEČ / 6 BOLJ /

izpostavljanje problematike pogleda z njegovim oteževanjem pa ima lahko po Lehmannu potencialno politično ali etično funkcijo: gledalčevo pozornost nenehno vrača na njega samega, na njegov akt gledanja. To nikoli ni nevtralna in pasivna recepcija, temveč je prek razporeditve razmerij moči med gledajočim in gledanim, med producentom in potrošnikom, med avtorjem in občinstvom vselej implicitno politično dejanje.

Za predstavo, ki na vsebinski ravni ne prinaša nikakršnih eksplicitnih političnih provokacij, ki pravzaprav nima nobene konkretne vsebine oz. naracije in poleg tega od gledalca ničesar eksplicitno ne zahteva, pričakuje ali želi, razen gledanja samega, se zapisano utegne zdeti nenavadno. A kot vztraja Rancière, je gledalec aktiven že s samim dejanjem gledanja, s samo kognicijo, in ne potrebuje dodatnih aktivacij (participatornih ali ne) v smislu Brechta in Artauda (ter nebroja drugih sodobnih ustvarjalcev). Če izpeljemo njegovo (v svojem izključujočem privilegiranju pasivnosti sicer morda nekoliko problematično) pozicijo do skrajnosti, če mu deleuzijansko »naredimo otroka za hrbtom«, bi bila lahko najbolj politično učinkovita predstava tista, ki bi gledalca pripravila do najbolj aktivne kognicije in percepcije, do skorajšnjega stanja nekakšne zen kontemplacije in meditacije (ne da bi za to moral izvajati kake posebne duhovne vaje) v smislu absolutne potopitve in zavedanja trenutnega stanja (gledanja). In prav nekaj podobnega uspe predstavi Dragane Alfirević – z intenziviranjem gledalčeve pozornosti nas zaziblje v stanje kontemplacije teles performerjev v prostoru in relacij med njimi, s tem pa tudi kontemplacije lastnega dejanja te kontemplacije. Kje se skriva subverzivni potencial tovrstne (izvorno pasivne) kvazi-zenovske prakse?

Dekonstrukcija gibanja na njegove najosnovnejše elemente v obravnavanem dogodku (na drobne trzljaje, obotavljajoče poskuse in nezaznavne premike) morda nekoliko spominja na logiko razstavljanja gibanja v futurističnem in modernističnem slikarstvu (Picasso, Duchamp idr.), pa vendar ji je prav nasprotna. Medtem ko skuša prva v statični medij vpeljati dinamiko z reprezentacijo čim večjega števila njenih delov (pozicij teles in objektov), pa obravnavani dogodek v dinamičnem mediju dekonstruira dinamiko samo; vendar ne z njeno ukinitvijo ali reprezentacijo statike, temveč prav z (minimalno, kontrolirano in precizno) kontinuirano dinamiko. Na sledi Deleuzovih refleksij literature v Kritiki in kliniki bi lahko rekli, da tudi obravnavani dogodek z gibanjem kot »jecljanjem, momljanjem, cviljenjem« trči ob lastno mejo, ob lastno drugo (plesnega) jezika, ob njegov »molk«: ob ne-gib. To pomeni najprej re-volucijo (ne nujno v smislu pionirske avantgardnosti ali radikalne provokativnosti) plesnega medija, ki ga sili v nenehno postajanje-drugo od sebe samega.

Tej morda nekoliko sorodne prakse ne-plesa je obširno analiziral André Lepecki v Izčrpavajočem plesu. Tudi njegove izpeljave vodijo v radikalno politični temelj redefinicije narave plesnega medija. Vendar moramo biti pozorni, da vsaki formalno podobni praksi ne pripišemo enakega pomena. Analizi Lepeckega je

namreč implicitna močna kontekstualna vpetost obravnavanih praks, iz katere črpajo svoj subverzivni naboj, ki pride na dan v dejanju »miroljubnega protesta« zavračanja giba: stopicanje na mestu Vere Mantero kot reakcija na portugalski kolonializem preteklosti; spotikanja Alexandra L. Popea kot eksplikacija belega rasizma; odpoved vertikali Trishe Brown in La Ribot kot prevrat mačizma v umetniški ideologiji modernega Avtorja ...

Obravnavanemu dogodku bi težko pripisali kak tovrstni eksplicitni spopad z določeno politično ali etično dominantno pozicijo. Kot nakazuje naslov, v njej pravzaprav težko prepoznamo kakršnokoli jasno opredeljeno identiteto ali pozicijo. Bolj kot z (rasnimi, etničnimi, spolnimi …) identitetami ima obravnavana predstava morda opraviti s »fluidno identiteto« moderne (kot bi dejal Zygmunt Bauman) ali s procesom, ki mu Virilio pravi globalna »delokalizacija« hipermoderne dobe.

Dromologija kot »logistika hitrosti« je po Virilioju značilna za moderno dobo »diktature hitrosti« – dovolj pomenljivo, dromos v grščini pomeni tekmovanje. Razporeditev moči v sodobnem svetu namreč poteka prav glede na izid tekmovanja v hitrosti: posedovanje teritorija v času »informacijskih vojn« ni več stvar pravnih pogodb in zakonov, temveč mobilnosti, cirkulacije (informacij, kapitala – morda bolj kot ljudi samih). Te procese lahko vidimo kot skrajno konsekvenco »kinetičnega gona moderne« (kakor ga imenuje Sloterdijk) po neskončnem napredku, ki je primorana nenehno producirati potrebo po proizvodnji novih dobrin, po njihovi cirkulaciji. Vsaka zaustavitev (proizvodnje, potrošnje) je za tovrstno logiko potencialno eksplozivna. Dve umetniški formi pa sta prav z moderno dobo in naraščanjem njenega kompulzivnega gibanja od začetkov industrializacije naprej v gibanju prepoznali svojo specifiko: sodobni ples ter film, modernistična umetnost par excellence (kot so jo oklicali številni, od Benjamina do Jamesona).

Prav »kinematični modus produkcije« se danes po Bellerju iz filma seli na vse vrste kulturne produkcije. Tudi obravnavani dogodek obvladuje neke vrste kinematična logika: do skrajnosti prignani slow-motion. Vendar je ta logika, če vstopa v plesni dogodek, bolj dekonstrukcija kot pa apropriacija kinematičnega načina »delitve čutnega«. Tudi v določenih sodobnih »manjšinskih«, neodvisnih pristopih h kinematografiji je moč opaziti svojevrstno dekonstrukcijo kinematičnih modusov reprezentacije, ki prevladujejo v sodobni (zlasti mainstream in žanrski) filmski produkciji. Slednja tako vsebinsko kot formalno temelji na maksimizaciji dinamičnega učinka: če vsebinsko (ne glede na žanr) stremi h kopičenju narativnih prvin in informacijski gostoti, formalno inkorporira nekdaj avantgardne pristope k montaži kot krajšanju filmskega časa in realnega prostora. Pri sovjetskih avantgardistih (npr. Eisensteinu, Vertovu) je bila bliskovita »dialektična« montaža razumljena kot močno ideološko orodje za spodbudo k politični akciji in obenem realizacija (tudi sovjetskega ideala) industrializacije družbe. Prav ta logika pa je danes postala prevladujoči modus MTV, reklamne, reportažne in splošne senzacionalistične TV estetike, le da z nasprotnim učinkom, ki je morda posledica njene izčrpanosti:

( N E) G IB IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 3 9

6 DO / 6 IZ / 6 PERCEPCIJE / 6 TA / 6 TE / 6 TER / 6 VENDAR / 6 ZARADI / 5 A / 5 BISTVENO / 5 ČASA / 5 DOGODKA / 5 DOGODKU / 5 FOTOGRAFIJE / 5 GA

kopičenje podob in senzacij ne deluje več v smeri politične budnice, temveč pasivizacije in jačanja vsesplošne apatije, v smeri učinka de-realizacije in de-senzibilizacije, ki ga ima bombardiranje potrošnikov z vsakovrstnimi mediatiziranimi podobami, zlasti podobami vojn, katastrof, trpljenja ... Sodobni cineasti (Pedro Costa, Hou Hsiao-Hsien, Brillante Mendoza, Lav Diaz idr.) so zato morali iznajti drugačne načine učinkovanja na senzibiliteto gledalcev, ki so morda sorodni obravnavani predstavi: ekstremno dolge sekvence v realnem času z minimalno gostoto dogajanja, obširna raba statične kamere ali pa ekstremno trajanje celega filma (tudi do 9 h pri Diazu), ki nas na soroden način kontemplacije primorajo, da ostrimo svojo pozornost in percepcijo ponovno privajamo na opažanje detajlov, načina konstrukcije podob in njihovega sosledja ali pa dobesedno zarežejo v realni čas gledalcev z ekspanzijo prek komodificiranega trajanja, primernega za neoburžoazno konzumpcijo.

Ponovno pa gre, kljub sorodnim fenomenološkim učinkom na percepcijo gledalcev tako med konkretnimi motivi in učinki samih filmov kot med filmskimi primeri in obravnavanim dogodkom, za bistveno razliko (ki je morda posledica kontekstualne umeščenosti obravnavanih del). Če je moč nekatere izmed filmov umestiti v kontekst refleksije globalnih učinkov preteklega kolonializma in sodobnega imperializma na življenje ekonomsko in socialno marginaliziranih populacij, katerih čas zaradi drugačne strukture načinov produkcije in stopnje industrializacije, pa tudi zaradi drugačne kulturne in duhovne tradicije poteka bistveno drugače kot obsesivni kinetični čas zahodne (hiper)moderne, je obravnavani dogodek s svojo specifično časovnostjo, ki izrašča iz percepcije (skoraj ne)gibnosti, zareza v osrčje same kinetične obsesije zahoda, ki se je udejanjala tudi v določenih ideologijah sodobnega plesa. Specifična dekonstrukcija gibanja v obravnavanem dogodku je zaradi narave medija seveda tudi drugačna od kinematičnih načinov dekonstrukcije gibanja. Gibanje, ki uhaja zaznavi in za seboj pušča zgolj sledove pozicij, ki jih je prešlo, bolj spominja na fotograme kot na kontinuiteto filmskega predvajanja. Tudi sicer so drama-

T

turgija prestave, specifična prezenca performerjev in način izrisovanja njihovega giba močno sorodni fotografiji, zlasti nekaterim njenim refleksijam izpod peresa Barthesa in Derridaja.

Barthes v svojem zadnjem delu Camera lucida refleksijo fotografije gradi na analizi fotografij umrle matere: fotografijo tako razume kot bistveno povezano z minevanjem in smrtjo – fotografija je namreč sled, ki jo na filmu pusti nek pretekli trenutek, za vselej izgubljen. Ne glede na to, ali so reprezentirani objekti v resnici neživi, še živi ali že minuli, je fotografija vedno (a priori neuspešen) poskus aktualizacije nečesa, kar ne obstaja več, nekega trenutka, ki je že »umrl.« Ta sled minulosti pa se nas najbolj dotakne v punctumu fotografije: drobnem detajlu, ki uhaja vsakemu mogočemu pragmatičnemu (dokumentarnemu, propagandnemu, estetskemu ...) namenu fotografije ter njeni racionalni in jezikovni interpretaciji (značilni za studium) in na gledalca učinkuje afektivno, celo telesno. Derrida to bistveno povezanost fotografije z minljivostjo referenta povezuje s spektralnim učinkom tega, kar na sledi enega njenih začetnikov (Williama Talbota) imenuje skyographia, zapisovanje senc: vsaka reproducirana podoba je v sebi delitev časovnega trenutka na to, kar je v zapisu ohranjeno, in to, kar premine. Fotografija je tako bistveno paradoksna, ne zgolj zaradi delitve (nedeljivega) časovnega trenutka, temveč tudi zaradi shizofrene narave na meji med dokumentiranjem, arhiviranjem, nanašanjem na nek (nekoč) obstoječi referent na eni strani in zavestno avtorjevo manipulacijo (s kadriranjem, osvetlitvijo, fokusiranjem, izbiranjem motiva ...) na drugi. Čeprav zaradi materialnega obstoja nosilca prvi način zapisa in referencialnosti ponavadi pripisujemo analogni fotografiji, drugi modus »performativne« konstrukcije podobe in njene reprodukcije ad infinitum pa digitalni, Derrida opozarja, da sta oba inherentna že rojstvu fotografije in se v nekem smislu ohranjata tudi v preskoku na drugi materialni nosilec. Kakorkoli že, prav te paradoksne dvojnosti, značilne za fotografijo, je morda moč pripisati tudi obravnavanemu dogodku, ki se že z naslovom umešča v razsežnost paradoksa.

Odsotnost vsake fabulativne naracije ali konkretnih vsebinskih

e procese lahko vidimo kot skrajno konsekvenco »kinetičnega gona moderne« (kakor ga imenuje Sloterdijk) po neskončnem napredku, ki je primorana nenehno producirati potrebo po proizvodnji novih dobrin, po njihovi cirkulaciji. Vsaka zaustavitev (proizvodnje, potrošnje) je za tovrstno logiko potencialno eksplozivna.

4 0 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUBL I C S PACE

/ 5 GLEDALCEV / 5 GLEDANJA / 5 HITROSTI / 5 KONTEMPLACIJE / 5 LAHKO / 5 MODUS / 5 NAČIN / 5 NAMREČ / 5 NAS / 5 OB / 5 STA / 5 SVOJO / 5 TEM

elementov ter skoraj abstraktni improvizirani minimalni gibi, katerih vir je mogoče pripisati nekim notranjim vzgibom performerjev (daleč od kakega psihološkega patosa ali ekspresije), ki pa gledalčevi zaznavi niso dostopni, onemogočajo vsakršno racionalno interpretacijo. Na gledalce učinkujejo zgolj na ravni percepcije in afekcije, ti pa izraščata zlasti iz opažanja detajlov in mikropremikov (svojevrstnih punctumov), na katere nas specifična gibalna tehnika minimalne dinamike navaja. Prav ta detajlna pozornost, ki učinkuje afektivno, pa paradoksno razdeli časovni trenutek na to, kar se ohrani v gledalčevi percepciji in kasneje po predelavi preide v spomin, in to, kar odteče v minevanje. Neskončna deljivost trenutka (katere paradoksalnost ilustrira eden od Zenonovih paradoksov) tako poudari prav neobstoj trenutka samega: v človekovi zavesti obstoja zgolj sled preteklega ali slutnja prihodnjega, nikoli pa neposredna percepcija sedanjega. Prav ta modus percepcije obravnavano predstavo približuje fotografiji, s tem ko predstava izpostavlja paradoksalnost sleherne performativne prakse: ideala živosti in prezence sta nekakšni mitološki konstrukciji, danes pa tudi že ugodno kapitalizirana fetiša potrošnje performativnih umetnosti, pravzaprav nikoli zares izpolnjeni obljubi. Performativni dogodki so morda veliko bolj dogodki minevanja, odtekanja, smrti kot pa udejanitev prezence v živosti dogodka.

Prav to poudarjanje nemogoče prezentnosti performativnega telesa na odru, s tem pa tudi celotnega performativnega dogodka, slednji iztrga iz prevladujoče ekonomije scenskih umetnosti, ki temelji na dogodkih kot izgotovljenih delih, namenjenih potrošnji občinstva. Obenem pa tudi preobrne prevladujočo hierarhično distribucijo funkcij, ki je inherentna ekonomski logiki avtorjev kot proizvajalcev in gledalcev kot potrošnikov umetniškega dela. Redistribucija teh funkcij pa ne poteka na način kake direktne participacije ali eksplicitnega prebijanja klasičnega okvirja odrskega dogodka, temveč prav z emfatičnim izčrpavanjem specifične funkcije gledalca v scenskem dogodku: funkcije gledanja. Kot ugotavlja Rancière, je gledalec ob gledanju ter s svojo interpretacijo vselej že aktivni so-delavec uprizoritve; določena dela pa s širjenjem prostora njegovega vstopa to zgolj naredijo eksplicitno. To velja tudi za obravnavani dogodek: gledalcem se ne ponuja kot izgotovljeni produkt dela avtorjev, temveč so vanj nekako primorani investirati večjo intenziteto lastnega dela, kar pa ne rezultira v nikakršnem otipljivem produktu, pa tudi jasno zaznavnem mentalnem produktu (v smislu jasne interpretacije, »spoznanja«) ne. Vendar ta odtujitev dela in delavca od njegovega produkta seveda nima značaja negativne alienacije v Marxovem smislu – gledalčev »gon po interpretaciji« (ki ga David Lodge prav tako pripisuje moderni in zlasti modernistični literaturi) in sla po zaužitju umetniškega dela sta seveda (kot bomo videli, produktivno) frustrirani, a težko bi rekli, da se po predstavi počutimo eksploatirani. Te ne-produktivnosti (v dobesednem smislu) gledalčevega dela prav tako ne smemo zamenjati za pasivno brezinteresno kontemplacijo in estetsko ugajanje v Kantovem smislu, značilni za buržoazno ideologijo avtonomne umetnosti.

Svojevrstna »brezinteresnost«, ki je tu na delu, je bolj sorodna filozofski refleksiji, pa tudi kontemplaciji zenovskih paradok-

sov: intenziviranje gledalčeve perceptivne, afektivne in kognitivne investicije prav z njihovo frustracijo. Resnična produktivnost te investicije je torej odvisna predvsem od gledalčevega dejanskega vložka.

Je tovrstni modus konstrukcije drugačnega teritorija percepcije tista »nezgoda nezgod«, ki bo uničila »diktaturo hitrosti« in režim tekmovanja za informacije, tista subverzivna strategija upiranja sodobnim težnjam »globalizacije in virtualizacije«, ki z virtualnim udejanjanjem »realnega časa« povzročajo zgolj naraščanje dezinformacij in vse večje potujevanje naših odnosov s soljudmi in svetom, kot proces hipermoderne opisuje Virilio? Slednji sicer v »nezgodi nezgod« sluti nenamerno katastrofo, ki bo radikalno destabilizirala svetovni red; edini način upora v človekovi moči pa v boljšem poznavanju prednosti in slabosti ter reapropriaciji sodobnih tehnoloških orodij.

Obravnavani dogodek je seveda daleč od kakega strateškega gverilskega prisvajanja tehnologije in direktnega političnega učinkovanja; počasnost in kontemplacija pa nista nujno subverzivni na sebi, saj sta prav odsotnost gibanja in minimalnost dela telesa, pa tudi možnost zgolj-recepcije (četudi še tako aktivne) nekega dogodka, pravzaprav privilegija pripadnikov razmeroma dobro situiranih slojev postindustrijskih družb. Pa vendar, radikalna »zareza v prevladujoči režim čutnega« (po Rancièru), ki ga vpelje Soiztega, s svojo radikalno aktivacijo gledalcu v nekem smislu povrne izkušnjo časa, sorodno Bergsonovemu trajanju (kot subjektivni izkušnji odtekanja trenutkov v minevanje) in (vsaj potencialno in začasno) prekine s širjenjem monopola globalnega »realnega časa« (po Virilioju), ideološkega diktata tistih s primatom hitrosti dostopa in distribucije informacij. Četudi (ali prav zato, ker) učinkuje na partikularni in zgolj kognitivno-perceptivni ravni posameznih gledalcev, Soiztega z de-aktualizacijo morda razpre Deleuzovo »virtualno«, ko gledalce in ustvarjalce odpre (neteleološki in nekinetični) dimenziji postajanja. ..

Viri in literatura: Beller, Jonathan, The Cinematic Mode of Production: Attention Economy and the Society of the Spectacle, Hanover, N.H.: Dartmouth College Press; London: University Press of New England (Interfaces: Studies in Visual Culture), 2006.

Deleuze, Gilles, Kritika in klinika, Ljubljana: Študentska založba (Knjižna zbirka Koda), 2010.

Derrida, Jacques, Copy, Archive, Signature: A Conversation on Photography, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2010.

Lehmann, Hans-Thies, Postdramsko gledališče. Ljubljana: Maska, 2003.

Lepecki, Andre, Izčrpavajoči ples. Ljubljana: Založba MGL, 2010.

Lodge, David, Modes of Modern Writing. London: Edward Arnold, 1989.

Rancière, Jacques, Emancipirani gledalec, Ljubljana: Maska, 2010.

Sloterdijk, Peter, Kritika ciničkog uma, Zagreb: Globus, 1992.

Armitage, John, Critical Interview with Paul Virilio. Dostopno na: http://www.ctheory. net/articles.aspx?id=132 Virilio, Paul, Speed and Information: Cyberspace Alarm! Dostopno na: http://www. ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=72

( N E) G I B IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 41

279 THE / 250 OF / 101 AND / 65 IN / 60 TO / 54 IS / 45 A / 35 AS / 35 WHICH / 33 BY / 29 ON / 28 IT / 26 WITH / 25 THIS / 21 ARE / 20 ITS / 19 EVENT

Foto: Darko Radanović

THE SLOWNESS OF LIBERATION1 THE DECONSTRUCTION OF MOVEMENT AND THE RECONSTRUCTION OF ITS PERCEPTION IN THE PERFORMANCE OF DRAGANA ALFIREVIĆ ARE MADE OF THIS (DECEMBER 17TH, 2010, DANCE THEATRE LJUBLJANA) KATJA ČIČIGOJ TRANSLATED BY EVA ERJAVEC

1

The title is a paraphrase of Virilio’s work La vitesse de liberation (The Speed of Liberation).

4 2 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUBL IC S PACE

“Come with me to mythology, all my previous work is falling apart, I don’t want to be an object of art.

I’m breaking the chains, the creator has no more power over me.

I stand no chance. Therefore I am the actual. (Katalin Ladik)

T

he poem from which the above passage is taken has been alleged by Dragana Alfirević, a choreographer, theoretician and performer, born in Belgrade, in order to describe her performance Mosaic (Mozaik; May 19th, 2009, Glej Theatre). With tiny but key transformation we can also appropriate it for the description of her newest project – Are Made of This (Soiztega) (December 17th, 2010, Dance Theatre Ljubljana). As the title is eloquently telling us, in it there is to be found nothing actual, nothing in fact present or existent; the indistinctness, the ambiguity of the title at the utmost points out the existence of some indefinite is, Being as such in all its abstract metaphoric. The aporethic title of the event takes away from the classical, logical sentence structure the subject as well as the predicate and by doing so it changes it into the (unsolvable) riddle.

The discussed performing event, by a specific technique of the movement, which is based upon improvisation but works extremely controlled and precise, in fact works similarly as a riddle game of finding out the differences of two seemingly identical images. Barely noticeable, utmost slowed down movement of the four performers namely efficaciously activates the viewer’s attention and exercises his perception of details, tiny moves and impulses exactly by making it more difficult. If we dissuade our look for a few moments, away from a certain performer, we shall later detect the change of his position; the perception of the move in its presented performance is always escaping away from us.

And if something like the perception of movement in the present moment is always impossible, as is Zeno’s paradox on movement teaching us, the Dragana Alfirević’s performance makes these problems of time, movement and above all the perception

/ 19 OR / 18 BUT / 18 FOR / 17 DISCUSSED / 17 FROM / 17 MOVEMENT / 16 PERCEPTION / 16 THAT / 15 INTO / 15 SOME / 14 ALSO / 14 PERFORMANCE / 14 TIME /

of them completely explicit. Precisely this kind of explicit exposure of the problems of the look, with its making it difficult, can have, after Lehmann, the potential political or ethic function: the viewer’s attention is continuously returning back to himself and to his act of looking. This is never neutral and passive reception but through disposition of power relations between the observers and observed, between producer and consumer, between author and audience always implicitly a political act.

For the performance, which on conceptual level brings no explicit political provocations and actually has no concrete content or narration and which beside all it doesn’t require, expect or want anything explicit from the spectator, except the watching itself, the written may seem unusual. But as insists Rancière the spectator is being active with the sole act of looking, with sole cognition and doesn’t need additional activations (participatory or not) in the sense of Brecht and Artaud (and of many other contemporary artists). If we derive his (in its exclusionary privileging of passivity somewhat problematic) position to the extreme, if we “make a child behind his back” in a Deleuzian way, the politically most effective performance would be the one which would induce the spectator to the most active cognition and perception, almost to the state of some kind of Zen contemplation and meditation (without him having to do some kind of special spiritual exercises) in the sense of complete immersion and awareness of the present state (of looking). And just something similar achieves the performance of Dragana Alfirević – by intensifying the spectator’s attention she rocks us into the state of contemplation of performers’ bodies in space and of relations between them and by this also into the contemplation of our own act of this contemplation.

Where does the subversive potential of such (originally passive) quasi-Zen practice hide?

In the discussed event, the deconstruction of the movement to its most basic elements (on tiny twitching, hesitating attempts and unperceived movements) perhaps somewhat resembles the logic of dismantling of the movement in Futurist and Modernist painting (Picasso, Duchamp, et al.), but however it is just its opposite. While painting tries to introduce into the static medium the dynamics by a representation of the greatest possible number of parts of this dynamics (by positions of the bodies and objects), the discussed event deconstructs this dynamics itself in the dynamic medium; but not by abolishing it or by representation of statics but just by (minimal, controlled and precise) continuous dynamics. On the trail of Deleuze’s reflections on literature in Critique and Clinic we could say that the discussed event by movement as by “stuttering, mumbling, whining” clashes with its own boundary with its own otherness of the (dance) language, with its “silence”: with non-movement. By this it first means the r-evolution (not necessarily in the sense of pioneer avant-garde or radical provocativeness) of the dance medium, which it forces into constantly becoming-other from itself.

This, maybe in some way related practices of non-dance, has been amply analyzed by André Lepecki in the Exhausting Dance. His

derivations are also leading into the radically political foundation of redefinition of the nature of the medium of dance. But we have to be vigilant not to attribute to every formally similar practice the same meaning. To the Lepecki’s analysis, the strong contextual intertwining of the discussed practices, from which they are drawing their subversive charge which comes into a light at a “peaceful protest” of rejecting the move, is namely implicit: Vera Mantero’s tripping in one spot as a reaction on the Portuguese colonialism of the past; Alexander L. Pope’s stumbling as an implication of the white racism; cancellation of Trisha Brown’s vertical and La Ribot as a subversion of machismo in the artistic ideology of the modern Author … It would be hard to attribute to the discussed event such explicit encounter with specific political or ethical dominant position. As the title suggests we can in fact hardly recognize any clearly defined identity or position. More than (racial, ethnical, sexual …) identities, the discussed performance deals with the “liquid identity” of modernity (as Zygmunt Bauman would say), or with the process, which Virilio calls the global “de-localization” of the hypermodern era.

Dromology as the “logistic of speed” is, after Virilio, characteristic of the modern era of the “dictatorship of speed” – and, significantly enough, in Greek dromos means competition. The disposition of power in contemporary world takes place precisely according to the outcome of the speed competition: the possession of territory in times of “Information Wars” is no longer a matter of legal agreements and laws, but a matter of mobility, circulation (of information, of capital – perhaps more so, than a matter of people themselves). These processes can be seen as the utmost consequence of (as Sloterdijk calls it) the “kinetic impulse of modernity” after the endless progress. And the modernity is forced to perpetually produce the need for the production of new commodities and for their circulation. Each stopping (of a production, of consumption) is for such logic potentially explosive. Two art genres however, have exactly by the modern era and by growth of its compulsive movement from the beginning of the industrialization onwards, recognized its own specificity exactly in the movement: contemporary dance and film, Modernist art par excellence (as were named by many, by Benjamin and Jameson, for example).

Precisely the “cinematic mode of production” today, after Jonathan Beller, is moving from cinema to all kinds of cultural production. Some sort of cinematic logic also controls the discussed event: slow-motion pushed to the extreme. But this logic is, if entering the dance event, more a deconstruction than an appropriation of cinematic way of the “distribution of the sensible”. In specific modern “minority”, independent approaches to cinematography it is also possible to notice peculiar deconstruction of the cinematic modes of representation which prevail in contemporary (especially mainstream and genre) film production. The latter is substantially as well as formally based on the maximization of the dynamic effect: if it substantially (regardless of the genre) strives to accumulate narrative elements and information density, it formally incorporates formerly avant-garde approaches to the montage as the shortening of the film’s time

( N E) G I B IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 43

13 NOT / 12 HAS / 12 HIS / 12 JUST / 11 BE / 10 AWAY / 10 DANCE / 10 MOMENT / 10 WAY / 10 WE / 9 AFTER / 9 AT / 9 CONTEMPORARY / 9 PHOTOGRAPHY

and real space. At the Soviet avant-garde artists (for example Eisenstein, Vertov) the swift “dialectic” montage was understood as the powerful ideological weapon for incentive to a political action and at the same time the realization of the industrialization of the society (also of the Soviet ideal). The same logic has today become a prevailing mode of MTV, commercial, reportage and general sensational TV aesthetics, but now with the opposite effect, which is possibly a consequence of its exhaustion: the accumulation of images and sensations does not operate in the direction of the political wake-up call, but in the direction of passivity and strengthening overall apathy, in the direction of the effect of de-realization and de-sensibility which the bombing of consumers with all kinds of mediatised images, especially by the images of wars, catastrophes, suffering … has. Contemporary cineastes (Pedro Costa, Hou Hsiao-Hsien, Brillante Mendoza, Lav Diaz et al.) therefore had to invent other ways of effecting the sensibility of viewers, which are perhaps related to the discussed performance: the extremely long sequences in the real time with minimal density of happening, the broad use of a static camera or the extreme duration of the whole film (at Diaz even up to nine hours), which force us in a similar way of contemplation to sharpen our attention and again adjust our perception on noticing the details, on the way the images are constructed and on their succession, or they literally cut into the real time of the viewers by expansion through commodified duration suitable for neo-bourgeois consumption.

It is again about, despite the related phenomenological effects on the perception of viewers, a significant difference (which may be the consequence of the contextual placing of the discussed works) between concrete motives and effects of films themselves, as well as between film cases and the discussed event. Although it is possible to place some films into the context of reflection on global effects of past colonialism and contemporary imperialism to the life of economically and socially marginalized populations, whose time due to different structure of production ways and the level of industrialization and also due to different cultural and spiritual

E

ach stopping (of a production, of consumption) is for such logic potentially explosive.

4 4 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUB L IC S PACE

tradition takes place in a significantly different manner as the obsessive kinetic time of western (hyper)modernity, the discussed event with its specific temporality, which outgrows from the perception of (almost non)mobility, is just the incision in the heart of the western kinetic obsession itself, which also has been carried out in certain ideologies of the contemporary dance. Because of the nature of the medium the specific deconstruction of the movement in the discussed event is of course different from cinematic ways of movement deconstruction. Movement that is escaping perception and is leaving behind only trails of positions which it over passed, reminds us more on photograms than on the continuity of the film broadcasting. In other respects also the dramaturgy of the performance, the specific presence of the performers and the way of plotting their move, are strongly related to photography, especially to some of its reflections by Barthes and Derrida. In his last work Camera lucida Barthes builds his reflections on photography on the analyses of the photographs of his dead mother: he understand photography as essentially connected with passing away and death – a photograph is in fact a trail which is being left on the tape by a moment already gone, lost forever. Regardless of whether the represented objects are in fact un-alive, still alive or already gone, a photograph is always (a priori unsuccessful) attempt to actualize something that no longer exists, some moment that has already “died”. This trail of passing touches us the most in the punctum of a photograph: tiny detail, which is escaping every possible pragmatic (documentary, propaganda, aesthetic …) purpose of a photograph and its rational and linguistic interpretation (typical for studium) and has an affective, even bodily effect on the viewer. Derrida associates this essential connection of photography with the passing of the referee with the spectral effect of that, which on the trail of one of its beginners (i.e. William Talbot) he calls skyographia – writing down the shadows: every reproduced image is in itself a division of a time moment on that, which is preserved on the record and that which is passed.

The photography is so essentially paradoxical, not just because of the division of (indivisible) time moment, but also because of its schizophrenic nature on the border of documenting, archiving, referring to some (once) existing referee on one side, and of conscious manipulation (by bracketing, lighting, focusing, choosing the motive …) by an author on the other. Even though, due to the material existence of the carrier, the first way of recording and referentiality is usually attributed to analogue photography, and the second mode of “performative” image construction and its reproduction to the digital one, Derrida points out, that they are both already inherent to the birth of photography, and in some way also maintain at the use of the other material carrier. However, exactly these paradoxical dualities, typical for the photography, are perhaps possible to be attributed to the discussed event, whose title can already be placed into the paradox.

The absence of every fabulative narration or concrete substantive elements and almost abstract improvised minimal movements, whose source is possible to ascribe to some inner impulses of the performers (far away from any psychological pathos or expression), which are not accessible to spectator’s perception,

/ 8 CONTEMPLATION / 8 ITSELF / 8 MORE / 8 POLITICAL / 8 SENSE / 8 US / 7 ALL / 7 ALREADY / 7 EXPLICIT / 7 FACT / 7 NO / 7 SPECIFIC / 6 AN / 6 BETWEEN

and they make every rational interpretation impossible. They affect the spectators only on the level of perception and affection), and those are growing out especially from the perception of the details and micro-movements (peculiar punctums), on which the special movement technique of minimal dynamics is trying to get us used to. Just this detailed attention, which effects affective, paradoxically divides time moment onto what stays in observer’s perception and later after rethinking passes into the memory, and that what flows away into passing. The infinite division of the moment (which paradox is illustrated by one of Zeno’s paradoxes) so emphasizes just the nonexistence of the moment itself: in human consciousness merely trail of gone or a premonition of future moment exists, but never the direct perception of the present moment. Just this mode of perception is bringing the discussed performance closer to photography, by performance exposing the paradox of every performative practice: the ideal of liveliness and presence are some mythological constructions, today already capitalized fetishes of performing arts consumption, in fact never kept promises. Performing events are possibly much more the events of passing, flowing away, death, than apparition of presence into the liveliness of the event.

Just this emphasizing of the impossible presence of the performing body on the stage and by that the whole performing event, rips the latter out of prevailing economy of performing arts, which is based on events as made-up works that are designed for audience’s consumption. At the same time it inverts prevailing hierarchical distribution of functions, which is inherent to economic logic of authors as producers, and spectators as consumers of artwork. Redistribution of these functions does not take place in a way of some direct participation or explicit breaking of classic frame of the stage event, but with emphatic exhaustion of the spectator’s specific function in the scene event: the function of looking. As Rancière observes, the spectator while looking and interpreting, is always already an active co-worker of the performance; certain works with the expansion of the space of his entrance make this merely explicit. This also applies for the discussed event: it does not offer itself to the spectators as a made-up product of authors’ work, but it is somehow forced to invest in it a greater intensity of their own work. This does not result in any tangible product and not in a clearly detectable mental product (in a sense of clear interpretation or of “cognition”). But this alienation of work and worker from his product, of course, has no character of negative alienation in Marx’s sense – spectators “impulse for interpretation” (which David Lodge as well ascribes to Modern, especially to Modernist literature) and lust after consuming the artwork are of course (as we shall see, productively) frustrated, but it would be hard to say, that after the performance we feel exploited. This un-productivity (in the literal sense) of spectator’s work should not be mistaken for a passive disinterested contemplation and aesthetic pleasure in Kant’s sense, which is typical for bourgeois ideology of autonomous art. Peculiar “disinterestedness” which is at stake here is more related to the philosophical reflection and also contemplation of Zen paradoxes: the intensifying of spectators’ perceptive,

affective and cognitive investment by their frustration. The real productivity of this investment therefore depends above all from the spectator’s concrete stake.

Is this kind of mode of construction of different perceptive territory that “accident of accidents”, which will destroy the “dictatorship of speed” and the regime of competing for information, is it that subversive strategy of resisting the contemporary tendencies of “globalization and virtualization”, which by virtual realization of “real time” cause just growth of disinformation and increasing alienation of our relations with fellow human beings and the world, as the process of hypermodern has been described by Virilio? In the “accident of accidents” he has a premonition of unintentional catastrophe that will radically destabilize the world order; and the only way of resisting it that is in human power lies in better knowledge of strengths and weaknesses and in re-appropriation of contemporary technological tools.

The discussed event is of course far away from any strategic guerrilla appropriation of technology and from direct political effect; slowness and contemplation are not necessarily subversive in itself, as just the absence of movement and the minimality of the body part, and also the possibility of just-reception (although very active) of some event, are in fact a privilege of individuals who are part of relatively well situated layers of post-industrial societies. However, the radical “cut into the prevailing regime of the sensible” (after Rancière), which is introduced by Soiztega (Are Made of This), with its radical activation, in some sense renders the spectator his experience of time, familiar to Bergson’s continuity (as a subjective experience of moments flowing away into passing away) and (at least potentially and temporarily) interrupts with spreading of the primacy of global “real time” (after Virilio), the ideological dictatorship of those with the primacy of speed access and information distribution. Although (or precisely because) it operates on a particular and merely cognitiveperceptive level of individual spectators, Are Made of This with de-actualization perhaps sets asunder Deleuze’s “virtual”, when it opens the spectators and authors to (non-teleological and nonkinetic) dimension of becoming. ..

Notes: Beller, Jonathan, The Cinematic Mode of Production: Attention Economy and the Society of the Spectacle, Hanover, N.H.: Dartmouth College Press; London: University Press of New England (Interfaces: Studies in Visual Culture), 2006.

Deleuze, Gilles, Critique et clinique, Paris: Les Editions de Minuit, 1993.

Derrida, Jacques, Copy, Archive, Signature: A Conversation on Photography, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2010.

Lehmann, Hans-Thies, Postdramatic Theatre, London, New York: Routledge, 2006.

Lepecki, Andre, Exhausting Dance. Performance and the Politics of Movement, London: Routledge, 2006.

Lodge, David, Modes of Modern Writing, London: Edward Arnold, 1989.

Rancière, Jacques, The Emancipated Spectator, London: Verso, 2009.

Sloterdijk, Peter, Critique of Cynical Reason, London, New York: Verso, 1988.

Armitage, John, Critical Interview with Paul Virilio. Accessible at: http://www.ctheory. net/articles.aspx?id=132 Virilio, Paul: Speed and Information: Cyberspace Alarm! Accessible at: http://www. ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=72

( N E) G IB IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 45

80 JE / 79 IN / 59 KI / 59 V / 46 KOT / 45 NE / 41 BI / 39 DA / 39 SE / 37 NA / 33 NI / 26 PA / 21 UMETNOSTI / 19 BARTLEBY / 19 S / 19 ŠE / 18 FORMULA / 18 ZA

RAJE BI, DA NE. UMETNIŠKA IZJAVA, KI PREČI POLITIČNO PREVPRAŠEVANJE PARADIGME NEGIBANJA KOT REVOLTA V SODOBNEM PLESU PIA BREZAVŠČEK

IZHODIŠČE: BARTLEBY, PISAR1

N

ekega dne v pisarno advokata na Wall Streetu vstopi siva figura prepisovalca. Na oglas se je odzval čuden tih mož brez referenc, za katerega se odvetniku zdi, da bo vnesel red med ostale uslužbence. Zares se izkaže z izjemno vestnim prepisovanjem, a ko ga delodajalec prosi, naj z ostalimi prepisovalci pregleda prepise, Bartleby prvič izusti svoj »raje bi, da ne«. Preden se formula kot virus razširi in v slavnem newyorškem zaporu Grobnice dobesedno izstrada pisarja, pustoši tudi po drugih protagonistih. Bartlebyjeva pasivnost je pravzaprav tista, ki šele lahko aktivira dogajanje. »Raje bi, da ne« je sprožilec in gonilo zgodbe. Enigma Bartleby je nabito orožje.

Figura Bartleby ameriškega pisatelja Hermana Melvilla, ta origi1

4 6 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUBL I C S PACE

Herman Melville, »Bartleby, pisar«, v: Mladen Dolar (ur.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, Ljubljana: Analecta, 2004. Angleški izvirnik je najprej izšel v dveh izvodih Putnam’s Magazine leta 1853 in bil ponatisnjen v zbirki The Piazza Tales leta 1856.

/ 17 LAHKO / 17 PO / 17 RAJE / 15 TA / 15 TAKO / 14 PRAV / 14 Z / 13 KAR / 13 TUDI / 13 ZGOLJ / 12 TO / 12 ŽE / 10 GIBANJA / 10 KRITIKA / 10 PLESA / 10 ZATO /

nal, ki bi raje, da ne, ni zgolj medla pojava, ki jo žene gon po smrti, kot ugotavlja Mladen Dolar.2 Bartleby ne prakticira zgolj do roba pasivnosti prignanega nihilizma, ki bi zaobrnil celo Nietzscheja in njegov »človek bo še raje hotel nič kot nič ne hotel«.3 Pisar je s svojim »raje bi« na strani afirmacije, ki pa jo v zaključku stavka pogoltne konstanta negacije. Bartleby ni, kot bi morda zatrdila Negri in Hardt,4 zgolj figura v dolgi tradiciji zavračanja dela, ni preprost upornik – negator, ki bi mu šele morala slediti aktivnost, konstitucija nove družbe. Bartleby, tako opaža tudi Mladen Dolar, je že tako negacija kot afirmacija in prav ta vmesna pozicija je najbolj eksplozivna. Sivopolti pisar na skrivnosten način izumlja novo bežiščnico, ki ima lahko revolucionarne razsežnosti. Nastopi kot virus in se potem razširi v vse pore zgodbe/družbe. To ni odkriti upor, je bolezen, ki ima zdraviteljske potenciale, kot je ugotavljal Deleuze.5 Bartleby je anomalija, ki pa potencira lastnosti, že prisotne v družbi. Preseka rutino pisarne s svojo novo rutino negacije. V utečen stroj zareže z novim ritmom, ki prvotnega povsem iztiri. Mladen Dolar6 ugotavlja, da Bartleby zagreši anomalijo s tem, ko pomeša dva nezdružljiva kraja kapitalizma.

Svobodno izbiro, ki mu je dana kot kupcu, izrablja natanko tam, kjer mu je odvzeta, torej na delovnem mestu. Bartleby uveljavlja voljo na napačnem strukturnem mestu, kar pa sprevrača celotno konstelacijo tega toposa. Privatno in javno se, več kot sto let prezgodaj, popolnoma pomešata. Pisar je klica postfordizma v fordizmu, ampak morda prav tista, ki skupaj z negacijo ohranja tudi pozitivno možnost subverzije, je »tisti tip mišljenja, ki hkrati misli pogubne značilnosti kapitalizma skupaj z njegovim nenavadnim in osvobajajočim dinamizmom«,7 k čemur po Jamesonu poziva Karl Marx. Bartleby je za kapitalizem več, kot želijo biti Laibach za totalitarizem. Bartleby je subverzivna afirmacija in negacija hkrati. Je imitacija ritmičnega gibanja kapitalizma in s tem njegova afirmacija, a rutinirano se ponavlja prav negacija na mestu, kjer se ne bi smela pojavljati in s tem sprevrže celoten ustroj ustaljene produkcije.

Bartleby ni umetnik, presega pa celo oznako »umetnina«, saj kot opaža Deleuze,8 on ni ne metafora, niti ni simbol; je čista, do minimalizma izklesana forma ali z Deleuzom – formula – saj gre prav za aktivno formo. Alenka Zupančič9 ugotavlja, da aktivnost Bartlebyjeve formule povzroča nemoč ostati na mestu oziroma biti čisto mesto samo, kar je pisarjeva želja. Vsako mesto že predpostavlja aktivnost, a ker bi Bartleby rad ostal samó mesto sâmo, brez vsakršnih funkcijskih pritiklin, ki vsakemu mestu neizogibno pripadajo, postane formula, aktivnost, ki sprevrača vsa druga mesta. Advokat mora zaradi Bartlebyjeve imobilnosti celo zbežati iz lastne pisarne. S svojo pasivnostjo pisarjeva for2 3 4

5 6 7 8 9

Mladen Dolar, »Pisar Bartleby in njegova pravica«, v: Dolar (ur.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, str. 159.

Friedrich Nietzsche, Genealogija morale, Ljubljana: SM, 1988, str. 354.

Antonio Negri in Michael Hardt, Imperij, Ljubljana: Študentska založba, 2003, str.

169–170, ali tudi Antonio Negri in Michael Hardt, »Bartlebyjevo zavračanje«, v: Dolar (ur.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, str. 129–130.

Gilles Deleuze, »Bartleby in formula«, v: Dolar (ur.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne.

Dolar, »Pisar Bartleby in njegova pravica«, v: Dolar (ur.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, str.

156.

Fredric Jameson, Postmodernizem, Ljubljana: Analecta (2. izdaja), 2001, str. 58.

Deleuze, »Bartleby in formula«, v: Dolar (ur.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, str. 55.

Alenka Zupančič, »Bartleby: beseda je meso postala«, v: Dolar (ur.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, str. 214–220.

N

ekega dne v pisarno advokata na Wall Streetu vstopi siva figura prepisovalca. Na oglas se je odzval čuden tih mož brez referenc, za katerega se odvetniku zdi, da bo vnesel red med ostale uslužbence.

Zares se izkaže z izjemno vestnim prepisovanjem, a ko ga delodajalec prosi, naj z ostalimi prepisovalci pregleda prepise, Bartleby prvič izusti svoj »raje bi, da ne«. Preden se formula kot virus razširi in v slavnem newyorškem zaporu Grobnice dobesedno izstrada pisarja, pustoši tudi po drugih protagonistih.

Bartlebyjeva pasivnost je pravzaprav tista, ki šele lahko aktivira dogajanje. »Raje bi, da ne« je sprožilec in gonilo zgodbe. Enigma Bartleby je nabito orožje.

( N E) G I B IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 47

9 INSTITUCIJE / 9 SO / 9 UMETNOST / 8 CELO / 8 IZ / 8 KO / 8 MESTO / 8 NAJ / 8 OSTAJA / 8 SAJ / 7 A / 7 KJER / 7 MED / 7 MESTU / 7 NEGACIJA / 7 PRI

K

ako izstopiti iz prevladujočega modela produkcije umetnosti, ne da bi izpadli iz njega?

Kako z afirmatorno negacijo sprevrniti meje umetnosti in politike? Kako reči »raje bi, da ne« in obstati na mestu celo brez bartlebyjevskega samoizstradanja?

Bartlebyjeva formula je žrtvovala avtorja izjave, vendar je zarezala v ustaljeno družbeno produkcijo in funkcioniranje. Kaj pa mora formula žrtvovati v našem primeru?

mula reartikulira potencial gibanja, tako da ga najprej zaustavi, iztiri in nato zanj najde nove bežiščnice.

UMETNOST: INSTITUCIONALIZIRANO ČUDAŠTVO

»R

aje bi, da ne« – ta zatik, čudaštvo, manieristična neslovnična formula, kakor ponavljajoči se Bartlebyjev stavek poimenuje Deleuze,10 pa je vseeno izjava, ki se nahaja trdno znotraj literature, na notranji strani institucije umetnosti. Prav zato ta zatik, to čudaštvo, lahko jemljemo resno in (zato) ostaja Bartleby predmet toliko interpretacij tudi izven psihiatričnega diskurza zaprte institucije. Zgolj zato, ker je literarni junak, lahko presega oznake avtizma, anoreksije, katatonije, monomanije in služi kot njihova izčiščena presežna oblika, pozitivna paradigma bolezenskega, ki lahko celo zdravi. Kot literarni junak je veliko več kot zgolj partikularen. Po Dolarju11 je funkcija tega lika zaradi njegove čiste izpeljave kvintesenčna in je z njim mogoče pojasnjevati celo psihologijo samo.

Vsak zatik v ustaljeni družbeni dinamiki se v sodobni družbi po Foucaultu že popolnoma samoregulira, saj je nadzor inkorporiran v najbolj fine družbene strukture. Biooblast parazitira na tistem, kar pojmujemo kot povsem privatno. Vsako čudaštvo se iz družbe, tega gladko tekočega produkcijskega stroja, samoizloči. Kamen spotike je treba čim prej odpraviti, da bi stroj lahko stekel dalje, in ko steče, se ne ozira. Vsako čudaštvo, vsak tujek je treba kategorizirati in zakleniti v institucijo, pa naj bo to psihiatrična institucija, zapor ali pa nenazadnje institucija umetnosti. Takoj ko je nekaj opredeljeno, pa četudi kot umetnost, postane družbeno konformno, čeprav morda ostane nerazumljeno.

Dispozitiv umetnosti sicer res dopušča še največ svobode, a zdi se, da ta svoboda ostaja omejena na znotrajumetniško področje. Umetnost je blažilo za neposrednost čudaštva, norosti in deviantnosti. Ustvarja suspenz, ki te družbeno nesprejemljive faktorje, ki bi se sicer takoj samoizločili, ohranja žive in utripajoče, pa čeprav varno pospravljene v instituciji umetnosti, ki je tako kot ostale institucije znotrajoblastna struktura. Umetnost paradoksno ostaja edino polje upora, a je prav tako vedno že del vladajoče oblasti. Umetnost ni avtonomna sfera zunaj političnega, ampak hermetična tvorba znotraj politike, ki ni membranasto prepustna. Ali pač?

Bartleby, kot smo z Deleuzom povedali že zgoraj, ni metafora in ni simbol, kar naj bi bili prevladujoči sredstvi v umetnosti. Najbolj umetniško v smislu ustvarjanja novega je tako prav tisto, kar presega metaforičnost in simboliko. Sivolični pisar ni nič od naštetega; Bartleby je formula, ki zaradi svoje gole formalnosti, ki je nedoločljivost sama, zaradi poskusa zasesti golo 10 Deleuze, »Bartleby in formula«, v: Dolar (ur.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, str. 55.

11 Dolar, »Pisar Bartleby in njegova pravica«, v: Dolar (ur.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, str.

133–134.

4 8 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUB L IC S PACE

/ 7 TEM / 7 VEČ / 7 VEDNO / 7 ZARADI / 6 ALI / 6 BITI / 6 BREZ / 6 ČE / 6 FORMA / 6 MEJE / 6 NIČ / 6 PLESU / 6 POLITIČNO / 5 AFIRMACIJA / 5 ČUDAŠTVO

mesto, učinkuje prek robov umetnosti. Formula Bartleby luknja hermetični prostor institucije in zato lahko njena izčiščena forma predira meje umetnosti. Formula »raje bi, da ne« je kreacija, ki ne more nastati na nobenem drugem družbenem polju kot v umetnosti, saj bi bila po hitrem postopku sankcionirana in utišana. Če pa nastane v polju umetnosti, se lahko z redukcijo na golo formo samoaktivira na način formule. Ko ji uspe z golo formalnostjo preseči partikularnost umetnostne panoge ali institucije, lahko prodre tudi izven njenih meja. Ker je formula, je aktivna sila, ki ima prav to zmožnost fluidnosti.

LEPECKIJEV IZČRPAVAJOČI PLES:12 FORMA (ŠE) NI FORMULA

V

svojem delu Izčrpavajoči ples André Lepecki podaja svojevrsten primer parafraze Bartlebyja. Portugalska koreografinja Vera Mantero in španski koreograf Santiago Sempre sta na enomesečnem laboratoriju SKITE, ki ga je leta 1992 zasnoval Jean-Marc Adolphe, izjavila, da so »svetovni politični dogodki taki, da ne moreta plesati«.13 Koreografa in plesalca »bi raje, da ne«. Ples, tradicionalno pojmovan kot upiranje težnosti, dejanje lahkotnosti v svetu, ki je politično vse prej kot lahkoten, postane celo sporen. Politični kaos moralno terja imobilnost institucije umetnosti, še posebej plesa, katerega bistvo naj bi bila prav mobilnost.

Celo več. Tisto, kar na bi veljalo za samo bistvo plesa, torej gibanje, je po Lepeckiju14 prevladujoča paradigma sodobnega hegemoničnega sveta, ki se še vedno poslužuje kolonialističnih vzorcev. Svet se še ni izvil iz svojega kinetičnega impulza moderne, ni presegel taylorističnih modelov, ki težijo k vedno večji učinkovitosti, zmogljivosti in uspešnosti, nikoli nismo prestopili praga moderne k nečemu, kar bi bilo post-. Še vedno obstaja eksploatacija v imenu dobičkonosnih strasti15, hiperprodukcija za hiperpotrošnjo – vedno v gibanju. Moderna družba je dobro podmazan stroj, katere ontološki smisel ostaja čista bith-gibanju, kakor v delu Lepeckija pravi Sloterdijk16. Lepecki17 citira poznavalca plesa Randyja Martina, po katerem je mobilizacija ključni koncept, ki ga morajo preiskovati tudi plesni študiji, če želijo izstopiti iz svoje sumljive politične ohromelosti. Tudi Randy Martin želi ubežati mišljenju plesne umetnosti zgolj kot metaforične oziroma analogne politični teoriji oziroma političnemu. Namesto tega želi preiti k dobesednosti in metonimičnosti, kjer pod vprašaj preide sama ontološka podstat plesa kot gibanja, saj je ta v svojem bistvu enakovrstna ontologiji moderne kot biti-h-gibanju. Ples ne more biti kritična

12 André Lepecki, Izčrpavajoči ples: uprizarjanje in politika giba, Ljubljana: Knjižnica MGL, 2009.

13 Lepecki, Izčrpavajoči ples, str. 38.

14 Prav tam, predvsem »Uvod«, str. 9–41.

15 Glej: Peter Klepec, Dobičkonosne strasti - Kapitalizem in perverzija 1, Ljubljana: Analecta, 2008.

16 Glej: Lepecki, Izčrpavajoči ples, str. 32 (Peter Sloterdijk, La mobilisation infinite, Pariz: Christian Bourgeois Editeurs, 200, str. 35 in 36).

17 Prav tam, str. 29 in 30 (Randy Martin, Critical Moves, Durham, NC. in London: Duke University Press, str. 14).

umetniška praksa, vse dokler pleše v istem ritmu kot oblast.

André Lepecki zato afirmira prakso počasnejše plesne ontologije. Njegova razdelava spotikov, padcev, plazenj, dejanj mirovanja, teh parafraz formule »raje bi, da ne«, odpre novo poglavje v mišljenju plesa. Kritika spektakelske hiperkinetike razširi meje plesnega in koreografskega in opredeljuje njuno ontologijo z vnovičnim prevpraševanjem »razmerja med subjektom in telesom«.18 Ko plesalec gibanju, česar naj bi bil po definiciji kar najbolj vešč, reče svoj »raje bi, da ne«, se v plesu začne novo poglavje. »Pasivnost« imobilnosti je ponovno uspela proizvesti bežiščnico, ki aktivno razširja meje in prodira onkraj membrane tradicionalno avtonomno plesnega. Pa je res to že kar politični potencial ali ostaja ta reartikulacija znotrajumetniška?

Lepecki zatrjuje, da naj bi dejanja mirovanja v plesu »sprožala performativno kritiko njegove udeleženosti v splošni ekonomiji mobilnosti, ki sporoča, podpira in reproducira ideološke formacije poznokapitalistične moderne«.19 Na tem mestu se moramo ustaviti in premisliti dobesednost in neposrednost povezave med kinetiko kot formalnim določilom znotraj določene umetniške discipline in na drugi strani kinetiko pretoka kapitala, ki narekuje vsesplošen vrvež produkcije in potrošnje. Ima gibanje zares obakrat isti vzgib, pri čemer vztrajata Randy Martin in André Lepecki? Če je bila dobesednost in neposrednost mogoča v primeru Bartleby, kjer je namesto metaforičnosti parabole zaradi redukcije na čisto formo njegova izjava zaživela kot formula, pa se zdi, da v tem primeru stvari ne potekajo tako gladko. Kljub temu, da je izčrpanost plesa kot gibanja privedla do redefinicije plesnega, pa je preboj zidov umetnosti kot institucije tu težja naloga. Resda gre politično v umetnosti po Lehmanu20 iskati prav v formi in ne toliko v vsebini, a tudi forma ni že politično per se.

Načelna ustavitev gibanja na ravni sodobnoplesne umetnosti, če naj bi vsaka takšna redukcija pomenila že kar družbeno kritiko, se ponovno zaplete v analogijo oziroma metaforo, pred čemer naj bi kot zares kritična umetnost, tako Martin,21 ravno bežala. Četudi na odru ostaja ontologija počasna, pa je vseeno vpeta v izjemno hiter produkcijski mehanizem, ki to počasnost skoraj z nadsvetlobno hitrostjo distribuira po pomembnih sodobnoplesnih odrih. Izjava »raje bi, da ne«, zataknjena znotraj institucije umetnosti, še ne more učinkovati zares politično, saj se še vedno giblje na polju analogije in metafore, ki še nista reakcionarni. »Raje bi, da ne bi bilo gibanja v plesu«, še ni formula, umeščena v polje absolutne neodločenosti. Točno ve, o čem se odloča in kje je njeno mesto, zato to ni čisto mesto, ki bi lahko pretirano zamajalo okoliške (zunajumetniške) pozicije; čeprav širi meje plesa in umetnosti, pa jih še ne predira. Absolutna negacija gibanja v plesu še ni afirmacija negacije,22 še ni hoteti ne-gibanje in tako aktivno sprožiti virus, da bi se neizogibno razširil po vseh vejah oblasti. Forma še ni formula.

18 19 20 21 22

Prav tam, str. 18.

Prav tam, str. 38.

Hans-Thies Lehman, Postdramsko gledališče, Ljubljana: Maska, 2003, str. 300.

V: Lepecki, Izčrpavajoči ples, str. 30.

Zupančič, »Bartleby: beseda je meso postala«, v: Dolar (ur.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, str. 219.

( N E) G I B IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 49

/ 5 FORMO / 5 GA / 5 GIBANJE / 5 IMA / 5 LEPECKI / 5 NAJBOLJ / 5 NEGACIJE / 5 OBSTAJA / 5 PISAR / 5 PLES / 5 PONOVNO / 5 POSTANE / 5 PRODUKCIJE

6 MESECEV 1 LOKACIJA: IZSTOP IZ MOBILNOSTI IN REAFIRMACIJA GIBANJA

V

domači gledališki produkciji je tako na institucionalni, še bolj pa na neodvisni sceni, opazen porast števila produkcij, ki povečujejo kulturno ponudbo, hkrati pa zmanjšujejo čas nastanka produkcij na povprečno dva meseca.

Produkcijski model umetnosti je kapitalistični stroj par excellence, ki s svojo hitrostjo zmanjšuje kakovost in ubija ideje.

Temu stroju pa ni podvržena samo produkcija, ampak vsi izrastki, ki pritičejo njenemu dispozitivu, vključno s kritiko, pri kateri zaradi hiperprodukcije prav tako pada njena teža, poglobljenost refleksije, relevantnost zaradi velike frekventnosti itn. Kolesje stroja teče dalje – kapitalizem ne prenese misli na tratenje denarja, niti si ne predstavlja trenutka brez tratenja.

Kroženje kapitala je njegovo bistvo, zato se ves čas pretvarja, da je nadpovprečno aktiven. Misliti, kaj šele prakticirati »malevičevsko lenobo«23 kot resnico človeštva, brez katere ni možna umetnost, je v takšni vsesplošni mobilnosti največji možni greh. Kako izpeljati tovrsten »greh« brez linča? Kako izstopiti iz prevladujočega modela produkcije umetnosti, ne da bi izpadli iz njega? Kako z afirmatorno negacijo sprevrniti meje umetnosti in politike? Kako reči »raje bi, da ne« in obstati na mestu celo brez bartlebyjevskega samoizstradanja? Bartlebyjeva formula je žrtvovala avtorja izjave, vendar je zarezala v ustaljeno družbeno produkcijo in funkcioniranje. Kaj pa mora formula žrtvovati v našem primeru?

Bojana Cvejić in Xavier Le Roy v predstavitvi projekta 6 months 1 location24 v istoimenski knjižici razlagata, da je »tisto, kar smo nekoč imeli za gibanje deteritorializiacije – delo na več različnih mestih in na več projektih naenkrat – postala obveznost za vsakogar, ki želi biti neodvisen. Projekti so zgolj še koproducirani in umetniki so prisiljeni v rezidence, da bi napolnili prizorišča s svojimi umetniškimi aktivnostmi, predstavljati morajo projekte v nastajanju. Rezultat tega je prosti trg, kjer se so se umetniki prisiljeni ponovno izumljati kot želena komoditeta, ki tekmuje za priložnosti med zmanjšanim številom kuriranih mest.«25 Umetniki so sami postali prodajno blago, ki se mora tržiti po principih oportunizma in cinizma.

Namen projekta 6M1L je ustaviti tovrstne pogoje umetniške produkcije, ki na participiente lahko deluje kvečjemu zaviralno.

To lahko stori samo tako, da sam deluje kot zavora mobilnosti, ki na videz osvobaja. Projekt združi 18 umetnikov in teoretikov, ki vsak s svojim projektom participirajo v raziskovalnem procesu, ki traja šest mesecev in obstaja na eni sami lokaciji. Njihova (bartlebyjevska) žrtev je pač ta, da začasno ne participirajo na institucionalnem trgu in so zato manj vidni in prezentni na internacionalni sodobni performativni sceni. Ta »lenoba« nemobilnosti pa sproži drugo vrsto gibanja, ki je prav v kontinuiteti 23 Kazimir Malevich, Laziness - the real truth of mankind (1921).

24 Mette Ingvardsen (ur.), 6 months 1 location, ur., everybods publications, 2009, str.

11–14. V nadaljevanju navajano kot 6M1L. 25 Prav tam, str. 12.

5 0 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUB L I C S PACE

dela.26 Bojana Cvejić se sprašuje, kaj torej narediti s časom, ko ga imamo naenkrat dovolj? Pavza v ustaljeni kontinuiteti dela, med katero ni časa za refleksijo lastne pozicije, omogoča čas za vse to, za kar sicer ni časa. Premisliti lastno pozicijo, imeti možnost iti dlje pri lastni raziskavi ter možnost dela s kolektivom ljudi, pri čemer projekt ne zahteva nikakršnih nujnih končnih produktov. To nikakor ne pomeni zgolj oditi na počitnice. 6M1L je motnja v ritmu, ki spodbudi drugačen ritem – ki je bil, če prelistamo publikacijo, tudi precej natempiran, vendar ne hektično pavšalen v dirki do premiere. Razvila so se nova orodja, temeljiteje so se premislila vprašanja in ideje, nastali so inovativni zapisi itn.

POBEG IN VNOVIČNA ARTIKULACIJA: TOČKA KRITIČNEGA PREŠITJA UMETNOSTI IN POLITIČNEGA

U

stavljeni ples je negacija, ki afirmira nove načine mišljenja plesa in je zato znotraj plesa kritična praksa, a zdi se, da je njen domet le stežka političen, saj če postane političen, mu ostane zgolj še negacija, brezglavi upor: »nič več gibanja!«. Po drugi strani pa projekt 6M1L ustavi kulturnopolitično perpetuirano gibanje in ta negacija sproži produktivne pogoje za reinvencije lastne pozicije in produktivno razvijanje idej. Protagonisti projekta 6M1L niso preprosto eskapisti. Njihova pozicija vključuje tako negacijo kot afirmacijo. Šele eksodus, prekinitev s prevladujočim načinom produkcije, lahko vrne umetniškemu ustvarjanju avtonomijo, da ta lahko ponovno izumlja lastno pozicijo, s tem pa tudi metode in ideje, formo in vsebino.

Bartlebyjevska afirmatorna forma negacije tudi po Geraldu Raunigu27 nosi kritični potencial. Ta obstaja kot socialna kritika, ki se ne spreneveda glede lastne vpetosti v institucijo. Obstaja torej kot kombinacija socialne kritike IN samokritike, ki je strukturirana na način pobega, ki pa ne ostaja v izgnanstvu, ampak spreminja same načine vladanja. Učinkovita kritika je lahko takšna, ki po Raunigu28 vsebuje obe stopnji: suspenz sodbe (moment negacije) in reinvencijo (moment afirmacije). Raunig29 izhaja iz Foucaultovega predavanja »Kaj je kritika?«, kjer ta razvije tezo, da je kritika umetnost »ne biti vladan ‘takole’, ne v imenu teh principov, ne pod takšnimi pogoji, s takšnimi procedurami, ne tako, ne za to in ne od njih«. Produktiven je lahko le nenehen proces instituacije, ne pa zgolj fundamentalna kritika institucij. Kritika obstaja v nenehnem preoblikovanju, iskanju bežiščnic, saj kot pravita Gilles Deleuze in Claire Parnet: »nič ni bolj aktivno kot beg« in kot pravi Paolo Virno: »nič ni manj pa26 Prav tam, str. 11.

27 Gerald Raunig, »Instituent Practices: Fleeing, Instituing, Transforming in What is Critique? Suspension and Re-composition in Textual and Social Machines«, v: Gerald Raunig in Gene Ray (ur.), Art and Contemporary Critical Practice, Reinventing Institutional Critique, London: Mayfly, 2009.

28 Gerald Raunig, »What is Critique? Suspension and Re-composition in Textual and Social Machines«, v: Raunig in Ray (ur.), Art and Contemporary Critical Practice, str. 114.

29 Raunig, »Instituent Practices: Fleeing, Instituing, Transforming«, v: Art and Contemporary Critical Practice, str. 4.

/ 5 SAMO / 5 TEGA / 5 ZNOTRAJ / 4 AKTIVNO / 4 AKTIVNOST / 4 AMPAK / 4 BISTVO / 4 DELA / 4 DELEUZE / 4 DO / 4 DRUŽBENO / 4 GIBANJU / 4 GOLO

sivno kot akcija pobega in izhoda«. Pobeg je s svojo aktivnostjo afirmacija, hkrati pa negira mesto, s katerega uhaja. Seveda pa ni že vsako preoblikovanje emancipatorna transformacija. Kot pojasnjuje Raunig, je nenehno preoblikovanje že sam sestavni del vladanja. Emancipatorna transformacija je mogoča takrat, ko se efekti razširjajo čez meje partikularnih polj, kot smo pokazali za formulo »raje bi, da ne«, kjer umetnost skozi redukcijo na golo formo postane aktivna formula, ki preči tudi politično. Prav to uhajanje je po Foucaultu bistvo kritike. Ni res, da ni mogoča kritika institucije, ker je ta vedno že v nas, kritika je tako partnerica kot nasprotovalka umetnosti vladanja. Kritika presega zgolj cinične invokacije nemožnosti pobega in brezupa. Tudi za Virna je eksodos tak koncept, ki rajši spreminja sam kontekst problema, kot da bi se s problemom soočili in poskusili z eno ali drugo alternativo. Formula spreminja in ni princip konzervacije.

Gerald Raunig kritiko pojmuje kot možnost drugačnega življenja, ki se ne ustavlja pri anarhični sferi svobode, ni zgolj negativiteta, gre za reorganizacijo in ponovno izumljanje in konstantno preprečevanje, da bi novi produkt »instituacije« postal institucija v smislu konstituirane moči oblasti. Pod tem opisom bi lahko prepoznali enkraten projekt 6M1L, ki ima potencial prav v fluidni izmenjavi med političnim in umetniškim.

Ta izmenjava se pri zgolj analognem vzporejanju med ontologijo plesa in ontologijo politike pri Lepeckijevem Izčrpavajočem plesu še precej zatika. Zato ni najtežja naloga sodobne kritiške misli in prakse preprosto zatrditi svoj »raje bi, da ne«. Esencialna naloga sodobne kritiške misli in prakse ostaja detektirati naslovnika izjave ter mesto, s katerega bi formula »raje bi, da ne« kar najbolj učinkovala. ..

( N E) G I B IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 51

242 THE / 178 OF / 125 IS / 98 TO / 87 AND / 86 A / 71 IN / 66 IT / 59 NOT / 59 THAT / 53 AS / 46 WHICH / 36 ART / 31 DANCE / 31 THIS / 29 FOR / 28 BE

I WOULD PREFER NOT TO. AN ARTISTIC STATEMENT THAT TRAVERSES THE POLITICAL AN INTERROGATION OF THE PARADIGM OF NON-MOVEMENT AS REVOLT IN CONTEMPORARY DANCE PIA BREZAVŠČEK TRANSLATED BY POLONA PETEK.

5 2 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUBL I C S PACE

STARTING POINT: BARTLEBY, THE SCRIVENER1

O

ne day, a grey figure enters the office of a Wall Street lawyer. A strange quiet man with no references has responded to the job advertisement, and it seems to the lawyer that he will restore order among other employees. Indeed, the man proves to be an exceptionally meticulous scrivener; however, when his employer asks him to check the transcripts with other scriveners, Bartleby utters his “I would prefer not to” for the first time. By the time the formula has spread like a virus and literally starved the scrivener to death in the famous New York prison The Tombs, it will have wreaked havoc among other protagonists. In fact, it is Bartleby’s passivity that sets off the action. “I would prefer not to” is the trigger and the drive of 1

Herman Melville, “Bartleby, pisar”, in: Mladen Dolar (ed.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, Ljubljana, Analecta, 2004. The original English text was first published in two issues of the Putnam’s Magazine in 1853 and reprinted in the collection The Piazza Tales in 1856.

/ 26 AN / 24 WOULD / 22 CAN / 22 FORMULA / 22 WITH / 20 BARTLEBY / 20 MOVEMENT / 19 BY / 19 ITS / 17 HAS / 17 HE / 16 CRITIQUE / 16 POLITICAL

H

ow can one withdraw from the dominant model of artistic production without being expelled from it?

How can one, by means of affirmative negation, subvert the boundaries of art and politics? How can one say “I would prefer not to” and stand still even without self-starvation à la Bartleby? Bartleby’s formula sacrificed the author of the statement; however, it cut into the established social production and functioning. What does the formula need to sacrifice in our case? the story. The enigma of Bartleby is a charged weapon.

Bartleby, the oddball who “would prefer not to”, created by American writer Herman Melville, is not merely a dull figure driven by the death drive, as Mladen Dolar points out. 2 Bartleby does not exercise only nihilism driven to the verge of passivity, which would convert even Nietzsche and his “man [who] would rather will nothingness than not will”. 3 The scrivener with his “I would prefer” stands on the side of affirmation; however, the latter is swallowed up by the constant of negation at the end of the sentence. Bartleby is not, as Negri and Hardt might argue,4 merely a figure in the long tradition of those who refuse to work; he is not simply a rebel–negator, who is yet to be followed by activity, by the constitution of a new society. As Mladen Dolar also observes, Bartleby is already negation as well as affirmation, and it is precisely this liminal position that is most explosive. The ashen-faced scrivener is mysteriously inventing a new line of flight, which might have revolutionary ramifications. It appears as a virus and then spreads into all pores of the story/society. This is not an open revolt; it is a disease, which has healing potentials, as Deleuze has argued.5 Bartleby is an anomaly, however, one that intensifies the traits that are already present in the society. He interrupts the office routine with his new routine of negation. He cuts into a smooth-running machine with a new rhythm, which completely derails the old one. Mladen Dolar establishes that Bartleby perpetrates an anomaly by mixing up two incompatible spaces of capitalism. 6 He exercises free choice, which is given to him as a buyer, precisely where he is divested of it, 2 3 4

5 6

Mladen Dolar, “Pisar Bartleby in njegova pravica”, in: Dolar (ed.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, p. 159.

Friedrich Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morals and Ecce Homo, New York: Vintage, 1989, p. 97.

Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt, Empire, Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press, 2001, pp. 203–204; see also Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt, “Bartlebyjevo zavračanje”, in: Mladen Dolar (ed.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, pp. 129–130.

Gilles Deleuze, “Bartleby in formula”, in: Dolar (ed.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne.

Dolar, “Pisar Bartleby in njegova pravica”, in: Mladen Dolar (ed.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, p. 156.

that is, in his workplace. Bartleby asserts his will in the wrong structural space, which is precisely what subverts the entire constellation of this topos. More than a hundred years too early, the private and the public get completely snarled. The scrivener is the germ of post-Fordism within Fordism; yet, perhaps it is precisely the germ that, together with negation, sustains the positive possibility of subversion; it is that “type of thinking that would be capable of grasping the demonstrably baleful features of capitalism along with its extraordinary and liberating dynamism”, 7 which is what Karl Marx has called for, according to Fredric Jameson. Bartleby means more to capitalism than what Laibach wish to be for totalitarianism. He is subversive affirmation and negation at the same time. He is an imitation of the rhythmic movement of capitalism and thus its affirmation; yet, negation occurs repeatedly and routinely where it should not appear at all; hence, it subverts the entire structure of the established production.

Bartleby is not an artist, and he even transcends the designation of a “work of art”, for he is neither a metaphor nor a symbol, as Deleuze has observed;8 he is pure form, chiselled out to the degree of becoming minimalist – or, as Deleuze would say, he is a formula, for we are dealing with an active form. Alenka Zupančič ascertains that the activity of Bartleby’s formula is caused by the inability to stand still, to stay in one space, or rather, to be the space itself, which is what the scrivener desires.9 Every space presupposes activity; however, since Bartleby only wants to be the space itself, without any functional fixtures that inevitably belong to every space, he becomes a formula, activity, which subverts all other spaces. Because of Bartleby’s immobility, the lawyer even has to flee from his own office. With its passivity, the scrivener’s formula rearticulates 7 8 9

Fredric Jameson, Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, Durham: Duke University Press, 1991, p. 55.

Deleuze, in: Mladen Dolar (ed.), Bartleby: “Raje bi, da ne”, Analecta, Ljubljana 2004, p. 55.

9 Alenka Zupančič, “Bartleby: beseda je meso postala”, in: Dolar (ed.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, pp. 214–220.

( N E) G IB IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 5 3

/ 16 PRECISELY / 16 PREFER / 15 HOWEVER / 15 NEGATION / 15 YET / 14 I / 14 ONE / 14 WHAT / 13 FORM / 13 INSTITUTION / 13 NEW / 13 PRODUCTION / 12 DOES

the potential of movement by first halting it, derailing it, and then finding new lines of flight for it.

ART: INSTITUTIONALISED ODDITY

“I

would prefer not to” – this stoppage, oddity, a mannerist non-grammatical formula, as Deleuze has described Bartleby’s recurring statement 10 – is nevertheless a statement that is firmly situated within literature, within the institution of art. It is precisely for this reason that we can take this stoppage, this oddity, seriously, and (this is why) Bartleby remains the subject of so many interpretations also beyond the psychiatric discourse of a closed institution. Merely because he is a literary character, he can transcend the designations of autism, anorexia, catatonia and monomania, and he can serve as their distilled surplus form, the positive paradigm of the sick, which can be even healing. As a literary character, Bartleby is much more than particular. According to Dolar,11 due to its pure derivation, the function of this character is quintessential and it can even be used to throw light on psychology itself.

According to Foucault, every stoppage in the established social dynamics is totally self-regulated in contemporary society, for surveillance is incorporated into the finest social structures. Biopower feeds from what we consider entirely private.

Every oddity self-extracts from society, from this smooth-running production machine. The object of resentment must be removed as soon as possible, so that the machine can resume its functioning, and once it starts functioning again, it does not look back. Every oddity, every intruder must be categorised and locked up in an institution, be it a psychiatric institution, a prison or, last but not least, the institution of art. As soon as something is defined, albeit as art, it becomes socially conformable, even if it might remain incomprehensible.

The dispositif of art indeed affords most freedom; yet, it seems that this freedom remains limited to the sphere of art. Art mitigates the immediacy of oddity, madness and deviance. It generates suspense, which keeps these socially unacceptable factors, which would otherwise self-extract immediately, alive and pulsating, albeit safely locked away in the institution of art, which, like other institutions, is an internal power structure. Paradoxically, art remains the only sphere of revolt; yet, it is always already part of the ruling power. Art is not an autonomous sphere outside the political; rather, it is a hermetic formation within politics, whose membrane is not permeable.

Or is it?

Bartleby, as we have already established with Deleuze, is neither a metaphor nor a symbol, which are believed to be the dominant means of art. What is most artistic, in the sense of 10 Deleuze, in: Mladen Dolar (ed.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, p. 55.

11 Dolar, “Pisar Bartleby in njegova pravica”, in: Dolar (ed.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, pp.

133–134.

5 4 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUBL I C S PACE

creating something new, is thus precisely what transcends metaphorical imagery and symbolism. The ashen-faced scrivener is none of the above; Bartleby is a formula, which – due to its pure formality, which is indeterminacy itself, due to its attempt to assume pure space – operates beyond the boundaries of art. Bartleby the formula perforates the hermetic space of institution and thus its distilled form can break through the boundaries of art. The formula “I would prefer not to” is a creation that cannot emerge in any other social field but art, for elsewhere it would be promptly sanctioned and suppressed. If, however, it does emerge in the field of art, the reduction to pure form allows it to self-activate as a formula.

Once it succeeds in surpassing the particularity of the artistic branch or institution with sheer formality, it can break through its boundaries. Since it is a formula, it is an active force, which possesses the capacity of fluidity.

LEPECKI’S EXHAUSTING DANCE:12 FORM IS NOT (YET) FORMULA

I

n his Exhausting Dance, André Lepecki mentions a unique example of paraphrasing Bartleby. In SKITE, the one-month laboratory established in 1992 by Jean Marc Adolphe, Portuguese choreographer Vera Mantero and Spanish choreographer Santiago Sempre both stated that “the political events in the world were such that they could not dance”.13 The choreographers and dancers “would prefer not to”. Dance – which is traditionally considered an act of defying gravity, and act of lightness – can even become controversial in a world that is, politically, anything but light. In a moral sense, political chaos demands the immobility of the institution of art, especially dance, whose essence is supposed to be precisely mobility.

Even more. According to Lepecki, 14 what should be the very essence of dance, that is, movement, is the dominant paradigm of the contemporary hegemonic world, which still makes use of colonialist patterns. The world has not yet wrested itself from the kinetic impulse of modernity; it has not surpassed the Taylorist models, which are aimed at ever greater efficiency, capacity and performance; we have never crossed that boundary of modernity that separates us from something that could be considered post-. Exploitation in the name of profitable passions still exists,15 hyperproduction for hyperconsumption – always in movement. Modern society is a well-oiled machine, whose ontological meaning remains pure being-toward-movement, as Sloterdijk (cited in Lepecki) maintains. 16

12 André Lepecki, Exhausting Dance: Performance and the Politics of Movement, New York: Routledge, 2006.

13 Ibid., p. 16.

14 Ibid., esp. “Introduction”, pp. 1–18.

15 See Peter Klepec, Dobičkonosne strasti – Kapitalizem in perverzija 1, Ljubljana: Analecta, 2008.

16 See Lepecki, Exhausting Dance: Performance and the Politics of Movement, p.

12 (Peter Sloterdijk, La mobilisation infinite, Paris: Christian Bourgeois Editeurs, 2000, pp. 35 and 36).

/ 12 FROM / 12 HIS / 12 WITHIN / 11 EVEN / 11 HAVE / 11 TIME / 11 WE / 10 ACCORDING / 10 AT / 10 FLIGHT / 10 ON / 10 SPACE / 9 ALREADY / 9 BOUNDARIES

Lepecki refers to dance connoisseur Randy Martin, 17 according to whom mobilisation is a key concept that needs to be studied in dance studies, too, if the discipline wants to get rid of its suspicious political paralysis. Randy Martin, too, wants to avoid thinking dance art as merely metaphorical or as analogous to political theory and the political. Instead, he wants to move on to literalness and metonymy, where the very ontological basis of dance as movement becomes questionable, for it is basically identical to the ontology of modernity as beingtoward-movement. Dance cannot be a critical artistic practice as long as it dances to same rhythm as the ruling power.

For this reason, André Lepecki affirms the practice of a slower dance ontology. His typology of stumbling, toppling, crawling and the so-called still-acts – in other words, the paraphrases of the formula “I would prefer not to” – opens a new chapter in thinking dance. This critique of the hyperkinetics of spectacle opens up the boundaries of dance and choreography and redefines their ontology by “rethinking the subject in terms of the body”.18 When the dancer utters her “I would prefer not to” à propos of movement, which by definition is her utmost skill, a new chapter begins in the field of dance. The “passivity” of immobility has once again managed to produce a line of flight, which actively broadens the boundaries and advances beyond the membrane of the traditionally autonomous dance.

However, is this indeed already a political potential or does this rearticulation remain within the sphere of art?

Lepecki asserts that still-acts in dance “initiate a performative critique of [the dancer’s] participation in the general economy of mobility that informs, supports, and reproduces the ideological formations of late capitalist modernity”.19 We need to pause here and ponder the literalness and directness of the relation between kinetics as a formal determinant within a specific art discipline and kinetics as the flow of capital, which dictates the general hustle and bustle of production and consumption.

Does movement indeed, as Randy Martin and André Lepecki argue, results from the same incentive? While literalness and directness were feasible in Bartleby’s case – where instead of the metaphoricalness of the parable, thanks to the reduction to pure form, his statement became a formula – it seems that not everything is so smooth in this case. Despite the fact that the exhaustion of dance as movement has led to a re-definition of dance, breaking through the boundaries of art as institution is a harder task here. Indeed, according to Lehmann,20 the political in art must be sought in form rather than content; however, neither is form as such the political per se.

Cessation of movement, based on principle, at the level of contemporary dance art – insofar as every reduction of this sort should already constitute social critique – gets entangled once 17 See Lepecki, Exhausting Dance: Performance and the Politics of Movement, pp.

11–13 (Randy Martin, Critical Moves, Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1998, p. 14).

18 Lepecki, Exhausting Dance: Performance and the Politics of Movement, p. 5.

19 Ibid., p. 16.

20 Hans-Thies Lehmann, Postdramatic Theatre, New York: Routledge, 2006, p. 178.

O

ne day, a grey figure enters the office of a Wall Street lawyer. A strange quiet man with no references has responded to the job advertisement, and it seems to the lawyer that he will restore order among other employees.

Indeed, the man proves to be an exceptionally meticulous scrivener; however, when his employer asks him to check the transcripts with other scriveners, Bartleby utters his “I would prefer not to” for the first time. By the time the formula has spread like a virus and literally starved the scrivener to death in the famous New York prison The Tombs, it will have wreaked havoc among other protagonists. In fact, it is Bartleby’s passivity that sets off the action. “I would prefer not to” is the trigger and the drive of the story. The enigma of Bartleby is a charged weapon.

( N E) G IB IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 5 5

/ 9 CONTEMPORARY / 9 MORE / 9 ONLY / 9 OR / 9 OTHER / 9 PROJECT / 9 PURE / 8 AFFIRMATION / 8 ARE / 8 ARTISTIC / 8 EVERY / 8 OWN / 8 RE

again in an analogy, or rather, a metaphor, which, according to Martin,21 is precisely what contemporary dance art as a genuinely critical art is meant to avoid. Even if ontology remains slow on stage, it is nevertheless embedded in an incredibly fast production mechanism, which distributes this slowness to significant venues of contemporary dance at a pace that almost exceeds the speed of light. The statement “I would prefer not to”, stuck within the institution of art, cannot have a genuinely political effect yet, for it still operates within the field of analogy and metaphor, which are not yet reactionary. “I would prefer not to have movement in dance” is not yet a formula situated within the field of absolute indefiniteness. It knows exactly what is being decided upon and where it belongs, which is why this is not pure space that could significantly undermine external positions (that is, positions beyond art); and this is so despite the fact that it does broaden the boundaries of dance and art; however, it does not break through them. The absolute negation of movement in dance is not yet an affirmation of negation;22 it is not yet a desire for non-movement and thus an active trigger for the virus that would inevitably spread to all branches of power. Form is not yet formula.

6 MONTHS 1 LOCATION: WITHDRAWAL FROM MOBILITY AND REAFFIRMATION OF MOVEMENT

I

n domestic theatrical production, at the institutional level and even more so on the independent scene, we can observe a noticeable increase in the number of productions, which means that there is a greater choice of cultural events available in our country; however, this also means that there is less time available for the making of each production (on average, two months per production). The production model of art is the capitalist machine par excellence, whose speed diminishes quality and destroys ideas. However, it is not only production that is subject to this machine, but also all offshoots that belong to its dispositif, including critique, which, due to hyperproduction, is also showing signs of having less substance, offering less in-depth reflection, having less relevance because of greater frequence, etc. The wheels of the machine keep turning – capitalism cannot bear the thought of wasting money, nor can it imagine a moment without wasting something. The circulation of capital is its essence, which is why it constantly pretends to be exceptionally active. The greatest possible sin within this universal mobility is to think, let alone practice, “laziness” à la Malevich as the truth of mankind, without which art is not possible.23 How can one carry out this “sin” without being lynched? How can one withdraw from the dominant model of artistic production without being expelled from it? How can one, by means of affirmative negation, subvert the 21 In: Lepecki, Exhausting Dance: Performance and the Politics of Movement, p. 15.

22 Zupančič, “Bartleby: beseda je meso postala”, in: Dolar (ed.), Bartleby: raje bi, da ne, p. 219.

23 Kazimir Malevich, Laziness – the real truth of mankind (1921).

5 6 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUBL I C S PACE

boundaries of art and politics? How can one say “I would prefer not to” and stand still even without self-starvation à la Bartleby? Bartleby’s formula sacrificed the author of the statement; however, it cut into the established social production and functioning. What does the formula need to sacrifice in our case?

Introducing the project 6 months 1 location in the booklet of the same title,24 Bojana Cvejić and Xavier Le Roy explain that “[a]ll that which once had been a movement of deterritorialization – working in different places at more than one project at a time – became an obligation. Projects could only be coproduced, and then artists had to reside in order to fill the venues that would show the work with artistic activity. Artists are forced to constantly reinvent themselves as the desirable commodity in competition for a limited number of opportunities in the narrowed spaces of curation”. 25 Artists have become merchandise, which must be marketed according to the principles of opportunism and cynicism.

The aim of the project 6M1L is precisely to create such conditions of artistic production, which can only impede the participants. It can do this only by curbing mobility, which appears to be liberating. The project brings together 18 artists and theorists, who, each with their own project, participate in the research process, which lasts six months and transpires in one location. Their (Bartlebyesque) sacrifice is thus the fact that, for the time being, they do not participate in the institutional market and are thus less visible and less present on the international contemporary performing arts scene. However, this “laziness” of immobility triggers other kinds of movement, which resides precisely in the continuity of work.26 Bojana Cvejić wonders what to do with time, then, since suddenly one has plenty of it. A pause in the established continuity of work, where there is no time for reflection on one’s own position, affords precisely the time for everything that one has no time to do otherwise. To think through one’s own position, to have the opportunity to go further in one’s own research, and to have the opportunity to work with a collective of people, while the project does not require any necessary final products. This is certainly not like being on holidays. 6M1L is a glitch in the rhythm, which encourages a different rhythm – which, as we see if we leaf through the publication, was also rather fast-paced, yet, not universally hectic in the race to the première. New tools were developed, questions and ideas were more thoroughly thought through, innovative texts were created, etc.

24 In: Mette Ingvardsen (ed.), 6 months 1 location, everybodys publications, 2009, pp.

11–14. Henceforth cited as 6M1L. 25 Ibid., p. 12. Also available online at http://www.corpusweb.net/continuation-8.html [last accessed 9 June 2011].

26 Ibid., p. 11.

/ 8 SCRIVENER / 8 STILL / 8 THAN / 7 BEING / 7 CRITICAL / 7 LEPECKI / 7 LESS / 7 MACHINE / 7 MEANS / 7 MERELY / 7 POSITION / 7 RATHER / 7 SOCIAL

FLIGHT AND NEW ARTICULATION: THE POINT OF A CRITICAL SUTURE OF ART AND THE POLITICAL

H

alted dance is a negation that affirms new ways of thinking dance, hence, it is a critical practice within dance; however, it seems that its scope can hardly be political, for inasmuch as it becomes political, all that it is left with is negation, thoughtless revolt: “No more movement!” Conversely, what the project 6M1L creates is precisely a culturally and politically perpetuated movement, and this negation generates productive conditions for the reinvention of one’s own position and for productive development of ideas. The protagonists of the project 6M1L are not simply escapists. Their position entails both negation and affirmation. It is only with an exodus, a break with the dominant mode of production, that autonomy can be restored to artistic creation, which is thus again able to invent its own position and, consequently, its methods and ideas, its form and content.

Gerald Raunig, too, believes that the Bartlebyesque affirmative form of negation has critical potential.27 The latter exists precisely as social critique that does not pretend ignorance as regards its own embeddedness in the institution. In other words, it exists as a combination of social critique and self-criticism, which is structured like a flight, however, one that does not remain in exile, but rather transforms the very modes of governing. Effective critique, according to Raunig, involves two stages: suspension of judgement (the moment of negation) and re-invention (the moment of affirmation). 28 Raunig takes as his starting point Foucault’s lecture “What is Critique?”, in which Foucault has argued that critique is the art of “how not be governed like that, by that, in the name of those principles, with such and such an objective in mind and by means of such procedures, not like that, not for that, not by them”.29 Not a fundamental critique of institutions, but only a continuous process of instituting can be productive. Critique exists in the process of constant re-shaping, in searching for lines of flight, for as Gilles Deleuze and Claire Parnet have put it, “nothing is more active than a flight”, or as Paolo Virno has argued, “nothing is less passive than the act of fleeing, of exiting”. With its activity, flight is precisely affirmation, however, at the same time, it negates the space from which it flees. Yet, of course, not every re-shaping is already an emancipatory transformation. As Raunig explains, constant re-shaping is itself already part of governing. Emancipatory transformation is possible when the effects extend beyond the boundaries of particular fields, as we have demonstrated with regard to the

formula “I would prefer not to”, where art by means of reduction to pure form becomes an active formula, which traverses the political as well. According to Foucault, it is precisely this flight that is the essence of critique. It is not true that critique of institutions is impossible, for the latter is always already within us; critique is a partner of as well as an opponent to the art of governing. Critique transcends the merely cynical invocations of the impossibility of flight and hopelessness. For Virno, too, exodus is a concept that prefers to change the very context of the problem, instead of confronting the problem and trying out an alternative. Formula carries out a transformation and it is not a principle of conservation.

Gerald Raunig understands critique as a possibility of a different kind of life, which does not stop with the anarchic sphere of freedom; it is not merely negativity; it concerns re-organisation and re-invention and constant prevention of the new product of “instituation” becoming an institution in the sense of constituted power. In this description, we can recognise the unique project 6M1L, whose potential is precisely in the fluid exchange between the political and art. This exchange is still faltering to a large extent in the merely analogical comparison between the ontology of dance and the ontology of politics in Lepecki’s Exhausting Dance. Hence, it is not the most difficult task for contemporary critical thinking and practice to simply assert its “I would prefer not to”. The essential task of contemporary critical thinking and practice remains to identify the addressee of the statement and the position from which the formula “I would prefer not to” can be most effective. ..

27 Gerald Raunig, “Instituent Practices: Fleeing, Instituting, Transforming” and “What is Critique? Suspension and Re-Composition in Textual and Social Machines”, in: Gerald Raunig and Gene Ray (eds), Art and Contemporary Critical Practice: Reinventing Institutional Critique, London: MayFly, 2009, pp. 3–12, 113–130.

28 Raunig, “What is Critique? Suspension and Re-Composition in Textual and Social Machines”, in: Raunig and Ray (eds), Art and Contemporary Critical Practice: Reinventing Institutional Critique, p. 114.

29 Raunig, “Instituent Practices: Fleeing, Instituting, Transforming”, in: Raunig and Ray (eds), Art and Contemporary Critical Practice: Reinventing Institutional Critique, p. 4.

( N E) G I B IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 57

165 IN / 127 V / 73 JE / 61 KI / 46 KOT / 46 NA / 40 SE / 39 Z / 36 S / 33 DA / 29 LIGNA / 28 ALI / 27 LAHKO / 24 BI / 24 SO / 23 SKUPINE / 23 ZA / 19 TEM

Radio Ballet, Leipzig, Augustusplatz Foto: Nicolas Reichelt

PRENOS GEST SITUACIJA IN INTERVENCIJA V RADIJSKIH PERFORMANSIH SKUPINE LIGNA PATRICK PRIMAVESI PREVOD MAJA LOVRENOV

5 8 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUB L IC S PACE

P

redstavljajte si, da ležite na tleh železniške postaje in prek slušalk poslušate glasbo ter nežna navodila javnega radijskega baleta. Pol ure ste izvajali vrsto gest, ki jih hišni red običajno prepoveduje. Pustili ste, da vam pogled tava naokoli in mogoče ste z ušesom, prislonjenim na tla, poslušali lokomotivo prihodnjih revolucij. Naenkrat vas zagrabi uniformiran varnostnik, ki zahteva vaše ime ter naslov in vas izžene iz stavbe. Nekaj tednov kasneje po pošti prejmete obvestilo o kazni zaradi kršitve hišnega reda. Lahko pa je vse drugače, boljše ali mogoče celo slabše: nobenih represalij, ravno nasprotno. Po koncu performansa postrežejo pijačo na račun hiše in razdelijo potovalne bone. Vaše ime je že znano in prejeli boste le obvestilo, da je bil častni honorar nakazan na vaš bančni račun, in sicer so ga sponzorirala nekatera podjetja, delničarji zabaviščnega parka železniške postaje. Ustvarjalno ste prispevali k dokazovanju kulturnega potenciala prostora in liberalnosti njegovih upravljalcev: »Hvala, da ste nastopili z našim podjetjem …«

/ 18 TUDI / 17 PA / 16 PO / 15 TER / 14 TAKO / 13 GEST / 13 JAVNE / 13 NE / 13 OD / 13 SFERE / 12 GLASU / 12 IZ / 12 LE / 12 PREK / 12 RADIJSKI / 11 DO / 11 KO

Lahko domnevamo, da sta obe različici konca takega dogodka precej neverjetni. Vendar blago pretiravanje pokaže na učinek in dvoumnost intervencij, kakršna je Radijski balet skupine LIGNA, ki se izvaja na železniških postajah, v nakupovalnih središčih in na podobnih krajih. Naraščajoča privatizacija javne sfere sproža iskanje novih umetniških praks zunaj uveljavljenih kulturnih institucij, praks, ki bi lahko sprevrgle norme in pravila našega vsakdanjega obnašanja. Toda nove oblike protestov ali subverzivnih dejavnosti so vedno znova hitro privzete in komercializirane. V tem pogledu bomo produkcije skupine LIGNA v nadaljevanju obravnavali kot intervencije in situacije razpršitve. Udeleženci so povabljeni, da izvajajo gibe in geste, ki se v obliki navodil prenašajo prek radijskih oddajnikov: scenarije za revolucionarno (ali vsaj nepravilno) vedenje v javni sferi.

Skupina LIGNA je bila ustanovljena v okviru javne neprofitne radijske postaje v Hamburgu, imenovane Freies Sender Kombinat (FSK). Skupino sestavljajo trije strokovnjaki teorije medijev in radijske umetnosti: Ole Frahm, Michael Hueners in Torsten Michaelsen. Leta 1997 so začeli predvajati dvotedensko kontaktno oddajo z naslovom Lignas Musik Box. Poslušalci so bili naprošeni, da pokličejo v oddajo in po telefonu predvajajo svojo najljubšo glasbo. Kot jasno kaže ta primer, skupine LIGNA ne zanima pisanje nečesa, kar bi bilo kakorkoli blizu konvencionalnim radijskim igram, niti je ne zanima uporaba elektronskih medijev za proizvajanje izdelanih celovečernih programov.

Nasprotno, ponavadi postavljajo pod vprašaj celoten aparat uveljavljene dejavnosti kulturne in komercialne radiodifuzije.

Tu je kratek avtoportret z njihove spletne strani: »Vsem projektom skupine LIGNA je skupno, da svoje občinstvo obravnavajo kot kolektiv proizvajalcev. V začasni združbi lahko to proizvede nepredvidljive, neobvladljive učinke, ki izzivajo ureditev prostora. Eden od LIGNINIH modelov uporabe medijev, Radijski balet (izumljen leta 2002), radijske poslušalce oskrbi s koreografijo izključenih in prepovedanih gest v nekdaj javnih, zdaj nadzorovanih prostorih. Med ostalimi modeli sta npr. Radijski koncert za 144 mobilnih telefonov, ki radijskim poslušalcem omogoči, da sodelujejo v procesu skupinskega skladanja, in Novi človek, gledališka igra brez igralcev, ki občinstvo vplete v kompleksno gestično interakcijo.«1 Ta kratki opis bi bil lahko koristen za to, da dobimo prvo predstavo o delu skupine LIGNA. Toda kaj so praktični in teoretični predpogoji ter konteksti tega dela? Kako te produkcije izgledajo, kako si lahko zamislimo realizacijo pojmov, kot so intervencija in kolektivnost, participacija in interakcija? V njihovi očitni navezavi na teoretski okvir situacionističnega mišljenja lahko dela v nastajanju skupine LIGNA opišemo tudi kot dispozitiv, kot aparat in mrežo pravil ter strategij na eni strani in praks ter taktik na drugi.

Intervencije skupine LIGNA izzivajo javno sfero kot dispozitiv obvladovanja, nadzora in normativnega reda, pri čemer same proizvajajo dispozitiv, ko prehajajo skupek vsakdanjih gibov in gest, pravil obnašanja v javni sferi in trenutni diskurz o medsebojnih razmerjih med estetiko in politiko.

1

Glej: http://ligna.blogspot.com.

Prvi primer posebnega vpliva teorije na delo skupine LIGNA, ki hkrati kaže na vpliv prakse na njen lastni teoretski pristop, bi bilo lahko predavanje, izvedeno leta 1999 znotraj akademskega konteksta. Naslov tega predavanja je bil: »Poslušajte druge valove! Poprostorjenje glasu v radiu ali kako glasovi postanejo prostorski«. Namesto da bi zgolj prebrali svoje predavanje in uporabili sistem ozvočenja na samem prizorišču, namesto da bi se tako ojačali, so svoje glasove raje prenašali z radijsko tehnologijo in za občinstvo postali slišni prek številnih individualnih radijskih naprav in slušalk, pomešani z drugim zvočnim materialom, in tako so bili njihovi glasovi s pomočjo tehnologije odmaknjeni od njihovih govorcev. S takšno ekstravagantno postavitvijo ni postalo slišno le sporočilo predavanja (»Poslušajte druge valove!«). S tem so reflektirali tudi konvencionalno in »normalno« uporabo tehnologije v situacijah vnaprej postavljenega dispozitiva, nekakšne hierarhične komunikacije. In vprašanje skupnega, proces izmenjave znanja, izkušenj in morda uvidov je bil ponujen v razpravo, še preden je bilo povedanega kaj določnega.

Predavanje iz leta 1999 je tematsko odražalo delo skupine LIGNA v navezavi na dojemanje glasov, posebej v javni sferi.

Toda izhodišče je bila ideja grozljivega (Das Unheimliche), nekako neprijetnega ali celo strašljivega izkustva, ko si ločen od svojega glasu prek posnetkov, ki tvoj glas ponavadi naredijo za nekaj tujega, za nekaj, kar ni več znotraj tvojega telesa, pač pa je del zunanjega sveta s svojo lastno materialno prisotnostjo, primerljivo s črkami v zapisanem besedilu. To nas usmeri na precej pomemben in temeljen diskurz, ki vključuje semiološke teorije Rolanda Barthesa o hrapavosti, zrnavosti glasu, pa na Derridajevo dekonstrukcijo fenomenološke ideje glasu kot živega diha (posebej v filozofiji Edmunda Husserla) ter ne nazadnje na krizo subjekta, oropanega lastnega glasu, kot jo je uprizoril Antonin Artaud v svojih poznih pisanjih in v slavni radijski oddaji Naj se konča božja sodba (Pour enfinir avec le jugement de dieu, 1948).2 Ločenost glasu od telesa, ki se še okrepi s snemanjem in oddajanjem, izkazuje temeljno izkustvo odtujitve, ki je vselej že bila del našega izkustva poslušanja glasov. Dobršen del zahodne filozofije in estetike glasu lahko (po Derridaju) interpretiramo kot trajen poskus kompenzirati izkustvo odtujitve v trenutku poslušanja-lastnega-glasu – in sicer s pomočjo metafizike prisotnosti, osnovane na ideji subjekta, ki poskuša nadzorovati vse možne učinke, ki bi jih njegov lasten glas lahko imel na tiste, ki ga poslušajo. Kritična refleksija te metafizike glasu je eden od predpogojev za radijsko delo skupine LIGNA. V nasprotju z vsemi strategijami, s katerimi poskušajo komercializirani mediji kompenzirati ta izkustva odtujitve, performansi skupine

2

Cf. Roland Barthes, »The Grain of the Voice«, prev. Stephen Heath, v: M. Huxley in N. Witts (ur.), The Twentieth Century Performance Reader, London: Routledge, 1996, str. 46; Jacques Derrida, Voice And Phenomenon: Introduction to the Problem of the Sign in Husserl’s Phenomenology, prev. Leonard Lawlor, Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 2010 [v slov.: Derrida, Glas in fenomen, Ljubljana: Škuc, Znanstveni inštitut Filozofske fakultete, 1988]; Derrida, Writing and Difference, prev.

Alan Bass, London: Routledge & Kegan, 1976; Antonin Artaud, Selected Writings, prev. H. Weaver, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988, str. 583.

( N E) G IB IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 5 9

/ 11 NI / 11 TE / 10 GESTE / 10 JIH / 10 OBNAŠANJA / 10 PAČ / 10 PRI / 10 RADIJSKIH / 10 TA / 9 GLASOV / 9 MED / 9 O / 8 BALET / 8 DISPOZITIV / 8 JAVNI

LIGNA grozljive trenutke v uporabi medijske tehnologije celo okrepijo in pri tem zastavijo vprašanje medija kot območja duhov in vmesnega prostora.

GLASOVI DUHOV – MEDIJSKA GROZA

P

olitično angažirani koncept Svobodnega radia si je pogosto poskušal prisvajati radijsko tehnologijo in institucije, da bi si ponovno prilastil individualni, svobodni in necenzurirani glas. V svoji skepsi do te drže delo skupine LIGNA kaže na dejstvo, da je grozljivo izkustvo nepopolne in oropane prisotnosti dejansko tisto, ki ga posreduje radijski prenos: ne izvirna identiteta in avtentičnost glasu, pač pa njegova heterogenost in nestabilnost. V tem pogledu se upanje, da bi bilo možno popolnoma opustiti oblastno strukturo in neenakost, ki sta inherentni glasovnemu aktu govora in njegovemu radijskemu prenosu, izkaže za dobronamerno iluzijo. Manipulacija poslušalcev v komercialnih in politično propagandističnih ali vsaj državno nadzorovanih programih se ponavadi seveda zamegli, kot tudi odtujujoči učinki glasu, ločenega od svojega govorca s tehničnimi sredstvi snemanja in reprodukcije. Ta posebni sistem zamegljevanja in iluzionistične kompenzacije je inherenten radijskemu mediju, kot lahko vidimo npr. v dolgi tradiciji tistih navidezno spontanih klicev poslušalcev v oddajo ali v vnaprej posnetih studijskih aplavzih in smehu (kar je bilo prvič uporabljeno v popularnih radijskih oddajah v poznih štiridesetih letih dvajsetega stoletja). Izhajajoč iz teh skrajnih primerov postane jasno, da obstaja določena potreba po proizvajanju fantazme uspešne komunikacije in da nobena oddaja Svobodnega radia ne bo mogla preseči teh iluzij. Enako se zgodi tudi z materialnostjo pomnoženih glasov – kljub vsem poskusom, da bi kompenzirali njihovo tujost z na videz »naravnimi«, a dejansko zelo konvencionalnimi načini govora v javnih radijskih oddajah.

Včasih ideja oddajanih glasov kot duhov in medijev kot grozljive sfere vmesnega prostora celo pristane v estetskih ali mističnih vizijah. In dejansko je percepcijo glasov v dobi njihove tehnične reprodukcije vedno spremljala določena medijska groza – ko je telefonska komunikacija postala dostopnejša ali pri začetkih zvočnega filma s sinhroniziranimi glasovi.3 Vse od samih začetkov oddajanja zvoka do – tako politično kot ekonomsko pomembnega – razmaha javnega in zasebnega radijskega oddajanja (med letoma 1920 in 1950) ter končno do razvoja interneta in t. i. podcastov se vleče sled grozljivega, pogosto povezanega s tehnično pomnožitvijo in recepcijo glasov. Tradicionalna razlaga telepatskih pojavov kot manifestacije mrtvih je imela svoje nadaljevanje v ideji, ki so si jo v dvajsetem stoletju delili Thomas Alva Edison in mnogi drugi – namreč tej, da bi radijsko oddajanje lahko omogočilo aktivno vzpostavitev stika z mrtvimi osebami.4 Omenjeno prepričanje 3 4

Cf. Michel Chion, La voix au cinéma, Pariz: Édition de l’Étoile, 1982, str. 21.

Glej: Verena Kuni, »Radio (((o))) Séance«, v: Golo Föllmer in Sven Thiermann (ur.), Relating Radio. Communities. Aesthetics. Access, Leipzig: Spector Books, 2006, str.

217–223.

6 0 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUB L I C S PACE

bi lahko razumeli tudi kot poskus kompenzirati grozo odtujitve v trenutku poslušanja oddajanih glasov prek zamišljanja scenarijev, v katerih bi naključnost in nenadzorovanost glasov ter zvokov v našem okolju postali smiselni. Beli šum etra bi postal razložljiv kot osebno naslovljena sporočila, ki nam govorijo iz onega sveta, podobno kot glas Hamletovega očeta, ki nas izziva z nerešenimi problemi in morda kliče k maščevanju. V luči te dokaj patetične in resne interpretacije glasovnih fantazem dela skupine LIGNA nakazujejo precej igriv način spopadanja z glasovi in šumi duhov, ki dejansko nimajo nobenega določenega in osebnega izvora in nastanejo kot interferenca prav med oddajanjem in sprejemanjem.

RAZPRŠITEV

O

snovni element v delu skupine LIGNA je načelo razpršitve, »Zerstreuung«. Pomen tega precej dvoumnega termina vključuje širjenje in razpršitev, a tudi stanje raztresenosti, nepozornosti ali celo nezbranosti. Zato je vsaj v nemščini termin v pomoč pri opisovanju nekaterih strukturnih vidikov radiodifuzne tehnologije, kot tudi različnih umetniških in političnih strategij ter taktik za uporabo te tehnologije. Teorijo sprejemanja v raztresenosti je formuliral že Walter Benjamin v svojem slavnem eseju o umetnini v času, ko jo je mogoče tehnično reproducirati.5 Bertolt Brecht je leta 1932 zahteval, da bi se moral radio iz aparata distribucije spremeniti v aparat komunikacije.6 Vse do danes je bila distribucija radijskih signalov razumljena kot nepopolna praksa, ki bi se nekako morala izpopolniti v smeri vzajemne izmenjave. V dvajsetem stoletju so obstajali različni poskusi izpolniti to željo po neposredni radijski komunikaciji, danes, v času interneta, pa se zdi ideja interaktivnosti res na dosegu roke. Zaradi tehnične bližine med žičnim in brezžičnim prenosom je bilo vselej mikavno združiti možnosti radia z možnostmi telefona: oddajati jezikovne in glasbene programe skoraj neskončni množici prejemnikov in jim hkrati omogočiti, da vstopijo v neposreden pogovor. Toda ustaljena praksa dajanja glasu posameznim poslušalcem na telefonu med oddajami v živo omogoča le točkovne in reprezentativne kontakte med studiem in občinstvom. In uporabna ponudba podcastov, ki jih lahko prejmemo ali snamemo prek interneta, bo javne radijske in televizijske programe (za številna občinstva hkrati) prej ko slej spremenila v dokaj individualizirane načine potrošnje.

Ves ta napredek spreminja družbene, politične in ekonomske funkcije ter ideologijo radijskega oddajanja do take mere, da je precej dvomljivo, ali radio lahko še vedno velja za forum javnega diskurza. Ideja dispozitiva je v tem kontekstu pomembna, ker pomaga zaobiti konvencionalno kritiko ideologij. Niso le spremembe v uporabi tehničnih možnosti tiste, ki so del 5

6

Walter Benjamin, The Work of Art in the Age of Its Technological Reproducibility and Other Writings on Media, prev. Edmund Jephcott et al., Harvard University Press, 2008. [V slov.: Walter Benjamin, »Umetnina v času, ko jo je mogoče tehnično reproducirati«, v: Izbrani spisi, Ljubljana: SH Zavod za založniško dejavnost (Studia humanitatis), 1998, str. 145–176.]

Bertolt Brecht: »The Radio as a Communication Apparatus« (1932), v: Brecht on Film and Radio, prev. in ur. Marc Silberman, London: Methuen, 2000, str. 41–46.

/ 8 NADZORA / 8 RADIJSKO / 8 SFERI / 8 TODA / 7 CELO / 7 DEL / 7 DISPOZITIVA / 7 GA / 7 LETA / 7 NITI / 7 TEHNOLOGIJE / 7 TO / 7 VSE / 6 BILA / 6 BILO

Radio Ballet, Leipzig, Central Train Station Foto: Eiko Grimberg

dispozitiva javne sfere, pač pa tudi s tem povezane ideologije komunikacije, politične angažiranosti, kulturne identitete, lokalnosti in globalizacije itd.

Delo skupine LIGNA je obravnavalo ta vprašanja s pomočjo raznih eksperimentov s prakso distribucije in komunikacije v studijskem radijskem oddajanju ali v poskusu prenašanja zvokov, glasov in celo gest prek radijske tehnologije v javni sferi. Različni projekti še naprej iščejo ostanke javne sfere, ki še niso privatizirani in nadzorovani v prid svojega ekonomskega izkoriščanja. Že v petdesetih letih je Guy Debord analiziral transformacijo javne sfere v območja potrošnje in spektakularne samoreprezentacije kapitalističnega trga. Do danes se je ta transformacija celo zaostrila, ne le z video nadzorom, pač pa tudi s sistemom družbenega nadzora. Po Gillesu Deleuzeu je trženje postalo nov instrument družbenega nadzora.7 Kar je imenoval družba nadzora, ni več vezano na zunanji nadzor, pač pa na ponotranjeno normo in standardizacijo vedenja, npr. v nakupovalnih središčih. Take strategije standardizacije lahko naredimo vidne in jih subvertiramo z določeno vrsto taktik, ki so se pred desetletji razvile iz situacionističnih pozicij in metod: oblike neobvladljive deviacije (dérive), ustvarjalne skupne akcije, kot so flash mobi, subverzivna reprodukcija reklam in propagande (culture jamming) itd. V privzemanju in kritični refleksiji teh taktik skupina LIGNA preiskuje in utrjuje njihov potencial tudi v smislu gledališkosti in uprizoritve onkraj tradicionalne strategije širjenja sporočil o družbenih problemih.

V tem kontekstu načelo razpršitve ponuja nekaj prednosti: prvič, posebno taktiko, s katero se zaobide zakone o prepovedi zbiranja. Ljudje se ne srečajo ali zberejo skupaj, pač pa se v istem trenutku razpršijo; drugič, v tem trenutku razpršitve je možno proizvesti kolektivnost z uporabo radijskega prenosa, ki posameznike doseže istočasno in precej diskretno (ker je uporabljena le preprosta tehnologija: osebni mobilni telefoni,

radii in slušalke); in tretjič, kolektivna akcija lahko kljub temu postane vidna z radijsko osnovano koordinacijo na videz izoliranih gibov in gest v javni sferi. Tako LIGNA v javni sferi ustvari situacije, ki jih nadzorujejo gibalna navodila po radijskih napravah, a jih vendarle do določene mere ne morejo nadzorovati zunanji organi, kot so policija in varnostniki. Ta taktika ustvarjanja situacij se približa situacionistični teoriji in praksi Guyja Deborda in njegovih privržencev, pri čemer razkriva potencial uprizoritve in gledališkosti ter eksperimentira z bolj ali manj eksplicitnimi pravili sprejetega obnašanja v javnosti prek celega nabora prizorišč in scenarijev deviacije ter dérive. 8

RADIJSKI BALET

Z

a razvoj radijskega baleta kot najuspešnejšega in najbolj znanega formata skupine LIGNA je poleg situacionistične prakse intervencije pomemben tudi kontekst postdramskega gledališča.9 Z izpodrivom drame, dialoga in iluzije iz njihove paradigmatične funkcije se je spremenila tudi praksa uprizarjanja: namesto profesionalnih igralcev na odru pogosto vidimo amaterje, ki razgaljajo svoje resnične življenjske pogoje. Vpliv medijske zabave je proizvedel občinstva z drugačnimi zaznavnimi navadami, ki jih pogosto odražajo uprizoritve same. In končno, mesto in prostor gledališča nista več vezana na odre buržoazne reprezentacijske kulture. Namesto tega se razvijajo nove oblike in taktike lokalizacije, ki skušajo performans, gledališče in ples umestiti v urbani prostor kot politični in institucionalni kontekst. Strategija tako imenovanega političnega gledališča zgodnjega dvajsetega

8

9 7

Gilles Deleuze, »Postscript on the Societies of Control«, v: October, št. 59, 1992, str. 3–8.

Guy Debord, »Report on the Construction of Situations«, v: Tom McDonough (ur.), Guy Debord and the Situationist International, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2002, str. 39–50.

Cf. Hans-Thies Lehmann, Postdramatic Theatre (1999), prev. Karen Juers-Munby, London: Routledge, 2007.

( N E) G IB IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 6 1

/ 6 DELO / 6 GIBANJA / 6 GLEDALIŠČA / 6 NPR / 6 PRECEJ / 6 RADIJSKE / 6 RAZPRŠITVE / 6 SI / 6 ŠE / 6 SVOJE / 5 A / 5 ČEMER / 5 DELA / 5 GLASOVI

stoletja, ki izstopa iz konvencionalnih odrskih zgradb, je bila spremenjena in razvita v različne taktike, katerih cilj je ponovna prisvojitev javne sfere kot pristnega mesta za politično dejavnost. Toda goli impulz postavitve vsakovrstnih gledaliških dogodkov v urbani prostor zagotovo ni dovolj, saj ostaja znotraj meja političnega uličnega gledališča, ki se ga da zlahka prepoznati ali pa postane le del družbe spektakla, ki zaseda javno sfero skupaj z reklamami in propagando vseh vrst. Prej gre za proizvodnjo gibanja v javnem prostoru v smislu motnje ali vsaj iritacije normalnega reda v vsakdanjem življenju.

Od poznih devetdesetih let je LIGNA ustvarila več kot 50 gledaliških del in performansov ali intervencij, živih radijskih iger in radijskih baletov, ki izkazujejo široko paleto takih situacij, pri čemer se osredotočajo na radijsko osnovano koordinacijo samostojno gibajočih se udeležencev v javnih prostorih.

Radijski balet ni niti zbiranje protestirajočih množic, niti zahteva po individualnem protestu, niti okrasna koreografija izurjenega ansambla v urbanem okolju, niti avtentični slog gibanja za plesne odštekance. LIGNA prej dela s preklicem takih kolektivnih ali individualnih vzorcev obnašanja in s tem povezanih ideologij. A kljub temu obstaja določen potencial koordinacije v tem procesu razpršitve, ki ga imenujejo »združba« in je včasih popolnoma nezaznavna od zunaj.

Pomembno je tudi, da radijski balet ne sledi vedno določeni metodi ali koreografiji. Različne verzije, ki so bile izvedene od leta 2002, večinoma na železniških postajah in na polnih urbanih trgih, so pogosto poimenovali »vaje«: npr. Übungen im unnötigen Aufenthalt (Vaje v nepotrebnem zadrževanju, Hamburg, 2002) ali Übung im Nichtbestimmungsgemäßen Verweilen (Vaja v nenamernem postopanju, Leipzig, 2003). Te vaje, ki niso niti politične akcije niti zgolj umetniški dogodki, ki bi bili sami sebi namen, zagotovo spremenijo vzdušje določenega prostora: na stotine udeležencev se lahko pridruži, tako da sledijo navodilom za izvajanje gibov in gest, ki jih prejmejo individualno prek radia in slušalk. Toda v nasprotju z estetiko množičnih koreografij v spektaklih reklam ali

R

propagande cilj ni posamična ornamentalna slika, pač pa določena neformalnost dogodka, ki postopoma krši normalno obnašanje v zadevnih prostorih.

Razpršitev je uporabljena kot proizvodno sredstvo, ki včasih namenoma okrepi učinke potrošniškega kapitalizma, ki nadzoruje obnašanje posameznika z obljubo svobode in zadovoljitve skritih želja prek brezciljnega tavanja po nakupovalnih območjih ali pa prek brezumne uporabe medijev zabave. Tako lahko produkcijo razpršitve obravnavamo kot taktiko, ki z dejanji afirmacije subvertira institucionalne strategije nadzora in manipulacije v javni sferi. LIGNA včasih povabi udeležence, da samo opazujejo in posnemajo fizične pozicije, drže in geste potrošnikov v nakupovalnem središču ali območju za pešce, da bi s tem omogočili igrivo in zavestno izkušnjo pogojenega obnašanja v javnosti. Z minimalnimi spremembami se lahko vsakdanji gibi spremenijo v obnašanje, ki je po hišnem redu prizorišča prepovedano. Na primer, geste pozdravljanja ljudi se lahko zlahka spremenijo v geste prosjačenja le z majhnim obratom iztegnjene roke.

Kot je to definiral že Michel Foucault, je dispozitiv sestavljen iz različnih praks, pa tudi iz pravil in kompleksnih naracij ter ne nazadnje teoretskih in ideoloških pojmov.10 Analiza javne sfere se ukvarja s heterogenostjo teh elementov, še posebej, ko se reflektirajo spremembe in transformacije tega dispozitiva. Sam radijski balet – tako predlogo praktičnih navodil kot scenarij zgoščene teoretske refleksije – bi lahko obravnavali kot dispozitiv, ki služi tudi kot analitično orodje za preučevanje trenutnega stanja javne sfere. Način, kako radijski balet eksperimentira z repertoarjem gest, ki jih hišni red prepoveduje, razkrije normativni red, ki je inherenten tem pravilom in ponotranjenim vzorcem obnašanja, s katerim nadzorujemo svoje dnevne gibe.

In prav v tem procesu postane vidna transformacija dispozitiva javne sfere proti privatizaciji.

10 Cf. še posebej Foucaultove ideje o dispozitivu v intervjuju: »Le jeu de Michel Foucault«, v: Ornicar, št. 10, 1977, Pariz.

azpršitev je uporabljena kot proizvodno sredstvo, ki včasih namenoma okrepi učinke potrošniškega kapitalizma, ki nadzoruje obnašanje posameznika z obljubo svobode in zadovoljitve skritih želja prek brezciljnega tavanja po nakupovalnih območjih ali pa prek brezumne uporabe medijev zabave. Tako lahko produkcijo razpršitve obravnavamo kot taktiko, ki z dejanji afirmacije subvertira institucionalne strategije nadzora in manipulacije v javni sferi.

6 2 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUB L IC S PACE

/ 5 HKRATI / 5 KAKO / 5 KAR / 5 KOMUNIKACIJE / 5 MEDIJEV / 5 NAMESTO / 5 NEKAJ / 5 POGOSTO / 5 PRENOSA / 5 PROSTORA / 5 RADIA / 5 RADIJSKEGA

PRENOS GEST – GESTA PRENOSA

P

rodukcije skupine LIGNA so vedno tako intervencijski performansi kot eksperimentalne raziskave njihovih zadevnih okolij in struktur obnašanja, povezanih s temi okolji.

S prakso sondiranja in oddajanja radijskih signalov, s čimer se telesa udeležencev spravijo v gibanje, okolje in njegove geste postanejo razpoznavni. In te geste se lahko spremenijo s taktiko subverzivne afirmacije, npr. gesta poslušanja, vsakodnevna potrošniška praksa, ki je postala popolnoma normalna in običajna z uvedbo walkmana, mobilnega telefona in iPoda.

Tiste geste, ki so postale običajne, lahko spet prikličemo v zavest, tako da jih ponavljamo in razkrijemo, natanko tako, kot v napisanem tekstu izpostavimo citat. Kot je zapisal Walter Benjamin v svojem prispevku o Brechtovem epskem gledališču, lahko gledališka predstava občinstvo ozavesti o njegovih gestah s prekinitvijo normalnega toka in rutin vsakdanjega obnašanja.11 V tem pogledu lahko mnoga dela skupine LIGNA razumemo kot radijska sondiranja prostorov in z njimi povezanih struktur gibanja – pri čemer geste naredijo vidne s pomočjo njihove analize, igrive prekinitve in prenosa vsem aktivnim udeležencem. Podobno idejo prekinitve je formuliral Guy Debord, ko je opisal konstrukcijo situacij v javni sferi kot nekaj, kar prekine ali iritira ekonomijo odvijajočega se spektakla vsakdanjega življenja v kapitalističnih družbah. In ne nazadnje, bolj nedavni koncept političnega, ki ga je artikuliral Jacques Rancière, se prav tako osredotoča na potencial prekinitve vseh vrst institucionaliziranih in hierarhičnih politik. Sodobne študije gledališča in performansa so prevzele idejo prekinitve in opisale novo razumevanje političnega zgolj z eksplicitno distanco do politike v smislu konvencionalne distribucije, pogajanj in reprezentacije oblasti. Michel de Certeau je pokazal v isto smer, ko je definiral taktiko (kot del manjšinskega diskurza in prakse) v nasprotju s strategijami (kot sistemi nadzora).

V tem smislu politični učinek skupine LIGNA ni le v kršenju pravil sprejetega obnašanja na bolj ali manj javnih mestih, pač pa v dekonstrukciji dispozitiva javne sfere vključno z njeno ideologijo. Način, kako se ta proces zažene, je odvisen od posameznih gest, ki se prenašajo, in tudi od geste prenosa. Pomembno je, da to gesto razumemo ne toliko v smislu premoči in nadzora, pač pa prej kot subverzivno ponovitev vseh sredstev, s katerimi je dispozitiv javne sfere postal dispozitiv nadzora in standardizacije. Ti dve plati medalje, prenos gest in gesta prenosa, sta bili premišljeni tudi v okviru gledaliških odrov.

Eden od projektov, ki je nadaljeval radijski balet, je bila predstava Der Neue Mensch (Novi človek, 2008).

Podnaslov te produkcije je Vier Übungen in utopischen Bewegungen (Štiri vaje v utopičnem gibanju). Njeni prvi uprizoritvi v Hamburgu leta 2008 je sledilo veliko ponovitev.

Toda ker v njej ni nobenih izvajalcev, pač pa le udeleženci, je vsaka predstava drugačna in vsaka po koncu svojo premiero 11

proslavi z zabavo. Prek slušalk obiskovalci poslušajo radijsko igro s štirimi različnimi pozicijami iz modernih avantgard, ki so se vse ukvarjale s konceptom novega človeka in nove družbe.

Te so: 1) uprizoritveni eksperiment Bertolta Brechta Lehrstück (Učni komad) za brezrazredno državo, kjer vstopijo v igro geste, odnosi in družbene pozicije; 2) Gibalni zbori (BewegungsChöre) Rudolfa von Labana, v katerih naj bi kolektivna gibanja in vibracije razpršile oblast samo; 3) eksperimenti Vsevoloda Mejerholda z biomehaničnimi vajami za igralce, zasnovanimi za prenovo njihovih teles in oblikovanje nove vrste družbene, interaktivne subjektivnosti; in 4) posebna zmožnost Charlieja Chaplina, da po naključju naleti na vse te utopične vizije in z njimi povezane obljube moderne tehnologije in ideologije. V performansu skupine LIGNA ni kaj videti razen dejavnosti obiskovalcev, ki uprizarjajo predlagane gibe glede na omenjene različne koncepcije novega človeka. Štiri različne skupine dobijo isto gradivo, toda v različnem vrstnem redu.

Po petnajstih minutah se program spremeni. Na koncu vsaka skupina poslušalcev preizkusi in z ustreznimi gibi citira vse štiri odnose, pri čemer isto strukturo odigrajo štirikrat v štirih različnih vlogah, pri tem pa so hkrati igralci in gledalci.

Razdeljevanje gibalnega materiala koordinira le natančno razdelana predloga (angl. score), ki se radijsko prenaša znotraj gledaliških stavb ali studijskih prostorov. Na odru ni nobenega režiserja ali koreografa, nikogar, ki bi nadzoroval koreografijo.

Lahko pride do nekaterih kočljivih situacij, npr. ko nekdo leži na tleh z zaprtimi očmi, medtem ko nekdo drug teče v bližini in v rokah drži stol, a menda v teh performansih ni prišlo do nobenih pravih nesreč. Zabavno je izvajati te vaje in hkrati izkusiti razlike ter nasprotja med različnimi koncepti gibanja, recimo med labanovskim poskusom utelešenja kozmične sfere z lastnim telesom na eni strani in nekaterimi Mejerholdovimi agitpropovskimi slogani ter gibalnimi impulzi na drugi strani. Kot LIGNA opiše ta projekt: »Novi človek kliče po spremembi proizvodnje gest in gibov v javno, kolektivno zadevo. Novi človek je drama v tretji osebi, ki izkorišča ponovljivost gest in s tem ponovno premisli estetske paradigme Brechtove Lehrstück.« Na Brechta se nanaša tudi moto, povezan s to produkcijo: »Početi je boljše kot čutiti,« stavek iz Brechtove tako imenovane radijske teorije, ki kliče po dejavnih udeležencih namesto pasivnih potrošnikih.

Omeniti bi morali veliko več produkcij, da bi pokazali, da je delo skupine LIGNA na veliko načinov paradigmatično za organizacijo performansov in gledališča v urbanih prostorih, s tem ko proizvaja situacije, iritacije normalnega reda s spremembo običajnega obnašanja, ne da bi pri tem ljudi združila v kakršnokoli harmonično skupnost. Nasprotno, z uporabo aparata in interference radia raje delajo na koordinaciji gibanja posameznikov z razpršitvijo in začasno združitvijo. Zato je dispozitiv, ki ga ustvarijo v odnosu do dispozitiva javne sfere, tako igriv kot krhek, stalno spreminjajoč se eksperiment v spreminjajočih se okoliščinah. ..

Cf. Walter Benjamin, »What is epic theatre?« (druga različica), v: Understanding Brecht, prev. Anna Bostock, London: Verso, 1998, str. 15–22.

( N E) G I B IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 6 3

354 THE / 305 OF / 175 AND / 136 IN / 117 A / 104 TO / 58 BY / 52 AS / 51 RADIO / 50 THAT / 48 IS / 36 FOR / 34 AN / 34 PUBLIC / 32 OR / 31 THIS / 30 LIGNA

Der Neue Mensch, Kampnagel Hamburg 2009 (Tanzkongress) Foto: LIGNA

TRANSMITTING GESTURES SITUATION AND INTERVENTION IN LIGNAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S RADIO PERFORMANCES PATRICK PRIMAVESI

6 4 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUBL I C S PACE

I

magine yourself lying on the floor of a train station hall, listening on your earphones to the music and the gentle instructions of a public radio ballet. For half an hour, you performed a number of gestures that are normally forbidden by the station rules. You have let your gaze wander around and, perhaps with an ear on the floor, listened to the locomotive of the revolutions still to come. Suddenly a uniformed security guard grabs hold of you, asks for your name and address and expels you from the building. Some weeks later, you receive a penalty notice by mail due to a violation of the station rules. Or, everything is different, better, or perhaps even worse: no reprisals at all, on the contrary. After the end of the performance, drinks will be served on the house and traveling vouchers distributed. Your name is known already and you will receive only a notification that your honorary fee has been transferred to your bank account, sponsored by some companies that are shareholders of the train station amusement park. You have creatively contributed to proving the cultural potential of the place and the liberality of its

/ 26 WITH / 25 BUT / 24 BE / 24 ON / 24 SPHERE / 21 ARE / 21 THEIR / 20 GESTURES / 17 BROADCASTING / 17 FROM / 17 HAS / 17 IT / 16 ALL / 16 ALSO / 16 CAN

trust: “Thank you for performing with our Company …”

We can assume that both versions for the ending of such an event are rather improbable. However, the slight exaggeration shows the impact and the ambiguity of interventions like the Radio Ballet by LIGNA, performed in train stations, shopping malls and like places. An increasing privatization of the public sphere provokes the search outside of the established cultural institutions for new artistic practices that may subvert the norms and rules of our daily behaviour. But again and again, new forms of protest or subversive activities are quickly taken over and commercialized. In this perspective, the productions of LIGNA will be discussed in the following, as interventions and situations of dispersal. Participants are invited to perform movements and gestures that are broadcast as instructions by radio transmitters: scenarios for revolutionary (or at least irregular) behavior in the public sphere.

LIGNA was founded in the framework of a public non-profit radio station in Hamburg, called Freies Sender Kombinat (FSK).

The group consists of three experts in media theory and radio art: Ole Frahm, Michael Hueners and Torsten Michaelsen. In 1997, they started broadcasting every two weeks a phone-in programme called Lignas Musik Box. Listeners were asked to call in to the show and play their favourite music via telephone.

As this example clearly indicates, LIGNA is not interested in writing anything close to conventional radio plays, or in using the broadcasting media in order to produce elaborate feature programmes. Rather, they tend to call into question the whole apparatus of an established business of cultural and commercial broadcasting. Here is a brief self-portrait from their homepage: “What all the works of LIGNA have in common is that they regard their audience as a collective of producers. In a temporary association, it can produce unforeseeable, uncontrollable effects that challenge the regulation of a space. One of LIGNA’s models of media usage, the Radio Ballet (invented in 2002), provides radio listeners with a choreography of excluded and forbidden gestures in formerly public, now controlled spaces.

Others are the Radio Concert for 144 Mobile Phones, which lets the radio listeners participate in a process of collective composition, or The New Man, a theatre play without actors, which engages the audience in a complex gestural interaction.”1 This short description may be helpful getting a first idea of LIGNA’s work. But what are the practical and theoretical preconditions and contexts of this work? How do these productions look, how can we imagine the realization of concepts such as intervention and collectivity, participation and interaction? Obviously linked to the theoretical framework of situationist thinking, LIGNA’s works-in-progress can also be described as a dispositif, as an apparatus and network of rules and strategies on the one hand, practices and tactics on the other. LIGNA’s interventions challenge the public sphere as a dispositif of control, surveillance and normative order, and at the same time they produce a dispositif on their own, crossing the ensemble of everyday 1

See http://ligna.blogspot.com.

life movements and gestures, the rules of behavior in the public sphere and an ongoing discourse on interrelations between aesthetics and politics.

A first example for the particular impact of theory in LIGNA’s work, which at the same time demonstrates the impact of practice in their own theoretical approach, may be a lecture performed in 1999 in an academic context. The title of the lecture was: “Listen to the other waves! The spatialization of the voice in radio, or: How voices become spatial.” Instead of just reading their lecture using the loudspeaker system of the venue, instead of becoming amplified, they preferred to transmit their voices by broadcasting technology and to become audible to their audiences via many individual radio devices and headphones, mixed with some other sound material, thus technologically displaced from their speakers. By this extravagant setting, it was not only the message of the lecture (“Listen to the other waves!”) that became audible. It was also the conventional and “normal” use of technology in such situations of a pre-installed dispositif, of a somehow hierarchic communication, that was reflected. And the question of the common, the process of sharing knowledge, experience and some insights perhaps, was brought up for discussion even before anything particular had been said.

That lecture from 1999 also reflected thematically LIGNA’s work in regard to the perception of voices, particularly in the public sphere. But the starting point was the notion of the uncanny, the somehow uncomfortable or even scary experience of being separated from your own voice by recordings, which tend to render the voice as something foreign, no longer inside of your body but as part of the outside world, with its own material presence, comparable to characters in a piece of writing. This points to a quite important and fundamental discourse, including Roland Barthes’ semiologic theories on the harshness, the grain of the voice, and also Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction of a phenomenological idea of the voice as a living breath (in particular in the philosophy of Edmund Husserl), and – last but not least – the crisis of a subject deprived of its own voice as it was staged by Antonin Artaud in his later writings and in a famous radio programme (Pour enfinir avec le jugement de dieu / To Have Done with the Judgement of God, 1948).2 The detachment of the voice from the body, as reinforced by means of recording and transmission, demonstrates a fundamental experience of alienation that has always already been part of our experience of listening to voices. A considerable part of an occidental philosophy and aesthetics of the voice can be interpreted (according to Derrida) as an ongoing attempt

2

Cf. Roland Barthes, “The Grain of the Voice”, translated by Stephen Heath, in: M. Huxley and N. Witts (ed.), The Twentieth Century Performance Reader, London: Routledge, 1996, p. 46; Jacques Derrida, Voice And Phenomenon: Introduction to the Problem of the Sign in Husserl’s Phenomenology, translated by Leonard Lawlor, Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 2010; and Derrida, Writing and Difference, translated by Alan Bass, London: Routledge & Kegan, 1976; and Antonin Artaud, Selected Writings, translated by H. Weaver, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988, p. 583.

( N E) G I B IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 6 5

/ 16 VOICE / 15 DISPOSITIF / 15 RATHER / 14 BEHAVIOR / 14 PERFORMANCE / 14 THESE / 14 VOICES / 13 BEEN / 13 HAVE / 13 MOVEMENTS / 13 NEW / 13 NOT

D

ispersal is used as a productive tool, sometimes deliberately intensifying the effects of a consumerist capitalism that controls the behavior of the individual by promising freedom and fulfillment of hidden desires by aimless drifting in shopping zones or by an absentminded use of entertainment media. Thus the production of dispersal can be regarded as tactics that subvert the institutional strategies of control and manipulation in the public sphere by acts of affirmation. to compensate the experience of alienation in the moment of listening-to-one’s-own-voice by the help of a metaphysics of presence, based on the idea of a subject that tries to control all possible effects that his own voice may have on those who listen to it. A critical reflection of this metaphysics of the voice is one of the preconditions for LIGNA’s radio work. As opposed to all strategies by which commercialized media try to compensate those experiences of alienation, LIGNA’s performances even intensify all the uncanny moments in the use of media technology, raising the question of the medium as the ghostly sphere and instance of the in-between.

GHOST VOICES – MEDIA FRIGHT

T

he politically engaged concept of a Free Radio often tried to claim the technologies and the institutions of broadcasting in order to re-appropriate an individual, free and uncensored voice. Rather skeptical towards this attitude, LIGNA’s work points to the fact that it is always the uncanny experience of an incomplete and deprived presence which is mediated by radio broadcasting: no original identity and authenticity of a voice but rather its heterogeneity and volatility.

In this perspective, the hope that it might be possible to fully abandon the power structure and the inequality inherent to the vocal act of speech and its transmission by radio broadcasting proves to be a well minded illusion. The manipulation of the listeners in commercial and politically propagandistic or at least state-controlled broadcasting programmes tends, of course, to be obscured, as well as the alienating effects of a voice that is separated from its speaker by technical means of recording and reproduction. This particular system of obscuration and illusionist compensation is inherent to the radio medium, as we can see for instance in the long tradition of seemingly spontaneous phone-in calls by listeners or in the pre-recorded studio applause and canned laughter (first used in the popular radio

6 6 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUBL I C S PACE

shows of the late 1940s). Starting from these extreme examples, it becomes obvious that there is a certain need to produce a phantasm of successful communication and that no Free Radio programme would be able to surpass these illusions. The same happens to the materiality of the proliferated voices, despite all attempts to compensate their strangeness by seemingly “natural” but in fact highly conventional modes of talking in public radio programmes.

Sometimes the notion of the ghostliness of transmitted voices and of the media as an uncanny sphere of the in-between even ends up in aesthetic or mystic visions. And indeed the perception of voices in the age of their technical reproducibility has always been accompanied by a certain media fright – when telephone communication became more accessible or in the emergence of sound film with synchronized voices.3 From the very beginnings of sound transmission to the – both politically and economically important – boom of public and private radio broadcasting (between 1920 and 1950) and finally to the development of the Internet and podcasts, there is a trace of the uncanny, often associated to the technical proliferation and reception of voices. The traditional interpretation of telepathic phenomena as a manifestation of the dead was continued in the idea, shared by Thomas Alva Edison and many others (during the twentieth century), that radio broadcasting would possibly allow to actively get in contact with dead persons.4 This belief also may be understood as an attempt to compensate the horror of alienation in the moment of listening to transmitted voices just by imagining scenarios, where the randomness and uncontrollability of voices and sounds in our environment would become meaningful. The white noise of the ether would become decipherable, as personally addressed messages speaking to us from the other world, just like the voice of Hamlet’s father, 3 4

Cf. Michel Chion, La voix au cinéma, Paris: Édition de l’Étoile, 1982, p. 21.

See Verena Kuni, “Radio (((o))) Séance”, in: Golo Föllmer and Sven Thiermann (eds.), Relating Radio. Communities. Aesthetics. Access., Leipzig: Spector Books, 2006, pp. 217–223.

/ 13 WHICH / 12 AT / 12 INTO / 12 ITS / 12 JUST / 12 PARTICULAR / 12 THEATRE / 12 WAS / 12 WORK / 11 DIFFERENT / 11 POLITICAL / 11 RULES / 11 TACTICS

Radio Ballet, Leipzig, Central Train Station Foto: Eiko Grimberg

challenging us with unsolved problems and perhaps calling for revenge to be taken. Against this backdrop of a quite pathetic and serious interpretation of vocal phantasms, the works of LIGNA suggest a rather playful way to deal with all the ghostly voices and noises that don’t really have any particular and personal origin and come into being as interference, just between transmission and reception.

DISPERSAL

A

basic element in the work of LIGNA is a principle of dispersal, “Zerstreuung”. The meanings of this quite ambiguous term include proliferation and scattering, but also a state of distraction, inattentiveness or even absent-mindedness. Thereby, the term, at least in the German language, is helpful to circumscribe some structural aspects of broadcast-

ing technology as well as various artistic and political strategies and tactics for using this technology. A theory of reception in distraction was formulated already by Walter Benjamin in his famous essay on the work of art in the age of its technological reproducibility.5 Bertolt Brecht demanded in 1932 that radio should be changed from an apparatus of distribution into an apparatus of communication.6 Until today, the distribution of radio signals has been regarded as a still incomplete practice that should somehow be completed towards a mutual exchange.

In the course of the twentieth century there were various attempts to fulfill this desire for a direct communication through the radio, until today, when, in the time of the Internet, the notion of interactivity seems truly at hand. Because of the tech5

6

Walter Benjamin, The Work of Art in the Age of Its Technological Reproducibility and Other Writings on Media, translated by Edmund Jephcott, et al., Harvard University Press, 2008.

Bertolt Brecht, “The Radio as a Communication Apparatus” (1932), in: Brecht on Film and Radio, translated and ed. by Marc Silberman, London: Methuen, 2000, pp.

41–46.

( N E) G I B IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 67

/ 10 BALLET / 10 CONTROL / 10 MEDIA / 10 PRACTICE / 10 SAME / 10 THEY / 9 BECOME / 9 BETWEEN / 9 DISPERSAL / 9 MAY / 9 NO / 9 ONLY / 9 ORDER / 9 OWN

nical proximity between wired and wireless transmission, it was always tempting to combine the possibilities of radio with those of the telephone: broadcasting language and music programmes to an almost infinite amount of receivers and at the same time allowing them to enter into direct conversation. But the established practice to give voice to individual listeners on the phone during broadcasted programmes allows only punctual and exemplary contacts between studio and audience. And the useful offer of podcasts that can be received or downloaded via the Internet will sooner or later turn the public broadcasting programmes (for many audiences simultaneously) into a rather individualized mode of consumption. All these developments transform the social, political and economic functions and the ideology of radio broadcasting to such an extent that it is rather dubious if radio can still be regarded as a forum of public discourse. The notion of the dispositif is important in this context because it helps to circumvent a conventional critique of ideologies. Not only are the changes in the use of technical possibilities part of the dispositif of the public sphere, but so are the related ideologies of communication, political engagement, cultural identity, locality and globalization, etc.

The work of LIGNA has reflected these issues by various experiments with the practice of distribution and communication, either in studio-based radio broadcasting or in the attempt to transmit sounds, voices and even gestures through radio technology in the public sphere. The different projects continue to look for remainders of the public sphere that are not yet privatized and controlled in favor of their economic utilization. Already in the 1950s, Guy Debord analyzed the transformation of the public sphere into zones of consumption and of a spectacular self-representation of the capitalistic market. Up until today, this transformation has even intensified, not only by video surveillance, but also by a system of social control. According to Gilles Deleuze, marketing became the new

instrument of social control.7 What he has called the society of control is bound no longer to outside surveillance, but rather to an internalized norm and standardization of behavior, for instance, in shopping malls. Such strategies of standardization can be made visible and also subverted by a certain kind of tactics that have for decades been evolving from situationist positions and methods: forms of an uncontrollable deviation (dérive), creatively shared actions such as flash mobs, a subversive reproduction of advertisement and propaganda (culture jamming), etc. In taking up and critically reflecting these tactics, LIGNA investigates and reinforces their potential also in terms of theatricality and performance, beyond the traditional strategy to spread messages about social problems.

In this context, the principle of dispersal offers some advantages: first, a particular tactics to circumvent laws for the prohibition of assembly. People don’t meet or gather together, but they disperse in the same moment; second, it is possible to produce a collectivity in this moment of dispersal by the use of radio transmission to reach individuals simultaneously and rather discreetly (because only simple technology is used: personal mobile phones, radios and earphones); and third, a collective action can nevertheless become visible by the radio-based coordination of seemingly isolated movements and gestures in the public sphere. Thus LIGNA creates situations in the public sphere that are controlled by the movement instructions via radio devices, and yet to a certain extent uncontrollable by outside authorities such as police or security guards. This tactics to create situations comes close to the situationist theory and practice of Guy Debord and his followers, exposing a potential of performance and theatricality, experimenting with the more or less explicit rules for accepted behavior in public by a whole range of settings and scenarios of deviation and derive.8 7 8

L

Gilles Deleuze, “Postscript on the Societies of Control”, in: October 59 (1992), pp.

3–8.

Guy Debord, “Report on the Construction of Situations”, in: Tom McDonough (ed.), Guy Debord and the Situationist International, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2002, pp. 39–50.

IGNA sometimes invites the participants just to observe and imitate the physical positions, postures or gestures of consumers in a mall or a pedestrian precinct, in order to allow the conditioned behavior in public to be experienced playfully and consciously. By minimal transformations, everyday movements may turn into a behavior that is forbidden by the house rules of the place. For instance, the gesture of greeting a person may easily transform into the gesture of begging by only a little turn of the outstretched hand.

6 8 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUBL IC S PACE

/ 9 SUCH / 9 THERE / 9 YOUR / 8 EVEN / 8 GESTURE / 8 PARTICIPANTS / 8 SITUATIONS / 8 SOME / 8 TECHNOLOGY / 8 TRANSMISSION / 8 YOU / 7 CALLED

RADIO BALLET

I

mportant for the development of the radio ballet, as the most successful and well known format of LIGNA’s work, besides of the situationist practice of intervention, is also the context of postdramatic theatre.9 With the replacement of drama, dialogue and illusion from their paradigmatic function, the practice of performance has changed as well: instead of professional actors, we often see amateurs on stage exposing their real living conditions. The influence of media entertainment has produced audiences with different perceptional habits that are often reflected by the performances themselves. And finally, the place and the space of the theatre are no longer bound to the stages of a bourgeois representational culture. Instead, new forms and tactics of localization are developed, that try to situate performance, theatre and dance in the urban space as a political and institutional context. A strategy of the so-called political theatre of the early twentieth century, the step outside of the conventional stage buildings, has been changed and elaborated into various tactics that aim for a re-appropriation of the public sphere as the genuine place for political activity. But the mere impulse to stage theatrical events of all kinds in the urban space is definitely not enough, because it remains inside the borders of a political street theatre that is easily identifiable, or becomes just a part of the society of the spectacle that has occupied the public sphere together with advertisement and propaganda of all kinds. What is at stake is rather the production of movement in public space in terms of an interruption or at least an irritation of the normal order in everyday life.

Since the late 1990s, LIGNA has produced more than 50 theatre and performance works and interventions, live radio plays and radio ballets that demonstrate a wide panorama of such situations, focusing on the radio-based coordination of discretely moving participants in public spaces. The radio ballet is neither a congregation of demonstrating masses nor the claim of an individual protest, neither an ornamental choreography of a trained ensemble in the urban environment nor an authentic style of movement for dance freaks. LIGNA works rather with a revocation of such collective or individual patterns of behavior and their related ideologies. And yet there is a certain potential of coordination in this process of dispersal, which they call “association”, sometimes completely imperceptible from the outside. It is also important that the radio ballet does not always follow a fixed method or score. The different versions that have been produced since 2002, mainly in train stations and populated urban squares, were often called “exercises”: for instance Übungen im unnötigen Aufenthalt (Exercises in Unnecessary Staying, Hamburg, 2002) or Übung im Nichtbestimmungsgemäßen Verweilen (Exercise in Non-Intended Lingering, Leipzig, 2003). These exercises, neither a mere political action nor just an artistic event for its own sake, definitely change the atmosphere of a place: hundreds of participants can 9

Cf. Hans-Thies Lehmann, PostdramaticTheatre (1999), translated by Karen JuersMunby, London: Routledge, 2007.

join in by performing the instructions for movements and gestures that they receive individually via radios and earphones.

But, as opposed to the aesthetics of mass choreographies in spectacles of advertisement or propaganda, the aim is not a particular ornamental picture, but rather a certain casualness of the event that gradually transgresses the normal behavior in the respective places.

Dispersal is used as a productive tool, sometimes deliberately intensifying the effects of a consumerist capitalism that controls the behavior of the individual by promising freedom and fulfillment of hidden desires by aimless drifting in shopping zones or by an absent-minded use of entertainment media.

Thus the production of dispersal can be regarded as tactics that subvert the institutional strategies of control and manipulation in the public sphere by acts of affirmation. LIGNA sometimes invites the participants just to observe and imitate the physical positions, postures or gestures of consumers in a mall or a pedestrian precinct, in order to allow the conditioned behavior in public to be experienced playfully and consciously. By minimal transformations, everyday movements may turn into a behavior that is forbidden by the house rules of the place. For instance, the gesture of greeting a person may easily transform into the gesture of begging by only a little turn of the outstretched hand.

As it has been defined in particular by Michel Foucault, a dispositif consists of various practices, but also of rules and complex narratives, and last but not least, of theoretical and ideological concepts.10 An analysis of the public sphere is concerned with the heterogeneity of these elements, in particular when the changes and transformations of this dispositif are reflected. The radio ballet, both a score of practical instructions and a scenario of condensed theoretical reflection, may itself be regarded as a dispositif that serves also as an analytical tool in order to examine the current state of the public sphere. The way in which the radio ballet experiments with the repertoire of gestures that are forbidden by the house rules exposes the normative order inherent to these rules and to the internalized patterns of behavior by which we control our daily movements.

And in just this process, the transformation of the dispositif of the public sphere towards privatization becomes visible.

TRANSMITTING OF GESTURES – THE GESTURE OF TRANSMITTING

L

IGNA’s productions are always both interventionist performances and experimental explorations of their respective environments and the structures of behavior related to these environments. By a practice of sounding out, broadcasting radio signals and thereby setting the bodies of the participants in motion, the environment and its gestures become reco10 Cf. in particular Foucault’s notions on the dispositif in the interview: “Le jeu de Michel Foucault”, in: Ornicar, no. 10 (1977), Paris, 1977.

( N E) G I B IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 6 9

/ 7 COMMUNICATION / 7 EXPERIENCE / 7 INSTANCE / 7 LEAST / 7 LISTENERS / 7 MANY / 7 MOVEMENT / 7 RELATED / 7 WELL / 6 ALWAYS / 6 CERTAIN

gnizable. And these gestures can be transformed by tactics of subversive affirmation, for instance the gesture of listening, an everyday practice of consumption that has become completely normal and ordinary since the introduction of the Walkman, mobile phones and the iPod. In particular, those gestures that have become habitual can be called back into consciousness by repeating and exposing them, just as a quotation is highlighted in a written text. As Walter Benjamin has analyzed in his commentary on Brecht’s epic theatre, a theatrical performance can make an audience aware of their gestures by an interruption of the normal flow and routines of daily behavior.11 In this perspective, we can understand many works of LIGNA as a radiobased sounding out of places and of their related structures of movements – making gestures visible by their analysis, playful interruption and transmission to all the active participants.

A similar idea of interruption has been formulated by Guy Debord when he describes the construction of situations in public sphere as something that interrupts and irritates the economy of the ongoing spectacle of daily life in capitalist societies. And last but not least, the more recent concept of the political articulated by Jacques Rancière also focuses on the potential of an interruption of all kinds of institutionalized and hierarchic politics. Contemporary studies of theatre and performance have taken up this notion of interruption as well, describing a new understanding of the political just by an explicit distance towards politics in the sense of the conventional distribution and negotiation and representation of power. Michel de Certeau pointed in the same direction when he defined tactics (as part of a minoritarian discourse and practice) as opposed to strategies (as systems of control).

Now, in this sense, the political impact of LIGNA is not just to break the rules of accepted behavior in more or less public places, but rather to deconstruct the dispositif of the public sphere, including its ideology. The way in which this process is set in motion depends on the particular gestures that are transmitted and also on the gesture of transmitting. It is important to understand this gesture not so much in terms of superiority and control, but rather as a subversive repetition of all the means by which the dispositif of the public sphere has become a dispositif of surveillance and standardization. These two sides of the coin, the transmission of gestures and the gesture of transmitting, have been reflected in the framework of theatre stages as well. One of the projects that continued the radio ballet was the performance Der Neue Mensch (The New Man, 2008).

The subtitle of this production is Vier Übungen in utopischen Bewegungen (Four Exercises in Utopian Movements). Since its first performance in Hamburg in 2008, there have been many repetitions. But as there are no performers but only participants, each performance is different and will be celebrated by its own premiere party afterwards. Via earphones, the visitors are listening to a radio play with four different positions 11

Cf. Walter Benjamin, “What is Epic Theatre?“ (second version), in: Understanding Brecht, translated by Anna Bostock, London: Verso, 1998, pp. 15–22.

70 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I P RO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUB L I C S PACE

from the modern avant-gardes that were all concerned with the conception of a new man and a new society: 1) Bertolt Brecht’s performance experiment of the Lehrstück (Learning Play) for a state without classes, where gestures, attitudes and social positions come into play; 2) Rudolf von Laban’s Movement Choirs (Bewegungs-Chöre), in which the collective movements and vibrations where meant to disperse power itself; 3) Vsewolod Meyerhold’s experiments with biomechanical exercises for actors devised to renew their bodies and to shape a new kind of social, interactive subjectivity; and 4) Charlie Chaplin’s particular ability to stumble across all these utopian visions and the related promises of modern technology and ideology. In LIGNA’s performance, there is nothing to see except for the activity of the visitors enacting the proposed movements according to those different blueprints of the new man. Four different groups receive the same material, but in a different order. After fifteen minutes, the program changes. In the end, each group of listeners will have tested and quoted all four attitudes with the related movements, engaged in playing the same structure four times with four different roles, being actors and viewers at the same time.

The distribution of movement material is coordinated only by the precisely elaborated score, which is transmitted by radio broadcasting inside of theatre buildings or studio spaces. There is no choreographer or director on stage, no one to organize the choreography in terms of control. Some tricky situations may occur, for instance lying on the floor with eyes closed while someone else is running nearby holding up a chair in his hands, but apparently there haven’t been any real accidents in these performances. It is just fun to do the exercises and at the same time to experience the contrasts or conflicts between the different concepts of movement, let’s say between a Labanian attempt to embody a cosmic sphere with your body and on the other hand some agitprop slogans and movement impulses from Meyerhold. As LIGNA describes this project: “The New Man calls for turning the production of gestures and movements into a public, collective affair. The New Man is a play in the third person, exploiting the iterability of the gesture and thus reconsidering the aesthetical paradigms of Brecht’s Lehrstück.” Related to Brecht is also the motto connected to this production: “Doing is better than feeling”, a sentence from Brecht’s so-called radio theory, calling for active participants instead of passive consumers. Many more productions should be mentioned to show that LIGNA’s work is paradigmatic in many ways for the organization of performance and theatre in urban spaces, producing situations, irritations of the normal order by the transformation of common behavior, without uniting people in any harmonious community. By using the apparatus and the interference of the radio, they rather work on the coordination of movements of individuals, by dispersal and temporary association. Therefore, the dispositif they create in relation to the dispositif of the public sphere is both playful and fragile, a constantly transforming experiment in changing circumstances. ..

/ 6 COLLECTIVE / 6 CONVENTIONAL / 6 EXERCISES / 6 FOUR / 6 HIS / 6 IMPORTANT / 6 INDIVIDUAL / 6 INTERRUPTION / 6 LISTENING / 6 MAN / 6 MORE

SCENARIO OF CONDENSED THEORETICAL REFLECTION

( N E) G IB IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 7 1

87 V / 65 IN / 55 FLASH / 49 JE / 42 NA / 35 SE / 32 KOT / 31 KI / 21 Z / 20 TUDI / 19 MOB / 19 S / 18 PA / 13 OD / 12 DOGODEK / 12 SO / 11 PO / 11 ZA / 10 ALI

FLASH MOB JASMINA ZALOŽNIK

Junij 2003. V veleblagovnici Macy v New Yorku se približno 100 ljudi gnete okrog 10.000 $ vredne preproge. Srčika njihove diskusije je nakup ljubezenske preproge za »ljubezenske igre«.

10 minut kasneje se množica brez besed razide.

O

menjeni dogodek je obeležen kot rojstvo flash moba, kateremu ime in osrednje karakteristike podeli Bill Wasik. 1 Flash mob je dogodek, na katerem se zbere skupina ljudi in v kratkem časovnem intervalu (10–20 minut) izvede nenavadno, če ne celo bizarno dejanje-akcijo in se nato brez besed razide. Dogodek je iniciiran s strani »mobberja«, organizatorja, ki prek novih komunikacijskih orodij (elektronskih sporočil, blogov, forumov, socialnih omrežij, tekstovnih sporočil (sms)) skupini ljudi posreduje vabilo na skupinsko akcijo v javnem prostoru. Informacija o dogodku se po spletu razširi po me1

72 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I P RO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUB L IC S PACE

Bill Wasik je oče flash moba, častni urednik ameriške modne revije Harper, urednik revije WIRED, avtor knjige And Then There’s This: How Stories Live and Die in Viral Culture (2009).

/ 10 NE / 10 PROSTORU / 9 IZ / 9 MOBE / 9 MOBI / 9 MOBOV / 8 DA / 7 BI / 7 LAHKO / 7 MED / 7 MOBA / 7 TAKO / 6 DOGODKA / 6 JAVNEM / 6 JIH / 6 KATEREM

todi snežne kepe. V primeru odziva na povabilo, ki se kaže kot prijava/odziv na elektronsko pošto, forum ali sam prihod na lokacijo, mobber zainteresiranim participatorjem posreduje navodila za izvedbo skupinske akcije v javnem prostoru.

Glede na številčnost in raznolikost flash mobov danes se omenjena opredelitev izkaže za preozko in zahteva klasifikacijo fenomena glede na cilj, način interakcije, intence iniciatorja in tudi prebiranje flash moba znotraj vsakokratnega družbenega konteksta. Tudi v primeru, da dogodek opredelimo s kakšnim drugim pojmom.

Virág Molnár2 flash mobe razporeja v pet skupin, pri čemer pa opozarja, da zaradi številčnosti in raznolikosti dogodkov, ki jih organizatorji sami opredeljujejo s terminom flash mob, lahko razporejanje razumemo zgolj kot klasifikacijski okvir, znotraj katerega je nekatere flash mobe mogoče razporejati v več kategorij hkrati, istočasno pa se mnogi od njih od izvirnega oddaljijo po organizacijski, časovni ali kateri drugi dimenziji.3 Zaradi kompleksnosti in diverzitete flash mobov kot tudi zaradi pomanjkanja ustreznejših kategorij bo omenjena klasifikacija služila kot orodje za njihovo umeščanje in kratko analizo, predvsem pa poskus pojasnitve in razgrnitve kratke zgodovine flash mobov v slovenskem prostoru.

Najbolj množičen je t. i. razpršeni flash mob. Razpršeni flash mob se neposredno referira na prvoten, originalen – Wasikov flash mob iz blagovnice Macy, ki priteče v leto 2003. Razpršeni flash mobi se odvijajo v javnem ali polprivatnem (polzasebnem) prostoru, v katerem zbrana skupina participantov v kratkem časovnem intervalu (dogodek ne traja dlje kot dvajset minut) izvede (bolj ali manj) sinhrono akcijo po vnaprej začrtanem scenariju in se nato razkropi. Omenjeni flash mob participanti in organizatorji opredeljujejo kot apolitičen.

Prvi flash mob, ki ga je iniciiral Bill Wasik, je nastal iz družbenega eksperimenta, v katerem je avtor »preverjal« učinkovanje najave bizarnega, nesmiselnega dogodka v družbeni sredini (»wanna be«) umetniških krogov v New Yorku.4 Eksperiment je služil kot dokaz pomena vpliva novih komunikacijskih orodij in njihove 2

3 4

Virág Molnár, Reframing Public Space Through Digital Mobilization: Flash Mobs and the Futility(?) of Contemporary Urban Youth Culture, 2009. Dostopno na: http://ebookbrowse.com/search/http-isites-harvard-edu-fs-docs-icb-topic497840-files-molnar-reframing-public-space-pdf. Zadnjič dostopano: 1. 3. 2011.

Prav tam, str. 11.

V knjigi And Then There’s This: How Stories Live and Die in Viral Culture in številnih intervjujih podaja avtor sorodno utemeljitev. V intervjuju s Francis Heaney »The Short Life of Flash Mobs« avtor utemeljuje: »Izvorna ideja je bila ustvariti elektronsko sporočilo, ki bi ga prejemniki posredovali naprej, da bi posameznike pritegnil k udejstvovanju, pa čeprav bi se izkazalo, da se dogodek razlikuje od najavljenega, nekaj, kar jih bo presenetilo. V bistvu sem želel posredovati elektronsko sporočilo, ki ne bi vodilo k nobenemu dejanju … Omenjena situacija je bila zame dojeta kot specifično newyorška stvar. Ljudje v New Yorku vselej stremijo k naslednji veliki zadevi, ki jo poganja ‘nano-story’.« V mesto se preselijo, ker si želijo biti del umetniške elite/družbe, želijo družbe posameznikov, vpetih v kreativne poklice (se udeležijo branja, koncerta, ki je posredovan preko ustnih kanalov). Delno si želijo odkriti, kaj vznemirja druge, delno pa samo biti del scene. To najdeš tudi drugod, vendar se mi zdi, da je takšno obnašanje tipično newyorško. Želel sem parodirati to newyorško ‘insajderskost’ in nisem pričakoval, da se bo zadeva prijela in razširila.« Francis Heaney, »The Short Life of Flash Mobs«. Dostopno na: http://www.ibiblio. org/pub/electronic-publications/stay-free/archives/24/flash-mobs-history.html.

Zadnjič dostopano: 1. 3. 2011.

množične uporabe na družbo kot tako. Wasik je s projektom izpostavil neposreden odnos med virtualnim in fizičnim prostorom. Pokazal je, da lahko z eno samo potezo (oblikovanjem elektronskega sporočila) zasnujemo in izvedemo dogodek oziroma fizično akcijo z množično participacijo. Odziv in odmevnost je bodisi odvisna od senzacionalnosti, originalnosti, zanimivosti kot tudi od elementov nepredvidljivega. Omenjeni dogodek jemljem kot prelomen zaradi njegovega dometa znotraj širšega kulturnega polja, pa tudi zato, ker je poskus narejen pred nastankom najrazširnejših socialnih mrež (Facebook – ustvarjen leta 2004, Twitter – zaživi leta 2005).

Na podlagi omenjenega je Wasika mogoče opredeliti kot glasnika nove ere. S tem pa ciljam predvsem na zanimivo opredelitev družbe 21. stoletja, ki jo označi s pojmom »virusna kultura« (viral culture). Pojem virusne kulture avtor povezuje z družbo, katere bit se nahaja v hiperpovezanosti, informacijski preobremenjenosti, senzacionalno krmarjeni/»story-driven«5 internetni kulturi. Virusna kultura temelji na hitrosti, brezsramnosti in kratkotrajnosti. Njen motor so t. i. »nanozgodbe« – »nepomembne«, pogosto bizarne, v ozadju katerih se skrivajo »muhe enodnevnice«.6 Glede na možnosti, ki jih danes ponuja internet, se zdi skorajda nemogoča natančna analiza kazalcev vidnosti in senzacionalnosti na spletu. Brezkrajno število elementov in naključij je tisto, ki »nanozgodbe« pripelje v vidno polje spleta, ki iz majhnega človeka ustvarja »zvezde«. Vidnosti in pojavnosti potemtakem ni mogoče več navezovati na relevantnost akterja, ki mu zgodba pritiče, temveč na zapleteno kombinatoriko, ki vodi v hiperpojavnost na spletu. Ustvarja se analogija z virusom, ki se širi po spletu, mreži in množi, hkrati pa je njegovo »širjenje« nepredvidljivo in nedoločljivo.7 Kot navajam zgoraj, je uspeh dogodka mogoče (za zdaj) opredeliti samo za nazaj, nikdar ne tudi vnaprej, saj je usmerjanje in moderiranje posameznikov mogoče le do določene mere. Nepredvidene odločitve, spremembe modusov obnašanja vselej vplivajo ne le na posameznika, temveč na sistem kot celoto.

Sistem je kot živ organizem, razvijajoč se z vsakokratnimi, tudi minimalnimi spremembami. Nemožnost moderiranja posameznika odzvanja v omejeni moči analitikov socialnih omrežij pri natančni detekciji in usmeritvi njihovih uporabnikov. Oziroma – socialni inženiring ima moč spodbujanja in usmerjanja določenega tipa (predvsem potrošnje) obnašanja skupine, vendar pa ta moč ni absolutna.8 Spoznanja socialnih analitikov je mogoče neposredno prenesti tudi na izkušnje in analizo flash mobov, političnih demonstracij ali drugih množičnih oblik upora in preobračanja političnih situacij. Njihovemu razmahu smo priče v zadnjih nekaj mesecih.

Na spletu namreč vznikajo številne pobude in ideje, vendar 5 6 7 8

Pojem se nanaša na družbo, ki se napaja iz senzacionalnih zgodb. Zgodbe z »udarnimi«, senzacionalnimi naslovi pritegnejo več pozornosti.

Bill Wasik, And Then There’s This: How Stories Live and Die in Viral Culture, Penguin Group, 2009.

Prav tam.

Lenart J. Kučić, »Iskanje orodja, s katerim bomo izluščili modrost množic«, intervju z Juretom Leskovcem, Delo, Sobotna priloga, letn. 52, št. 6 (9. januar 2010), str. 4–7.

( N E) G IB IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 73

/ 6 LE / 6 MOGOČE / 6 OMENJENI / 5 AKCIJO / 5 DRUŽBENEGA / 5 DRŽAVAH / 5 LETA / 5 NAMREČ / 5 NI / 5 POGOSTO / 5 POLITIČNI / 5 PREDVSEM

le nekatere med njimi v resnici zaživijo in se iz virtualnega naselijo v realni, fizični prostor.

Kljub obstoju teorij in neposrednih povezav med flash mobi in »revolucionarnim« dogodkom na Bližnjem vzhodu bomo v analizi ostali zvesti izbrani klasifikaciji, ki ohrani distinkcijo med demonstracijami, stavkami in političnimi flash mobi. Politični flash mob se v svoji obliki navidez ne razlikuje od razpršenega flash moba, njegov »politični« moment je razberljiv šele skozi partikularnost družbene situacije, v kateri se pojavi. Politični flash mobi pogosto vznikajo v avtoritarnih državah (državah nekdanjega socialističnega bloka in v državah Bližnjega vzhoda), kjer se še tako nedolžna akcija lahko izkaže kot potencialno nevarna. Srčika tovrstnih akcij ni toliko v neposredni agitaciji družbenega stanja, kot je demonstracija preizkušanja meja posameznikove svobode. Kot eksemplaričen primer političnega flash moba si prisvajam/jemljem Sladoledni flash mob. Dogodek iz leta 2008 se je pripetil v Minsku v Belorusiji le nekaj dni po volitvah. Na osrednjem trgu v mestu se je zbrala skupina okoli 40 mladostnikov, ki so povsem nedolžno – z lizanjem sladoleda – izrazili/izkazali nestrinjanje z izidom volitev in neodobravanje Lukašenkove politike. Tako kot v večini drugih »demokratičnih« držav namreč tudi belorusko zakonodajo opredeljuje sumničavost do zborovanja večjega števila ljudi na javnem mestu. Konkretneje, beloruska zakonodaja prepoveduje vsako množično zbiranje brez predhodne najave državnim oblastem. Nenajavljena »akcija« je tako pritegnila pozornost policije, ki je mladostnike na silo odstranila s kraja dogodka in večje število participantov celo odvedla na zaslišanje. Številni novinarji, analitiki in aktivisti so poseg policije utemeljevali kot delo obveščevalne službe, ki v številnih avtoritarnih državah nadzoruje širjenje informacij v virtualnem okolju, pa čeprav bi jo lahko ugledali le v luči zakonodaje. Lizanje sladoleda vsekakor ne bi smelo sprožiti tovrstnega ravnanja.

Sledeč Molnárjevi klasifikaciji je zanimiva tudi opredelitev performativnih ali uprizoritvenih flash mobov. Z njimi avtorica

P

oskus prvega flash moba v Sloveniji sega v leto 2003, vendar pa za razliko od flash mobov v Evropi ti vse do lanskega leta niso imeli bistvenega odziva.

74 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I P RO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUBL I C S PACE

opredeli flash mobe, ki izhajajo iz performativnih umetniških praks. Bistvena razlika, ki jo avtorica poudari, je raba novih tehnoloških orodij. Ta omogočajo premik navzven, iz zaprtih galerijskih prostorov na ulice in s tem ciljanje bistveno večjega števila udeležencev. Uprizoritveni flash mob je torej umetniški dogodek v javnem prostoru, iniciiran s strani umetnika in umetniške skupine, berljiv v navezavi na happeninge iz 60. let.

Tovrstni flash mobi, ki jih podpisujejo umetniki, imajo za razliko od zabavljaških (vsaj posredno) umetniško intenco in jih produkcijsko snuje profesionalizirano telo.

Omenjeni kategoriji bi se dalo oporekati na več ravneh, predvsem pa ji lahko očitamo pomanjkanje utemeljitve tovrstne kategorizacije. Kategorija namreč napeljuje, da so site-specific projekti, ad hoc performansi, ki vključujejo mimoidoče z vnaprejšnjo najavo, že tudi flash mobi. Še več, umetniškemu projektu, postavljenemu in predstavljenemu v javnem prostoru, bi bilo nujno pripisati oznako flash mob, saj je emancipirani gledalec po Rancièru aktiven in vključen, kot velja za ad hoc gledališče. V navezavi na Rancièra bi lahko številne performativne ali uprizoritvene flash mobe prepoznali kot politične, njihove posege v javne prostore pa kot subverzivna dejanja. Pri tem lahko kot primer jemljemo delovanje umetniške skupine Ligna.

Premik po Molnárjevi klasifikaciji vodi k interaktivnim flash mobom, v središče katerih je postavljena interakcija med posamezniki. Njihov indic je zabava ali igra, ki s prenosom v javni prostor pogosto ustvari »zarezo«, saj posežejo v normative, vpisane v javni prostor. Omenjeni dogodki časovno niso omejeni na nekaj minut, hkrati pa pogosto pustijo v prostoru »sledi« v izrazu nestrinjanja z družbenimi normami. Tovrstne flash mobe Molnárjeva razume kot novo obliko zabave, ki ji je treba dodati tudi izražanje kritike sodobne potrošniške družbe. Med odmevnejšimi in bolj razširjenimi dogodki so NEMI DISKO, v katerem se posamezniki zberejo v poljavnem prostoru (metro postaje, železniške postaje) in plešejo na glasbo z iPodov. Interaktivni flash mobi so blizu komercialnim flash mobom, ki si jih množično prilaščajo podjetja in televizije za promocijo svojih produktov. Slednji z vidika organizacije in izvedbe izstopajo iz flashmobovske strukture, saj stremijo k brezhibnosti izvedbe, zahtevajo več priprav in vaj, prav tako pa jih običajno izvaja vnaprej izbrana profesionalna skupnost plesalcev in ne »naključni« posamezniki, obveščeni skozi nova komunikacijska orodja.

Razširjenost flash mobov in njihove prevladujoče oblike so neposredno odvisne od družb, v katerih se pojavljajo. V ameriški družbi tako prevladujejo interaktivni, razpršeni in komercialni, v vzhodnih državah pa, kot že rečeno, politični. V Nemčiji je opaziti naraščajoče število interaktivnih, ki sovpadajo s političnimi, pri analizi slovenskih primerov pa jim je zaradi majhnega števila nemogoče opredeliti osrednji namen.

Poskus prvega flash moba v Sloveniji sega v leto 2003, vendar pa za razliko od flash mobov v Evropi ti vse do lanskega leta niso imeli bistvenega odziva. Avgusta 2003 v časopisu Dnevnik poročajo o nenavadnem dogodku na Čopovi ulici. Marca 2003

/ 5 SOCIALNIH / 5 SPLETU / 5 VEČ / 5 ZARADI / 4 BOLJ / 4 DRUGIH / 4 JO / 4 KATERIH / 4 LJUDI / 4 MINUT / 4 MNOŽIČNO / 4 MOČ / 4 NAVEZAVI / 4 NEKAJ /

O

b prebiranju flash mobov v slovenskem prostoru ugotavljam, da se način percipiranja družbene stvarnosti kot tudi vedenjski vzorci posameznikov v virtualnem okolju razlikujejo od številnih drugih držav.

Posamezniki se namreč ne odzivajo na skupinske participatorne dogodke. Omenjeno razliko razumem v navezavi na pomanjkanje strukturnih oblik in mehanizmov družbenega upora, ki se modificirajo tudi v druge oblike družbenega. poskušajo organizirati flash mob tudi v Celju. Neuspešno.

Prvi uspeh z borno udeležbo je v Celju datiran v letu 2005.

Novembra 2008 pred Namo izvedejo akcijo zamrznitve peščev.

29. 4. 2010 ob svetovnem dnevu plesa gledališče Ane Monro v sodelovanju s številnimi neodvisnimi organizacijami skoncipira celodnevni ulični plesni projekt Prešerna Ana - Go out & dance!.

Prestolnico opremi s starimi tranzistorji, prek katerih udeleženci in naključni mimoidoči na radijski postaji radioCona sledijo raznovrstnim »plesnim navodilom« in zaporedju »plesnih« dogodkov, razpršenih po mestnem jedru. Odprta, komunikativna in preprosta oblika dogodka pritegne pozornost s tremi oblikami oziroma tremi flash mobi: flash mob z naslovom Zapleši tudi ti!, v katerem so udeleženci izvajali score, posredovane prek radijskih valov (podobnost z nekaterimi projekti skupine Ligna), baletni flash mob, v katerem so udeleženci na ljubljanski tržnici izvajali baletne partiture po navodilih baletnega plesalca, in seveda evrovizijski flash mob, ki ga opisujem v nadaljevanju. Kljub temu da dveh od teh ne bi mogli opredeliti s pojmom komercialnega, temveč pritičeta prej skupini umetniških flash mobov, se zdi nujno izpostaviti tudi njuno šibko stran; oba dogodka sta namreč svoj naboj izgubila v strukturi dogodka, v katerega sta se vpisovala. Dogodek je bil preveč strukturiran, pripravljen in se je tako oddaljil od momenta presenečenja. Zareza v prostoru je bila minorna in prepoznana zgolj neosveščenim mimoidočim. Še bolj sporen se je zdel osrednji dogodek, highlight dneva – evrovizijski flash mob, ki ga je zaznamovala predvsem komercialna plat.

Dogodek se je sinhrono odvijal v Ljubljani, Oslu, Düsseldorfu, Vilni, Reykjaviku, Barceloni in Londonu. Množično je preplavil Prešernov trg, vendar žal razkril svojo najbolj rigorozno obliko komodifikacije, zlorabljeno s strani kanibalizirajočih kapitalističnih struktur. Slab mesec kasneje so si flash mob z namenom promocije javnega prevoza prisvojile tudi Slovenske železnice, v sodelovanju z društvom Focus in plesalci plesne šole Kazina. Med njim in evrovizijskim pa razen v številčnosti ni bilo opaziti bistvene razlike. Če je prvi stavil na promocijo Evrovizije, je drugi eksplicitneje, a enako legitimno promoviral svoj lastni produkt – vožnjo z vlakom.

Ob prebiranju flash mobov v slovenskem prostoru ugotavljam, da se način percipiranja družbene stvarnosti kot tudi vedenjski vzorci posameznikov v virtualnem okolju razlikujejo od številnih drugih držav. Posamezniki se namreč ne odzivajo na skupinske participatorne dogodke. Omenjeno razliko razumem v navezavi na pomanjkanje strukturnih oblik in mehanizmov družbenega upora, ki se modificirajo tudi v druge oblike družbenega. Politični potencial umetnosti v neposredni navezavi na flash mob v spremni besedi k Rancièrovi knjigi Politika estetike izpostavi Slavoj Žižek. Flash mobe uvede z vprašanjem: »Ali nenavadni fenomen flash moba ne predstavlja estetično-političnega v čisti obliki, zvedenega na svoj minimalni okvir? Ljudje pridejo na določeno mesto ob določenem času in izvedejo nekaj kratkih akcij (pogosto bizarnih, smešnih), potem pa se spet razkropijo – ni čudno, da flash mobe opisujejo kot kibernetični prostor, ki je poln možnosti igranja s številnimi družbenimi mrežami ... Daleč od tega, da bi zagovarjal nostalgično navezanost na populizem, izgubljen z našim vstopom v globalno postindustrijsko družbo, je Rancièrova misel danes bolj aktualna kot kadarkoli prej: v našem času dezorientirane levice njegova dela nudijo eno redkih konsistentnih konceptualizacij nadaljnjega upora.«9 In prav v tem prepoznavam moč flash moba, ki ima moč spontane prelevitve v politične demonstracije, kot smo bili temu priča v začetku leta 2011, ko so demonstracije kot posledica medmrežnega povezovanja, spodbude, posredovane s strani mladih po socialnih mrežah, preplavile države Bližnjega vzhoda in dosegle zamenjave političnih oblasti (Egipt, Libija ...). Omenjeni prevrati so sicer skrajni primeri utelešenja političnega potenciala, vpisanega tudi v flash mobe, ali zgolj način reprezentacije, ki je za flash mobe značilen in ki odvrača pozornost od drugih oblik, s katerimi flash mobi subtilno, a učinkovito posegajo v družbeno realnost, razpirajo njeno potencialnost in jo z vpisi in zarezami v dispozitiv vsakdana tudi spreminjajo, pa čeprav le kot nosilci Debordove kritike družbe spektakla. ..

9

Slavoj Žižek, »Afterword: The Lesson of Rancière«, v: Jacques Rancière, The Politics of Aestetics, London and New York: Continuum, 2006, str. 79.

( N E) G IB IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 75

227 THE / 136 OF / 77 AND / 73 IN / 70 FLASH / 66 TO / 55 A / 44 MOBS / 35 AS / 31 IS / 27 BY / 26 MOB / 25 WHICH / 25 WITH / 19 EVENT / 19 ON / 18 FOR

June 2003. At Macy’s department store in New York, there are about a hundred people swarming around a 10,000 dollar rug.

Their discussion revolves around the purchase of a love rug for “love games”. Ten minutes later, the mob silently disperses.

T

FLASH MOB JASMINA ZALOŽNIK TRANSLATED BY POLONA PETEK

he abovementioned event has entered history as the birth of flash mob, whose name and key characteristics were conceived by Bill Wasik.1 Flash mob is an event involving a group of people who gather somewhere and perform an unusual, even bizarre act/action for a brief period of time (10–20 minutes), and then disperse without any further discussion.

The event is initiated by the “mobber”, the organiser, who uses new means of communication (such as email, blogs, forums, social networks or text messages) to invite a group of people to a collective action in a public space. Information about the event spreads through the web by means of communication tools with a sort of snowball effect. If one responds to the invitation by responding to the email or in forum or simply by coming to the chosen location, the mobber gives the interested participants instructions about the realisation of the collective action in a public space.

Given the profusion and diversity of contemporary flash mobs, this definition has become too narrow and it calls for further classification of the phenomenon with regard to the aim, the mode of interaction, the intentions of the initiator and also with regard to the reading of flash mob within each specific social context. And this also applies to those cases that might be described with yet another term.

Virág Molnár 2 identifies five types of flash mobs; however, he advises that, due to the profusion and diversity of events dubbed flash mobs by the organisers themselves, this typology can only serve as a classificatory framework, within which some flash mobs might fit into several categories, while at the same time many of them will diverge from the original flash mob with regard to the organisational, temporal or another dimension.3 Because of the complexity and diversity of flash mobs as well as because of the absence of more apposite categories, Molnár’s classification will be used here as a tool for classifying and analysing flash mobs and, above all, to help us elucidate and map out the short history of flash mobs in Slovenia.

The most common flash mob is the so-called atomised flash mob. It refers directly to the first, the original, that is, Wasik’s flash mob at Macy’s in 2003. Atomised flash mobs take place in a public or semi-private space, in which the assembled group of participants during a brief period of time (the event does 1

2

3

76 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I P RO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUB L IC S PACE

Bill Wasik is the father of flash mob, an honorary editor of the American Harper’s fashion magazine, the editor of the WIRED magazine, and the author of And Then There’s This: How Stories Live and Die in Viral Culture (Penguin, 2009).

Virág Molnár, “Reframing Public Space Through Digital Mobilization: Flash Mobs and the Futility(?) of Contemporary Urban Youth Culture”, 2009. Available at: http://ebookbrowse.com/search/http-isites-harvard-edu-fs-docs-icb-topic497840-files-molnar-reframing-public-space-pdf. [Last accessed on 1 March 2011.]

Ibid., p. 11.

/ 18 THEIR / 17 AN / 16 ARE / 16 IT / 16 SOCIAL / 16 THIS / 15 BE / 15 INTO / 15 THAT / 14 AT / 14 NOT / 14 OR / 14 POLITICAL / 14 THEY / 14 WAS / 13 FROM

not last more than twenty minutes) performs a (more or less) synchronous action according to a scenario that was set out in advance, and then disperses. Both the participants and the organisers define this type of flash mobs as apolitical.

The first flash mob, initiated by Bill Wasik, was a result of a social experiment, with which the author tried to “verify” the effect of announcing a bizarre, preposterous event in the (“wanna be”) artistic circles of New York.4 The experiment served as proof of the importance of the impact of new communication tools and their mass usage on the society as such. With his project, Wasik pointed out the direct relationship between virtual and physical space. He demonstrated that it was possible to conceive and carry out an event or physical action with mass participation with a single gesture (writing an email). The type and scale of response depend on how sensational, original and interesting the event it, and on unpredictable elements. I consider the abovementioned event at Macy’s ground-breaking because of its reach within a broader cultural field as well as because the experiment was carried out before the emergence of the most widespread social networks (facebook was created in 2004; twitter started in 2005).

Given this, Wasik can be called the trailblazer of a new era.

In saying so, I am alluding mainly to the interesting designation of the 21st century society as “viral culture”. The author of the term describes viral culture as a society whose essence resides in hyper-connectedness, information overload, and story-driven internet culture.5 Viral culture is based on speed, shamelessness and ephemerality. It is driven by the so-called “nanostories” – “insignificant”, often bizarre stories concealing “ephemera” in their background.6 Given the possibilities afforded by the internet today, it seems almost impossible to analyse precisely the indicators of visibility and sensationalism on the web. An endless number of elements and coincidences is what brings “nanostories” into the field of vision on the web, which transforms average people into “stars”. Visibility and manifestation, then, can no longer be related to the relevance of the agent of the story, but rather to the complex combinations

4

5 6

In his book (And Then There’s This: How Stories Live and Die in Viral Culture) and in numerous interviews, the author offers similar reasoning. In the interview “The Short Life of Flash Mobs” conducted by Francis Heaney, he explains: “The original idea was to create an email that would get forwarded around in some funny way, or that would get people to come to a show that would turn out to be something different or surprising. I eventually came up with a lazy idea, which was that the thing would just have one simple, in-your-face aspect to it – there wouldn’t be any show, and that the email would be upfront about the fact that it was inviting people to do basically nothing at all. […] I had conceived it specifically as a New York thing.

People in New York are always looking for the next big thing. They come here because they want to take part in the arts community, they want to be with other people who are doing creative stuff, and they will come out to see a reading or a concert on the basis of word-of-mouth. Partly they want to find out what everybody else is so excited about, but partly they just want to be a part of the scene. You have this in other places too, but I feel like there’s something in New York that makes it kind of a city-wide pastime. […] I had imagined it as kind of a parody of New York insiderness, and I didn’t anticipate the fact that it would take off other places.” Francis Heaney, “The Short Life of Flash Mobs”, http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/electronic-publications/ stay-free/archives/24/flash-mobs-history.html. [Last accessed on 1 March 2011.]

The term refers to a society that is fuelled by sensational stories. Stories with »striking«, sensational titles attract more attention.

Bill Wasik, And Then There’s This: How Stories Live and Die in Viral Culture, Penguin, 2009.

T

he first attempt at a flash mob in Slovenia dates back to 2003; however, in contrast to flash mobs elsewhere in Europe, flash mobs in Slovenia had not been met with a significant response until last year. that lead to hyper-manifestation on the web. Thus emerges the analogy with the virus spreading through the web, networking and multiplying, while at the same time its “dispersal” is unpredictable and indefinable.7 As mentioned above, the success of the event (for now) can only be determined retrospectively, and never in advance, for guidance and moderation of individuals are only possible to a certain extent. Unpredictable decisions, changes in modes of behaviour always have an impact not only on the individual but also on the system as a whole. The system is like a living organism, constantly evolving, at least minimally. The impossibility of moderation as regards the individual is echoed in the limited power of social networks analysts to identify precisely and guide their users. To put it differently, social engineering has the power to stimulate and guide a certain type of group behaviour (predominantly consumption); however, this power is not absolute.8 The findings of social analysts can be directly applied to the experience and analysis of flash mobs, political demonstrations and other types of mass resistance to and subversion of political situations. Over the past few months, we have witnessed their coming into full swing. Namely, numerous incentives and ideas have appeared on the web; yet, only some of them have actually taken off and moved from the virtual into the real, physical space.

Regardless of the existence of theories and direct connections between flash mobs and “revolutionary” events in the Middle East, we are going to stick to the chosen classification, which preserves the distinction between demonstrations, strikes and political flash mobs. As far as its form is concerned, the politi7 Ibid.

8 Lenart J. Kučić, “Iskanje orodja, s katerim bomo izluščili modrost množic”, an interview with Jure Leskovec, Saturday supplement (Sobotna priloga) of Delo, Vol. 52, No. 6 (9 January 2010), pp. 4–7.

( N E) G I B IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 77

/ 13 ITS / 13 SPACE / 11 PUBLIC / 10 HAVE / 9 ALSO / 9 GROUP / 9 MORE / 9 PARTICIPANTS / 8 ACTION / 8 CAN / 8 DANCE / 8 EVENTS / 8 MOST / 8 NEW

cal flash mob apparently does not differ from the atomised flash mob; its “political” moment becomes legible only through the particularity of the social situation, in which it occurs. Political flash mobs often appear in authoritarian states (the countries of the former socialist bloc and Middle Eastern countries), where even the most innocent action can prove to be potentially dangerous. The essence of such actions is not so much the direct agitation of the social conditions, but rather a demonstration of probing the boundaries of the individual’s freedom.

As an exemplary instance of the political flash mob, I refer to the Ice-Cream Flash Mob. The 2008 event took place in Minsk, Belarus, only few days after the election. A group of about forty youngsters gathered in a central square in the city, and they totally innocently – by licking their ice-creams – expressed their disagreement with the outcome of the election and their disapproval of Lukashenko’s politics. Namely, not unlike legislation in the majority of other “democratic” countries, Belarusian legislation, too, regards rallying of a larger number of people in public spaces as suspicious. More specifically, Belarusian legislation prohibits any mass gathering that has not been previously announced to the state authorities. Therefore, the unannounced “action” attracted police attention, the youngsters were forcefully removed from the site and a larger number of participants were taken into custody to be interrogated. Despite the fact that they could have interpreted the incident solely from the perspective of legislation, several journalists, analysts and activists perceived police intervention as the work of intelligence services, which in many authoritarian countries control the dissemination of information in virtual environments.

Certainly, licking ice-cream should never have triggered such treatment.

Following Molnár’s classification, the definition of performative or performance flash mobs is also interesting. This is the author’s designation for those flash mobs that derive from performative artistic practices. The key difference, emphasised by the author, is the use of new technological tools. The latter afford an outward shift, from the closed gallery spaces into the streets, and consequently the targeting of a much greater number of participants. A performance flash mob, then, is an artistic event in a public space, initiated by the artist or an art group, and it is intelligible through its connection to the happenings of the 1960s. This type of flash mobs is signed by artists; in contrast to the mocking nature of the abovementioned flash mobs, performance flash mobs have (at least indirectly) an artistic intention and they are produced by a professionalised body.

This category could be disputed on several levels, but most importantly, it can be accused of lacking a justification of such categorisation. Namely, the said category implies that site-specific projects, ad hoc performances, which include passersby by means of prior announcements, are also already flash mobs.

Even more, the label flash mob should be necessarily attributed to every artistic project set up and presented in a public space, for according to Rancière, the emancipated spectator is active and included, as it holds true for ad hoc theatre. Drawing

78 (N E )GIB IN JAVN I PRO STO R / (NO N)MOVEMENT AND PUB L I C S PACE

on Rancière, we might see many performative or performance flash mobs as political and we might interpret their interventions into public spaces as subversive acts. The work of the art group Ligna can serve as an example here.

The next category in Molnár’s classification are the interactive flash mobs, which focus on the interaction between individuals.

Their characteristic is entertainment or game, which – through their transfer into a public space – often makes an “incision”, for these flash mobs interfere with the normatives inscribed in the public space. These events are not limited to a few minutes and, at the same time, they often leave “traces” in the space, expressing their disagreement with social norms. Molnár sees this type of flash mobs as a new form of entertainment, which must be complemented by a critique of contemporary consumer society. One of the most widely publicised and widespread events of this type is SILENT DISCO, where people gather in a semi-public space (underground stations, railway stations) and dance to music playing on their iPods. Interactive flash mobs are akin to commercial flash mobs, which have been co-opted en masse by companies and television channels for promotion of their products. From the perspective of organisation and execution, this type of flash mobs is an exception, for they strive for perfection, they require more preparation and rehearsals, and they are usually carried out not by “accidental” individuals, informed via new communication tools, but rather by a professional group of dancers that have been chosen in advance.

The scale of their dissemination as well as the dominant forms of flash mobs are directly dependent upon the society in which they occur. Interactive, atomised and commercial flash mobs are the most common types of these events in American society, whereas in the eastern countries political flash mobs are the most prevalent type. In Germany, interactive flash mobs are on the increase, and they coincide with political flash mobs, whereas in Slovenia, due to the small number of flash mobs so far, it is impossible to determine their central aim.

The first attempt at a flash mob in Slovenia dates back to 2003; however, in contrast to flash mobs elsewhere in Europe, flash mobs in Slovenia had not been met with a significant response until last year. The newspaper Dnevnik reported about an unusual event in Čopova Street in August 2003. There was also an unsuccessful attempt to organise a flash mob in Celje in March 2003. The first success in Celje, with rather miserable attendance, dates back to 2005. In November 2008, they carried out the action of freezing the pedestrians in front of Nama. On 29 April 2010, on the International Dance Day, the Ana Monro Theatre in collaboration with numerous independent organisations conceived a one-day street dance project Joyful Ana (Prešerna Ana) – Go out & dance!. The capital city was equipped with old transistors, which enabled the participants and accidental passersby to listen to radioCona and follow various “dance instructions” and the sequence of “dance” events scattered in the city centre. The open, communicative and simple form of the event drew attention in three ways, or rather, with three flash

/ 8 ONLY / 8 OUT / 8 PEOPLE / 8 SOCIETY / 8 TYPE / 7 COUNTRIES / 7 SO / 7 TIME / 6 ARTISTIC / 6 BUT / 6 I / 6 NUMBER / 6 SLOVENIA / 6 TOO / 6 WE / 6 WEB

I

nterpreting the flash mobs in Slovenia, I have come to the conclusion that the modes of perceiving social reality as well as the individuals’ patterns of behaviour in virtual space in Slovenia differ from those in many other countries. Namely, Slovenian individuals do not respond to mass participatory events. I relate this difference to the lack of structural forms and mechanisms of social resistance that could morph into other manifestations of the social. mobs: the flash mob entitled You, too, dance! (Zapleši tudi ti!), in which the participants performed the scores transmitted via radio waves (this is similar to some of the projects by the group Ligna); the ballet flash mob, in which the participants at the main market in Ljubljana performed ballet scores according to the instructions of a ballet dancer; and of course the Eurovision flash mob, which will be described below. Despite the fact that two of these flash mobs could not be defined as commercial, for they seem to fit better into the category of artistic flash mobs, it is urgent to point to their weak side, too; namely, both events lost their charge in the structure of the event, into which they were being inscribed. The event was too structured, too prepared, hence, it lost its moment of surprise. The incision in space was minor and intelligible only to unaware passersby.

Even more disputable was the central event, the highlight of the day – the Eurovision flash mob, which was marked, above all, by its commercial aspect. The event unfolded synchronously in Ljubljana, Oslo, Düsseldorf, Vilnius, Reykjavík, Barcelona and London. The Prešeren Square was jam-packed; however, unfortunately, the event revealed its most rigorous form of commodification, abused by the cannibalistic capitalist structures. Less than a month later, flash mob was also co-opted by Slovenske železnice, in collaboration with the Focus Association and the dancers from the dance school Kazina, to promote public transport. Except for the number of participants, there was no significant difference between this flash mob and the Eurovision flash mob. Whereas the latter waged its bets on the promotion of Eurovision, the former – more explicitly, but just as legitimately – promoted its own product: the train ride.

Interpreting the flash mobs in Slovenia, I have come to the conclusion that the modes of perceiving social reality as well as the individuals’ patterns of behaviour in virtual space in Slovenia differ from those in many other countries. Namely, Slovenian individuals do not respond to mass participatory events. I relate this difference to the lack of structural forms and mechanisms of social resistance that could morph into

other manifestations of the social. In his “Afterword” to Rancière’s book The Politics of Aesthetics, Slavoj Žižek points to the political potential of art in direct relation to flash mobs.

He introduces flash mobs with a question: “Does not the curious phenomenon of ‘flash mobs’ stand for the aesthetico-political protest at its purest, reduced to its minimal frame? People show up at an assigned place at a certain time, perform some brief (and usually trivial or ridiculous) acts, and then disperse again – no wonder flash mobs are described as being urban poetry with no real purpose. Not to mention, of course, cyberspace which abounds with possibilities of playing with multiple (dis)identifications and lateral connections subverting the established social networks… So, far from standing for a nostalgic attachment to a populist past lost by our entry into the global post-industrial society, Rancière’s thought is today more actual than ever: in our time of the disorientation of the Left, his writings offer one of the few consistent conceptualizations of how we are to continue to resist.”9 It is precisely in this that I discern the power of flash mob, which is able to morph spontaneously into political demonstrations, as we saw at the beginning of 2011, when demonstrations resulting from internet connections and incentives initiated by young people on social networks engulfed Middle Eastern countries and achieved changes of governments (in Egypt, Libya…). These revolutions are indeed extreme examples of the embodiment of the political potential, which is also inscribed in flash mobs, or merely a mode of representation, which is typical of flash mobs and which detracts attention from other forms, with which flash mobs subtly, yet, effectively intervene in social reality; they open up its potentiality and also transform it by dint of inscriptions and incisions into the dispositif of everyday life, albeit they do so merely as vehicles for Debord’s critique of the society of the spectacle. ..

9

Slavoj Žižek, “Afterword: The Lesson of Rancière”, in: Jacques Rancière, The Politics of Aesthetics, London and New York: Continuum, 2004, p. 79.

( N E) G IB IN JAV N I P RO STO R / ( N O N ) M OV EM EN T A N D P U B L I C S PAC E 79

7€

141-142

JESEN/AUTUMN

2011

Iz naslednje številke / From the forthcoming issue

POPRAVEK V prejšnji številki Maske (št. 137–138) je pomotoma izpadlo ime prevajalke članka Miška Šuvakovića »Filozofija telesa in umetniške prakse« v angleški jezik. Prevajalki EVI ERJAVEC in bralcem se iskreno opravičujemo.

NOVOMEDIJSKA UMETNOST IN NOVE SOCIALNE PARADIGME I / NEW MEDIA ART AND NEW SOCIAL PARADIGMS I ANTONIO NEGRI, JONATHAN BELLER, JANEZ STREHOVEC

INTERVJU / INTERVIEW CORRECTION In the previous issue of Maska (No. 137–138) an unfortunate error occurred: the name of the translator of Miško Šuvaković’s contribution “The Philosophy of the Body and Art Practices” into English was left out. We sincerely apologise to the translator EVA ERJAVEC as well as the readers.

SUSAN FOSTER

REFLEKTOR / REFLECTOR POVEZOVANJE UMETNOSTI IN ZNANOSTI (OKROGLA MIZA) / CONNECTING ART & SCIENCE (ROUND TABLE)

NAZADNJE IZŠLO Informacije in naročila: ana.ivanek@maska.si.

Janez Janša, Maja Murnik (ur.)

ZID OBJOKOVANJA

Z

www.maska.si

bornik Zid objokovanja na novo kontekstualizira razmerja med posameznikom in njegovimi čustvi, izraženimi med umetniškim dogodkom. Zamisel terminalnega gledalca, gledalca, ki je obenem ustvarjalec, izvajalec in priča, je tukaj prignana do skrajno intimne situacije, v kateri se gledališče iz institucije javnega dogodka spreminja v situacijo intimnega preizpraševanja čustvenih spominov. Zbornik izvirnih člankov obsega tekste, ki se ukvarjajo z mestom joka v sodobni družbi, z vprašanjem (individualnega in kolektivnega) spomina ter s statusom čustev v umetniškem dogodku. Avtorji člankov so Marina Gržinić, Barbara Orel in Blaž Lukan. Knjiga vključuje bogato vizualno gradivo o razvoju projekta Zid objokovanja Janeza Janše. Besedila so v slovenskem in v angleškem jeziku. 5 €

Gerald Raunig UMETNOST IN REVOLUCIJA. UMETNIŠKI AKTIVIZEM V DOLGEM 20. STOLETJU

R

aunig je pisec alternativne umetnostne zgodovine dolgega 20. stoletja, v katerem zaobjame dogodke od pariške komune leta 1871 do protiglobalizacijskih protestov v Genovi leta 2001. V svojem delu postreže z analizo različnih umetniških gibanj, od Courbeta in Sergeja Eisensteina do situacionistov, avstrijskih akcionistov in PublixTheatreCaravan. Skozi elokventno utemeljevanje zgodovine in njenih primerov, skozi teoretsko misel Deleuzea in Guattarija (naslanjajoč se na teorijo in razlago termina »stroj«) Raunigu uspeva raztegniti poststrukturalistično teorijo revolucije in jo povezati s splošnejšo idejo umetnosti in aktivizma. 19 €

Uroš Hočevar ESTETIKA REPORTAŽNE FOTOGRAFIJE

K

njiga Estetika reportažne fotografije, prvenec uveljavljenega fotoreporterja Dela, Uroša Hočevarja, obravnava polje reportažnih fotografij kot nosilk spomina z možnostjo prestopanja v polje ikoničnih podob. Slednje zanj predstavljajo edinstveno zgostitev časa in kulminacijo ustvarjalne energije ustvarjalca, ki je zavestno pritisnil na sprožilec fotoaparata v natančno določenem »odločilnem trenutku«, kar je popolno nasprotje digitalnim fotografskim navedkom ali fotografijam mučenja iz Abu Graiba. V knjigi avtor popisuje in hkrati reflektira zgodovinsko evolucijo reportažne fotografije od njene izvorne razpetosti med brezčasnostjo umetnosti do dokumentarnega lovljenja trenutka v dvajsetih letih 20. stoletja, pa vse do današnje vpetosti v množične medije, ki ji neizogibno podeljujejo politično dimenzijo in odpirajo vprašanja o režimih gledanja. Posebno pozornost

avtor nameni tudi fotografijam samim, tako da se v delu nahajajo analitični opisi in razmisleki o nekaterih najbolj znanih (ter v več primerih tudi razvpitih) podobah iz časa obstoja medija. 16 € Marin Blažević (ur.)

NE (ZBORNIK)

Z

bornik Ne prinaša izčrpno refleksijo enega najbolj zanimivih scenskih projektov v zadnjem desetletju, Vie Negative. Projekt, ki je odprl mnoga vprašanja sodobnih scenskih umetnosti in v gledališče na radikalen način vpeljal elemente performansa in body arta, je doživel veliko afirmacijo v Sloveniji in v tujini. Vii Negativi je uspelo temo sedem smrtnih grehov narediti za temo sodobnega gledališča in nasloviti številna vprašanja: impliciten in ekspliciten metaperformativen in metagledališki dialog, v katerega performerji in avtorji vstopajo z zgodovinskimi poetikami ali konkretnimi deli umetnosti performansa (body art in avtobiografski performans); testiranje učinkov scenskega performativa, uprizoritve teorije (teatra, performansa ...); interakcijo med performerji in gledalci na na videz nasprotnih straneh izvedbene situacije; strategijo političnosti izvedbe; kontekstualiziranje estetike, etike in politike dela itd. 19 €