Contemporary Art and New Social Paradigms II by Maska Ljubljana

7€

143-144

771318 050001

ZIMA/WINTER

2011

Sodobna umetnost in nove družbene paradigme II. / Contemporary Art and New Social Paradigms II

Uvodnik

Maja Murnik

e smo si na začetku letošnjega leta zadali nalogo razširiti polje zanimanja Maske in ga eksplicitno misliti v gibljivih presečiščih sodobnih umetniških (uprizoritvenih in novo- ter intermedijskih) praks, filozofije, družbe, kulture, znanosti in tehnologij, jih reflektirati in včasih problematizirati, se te vodilne niti držimo tudi v zadnji letošnji številki. Vpetost sodobne umetnosti v različne okvire, zlasti spremenjene družbene, ekonomske in tehnološke, je glavna tema drugega dela teoretskega bloka »Sodobna umetnost in nove družbene paradigme« (prvi del je izšel v prejšnji številki Maske), ki ga je pripravil Janez Strehovec. Poleg prevoda pomembnega teksta Siegfrieda Kracauerja (ki se ga včasih povezuje s frankfurtsko šolo kritične teorije) s konca dvajsetih let prejšnjega stoletja, ki ima veliko povedati tudi za današnji čas in s katerim presegamo občasno slovensko prevodno zamudništvo, so v blok vključeni še štirje izvirni teksti, ki se lotevajo različnih vidikov sodobne umetnosti in njenih družbenoekonomskih kontekstov. Podobno bi lahko rekli za prispevka Bojana Andjelkovića in Tomaža Toporišiča. Prvi, ki z definiranjem tehnodispozitivov projekta Noordung Dragana Živadinova na svojevrsten način obeležuje dejstvo, da je Živadinov, eden najvidnejših

in najizvirnejših slovenskih ustvarjalcev, na sceni že nekaj časa; letos namreč mineva 25 let od prve uprizoritve njegove prelomne predstave Krst pod Triglavom. Toporišičev članek pa odgovarja na vprašanje, kakšne možnosti so nam na voljo po razglasitvi konca postmodernizma in kakšni so (vsaj zasilni) odgovori na to paradoksalno situacijo. Številko sklepata dve recenziji/refleksiji. Prva se loteva teoretskega prvenca Mojce Puncer z naslovom Sodobna umetnost in estetika, v katerem se avtorica knjige osredotoča na slovensko sodobno umetnost; druga izpod peresa Pie Brezavšček pa premišljuje o več gledaliških predstavah zadnjega časa, ki na različne načine reflektirajo otroštvo in otroškost. V skladu z vodilno temo je vizualno gradivo tokratne Maske nastalo s pomočjo trilateracijskega sledenja posameznikove geografske pozicije v prostoru. Gibanje po prostoru je bilo delno funkcionalno in delno zavestno taktično, kar je več kot očitno pri vizualizaciji uporabljenih podatkov. Ne povem, kdo se je gibal in taktiziral, niti tega, ali je bil človek ali kura. Toliko za zdaj. Čao. ..

Editorial

Maja Murnik Translated by Melita Silič

f our objective at the start of this year was to extend the scope of Maska and to think of it as a flexible crossing place for contemporary art practices (performing, new media and inter-media), philosophy, society, culture, science and technology; as a place to reflect upon and sometimes problematize these practices; then we continue to follow this guiding principle with the final issue of the year. The integration of contemporary art into various frameworks, particularly into changing social, economic and technological ones, is the primary subject of the second part of a theoretical section entitled Contemporary Art and New Social Paradigms, edited by Janez Strehovec. The first part was published in the previous issue. Not only is there a translation of an important late-1920s text by Siegfried Kracauer (sometimes been associated with the Frankfurt School of critical theory), which continues to readily communicate with our era and finally settles the Slovenian ‘debt’ in the address of a relevant theoretical text; the section also brings together four original pieces addressing various aspects of contemporary art and its socio-economic context. Similar is true of the contributions by Bojan Andjelković and Tomaž Toporišič. By defining the techno-dispositifs of Dragan

Živadinov’s Noordung project, Andjelković uniquely marks 25 years of the first staging of Baptism Under Triglav by Živadinov, regarded as one of Slovenia’s most visible and original artists. Toporišič’s article attempts to answer the question as to what options are available after the declaration of the end of postmodernism, and what are at least the provisional answers to this paradoxical situation. The issue ends with two reviews and reflections. The first, Mojca Puncer’s debut academic work Contemporary Art and Aesthetics, focuses on contemporary art in Slovenia, whilst the second by Pia Brezavšček reflects on several recent theatre performances which, in various ways, address the issue of childhood and puerility. Following the principal topic of this issue of Maska, visual design was provoked by the trilateral tracking of a body’s position in space. Such movement in space was partially functional and – in part – wilfully tactical, which is more than obvious in the visualisation of the data used. I won’t reveal who was moving and using such tactics, nor whether it was a human or a hen. This is it for now. Bye. ..

S RA PO EM

NT NJ JE

BO U

S AS

TU NA SS

RR I

ORN

TU NA

RE MA

NT ME

BOOK

UR R

BOU

ICE MNOŽ

CHIN

O VA

LT U

UL TU

RRI

DELE

CH IN OVA MN OŽ IC E BO OK

AU D

UZE N

I E TZ S CH

E ’S N OOR

DUNG

DI SP OS IT IF NO OR DU NG

BO OK CH IN YO UT UB E GI RL TI LL ER

BOOK

G N U RD OO N ZE U LE NG DE DU OR NG NO E DU OR EUZ NO DEL NG DUNG RDU NOOR NOO SITIF ISPO E ’S D ZSCH NG SO CI AL AR T OS IT IF NO OR DU DE LE UZ E DI SP

NIET

HI BO

HI U

CHIN

ETN

T EM

OST

HO RN

YO U T

BOU

A R

Y B

UBE M ASS B OOKC

RRI

U R

AU D

DU M

O C IA

L A R T

ROČ

POD

STI

OSTI

TNO

OČ

UMETN

UME

IA L E C O NOM

AR T

IAL

YA R

OMY SOC

RA R

CO N

NT E

AL E CO

NCI

FIE

EL D

A AR

UMETNOSTI PODROČJU

F IN A N C

NIA N

NI A

ON T

FIEL D FI NA

TI C

AR T

O O

PO R RY

CON

T EMP OR A RY ART

LC O CIA

LL TI

T IL L E R

TILL

THEATRE STAGE

T H E AT R

O SL

I EN

T ON

E S TA G E

R RA

TM A

IN’

ST ILL E

RG IRL

ARC DIAGRAM

ETN

OST

H I N ‘S

7€

143-144

771318 050001

ZIMA/WINTER

2011

Teoretski blok / Theory

Sodobna umetnost in nove družbene paradigme (II) / Contemporary Art and New Social Paradigms (II) / ur. / ed. Janez Strehovec 7 / Abstraktni ornamentni gibi v ravnih črtah in zankah (Uvodna predstavitev) / Abstract ornamental movements in straight lines and loops (Introduction) / Janez Strehovec 14 / Ornament množice / The Mass Ornament / Siegfried Kracauer 26 / Subvertirane intence in možnost za »najdeno« kolektivnost v delu Mass Ornament Natalie Bookchin / Subverted Intentions and the Potential for “Found” Collectivity in Natalie Bookchin’s Mass Ornament / Jaimie Baron 38 / Sodobna umetnost – znanilka novih družbenih paradigem? / Contemporary Art – A Herald of New Social Paradigms? / Mojca Puncer 50 / Umetniško delo v času viharjev na finančnih trgih / THE WORK OF ART in the Age of Turmoil in the Financial Markets / Janez Strehovec Teorije uprizoritvenih praks / Theories of Performing Arts

70 / Tehnodispozitivi konceptualnega časovnega stroja Noordung / The Technodispositifs of the Conceptual Time Machine Noordung / Bojan Andjelković 86 / Kako pristopiti k umetnosti v post ... in post-post ... dobi / How to Approach Art in a Post … and PostPost … Era / Tomaž Toporišič Recenzije, refleksije / Reviews, Extensions

94 / Užitki in spoznanja ob branju akademsko nečistega prvenca / Delights and Insights From Reading an Academically Unclean Debut / Petja Grafenauer 100 / Postajanje-otrok gledališča. Vloga otroškega amaterizma in performativne infantilnosti v sodobnem gledališču in plesu / The Becoming-Child of the Theatre. The role of children’s amateurism and performative infantility in contemporary theatre and dance / Pia Brezavšček

MASKA Časopis za scenske umetnosti / Performing Arts Journal Ustanovljen 1920 / Since 1920 Letn. / vol. XXVI, št. / No. 143–144 (zima 2011 / winter 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 | Stalni sodelavci revije / Contributing Editors: 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 Editor: Melita Silič | Angleška lektura / English Language Editor: Eric Dean Scott | 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.

70 in / 51 v / 42 ki / 37 je / 27 za / 25 na / 23 tudi / 21 se / 20 s / 19 pri / 15 z / 13 da / 13 umetnosti / 12 so / 10 kot / 9 gre / 8 pa / 8 ples / 7 jih / PIVOVARNIŠKA ULICA 7

TRSTENJAKOVA ULICA 12 A

TRG OSVOBODILNE FRONTE 14

Sodobna umetnost in nove družbene paradigme (II): Kracauer, Baron, Puncer in Strehovec Contemporary Art and New Social Paradigms (II): Kracauer, Baron, Puncer AND Strehovec Urednik / Editor: Janez Strehovec

6 T EORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

7 le / 7 med / 6 kar / 6 ko / 6 lahko / 6 od / 6 smislu / 6 tako / 6 tem / 6 veliko / 5 danes / 5 del / 5 dela / 5 družbene / 5 iz / 5 k / 5 o /

ukvarjamo, pomembna tudi sama refleksija te problematike pri Bookchinovi, ki je v pogovoru za Rhizome.org kar se da precizno umestila teoretske podlage svojega umetniškega projekta v svet nematerialnega in postfordističnega dela in s tem tudi definirala svoj odnos do Kracauerjevega teksta kot ključne reference za svoj »YouTube« projekt. »Kot uteleša ples Tillerjevih deklet značilnosti fordizma in taylorizma, izraža ples na YouTubu s svojim poudarkom na individualnem, domu ter individualizirani in ponotranjeni proizvodnji ključne značilnosti našega postfordističnega ekonomskega položaja.«1 Tako stadionski, spektakelski ples SLOVENSKA CESTA 38

Abstraktni ornamentni gibi v ravnih črtah in zankah Uvodna predstavitev Janez Strehovec

odobna in še posebej novomedijska umetnost, ki se uresničuje v globaliziranem svetu novih družbenih in kulturnih paradigem, je v isti igri z drugimi družbenimi področji, prav tako pa s svojo kritično refleksijo (in reprodukcijo) družbenega prispeva tudi avtonomne oblike in celo izvirne produkcijske načine, ki so izziv za sodobno družbeno teorijo. V prvem bloku prispevkov s tega področja smo se osredotočili na dva odlomka iz Bellerjeve in Negrijeve knjige, ki vsekakor izzivata ustaljene predstave o družbenih funkcijah sodobne umetnosti, to besedilo pa uvaja drugi in sklepni blok na to temo, v katerega je vključen prevod Kracauerjevega eseja Ornament množice in tekst Baronove o umetniškem delu Natalie Bookchin z istim naslovom, v katerem avtorica aplicira matrico Kracauerjevega ornamenta na sedanjo situacijo postfordističnega dela, fleksibilne konsumpcije in kulture družbenih omrežij. Blok končujeta dva eseja slovenskih avtorjev, in sicer Mojce Puncer (o vlogi medijev v sodobni umetnosti) in pisca tega uvodnega besedila (o umetnosti v kriznem obdobju finančnega kapitalizma). Video projekt Bookchinove je kritiško in konceptualno osvetljen v eseju ameriške teoretičarke Jaimie Baron (gre za njegovo prvo, za Masko pripravljeno objavo), vsekakor pa je za razumevanje tako projekta kot tudi teme, s katero se v obeh prevodnih blokih

Tillerjevih deklet (nanj referira Kracauerjevo besedilo) kot zasebni ples YouTube plesalk pred spletnimi kamerami ponotranjata temeljne sodobne družbene paradigme. Pri prvem gre za nekaj, kar referira na megadogodke, velikoserijsko tovarniško produkcijo, logiko strojev in tekočega traku, pri drugem pa se srečujemo z veliko bolj fleksibilno in individualizirano aktivnostjo, ki pogosto poteka doma in katere mašinerija ni več mehanska, ampak vse bolj digitalna. »YouTube plesalka v svoji sobi izvaja na svoj način plesno dejanje, ki je hkrati ekstremno zasebno in nenavadno javno, dovršen izraz naše dobe.«2 Video, vključen v projekt, je izgubil svojo avtonomnost, pojavlja se le kot del družbenega in kulturnega konteksta, ki naddoloča koreografije teles in njihove medijsko profilirane prakse. Za njeno instalacijo je bistvena tudi tehnološka podlaga v portalu YouTube, ki vabi k povezavam od enega videa k sorodnim videom (prikazanim na desni z gumbi za klikanje), s čimer je nagovorjena kultura video distribucije, ko lahko en video sproži pravcato verižno reakcijo, ki vključuje številne manipulacije (mikse, remikse, kopije, variacije, modifikacije itn.). Projekt Bookchinove je vpet v kulturo družbenih mrež in novih medijev, kar je spodbudilo tudi Baronovo, katere besedilo kritično osvetljuje vrsto razlik in tudi antagonizmov, ki spremljajo »postfordistični« ornament množice. Projekt Bookchinove je nedvomno manipulacija, ki je v jedru današnje, z novimi mediji profilirane množične kulture remiksov, machinime in mash-upov. »Naša zaznava intencionalne neskladnosti izhaja iz dejstva, da je Bookchinova očitno izbrala vse te solo performanse ter jih spremenila v skupinski ples in tako individualne, izolirane performerje spremenila v plesno skupino.«3 Srečujemo se s podobno situacijo kot pri Tillerjevih dekletih, ko plesalkam umanjka pogled na celoto, kajti tudi plesalci od tu in tam, ki so stopili v Ornament množice Bookchinove, niso vedeli, da bodo s svojim plesom prispevali k celoti. Baronova tudi opozarja na dvojnost in konfliktnost, ki je na delu pri današnjih plesalkah, ujetih in manipuliranih v videu Bookchinove. Na eni strani izražajo anonimnost in zasebnost, so glasovi in koreografije, ki izhajajo od spodaj, na drugi strani pa je tudi njihov zasebni ples že posredovan in vplivan s 1

2 3

Carolyn Kane, »Dancing Machines: An Interview with Natalie Bookchin«, Wed. May 27th, 2009, http://rhizome.org/editorial/2009/may/27/dancing-machines/, 2009 (dostopno: 31. 8. 2011). Prav tam. Jaimie Baron, »Subvertirane intence in možnost za ‘najdeno’ kolektivnost v delu Ornament množice Natalie Bookchin«, pričujoča številka Maske, str. 28.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 7

5 sodobne / 5 sodobni / 5 tega / 5 Tillerjevih / 5 že / 4 ampak / 4 besedilo / 4 Bookchinove / 4 do / 4 družbenih / 4 gibi / 4 kajti /

»O

rnament je smoter v samem sebi,« je zapisal Kracauer in s tem pozornost usmeril na vakuumsko razsežnost ornamentnih oblik, ki praznijo sleherno substancialnost, vsebine. »Ornament spominja na fotografije pokrajin in mest, posnete iz zraka,« kajti za kaj gre, se pri stvari dobro vidi le iz zraka; ko gre za ornamentne vzorce, se ti razvidno pokažejo le posnetkom »od zgoraj«, recimo tistim, ki so jih posredovale najvišje postavljene kamere na stadionu JLA v Beogradu med spektakli ob podelitvi štafete mladosti. Ta »zgoraj« je dejansko popularno kulturo, z zvezdami in trendi, ki jih diktira trg. Začeli smo z Bookchinovo, toda čas je, da se ozremo tudi na Kracauerjev, danes že klasični esej s področja kritične teorije kulture. »Roke v tovarni ustrezajo početju nog pri Tillerjevih dekletih.«4 To stališče je tukaj bistveno; plesalke, vključene v ornamentalični, deseksualizirani, zelo abstraktni ples pri množičnih spektaklih (od tistih v ritualih Tretjega rajha do sodobnejših variant pri Titovi štafeti mladosti in Kim il Sungovih proslavah), ničesar ne posnemajo, ampak delujejo z roko v roki z delavci za tovarniškim tekočim trakom, katerih gibi rok so tayloristično dresirani in prilagojeni strojem. Med plesalkami in delavci je tekoče prehajanje, podobno tudi tistemu, ki se dogaja pri organizaciji gibljivih filmskih podob (stališče Jonathana Bellerja). Korespondence torej ni le med filmom in industrijsko proizvodnjo za tekočim trakom, ampak tudi med slednjim in plesom, kakršen se uprizarja na velikih spektakelskih prireditvah. Tillerjeva dekleta oblikujejo s svojimi gibi geometrijske oblike, za katere je značilna abstraktnost (derealizirana telesnost in seksualnost) in izživljanje v ornamentih, kar spremlja tudi kapitalistično krožno gibanje v zankah, ki značilno demonstrirajo takšen pogon. Tillerjeva dekleta plešejo s telesnimi deli, ki so videti poudarjeno izolirani; njihova koreografija je simptom kapitalizma samega. Plesni ornament zahteva podrejanje delov telesa kompleksnejšim vzorcem, recimo vrsti črt, ki pa jih nobena plesalka ne more videti. Plesni gibi posamezne plesalke so bili zato interpretirani le kot funkcionalni del sistema, podobno kot delavčeva roka pri tayloristično organiziranem delu za tekočim trakom. »Ornament je smoter v samem sebi,«5 je zapisal Kracauer in s tem pozornost usmeril na vakuumsko razsežnost ornamentnih oblik, ki praznijo sleherno substancialnost, vsebine. »Ornament spominja na fotografije pokrajin in mest, posnete iz 4 5

Siegfried Kracauer, »Ornament množice«, pričujoča številka Maske, str. 16. Isto, str. 15.

8 T EORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

zraka,«6 kajti za kaj gre, se pri stvari dobro vidi le iz zraka; ko gre za ornamentne vzorce, se ti razvidno pokažejo le posnetkom »od zgoraj«, recimo tistim, ki so jih posredovale najvišje postavljene kamere na stadionu JLA v Beogradu med spektakli ob podelitvi štafete mladosti. Ta »zgoraj« je dejansko merodajen, ko gre za stvari, ki jih producirajo globalni kapitalizem, vojaški stroj in množična kultura. Optika »smart bomb eye«,7 investirana med prvo Zalivsko vojno na zaslone med cnn-ovskimi breaking news, je postala merodajna za tovrstne aranžmaje. Smo pri abstraktnosti (ravnih črt, zank, ponavljajočih se obrazcev, pri reduciranju vsebin na skrajno ekonomične in všečne označevalce), ki je lastna tako kapitalizmu in fordistični (in še posebej tayloristično organizirani) produkciji. Slednja je sicer doživela določene spremembe v postfordistični paradigmi, vendar pa je tudi v njej veliko kulturnih vsebin naddoločenih z družbenim in ideološkim sistemom. Abstraktnost je točka, ki bi lahko postala tudi upoštevanja vredno merilo za vrsto kritiških pristopov do novomedijske umetnosti, pri kateri je veliko vsebin izrazito abstraktnih v smislu, da gre za izživljanja z oblikami, mediji in pametnimi tehnologijami. Ko se danes srečujemo s produkcijo na tem področju, pogosto vidimo, da se vse vrti le okrog avtorskih pojasnil in napotkov, kako razumeti takšna dela (angl. statements), in tudi strokovni zapisi s tega področja niso kritike, ampak pogosto le razlage teh del, ne da bi jih njihovi avtorji primerjali (s sorodnimi deli) in vrednotili. Tako tradicionalni množični mediji kot novi, povezani predvsem z razmahom interneta, generirajo različne oblike medijske in novomedijske umetnosti, pri katerih se, ko gre za teoretske pristope, v sedanjosti začenja »za medij specifična analiza« (izraz N. K. Hayles) umikati družbenokritičnim pristopom, ki 6 7

Prav tam. Mislimo na posnetke kamere, pritrjene na pametni vodeni izstrelek, ki kažejo njegovo približevanje ciljnemu objektu, se pravi tarči.

4 mediji / 4 ne / 4 oblike / 4 ornament / 4 posebno / 4 recimo / 4 svojo / 4 YouTube / 3 Baron / 3 bi / 3 bolj / 3 Bookchin / 3 deklet / 3 delu

merodajen, ko gre za stvari, ki jih producirajo globalni kapitalizem, vojaški stroj in množična kultura. Optika »smart bomb eye«, investirana med prvo Zalivsko vojno na zaslone med cnn-ovskimi breaking news, je postala merodajna za tovrstne aranžmaje.

poudarjajo vpetost te umetnosti v sodobne družbene paradigme, tako da Nicolas Bourriaud piše o relacijski umetnosti v smislu, da gre za »umetnost, ki si za teoretski horizont jemlje področje medčloveških odnosov in njihov družbeni kontekst«.8 Ta vprašanja so spodbudila tudi teoretičarko Mojco Puncer, ki v svojem eseju problematizira vlogo kulturno-umetniškega angažmaja pri mobilizaciji emancipatornih sil. Že uvodoma zapiše misel, ki bo ena vodnic njenega razmišljanja: »Definiranje umetnosti z medijem je del formalistične estetske tradicije, ki sta jo postavila pod vprašaj že poststrukturalizem in feministična teorija s srede prejšnjega stoletja.«9 Pojmovni aparat, primeren za razumevanje tradicionalne umetnosti, pri sodobni umetnosti in njeni družbeni resničnosti (pri obeh lahko ugotavljamo prekarnost) zato odpove, vendar pa hibridne vsebine sodobne umetnosti, ki išče nove, recimo kar postestetske družbene funkcije, spodbujajo zelo različne umetnostnoteoretske pristope (recimo v besedilih Jacquesa Rancièra in Thomasa Hirschhorna), ki jih je umestno brati tudi v kontekstu sodobne družbene teorije (Giorgio Agamben). Avtorica zato ugotavlja, da »sodobna umetnost vztraja v napetosti med avtonomno umetnostjo in politično angažirano umetnostjo in tako ostaja v nekem (minimalnem) reprezentativnem razmerju do družbene stvarnosti, ki je vselej družbeno specifično.«10 Vsekakor gre za kompleksna razmerja, opozicija medij proti socialnemu ne deluje, kajti danes so prav novi mediji generator nove družbenosti, k čemur veliko pripomorejo že njihove povsem tehnološke in softverske podlage, kajti »digitalni procesi so prispevali k večjemu številu možnosti, s katerimi razpolagamo, ko želimo dokumente iz digitalnih arhivov ponovno uporabiti za druge namene.«11

8 9

Nicolas Bourriaud, Relacijska estetika. Postprodukcija, Ljubljana: Maska, 2007, str. 17. Mojca Puncer, »Sodobna umetnost – znanilka novih družbenih paradigem?«, pričujoča številka Maske, str. 39. 10 Isto, str. 42. 11 Baron, »Subvertirane intence in možnost za ‘najdeno’ kolektivnost v delu Ornament množice Natalie Bookchin«, str. 27.

Okrog abstraktnosti, ki jo je pri analizi kapitalizma in koreografij, ki mu ustrezajo (ples Tillerjevih deklet), ugotavljal Siegfried Kracauer v svojem eseju, pa se veliko vrti tudi pri ekonomiji finančnih trgov, ki so eno izmed izhodišč eseja »Umetniško delo v času viharjev na finančnih trgih«, ki ga je prispeval avtor tega zapisa. V njem se refleksija osredotoča na paradigme ekonomija kot kultura, umetniška ekonomija (ki jo mora danes v samosvoji obliki iznajti sodobni umetnik), kulturna ekonomija v smislu prehajanja med profanimi in valoriziranimi umetniškimi arhivi in trgovanje z derivati (izvedenimi finančnimi inštrumenti), ki so lahko model za razumevanje nekaterih ekonomskih operacij v sodobni umetnosti. Sklicevanje na velike teme in arhetipske motive v sodobni in še posebej novomedijski umetnosti lahko pojasnimo tudi z veliko bolj sodobnimi, iz ekonomije sposojenimi koncepti v smislu, da se danes tudi umetniki sklicujejo na referenčno osnovno vrednost (angl. underlaying asset) v smislu znane umetnine umetnikovznamk in referirajo nanjo, da bi s tem zavarovali svoje interese in celo profitirali od nje. Naredijo derivatska dela v smislu, da referirajo na nesporno vrednost podloženega, referenčnega dela,12 ki posredno s svojo vrednostno prepoznavnostjo jamči tudi za prepoznavnost njegove izvedenke, kar je značilnost prav del avtorice, ki smo ji v tem bloku namenili posebno pozornost, in sicer Bookchinove (mislimo na njena video projekta Vsiljivka in Ornament množice, ki sta za svojo vrednostno podlago vzela Borgesovo novelo in Kracauerjevo besedilo). ..

Literatura Bourriaud, Nicolas, Relacijska estetika. Postprodukcija, Ljubljana: Maska, 2007. Hayles, N. Katherine, Writing Machines, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002. Kane, Carolyn, »Dancing Machines: An Interview with Natalie Bookchin«, Wed. May 27th, 2009, http://rhizome.org/editorial/2009/may/27/dancing-machines/, 2009 (dostopno: 31. 8. 2011). Kracauer, Siegfried, The Mass Ornament. Weimar Essays. Prevedel, uredil in uvod napisal Thomas Y. Levin. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995. 12 To je operacija, podobna tisti pri izvedenih finančnih inštrumentih (derivatih) na finančnih trgih.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 9

114 the / 94 of / 69 and / 41 in / 40 to / 28 a / 27 is / 25 that / 23 art / 20 The / 20 which / 17 as / 16 by / 15 dance / 15 from / 15 its / 15 social /

Abstract ornamental movements in straight lines and loops Introduction Janez Strehovec Prevod / Translated by Špela Drnovšek Zorko

PREVOJE 5

ontemporary art, and particularly new media art that manifests itself in the globalised world of new social and cultural paradigms, are at the same play with other social fields – yet its critical reflection (and reproduction) also contributes autonomous forms, and even original modes of production, which challenge contemporary social theory. In our first special section of contributions from this field (Maska, no. 141–142, 2011), we focused on two excerpts from Beller and Negri’s book that most definitely challenge established conceptions of the social functions of contemporary art. This text introduces the second and final segment relating to this theme: it includes the translation of Kracauer’s essay The Mass Ornament as well as Baron’s text on Natalie Bookchin’s art work of the same name, in which the author applies the matrix of Kracauer’s ornament to the current situation of post-Fordist labour, flexible consumption and the culture of social networking. The special section is rounded off by two essays from Slovenian authors, Mojca Puncer (on the role of the media in contemporary art) and the author of this text (on art in the age of financial capitalist crisis). The essay by American theorist Jaimie Baron (her first published text, adapted here for Maska) critically and conceptually illuminates Bookchin’s video project – and yet to understand it fully, and to understand the subject we have been dealing with in our two translated instalments, it is important to note Bookchin’s own reflections on this set of issues. In conversation with Rhizome.org, she very precisely located the theoretical underpinnings of her art project in the world of immaterial and post-Fordist labour, and thus also defined her relationship to Kracauer’s text as a crucial reference for her “YouTube” project. “[As] the Tiller Girls dance embodied characteristics of Fordism and Taylorism, the YouTube dance, with its emphasis on the individual, the home, and individuated and internalized production, embodies key characteristics of our economic situation of

10 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

14 contemporary / 14 with / 12 also / 12 Bookchin / 12 media / 12 this / 10 on / 9 can / 9 video / 8 Kracauer / 8 new / 8 production / 8 their / 7 are /

his theoretical point is central, as the dancers involved in the ornamental, desexualised and highly abstract dance of the mass spectacle (ranging from the rituals of the Third Reich to more contemporary versions such as Tito’s Youth Relay and Kim Il Sung’s ceremonies) do not reflect anything but rather work hand in hand with the workers behind factory conveyor belts whose movements are Tayloristically trained and adapted to machines.

post-Fordism.”1 Both the spectacular dance of the Tiller Girls in the stadium (which Kracauer refers to) and the private dance of the YouTube dancers in front of web cams internalise foundational paradigms of contemporary society. The former deals with references to mega-events, large-scale serial factory production, the logic of machines and the conveyor belt, while the latter confronts us with a much more flexible and individualised action, which frequently takes place in the home and whose machinery is no longer mechanical but increasingly digital. “The YouTube dancer alone in her room, performing a dance routine that is both extremely private and extraordinarily public is, in its own way, a perfect expression of our age.”2 The video included in this project has lost its autonomy and only appears as part of a social and cultural context that overdetermines the choreography of bodies and their media-proliferated practices. Her installation also hinges on the technological basis of the YouTube portal, which offers links from one video to a different, similar video (these appear off to the right) and thus addresses the culture of video distribution where one video can trigger a veritable chain reaction of numerous manipulations (mixes, remixes, copies, variations, modifications, etc). Bookchin’s project is embedded in a culture of social networks and their media, which also inspired Baron: her text is a critical illumination of the numerous variations and antagonisms that accompany the “post-Fordist” mass ornament. Bookchin’s project is without a doubt a manipulation that can be located in the nucleus of today’s media-proliferated mass culture of remixes, machinima and mash-ups. “Our perception of intentional disparity derives from the fact that Bookchin has clearly taken all of these solo performances and turned them into a collective dance, transforming individual, isolated performers into a dance troupe.”3 We are faced with a situation similar to 1

Carolyn Kane, “Dancing Machines: An Interview with Natalie Bookchin”, Wed. May 27th, 2009, http://rhizome.org/editorial/2009/may/27/dancing-machines/, 2009 (accessed on August 31, 2011). 2 Ibid. 3 Jaimie Baron, “Subverted Intentions and the Potential for ‘Found’ Collectivity in Natalie Bookchin’s Mass Ornament”, Maska, no. 143–144, 2011, p. 34.

that of the Tiller Girls, where dancers lack a view of the whole; the dancers who entered Bookchin’s Mass Ornament from this or that place did not know that their dances would contribute to a whole. Baron also points to the duality and conflict that permeate the dancers of today, caught and manipulated in Bookchin’s video. On the one hand, they express anonymity and privacy, voices and choreography from below, while on the other, their private dance has already been mediated and influenced by popular culture, the stars and trends dictated by the market. We have begun with Bookchin, but it is time to turn our attention to Kracauer’s classic essay from the field of critical cultural theory. “The hands in the factory correspond to the legs of the Tiller Girls.”4 This theoretical point is central, as the dancers involved in the ornamental, desexualised and highly abstract dance of the mass spectacle (ranging from the rituals of the Third Reich to more contemporary versions such as Tito’s Youth Relay and Kim Il Sung’s ceremonies) do not reflect anything but rather work hand in hand with the workers behind factory conveyor belts whose movements are Tayloristically trained and adapted to machines. There is a smooth transition between dancers and workers, similar to that of the organisation of moving cinematic images (as is claimed by Jonathan Beller). Thus, there is not only a correspondence between film and industrial production behind the conveyor belt, but also between industrial production and dance, as the latter is staged at events of the mass spectacle. The Tiller Girls’ movements form geometric shapes characterised by their abstractness (that is, de-realised embodiment and sexuality) and the fact that they play out in ornaments, which are also present in the circular capitalist movements of loops that characteristically demonstrate this type of drive. The Tiller Girls dance with parts of bodies which seem emphatically isolated; their choreography is a symptom of capitalism itself. The dance ornament demands the subjugation of body parts to more complex patterns, such as a row of lines, which no one dancer 4

Siegfried Kracauer, The Mass Ornament. Weimar Essays, edited by Thomas Y. Levin. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995, p. 79.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 1 1

7 culture / 7 essay / 7 her / 7 text / 7 Tiller / 6 Baron / 6 dancers / 6 for / 6 Girls / 6 it / 6 mass / 6 one / 6 our / 6 project / 6 thus / 6 we / 5 be /

“T

he ornament is an end in itself,” writes Kracauer, and thus directs our attention to the vacuumlike expanse of ornamental forms that empty all substance of its contents. “The ornament resembles aerial photographs of landscapes and cities,” since the matter at hand can only be truly perceived from the air; when dealing with ornamental patterns, we can only make them out in images “from above”, for example, the images that were transmitted by the top-most video

can perceive. The dance movements of each individual dancer were thus interpreted only as functional parts of a system, just as a worker’s hand in Taylorist organised labour behind the conveyor belt. “The ornament is an end in itself,”5 writes Kracauer, and thus directs our attention to the vacuum-like expanse of ornamental forms that empty all substance of its contents. “The ornament resembles aerial photographs of landscapes and cities,”6 since the matter at hand can only be truly perceived from the air; when dealing with ornamental patterns, we can only make them out in images “from above”, for example, the images that were transmitted by the top-most video cameras at the JLA Stadium in Belgrade during the spectacles of the Youth Relay ceremony. This “above” is indeed fitting when speaking of those things produced by global capitalism, the war machine and mass culture. The lens of the “smart bomb eye”,7 relayed during the first Gulf War to television screens during CNN’s breaking news, has become acceptable for such arrangements. We are hereby dealing with abstraction (of straight lines, loops, repeating forms, the reduction of contents to highly economical and palatable signifiers), which is inherent to both capitalism and post-Fordist production (especially to Taylorist production). The latter has undergone certain changes in the post-Fordist paradigm, yet much of its cultural contents is still overdetermined by the social and ideological system. Abstraction could also become a legitimate yardstick for numerous critical approaches to new media art, whose contents are frequently, markedly abstract in the sense that they are preoccupied with forms, media and smart technologies. Faced with today’s production in this field, we often find that it revolves around artists’ explanations and statements, and even theoretical texts from this field are 5 6 7

Ibid., p. 76. Ibid., p. 77. This refers to video recordings taken from a smart guided missile, which show its approach to the targeted object.

12 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

more often than not mere explanations of art works rather than critiques comparing and evaluating them in relation to other similar art projects. Both traditional mass media and the new media linked particularly to the Internet boom generate various forms of media- and new media art, where theoretical approaches have begun to replace “media-specific analysis” (as coined by N. K. Hayles) with socio-critical frameworks that emphasise the embeddedness of this art within contemporary social paradigms, so that Nicolas Bourriad writes about relational art “taking as its theoretical horizon the realm of human interactions and its social context.”8 These questions have also inspired the theorist Mojca Puncer, whose essay problematises the role of cultural-artistic engagement in the mobilisation of emancipatory forces. She begins by stating a thought that goes on to form one of the red threads of her discussion: “Defining art through its medium is part of a formalist aesthetic tradition that post-structuralism and feminist theory already challenged from the mid-twentieth century onwards.”9 The conceptual apparatus suitable to understanding traditional art fails when applied to contemporary art and its social reality (both of which can be considered precarious), yet the hybrid contents of contemporary art, which seeks new, even post-aesthetic social functions, inspire considerably varied artistic-theoretical approaches (say, the writings of Jacques Rancière and Thomas Hirschhorn), which we would do well to also read in the context of contemporary social theory (Giorgio Agamben). Puncer thus finds that “contemporary art persists in the tension between autonomous and politically engaged art, and thus remains in some form of (minimal) representative relation to social reality, which is always socially determined.”10 These are certainly complex relations; since new media is today 8 9

Nicolas Bourriaud, Relational Aesthetics, Dijon: Les Presse Du Réel, 1998, p. 14. Mojca Puncer, “Contemporary Art – A Herald of New Social Paradigms?”, Maska, no. 143–144, 2011, p. 45. 10 Ibid., p. 48.

5 contents / 5 cultural / 5 forms / 5 hand / 5 has / 5 have / 5 more / 5 only / 5 ornament / 5 postFordist / 5 theoretical / 5 whose / 5 YouTube /

cameras at the JLA Stadium in Belgrade during the spectacles of the Youth Relay ceremony. This “above” is indeed fitting when speaking of those things produced by global capitalism, the war machine and mass culture. The lens of the “smart bomb eye”, relayed during the first Gulf War to television screens during CNN’s breaking news, has become acceptable for such arrangements.

precisely the driving force behind new sociality, much aided by its purely technological and software bases, the opposition of media versus the social can no longer function: indeed, “digital processes have expanded the ways in which documents found in digital archives may be repurposed.”11 The abstraction that Siegfried Kracauer’s essay outlines through an analysis of capitalism and its choreographies (the dance of the Tiller Girls) is also the focal point of economic financial markets, which are one of the starting points of the essay “The Work of Art in the Age of Turmoil in the Financial Markets”, contributed by myself. In this text, the core reflections revolve around the paradigms of: economics as culture, the artistic economy (which the contemporary artist must invent in its own unique form), the cultural economy, in the sense of transitioning from profane to valorised artistic archives, and the trading of derivatives (implemented financial instruments), all of which can act as a model for understanding several economic operations within contemporary art. The references to grand themes and archetypal motifs in contemporary and especially new media art can also be explained by much more contemporary concepts borrowed from economics, in that artists today draw on underlying assets of famous art works by brand-name-artists, and refer to these assets in order to insure their interests or even to create a profit. They create derivative works by referring to the indisputable value of the underlying referenced work,12 which by its recognised worth indirectly justifies the recognition of its spin-off. This is characteristic of the work of an artist we highlight in this issue: Natalie Bookchin, whose video projects The Intruder and Mass Ornament seize Borges’s novella and Kracauer’s essay as their underlying values. ..

Literature Nicolas Bourriaud, Relational Aesthetics, Dijon: Les Presse Du Réel, 1998. Hayles, N. Katherine, Writing Machines, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002. Carolyn Kane, “Dancing Machines: An Interview with Natalie Bookchin”, Wed. May 27th, 2009, http://rhizome.org/editorial/2009/may/27/dancing-machines/, 2009 (accessed on August 31, 2011).

Baron, as cited, p. 33.

Siegfried Kracauer, The Mass Ornament. Weimar Essays, edited by Thomas Y. Levin. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 1 3

86 ki / 85 se / 81 je / 77 v / 63 in / 58 ne / 50 da / 47 kot / 40 bi / 36 so / 32 le / 30 na / 28 iz / 18 jih / 18 od / 18 s / 17 ornament / 17 pa / 17 z /

Ornament množice1 The Mass Ornament see page 20

Siegfried Kracauer

Orbital speed

Prevod / Translated by Špela Drnovšek Zorko

15000 km/h 10000 mph 20000 km/h 15000 mph 20000 miles

25000 km/h

10000 miles

Radius of orbit Height above sea level 40 Mm

30 Mm

20 Mm

10 Mm

ISS

GLONASS

Hubble Iridium

GPS

5 hours

COMPASS MEO satellites 10 hours

Galileo 15 hours 20 hours

Geostationary Earth Orbit Orbital period

14 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

Iz zbirke esejev: Siegfried Kracauer, Das Ornament der Masse: Essays, Berlin: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1977. Prevedeni esej (gre za njegovo prvo objavo v slovenščini) je v izvirniku prvič izšel leta 1927. Objavljeno z dovoljenjem Suhrkamp Verlag. Op. ur.

17 za / 15 narave / 15 še / 14 človeka / 14 do / 14 tako / 13 narava / 13 razuma / 12 lahko / 12 ni / 12 po / 12 ter / 11 ko / 11 ornamenta / 11 razum /

Vsaka življenjskih črt hiti po svoje, kakor steze so in kot gorski lok. Kar tu smo, tam morda dopolni neki bog z ubranostjo, večnim plačilom in pokojem. Hölderlin, Zimmerju2

Položaj, ki ga neka doba zaseda v zgodovinskem procesu, je mogoče bolj izrazito določiti skozi analizo njenih neopaznih površinskih izrazov kot pa iz njenih lastnih sodb o sebi. Ker te sodbe izražajo tendence določenega obdobja, nam ne morejo nuditi dokončnega pričevanja o njegovi celotni tvorbi. Medtem pa nam površinski izrazi na podlagi svoje nezavedne narave zagotavljajo neposreden dostop do temeljne substance stanja stvari. Po drugi strani pa je znanje o tem stanju stvari odvisno od interpretacije površinskih izrazov. Temeljna substanca neke dobe in njeni neopaženi impulzi drug drugega vzajemno razjasnjujejo.

Na področju telesne kulture, h kateri sodijo tudi ilustrirani časopisi, se okusi že nekaj časa tiho spreminjajo. Postopek se je začel s Tillerjevimi dekleti [the Tiller Girls].3 Ti izdelki ameriških tovarn razvedrila niso več individualna dekleta, ampak nerazvezljivi klobčiči deklet, katerih gibi so matematične ponazoritve. Medtem ko se v nastopih združujejo v različne figure, se na nabito polnem stadionu, ki je vedno enak stadion, naj bo v Avstraliji ali v Indiji, da ne omenjamo Amerike, odvijajo čisto enake, geometrično natančne predstave. Tudi najmanjša vas, ki je nastopi še niso dosegli, jih pozna iz tedenskih novic. Ekran moramo le ošvrkniti s pogledom, pa nam postane jasno, da so ti ornamenti sestavljeni iz tisočev teles, aseksualnih teles v kopalkah. Pravilnost njihovih vzorcev spremljajo navdušeni vzkliki množic, ki so same razvrščene v brezkončnih urejenih stadionskih vrstah. Ti ekstravagantni spektakli, ki jih uprizarjajo različne vrste ljudi, ne le dekleta in stadionske množice, so že zdavnaj postali uveljavljena forma. Pridobili so mednarodni ugled in postali žarišče estetskega zanimanja. Nosilec teh ornamentov je množica in ne ljudstvo [Volk], kajti kadarkoli ljudstvo oblikuje figure, te ne lebdijo v vmesnem prostoru, ampak izhajajo iz skupnosti. Iz teh skupnosti, ki jih združuje skupna usoda, kipi proti njihovim ornamentom organski tok življenja, ki jim poda čarobno moč in jih podloži s smislom do tolikšne mere, da jih ni mogoče zreducirati na golo asemblažo linij. Tisti, ki so se umaknili iz skupnosti in ki se imajo za edinstvene osebnosti z lastnimi individualnimi 2

Friedrich Hölderlin, Zimmerju, v: Hölderlin. Izbral, prevedel in spremno besedo napisal Niko Grafenauer, Ljubljana: Založba Mladinska knjiga (zbirka Lirika), 1978, str. 114. Skupina vojaško izurjenih plesalk, imenovanih po manchestrskem koreografu Johnu Tillerju. Skupina je pričela delovati v poznem devetnajstem stoletju, v Nemčiji pa jo je najel Eric Charell, ki je bil v obdobju 1924–1931 direktor berlinskega gledališča Großes Schauspielhaus. Njegove plesne revije in operete so predhodniki današnjih muzikalov. Glej: Derek in Julia Parker, The Natural History of the Chorus Girl, London: Newton Abbot, 1975; in Fritz Giese, Girl-kultur, München: Delphin Verlag, 1925.

dušami, prav tako propadejo, kadar se lotijo ustvarjanja teh novih vzorcev. Če bi se udeležili takšnih predstav, jih ornament ne bi transcendiral. Ornament bi bil pisana kompozicija, ki je ne bi bilo mogoče izvesti do njegovega logičnega zaključka, kajti njene točke – kot zobje grabelj – bi bile vsajene v vmesno strato duše, katere ostanek bi preživel. Vzorci, ki so nam na ogled na stadionih in v kabaretih, ne izdajajo nobenih takšnih izvorov. Sestavljeni so iz elementov, ki so zgolj gradniki in nič več. Konstrukcija stavbe je odvisna od velikosti kamnov in od njihovega števila. Tu se uporabi množica. Le kot del množice in ne kot posamezniki, ki verjamejo, da so oblikovani od znotraj, postanejo ljudje delci neke figure. Ornament je smoter v samem sebi. Balet je nekoč prav tako ustvarjal ornamente, ki so se pojavljali kalejdoskopsko. A tudi potem, ko so zavrgli svoj ritualni pomen, so ostali kot plastičen izraz erotičnega življenja; erotičnega življenja, ki jih je obenem povzdignilo in determiniralo njihove značilnosti. Množična gibanja deklet se, nasprotno, odvijajo v vakuumu; so del linearnega sistema, ki nima več nobenega erotičnega pomena, ampak v najboljšem primeru le nakazuje na lokus erotičnega. Še več, smisel teh živečih zvezdnih formacij na stadionih ni enak tistemu na vojaških vajah. Čeprav se slednje lahko izkažejo za pravilne in regularne, ta regularnost vodi k določenemu cilju; vojaške parade izhajajo iz patriotskih čustev, ki jih nato vzbujajo v vojakih in subjektih. Zvezdne formacije pa nimajo pomena onkraj samih sebe in množice, nad katerimi se dvigajo, niso moralna enota, kot je vojaški eskadron. Figur tudi ne moremo opisati kot dekorativne dodatke h gimnastični disciplini. Enote deklet se urijo z namenom, da bi proizvedle neizmerno število vzporednih linij, s ciljem, da bi največje možno število ljudi izurile za ustvarjanje vzorca neslutenih dimenzij. Končni rezultat je ornament, katerega zaključek nastane z izpraznjenjem vseh bistvenih konstruktov njihovih vsebin. Čeprav množice tvorijo ornament, niso vključene v premišljevanje o njem. Ornament je sicer zelo linearen, vendar tu ne obstaja nobena linija, ki bi se raztezala od majhnih delov množice do celotne figure. Ornament spominja na fotografije pokrajin in mest, posnete iz zraka, v smislu, da ne izhaja iz notranjosti danih pogojev, ampak se pojavi nad njimi. Podobno tudi igralci nikoli ne dojamejo inscenacije na odru v vsej njeni celovitosti, čeprav zavestno sodelujejo pri njenem ustvarjanju; celo v primeru baletnih plesalcev je figura podvržena vplivu njenih izvajalcev. Bolj kot se skladnost figure podredi v korist gole linearnosti, bolj oddaljena postane od imanentne zavesti tistih, ki jo konstituirajo. Vendar nas to ne privede do tega, da bi figuro premerili s prodornejšim pogledom. Figure pravzaprav nihče niti ne bi opazil, če ne bi množica gledalcev, ki je v estetskem odnosu z ornamentom in ne predstavlja nikogar, sedela tik pred njo. Ornament, ločen od svojih nosilcev, moramo razumeti racionalno. Sestavljen je iz linij in krogov, kot jih najdemo v učbenikih evklidske geometrije, vključuje pa tudi osnovne komponente fizike, kot so valovi in spirale. Takó ostanejo brstenje organ-

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 1 5

11 to / 10 množični / 10 niso / 10 tega / 10 teh / 10 tudi / 9 ali / 9 ampak / 9 bolj / 9 mišljenja / 9 naravo / 9 že / 8 ga / 8 jo / 8 kadar /

a tekočem traku vsak izpolni svojo nalogo in opravlja delno funkcijo, ne da bi razumel celoto. Tako kot vzorec na stadionu stoji organizacija nad množicami, pošastna figura, katere stvarnik jo umakne iz pogleda njenih nosilcev in jo tudi sam komaj opazi. Zamišljena je po racionalnih principih, ki jih tayloristični sistem le potisne do skrajnega zaključka. Roke v tovarni ustrezajo početju nog pri Tillerjevih dekletih.

skih form in emanacije spiritualnega življenja izločene. Tillerjevih deklet post factum ni več mogoče sestaviti v človeška bitja. Njihove množične gimnastike nikoli ne izvajajo popolnoma ohranjena telesa, katerih zvijanje se upira racionalnemu razumu. Roke, stegna ter drugi segmenti so najmanjši sestavni deli kompozicije.

sistem le potisne do skrajnega zaključka. Roke v tovarni ustrezajo početju nog pri Tillerjevih dekletih. Psihotehnični preizkusi sposobnosti, ki presegajo gole ročne spretnosti, skušajo izračunati tudi nagnjenosti duše. Ornament množice je estetski refleks racionalnosti, h kateri teži prevladujoči ekonomski sistem.

Struktura ornamenta množice zrcali strukturo celotne sodobne situacije. Ker princip kapitalističnega procesa proizvodnje ne izhaja le iz narave, je prisiljen uničiti naravne organizme, ki jih dojema bodisi kot sredstvo bodisi kot upor. Skupnost in osebnost premineta, kadar se zahteva izračunljivost; posameznik lahko le kot čisto majhen del množice spleza po grafih in oskrbuje stroje brez kakršnegakoli trenja. Sistem, ki se ne meni za razlike v formi, sam po sebi privede do zabrisovanja nacionalnih značilnosti in produkcije delavskih množic, ki jih je mogoče enako dobro zaposliti na katerikoli geografski točki. Tako kot ornament množice je tudi kapitalistični proizvodni proces smoter v samem sebi. Potrošne dobrine, ki jih izpljune, pravzaprav niso narejene zato, da bi jih kdo posedoval; narejene so le za dobro profita, ki ne pozna meja. Njegova rast je povezana z rastjo posla. Proizvajalec ne gara zaradi osebnega dobička, katerega dobrine lahko uživa le do določene mere (v Ameriki se presežke v dobičku usmeri v duhovna zavetišča, kot so knjižnice in univerze, te pa kultivirajo intelektualce, ki investicijo kasneje povrnejo z obrestmi). Ne: proizvajalec dela zato, da bi razširil posel. Vrednosti se ne proizvaja zaradi njene vrednosti. Delo je morda nekoč res služilo proizvajanju in trošenju vrednosti do določene točke, danes pa so vrednosti postale le stranski učinki v službi proizvodnega procesa. Dejavnosti znotraj tega procesa so slekle svojo bistveno vsebino. Proces proizvodnje se javno odvija po skrivni poti. Na tekočem traku vsak izpolni svojo nalogo in opravlja delno funkcijo, ne da bi razumel celoto. Tako kot vzorec na stadionu stoji organizacija nad množicami, pošastna figura, katere stvarnik jo umakne iz pogleda njenih nosilcev in jo tudi sam komaj opazi. Zamišljena je po racionalnih principih, ki jih tayloristični

Izobraženi ljudje – ki niso nikoli popolnoma odsotni – se zmrdujejo nad pojavom Tillerjevih deklet in stadionskimi podobami. Vse, kar množico zabava, obsodijo kot njeno razvedrilo. Vendar je estetski užitek, ki ga sprožajo gibanja ornamentov množice, kljub njihovim sodbam legitimen. Taka gibanja so pravzaprav med redkimi stvaritvami naše dobe, ki danemu materialu podelijo formo. Množice, organizirane v teh gibanjih, prihajajo iz pisarn in tovarn; formalni princip, po katerem so oblikovane, jih določa tudi v realnosti. Kadar postanejo pomembni deli realnosti v našem svetu nevidni, se mora umetnost zadovoljiti s preostankom, kajti estetska predstavitev je toliko bolj realna, kadar se čim manj ukvarja z realnostjo zunaj estetske sfere. Popolnoma vseeno je, kako nizko ocenjujemo vrednost ornamenta množice, njegova stopnja realnosti je še vedno višja kot v umetniškem ustvarjanju, ki goji preminule, aristokratske sentimente v zastarelih formah – pa čeprav ne pomeni nič več kot to.

16 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

Proces zgodovine je bitka med šibkim in oddaljenim razumom ter silami narave, ki so v mitologiji vladale nad nebom in zemljo. Po somraku bogov bogovi niso odstopili: stara narava se še naprej uveljavlja znotraj in zunaj človeka. Omogočila je velike kulture človeštva, ki morajo tako kot vsaka kreacija narave umreti, in služi kot podlaga za nadstavbe mitološkega mišljenja, ki jo potrjuje v njeni vsemogočnosti. Kljub vsem variacijam mitološkega mišljenja, ki se iz dobe v dobo spreminja, pa to mišljenje vselej spoštuje meje, ki jih izriše narava. Organizem priznava kot pra-formo [Ur-form]; lomi se v formi tega, kar že obstaja; preda se delovanju usode. Odseva premise narave na vseh področjih, ne da bi se upiralo

8 množičnega / 8 množice / 8 način / 8 nad / 8 proces / 8 več / 7 čigar / 7 deklet / 7 figure / 7 kar / 7 mišljenje / 7 razumu / 7 ta / 7 te /

njihovemu obstoju. Organska sociologija, ki postavi naravni organizem kot prototip družbene ureditve, ni nič manj mitološka kot nacionalizem, ki ne pozna nobene višje enotnosti, kot je skladnost narodove usode.

učinek takšnih regresivnih drž, te tudi ne razumejo osnovne napake kapitalizma: kapitalizem ne racionalizira preveč, temveč premalo. Mišljenje, ki ga podpira kapitalizem, se upira vrhuncu v razumu, ki izhaja iz podlage človeka.

Razum ne deluje znotraj kroga naravnega življenja. Ukvarja se s tem, da v svet pripelje resnico. Njegova domena je že bila nakazana v pristnih pravljicah, ki niso zgodbe o čudežih, temveč napovedi čudežnega prihoda pravice. To, da se je Tisoč in ena noč pojavila prav v razsvetljeni Franciji in da je razum osemnajstega stoletja prepoznal razum pravljic kot enakovreden svojemu, ima globok zgodovinski pomen. Celo v zgodnjih dneh zgodovine je gola narava v pravljicah pridržana, da nad njo lahko zmaga resnica. Naravno moč premaga nemoč dobrega; zvestoba nadvlada umetnost čarovništva.

Aktualno polje kapitalističnega mišljenja zaznamuje abstraktnost. Dandanašnja prevlada abstraktnosti vzpostavi duhovni prostor, ki zajema vsa izražanja. Kritika tega abstraktnega načina mišljenja – to, da ni zmožen razumeti dejanske substance življenja in se mora zato umakniti konkretnim opažanjem fenomenov – resda zariše meje abstraktnosti. Kot kritika pa je zgrešena, kadar zagovarja tisto lažno mitološko konkretnost, katere cilj sta organizem in forma. Vrnitev k takšni konkretnosti bi žrtvovala že pridobljeno sposobnost abstrakcije, ne da bi abstrakcijo presegla. Ta je izraz racionalnosti, ki je postala zakrknjena. Določitve smisla, prikazanega kot abstraktna splošnost – recimo določitve na ekonomskem, družbenem, političnem ali moralnem področju – razumu ne dajo tega, kar mu po vsej pravici pripada. Takšne določitve ne upoštevajo empiričnosti; te abstrakcije brez vsebine je mogoče uporabiti na kakršenkoli način. Le za pregrado teh abstrakcij lahko najdemo individualne racionalne uvide, ki ustrezajo partikularnosti dane situacije. Kljub substancialnosti, ki jo lahko zahtevamo od njih, so takšni uvidi »konkretni« le kot izpeljave; v nobenem primeru niso »konkretni« v preprostem pomenu, ki to besedo uporablja kot podkrepitev mnenj, prepletenih z naravnim življenjem. Abstraktnost sodobnega mišljenja je torej ambivalentna. Iz perspektive mitoloških doktrin, v katerih se narava naivno vzpostavlja, pomeni proces abstraktnosti – kot ga, recimo, uporabljajo naravoslovne vede – pridobitev v racionalnosti, ki odtegne od bleska stvari v naravi. Iz perspektive razuma se zdi, da enak proces abstrakcije določa narava; izgublja se v praznem formalizmu, v čigar preobleki ima naravno prosto pot, saj ne dopušča uvidov razuma, ki bi ga lahko napadli. Prevladujoča abstraktnost kaže na to, da proces demitologizacije še ni zaključen.

Ko služi preboju resnice, postane zgodovinski proces proces demitologizacije, ki izvaja radikalno dekonstrukcijo položajev, ki jih je naravno vselej znova zavzemalo. Francosko razsvetljenstvo je pomemben primer boja med razumom in mitološkimi zablodami, ki so vdrle na področja vere in politike. Ta boj se nadaljuje in povsem mogoče je, da bo v toku zgodovine narava, ki je čedalje bolj oropana svoje magije, postala bolj in bolj dostopna razumu.

Kapitalistična doba je stopnja v procesu demistifikacije. Način mišljenja, ki se ujema s sedanjim ekonomskim sistemom, je do povsem nove stopnje omogočil prevlado in uporabo narave kot samozadostne entitete. Kar je tu odločilno, ni dejstvo, da takšno mišljenje ponuja način za izkoriščanje narave; če bi človeška bitja naravo le izkoriščala, potem bi narava že nadvladala nad naravo. Odločilno je, da takšno mišljenje spodbuja vse večjo neodvisnost od naravnih pogojev in tako ustvari prostor za intervencijo razuma. Racionalnost tega mišljenja (ki do neke mere izhaja iz razuma pravljic) pojasnjuje – čeprav ne povsem – buržoazne revolucije zadnjih sto petdeset let, revolucije, ki so poravnale dolg z naravnimi silami cerkve (same vpletene v afere svoje dobe), monarhije in fevdalnega sistema. Neustavljiva razgradnja teh in drugih mitoloških vezi je za razum dobra novica, kajti pravljica lahko postane realnost le na ruševinah naravnih enotnosti. Vendar ratio kapitalističnega ekonomskega sistema ni razum sam, temveč temačen razum. Ko enkrat prestopi določeno točko, zapusti resnico, v kateri sodeluje. Človeka ne zajema. Delovanje proizvodnega procesa ni urejeno v skladu s človekovimi potrebami in človek ne služi kot temelj strukture družbenoekonomske ureditve. Prav zares, sistem na nobeni točki ne temelji na človeku. »Temelj človeka«: to ne pomeni, da naj bi kapitalistično mišljenje kultiviralo človeka kot zgodovinsko proizvedeno obliko, po kateri bi bil osebnost brez izzivov in bi izpolnjeval zahteve, ki jih postavlja njegova narava. Privrženci tega položaja očitajo kapitalističnemu razumu posilstvo človeka in hrepenijo po vrnitvi skupnosti, ki bi bila zmožna ohraniti domnevni človeški element na boljši način, kot to počne kapitalizem. Četudi pustimo ob strani bedasti

Sodobno mišljenje se sooča z vprašanjem, ali naj se odpre razumu, ali pa naj še naprej pritiska na razum, ne da bi se mu na kakršenkoli način odprlo. Ne more prestopiti meja, ki si jih je določilo sámo, ne da bi v temelju spremenilo ekonomski sistem, ki sestavlja njegovo infrastrukturo; nadaljnji obstoj slednjega pomeni nadaljnji obstoj sodobnega mišljenja. Z drugimi besedami, nebrzdan razvoj kapitalističnega sistema spodbuja nebrzdano rast abstraktnega mišljenja (ali pa ga prisili, da se pogrezne v lažno konkretnost). Ampak bolj kot se utrjuje abstraktnost, bolj človek zaostaja – razum mu ne vlada. Če njegova misel vmes naredi ovinek v abstraktno ter tako prepreči, da bi se prave vsebine vednosti prebile skozi, postane človek znova podvržen silam narave. Namesto da bi te sile potlačilo, takšno zablodelo mišljenje sproži njihov upor, s tem da ne upošteva pravega razuma, ki bi se edini lahko soočil z njimi in jih prisilil k vdaji. To, da se temne sile narave še bolj grozeče upirajo ter tako preprečujejo nastop človeka razuma, je zgolj posledica neovirane razširitve kapitalistične oblasti.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 1 7

7 Tiller / 7 vedno / 7 znotraj / 7 življenja / 6 bo / 6 čeprav / 6 izhaja / 6 njenih / 6 ponovno / 6 postane / 6 sebi / 6 sistema / 6 Tako /

nožični vzorci kljub racionalnosti hkrati spodbudijo naravno v njegovi nepresojnosti. Človek je kot organsko bitje zagotovo izginil iz teh ornamentov, a to ni dovolj, da bi se človekovo bistvo postavilo v ospredje; nasprotno, ta preostali, majhni množični delec se odreže od bistva prav tako kot vsak splošni formalni koncept. Res je, da se noge Tillerjevih deklet gibljejo v popolni sinhroniji, ne giblje pa se naravna enotnost njihovih teles. Res je tudi, da tisoči ljudi na stadionu oblikujejo eno samo zvezdo. Toda ta zvezda ne sije in noge Tillerjevih deklet so abstraktna oznaka njihovih teles.

Tako kot abstraktnost je ornament množice ambivalenten. Po eni strani zreducira njegova racionalnost naravo na način, ki človeku ne dopusti oveneti, in to bi, če bi le bilo izpeljano do konca, pokazalo človekov najbolj bistveni element v vsej njegovi čistosti. Prav zato, ker nosilec ornamenta ne nastopa kot celovita osebnost – torej kot harmonična enotnost narave in »duha«, v kateri je prvo preveč poudarjeno in slednje premalo –, postane transparenten za človeka, ki ga določa razum. Človeška figura, vključena v ornament množice, je pričela eksodus iz bujne organske krasote in konstitucije individualnosti proti sferi anonimnosti, ki jo opušča, ko stoji v resnici in ko vednost, ki žari iz podlage človeka, raztopi obrise vidne naravne forme. V ornamentu množice je narava prikrajšana za svojo substanco; prav to kaže na stanje, v katerem so edini elementi narave, zmožni preživetja, tisti, ki se ne upirajo razsvetljenju prek razuma. Tako so na starih kitajskih krajinskih slikah drevesa, ribniki in gore upodobljene zgolj kot raztreseni ornamentni znaki, narisani s črnilom. Organsko središče je bilo

18 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

odstranjeno in preostali nepovezani deli so sestavljeni po zakonih, ki niso zakoni narave, temveč zakoni vednosti resnice, ki je, kot zmeraj, funkcija svojega časa. Podobno le ostanki celote človeškega vstopijo v ornament množice. V estetskem mediju so izbrani in razvrščeni po načelu, ki predstavlja razum bruhajočih form na čistejši način kot druga načela, ki ohranjajo človeka kot organsko enotnost. Gledano iz perspektive razuma se ornament množice pokaže kot mitološki kult, ki se je zamaskiral v opravo abstrakcije. V primerjavi s konkretno aktualnostjo drugih telesnih predstavitev je ornamentova skladnost z razumom torej le navidezna. V resnici je ornament neokusna manifestacija manjvredne narave. Bolj kot je kapitalistični ratio odločno odrezan od razuma, bolj kot zaobide človeka in izgine v praznino abstraktnosti, lažje se ta manjvredna narava svobodno razcveti. Množični vzorci kljub racionalnosti hkrati spodbudijo naravno v njegovi nepresojnosti. Človek je kot organsko bitje zagoto-

6 zato / 5 če / 5 k / 5 kajti / 5 kapitalističnega / 5 med / 5 naj / 5 o / 5 pomena / 5 racionalnosti / 5 Ratio / 5 sam / 5 skozi / 5 strani / 5 torej /

vo izginil iz teh ornamentov, a to ni dovolj, da bi se človekovo bistvo postavilo v ospredje; nasprotno, ta preostali, majhni množični delec se odreže od bistva prav tako kot vsak splošni formalni koncept. Res je, da se noge Tillerjevih deklet gibljejo v popolni sinhroniji, ne giblje pa se naravna enotnost njihovih teles. Res je tudi, da tisoči ljudi na stadionu oblikujejo eno samo zvezdo. Toda ta zvezda ne sije in noge Tillerjevih deklet so abstraktna oznaka njihovih teles. Razum spregovori zmeraj, kjerkoli razgradi organsko enotnost in raztrga naravno površino (in čisto vseeno je, koliko je ta kultivirana); človeško formo secira le zato, da lahko neizkrivljena resnica človeka na novo oblikuje. Toda razum še ni prodrl v ornament množice; njegovi vzorci so nemi. Ratio, ki povzroča ornament, je dovolj močan, da skliče množico in iz figur, ki jo sestavljajo, eliminira vse življenje. Obenem je prešibek, da bi znotraj množice našel človeška bitja in figure v ornamentu napravil transparentne za vednost. Ker ta ratio beži pred razumom in išče zatočišče v abstraktnosti, se nenadzorovana narava razmnožuje pod preobleko racionalnega izražanja in za svojo predstavitev uporablja abstraktne znake. Nič več se ne more transformirati v krepke simbolične forme, kot se je med primitivnimi ljudstvi in v dobi verskih kultov. Ta moč jezika znakov se je umaknila iz ornamenta množice pod vplivom iste racionalnosti, ki svoji lastni nemosti prepreči, da bi se razpočila. Tako se gola narava manifestira v ornamentu množice – tista narava, ki se upira izrazu in razumevanju svojega lastnega pomena. Kar se pojavi v ornamentu množice, je racionalna in prazna oblika kulta, izpraznjena kakršnegakoli eksplicitnega pomena. Kot taka se izkaže kot vrnitev v mitologijo tako visoke stopnje, da bi si le s težavo predstavljali njen presežek – vrnitev, ki nato razkriva, do kolikšne stopnje je kapitalistični ratio odrezan od razuma. Vloga, ki jo ornament množice igra v družbenem življenju, potrjuje, da je nelegitimni potomec gole narave. Intelektualni privilegiranci, čeprav tega niso pripravljeni priznati, so privesek prevladujočega ekonomskega sistema in ornamenta množice niso niti zaznali kot znak tega sistema. Fenomenu se odrečejo, da bi lahko nadaljevali z iskanjem naukov na umetnostnih dogodkih, ki se jih ni dotaknila realnost stadionskih vzorcev. Množice, ki so tako spontano posvojile te vzorce, so superiorne tem izobraženim kritikom, saj vsaj približno priznavajo neprikrito resnico. Ista racionalnost, ki nadzira nosilce vzorcev v realnem življenju, vlada tudi njihovi potopitvi v telesno ter jim tako dovoljuje, da aktualno realnost napravijo nesmrtno. Dandanes nimamo le enega Waltherja Stolzinga z nagrajenimi pesmimi, ki poveličujejo telesno kulturo.4 Ideologijo takšnih pesmi je enostavno spregledati, pa četudi izraz »kultura telesa« upravičeno združuje dve besedi, ki druga drugi pripadata na podlagi svojih posameznih pomenov. Brezmejna pomembnost, ki je pripisana telesnemu, ne more izhajati iz omejene vrednosti, ki si jo zasluži. Takšno pomembnost si lahko razložimo le kot zavezništvo, ki ga organizirana športna vzgoja goji z ustanovami, v nekaterih primerih celo 4

za hrbti svojih prvovrstnih podpornikov. Fizični trening razlasti človekovo energijo, produkcija in brezumno potrošništvo ornamentnih vzorcev pa jo preusmerita stran od poziva po spremembi vladajočega reda. Razum le s težavo vstopi, ko se množice, v katere naj bi prodrl, predajo občutkom, izhajajočim iz brezbožnega mitološkega kulta. Družbeni pomen kulta je ekvivalenten rimskim cirkuškim igram, ki so jih sponzorirali vladarji.

Med različnimi poskusi, da bi se povzpeli na višjo raven, so bili številni pripravljeni ponovno opustiti racionalnost in stopnjo realnosti, ki jo je dosegel ornament množice. Telesni napori na področju ritmične gimnastike imajo na primer cilje, ki presegajo tiste v osebni higieni – namreč izražanje nališpanih stanj duše –, in k njim učitelji telesne kulture pogosto dodajajo poglede na svet. Te prakse, katerih nemogočo estetiko lahko popolnoma prezremo, poskušajo znova ujeti prav tisto, kar je ornament množice že pustil za seboj: organsko povezavo narave s tistim, kar preskromni temperament razume kot dušo ali duha – t. j. povzdigovanje telesa s tem, da mu podelijo pomene, ki iz njega izžarevajo in so morda res duhovni, a ne vsebujejo niti trohice razuma. Medtem ko ornament množice predstavlja nemo naravo brez kakršnekoli nadstavbe, ritmična gimnastika, v skladu s svojim lastnim prispevkom, sega dlje in razlašča višje mitološke ravni ter s tem prevlado narave le še okrepi. To je le en primer med številnimi enako brezupnimi poskusi, da bi iz množične eksistence dosegli višjo obliko življenja. Večina teh poskusov je na iskreno romantičen način odvisna od oblik in vsebin, ki so že zdavnaj podlegle do neke mere upravičeni kritiki kapitalističnega ratia. V želji, da bi človeku spet podarile čvrstejšo povezavo z naravo, kot jo ima danes, odkrijejo povezavo z višjo sfero; ne tako, da se obrnejo na še nerealizirani razum v tem svetu, temveč tako, da se umaknejo v mitološke strukture pomena. Njihova usoda je nerealnost, kajti kadar na neki točki zasveti le najmanjši blisk razuma, mora tudi najbolj sublimna entiteta, ki se hoče zaščititi pred njim, razpasti. Podvigi, ki se ne zmenijo za naš zgodovinski kontekst in skušajo rekonstruirati obliko države, skupnost, način umetniškega ustvarjanja, ki je odvisen od tipa človeka, ki ga je sodobno mišljenje že napadlo – tipa človeka, ki pravzaprav sploh ne obstaja več –, ne presežejo prazne in površinske plitkosti ornamenta množice, ampak bežijo pred njegovo realnostjo. Proces vodi neposredno skozi središče ornamenta množice, ne stran od njega. Naprej se lahko pomakne le takrat, ko mišljenje zaobseže naravo in ustvari človeka, sestavljenega iz razuma. Nato se bo družba spremenila. Nato bo tudi ornament množice zbledel, človeško življenje sámo pa bo prevzelo značilnosti tistega ornamenta, v katerega se bo skozi soočenje z resnico razvilo v pravljicah. ..

Walther von Stolzing, mladi vitez v Wagnerjevi operi Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg (1867), ki v tretjem dejanju zapoje »nagrajeno pesem«, s katero osvoji svojo predrago Evo.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 1 9

365 the / 232 of / 116 to / 96 in / 87 that / 82 and / 78 is / 72 a / 55 it / 54 The / 49 not / 37 which / 36 from / 35 as / 35 mass / 34 are / 34 its /

The Mass Ornament1

Siegfried Kracauer

1 WWW.N2YO.COM

2 0 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

NAVSTAR 66 (USA 232)

37753

2011-036A

718

N/A

NAVSTAR 65 (USA 213)

36585

2010-022A

717.9

N/A

NAVSTAR 64 (USA 206)

35752

2009-043A

717.9

NAVSTAR 63 (USA 203)

34661

2009-014A

718

NAVSTAR 62 (USA 201)

32711

2008-012A

718

NAVSTAR 61 (USA 199)

32384

2007-062A

718

NAVSTAR 60 (USA 196)

32260

2007-047A

718

NAVSTAR 59 (USA 192)

29601

2006-052A

718

NAVSTAR 58 (USA 190)

29486

2006-042A

717.9

NAVSTAR 57 (USA 183)

28874

2005-038A

717.9

NAVSTAR 56 (USA 180)

28474

2004-045A

718

NAVSTAR 55 (USA 178)

28361

2004-023A

718

NAVSTAR 54 (USA 177)

28190

2004-009A

718

NAVSTAR 53 (USA 175)

28129

2003-058A

718

NAVSTAR 52 (USA 168)

27704

2003-010A

718

NAVSTAR 51 (USA 166)

27663

2003-005A

717.9

NAVSTAR 50 (USA 156)

26690

2001-004A

718

NAVSTAR 49 (USA 154)

26605

2000-071A

718

NAVSTAR 48 (USA 151)

26407

2000-040A

718

NAVSTAR 47 (USA 150)

26360

2000-025A

718

NAVSTAR 46 (USA 145)

25933

1999-055A

718

NAVSTAR 44 (USA 135)

25030

1997-067A

718

NAVSTAR 43 (USA 132)

24876

1997-035A

718

NAVSTAR 39 (USA 128)

24320

1996-056A

718.2

NAVSTAR 38 (USA 126)

23953

1996-041A

718

NAVSTAR 37 (USA 117)

23833

1996-019A

718

NAVSTAR 36 (USA 100)

23027

1994-016A

718

NAVSTAR 35 (USA 96)

22877

1993-068A

718

NAVSTAR 34 (USA 94)

22779

1993-054A

718.7

N/A

NAVSTAR 33 (USA 92)

22700

1993-042A

718

NAVSTAR 32 (USA 91)

22657

1993-032A

717.9

N/A

NAVSTAR 29 (USA 87)

22275

1992-089A

764.9

N/A

NAVSTAR 28 (USA 85)

22231

1992-079A

718

N/A

NAVSTAR 28 (USA 85)

22231

1992-079A

718

N/A

NAVSTAR 27 (USA 84)

22108

1992-058A

717.9

NAVSTAR 26 (USA 83)

22014

1992-039A

718

NAVSTAR 24 (USA 79)

21890

1992-009A

750.7

NAVSTAR 23 (USA 71) 21552 1991-047A 750.5 24 Siegfried Kracauer, “The Mass Ornament”, in: Siegfried Kracauer, The Mass OrnaNAVSTAR 23 (USA 1991-047A 24 Y. ment. Weimar Essays; translated, edited, and71)with21552 an introduction by 750.5 Thomas Levin; Cambridge: Harvard University pp. 75–86. The essay718 was writNAVSTARPress, 22 (USA1995, 66) 20959 1990-103A 32 ten in 1927 in German (as “Ornament der Editor’s note. NAVSTAR 21 Masse”). (USA 64) 20830 1990-088A 767 N/A

34 nature / 32 ornament / 31 by / 31 reason / 26 be / 23 an / 22 man / 18 have / 18 itself / 18 their / 17 can / 17 does / 17 It / 17 they / 17 thinking /

The lines of life are various; they diverge and cease Like footpaths and the mountains’ utmost ends. What we are here, elsewhere a God amends With harmonies, eternal recompense, and peace. —Hölderlin, “To Zimmer”

The position that an epoch occupies in the historical process can be determined more strikingly from an analysis of its inconspicuous surface-level expressions than from that epoch’s judgments about itself. Since these judgments are expressions of the tendencies of a particular era, they do not offer conclusive testimony about its overall constitution. The surfacelevel expressions, however, by virtue of their unconscious nature, provide unmediated access to the fundamental substance of the state of things. Conversely, knowledge of this state of things depends on the interpretation of these surface-level expressions. The fundamental substance of an epoch and its unheeded impulses illuminate each other reciprocally.

In the domain of body culture, which also covers the illustrated newspapers, tastes have been quietly changing. The process began with the Tiller Girls.2 These products of American distraction factories are no longer individual girls, but indissoluble girl clusters whose movements are demonstrations of mathematics. As they condense into figures in the revues, performances of the same geometric precision are taking place in what is always the same packed stadium, be it in Australia or India, not to mention America. The tiniest village, which they have not yet reached, learns about them through the weekly newsreels. One need only glance at the screen to learn that the ornaments are composed of thousands of bodies, sexless bodies in bathing suits. The regularity of their patterns is cheered by the masses, themselves arranged by the stands in tier upon ordered tier. These extravagant spectacles, which are staged by many sorts of people and not just girls and stadium crowds, have long since become an established form. They have gained international stature and are the focus of aesthetic interest. The bearer of the ornaments is the mass and not the people [Volk], for whenever the peopIe form figures, the latter do not hover in midair but arise out of a community. A current of organic life surges from these communal groups—which share a common destiny—to their ornaments, endowing these ornaments with a magic force and burdening them with meaning to such an extent that they cannot be reduced to a pure assemblage of lines. Those who have withdrawn from the community and consider themselves to be unique personalities with their own individual

A group of militarily trained dancing girls named after the Manchester choreographer John Tiller. Introduced in the late nineteenth century, the troupe was hired in Germany by Eric Charell, who from 1924 to 1931 was the director of Berlin’s Großes Schauspielhaus theater and whose revues and operetta productions were the forerunners of today’s musicals. See Derek Parker and Julia Parker, The Natural History of the Chorus Girls (London: Newton Abbot, 1975); and Fritz Giese, Girl-kultur (Munich: Delphin Verlag, 1925).

souls also fail when it comes to forming these new patterns. Were they to take part in such a performance, the ornament would not transcend them. It would be a colorful composition that could not be worked out to its logical conclusion, since its points—like the prongs of a rake—would be implanted in the soul’s intermediate strata, of which a residue would survive. The patterns seen in the stadiums and cabarets betray no such origins. They are composed of elements that are mere building blocks and nothing more. The construction of the edifice depends on the size of the stones and their number. It is the mass that is employed here. Only as parts of a mass, not as individuals who believe themselves to be formed from within, do people become fractions of a figure. The ornament is an end in itself. Ballet likewise used to yield ornaments, which arose in kaleidoscopic fashion. But even after discarding their ritual meaning, these remained the plastic expression of erotic life, an erotic life that both gave rise to them and determined their traits. The mass movements of the girls, by contrast, take place in a vacuum; they are a linear system that no longer has any erotic meaning but at best points to the locus of the erotic. Moreover, the meaning of the living star formations in the stadiums is not that of military exercises. No matter how regular the latter may turn out to be, that regularity was considered a means to an end; the parade march arose out of patriotic feelings and in turn aroused them in soldiers and subjects. The star formations, however, have no meaning beyond themselves, and the masses above whom they rise are not a moral unit like a company of soldiers. One cannot even describe the figures as the decorative frills of gymnastic discipline. Rather, the girl-units drill in order to produce an immense number of parallel lines, the goal being to train the broadest mass of people in order to create a pattern of undreamed-of dimensions. The end result is the ornament, whose closure is brought about by emptying all the substantial constructs of their contents. Although the masses give rise to the ornament, they are not involved in thinking it through. As linear as it may be, there is no line that extends from the small sections of the mass to the entire figure. The ornament resembles aerial photographs of landscapes and cities in that it does not emerge out of the interior of the given conditions, but rather appears above them. Actors likewise never grasp the stage setting in its totality, yet they consciously take part in its construction; and even in the case of ballet dancers, the figure is still subject to the influence of its performers. The more the coherence of the figure is relinquished in favor of mere linearity, the more distant it becomes from the immanent consciousness of those constituting it. Yet this does not lead to its being scrutinized by a more incisive gaze. In fact, nobody would notice the figure at all if the crowd of spectators, who have an aesthetic relation to the ornament and do not represent anyone, were not sitting in front of it. The ornament, detached from its bearers, must be understood rationally. It consists of lines and circles like those found in textbooks on Euclidean geometry, and also incorporates the elementary components of physics, such as waves and spirals. Both the

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 21

17 this / 16 for / 16 more / 16 natural / 16 process / 15 such / 15 these / 14 but / 14 only / 13 all / 13 form / 13 has / 13 life / 13 no / 13 with /

veryone does his or her task on the conveyor belt, performing a partial function without grasping the totality. Like the pattern in the stadium, the organization stands above the masses, a monstrous figure whose creator withdraws it from the eyes of its bearers, and barely even observes it himself.—It is conceived according to rational principles which the Taylor system merely pushes to their ultimate conclusion. The hands in the factory correspond to the legs of the Tiller Girls.

proliferations of organic forms and the emanations of spiritual life remain excluded. The Tiller Girls can no longer be reassembled into human beings after the fact. Their mass gymnastics are never performed by the fully preserved bodies, whose contortions defy rational understanding. Arms, thighs, and other segments are the smallest component parts of the composition. The structure of the mass ornament reflects that of the entire contemporary situation. Since the principle of the capitalist production process does not arise purely out of nature, it must destroy the natural organisms that it regards either as means or as resistance. Community and personality perish when what is demanded is calculability; it is only as a tiny piece of the mass that the individual can clamber up charts and can service machines without any friction. A system oblivious to differences in form leads on its own to the blurring of national characteristics and to the production of worker masses that can be employed equally well at any point on the globe.—Like the mass ornament, the capitalist production process an end in itself. The commodities that it spews forth are not actually produced to be possessed; rather, they are made for the sake of a profit that knows no limit. Its growth is tied to that of business. The producer does not labor for private gains whose benefits he can enjoy only to a limited extent (in America surplus profits are directed to spiritual shelters such as libraries and universities, which cultivate intellectuals whose later endeavors repay with interest the previously advanced capital). No: the producer labors in order to expand the business. Value is not produced for the sake of value. Though labor may well have once served to produce and consume values up to a certain point, these have now become side effects in the service of the production process. The activities subsumed by that process have divested themselves of their substantial contents.—The production process runs its secret course in public. Everyone does his or her task on the conveyor belt, performing a partial function without grasping the totality. Like the pattern in the stadium, the organization stands above the masses, a monstrous figure whose creator withdraws it from the eyes of its bearers, and barely even observes it himself.—It is conceived

2 2 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

according to rational principles which the Taylor system merely pushes to their ultimate conclusion. The hands in the factory correspond to the legs of the Tiller Girls. Going beyond manual capacities, psychotechnical aptitude tests attempt to calculate dispositions of the soul as well. The mass ornament is the aesthetic reflex of the rationality to which the prevailing economic system aspires. Educated people—who are never entirely absent—have taken offense at the emergence of the Tiller Girls and the stadium images. They judge anything that entertains the crowd to be a distraction of that crowd. But despite what they think, the aesthetic pleasure gained from ornamental mass movements is legitimate. Such movements are in fact among the rare creations of the age that bestow form upon a given material. The masses organized in these movements come from offices and factories; the formal principle according to which they are molded determines them in reality as well. When significant components of reality become invisible in our world, art must make do with what is left, for an aesthetic presentation is all the more real the less it dispenses with the reality outside the aesthetic sphere. No matter how low one gauges the value of the mass ornament, its degree of reality is still higher than that of artistic productions which cultivate outdated noble sentiments in obsolete forms— even if it means nothing more than that.

The process of history is a battle between a weak and distant reason and the forces of nature that ruled over heaven and earth in the myths. After the twilight of the gods, the gods did not abdicate: the old nature within and outside man continues to assert itself. It gave rise to the great cultures of humanity, which must die like any creation of nature, and it serves as the ground for the superstructures of a mythological thinking which affirms nature in its omnipotence. Despite all the variations in the structure of such mythological thinking, which changes from epoch to epoch, it always respects the boundaries that nature has drawn. It acknowledges the organism as the ur-form; it is refracted in

12 on / 12 system / 11 at / 11 mythological / 11 one / 11 them / 10 capitalist / 10 into / 10 meaning / 10 reality / 10 through / 9 any / 9 do /

the formed quality of what exists; it yields to the workings of fate. It reflects the premises of nature in all spheres without rebelling against their existence. Organic sociology, which sets up the natural organism as the prototype for social organization, is no less mythological than nationalism, which knows no higher unity than the unison of the nation’s fate. Reason does not operate within the circle of natural life. Its concern is to introduce truth into the world. Its realm has already been intimated in genuine fairy tales, which are not stories about miracles but rather announcements of the miraculous advent of justice. There is profound historical significance in the fact that the Thousand and One Nights turned up precisely in the France of the Enlightenment and that eighteenth-century reason recognized the reason of the fairy tales as its equal. Even in the early days of history, mere nature was suspended in the fairy tale so that truth could prevail. Natural power is defeated by the powerlessness of the good; fidelity triumphs over the arts of sorcery.

thinking should cultivate man as a historically produced form such that it ought to allow him to go unchallenged as a personality and should satisfy the demands made by his nature. The adherents of this position reproach capitalism’s rationalism for raping man, and yearn for the return of a community that would be capable of preserving the allegedly human element much better than capitalism. Leaving aside the stultifying effect of such regressive stances, they fail to grasp capitalism’s core defect: it rationalizes not too much but rather too little. The thinking promoted by capitalism resists culminating in that reason which arises from the basis of man.

The capitalist epoch is a stage in the process of demystification. The type of thinking that corresponds to the present economic system has, to an unprecedented degree, made possible the domination and use of nature as a self-contained entity. What is decisive here, however, is not the fact that this thinking provides a means to exploit nature; if human beings were merely exploiters of nature, then nature would have triumphed over nature. Rather, what is decisive is that this thinking fosters ever greater independence from natural conditions and thereby creates a space for the intervention of reason. It is the rationality of this thinking (which emanates to some extent from the reason of fairy tales) that accounts—though not exclusively—for the bourgeois revolutions of the last one hundred fifty years, the revolutions that settled the score with the natural powers of the church (itself entangled in the affairs of its age), of the monarchy, and of the feudal system. The unstoppable decomposition of these and other mythological ties is reason’s good fortune, since the fairy tale can become reality only on the ruins of the natural unities.

The current site of capitalist thinking is marked by abstractness. The predominance of this abstractness today establishes a spiritual space that encompasses all expression. The objection raised against this abstract mode of thought—that it is incapable of grasping the actual substance of life and therefore must give way to concrete observation of phenomena—does indeed identify the limits of abstraction. As an objection it is premature, however, when it is raised in favor of that false mythological concreteness whose aim is organism and form. A return to this sort of concreteness would sacrifice the already acquired capacity for abstraction, but without overcoming abstractness. The latter is the expression of a rationality grown obdurate. Determinations of meaning rendered as abstract generalities—such as determinations in the economic, social, political, or moral domain—do not give reason what rightfully belongs to reason. Such determinations fail to consider the empirical; one could draw any utilitarian application whatsoever from these abstractions devoid of content. Only behind the barrier of these abstractions can one find the individual rational insights that correspond to the particularity of the given situation. Despite the substantiality one can demand of them, such insights are “concrete” only in a derivative sense; in any case they are not “concrete” in the vulgar sense, which uses the term to substantiate points of view entangled in natural life.—The abstractness of contemporary thinking is thus ambivalent. From the perspective of the mythological doctrines, in which nature naïvely asserts itself, the process of abstraction—as employed, for example, by the natural sciences—is a gain in rationality which detracts from the resplendence of the things of nature. From the perspective of reason, the same process of abstraction appears to be determined by nature; it gets lost in an empty formalism under whose guise the natural is accorded free rein because it does not let through the insights of reason which could strike at the natural. The prevailing abstractness reveals that the process of demythologization has not come to an end.

However, the Ratio of the capitalist economic system is not reason itself but a murky reason. Once past a certain point, it abandons the truth in which it participates. It does not encompass man. The operation of the production process is not regulated according to man’s needs, and man does not serve as the foundation for the structure of the socioeconomic organization. Indeed, at no point whatsoever is the system founded on the basis of man. “The basis of man”: this does not mean that capitalist

Present-day thinking is confronted with the question as to whether it should open itself up to reason or continue to push on against it without opening up at all. It cannot transgress its self-imposed boundaries without fundamentally changing the economic system that constitutes its infrastructure; the continued existence of the latter entails the continued existence of present-day thinking. In other words, the unchecked development of the capitalist system fosters the unchecked growth of

In serving the breakthrough of truth, the historical process becomes a process of demythologization which effects a radical deconstruction of the positions that the natural continually reoccupied. The French Enlightenment is an important example of the struggle between reason and the mythological delusions that have invaded the domains of religion and politics. This struggle continues, and in the course of history it may be that nature, increasingly stripped of its magic, will become more and more pervious to reason.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 23

9 even / 9 patterns / 9 rationality / 9 whose / 9 would / 8 abstract / 8 In / 8 masses / 8 organic / 8 than / 8 truth / 8 what / 8 when /

abstract thinking (or forces it to become bogged down in a false concreteness). The more abstractness consolidates itself, however, the more man is left behind, ungoverned by reason. If his thought midway takes a detour into the abstract, thereby preventing the true contents of knowledge from breaking through, man will once again be rendered subject to the forces of nature. Instead of suppressing these forces, this thinking that has lost its way provokes their rebellion itself by disregarding the very reason that alone could confront such forces and make them submit. It is merely a consequence of the unhampered expansion of capitalism’s power that the dark forces of nature continue to rebel ever more threateningly, thereby preventing the advent of the man of reason.

Like abstractness, the mass ornament is ambivalent. On the one hand its rationality reduces the natural in a manner that does not allow man to wither away, but that, on the contrary, were it only carried through to the end, would reveal man’s most essential element in all its purity. Precisely because the bearer of the ornament does not appear as a total personality—that is, as a harmonious union of nature and “spirit” in which the former is emphasized too much and the latter too little—he becomes transparent to the man determined by reason. The human figure enlisted in the mass ornament has begun the exodus from lush organic splendor and the constitution of individuality toward the realm of anonymity to which it relinquishes itself, when it stands in truth and when the knowledge radiating from the basis of man dissolves the contours of visible natural form. In the mass ornament nature is deprived of its substance, and it is just this that points to a condition in which the only elements of nature capable of surviving are those that do not resist illumination through reason. Thus, in old Chinese landscape paintings the trees, ponds, and mountains are rendered only as sparse ornamental signs drawn in ink. The organic center has been removed and the remaining unconnected parts are composed according to laws that are not those of nature but laws given by a knowledge of truth, which, as always, is a function of its time. Similarly, it is only remnants of the complex of man that enter into the mass ornament. They are selected and combined in the aesthetic medium according to a principle which represents form-bursting reason in a purer way than those other principles that preserve man as an organic unity. Viewed from the perspective of reason, the mass ornament reveals itself as a mythological cult that is masquerading in the garb of abstraction. Compared to the concrete immediacy of other corporeal presentations, the ornament’s conformity to reason is thus an illusion. In reality the ornament is the crass manifestation of inferior nature. The latter can flourish all the more freely, the more decisively capitalist Ratio is cut off from reason and bypasses man as it vanishes into the void of the abstract. In spite of the rationality of the mass pattern, such patterns simultaneously give rise to the natural in its impenetrability. Certainly man as an organic being has disappeared from these ornaments, but that does not suffice to bring man’s basis to the fore; on the contrary, the remaining little mass particle cuts

24 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

itself off from this basis just as any general formal concept does. Admittedly, it is the legs of the Tiller Girls that swing in perfect parallel, not the natural unity of their bodies, and it is also true that the thousands of people in the stadium form one single star. But this star does not shine, and the legs of the Tiller Girls are an abstract designation of their bodies. Reason speaks wherever it disintegrates the organic unity and rips open the natural surface (no matter how cultivated the latter may be); it dissects the human form here only so that the undistorted truth can fashion man anew. But reason has not penetrated the mass ornament; its patterns are mute. The Ratio that gives rise to the ornament is strong enough to invoke the mass and to expunge all life from the figures constituting it. It is too weak to find the human beings within the mass and to render the figures in the ornament transparent to knowledge. Because this Ratio flees from reason and takes refuge in the abstract, uncontrolled nature proliferates under the guise of rational expression and uses abstract signs to display itself. It can no longer transform itself into powerful symbolic forms, as it could among primitive peoples and in the era of religious cults. This power of a language of signs has withdrawn from the mass ornament under the influence of the same rationality that keeps its muteness from bursting open. Thus, bare nature manifests itself in the mass ornament—the very nature that also resists the expression and apprehension of its own meaning. It is the rational and empty form of the cult, devoid of any explicit meaning, that appears in the mass ornament. As such, it proves to be a relapse into mythology of an order so great that one can hardly imagine its being exceeded, a relapse which, in turn, again betrays the degree to which capitalist Ratio is closed off from reason. The role that the mass ornament plays in social life confirms that it is the spurious progeny of bare nature. The intellectually privileged who, while unwilling to recognize it, are an appendage of the prevailing economic system have not even perceived the mass ornament as a sign of this system. They disavow the phenomenon in order to continue seeking edification at art events that have remained untouched by the reality present in the stadium patterns. The masses who so spontaneously adopted these patterns are superior to their detractors among the educated class to the extent that they at least roughly acknowledge the undisguised facts. The same rationality that controls the bearers of the patterns in real life also governs their submersion in the corporeal, allowing them thereby to immortalize current reality. These days, there is not only one Walter Stolzing singing prize songs that glorify body culture.3 It is easy to see through the ideology of such songs, even if the term “body culture” does indeed justifiably combine two words that belong together by virtue of their respective meanings. The unlimited importance ascribed to the physical cannot be derived from the limited value it deserves. Such importance can be explained only by the alliance that organized physical education maintains with the establishment, in some cases unbeknownst to its front-line supporters. 3

Walther von Stolzing, a young knight in Richard Wagner’s Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg (1867), who in Act Three sings the “prize song” which wins him his beloved Eva.

8 who / 7 abstractness / 7 aesthetic / 7 become / 7 figure / 7 human / 7 latter / 7 or / 7 other / 7 out / 7 production / 7 those / 7 too /

n spite of the rationality of the mass pattern, such patterns simultaneously give rise to the natural in its impenetrability. Certainly man as an organic being has disappeared from these ornaments, but that does not suffice to bring man’s basis to the fore; on the contrary, the remaining little mass particle cuts itself off from this basis just as any general formal concept does. Admittedly, it is the legs of the Tiller Girls that swing in perfect parallel, not the natural unity of their bodies, and it is also true that the thousands of people in the stadium form one single star. But this star does not shine, and the legs of the Tiller Girls are an abstract designation of their bodies. Physical training expropriates people’s energy, while the production and mindless consumption of the ornamental patterns divert them from the imperative to change the reigning order. Reason can gain entrance only with difficulty when the masses it ought to pervade yield to sensations afforded by the godless mythological cult. The latter’s social meaning is equivalent to that of the Roman circus games, which were sponsored by those in power.

Among the various attempts to reach a higher sphere, many have been willing to relinquish once again the rationality and level of reality attained by the mass ornament. The bodily exertions in the field of rhythmic gymnastics, for example, have aims that go beyond those of personal hygiene— namely, the expression of spruced-up states of the soul—to which instructors of body culture often add world views. These practices, whose impossible aesthetics can be ignored entirely, seek to recapture just what the mass ornament had happily left behind: the organic connection of nature with something the all too modest temperament takes to be soul or spirit—that is, exalting the body by assigning it meanings which emanate from it and may indeed be spiritual but which do not contain the slightest trace of reason. Whereas the mass ornament presents mute nature without any superstructure whatsoever, rhythmic gymnastics, according to its own account, goes further and expropriates the higher mythological levels, thereby strengthening nature’s dominance all the more. It is just one example among many other equally hopeless attempts to reach

a higher life from out of mass existence. Most of these depend in a genuinely romantic way on forms and contents that have long since succumbed to the somewhat justified critique of capitalist Ratio. In their desire to once again give man a link to nature that is more solid than the one he has today, they discover the connection to the higher sphere, not by appealing to a still unrealized reason in this world but by retreating into mythological structures of meaning. Their fate is irreality, for when even a glimmer of reason shines through at some point in the world, even the most sublime entity that tries to shield itself from it must perish. Enterprises that ignore our historical context and attempt to reconstruct a form of state, a community, a mode of artistic creation that depends upon a type of man who has already been impugned by contemporary thinking—a type of man who by all rights no longer exists—such enterprises do not transcend the mass ornament’s empty and superficial shallowness but flee from its reality. The process leads directly through the center of the mass ornament, not away from it. It can move forward only when thinking circumscribes nature and produces man as he is constituted by reason. Then society will change. Then, too, the mass ornament will fade away and human life itself will adopt the traits of that ornament into which it develops, through its confrontation with truth, in fairy tales. ..

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 25

100 in / 69 v / 57 ki / 50 je / 49 da / 39 na / 31 se / 30 so / 27 lahko / 24 pa / 24 tudi / 23 množice / 22 jih / 21 za / 20 kot / 17 s / 16 po / 15 ne /

Subvertirane intence in možnost za »najdeno« kolektivnost v delu Ornament množice Natalie Bookchin Subverted Intentions and the Potential for “Found” Collectivity in Natalie Bookchin’s Mass Ornament see page 32

Jaimie Baron Prevod / Translated by Pavel Koltaj

J.R.2 0 1 1

2 6 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

14 tem / 14 ter / 13 iz / 13 tako / 12 Ornament / 12 si / 10 Bookchinove / 10 digitalnih / 10 med / 10 z / 9 ali / 9 Bookchinova / 9 kako / 9 temveč /

Določene objekte, ki sami po sebi nimajo nobenega globljega pomena, prisotnost množice napolni z vsebino; imajo določen miselni potencial, ki je v individualizmu skrit, ki je v vsakodnevnem življenju posameznika neopazen, ki pa postane viden v luči množice.1 (Andreas Jürgensen)

zadnjem desetletju smo priča pojavu digitalnih arhivov, ki predstavljajo vire, iz katerih si lahko po eni strani filmski ustvarjalci prilaščajo dokumente za svoja dela, po drugi pa so tudi mesta, kjer isti ustvarjalci distribuirajo in delijo lastna dela. Hkrati so digitalni procesi prispevali k večjemu številu možnosti, s katerimi razpolagamo, ko želimo dokumente iz digitalnih arhivov ponovno uporabiti za druge namene. Teoretik Lev Manovich trdi, da so digitalne tehnologije podvržene procesom rekombinacije celo na ravni najbolj osnovnih računalniških funkcij.2 Res je, da enostavnost ukaza kopiraj in prilepi spodbuja uporabnike k jemanju drobcev iz različnih virov in njihovemu kombiniranju v novih konfiguracijah. Manovich prav tako trdi, da so vsi digitalni objekti enako uporabni: (filmske) fotografije, gibljive podobe in zvoke lahko pretvorimo v računalniški kod.3 Tako lahko uporabnik katerikoli digitalni objekt, ki mu je dostopen, enostavno kombinira z drugimi digitalnimi objekti in si ga prilasti v novo delo. Lahko bi dejali, da je prilaščanje ena glavnih tendenc medijske produkcije v digitalni dobi.4 Neskončna skladišča digitalnih dokumentov, do katerih je enostavno dostopati in ki jih lahko uporabimo na neštete načine, so enako privlačna tako za uveljavljene umetnike kot amaterje. Vendar pa je tendenca po prilaščanju prinesla nek specifičen obrat. Upala bi si trditi, da poudarku na razumevanju sveta prek arhivskih dokumentov dominira fascinacija nad tem, čemur pravim »intencionalna neskladnost« (angl. intentional disparity) – poigravanje z razliko med tem, kako si predstavljamo izvirni namen dokumenta in kakšna je njegova trenutna uporaba. Na internetu kar mrgoli različnih oblik prilastitvenega filma – od glasbenih mash-upov in machinim do ponovno montiranih filmskih napovednikov ter satiričnih kompilacij posnetkov še svežih novic –, ki jih že umeščamo med polnopravne umetniške forme. Pri vseh teh oblikah pripoznanje intencionalne neskladnosti pogosto proizvede kritičen (in včasih tudi komičen) učinek. Po mojem mnenju tiči eden od vzrokov, zakaj sodobni prilastitveni filmi kažejo tako izrazito intencionalno neskladnost, v tem, da so ti filmi na internetu dostopni v na videz neskončni verigi dokumentov, ki jih ustvarjajo in objavljajo milijoni uporabnikov, pri čemer ima vsak od njih svoje razloge, zakaj jih ustvarja in 1

2 3 4

Andreas Jürgensen, »Mass and Meaning«, v: Andreas Jürgensen in Karsten Ohrt (ur.), The Mass Ornament: Mass Phenomenon at the Turn of the Millenium, Odense, Danska: Kunsthallen Brandts Klaedefrabrik, 1998), str. 21. Lev Manovich, The Language of New Media, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2001, str. xxxi. Prav tam, str. 20. Za podroben pretres kulture remiksa glej: Lev Manovich, Software Takes Command, Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License, 2008, str. 191–222. http://lab.softwarestudies.com/2008/11/ softbook.html. Dostop opravljen 1. novembra 2011.

deli z drugimi. Prek video spletišč, kot je YouTube, kjer amaterski performerji vseh vrst objavljajo posnetke svojih performansov (oziroma performanse svojih mačk, psov in otrok), lahko gledamo na milijone okenc in v njih vidimo drobce vsakodnevnega življenja drugih – katerega sestavni del je tudi nastopanje za YouTube – in si predstavljamo, kdo so ter zakaj so naredili in objavili določen posnetek. Z digitalnimi tehnologijami si lahko te drobce – ki s seboj nosijo sledove morebitnih preteklih intenc – potencialno prilastimo in jih uporabljamo po mili volji.5 Delo Natalie Bookchin Ornament množice (Mass Ornament, 2009), eno-kanalni video na deljenem zaslonu, ki se ponavlja v sedemminutni zanki, se poigrava z intencionalno neskladnostjo in nam ponuja model za navigiranje po bogastvu – oziroma poplavi – dostopnih materialov različnih intenc, ki so lastni le digitalnim arhivom in ki ustvarjajo novo vrsto specifično digitalnega »občutka«. Video Ornament množice nas popelje skozi kratke drobce življenj na YouTubu, skozi skladnosti in neskladnosti, ki jih odkrivamo v spalnicah, dnevnih sobah ter kleteh več sto anonimnih mladih ljudi obeh spolov, različnih etničnih ozadij in (glede na kraje, kjer jih vidimo) tudi različnih družbenih razredov, ki plešejo zase in – s pomočjo YouTuba – tudi za ves svet. Ne gre za slavne osebnosti, temveč za amaterje, ki pred kamero izvajajo imitacije in aspiracije. Video zanka se začne s podobo praznih sob, sledijo pa posnetki različnih performerjev, ki, preden začnejo plesati, gledajo neposredno v kamero in preverjajo, ali ta deluje. Ko tako gledamo posamezne amaterje, ki vadijo svoje korake samo za kamero, brez drugega občinstva, se začne število zaslonov množiti, vsak kaže drugega človeka. V kvadratkih se tako pojavlja vse več plesalcev ter plesalk in Bookchinova včasih njihovo gibanje preplete tako, da je usklajeno in vsi izvajajo skoraj popolnoma enake gibe – očitno oponašajo plesne korake, ki so jih videli v glasbenih spotih in ki jih poznajo iz popularne kulture. Usklajeno vrtijo svoja telesa, poplesujejo gor in dol ob zidu ter izvajajo stoje in mostove. Od časa do časa je nekaj sekund videti, kot da plešejo skupaj, potem pa znova začnejo izvajati vsak svoje gibe. Bookchinova različne posnetke poveže tudi tako, da jim občasno doda glasbene odlomke iz dveh filmov iz leta 1935, Gold Diggers Busbyja Berkeleyja in Triumf volje Leni Riefenstahl. Naslov videa Natalie Bookchin je očitna referenca na sloviti esej Siegfrieda Kracauerja, v katerem je govora o množični koreografiji plesne skupine Tiller Girls, v kateri so dekleta s sočasnim premikanjem delov teles ustvarjala geometrične oblike. Kracauer je bil mnenja, da ta koreografija predstavlja simptom kapitalistične družbene ureditve, in je trdil, da ornament množice uteleša tayloristično logiko tovarne, ki človeška bitja spreminja v niz gibljivih delov, ta pa služijo nekemu širšemu vzorcu – nizu linij

Referenca na intenco ne predstavlja naivnega vračanja k intencionalni zmoti (angl. intentional fallacy), po kateri je posamični avtor (oziroma filmski ustvarjalec) umeščen »za« svoje delo in predstavlja arbitra njegovega pomena, temveč opozarja na dejstvo, da ko se srečujemo z medijskim delom, vanj pogosto vtikamo oziroma projiciramo neko intenco (ne glede na to, kako dvoumna je), ki je lahko v skladu z avtorjevimi intencami ali pa tudi ne.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 27

8 ga / 8 katerem / 8 katerih / 8 različnih / 8 V / 8 vidimo / 7 hkrati / 7 izvajajo / 7 le / 7 nam / 7 od / 7 strani / 7 svoje / 7 vsakodnevno /

sak posameznik oziroma posameznica je plesala zase in nato objavil/a svoj video na YouTubu, Bookchinova pa je s pomočjo

montaže skoreografirala množični ples. Naša zaznava intencionalne neskladnosti izhaja iz dejstva, da je Bookchinova očitno izbrala vse te solo performanse ter jih spremenila v skupinski ples in tako individualne, izolirane performerje spremenila v plesno skupino. Večina ugodja ob gledanju filma v trenutkih, ko plesalci postanejo usklajeni, izhaja iz dejstva, da je usklajenost nekaj, česar izvajalci niso mogli predvideti, nekaj, kar je Bookchinova »našla« v posamičnih delcih, ki jih je združila v celoto. – ki jih nobena od sodelujočih plesalk sama ne more videti.6 Za razliko od Kracauerja, ki je pisal o predstavah, kjer je koreografija temeljila na identičnih korakih, lahko v delu Bookchinove vidimo ornament množice, ki ga je našla, zbrala in sinhronizirala. Vsak posameznik oziroma posameznica je plesala zase in nato objavil/a svoj video na YouTubu, Bookchinova pa je s pomočjo montaže skoreografirala množični ples. Naša zaznava intencionalne neskladnosti izhaja iz dejstva, da je Bookchinova očitno izbrala vse te solo performanse ter jih spremenila v skupinski ples in tako individualne, izolirane performerje spremenila v plesno skupino. Večina ugodja ob gledanju filma v trenutkih, ko plesalci postanejo usklajeni, izhaja iz dejstva, da je usklajenost nekaj, česar izvajalci niso mogli predvideti, nekaj, kar je Bookchinova »našla« v posamičnih delcih, ki jih je združila v celoto. Vendar »najdenost« tega ornamenta množice dopušča presežek, ki ga v koreografiranih predstavah, na primer skupine Tiller Girls, skorajda ni. Dejansko so v delu Ornament množice razlike med telesi plesalcev, njihovi samosvoji gibi ter ozadja zasebnih prostorov, v katerih plešejo, prav tako zanimivi kot trenutki usklajenosti. Čeprav plesalci niso želeli – vsaj izvorno ne – deliti svojih intimnih prostorov, v katerih živijo, je kamera posnela prostore okoli izvajalcev in s tem zajela več, kot so sami želeli. Skozi ta okenca lahko gledamo druge ljudi – ki jih najverjetneje ne bomo nikoli srečali in katerih imen verjetno ne bomo nikoli poznali –, kako živijo svoja življenja: kako razmetane so njihove dnevne sobe, kakšne tapete so si izbrali ter kakšno šaro in ropotijo imajo po svojih kleteh. Prav tako dobro vidimo, kako vsako dekle po svoje stresa lase in premika boke, kako vsak fant dvigne glavo in se zavrti. Tako del ugodja, ki ga ponuja delo, leži tudi v igri razlik, ki izhajajo iz naključnih elementov vsakodnevnega življenja, ki 6

Siegfried Kracauer, »The Mass Ornament«, v: The Mass Ornament: Weimar Essays, ur. Thomas Levin, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995 [1963], str. 74– 86. Čeprav Kracauer tega v tem spisu eksplicitno ne omenja, Berkeleyjevi mjuzikli in nacistični pomp, ki ga najdemo v Triumfu volje, tako kot predstave skupine Tiller Girls vključujejo tudi elemente ornamenta množice – sinhronizacijo teles, ki se podrejajo večjemu vzorcu. Tako ima tudi glasba, ki jo izbere Bookchinova, svoj pomen.

2 8 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

smo jim priča onkraj pričakovanj in intenc izvajalcev. Delo Ornament množice nas napoteva na misel, da v arhivih nasploh, še zlasti pa v digitalnih, hkrati obstajata podobnost in različnost, individualnost in konformizem. V materialnih arhivih smo lahko od vselej odkrivali (in ustvarjali) vzorce in odklone. Vendar pa je dejstvo, da lahko vsak, ki ima kamero, računalnik in dostop do interneta, objavi na spletu dokumente in to je omogočilo, da se je drastično povečalo število in raznolikost materiala v digitalnih arhivih, kot je na primer YouTube.7 Dostopnost tovrstnih spletišč in možnost iskanja po njih nam odpira nove načine iskanja in odkrivanja vzorcev in odklonov ne le v uradnih dokumentih častitljivih institucij, temveč tudi v bežnih javnih trenutkih sicer anonimnih in različnih zasebnih življenj. Z drugimi besedami, digitalni arhivi širijo prostore za odkrivanje vzorcev, iskalniki pa omogočajo hitro in enostavno iskanje teh vzorcev po digitalnem ozemlju, na katerem niso le poslanice bogatih in slavnih, temveč tudi poslanice skromnih in neznanih. (Pomembno je seveda vedeti, da ustroj iskalnikov tudi omejuje ali vsaj usmerja iskanje vzorcev. Bookchinova pravi, da je videe iskala s pomočjo ključnih besed, kot so »jaz plešem«, »plešem sam/a«, »ples v moji sobi«.8 Njen film predstavlja torej rezultat iskanja in sledenja določenim potem, po katerih nas iskalniki vodijo po labirintih YouTuba.) S tem, da išče vizualne vzorce po različnih prostorih in povezuje osamljene posameznike v kolektivno gibanje, film Bookchinove hkrati kaže na utopično obljubo demokracije, povezanosti in skupnosti, ki vznikne v sferi digitalnega, ter na antiutopični nabor konformnosti, ki je latentno prisoten v teh osamljenih video objavah. Kracauer je bil v tridesetih letih dvajsetega stoletja dokaj pesimističen glede ornamenta množice in je trdil, da se sodelujoči

Številni ljudje trdijo, da YouTube ne predstavlja digitalnega arhiva, saj nihče ne nadzoruje celotne vsebine, ki se nahaja na spletišču. Toda sama menim, da vendarle je arhiv, saj predstavlja kraj, kjer lahko uporabniki shranjene dokumente iščejo, si jih prilaščajo in jih ponovno uporabljajo. Pogovor s filmsko ustvarjalko, 14. avgust 2009, konferenca Visible Evidence Conference, USC.

7 탑ivljenja / 6 digitalni / 6 film / 6 kjer / 6 ko / 6 ni / 6 teles / 6 to / 6 vzorcev / 5 arhivih / 5 arhivov / 5 intenc / 5 niso / 5 oziroma /

Natalie Bookchin: Mass Ornament, 2009

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 29

5 plesalcev / 5 plesalci / 5 prav / 5 predstavlja / 5 svojih / 5 video / 5 vsak / 5 vsi / 5 življenje / 4 bi / 4 Dejansko / 4 delu / 4 do /

li so sodobni plesalci na YouTubu taki, kot so bila dekleta iz skupine Tiller Girls – strašljiva vizija individualnih teles, ki si jih je nasilno prilastila neka večja celota, ki je niti ne vidijo in ki odseva negacijo posameznikove volje in zmožnosti delovanja v modernosti – to bomo še videli. Video Bookchinove lahko beremo kot odsev podobne negacije individualnih intenc, ki jih je mogoče tako enostavno subvertirati bodisi za potrebe Bookchinove bodisi za potrebe potrošniške družbe.

ne zavedajo nasilne abstrakcije nad njihovimi telesi.9 Ornament množice iz tridesetih let ni predstavljal kolektivnosti deljenih ciljev oziroma intenc, temveč prej zatiranje individualnosti s strani politike in spektakla postvarjenih teles. Podobno kot pri skupini Tiller Girls tudi v filmu Bookchinove posamezni izvajalci najverjetneje nikoli ne bodo spoznali svoje vloge v tem novem ornamentu množice, saj so podobnosti pretvorjene v usklajenosti, individualnost pa se izgublja v ornamentu. Film Bookchinove poleg vizualnih vzorcev razkriva tudi družbene vzorce, ki so vpisani v posamične performanse; dejstvo namreč, da videi niso nastali sui generis, temveč da izhajajo iz deljenega družbenega in ideološkega sistema, ki spodbuja določene vrste gibanja teles in medijskih praks. V delu Bookchinove vlada med individualnostjo in konformnostjo enaka napetost kot med enakostjo in različnostjo ter osamljenostjo in kolektivnostjo. Po eni strani se anonimni ljudje v delu Ornament množice – nekateri med njimi so »nadarjeni«, drugi pa ne – navidezno izražajo kot posamezniki. Po drugi strani nam Ornament množice razkriva, da hkrati počnejo isto kot vsi ostali – na spletu želijo vsi objaviti enake plesne korake. Zdi se, da je telesa teh plesalcev usmerjala ista roka, še preden je prišla v sliko roka Bookchinove. Čeprav predstavlja gledanje »skupnega« performansa plesalcev v Ornamentu množice velik užitek, pa imamo hkrati tudi neprijeten občutek, da gledamo, kako se ti ljudje trudijo biti nekdo drug – najverjetneje pop zvezde –, pri tem pa ne izražajo lastnih ciljev in namenov, temveč namene korporacij ter interese, ki dominirajo množičnim medijem. V nekem intervjuju je Bookchinova dejala: »V na videz osebnem izražanju izvajajo plesalci na YouTubu vedno enake gibe, kot da bi bili programirani, ter s tem razkrivajo, kako je popularna kultura vtkana v telesa posameznikov in kako se reproducira v in prek njih. Plesalci pogosto igrajo obupno konvencionalne spolne vloge, ki pa zaradi dejstva, da so odigrane – ponavljane, oponašane in da se nanašajo ena 9

Kracauer, »The Mass Ornament«, str. 77.

3 0 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

na drugo, izgubijo kakršnokoli pretenzijo po tem, da bi bile resnične, pristne in nespremenljive.«10 Zato delo Ornament množice kar kliče po vprašanju, ali ni demokratizirajoča sila digitalnih arhivov, kjer lahko kdorkoli objavi karkoli, hkrati tudi sila konformnosti – ali pa vsaj odsev konformnosti, ki jo poskušajo množični mediji vsiliti posameznikom s tem, ko jih spremenijo v potrošnike. Performerjev dejansko ne ločujemo na podlagi imen ali gibov, ki jih izvajajo – prav zaradi tega Bookchinova sploh lahko doseže, da plešejo »skupaj« –, temveč le na podlagi naključnih vidikov njihovih utelešenj lastnih performansov in prostorov, v katerih jih izvajajo. In vendar se zdi, da imajo ti naključni elementi vrednost kot sledovi vsakodnevnega življenja, ki ni nikoli popolnoma kolonializirano. Teoretik kulture Ben Highmore piše, da je »vsakodnevno življenje nejasen in problematičen izraz« in da ga lahko uporabljamo na več načinov. Po eni strani, pravi: »se sklicevanje na vsakodnevno življenje lahko nanaša prav na tiste prakse in življenja, ki so bila tradicionalno izpuščena iz zgodovinskih opisov; izrinil jih je plaz dogodkov, ki so ga sprožile elite. V tem smislu postane vsakodnevno življenje kratica za glasove ‘potlačenih’: žensk, otrok, migrantov in drugih.«11 Vendar Highmore tudi trdi, da po drugi strani »vsakodnevno življenje« ni nujno tudi sinonim za upiranje ideologiji. Dejansko je na neki ravni razmerje z ideologijo dvoumno: »Morda najbolj ključno vprašanje nedavne zgodovine kulturne in družbene teorije ... je zvedeno na dualnost med odporom in/ ali oblastjo. Ali predstavlja vsakodnevno pripravljalni teren 10 Natalie Bookchin, »Dancing Machines: An Interview with Natalie Bookchin«, Rhizome, 27. maj 2009. http://rhizome.org/editorial/2653. Dostop opravljen 18. avgusta 2009. 11 Ben Highmore, »Questioning Everyday Life«, v: Ben Highmore (ur.), The Everyday Life Reader, London: Routledge, 2002, str. 1.

4 drugi / 4 drugimi / 4 družbene / 4 enostavno / 4 gibe / 4 Girls / 4 gledamo / 4 imajo / 4 kamero / 4 kar / 4 konformnosti / 4 nikoli /

za konformnost ali pa gre za kraj, kjer se konformnosti izogibamo? ... Spada vsakodnevno v domeno podrejanja razmerjem moči ali pa prostor, v katerem se lahko tem razmerjem zoperstavljamo (ali pa se z njimi vsaj uspešno pogajamo)?«12 Upam si trditi, da film Ornament množice prikazuje prav to dvoumnost. Anonimni performerji dejansko izražajo svoje »glasove« in intence ne le prek svojih teles, temveč tudi s pomočjo svoje okolice; jasno je, da govorijo »pod« pragom javnega diskurza. Obenem pa se zdi, da so zasebni prostori že spremenjeni v »pripravljalni teren za konformizem«, saj plesalci zrcalijo telesne gibe, ki jih izvajajo priljubljene zvezde popularne kulture. Zdi se, da intence niso povsem njihove lastne. Poleg tega je »odpor«, ki ga najdemo v naključnih elementih teles in okolice plesalcev, kar je ironično, s strani izvajalcev povečini nenameren. S tem ko film Ornament množice združuje namerne performanse z na videz nenamernimi naključnostmi, potrjuje dejstvo, da se sodobno vsakodnevno življenje sicer brani tržne logike, hkrati pa jo tudi asimilira. Istočasno lahko filmarsko strategijo Bookchinove vidimo tudi kot sredstvo, s katerim lahko obvladamo digitalne arhive kot vire vednosti o družbeni sedanjosti, strategijo, ki ustvarja pomen skozi posebna nalaganja in odkriva podobnosti med zelo različnimi prostori ter tako razkriva tudi družbene tendence – in možnosti. V obdobju, v katerem se soočamo s tolikšno količino informacij, da težko izluščimo bistveno, nam iskanje in zbiranje filmskih in video drobcev, ki imajo neko skupno potezo, omogoča, da se osredotočimo tudi na to, kako različni so si, da opazimo in cenimo razlike med njimi, vidimo sledi vsakodnevnega življenja, ki služijo kot naključni kontekst, v katerem se odvija performans. Podobnost ustvarja ozadje, na katerem se zarisujejo razlike in tako na nek način »dobivajo pomen«. Čeprav lahko v podobnostih med številnimi prilaščenimi videi z YouTuba vidimo konformizem, lahko hkrati vidimo tudi vidik podobnosti, na katerem se izrisuje odpor konformizmu. Bookchinova nam s tem, ko vse te različne intence zbere in organizira v »celoto«, omogoči, da si lahko predstavljamo skupne cilje in pojav koalicij, za katere pa ni nujno, da so popolnoma homogeni. Poleg tega trdim, da predstavljajo v digitalnem obdobju tovrstne zgradbe podobnosti in različnosti ter ospredja in ozadja pogoj za vedenje – in osveščeno ravnanje. Če hočemo v labirintu ponavljanja in raznolikosti digitalnih arhivov razumeti sodobni svet in si zamisliti novo vrsto politike, potrebujemo Ariadnino nit. Dejansko se zdi, da predstavlja film Ornament množice model za začrtovanje – v meri, ki je bila pred pojavom digitalnih arhivov nemogoča in nezamisljiva – gibanja posebnega niza objektov oziroma dejanj, prek katerega se razkrijejo vsi naključni elementi, ki se gnetejo in vrtijo okoli enega samega konsistentnega niza. Iskanje vzorcev v digitalnih arhivih nam lahko pomaga odkriti in ustvariti en-osti, na podlagi katerih lahko tvorimo skup-nosti, ki v zadnji instanci presegajo logiko imitacije in potrošnje.

12 Prav tam, str. 5.

Dejansko film Bookchinove ne kaže le na to, da so digitalni mediji pomagali ustvariti »ornamente množice«, ki so običajno skriti pred pogledi, temveč tudi na to, da lahko nek drug uporabnik – kot ona – razkrije te ornamente in jih (ponovno) razporedi v usklajeno celoto. Z drugimi besedami, spletna mesta za deljenje videa so dala uporabnikom v roke orodje, s katerim lahko sami izkopavajo ornamente množice digitalne dobe; z njimi lahko poiščejo »neopazne elemente vsakdanjega življenja posameznika« in jih »postavijo pred oči množice«.13 Ali so sodobni plesalci na YouTubu taki, kot so bila dekleta iz skupine Tiller Girls – strašljiva vizija individualnih teles, ki si jih je nasilno prilastila neka večja celota, ki je niti ne vidijo in ki odseva negacijo posameznikove volje in zmožnosti delovanja v modernosti – to bomo še videli. Video Bookchinove lahko beremo kot odsev podobne negacije individualnih intenc, ki jih je mogoče tako enostavno subvertirati bodisi za potrebe Bookchinove bodisi za potrebe potrošniške družbe. Lahko pa ga beremo tudi kot znamenje, ki nam daje vedeti, da v primeru, ko ornamente množice »najdemo«, ne pa ustvarimo od zgoraj, v digitalnih arhivih obstaja možnost za kolektivnost in sodelovanje – in ne le gola kooptacija – ki čaka trenutek, v katerem se bodo lahko uporabniki združili zaradi lastnih namenov. ..

13 Jürgensen, »Mass and Meaning«, str. 21.

Citirana dela: Bookchin, Natalie, »Dancing Machines: An Interview with Natalie Bookchin«, Rhizome, 27. maj 2009. http://rhizome.org/editorial/2653. Dostop opravljen 18. avgusta 2009. Highmore, Ben, »Questioning Everyday Life«, v: Ben Highmore (ur.), The Everyday Life Reader, London: Routledge, 2002, str. 1–34. Jürgensen, Andreas, »Mass and Meaning«, v: Andreas Jürgensen in Karsten Ohrt (ur.), The Mass Ornament: Mass Phenomenon at the Turn of the Millenium, Odense, Danska: Kunsthallen Brandts Klaedefrabrik, 1998, str. 19–31. Kracauer, Siegfried, »The Mass Ornament«, v: The Mass Ornament: Weimar Essays, ur. Thomas Levin, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995 [1963]), str. 74–86. Manovich, Lev, The Language of New Media, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2001. Manovich, Lev, Software Takes Command, Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License, 2008. http://lab.softwarestudies.com/2008/11/softbook.html. Dostop opravljen 1. novembra 2011.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 3 1

174 the / 124 of / 114 and / 66 in / 61 to / 52 a / 52 that / 31 their / 26 are / 26 digital / 26 is / 23 as / 23 these / 22 for / 21 Bookchin / 20 be /

Subverted Intentions and the Potential for “Found” Collectivity in Natalie Bookchin’s Mass Ornament

Jaimie Baron

32 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

20 they / 19 which / 18 also / 18 into / 17 can / 16 not / 16 or / 16 with / 15 from / 15 have / 15 mass / 15 we / 14 individual / 14 on / 13 by / 13

Certain objects which in isolation have no deeper meaning are charged en masse with content; they have this meaning potential that is hidden by individualism, that is inconspicuous in the everyday life of the individual, and which is only rendered visible in the light of the mass.1 (Andreas Jürgensen)

n the past decade or so, digital archives have emerged both as sources from which filmmakers may appropriate documents for their own works and as venues for distributing and sharing these same works. Simultaneously, digital processes have expanded the ways in which documents found in digital archives may be repurposed. As theorist Lev Manovich has noted, digital technologies lend themselves to processes of recombination even at the level of the most basic computer functions.2 Indeed, the easy use of the cut-and-paste command encourages users to take fragments from different sources and combine them into new configurations. Manovich has further noted that all digital objects are equivalent in terms of their usability: still images, moving images, and sounds can all be converted into computer code.3 Thus, any kind of digital object that can be accessed by a user can be easily combined with other digital objects and appropriated into a new work. Indeed, one of the major tendencies that can be said to characterize media production in the digital era is appropriation.4 Established artists and amateurs alike are drawn to the endless storehouses of digital documents that can be easily accessed and reused in infinite ways. However, this tendency toward appropriation has taken a particular turn. Indeed, I would suggest the emphasis on understanding the world through archival documents is now largely dominated by a fascination with what I term “intentional disparity” – a play with the gap between what we imagine to be the original intended purpose of a document and its present usage. Various forms of appropriation film – from musical mash-ups and machinima to recut trailers and satirical compilations of recent news footage – abound on the Internet and have become full-fledged art forms. In all of these, the recognition of intentional disparity often generates critical (and sometimes comical) effect. I would hypothesize that one of the reasons for the current emphasis on intentional disparity in contemporary appropriation films may be the accessibility through the Internet of a seemingly endless supply of documents produced and posted by millions of users, each with their own reasons for making and sharing these videos. Through video-sharing sites like 1

2 3 4

Andreas Jürgensen, “Mass and Meaning”, in: The Mass Ornament: Mass Phenomenon at the Turn of the Millenium, ed. Andreas Jürgensen and Karsten Ohrt, Odense, Denmark: Kunsthallen Brandts Klaedefrabrik, 1998, p. 21. Lev Manovich, The Language of New Media, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2001, p. xxxi. Ibid., p. 20. For an elaborate discussion of remix culture, see Lev Manovich, Software Takes Command, Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License, 2008, pp. 191–222. http://lab.softwarestudies. com/2008/11/softbook.html. Accessed 1 November 2011.

YouTube where amateur performers of every stripe post their performances (or those of their cats, dogs, and children), we can look into a million little windows and see a fragment of someone’s everyday life – of which performing for YouTube has become a part – inside each one and imagine who they are and why they made and posted each particular clip. And, with digital technologies, we can potentially appropriate these fragments – that carry with them traces of possible previous intentions – and use them in any way we see fit.5 Natalie Bookchin’s Mass Ornament (2009), a single-channel split-screen video running on a seven-minute loop, plays with intentional disparity and offers us one model for navigation through the wealth – or deluge – of accessible and intentionally disparate materials unique to digital archives in a way that produces an emergent kind of specifically digital “sense.” Mass Ornament sifts through the brief fragments of lives on YouTube to find both congruities and incongruities in the bedrooms, living rooms, and basements of hundreds of anonymous young people of different genders, ethnicities, and (judging from the spaces in which we see them) social classes, performing for themselves and – via YouTube – for the whole world. These are not celebrities but rather amateurs acting out their imitations and aspirations in front of the camera. The loop begins with empty rooms and moves on to images of these various performers peering directly into the camera to make sure it is working before each individual begins to dance. Then, as we watch these individual amateurs trying out their moves, with no immediate audience other than the camera, the numbers of screens in the image begin to increase, each showing someone different. As more and more dancers appear, each alone in his or her own little square, Bookchin weaves their movements together so that at times they come into synch, making almost the exact same movements – presumably imitating the dance moves they have seen in music videos and popular culture. In unison, they twirl their bodies, shimmy up and down with their backs against a wall, and perform handstands and backbends. They look, at least for a few seconds at a time, like they are dancing together before they again drift apart into their own, individual performances. Bookchin further unifies these disparate clips by adding, at times, bits of the soundtracks from two 1935 films, Busby Berkeley’s Gold Diggers and Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will. The title of Bookchin’s film is clearly a reference to Siegfried Kracauer’s famous essay in which he wrote about the mass choreography of the Tiller Girls, a dance troupe that created geometric forms through the movement of their body parts. Kracauer saw this choreography as a symptom of the capitalist order, arguing that the mass ornament embodied the Taylorist logic of the factory, transforming human beings into a 5

This reference to intention does not suggest a naïve return to the intentional fallacy, in which a single author (or filmmaker) is positioned “behind” the work and is the arbiter of its meaning, but, rather, points to the fact that when we encounter a media work, we frequently infer or project an intention (however ambiguous) onto that work, which may or may not be in line with that of the actual author.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 3 3

everyday / 13 may / 13 through / 12 archives / 12 each / 11 Mass / 11 Ornament / 11 own / 10 at / 10 but / 10 conformity / 10 Indeed / 10 one /

hile each individual dances on his or her own and then posts it on YouTube, Bookchin, through her editing, choreographs the mass

dance. Our perception of intentional disparity derives from the fact that Bookchin has clearly taken all of these solo performances and turned them into a collective dance, transforming individual, isolated performers into a dance troupe. When the dancers suddenly come into synch, much of the pleasure of watching the film derives from the fact that this synchronicity could not have been anticipated by these performers, that Bookchin “found” the pieces and brought them together as one.

set of moving parts in the service of a larger pattern – a set of lines – which none of the participating performers could themselves see.6 Although Kracauer was writing about performances choreographed down to each identical step, however, the mass ornament in Bookchin’s piece is one which she found, collected, and synchronized. While each individual dances on his or her own and then posts it on YouTube, Bookchin, through her editing, choreographs the mass dance. Our perception of intentional disparity derives from the fact that Bookchin has clearly taken all of these solo performances and turned them into a collective dance, transforming individual, isolated performers into a dance troupe. When the dancers suddenly come into synch, much of the pleasure of watching the film derives from the fact that this synchronicity could not have been anticipated by these performers, that Bookchin “found” the pieces and brought them together as one. However, the “foundness” of this mass ornament also allows for an excess that was largely eliminated from choreographed performances such as those of the Tiller Girls. Indeed, in Mass Ornament, as compelling as the moments of synchronicity are, the differences between the dancers’ bodies, their individual movements, and the background images of the private spaces in which they dance are equally fascinating. While these dancers may not have intended – at least not primarily – to share the intimate spaces in which they live, the camera records the spaces surrounding the performers, in excess of their performative aspirations. We are permitted to look through these little windows to see where other people – whom we will probably never meet and whose names we likely will never know – live everyday: how messy their living rooms are, 6

Siegfried Kracauer, “The Mass Ornament”, in: The Mass Ornament: Weimar Essays, ed. Thomas Levin, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995 [1963], pp. 74–86. Although Kracauer does not mention them specifically in this essay, Berkeley’s musicals and the Nazi pageantry featured in Triumph, like the Tiller Girls’ performances, also contain elements of the mass ornament – the synchronization of bodies subsumed within a larger pattern. Thus, Bookchin’s choice of music is also relevant here.

3 4 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

what kind of wallpaper they picked out, what odds and ends they keep in their basements. We also witness the exact way each girl tosses her hair and shakes her hips and how each boy cocks his head and spins his body. Thus, another part of the pleasure of the piece lies in the play of differences that derive from the contingent elements of everyday existence that are visible seemingly in excess of the performers’ intentions. Indeed, Mass Ornament invites us to think about the presence of both similarity and difference, individuality and conformity, within archives in general and digital archives in particular. There have always been patterns and deviations to be discovered (and constructed) in material archives. However, the fact that anyone with a camera, a computer, and an Internet connection can post documents online has allowed a staggering number and variety of materials to accrue to a digital archive such as YouTube,7 while the accessibility and searchability of such sites offers us new means to trace and discover such patterns and deviations, not just in the official documents of revered institutions but in the brief public moments in otherwise anonymous and disparate private lives. In other words, digital archives expand the territory for tracing such patterns, and the search engines allow us to quickly and easily trace these patterns across this digital territory, which includes not only the missives of the rich and famous but also of the modest and unknown. (It is important to note, however, that the structures of the search engines also limit or at least guide what sort of patterns we may find. Bookchin says that, in order to find these videos, she used search terms such as “me dancing”, “dancing alone”, or “dancing in my room”.8 Her film, then, is a result of finding and following certain pathways, guided by the search engines, through the YouTube labyrinth.)

There are many who would argue that YouTube is not an archive because no one oversees its contents as a whole. However, I would argue that it is an archive in that it serves as a place where users may find, appropriate and reuse documents stored there. In conversation with the filmmaker, 14 August 2009, Visible Evidence Conference, USC.

10 them / 10 YouTube / 9 bodies / 9 dance / 9 film / 9 it / 9 life / 9 other / 9 patterns / 9 performers / 8 In / 8 performances / 8 same / 8

Natalie Bookchin: Mass Ornament, 2009

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 3 5

spaces / 8 this / 7 all / 7 dancers / 7 documents / 7 fact / 7 has / 7 ornament / 7 perform / 7 rather / 7 such / 7 themselves / 7 those /

hether contemporary YouTube dancers are like the Tiller Girls – a disturbing vision of individual bodies violently appropriated in the service of a larger whole they cannot even see, reflecting the negation of the individual will and agency within modernity – remains to be seen. We may read Bookchin’s video as a reflection of a similar negation of individual intentionalities that can be so easily subverted for other purposes, whether those of Bookchin or of consumer society. In tracing these visual patterns across disparate spaces and bringing isolated individuals into a collective movement, Bookchin’s film points simultaneously to the utopian promise of democracy, connection, and community that emerges in the digital realm and to the dystopian specter of conformity latent in these lonely video posts. In the 1930s, Kracauer was quite pessimistic about the mass ornament, suggesting that the participants themselves were unable to recognize the violent abstraction done to their own bodies.9 The mass ornament as it was formulated in the 1930s was not a collectivity of shared goals or intentions but rather of the suppression of individuality in the service of politics and the spectacle of bodies turned into parts. And, like the Tiller Girls, the individual performers in Bookchin’s film will likely never recognize their place in this new mass ornament as similarities are transformed into synchronies and individuality is lost within the ornament. Moreover, in addition to visual patterns, Bookchin’s film also reveals the social patterns inscribed within each of these individual performances, the fact that each video is not sui generis but, rather, emerges from a shared social and ideological system that encourages certain kinds of bodily movements and media practices. The tension between sameness and difference or solitariness and collectivity in Bookchin’s pieces is also that between individuality and conformity. On the one hand, the anonymous people in Mass Ornament – some of whom seem to have “talent” and others whom do not – are putatively expressing themselves as individuals. On the other hand, as Mass Ornament reveals, they are also simultaneously doing what everyone else seems to be doing – the same dance moves combined with the same impulse to post their videos online. The bodies of these dancers seem to have been colonized by the same hand – even before Bookchin’s hand entered the picture. Indeed, while there is great pleasure in watching these dancers perform “together” in Mass Ornament, there is also the 9

Kracauer, “The Mass Ornament”, p. 77.

3 6 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

nagging sense that we are also watching them attempt to be something other than themselves – presumably pop stars – expressing goals and intentions not of their own but, rather, of the corporations and interests that dominate mass media. As Bookchin notes in an interview: In seeming displays of personal expression, the YouTube dancers perform the same movements over and over, as if scripted, revealing the ways that popular culture is embodied and reproduced in and through individual bodies. They often perform utterly conventional gender roles, but the fact that they are performed – repeated, mimicked, and quoted again and again, undermines any pretence of their being real, authentic, and immutable.10 Thus, Mass Ornament begs the question of whether the democratizing force of digital archives, where anyone can post anything, is not also a force for conformity – or at least a reflection of the conformity that mass media attempts to impose on individuals as it transforms them into consumers. Indeed, these performers are distinguished neither by their names nor by the moves they perform – which is the very reason Bookchin can make them dance “together” – but only by the contingent aspects of their own embodied performances and the spaces in which they perform. And yet, these contingent elements seem to hold value as traces of everyday life, whose colonization is always incomplete. Cultural theorist Ben Highmore notes that “everyday life” is a “vague and problematic phrase” and that the term can be used in multiple ways. On the one hand, he writes: To invoke everyday life can be to invoke precisely those practices and lives that have been traditionally left out of historical accounts, swept aside by the onslaught of events instigated by elites. It becomes shorthand for voices from 10 Natalie Bookchin, “Dancing Machines: An Interview with Natalie Bookchin”, Rhizome, 27 May 2009. http://rhizome.org/editorial/2653. Accessed 18 August 2009.

7 together / 7 us / 7 video / 6 contingent / 6 hand / 6 her / 6 I / 6 intentions / 6 movements / 6 particular / 6 see / 6 social / 6 what / 6

“below”: women, children, migrants and so on.11 However, Highmore also notes that, on the other hand, “everyday life” is not necessarily synonymous with resistance to ideology. Indeed, on some level, its relation to ideology is ambiguous: Perhaps the most central question for the recent history of cultural and social theory…is levelled at the duality resistance and/or power. Does the everyday provide the training ground for conformity, or is it rather a place where conformity is evaded?...Is the everyday a realm of submission to relations of power or the space in which those relations are contested (or at least negotiated in interesting ways)?12 I would argue that Mass Ornament enacts precisely this ambiguity. These anonymous amateur performers are, in fact, expressing their own “voices” and intentions, not only through their bodies but also through their surroundings, clearly speaking from “below” the frequency of public discourse. At the same time, however, their private spaces do seem to have been already transformed into a “training ground for conformity” as they mirror the bodily motions they have seen the anointed stars of popular culture perform. Their intentions are not, it seems, entirely their own. Moreover, the “resistance” that persists in the contingent elements of their bodies and surroundings may be largely – and ironically – unintended on the part of the performer. Yet, in bringing together these intended performances and seemingly unintended contingencies, Mass Ornament attests to the fact that contemporary everyday life simultaneously resists and assimilates the logic of the market. At the same time, Bookchin’s filmmaking strategies can also be seen as a means of coming to grips with digital archives as sources of knowledge about the social present, generating meaning through particular accumulations, revealing similarities across vastly different spaces and, thereby, also revealing social tendencies – and potentialities. In an era when we are often faced with so much information that it is difficult to cull the important pieces from the noise, finding and gathering film and video fragments that share one particular feature allows us to focus on how they are also different, to notice and appreciate their variations, those traces of everyday life that serve as the contingent context in which the performance takes place. Similarity generates a background against which differences are foregrounded and made “meaningful” in some way. And, although we may read conformity in the similarities between the many appropriated YouTube videos, we may also recognize a horizon of similarity along which resistance to conformity may take shape. By gathering and coordinating all of these disparate intentionalities into a “whole,” Bookchin allows us to envision the possibility of shared aims and emergent coalitions – that do not, however, require complete homogeneity. 11

Ben Highmore, “Questioning Everyday Life”, in The Everyday Life Reader, ed. Ben Highmore (London: Routledge, 2002), p. 1. 12 Highmore, p. 5.

Moreover, I would argue that such structures of similarity and difference, foreground and background, are the condition for knowledge – and informed action – in the digital era. We need Ariadne’s string to lead us through the labyrinth of the digital archive in all of its repetition and heterogeneity in order to make sense of the contemporary world and to conceive of a new kind of politics. Indeed, Mass Ornament seems to me to be a model for charting – to a degree impossible and unimaginable before the emergence of digital archives – the movements of a particular set of objects or actions in order to reveal all of those contingent elements that adhere to and circulate around that one consistent set. By tracing patterns within digital archives, we may be able to uncover and construct unities that may become the basis for communities that ultimately exceed the logics of imitation and consumption. Indeed, Bookchin’s film suggests not only that digital media has helped to produce “mass ornaments” that are generally hidden from view, but also that another user – like her – can uncover and (re)assemble them into a synchronous whole. In other words, video-sharing sites have given users the tools to excavate the mass ornaments of the digital era themselves, locating the “inconspicuous in the everyday life of the individual” and rendering it “visible in the light of the mass.”13 Whether contemporary YouTube dancers are like the Tiller Girls – a disturbing vision of individual bodies violently appropriated in the service of a larger whole they cannot even see, reflecting the negation of the individual will and agency within modernity – remains to be seen. We may read Bookchin’s video as a reflection of a similar negation of individual intentionalities that can be so easily subverted for other purposes, whether those of Bookchin or of consumer society. However, we can also read it as signal that if these mass ornaments can be “found” rather than produced from above, then the potential for collectivity and collaboration – rather than simply co-optation – lurks within digital archives, awaiting a moment in which users may join together for their own purposes. ..

13 Jürgensen, p. 21.

Works Cited Bookchin, Natalie, “Dancing Machines: An Interview with Natalie Bookchin”, Rhizome, 27 May 2009. http://rhizome.org/editorial/2653. Accessed 18 August 2009. Highmore, Ben, “Questioning Everyday Life”, in: The Everyday Life Reader, edited by Ben Highmore, London: Routledge, 2002, pp. 1–34. Jürgensen, Andreas, “Mass and Meaning”, in: The Mass Ornament: Mass Phenomenon at the Turn of the Millenium, edited by Andreas Jürgensen and Karsten Ohrt, Odense, Denmark: Kunsthallen Brandts Klaedefrabrik, 1998, pp. 19–31. Kracauer, Siegfried, “The Mass Ornament”, in: The Mass Ornament: Weimar Essays, edited by Thomas Levin, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995 [1963], pp. 74–86. Manovich, Lev, The Language of New Media, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2001. Manovich, Lev, Software Takes Command, Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License, 2008. http://lab.softwarestudies.com/2008/11/softbook.html. Accessed 1 November 2011.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 37

119 in / 104 v / 57 ki / 48 na / 42 je / 38 umetnosti / 29 se / 28 kot / 27 so / 25 z / 25 za / 23 umetnost / 20 tudi / 18 s / 17 o / 17 tem / 16 V /

SODOBNA UMETNOST – ZNANILKA NOVIH DRUŽBENIH PARADIGEM? CONTEMPORARY ART – A HERALD OF NEW SOCIAL PARADIGMS? see page 44

Mojca Puncer

3 8 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

15 dela / 15 od / 15 po / 12 k / 11 lahko / 11 med / 11 pri / 10 da / 10 iz / 10 umetniških / 9 tako / 8 ko / 8 novih / 8 pa / 8 ter / 8 umetniškega /

Vloga medijev v sodobni umetnosti

ljub uveljavitvi koncepta intermedialnosti in izraza (novo)medijske umetnosti za označevanje novih umetniških zvrsti, vezanih zlasti na uporabo novih tehnologij, pa tudi na oblike umetnosti v javnem prostoru (računalniška umetnost, umetnost taktičnih medijev, biotehnološka umetnost, nova javna umetnost ipd.), v sodobni umetnosti na splošno velja, da medij postaja vse manj pomemben. V ospredje stopajo umetniška akcija, procesualnost, dogodkovnost, za katere so ključni elementi iz stvarnosti. Tovrstna sodobna umetnost se pojavlja v različnih oblikah, kakršne so skupnostna umetnost, spletna umetnost, instalacije in performativna umetnost. Kritična dimenzija in dokumentarne reference so pogosta dimenzija sodobne umetnosti in zadevajo socialne, ekonomske ali politične pogoje, v katerih živimo. »V sodobni estetski misli ‘kritična dimenzija’ umetnosti predstavlja najbolj pogost kriterij presojanja,« ugotavlja Nicolas Bourriaud v besedilu »Altermodernity« iz knjige The Radicant (2009).1

Za sodobno, aktivistično naravnano umetnost je značilna tesna povezanost z družbenimi okoliščinami; težnja po vplivanju na stvarnost vznika iz specifičnih socialnih struktur in stremljenj v skupnosti. V tem kontekstu umetnika bolj kot ustvarjanje umetniškega objekta zanima razkrivanje različnih področij družbene stvarnosti, zlasti v njenih zastrtih, potlačenih, perečih vidikih. Vendar pa stvarnosti ne moremo pojmovati kot medij, zato umetnost, ki vsebuje njene elemente, spodbija zahtevo po definiranju umetnosti z medijem. Tako v stvarnost zazrti sodobni umetniki problematizirajo tisto estetiko, ki se osredotoča na umetniški medij. Definiranje umetnosti z medijem je del formalistične estetske tradicije, ki sta jo postavila pod vprašaj že poststrukturalizem in feministična teorija s srede prejšnjega stoletja. Ena od lastnosti sodobne umetnosti je razmah del, ki jih ne moremo več zaobjeti s klasifikacijskimi termini tradicionalne umetnosti. Z ukinitvijo jasnih meja med različnimi umetniškimi oblikami in žanri ne moremo več formalno razlikovati med deli na osnovi uporabljenih tehnik, materialov in medijev. Ta problem stopnjujejo v telo usmerjene umetniške prakse, ki so jih v velikem valu v svet umetnosti prinesla emancipatorna šestdeseta leta. V tej zvezi je pomenljiv razmislek feminističnih teoretičark, ki pozivajo k vnovični obravnavi umetniških in širših kulturnih razsežnosti umetniških praks, ki izhajajo iz odprtih, utelešenih intersubjektivnih razmerij.2

Relacijska forma, utelešena intersubjektivna razmerja in umetniška stremljenja v skupnost

navezavi na problematiko intersubjektivnosti v umetniških praksah na kratko strnimo nasledke postobjektne koncepcije umetnosti, ki prek intenzivnih transformacij umetniške prakse z vključitvijo gledalca kot aktivnega udeleženca in soustvarjalca umetniškega dogodka vodi k vprašanjem, ki jih zastavlja t. i. relacijska estetika od devetdesetih let prejšnjega stoletja ter nadalje njena kritika. Gre za premike od pasivnega in distanciranega opazovalca k participaciji gledalca v umetniškem delu kot specifičnem estetskem procesu.3 S sintagmo relacijska estetika je francoski kurator in kritik Nicolas Bourriaud označil in problematiziral raziskovanje medčloveških odnosov znotraj področja sodobne umetnosti.4 Bourriaud poda tipologijo tovrstnih umetniških praks, ki vključuje stike in zmenke, družabnosti in srečanja. Od vpeljave koncepta relacijske estetike (1998), t. j. estetske teorije, ki presoja umetniška dela na podlagi medčloveških odnosov, so se pojavile že tudi številne kritike5 : medtem ko je govora o publiki z vidika idealnih oblik »srečevanja« v specifičnem galerijskem kontekstu, so medčloveška razmerja (komunikacija, sodelovanje) popredmetena tudi na številnih področjih umetnosti in kulture. Ideologija ekonomskega profita spodbuja tekmovalnost namesto sodelovanja in atomizacijo namesto povezovanja.6 Pri tem smo priče popredmetenja novih produkcijskih oblik z razmahom t. i. »nematerialnega« oz. kognitivnega dela. V diskurzu relacijske estetike lahko, kljub sklicevanju na materialistično tradicijo, prepoznamo utajo oziroma idealizacijo kapitalističnega produkcijskega načina, kjer med drugim umanjka analiza distribucijske plati procesa. Računalnik je v sodobnosti glavno sredstvo, ki omogoča postindustrijsko organizacijo funkcije avtorja v stalnem odnosu povratne zveze s publiko, ki komunicira in »participira«. Tako na primer Brian Holmes relacijski estetiki očita prilastitev novih produkcijskih in potrošniških načinov, ki jih promovirajo novi umetnostni sistemi v imenu navidezne gledalčeve svobode, spregleda pa potencialnost participatornih umetniških projektov v smislu izmenjave idej, informacij, soustvarjanja vsebin, vstopanja v vsakdanjo stvarnost itn.7 Odprto ostaja vprašanje prenosa poudarka od zaključenega umetniškega dela k odprtim družbenim relacijam z vidika estetskega oz. političnega potenciala. Odprta ostaja tudi razlaga kvalitete teh odnosov. V tej zvezi so produktivne kritike, ki s poudarjanjem antago3

4 5

6 1 Nicolas Bourriaud, The Radicant, New York: Lukas & Sternberg, 2010, str. 25. 2 Glej npr. Amelia Jones, Body art: uprizarjanje subjekta, Ljubljana: Maska, Študentska založba, 2002, str. 43.

Tu nas zanima zlasti tista estetska procesualnost, ki zadeva emancipacijo, t. i. delitev čutnega in politiko percepcije, o katerih razmišlja Jacques Rancière. Glej Jacques Rancière, Nevedni učitelj. Pet lekcij o intelektualni emancipaciji, Ljubljana: Zavod EN-KNAP, 2005; Emancipirani gledalec, Ljubljana: Maska, 2010; The Politics of Aesthetics. The Distribution of the Sensible, London: Continuum, 2004. Nicolas Bourriaud, Relacijska estetika. Postprodukcija, Ljubljana: Maska, 2007. Glej npr. teze s simpozija v muzeju MACBA v Barceloni leta 2005: Another Relationality. Rethinking Art as Experience, http://transform.eipcp.net/Actions/discursive/anotherrelationality, dostopno 28. 10. 2011. Glej npr. Aldo Milohnić, Maja Breznik, Majda Hrženjak in Bratko Bibič, Kultura d.o.o.: materialni pogoji kulturne produkcije, Ljubljana: Mirovni inštitut, 2005. Glej npr. Brian Holmes, http://transform.eipcp.net/transversal/1106/holmes/hr, dostopno 28. 10. 2011.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 3 9

7 sodobnosti / 7 vse / 6 bolj / 6 Hirschhorn / 6 kjer / 6 kulture / 6 medijev / 6 ne / 6 oblik / 6 oblike / 6 odpora / 6 skupnosti / 6 sodobne /

ove oblike umetnosti v javnem prostoru so lahko tudi ideja, performans, (i)legalna intervencija, ulična, socialno angažirana umetnost, so mobilne, efemerne in prekarne. Tovrstna umetnost vnovič sproža vprašanja avtonomije ter vloge umetnika v artikulaciji javnega prostora. Na ta način problematizira tudi koncepcije sodobnega galerijskega prostora, ki ga želi postaviti v polje razmisleka in ne reprezentacije ter tako izpostavi vprašanje o možnosti »revolucionarne« geste v sodobnosti. V nadaljevanju nas bo zanimalo razumevanje umetnosti kot območja oblikovanja t. i. kritičnega korpusa.

4 0 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

nizmov in iskanja alternativnih oblik participacije namesto na neproblematični pripadnosti začasni skupnosti temeljijo na motnji in napetosti.8 Videti je, kot da je razpravo o emancipaciji (političnega) subjekta v razmerju do skupnosti v sodobnosti nadomestila relacija, vpeta v idealistični govor o političnem; nadalje relacija pri Borriaudu ni premišljena skozi ekonomski model, saj jo obkroža diskurz o idealiziranem »vmesnem prostoru.«9 Tudi ko je govora o kulturi didžejev in programerjev in s tem povezani demokratizaciji izraznih oblik,10 se gibljemo na formalno-idealni ravni medčloveških odnosov, ki spregleda vrsto praks, ki se ukvarjajo s participacijo in komunikacijo na podlagi taktične uporabe novih tehnologij11 itn. Tudi tu gre za različne oblike dela – materialnega in »nematerialnega«, kognitivnega (intelektualnega) – ki dosežejo neko vidnost in pripoznanje zgolj takrat, ko pripadajo določenemu trgu dela. Ker tudi pomemben del dela v svetu umetnosti in kulture ostaja neviden, je po prepričanju sodobnega francoskega filozofa Jacquesa Rancièra treba poudariti, »da je kategorija dela tudi politična kategorija, ki ima opraviti z vidnostjo«12 . Na drugem mestu Rancière spomni, da nas je že Marx naučil, »kako dešifrirati hieroglife, napisane na telo tržnega blaga, ki je navidezno brez zgodbe, in kako prodreti v proizvodni pekel, skrit za stavki ekonomije.«13 Kritiki in interpreti idealizirane relacijske forme v svetu umetnosti in kulture se po eni strani sklicujejo na Rancièra, po drugi pa na italijanska neomarksista Antonia Negrija in Paola Virna in na koncept nematerialnega in kognitivnega dela.14 Nedvomno gre pri preizpraševanju produkcijskih pogojev za enega ključnih vidikov relacijske forme, s tem da je vprašljiv koncept samega nematerialnega dela.15 Prehod 8

Glej Claire Bishop, »Relational aesthetics«, »Relational antagonism«, v: C. Bishop, Installation Art: A Critical History, London: Tate Publishing, 2005, str. 116–123. 9 Bourriaud, Relacijska estetika. Postprodukcija, str. 17–18. 10 Prav tam, str. 96: Postprodukcija je neke vrste nadaljevanje Relacijske estetike, obe deli pa izhajata iz sprememb, ki jih prinaša informacijska družba v načine produkcije, oblikovanje relacij, modelov družbenosti itn. 11 Geert Lovink, »Posodobitev taktičnih medijev«, v: Maska, letn. 24, št. 119–120 (2009), str. 32. Izraz »taktični mediji« sicer označuje povezanost umetnosti in aktivizma; pojavijo se v zgodnjih 90. letih, z razširitvijo medijskega aktivizma in velikega zanimanja umetnikov za nove tehnologije (vključno z vse cenejšo opremo tipa naredi sam); gre za kratkoročni koncept, ki je nastal iz odpora do ideologij in se zaveda svoje začasnosti. 12 Léa Gauthier, Jean-Marc Adolphe, »Demokracija kot nujen škandal: intervju z Jacquesom Rancièrom«, v: Maska, letn. 19, št. 86–87 (2004), str. 48. 13 Jacques Rancière, »Usoda podob«, v: Likovne besede / Teoretska priloga, št. 83– 84, 2008, str. 7. 14 Glej Paolo Virno, Michael Hardt (ur.), Radical Thought in Italy: A Potential Politics, Minneapolis in London: University of Minnesota Press, 1996. 15 Za nas je tu zanimivo, da Maurizio Lazzarato v besedilu »Nematerialno delo« (v: Virno in Hardt (ur.), Radical Thought in Italy: A Potential Politics, str. 144) predlaga pojem estetske proizvodnje: »Pri poskusih, da bi razumeli proces oblikovanja družbene komunikacije in njena podrejanja ‘ekonomskemu’, je koristneje kot ‘materialni’ model proizvodnje uporabiti estetski model, ki vključuje avtorja, reprodukcijo in recepcijo /.../ ‘Avtor’ mora izgubiti svojo individualno dimenzijo in se pretvoriti v proces industrijsko organizirane proizvodnje (z delitvijo dela, naložbami, naročili itn.), ‘reprodukcija’ postaja množična reprodukcija, organizirana v skladu z imperativi profitabilnosti, medtem ko publika (‘recepcija’) postaja potrošnik/komunikator.« Prim. tudi Sergio Bologna, »Proti napačni teoriji nematerialnega dela«, http://dpu.mirovni-institut.si/8letnik/bologna.php, dostopno 28. 10. 2011: avtor poudarja, da delo ne more biti nematerialni proces, saj delati pomeni porabljati fizično in intelektualno energijo, družbene odnose, prilagajanje ljudem, hierarhiji, disciplini, pomeni fleksibilnost itn. Takšno govorjenje po Bologni mistificira kapitalistične družbene odnose, to zmoto pa je pogosto mogoče najti v delih številnih Negrijevih učencev, med katerimi je tudi Lazzarato. Delo, pojmovano kot človeška aktivnost na splošno, zanj nima nič skupnega z marksistično teorijo, kjer je delo vedno povezano z družbenimi pogoji. Blago je lahko nematerialno, delo ne; če definiramo delo kot »nematerialno«,

5 Bourriaud / 5 družbene / 5 družbi / 5 estetika / 5 gre / 5 koncepta / 5 kontekstu / 5 kritičnega / 5 kulturnih / 5 Na / 5 nematerialnega /

k postfordističnemu kapitalizmu po Virnu in Negriju pogojuje prav pojav »nematerialnega« in kognitivnega dela kot nove produkcijske paradigme, v kateri afektivno, komunikacijsko in relacijsko postanejo orodja ali tehnologije produkcijskega procesa. V središču se torej znajdejo relacijski, komunikacijski, afektivni, kolaborativni in »nematerialni« vidiki, ki poganjajo delovanje razcepljene, utelešene umetniške subjektivitete v postindustrijski kapitalistični družbi. Nasledek teh procesov je med drugim ta, da so koncept avtonomije umetnosti zamenjali koncepti, kot so intertekstualnost, intermedialnost, inter- oz. transdisciplinarnost in relacionalnost. Na podlagi kritike relacijske forme lahko razmišljamo o njenih potencialih ter o nadaljnjih anticipacijah načinov, na katere lahko umetnost naseljuje javno sfero in posega v skupnost. Tovrstni projekti praviloma niso namenjeni samo izolirani galerijski uporabi, saj z različnimi strategijami in taktikami vstopajo v širši javni prostor in so dostopni tudi na spletu ter tako razširjajo svojo zmožnost vzburkanja širše javnosti in sprožanja sprememb v družbi.

Prekarnost oblik sodobne umetnosti in oblikovanje kritičnega korpusa

lobalna družbena gibanja zahtevajo družbene spremembe spričo vse večje prekarnosti, ki je značilna tako za migrantsko kot tudi za kognitivno delo. Danes se nam zastavlja pereče vprašanje usode kreativnega potenciala številnih umetniških in kulturnih skupnosti, ki zadeva status samih ustvarjalcev in kulturnih delavcev, njihovo obsojenost na prekarnost življenja in dela. Prekarnost lahko nadalje povežemo tudi s figuro homo sacer, kakršno zasnuje italijanski filozof Giorgio Agamben, ko o njej razpravlja skozi optiko golega življenja.16 Agamben na podlagi dognanj o biopolitiki usmeri pozornost v zožitev življenja na zgolj živalsko dimenzijo v t. i. izrednem stanju, ki je postalo nekaj običajnega. V središču politične arene se tako znajde golo življenje, t. j. življenje brez etične vrednosti. Koncept homo sacer prihaja iz rimskega prava in dopušča ubijanje ljudi s tem posebnim pravnim statusom, v sodobnem svetu pa obeležuje Jude v koncentracijskih taboriščih in ljudi z nejasnim pravnim statusom, kot so begunci, prosilci za azil, nezakoniti priseljenci in vojni ujetniki v zaporu ameriškega oporišča Guantanamo, ki se vsi znajdejo v območjih »izrednega stanja«. V tranziciji iz postsocializma v kapitalizem se je večina umetnikov – tako kot sicer večina ljudi – prisiljena prilagoditi novim razmeram, sicer so obsojeni na marginalizacijo. Zlasti pri ustvarjalcih na področju t. i. novih medijev je v zadnjih dveh desetletjih, t. j. v letih tranzicije in intenzivnih globalizacijskih nam namreč uide ključni fenomen nove ekonomije, povečanje delovnega časa. 16 Glej Giorgio Agamben, Homo sacer: suverena oblast in golo življenje, Ljubljana: Študentska založba, 2004.

procesov, zaznati ambivalentno držo, ki niha med zavedanjem o nemožnosti odpora in iskanjem vzporednih prostorov in načinov delovanja. Na to iskanje je potrebno navezati razpravo o alternativnih načinih uprostorjenja in utelešenja ter o poskusih zaseganja novih družbenih prostorov. Nove oblike umetnosti v javnem prostoru so lahko tudi ideja, performans, (i)legalna intervencija, ulična, socialno angažirana umetnost, so mobilne, efemerne in prekarne. Tovrstna umetnost vnovič sproža vprašanja avtonomije ter vloge umetnika v artikulaciji javnega prostora. Na ta način problematizira tudi koncepcije sodobnega galerijskega prostora, ki ga želi postaviti v polje razmisleka in ne reprezentacije ter tako izpostavi vprašanje o možnosti »revolucionarne« geste v sodobnosti. V nadaljevanju nas bo zanimalo razumevanje umetnosti kot območja oblikovanja t. i. kritičnega korpusa.17 V tej luči je poslanstvo umetnosti, ki se upira obstoječim političnim, kulturnim, estetskim in drugim normam, ustvariti pogoje za novo mišljenje, ki bo zarisalo pot spremembam v družbi. Angažma, aktivizem v sodobni umetnosti (v tem kontekstu zlasti v navezavi na različne marginalizirane skupnosti) namesto pasivnega gledalca in potrošnika kulturnih dobrin nagovarjata in sooblikujeta kritičnega, potencialno aktivnega udeleženca v gibanjih za bolj pravično družbo.18 Zahtevo po angažirani oziroma aktivistični umetnosti pa velja obravnavati skupaj z aktualizacijo zahteve, ki jo je v šestdesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja posebej izpostavil Adorno, namreč zahteve po avtonomni umetnosti kot mestu odpora.19 Estetiki, ki sledijo Adornovemu vodilu (med njimi Gerard Vilar)20 , v sodobnih umetniških projektih, kakršni so projekti v Parizu živečega švicarskega umetnika Thomasa Hirschhorna21 , odkrivajo pritrditev Adornovi zahtevi po ohranjanju določene avtonomije umetnosti in s tem tudi ločnice med umetnostjo in kulturno industrijo. Hirschhorn za razliko od številnih umetnikov, ki delujejo v skupnostih z namenom zlitja umetniške in družbene prakse, vseskozi poudarja pomen avtonomije umetnosti. Po drugi strani njegovi projekti, kot so Deleuze Monument (Avignon, 2000), Bataille Monument (Kassel, 2002) in Musée Précaire Albinet (Pariz, 2004), gradijo predvsem na sodelovanju z delavskim slojem in imigrantskimi skupnostmi ter tako izrisujejo aktualno prekarno situacijo vse večjega deleža populacije v mestih po Evropi. Projekt 24h Foucault (2004) prenese ta kolaborativni pristop na filozofe, pesnike in glasbenike v pariški Palais de Tokyo.22 17 Glej Hirshhorn, Establishing a Critical Corpus, Zürich: JRP/Ringier, 2011. 18 Konceptualno ozadje te zahteve ponuja Jacques Rancière z razpravo o emancipiranem gledalcu: glej J. Rancière, Emancipirani gledalec, Ljubljana: Maska, 2010. 19 Theodor W. Adorno, »Commitment«, v: C. Harrison, P. Wood (ur.), Art in Theory, 1900–1990, An Anthology of Changing Ideas, Oxford in Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers, 1993, str. 763–764. 20 Gerard Vilar se v referatu »Deartification, De-aesthetization, and Politization of Contemporary Art«, predstavljenem na V. mediteranskem kongresu estetike (Cartagena, Španija, 4.–8. julij 2011), 8. julija 2011, osredotoči na delo Thomasa Hirschhorna Crystal of Resistance za švicarski paviljon na Beneškem bienalu 2011 (www. crystalofresistance.com, dostopno 28. 10. 2011). 21 Glej Hirschhorn, nav. delo. 22 Glej Thomas Hirschhorn, »24h Foucault, 2004«, v: Claire Bishop (ur.), Participation, London: Whitechapel; Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press, 2006, str. 154–157.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 41

5 ni / 5 ostaja / 5 oz / 5 Pri / 5 projekti / 5 relacijske / 5 sodobni / 5 stvarnosti / 5 umetniške / 5 vidika / 4 avtonomije / 4 del / 4 do /

Medtem ko Bourriaud Hirschhornovo delo povezuje s pojavom bolšjega trga kot »prevladujoče umetniške oblike devetdesetih let,«23 se sam Hirschhorn pri svojem pristopu k javni umetnosti poskuša distancirati od prevladujoče struje družbeno angažirane umetnosti, ki je opremljena z oznakami, kot so relacijska estetika, participacija, skupnostna umetnost (kljub razglašanju krepitve družbenih vezi so ti vidiki pogosto instrumentalizirani) in poudarja »prisotnost in produkcijo« v določeni skupnosti; svoje delo razume v kontekstu poglabljanja koncepta participacije, kakršnega zasnavlja v sodelovanju z umetnostno zgodovinarko in kritičarko Claire Bishop.24 Bourriaud skuša s pomočjo Hirschhornovih projektov izluščiti prevladujoči »vizualni model«, ki spominja na tržnico, kjer gre za »začasno in nomadsko zbiranje dvomljivega blaga in izdelkov različnega izvora«.25 Pri tem so za formalni vidik ključne metode asemblaža, reciklaže in estetika kaotične razmestitve. Za Hirschhornova dela je po Bourriaudu ključen prikaz prostorov menjave, kjer se posameznik sreča z družbenim. Za njegove instalacije je značilna uporaba vsakdanjih materialov, aluminijaste folije in plastičnega filmskega traku, izrezkov iz revij in časopisov, političnih letakov, tv ekranov, medijskih podob, knjig in običajnih predmetov, vpetih v nejasno formo, ki spominja na monstruozni organizem in odzvanja kot komentar o sedanji ekonomiji. Hirschhorn svoje projekte označuje kot prekarne tako zaradi njihovega negotovega statusa kot zaradi omejenega trajanja (nekatera dela so pristala na ulici, kjer so bila na voljo naključnim mimoidočim ipd.); pri tem prekarnost razločuje od efemernosti kot lastnosti naravnih procesov, za razliko od družbenih dogajanj, ki so v središču njegovega zanimanja.26 Nedavno je izraz prekarnost prešel v obsežno uporabo pri označevanju družbenoekonomske negotovosti, v katero je zapadlo veliko število delavcev v neoliberalnem kapitalizmu; v zadnjem desetletju smo priče masivnemu porastu prekariata kot produkta postfordistične ekonomije. V soočanju s posledicami »prekarnosti« in pogostih izbruhov »izrednega stanja« Hirschhorn artikulira svoje razumevanje teh pojavov skozi avtonomni vizualno-diskurzivni jezik, ki pa ni samozadosten, saj poziva posameznika k prevpraševanju njegovih lastnih stališč in odločitev za delovanje. Specifična estetika njegovih del (kolaži, asemblaži, monumenti, oltarji, kioski ipd.) vztraja v napetosti med zahtevami po avtonomiji, participaciji in poseganju v javno sfero in je vseskozi obeležena s težnjo po doseganju neekskluzivne publike. Hirschhorn razume umetnost kot avtonomno in univerzalno, kot mesto odpora proti kulturnim, estetskim in političnim normam; pri tem političnost povezuje z razumevanjem prekarnosti, ne v smislu koncepta, marveč 23 Bourriaud, Relacijska estetika. Postprodukcija, str. 107–110. 24 Glej Claire Bishop, »And That Is What Happened There«, v: Hirschhorn, Establishing a Critical Corpus, str. 7–98 (intervjuji Bishopove s šestimi udeleženci v Hirschhornovem projektu The Bijlmer Spinoza-Festival, ki je potekal v Amsterdamu leta 2009, z barom, knjižnico, predavanji, delavnicami, lastnim časopisom, gledališko igro itn.). Gre za družbeno angažirano umetnost, za katero so ključni udeleženci (zlasti iz marginaliziranih skupnosti) in ki kritično prevprašuje različne vidike participacije (npr. ali so udeleženci v posameznih umetniških projektih ustrezno zastopani kot resnično enakovredni sodelavci, ki so za svoje delo primerno plačani itn.). 25 Bourriaud, Relacijska estetika. Postprodukcija, str. 107. 26 Glej Hal Foster, »Toward a Grammar of Emergency«, v: Hirschhorn, Establishing a Critical Corpus, str. 163.

4 2 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

kot določeno stanje in potencialnost. Hirschhorn v značilne prostore globalizirane ekonomije vpeljuje elemente refleksije in upora s poudarjanjem antihierarhije, egalitarnosti vidnosti in estetike prekarnosti, ki nas po njegovem prepričanju lahko pripeljejo k politični umetnosti v sedanjosti. Večino gradiva za svoje strategije najde v »košu za odpadke kapitalizma«, ki si ga na nek način vsi delimo.

Sodobna umetnost kot znanilka novih družbenih paradigem?

sodobnih razmerah in globalnem kontekstu je lahko angažirana oziroma aktivistična umetnost ena od sil, ki v pogojih globalne kolonizacije neoliberalizma skuša prispevati k demokratizaciji in večji socialni pravičnosti v družbi. Na tem mestu nas ne zanima nasilno uporništvo, ampak vloga kulturnoumetniškega angažmaja pri mobilizaciji emancipatornih sil. Izbira umetniškega medija je v funkciji posredovanja različnih individualnih in politiziranih sporočil, pričevanj, lokalnih in univerzalnih tem. Umetnost je v tem smislu nenasilno sredstvo v oblikovanju »kritičnega korpusa«. Tovrstna umetnost naseljuje javni prostor (zidove, ulice, v sodobnosti vse bolj tudi internet) in pomeni simbolične geste nasprotovanja oblikam zatiranja. Postmoderna (kot tudi predmoderna) umetnost ima – za razliko od modernizma – vselej neko funkcijo, ki ni vezana zgolj na raziskovanje samega umetniškega medija. Pri tem gre za projekte, ki mestoma poskušajo prestopiti iz (relativno avtonomnega) polja umetnosti v polje družbenega. Sodobna umetnost vztraja v napetosti med avtonomno umetnostjo in politično angažirano umetnostjo in tako ostaja v nekem (minimalnem) reprezentativnem razmerju do družbene stvarnosti, ki je vselej družbeno specifično. Pri tem se je treba vprašati o pomenu in učinkih intenzivnih procesov globalizacije, katerih sinonim je »transnacionalno« v pogojih neokolonializma in neoliberalnega kapitalizma. V tej zvezi se lahko navežemo na dobro znane koncepte Deleuza in Guattarija, kot so manjšinskost, mikropolitike, nomadizem in transverzalnost: v sodobnosti manjšinskost praviloma ni več svobodna, marveč prisilna izbira, medtem ko figura nomada pomeni predvsem medkulturnega migranta, prekarnega delavca, ki se v danih ekonomsko-tehnoloških in političnih pogojih globalizacije in virtualizacije sveta giblje, živi in ustvarja na izmuzljivih vmesnih področjih med kulturnimi lokacijami, njihovimi praksami, identitetami in objekti. Gerald Raunig pokaže, kako pri ponovni oživitvi figure nomada konec devetdesetih let prejšnjega stoletja prihaja do istovetenja prostovoljne in prisilne migracije, medtem ko se zavzema za ofenzivno nomadsko prakso oz. za »prekarnost v ofenzivi«.27 Pritrdimo lahko tudi Marchartovim pomislekom

27 Gerald Raunig, Umetnost in revolucija: umetniški aktivizmi v dolgem 20. stoletju, Ljubljana: Maska, 2011, str. 176 (ključni primer je tu aktivistična gledališka skupina VolksTheaterKarawane, glej »VolxTheaterKarawane in transverzalni preplet«, str. 157–181).

4 družbenih / 4 jih / 4 kako / 4 kognitivnega / 4 medtem / 4 namesto / 4 nas / 4 odnosov / 4 oziroma / 4 podlagi / 4 praks / 4 prakse /

glede povezovanja koncepta transverzalnosti (Guattari, 1964) kot ahierarhičnega, acentričnega, transnacionalnega, transdisciplinarnega načina povezovanja s protesti proti ekonomski globalizaciji, ki mu manjka refleksija o formah organizacije in kapacitetah za akcijo.28 Toda po drugi strani lahko pokažemo tudi na mikropolitične nastavke transverzalnosti in na zbliževanje umetniškega in »revolucionarnega« postajanja v sodobnosti.29 Umetniški projekti, ki izhajajo iz izkušnje konceptualne umetnosti, se pogosto nanašajo na dejstvo, da je umetnost zmožna vzpostaviti situacijo, v kateri usmerja pogled na spregledane vidike družbene stvarnosti. Individualne in kolektivne konceptualne akcije so splet nenehnih reinterpretacij in analize lastnega dela. Posebno skupino predstavljajo dela, ki se ukvarjajo z analizo družbeno ideoloških simbolov, razmerij moči v družbi v navezavi na utopične prakse modernistične oz. avantgardne umetnosti. Del umetnosti ohranja določeno utopično dimenzijo kot zavest o možnih alternativah v sodobnosti, kjer je vse bolj ključna nova tehnologija. Številni teoretiki sodobno umetnost reflektirajo v funkciji kulture in poudarjajo, da je tradicionalna umetniško-estetska funkcija postala zastarela oziroma sekundarna, medtem ko sodobna »novomedijska« umetnost sodeluje pri proizvodnji kulturnih inovacij.30 Nove funkcije umetnosti se vzpostavljajo zaradi prehoda od umetniškega artefakta k umetniški storitvi, ki je vselej v neki specifični funkciji kulture. To se kaže tudi v tem, da danes ni več poudarek na razstavni, marveč na komunikacijski vrednosti, ki se utrjuje zlasti v interakciji sodobne umetnosti z novo ekonomijo in medmrežnim aktivizmom. Subverzivni potencial v sodobnih umetniških praksah lahko osvetlimo z vidika taktičnih medijev in drugih odporniških in aktivističnih strategij, ki pa so v primerjavi z velikimi sistemi moči le točke minimalnega odpora (Peljhan)31 , zgolj mikropolitike.

jev). Umetnost s poskusi upiranja logiki kapitala privzema nove funkcije. V času pomanjkanja domišljije in alternativnih pogledov so posebnega pomena kreativne oblike odpora, ki se razlikujejo od preteklih oblik; pojavljajo se novi načini oblikovanja umetniških skupin in politiziranja umetnosti in kulture. Poleg intervencij v javnem prostoru je značilna uporaba tehnologije v radikalnem slogu. Tu gre tudi za primere, ki uporabljajo metode protestnih in direktnih akcij, kjer so ključni koncepti uporabe lastnega telesa. Raziskovalno in akcijsko naravnanih praks se vse pogosteje lotevajo tudi domači umetniki ter tako udejanjajo obrat sodobne (vizualne) umetnosti od objektov k intersubjektivnim razmerjem, da bi prispevali k oblikovanju kritičnega, potencialno aktivnega udeleženca v gibanjih za svetovno pravičnost. Pri tem je pomenljivo, kako z vidika razstav 29. grafičnega bienala, ki postavljajo v središče umetniški dogodek, umanjka referenca na aktualno protestno dogajanje, naperjeno proti prevladi finančnega kapitalizma, kakršno se odvija tudi pred ljubljansko borzo. Tako ostaja svet umetnosti na Slovenskem z vidika letošnje osrednje razstavne prireditve na temo »dogodka« na varni razdalji, v radikalni razločenosti od dogodkovnosti protesta, nezmožen reflektirati povezavo med kreativnostjo in odporom. ..

Umetniško-diskurzivni projekti, ki nastajajo v sodelovanju s strokovnjaki, z družbenimi skupinami in aktivisti iz različnih okolij, omogočajo vpogled v mehanizme zatiranja in posamezne oblike odpora obstoječim družbenim razmerjem moči. Krepi se ideja mreženja, ki povezuje umetnike z različnimi pobudami in gibanji v imenu dostopanja do javne sfere, ki se vedno bolj privatizira in krči. Eden od odgovorov je skvoterski aktivizem, ki ga pri odpiranju alternativne javne sfere vse bolj nadomešča novomedijski aktivizem (uporaba taktičnih medi28 Oliver Marchart, »The Crossed Place of the Political Party«, http://www.republicart. net/disc/empire/marchart02_en.htm, dostopno 28. 10. 2011. Nedavno sta izraz uporabila Michael Hardt in Antonio Negri, kot tudi kritiki, kot je Gerald Raunig, da bi označili nov teren za odprto sodelovanje med različnimi aktivističnimi, umetniškimi, družbenimi in političnimi praksami. Za Rauniga pri teh načinih sodelovanja ne gre za solidarnost med akterji in področji ali za interdisciplinarnost med polji, marveč za nereprezentacijsko obliko povezovanja. Glej tudi Susan Kelly, http://www.republicart.net/disc/mundial/kelly01_en.htm, dostopno 28. 10. 2011. 29 Glej Raunig, Umetnost in revolucija, str. 161. 30 Glej Janez Strehovec, »Od umetniškega artefakta k umetniški storitvi. Konceptualizacija interakcij sodobne umetnosti z novo ekonomijo in medmrežnim aktivizmom«, v: Filozofski vestnik, letn. 24, št. 1 (2003), str. 183–200. 31 Glej Marko Peljhan, »Strategije minimalnega odpora – analiza taktičnega delovanja v družbi kontrole«, v: S. Glavan (ur.), Zbornik Svet umetnosti 1999 (Geopolitika in umetnost / Tečaj za kustose sodobne umetnosti), Ljubljana: Zavod za odprto družbo – Slovenija, Sorosov center za sodobne umetnosti – Ljubljana, 1999, str. 55–59.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 4 3

286 the / 264 of / 129 and / 78 in / 75 to / 71 art / 67 a / 46 is / 33 as / 33 which / 31 that / 29 artistic / 27 are / 27 by / 27 contemporary / 25 on

CONTEMPORARY ART – A HERALD OF NEW SOCIAL PARADIGMS?

Mojca Puncer Translated by Špela Drnovšek Zorko

4 4 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

/ 21 with / 20 from / 20 new / 19 social / 16 The / 15 for / 15 or / 15 we / 14 also / 14 an / 14 In / 14 this / 14 within / 13 form / 13 forms / 13 into /

The role of media in contemporary art

espite the establishment of the intermediality concept and of the phrase (new)media art to denote new artistic practices, particularly those linked to the use of new technologies and forms of art in the public sphere (computer art, tactical media art, biotechnological art, new public art, etc.), it is generally accepted in contemporary art that the medium is losing its significance. Instead, the artistic action, the event and processuality are stepping into the forefront, along with their crucial material elements. This type of contemporary art appears in a number of forms, including community art, net art, performative art and installations. One of the frequent aspects of contemporary art is made up of documentary references and a critical dimension that deal with the social, economic or political conditions in which we reside. “In contemporary aesthetic thought, the ‘critical dimension’ of art represents the most common criterion of judgment,” notes Nicolas Bourriaud in his text “Altmodernity”, published in The Radicant (2009).1 Contemporary art with an activist bent is characterised by a close connection with social circumstances, by the drive to influence the appearance of some form of impetus arising out of given social structures and by a tendency toward community. In this context, the artist is more interested in uncovering various spheres of social reality than in creating an artistic object, particularly in all of reality’s hidden, suppressed and urgent aspects. Yet social reality cannot be understood as a medium, which is why art involving its components undermines the demand for defining art by its medium. In this way, contemporary artists who are enamoured by reality problematise aesthetics focused on the artistic medium. Defining art through its medium is part of a formalist aesthetic tradition that poststructuralism and feminist theory already challenged from the mid-twentieth century onwards. Indeed, one of the characteristics of contemporary art is the proliferation of works that can no longer be framed by the classificatory terms of traditional art. The dissolution of clear boundaries between various artistic forms and genres prevents us from formally distinguishing between works on the basis of the techniques, materials and media used in their construction. This problem is compounded by artistic practices focusing on the body, which swamped the art world in the emancipated sixties. Along these lines we also need to acknowledge the reflections of feminist theorists who call for a re-thinking of artistic and wider cultural dimensions of artistic practices arising from open, embodied intersubjective relations.2

The relational form, embodied intersubjective relations and artistic drives toward community

n relation to the problem of intersubjectivity in artistic practices, let us briefly condense the consequences of postobjective conceptions of art. Through intensive transformations of artistic practice, achieved by the involvement of the viewer as an active participant and co-creator of the artistic event, these consequences lead us to the questions posed by the so-called relational aesthetics of the nineties, as well as by its critiques. We are dealing with a move from the passive and distanced observer to the participation of the viewer in the art work as a specific aesthetic process.3 The phrase “relational aesthetics” was used by the French curator and critic Nicolas Bourriaud to demarcate and problematise the investigation of interpersonal relations within the field of contemporary art.4 Bourriaud offers a typology for this type of artistic practice, which involves connections and rendezvous, sociability and encounters. Since the introduction of the concept of relational aesthetics (1998), that is, aesthetic theory that assesses works of art on the basis of interpersonal relations, we have also seen the appearance of various critiques:5 when there is talk of a public, from the vantage point of ideal forms of the “encounter” within a specific gallery context, interpersonal relations (communication, cooperation) are objectified even in various areas of art and culture. The ideology of economic profit encourages competition instead of cooperation, and atomisation instead of connection.6 We are witnessing the objectification of new productive forces through the expansion of so-called “immaterial” or cognitive labour. In the discourse of relational aesthetics, despite the reference to a material tradition, we can recognise a denial or idealisation of the capitalist mode of production where the missing element, among others, is an analysis of the process of distribution. Within the contemporary situation, the computer is the main resource enabling post-industrial organisation of the function of the author in a constant reciprocal relation with an audience, which communicates and “participates”. Thus, for example, Brian Holmes accuses relational aesthetics of appropriating new ways of production and consumption promoted by new artistic systems in the name of the viewer’s supposed freedom, even as he overlooks the potential of participatory art projects in terms of exchanging ideas, information, the co-creation of contents, entry into everyday reality and so on.7 3

4 5

6 1 2

Nicolas Bourriaud, The Radicant, New York: Lukas & Sternberg, 2010, p. 25. See for example: Amelia Jones, Body Art/Performing the Subject, University of Minnesota Press, 1998.

Here we are interested particularly in that aesthetic processuality which concerns emancipation, the so-called separation of the sensible and the politics of perception discussed by Jacques Rancière. See Jacques Rancière, The Ignorant Schoolmaster: five lessons in intellectual emancipation, Stanford University Press, 1991; The Emancipated Spectator, London: Verso, 2009; The Politics of Aesthetics. The Distribution of the Sensible, London: Continuum, 2004. Nicolas Bourriaud, Relational Aesthetics, Dijon: Les Presse Du Réel, 1998. See for example the papers from a symposium held at the MACBA museum in Barcelona in 2005: Another Relationality. Rethinking Art as Experience, http://transform.eipcp.net/Actions/discursive/anotherrelationality (accessed 28. 10. 2011). See for example: Aldo Milohnić, Maja Breznik, Majda Hrženjak and Bratko Bibič, Culture Ltd.: Material Conditions of Cultural Productions, Ljubljana: Peace Institute, 2005. See for example: Brian Holmes, http://transform.eipcp.net/transversal/1106/hol-

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 45

13 public / 12 can / 12 political / 11 relations / 10 aesthetics / 10 between / 10 Hirschhorn / 10 his / 10 media / 10 precarious / 10 relational

ew forms of art in the public space can also take the form of an idea, a performance, an (il)legal intervention or of socially conscious street art; they are mobile, ephemeral and precarious. This type of art once again triggers the question of autonomy and the role of the artist in articulating public space. In this way, it also problematises conceptions of the contemporary gallery space, which it wishes to locate in the field of reflection instead of representation, and thus highlights the question of the possibility of “revolutionary” gestures within the contemporary situation. The following section will deal with an understanding of art as a domain where the so-called critical corpus is shaped.

4 6 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

The question of the transmission of emphasis from the finalised art work to open social relations from the perspective of aesthetic or political potential remains open. So, too, does the explanation of the quality of these relations. In this sense, productive critiques are those which emphasise antagonisms and the search for alternative forms of participation, and which are based on tension and disturbance rather than on unproblematic belonging to a temporary community.8 It appears that the discussion around the emancipation of the (political) subject has, in relation to community in contemporary times, been replaced by relationality embedded in idealistic speech about the political. Furthermore, since it is encompassed by a discourse on the idealised “middle ground”, Bourriaud’s relationality is not thought through an economic model.9 Even when speaking about DJ and programmer culture, linked to the democratisation of expressive forms,10 we remain on the formalistically ideal level of interpersonal relations, which overlooks a number of practices dealing with participation and communication on the basis of tactical uses of new technologies.11 Here we are also dealing with different forms of labour: material and “immaterial”, cognitive (intellectual), which reach some level of visibility and acknowledgment only when they belong to a specific labour market. Since a significant portion of labour within the art world remains invisible, we must point out, following the contemporary French philosopher Jacques Rancière, “that the category of work is also a political category, a category that concerns visibility.”12 On another occasion, Rancière reminds us that Marx has already taught us “to decipher the hieroglyphics written on the seemingly a-historical body of the commodity and to penetrate into the productive hell concealed by the words of economics”.13 Critics and interpreters of the idealised relational form in the world of art and culture refer to Rancière on the one hand, and to the Italian neo-Marxists Antonio Negri and Paolo Virno and their concepts of immaterial or cognitive labour on the other.14 Undoubtedly, questioning conditions of production is one of the central tenets of the relational form, in the sense that the very concept of immaterial labour becomes questionable.15 Accordmes/hr (accessed 28. 10. 2011). See Claire Bishop, “Relational Aesthetics”, “Relational Antagonism”, in: C. Bishop, Installation Art: A Critical History, London: Tate Publishing, 2005, pp. 116–123. 9 Bourriaud, Relational Aesthetics. 10 Nicolas Bourriaud, Postproduction: culture as screenplay: how art reprograms the world, New York: 11 HAS and Sternberg, 2001. Postproduction is in a sense a sequel to Relational Aesthetics, while both arise out of the changes to modes of production, shaping of relations and models of sociality brought about by IT society. 11 Geert Lovink, “Updating Tactical Media” in: Maska, nos. 119–120, 24 (2009), p. 32. The expression “tactical media” denotes the connections between art and activism; it appears in the early 90s with the expansion of media activism and a strong interest among artists in new technologies (including increasingly cheaper DIY equipment); it is a short-term concept that arose out of a resistance to ideologies and which is aware of its temporary nature. 12 Léa Gauthier, Jean-Marc Adolphe, “Democracy as a Scandal Bound to Happen: An Interview with Jacques Rancière” in: Maska, nos. 86–87, 19 (2004), p. 51. 13 Jacques Rancière, The Future of the Image, London and New York: Verso, 2009, p. 17. 14 See Paolo Virno, Michael Hardt (eds.), Radical Thought in Italy: A Potential Politics, Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press, 1996. 15 What is interesting in this case is Maurizio Lazzarato’s suggestion of the term “aesthetic production” in the text “Immaterial Labour” (in Virno and Hardt 1996, p. 114): “It is more useful, in attempting to grasp the process of the formation of social communication and its subsumption within the ‘economic,’ to use, rather than the 8

/ 10 resistance / 10 space / 10 various / 10 work / 9 aesthetic / 9 community / 9 concept / 9 cultural / 9 labour / 9 practices / 9 projects

ing to Virno and Negri, the move toward post-Fordist capitalism is conditioned precisely by the appearance of “immaterial” and cognitive labour as the new paradigm of production, where affectivity, communication and relationality become tools or technologies of the process of production. Relational, communicative, affective, collaborative and “immaterial” facets thus become central, powering the work of fragmented, embodied artistic subjectivities in a post-industrial capitalist society. The consequence of these processes, among others, is that the concept of artistic autonomy becomes replaced by concepts such as intertextuality, intermediality, inter- or trans-disciplinarity and relationality. On the basis of the critique of the relational form, we can reflect on its potential as well as further anticipating the ways in which art can occupy the public sphere and intervene in the community. These types of art projects are usually not intended for isolated gallery use: with their various strategies and tactics, they enter into a broader public space and are accessible through the Internet, widening their capacity to incite wider publics and trigger societal changes.

The precariousness of contemporary art forms and the shaping of a critical corpus

lobal social movements demand social changes in the face of ever greater precarity, which is a characteristic of both migrant and cognitive labour. Today, we are faced with the urgent question of the fate of creative potential within numerous artistic and cultural communities, which refers to the status of artists and creative workers who have been condemned to the precarity of life and labour. Precarity can be further linked to the figure of the homo sacer, described by the Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben through the lens of bare life.16 On the basis of claims made by biopolitics, Agamben directs our attention to the narrowing of life into a mere animal dimension within the so-called state of exception, which has now become the norm. The centre of the political arena is thus occupied by bare life, life without any ethical value. The concept of homo sacer stems from Roman law, which permitted the killing of people who bore this specific legal status; in the contemporary ‘material’ model of production, the ‘aesthetic’ model that involves author, reproduction, and reception. (…)The ‘author’ must lose its individual dimension and be transformed into an industrially organized production process (with a division of labor, investments, orders, and so forth), ‘reproduction’ becomes a mass reproduction organized according to the imperatives of profitability, and the audience (‘reception’) tends to become the consumer/communicator.” Cf Sergio Bologna, “Against an Erroneous Theory of Immaterial Labour”, http://dpu.mirovni-institut.si/8letnik/ bologna.php (accessed 28. 10. 2011): the author emphasises that labour cannot be an immaterial process, since to work means to utilise physical and intellectual energy, social relations, adapting to people, hierarchies, discipline, it means flexibility, and so on. According to Bologna, that sort of approach mystifies capitalistic social relations, a mistake often found in the work of Negri’s students, including Lazzarato. Labour understood as generalised human activity for him has no connection to Marxist theory, where labour is always linked to social relations. Goods can be immaterial, but labour cannot; if we define labour as “immaterial”, we miss a crucial phenomenon of the new economy, namely, longer working hours. 16 See Giorgio Agamben, Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, Stanford University Press, 1998.

world, it refers to Jewish people in the concentration camps as well as to people with unclear legal status, such as refugees, asylum seekers, illegal migrants and prisoners of war in the American prison complex Guantanamo, all of whom find themselves in areas of “the state of emergency”. In the transition from post-socialism to capitalism, the majority of artists – as the majority of people in general – are forced to adapt to new conditions or be banished to the margins. Among artists working in the field of so-called new media in particular, we can sense, within the last two decades, that is, during the years of transition and intense globalising processes, an ambivalent stance that oscillates between awareness of the impossibility of resistance and a search for parallel spaces and ways of acting. We must link this search to the debate about alternative ways of occupying space and embodiment, and to attempts to occupy new social spaces. New forms of art in the public space can also take the form of an idea, a performance, an (il)legal intervention or of socially conscious street art; they are mobile, ephemeral and precarious. This type of art once again triggers the question of autonomy and the role of the artist in articulating public space. In this way, it also problematises conceptions of the contemporary gallery space, which it wishes to locate in the field of reflection instead of representation, and thus highlights the question of the possibility of “revolutionary” gestures within the contemporary situation. The following section will deal with an understanding of art as a domain where the so-called critical corpus is shaped.17 In this light, the mission of art that revolts against existing political, cultural, aesthetic and other norms is to create conditions for new thinking that can sketch the path toward societal change. Social engagement and activism within contemporary art (in this context, particularly in relation to various marginalised communities) do not address and co-formulate the passive viewer and consumer of cultural goods but rather the critical, potentially active participant in movements working toward a fairer society.18 Yet the demand for engaged or activist art must be evaluated alongside actualisations of the demand that Adorno highlighted in the sixties, that is, the demand for autonomous art as a space of resistance.19 Theorists of aesthetics who follow Adorno’s lead (among them Gerard Vilar20 ) locate in contemporary art projects such as those of the Paris-based Swiss artist Thomas Hirschhorn21 a confirmation of Adorno’s demand 17 See Hirschhorn, Establishing a Critical Corpus, Zürich: JRP/Ringier, 2011. 18 The conceptual background to this demand is provided by Jacques Rancière in his discussion of the emancipated spectators. See The Emancipated Spectator, London: Verso, 2009. 19 W. Adorno, “Commitment”, in C. Harrison, P. Wood (eds.), Art in Theory, 1900–1990: An Anthology of Changing Ideas, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford in Cambridge 1993, pp. 763–764. 20 In his conference paper “Deartification, De-aesthetization, and Politization of Contemporary Art” presented at the V. Mediterranean Congress on Aesthetics (Cartagena, Spain, 4–8 July 2011) on 8 July 2011, Gerard Vilar focuses on Thomas Hirschhorn’s work Crystal of Resistance at the Swiss Pavilion at Venice Biennale 2011, www.crystalofresistance.com (accessed 28. 10. 2011). 21 Hirschhorn 2011, as cited.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 47

/ 9 toward / 8 not / 8 their / 8 use / 8 where / 8 who / 7 about / 7 artists / 7 be / 7 Bourriaud / 7 critical / 7 he / 7 it / 7 its / 7 medium / 7

for retaining a certain level of artistic autonomy, which thus also retains a boundary between art and the cultural industry. In contrast to the numerous artists who work within communities with the aim of intertwining artistic and social practice, Hirschhorn continually emphasises the significance of art’s autonomy. On the other hand, his projects, such as Deleuze Monument (Avignon, 2000), Bataille Monument (Kassel, 2002) and Musée Précaire Albinet (Paris, 2004), build particularly on cooperation with working classes and immigrant communities in order to sketch out the current precarious situation of an increasingly larger segment of European urban populations. The project 24h Foucault (2004) transposes this collaborative approach to philosophers, poets and musicians in the Parisian Palais de Tokyo.22 While Bourriaud links Hirschhorn’s work to the appearance of the flea market as “the dominant art form of the nineties”,23 Hirschhorn himself attempts to distance his approach to public art from the predominant strand of socially engaged art that is equipped with labels like relational aesthetics, participation or community art (despite declarations of strengthening community ties, these aspects are often instrumentalised), and emphasises “presence and production” within a given community; he understands his work in the context of intensifying the concept of participation, which he develops in concert with the art historian and critic Claire Bishop.24 Bourriaud attempts to use Hirschhorn’s projects to pinpoint the current predominant “visual model”, which resembles a marketplace in the form of “a temporary and nomadic gathering of precarious materials and products of various provenances.”25 From a formalist perspective, the methods of assemblage, recycling and the aesthetics of chaotic displacement are crucial. According to Bourriaud, the key aspect of Hirschhorn’s work is the representation of spaces of exchange where the individual meets the social. His installations are characterised by the use of everyday materials: aluminium foil and plastic film strip, magazine and newspaper clippings, political leaflets, TV screens, media images, books and ordinary objects embedded in an unclear form that resembles a monstrous organism and resonates as a commentary on contemporary economics. Hirschhorn calls his own projects precarious due to their uncertain status and limited time span (some works have ended up on the streets, where they were available to random passers-by, etc.); he separates the precarious from the ephemeral, where the latter is a characteristic of natural processes and not the processes of social events that 22 See Thomas Hirschhorn, “24h Foucault, 2004”, in: Claire Bishop (ed.), Participation, London: Whitechapel; Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press, 2006, pp. 154–157. 23 Nicolas Bourriaud, Postproduction: culture as screenplay: how art reprograms the world, New York: 11 HAS and Sternberg, 2001, p. 28. 24 See “And That Is What Happened There” in: Hirschhorn, Establishing a Critical Corpus, pp. 7–98 (Bishop’s interviews with six of the participants in Hirschhorn’s The Bijlmer Spinoza-Festival, which took place in Amsterdam in 2009 with its own bar, library, lectures, workshops, newspaper, drama performance, etc.). This is socially engaged art where participants are crucial (particularly those from marginalised communities) and which critically questions various aspects of participation (for example, whether participants in various art projects are represented as equal co-workers who are suitably remunerated for their work, etc.). 25 Nicolas Bourriaud, Postproduction: culture as screenplay: how art reprograms the world, p. 28.

4 8 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

form the centrepiece of his own interest.26 Recently, the term precarious has come into frequent use when labelling the socio-economic uncertainties affecting numerous workers within neoliberal capitalism: in the past decade, we have been witness to a massive growth of the state of precarity as a product of post-Fordist economics. In facing up to the consequences of the “precarious” and frequent outbursts of the “state of emergency”, Hirschhorn articulates his understanding of these phenomena through an autonomous, visually discursive language, which, since it urges the individual to question his or her own opinions and decisions for action, is nonetheless not self-sufficient. The specific aesthetic of his work (collages, assemblages, monuments, altars, kiosks, etc.) persists in the tension between demands for autonomy, participation and intervention into public space, and is continually marked by a drive toward reaching non-exclusive publics. Hirschhorn understands art as autonomous and universal, as the space of resistance against cultural, aesthetic and political norms; here he links the political to an understanding of the precarious, not in the sense of a concept but as a specific state and potential. By emphasising anti-hierarchies, egalitarianisms of visibility and aesthetics of precariousness, which he sees as potentially leading toward political art in the present, Hirschhorn introduces elements of reflection and resistance into the distinct spaces of the globalised economy. He finds most of the materials for his strategies in the “garbage bin of capitalism”, which we, in a sense, all share.

Contemporary art as a herald of new social paradigms?

nder contemporary circumstances and in the global context, socially engaged or activist art can be one of the forces attempting to contribute to greater democratisation and social justice within the conditions of global colonisation by neoliberalism. On this point, we are not interested in violent resistance but rather in the role of cultural-artistic engagement in mobilising emancipatory forces. The choice of the artistic medium acts as a function of mediation between various individual and politicised messages, testimonies and local and universal themes. In this sense, art is a non-violent means of shaping the “critical corpus”. This type of art inhabits the public space (walls, streets, today also the Internet) and signifies symbolic gestures of resistance to forms of oppression. In contrast to modernism, postmodern (as well as premodern) art always possesses some sort of function, which is not linked merely to the investigation of the artistic medium as such. These are projects that attempt to gradually cross over from the (relatively autonomous) field of art into the field of the social. Contemporary art persists in the tension between autonomous and politically engaged art, and thus remains in some form of (minimal) representative relation to social reality, which is always socially determined. It is important here

26 See Hal Foster, “Toward a Grammar of Emergency”, in: Hirschhorn, Establishing a Critical Corpus, p. 163.

particularly / 7 post / 7 production / 7 reality / 7 situation / 7 specific / 7 through / 6 action / 6 capitalism / 6 conditions / 6 culture /

to pose questions about the meanings and effects of intensive globalisation processes, synonymous with “transnationality”, under the effects of neo-colonialism and neoliberal capitalism. Here, we can also call on Deleuze and Guattari’s well-known concepts of minority, micropolitics, nomadism and transversality: in the contemporary situation, minority is as a rule no longer free, but a forced choice. Meanwhile, the figure of the nomad signifies particularly the intercultural migrant, the precarious worker who in the given economic-technological and political conditions of globalisation acts, lives and creates in the fluid spaces between cultural locations, their practices, identities and objects. Gerald Raunig shows how the renewed revitalisation of the figure of the nomad at the end of the nineties has led to the equation of voluntary and forced migration, even as he promotes a nomadic practice on the offensive, that is, “offensive action in precarious contexts”.27 We can also cite Marchart’s reservations about linking the concept of transversality (Guattari 1964) to a non-hierarchical, non-central, transnational, transdisciplinary means of forging connections with protests against economic globalisation, which lacks a certain reflexivity about forms of organisation and capacity for action.28 On the other hand, however, we could also point to the micropolitical seeds of transversality and to the convergence of the artistic and “revolutionary” becoming in the contemporary situation.29 Art projects arising from the experience of conceptual art often refer to the fact that art is capable of establishing a situation in which it directs the gaze toward overlooked aspects of social reality. Individual and collective conceptual actions are a web of constant re-interpretations and analyses of their own work. A particular sub-group is formed by those works that deal with analyses of socially ideological symbols, relations of power in society, and in relation to the utopian practices of modernist or avant-garde art. One particular segment of art maintains a certain utopian dimension in the form of awareness about possible alternatives within the contemporary situation, where new technologies are becoming increasingly crucial. Numerous theoreticians locate reflections of contemporary art in the function of culture, and emphasise that its traditional artistic-aesthetic function has become obsolete or secondary, while contemporary “new media” art contributes to the production of cultural innovations.30 New functions of art establish themselves as a 27 Gerald Raunig, Art and Revolution: Transversal Activism in the Long 20th Century, Los Angeles: Semiotext(e), 2007, p. 228 (a key example of this is the activisttheatrical group PublixTheatreCaravan; see “The Transversal Concatenation of the PublixTheatreCaravan”, pp. 203–237). 28 Oliver Marchart, “The Crossed Place of the Political Party”, http://www.republicart. net/disc/empire/marchart02_en.htm (accessed 28. 10. 2011). The term was also recently used by Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, as well as critics such as Gerald Raunig, to denote a new terrain for open cooperation between various activist, artistic, social, political practices. For Raunig, these forms of cooperation are not about solidarity between actors and domains or for interdisciplinarity between different fields, but about a non-representative form of connection. See also Susan Kelly, http://www.republicart.net/disc/mundial/kelly01_en.htm (accessed 28. 10. 2011). 29 See Raunig, as cited, p. 161. 30 See Janez Strehovec, “Od umetniškega artefakta k umetniški storitvi. Konceptualizacija interakcij sodobne umetnosti z novo ekonomijo in medmrežnim aktivizmom” [“From the art object to the art service. A conceptualisation of interactions between art, new economics, and networked activism”] in: Filozofski vestnik, no. 1,

result of the shift from the artistic artifact to the artistic action, which is always positioned within a specific function of culture. This is also evident from the fact that today’s emphasis is no longer on exhibitory value but rather on the value of communication, which reinforces itself particularly in the interaction between contemporary art, the new economy and networked activism. The subversive potential of contemporary artistic practices can be highlighted from the perspective of tactical media and other strategies of resistance and activism, which form only minimal points of rebellion (Peljhan),31 merely micropolitics, in comparison to the massive systems of forces. Artistic-discursive projects that come into being through cooperation with experts, social groups and activists from various backgrounds enable a peek into the mechanisms of repression and into individual forms of resistance to existing relations of social power. Ground is currently being gained by the concept of networking, which connects artists with various initiatives and movements in the name of gaining access to a public sphere that is becoming ever smaller and more privatized. One of the possible answers, squatter activism, which opens up alternative public spheres, is frequently becoming replaced by new media activism (the use of tactical media). In attempting to resist the logic of capital, art takes on new functions. During a time when imagination and alternative views are in short supply, creative forms of resistance that differ from past attempts are particularly significant, and new ways of shaping artistic groups and of politicizing art and culture are taking place. Alongside interventions into the public space, the radical use of technology is also characteristic of this shift. There are further examples which utilise the methods of protest and direct action, where the use of one’s own body becomes central. Investigative and activist practices are becoming more and more prevalent among local Slovenian artists, who are pursuing the shift of contemporary (visual) art away from objects and toward intersubjective relations in order to contribute to the appearance of a critical, potentially active participant in the world justice movement. It is significant that the exhibitions of the 29th Biennial of Graphic Arts, which focused on the subject of the artistic event, lacked any references to the current protest actions aimed at the domination of financial capitalism, which are also taking place in front of the Ljubljana stock exchange. From the point of view of this year’s central exhibition on the theme of “the event”, the Slovenian art world remains at a safe distance and in radical differentiation from the event of the protest, unable to reflect on the connections between creativity and resistance. ..

24 (2003), pp. 183–200. 31 See Marko Peljhan, “Strategies of Minimal Resistance – Analysis of tactical work in the surveillance society”, in: S. Glavan (ed.), Zbornik Svet umetnosti 1999 (Geopolitika in umetnost / Tečaj za kustose sodobne umetnosti), Ljubljana: Zavod za odprto družbo – Slovenija, Sorosov center za sodobne umetnosti – Ljubljana, 1999, pp. 60–63.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 4 9

46.0489 46.0493 46.0488 46.0486 46.0489 46.0479 46.0486 46.0487 46.0492 46.0498 46.0493 46.0493 46.0493 46.0489 46.049 46.0492 46.0489 46.0491 46.0482 46.0491 46.0472 46.0487 46.0481 46.0487 46.0491 46.0489 46.049 46.0487 46.0489 46.0494 46.049 46.0489 46.0488 46.0488 46.0493 46.0488 46.0498 46.0486 46.0489 46.049 46.0487 46.049 46.049 46.0487 46.0488 46.0486 46.0483 46.0489 46.0491 46.0485 46.0489 46.0486 46.0489 46.0492 46.0487 46.0488 46.0491 46.0491 46.0489 46.0495 46.0488 46.0496 46.0485 46.0472 46.0489 46.0488 46.0481 46.0487 46.0487 46.0495 46.0482 46.049 46.0482 46.0489 46.0486 46.0489 46.0492 46.0493 46.0482 46.0486 46.0488 46.0488 46.0487 46.0488 46.0492 46.049 46.0468 46.049 46.0491 46.0489 46.0481 46.0488 46.0488 46.0486 46.0482 46.0491 46.0488 46.0492 46.049 46.0488 46.0489 46.0494 46.0485 46.0487 46.049 46.0483 46.049 46.0494 46.0489 46.0488 46.0491 46.0483 46.0489 46.049 46.049 46.0497 46.0493 46.049 46.0487 46.0487 46.049 46.0491 46.0494 46.0487 46.049 46.0489 46.0489 46.0485 46.0488 46.0489 46.0489 46.0488 46.0494 46.0495 46.049 46.0492 46.049 46.0489 46.0488 46.0487 46.0475 46.0484 46.0489 46.0483 46.049 46.049 46.0486 46.0511 46.049 46.0472 46.0488 46.0488 46.0488 46.0486 46.0488 46.0488 46.0486 46.0488 46.0486 46.0489 46.0487 46.0487 46.0488 46.0488 46.0487 46.0488 46.0489 46.0487 46.0488 46.0489 46.0488 46.0486 46.0488 46.0487 46.0487 46.0488 46.0488 46.0475 46.0476 46.0485 46.0488 46.0488 46.0485 46.0488 46.0488 46.0488 46.0488 46.0487 46.0487 46.0488 46.0487 46.0488 46.0488 46.0488 46.0488 46.0488 46.0489 46.0488 46.0489 46.0487 46.0489 46.0489 46.0488 46.0488 46.0488 46.0487 46.0488 46.0488 46.0489 46.0487 46.0487 46.0489 46.0483 46.0487 46.0486 46.0486 46.0486 46.0486 46.0487 46.049 46.0489 46.0485 46.0486 46.0484 46.0484 46.0486 46.0483 46.0482 46.0487 46.0483 46.048 46.0484 46.0481 46.0485 46.0485 46.0489 46.0492 46.0496 46.0505 46.0528 46.0541 46.0551 46.0551 46.0553 46.0559 46.0565 46.0574 46.0574 46.0583 46.0606 46.0641 46.0645 46.0689 46.0731

14.5023 14.5012 14.5017 14.5029 14.5016 14.5042 14.5037 14.5034 14.5014 14.5025 14.5014 14.5017 14.5015 14.5017 14.5017 14.5014 14.5016 14.5019 14.5041 14.5016 14.5037 14.5023 14.5041 14.5027 14.502 14.5033 14.5029 14.5029 14.5018 14.5017 14.5017 14.5017 14.5016 14.5015 14.5011 14.5007 14.502 14.5017 14.5013 14.5016 14.5014 14.5013 14.5018 14.5017 14.5018 14.5023 14.5033 14.5018 14.5019 14.502 14.5019 14.5019 14.5014 14.502 14.5017 14.5015 14.502 14.5012 14.5016 14.5021 14.5019 14.5021 14.5028 14.5027 14.5019 14.5018 14.5029 14.5032 14.5016 14.4998 14.5031 14.5017 14.5015 14.5019 14.5021 14.5019 14.5015 14.5029 14.5027 14.5019 14.5023 14.5024 14.5013 14.5022 14.5014 14.5016 14.5055 14.5025 14.5021 14.5017 14.5024 14.5017 14.5019 14.5027 14.5028 14.5017 14.5016 14.5029 14.5017 14.5017 14.5018 14.5027 14.5028 14.5019 14.5015 14.503 14.5017 14.5014 14.5016 14.5016 14.5018 14.5009 14.5019 14.5017 14.5016 14.5034 14.5015 14.5017 14.5018 14.5017 14.5017 14.5016 14.5027 14.5018 14.5016 14.5016 14.5015 14.5022 14.5017 14.5017 14.5022 14.5017 14.5029 14.5023 14.5022 14.5017 14.5016 14.5017 14.5018 14.5022 14.5028 14.5021 14.5016 14.5027 14.5021 14.5016 14.503 14.5033 14.5015 14.5016 14.5017 14.5019 14.5017 14.5023 14.5019 14.5019 14.504 14.5017 14.502 14.5016 14.5024 14.5021 14.5019 14.5017 14.5018 14.5019 14.5015 14.5018 14.5018 14.5015 14.5018 14.502 14.5018 14.5019 14.5026 14.5023 14.5018 14.5179 14.5169 14.5019 14.5015 14.5018 14.5064 14.5015 14.5018 14.5015 14.5013 14.5013 14.5016 14.5017 14.5019 14.5016 14.5016 14.5015 14.5019 14.502 14.5022 14.5019 14.502 14.5018 14.503 14.502 14.5019 14.5026 14.5016 14.5016 14.5015 14.5017 14.5018 14.5017 14.5016 14.5018 14.5013 14.5012 14.5013 14.501 14.5012 14.5005 14.5015 14.5016 14.5013 14.5012 14.5012 14.5012 14.5011 14.5013 14.5013 14.5012 14.5013 14.5012 14.5012 14.5013 14.5013 14.5015 14.5016 14.5007 14.5021 14.5022 14.5028 14.5045 14.504 14.5048 14.5048 14.5084 14.5053 14.5053 14.5052 14.5059 14.5061 14.507 14.5085 14.5087 14.5102 14.5111

Dec 8, 2011 10:21 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:21 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:20 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:19 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:18 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:17 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:16 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:15 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:14 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:13 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:13 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:12 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:11 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:10 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:09 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:08 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:07 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:06 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:05 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:04 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:04 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:03 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:02 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:01 PM Dec 8, 2011 10:00 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:59 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:58 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:57 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:57 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:56 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:55 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:54 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:53 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:52 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:51 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:51 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:50 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:49 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:48 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:47 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:46 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:45 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:44 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:43 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:43 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:42 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:41 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:40 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:39 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:38 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:37 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:36 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:36 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:35 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:32 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:31 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:30 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:29 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:28 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:27 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:26 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:25 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:24 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:24 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:23 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:22 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:21 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:20 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:19 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:18 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:17 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:16 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:15 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:14 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:13 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:12 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:11 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:10 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:09 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:08 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:07 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:07 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:06 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:05 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:04 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:03 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:02 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:01 PM Dec 8, 2011 9:00 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:59 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:58 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:58 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:57 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:55 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:55 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:54 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:53 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:52 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:51 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:50 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:49 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:48 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:47 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:46 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:45 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:44 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:43 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:43 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:42 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:41 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:40 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:39 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:38 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:37 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:36 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:35 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:34 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:33 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:32 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:31 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:30 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:29 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:28 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:27 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:26 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:25 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:24 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:23 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:22 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:21 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:20 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:19 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:18 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:17 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:16 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:15 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:14 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:14 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:13 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:12 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:11 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:10 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:09 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:08 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:07 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:06 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:05 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:04 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:03 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:02 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:01 PM Dec 8, 2011 8:00 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:59 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:59 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:58 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:57 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:56 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:55 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:54 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:53 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:52 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:51 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:50 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:49 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:48 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:47 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:46 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:45 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:44 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:43 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:43 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:42 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:41 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:40 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:39 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:39 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:38 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:37 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:36 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:35 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:34 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:34 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:33 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:32 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:31 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:30 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:29 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:29 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:28 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:27 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:26 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:25 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:24 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:23 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:22 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:22 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:21 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:20 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:19 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:18 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:17 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:16 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:15 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:15 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:14 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:13 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:12 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:11 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:10 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:09 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:08 PM Dec 8, 2011 7:08 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:49 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:48 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:45 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:44 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:43 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:42 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:40 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:39 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:38 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:35 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:34 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:33 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:32 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:31 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:30 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:28 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:26 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:25 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:25 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:24 PM Dec 8, 2011 6:23 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:46 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:45 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:44 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:43 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:42 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:42 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:41 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:40 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:39 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:38 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:38 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:37 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:36 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:35 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:34 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:34 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:33 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:32 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:31 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:30 PM Dec 8, 2011 5:29 PM

SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 6 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 VEGOVA ULICA 4 A ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 GOSPOSKA ULICA 12 VEGOVA ULICA 3 VEGOVA ULICA 4 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 6 SLOVENSKA CESTA 21 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 6 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 4 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 6 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 6 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 2 GOSPOSKA ULICA 8 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 4 TRG FRANCOSKE REVOLUCIJE 7 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 GOSPOSKA ULICA 10 VEGOVA ULICA 4 A ERJAVČEVA CESTA 2 VEGOVA ULICA 4 VEGOVA ULICA 4 VEGOVA ULICA 4 A SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 6 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 ULICA JOSIPINE TURNOGRAJSKE 4 GRADIäČE 6 SLOVENSKA CESTA 19 SLOVENSKA CESTA 12 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 2 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 VEGOVA ULICA 6 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 2 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 2 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 2 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 17 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 SLOVENSKA CESTA 17 VEGOVA ULICA 4 A TRG FRANCOSKE REVOLUCIJE 5 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SOTESKA 1 VEGOVA ULICA 4 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 7 VEGOVA ULICA 6 A ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 10 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 6 KONGRESNI TRG 15 SOTESKA 4 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 6 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 BREG 12 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 2 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SOTESKA 8 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 VEGOVA ULICA 4 A SOTESKA 4 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 4 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 VEGOVA ULICA 4 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 KONGRESNI TRG 15 VEGOVA ULICA 4 A SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 VEGOVA ULICA 6 A ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ULICA JOSIPINE TURNOGRAJSKE 4 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 2 GRADIäČE 8 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 KONGRESNI TRG 13 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 6 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 4 KONGRESNI TRG 15 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 KONGRESNI TRG 15 SLOVENSKA CESTA 17 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 4 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 VEGOVA ULICA 12 SLOVENSKA CESTA 12 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SOTESKA 4 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 VEGOVA ULICA 4 A SLOVENSKA CESTA 28 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 RIMSKA CESTA 7 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 VEGOVA ULICA 4 A SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 VEGOVA ULICA 3 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 VEGOVA ULICA 4 A SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 VEGOVA ULICA 4 A SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 HUDOVERNIKOVA ULICA 1 ZEMLJEMERSKA ULICA 7 SLOVENSKA CESTA 12 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 MESTNI TRG 13 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 VEGOVA ULICA 4 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 VEGOVA ULICA 4 A IGRIäKA ULICA 1 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 16 SLOVENSKA CESTA 14 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 11 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 GRADIäČE 8 GRADIäČE 8 GRADIäČE 8 IGRIäKA ULICA 3 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 1 IGRIäKA ULICA 1 GRADIäČE 8 GRADIäČE 8 GRADIäČE 8 GRADIäČE 8 GRADIäČE 8 SLOVENSKA CESTA 11 SLOVENSKA CESTA 9 B IGRIäKA ULICA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 11 SLOVENSKA CESTA 9 B SLOVENSKA CESTA 11 SLOVENSKA CESTA 9 B SLOVENSKA CESTA 11 SLOVENSKA CESTA 11 IGRIäKA ULICA 4 ERJAVČEVA CESTA 2 SLOVENSKA CESTA 17 PLEČNIKOV PODHOD 1 NAZORJEVA ULICA 10 PUHARJEVA ULICA 1 SLOVENSKA CESTA 47 SLOVENSKA CESTA 47 ČUFARJEVA ULICA 3 TRDINOVA ULICA 2 SLOVENSKA CESTA 55 TIVOLSKA CESTA 50 TIVOLSKA CESTA 50 PARMOVA ULICA 14 DUNAJSKA CESTA 17 DUNAJSKA CESTA 47 DUNAJSKA CESTA 49 DUNAJSKA CESTA 73 TRIGLAVSKA ULICA 1

208 in / 160 v / 126 ki / 121 na / 114 je / 93 se / 64 z / 58 tudi / 55 da / 44 kot / 44 umetnosti / 43 za / 41 so / 38 pa / 34 k / 33 s / 27 kar / 27 področju /

Umetniško delo v času viharjev na finančnih trgih

THE WORK OF ART in the Age of Turmoil in the Financial Markets see page 60

Umetniški artefakt med materializacijo in dematerializacijo v svetu ekonomije kot kulture Janez Strehovec

5 0 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

26 tem / 23 iz / 19 finančnih / 19 pri / 18 dela / 18 lahko / 18 ni / 18 od / 18 recimo / 18 še / 18 umetnost / 16 ekonomija / 16 le / 16 tako / 15 do /

ič, kar se dogaja v sodobni umetnosti, ni izvzeto iz družbenega teksta in konteksta, ki je opredeljen z dognanji sodobnih znanosti, novih medijev in tehnologij ter nove, na mreženje oprte ekonomije in postpolitične politike (izraz Paola Virna iz Slovnice mnoštva). V času globalizacije in njenih scenarijev, ki vodijo k enorazsežnostnim, po vsem svetu uveljavljenim načinom presojanja in obnašanja (na kulturnem področju jih diktirajo mcdonaldizacija, cnn-novstvo, microsoftovstvo, benettonovstvo, googlovstvo in drugi, z nadnacionalnimi korporacijami in njihovimi znamkami diktirani trendi, ki posegajo v posameznikov lebenswelt in profilirajo njegove potrebe), smo sodobniki vrste novih kulturnih obratov, med katerimi ima pomembno mesto prehod od kulturne, še posebej na estetsko umetnost vezane dominante, k ekonomiji kot novemu prednostnemu področju, in sicer tako v širšem družbenem kot ožjem kulturnem smislu. Lahko celo rečemo, da je prednostno družbeno mesto, ki ga je pred desetletjema in več v razvitem zahodnem svetu zasedala politika, na Slovenskem pa kultura v vlogi političnega namestništva (mislimo na »kulturo kot alibi« za definiranje političnih proti-konceptov), v sedanjosti zavzela ekonomija, in sicer nova, na finančne trge oprta ekonomija, ki postaja v določenem pogledu tudi kulturna in ima v sedanji globalizirani družbi ter pri generiranju njenih podob in ritualov produktivno vlogo. (Tu moramo biti še natančnejši in poudariti, da gre predvsem pri umetnostnem področju, ki nas v tem besedilu še posebej zanima, za zamenjavo fleksibilne dvojice umetnost – politika z dvojico umetnost – ekonomija, ki je prav tako kar se da dinamična in vključuje vrsto interakcij, pa tudi povratnih zank med obema področjema.)

Od spektakelske ekonomije k umetnostni ekonomiji

konomija kot kultura ni vsaka ekonomija, temveč predvsem tista, ki je nase s kriznimi dogodki opozorila v zadnjih letih (prvi vrh je sredi septembra 2008 dosegla s propadom banke Lehman Brothers, ki je bil največji dosedanji bankrot v ZDA, v letu 2010 pa smo bili sodobniki napada na evro na svetovnih finančnih trgih, ki je bil posledica grških gospodarskih in finančnih težav ter začetka globalne valutne vojne). To je ekonomija finančnih trgov, ki je nastala z obratom od ekonomije, usmerjene na menjavo (pretežno materialnih) produktov, k ekonomiji finančnih poslov, finančnih inštrumentov in novih produktov, namenjenih borznemu trgovanju. Srečujemo se z zamenjavo paradigme, ki ni nič manj pomembna od drugih sodobnejših zamenjav paradigem na političnem, družbenem in kulturnem področju (recimo od industrijske k poindustrijski družbi in od politike nacionalnih držav h globalizirani politiki, oprti na interese multinacionalnih korporacij). Na ekonomijo kot kulturo v sedanjosti vplivajo tudi velike spremembe na ekonomskem področju, celo njegova destabilizacija, ki se je začela z opustitvijo smernic, začrtanih z dogovorom iz Bretton Woodsa (obdobje med letoma 1947–1971), ki so bile

namenjene varnosti monetarnih transakcij. Ko te varnosti ni bilo več (prehod od valutne oprtosti na zlato podlago k dolarju kot svetovni rezervni valuti), je sledila monetarna volatilnost in svojevrstna, na drzne špekulacije oprta dinamika finančnih trgov, ki je vodila k razcvetu delniških trgov v osemdesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja, k razmahu pika kom ekonomije desetletje kasneje in k balonom na področju ameriškega trga nepremičnin (kot povzročitelja predzadnje krize, katere posledice opazno čutimo tudi v Sloveniji). Ko omenjamo denar v sedanji globalni ekonomiji in postfordistični proizvodnji, opredeljeni z velikim vplivom programske opreme in informatičnih tehnologij ter z njimi povezanimi kibernetskimi procesi upravljanja in nadzorovanja, ki so praviloma locirani v nevidnih, prikritih strukturah protokolarne moči (izraz Alexandra Gallowayja), nam mora biti jasno, da se danes vprašanje moči zastavlja v območju kode, kar ima daljnosežne posledice tudi za razumevanje denarja, ki se obrača, slabi in raste v okviru na mreženje oprtih ekonomskih procesov. Vprašanje denarja se zato dejansko premešča k vprašanju (prikrite) kode denarja, ki je subtilno zaščitena; mogoče jo je napadati (to se dogaja na svetovnih borzah, zadnji primer je bil evro ob grški krizi spomladi 2010), ni je pa mogoče preprosto »shekati«, kajti valute, ki dajo kaj nase, niso, rečeno ironično, odprtokodne entitete. V času razcveta finančnega kapitalizma se je začela uveljavljati tudi poindustrijska družba, ki predpostavlja prehod od fordističnega k postfordističnemu proizvodnemu načinu. Zanj je bistveno, da vključuje vse več znanja, spremlja pa ga tudi modifikacija samega kapitalizma v smeri t. i. kognitivnega kapitalizma, ki v času prekarnega dela posega v celotni, 24-urni posameznikov delavnik in stalno izumlja nove oblike subtilnih izkoriščanj, primernih za postkeynesianski neoliberalni model razpolaganja z družbenim, še posebej nematerialnim bogastvom. Prav tako ne smemo zanemariti velikega vpliva novih tehnologij (tudi v smislu njihovih kulturnih, recimo spektakelskih funkcij) na sodobno družbeno življenje, politiko in ekonomijo; pri tem imajo še posebej pomembno vlogo socialno mreženje in informacijske tehnologije, tako da lahko pomemben aspekt sodobne družbe razumevamo tudi v smislu prehoda v softversko družbo (tudi popularni brskalniki so izrazita družbena in kulturna orodja). V osemdesetih in devetdesetih letih 20. stoletja se ni le v ZDA in zahodni Evropi, temveč tudi na Kitajskem in v razvijajočih se deželah začel razcvet finančnih trgov, na katere se je začel skokovito širiti kapital iz vseh ekonomskih sektorjev, kajti iz dneva v dan je postajalo vse bolj očitno, da je mogoče na njih, še posebej na kratek rok, služiti hitreje in z bistveno višjimi donosi kot na trgih surovin in materialnih izdelkov (ti procesi so postali tarča protestnega gibanja 99 % proti 1 % na Wall Streetu in tudi v Ljubljani jeseni 2011). Razmah na tem področju je bil nedvomno povezan tudi s tehniškim napredkom, še posebej na področju programske opreme in globalnega mreženja, ki omogoča današnje spektakelsko dogajanje na svetovnih

TEORETSKI BLOK R efl e k tor / R e/fTlHEORY ector 51

15 ne / 14 to / 13 ga / 13 po / 13 že / 12 ali / 12 ampak / 12 ko / 12 ter / 11 ekonomije / 11 med / 11 področje / 11 posebej / 11 prav / 11 smislu / 11 več /

finančnih trgih; že kmalu po zaprtju najbolj znanega na Wall Streetu se začno odpirati daljnovzhodni trgi (ob 2. uri po srednjeevropskem času se odpre tokijska borza), in šou na odrih, indeksiranih v ameriških indeksih Dow Jones in sestavljenem Nasdaq ter v evropskih (recimo DAX in FTSE), se nadaljuje z dogajanji, ki se merijo s Hang Sengom, šanghajskim sestavljenim indeksom, z japonskim Nikkei in drugimi azijskimi indeksi. V vsebinskem smislu smo pri tem sodobniki opazne transformacije (industrijske) ekonomije, osredotočene na proizvodnjo artefaktov, k ekonomiji, temelječi na storitvenih dejavnostih in financah. Preprosto rečeno gre pri slednji za veliko abstraktnejšo ekonomijo, pri kateri menjavo blagovnih izdelkov zamenjuje vrsta novih finančnih inštrumentov in izvedenk; bolj kot za stabilne predmete gre tudi v njej za nestabilne koncepte, ideje in seveda kodo (kar smo že omenili pri denarju). Ko omenjamo to zamenjavo paradigme, naj poudarimo, da dogajanje nikakor ni tuje tistim, ki se ukvarjajo s spremljanjem sodobne kulture in umetnosti ter njenih poglavitnih tokov. Če je kakšno področje, ki je stalno podvrženo destabilizacijam, volatilnosti, vpeljavi novosti, hibridizacijam, miksanju in remiksanju, nabijanju (menjalne) vrednosti in naglemu zatonu določenih trendov (in vrednosti), potem je to sodobna umetnost, v kateri je dematerializacija objekta opravila podobno vlogo kot v ekonomiji prehod od ekonomije, usmerjene na proizvodnjo (materialnih) artefaktov, k ekonomiji (veliko bolj abstraktnih) finančnih produktov in storitev. Pri tem pa umetnost nikakor ni pasivno sledila spremembam, opredeljenim z družbenimi in ekonomskimi obrati, ampak je sama opravljala pionirsko delo. Pomislimo le na Marcela Duchampa in njegove ready mades, ki so opozorili na pomen avtorja-znamke (kot potencialnega logotipa) na področju moderne umetnosti in tudi na širše vplive umetnostne inštitucije kot tiste, ki ima mehanizme za nabijanje menjalne vrednosti določenim produktom in za pošiljanje drugih na obrobje. Izdelku, sicer narejenemu za prav posebno uporabo, omogoča prenos v umetnostni kontekst in njegova iniciacija z znamko vstop v povsem novo in drugačno življenje – je bilo Duchampovo sporočilo ob njegovem »pisoarskem projektu« Fountain iz 1917. leta. Na ravni teorije je delo Borisa Groysa Űber das Neue (1992) eno redkih, ki je sledilo ekonomiki umetnostnega področja v smislu, da na njem stalno prihaja do ovrednotenj in razvrednotenj ter dinamičnih prehajanj med profanimi in vrednostnimi (kulturnimi) arhivi.

Abstraktnost, dematerializacija, performativnost in spekulativnost tako na ekonomskem kot umetniškem področju

a premestitev in opozorilo na vlogo avtorjeve znamke pri tem pa je področje, ki je blizu osrednji temi knjižne uspešnice Naomi Klein No logo, za katero lahko rečemo, da je tudi prispevala h konceptualizaciji sedanje ekonomije kot kul-

5 2 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

ture: »Ker mnogi od današnjih najslovitejših proizvajalcev ne proizvajajo več izdelkov in jih nato oglašujejo, ampak izdelke raje kupujejo in jih nato ‘znamčijo’, so ta podjetja na večnem lovu za novimi ustvarjalnimi načini, kako graditi in krepiti podobo znamk.«1 Teoretik Julian Stallabrass podobno ugotavlja, da »v svetu umetnosti cvetijo blagovne znamke. Galerije in muzeji se kitijo z novimi logotipi, s katerimi poskušajo javnosti sporočiti značilnosti svoje blagovne znamke.«2 Pri tem omenja britansko galerijo Tate, v isti igri pa se nahaja tudi muzejska ustanova Guggenheim. V sedanjosti se je torej na številnih področjih proizvodnja dobrin v obliki (materialnih) artefaktov začela umikati trženju znamk in imen, znane multinacionalne korporacije so zato namesto stvari začele proizvajati »podobe svojih znamk«. Pri tem pa lahko opažamo, da se stvari niso začele umikati le podobam atraktivnih znamk (od Coca Cole in Benettona do McDonaldsa, Microsofta, Googla in Nikea), ampak so v ospredje začeli stopati tudi koncepti, ideje, hibridi in izvedeni produkti (recimo opcije na finančnih trgih), kar je nedvomno prav tako blizu sodobni umetnosti, ki ji je močan pečat vtisnil tudi konceptualizem (usmeritev Sola LeWitta, sopotnikov in naslednikov, recimo Josepha Kosutha) s spoznanjem, da sodobna umetnost referira na sámo definicijo umetnosti. Tudi storitvena ekonomija kot eno poglavitnih področjih poindustrijske družbe je dejansko kar se da blizu sodobni umetnosti, v kateri se izdelava stabilnega, materialnega kunstverka umika fleksibilni, po algoritemskih postopkih organizirani storitvi, o čemer je avtor tega besedila pisal v knjigi Besedilo in novi mediji in v nekaterih, na tujem objavljenih znanstvenih člankih.3 Ta kulturni obrat ima opazne posledice za definiranje družbenega mesta umetnika v sedanjosti, ki prehaja od vloge izdelovalca artefakta k veliko bolj konceptualno zahtevni dejavnosti organiziranja umetnostnega procesa. Umetnik ni več genialni posameznik, ampak visoko strokovno usposobljena oseba, ki nadzoruje kompleksen projekt-v-nastajanju, za katerega je značilno, da je pogosto algoritmično zasnovan in namenjen reševanju določenih problemov, takšni in drugačni intervenciji ali posegu na področje, ki hibridno prečka različne discipline. Vsekakor lahko danes vlečemo vrsto vzporednic med poglavitnimi družbenimi področji, kot so ekonomija, politika, znanost in kultura, kajti pri vseh smo sodobniki svojevrstnih dematerializacij, konceptualnosti in spekulativnosti, ki izhajajo iz tega, da znanost opušča »branje odprte knjige narave« (in postaja veliko bolj konceptualna in kreativna), politika svojo utemeljenost v nacionalnih parlamentih, ekonomija menjavo (materialnih, industrijskih) produktov, umetnost izdelovanje artefaktov, se pravi »kunstverkov«, prav tako pa tudi tehnologija svojo orodno, služnostno vlogo zamenjuje s spektakelskimi in performativnimi funkcijami. 1 2 3

Primerjaj Naomi Klein, No logo, Ljubljana: Maska, 2004, str. 24. Glej Julian Stallabrass, Sodobna umetnost. Zelo kratek uvod, Ljubljana: Založba Krtina, 2007, str. 111. Glej Strehovec, Besedilo in novi mediji, Ljubljana: Literatura (Novi pristopi), 2007 in Janez Strehovec, »New Media Art as Research: art-making beyond the autonomy of art and aesthetics«, Technoetic Arts, letn. 6, št. 3, 2008, str. 233–250.

10 bolj / 10 ekonomijo / 10 ima / 10 novih / 10 pravi / 10 smo / 10 sodobne / 9 bi / 9 celo / 9 kajti / 9 o / 9 sicer / 9 svoje / 9 V / 8 ekonomiji /

Živimo v umetnem in spekulativnem svetu »po naravi«, v katerem štejejo storitve, koncepti, mreženje in naglica v odločanju, povezana s pozornostno ekonomijo.4 Ko omenjamo naglico, se pravi premestitev pozornosti na realni čas in s tem na terminalski položaj, ko je treba kar se da hitro sprejemati odločitve, naj opozorimo na učinek elevator pitch, ki izhaja iz sodobnega slenga piarovske ekonomije, ima pa tudi vrsto kulturnih implikacij. Za kaj gre pri tem učinku? Njegovo jedro je v tem, da je danes treba kar se da intenzivno nagovoriti posameznika v vlogi potrošnika ali (poslovnega, političnega ...) partnerja v čim krajšem časovnem intervalu. Ko deskamo po medmrežju, ugotavljamo, da nas le atraktivno opisane in vizualno všečno predstavljene vsebine pritegnejo h klikanju in k postanku ob njih, sicer brez zadrege (in slabe vesti) deskamo dalje. Elevator pitch je angleški izraz za ekonomično in prepričljivo predstavitev osebe, izdelka ali storitve, ki mora biti zgoščeno artikulirana v (kratkem, intenzivnem) času tridesetih sekund oziroma v 100 do 150 besedah. Gre za mobilizacijski čas, ki ga lahko primerjamo s časom vožnje z dvigalom v kaki sodobni stolpnici (to vlogo ima angl. elevator v tej sestavljenki). Posameznikova pozornost namreč postaja vse bolj okrnjena spričo zahtev, ki izhajajo iz njegovega terminalskega položaja, ko mora tekoče, brezkonfliktno preskakovati s področja na področje. Elevator pitch stavi vse na prvi vtis v smislu, da je treba od sogovornika oziroma potrošnika zelo hitro pridobiti pozitivni odgovor, kar pomeni, da pokaže interes za tisto, kar mu predstavljamo, in hoče o tem izvedeti še več. Svet učinka elevator pitch in drugih učinkov, ki izhajajo iz sedanjosti, opredeljene z (novo, omreženo) ekonomijo finančnih trgov, nikakor ni tuj umetnosti, prej nasprotno: (sodobna) umetnost spodbuja in oblikuje vrsto postopkov, naprav in taktik, ki so lahko (in so) zanimive za analitike in oblikovalce novih političnih, ekonomskih in znanstvenih paradigem. Paolo Virno je za ilustrativno predstavitev postfordističnega dela v svojem besedilu Slovnica mnoštva5 posegel po primeru iz umetnosti, ko je poudaril, da se v postfordizmu tisti, ki proizvajajo presežno vrednost, opazovano s strukturalnega stališča obnašajo kot pianisti in plesalci. Kaj je pri tem značilno za njihovo temeljno dejavnost, za recimo kar performans virtuozov, ki postaja metafora za sodobno obliko dela v nematerialni produkciji? Gre za dejavnost, ki najde svojo dovršitev (to je, svoj lastni namen) v sebi, ne da bi se objektivirala v končnem proizvodu, torej brez umestitve v »končnem izdelku« ali predmetu, ki bi ostal po koncu performansa, prav tako pa je to aktivnost, ki zahteva prisotnost drugih, kar pomeni, da eksistira samo v prisotnosti publike.

e je kakšno področje, ki je stalno podvrženo destabilizacijam, volatilnosti, vpeljavi novosti, hibridizacijam, miksanju in remiksanju, nabijanju (menjalne) vrednosti in naglemu zatonu določenih trendov (in vrednosti), potem je to sodobna umetnost, v kateri je dematerializacija objekta opravila podobno vlogo kot v ekonomiji prehod od ekonomije, usmerjene na proizvodnjo (materialnih) artefaktov, k ekonomiji (veliko bolj abstraktnih) finančnih produktov in storitev.

Elevator pitch je nedvomno na delu v sodobni novomedijski umetnosti in digitalni literaturi, ko skušajo avtorji zainteresirati uporabnika in bralca kar se da prepričljivo v delih (dejansko projektih, procesih) ali tekstih, ki se odvijajo v kratkih časovnih 4 5

Angl. attention economy, koncept Michaela H. Goldhaberja. Glej Paolo Virno, Slovnica mnoštva: k analizi oblik sodobnega življenja, Ljubljana: Založba Krtina, 2004.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 53

8 ob / 8 področja / 8 sodobni / 8 stvari / 8 svojo / 8 trgov / 8 umetnostnega / 8 vlogo / 8 vrsto / 7 artefaktov / 7 bil / 7 gre / 7 hkrati /

a kulturni obrat ima opazne posledice za definiranje družbenega mesta umetnika v sedanjosti, ki prehaja od vloge izdelovalca artefakta k veliko bolj konceptualno zahtevni dejavnosti organiziranja umetnostnega procesa. Umetnik ni več genialni posameznik, ampak visoko strokovno usposobljena oseba, ki nadzoruje kompleksen projekt-vnastajanju, za katerega je značilno, da je pogosto algoritmično zasnovan in namenjen reševanju določenih problemov, takšni in drugačni intervenciji ali posegu na področje, ki hibridno prečka različne discipline.

intervalih, pri čemer posegajo tudi po vrsti posebnih učinkov, da bi stopnjevali intenzivnost takšnega dogajanja. Vsekakor pa je umetnostno področje tudi zibelka stvari, ki bi morale zanimati sodobno politično misel (in prakso). Pomislimo le na slovensko trojico Janezov Janš, ki so (re)definirali oblike v umetnosti porojenega političnega nestrinjanja (te bi morale zanimati tudi poklicne politologe, podobno kot drugi pojavi umetnostnega aktivizma), kajti opozorili so na taktiko, da s pretiranim poudarjanjem določenega imena-znamke v določenem kontekstu pokažeš na to, da je s tistim imenom, znamko in političnim podjetjem, ki je v ozadju, nekaj zelo narobe. Janezi Janše niso bili nikakršna provokacija ali infantilno umetniško izzivanje, temveč ena izmed reflektiranih umetnostno-političnih taktik, ki izhajajo iz umetnosti onstran njenega, v meščanstvu porojenega avtonomnega koncepta.

Od lepe umetnosti k postestetski in »umazani« umetnosti

odobna umetnost se ne utemeljuje več na lepem, prav tako opušča svoje artikulacije v materialnem, čute fascinirajočem artefaktu; je postestetska, postpolitična in v novem, veliko kompleksnejšem odnosu do družbene in ekonomske resničnosti. Ni več »družbena antiteza družbe« (Adornov izraz), ampak področje, ki je iz dneva v dan bolj okuženo z warholovsko logiko: namesto disidentskega in absolutnega »ne« izreka brez večjih zadreg obstoječi resničnosti »yes«, samosvoj presežek pri tem pa si skušajo kritično naravnani sodobni umetniki priskrbeti v ironični distanci, niansah, subtilnih posmehovanjih korporacijam, v opozorilih na šume in krahe v visoki tehnologiji (kar je recimo na področju spletne umetnosti uresničila dvojica Jodi). V tem besedilu že omenjeni teoretik Julian Stallabrass je duhovito naslovil svojo knjigo z Art Incorporated in v njej še poglobil spoznanja, prisotna že v njegovi prejšnji knjigi, dostopni tudi v slovenskem prevodu, v kateri je z vrsto primerov utemeljil svojo tezo, da v umetnostni ekonomiji odseva ekonomija denarnega kapitala. »Kulturno vodilne države se lahko pohvalijo z obilno domačo produkcijo, ki zadošča potrebam njihovih domačih trgov, pri čemer malo uvažajo in uspešno izvažajo. Književni velesili 19. stoletja sta bili Francija in Britanija. Danes daleč najvplivnejša država na področju kulture so ZDA, ki celemu svetu izvažajo svoje produkte in zelo malo uvažajo.«6 Stallabrass je tudi zelo konkreten v opozorilu, da se vrsta umetniških aktivnosti vse izraziteje komercializira; sodobniki smo razcveta gradnje muzejev sodobnih umetnosti in vpeljavi vrste bienalnih prireditev, ki skušajo ustvarjati publiko, spodbujati kulturni turizem in prispevati k identiteti (rečemo lahko kar znamki) mesta, v katerem se dogajajo. Pri tem je pomembno, da sodi v privlačno ponudbo takšnih muzejev-svetišč umetnost instalacij, in sicer v tisti usmeritvi, ki je izrazito vezana na prav 6 Strallabrass, Sodobna umetnost. Zelo kratek uvod, str. 11.

5 4 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

7 jih / 7 Ko / 7 mesto / 7 sedanjosti / 7 sodobniki / 7 temveč / 7 umetniki / 7 vrednosti / 7 vse / 6 brez / 6 času / 6 denarja / 6 h / 6 i / 6 Na /

določeno muzejsko mesto in postavitev, se pravi, da je v dialogu z arhitekturno in konceptualno zasnovo tistega muzeja, tako da so ljubitelji umetnosti (v vlogi potrošnikov) prisiljeni obiskati prav tisti muzej, da bi videli določeno instalacijo Louise Bourgeois ali Josepha Beuysa (recimo londonski Tate Modern). Namesto oblike, sloga, ustvarjalca, umetniške vrednosti, ideje, vpliva in inovacije nas Stallabrass brez predsodkov uvaja v svet umetniškega uvoza in izvoza, trga in menjave, pranja denarja, investicij, obresti in finančnih mahinacij, pri čemer upravičeno izpostavi ZDA kot vodilno izvoznico umetnostnega blaga in hkrati slabo uvoznico. ZDA imajo namreč na umetnostnem področju zelo privilegirano mesto; umetniki z vsega sveta se naseljujejo v njih in začno tam tako rekoč brez kakršnegakoli povračila za svoje minulo delo (in stroške izobrazbe) izdelovati nove produkte in storitve, ki se, če so konkurenčni, vključijo v izvoz te velesile, medtem ko matična država, ki je šolala in tudi profilirala ustvarjalca, ne dobi nič oziroma mora po tržni ceni kupovati njegova nova dela. Tudi umetnostno področje ni izjema v nepravičnem globalnem svetovnem poslu, ko ZDA izstavljajo račune vsemu svetu, tudi najrevnejšim državam, za svoje storitve na področju vojaštva in poskusov zagotavljanja globalne varnosti. Ekonomsko profanost posla, ki se mu pravi umetnost, dejansko umetnostni trg, je Stallabrass še bolj poudaril z izjavo: »Cene umetniških del in obseg trgovine z njimi zelo spominjajo na borzo. Ni naključje, da so največja svetovna finančna središča tudi središča trgovine z umetnostjo. Ko potegnemo to vzporednico, umetnost ni več področje brezciljnega svobodnega preigravanja, temveč manjše špekulantsko tržišče, kjer umetniška dela služijo širokemu razponu praktičnih namenov, kot so investicije, izogibanje davkom in pranje denarja.«7 Besede kot špekulantsko tržišče, izogibanje davkom in pranje denarja so, ko omenjamo umetnost in literaturo, nedvomno tuje slovenskim akterjem na tem področju, ki so vključeni v pogon nacionalnih (državnih) subvencij, vendar pa je tudi na Slovenskem prisotna svojevrstna ekonomska logika v izumljanju sofisticiranih mehanizmov, kako se čim bolj uspešno polastiti milijonov evrov na soncu vsakoletnih razpisov za subvencije, se pravi, kako priti do njih kot prvi (oziroma med prvimi) in kako čim bolj surovo izriniti konkurente. Na slovenskem literarnem področju smo sodobniki prehoda od nacionalliteratstva (ironična skovanka avtorja tega besedila, ki meri celo na v določenem pogledu nacionalsocialistično forsiranje literature kot promocijskega in čitalniško-buditeljskega dejavnika naroda, razumljenega celo v njegovi etno-specifiki) k japificiranemu literatstvu ene vplivne skupine avtorjev, ki se gredo poezijo in prozo v pozi pravcatih finančnih izvedencev, kajti državi nenehno izstavljajo račune ne le za svoja dela, temveč tudi za vrsto finančnih izvedenih inštrumentov, ki spremljajo njihov posel (država jih iz leta v leto štipendira na vsakem koraku, nagrajuje ter pogosto plačuje prevode in tisk njihovih del na tujem, čeprav tam tiste njihove, pretežno konformistične stvari komaj kdo bere). 7

Isto, str. 12.

Za razliko od večine vplivnih slovenskih literatov pa nekateri slovenski novomedijski umetniki v svojih projektih vendarle upoštevajo resničnost postfordističnega dela, globalizacijske postpolitike, finančnega in kognitivnega kapitalizma. Na to področje sta daljnosežno posegla že leta 2001 Igor Štromajer in Janez Janša (Davide Grassi) z Borzo problemov, omenimo pa naj tudi številne reference na blagovno proizvodnjo in kapitalizem v delu XXX Razprodaja tandema Kitch, ki je bilo predstavljeno že na 7. mednarodnem festivalu računalniške umetnosti v Mariboru (2001). To besedilo pišemo v času po finančnih krizah, ki so se začele 2008 in katerih posledice bodo posebej majhne države občutile še dolgo (recimo na trgu dela). Ker nas zanimajo vzporednice med ekonomijo in umetnostjo, se pravi dinamičen odnos med njima, se nam nedvomno zastavlja vprašanje, ali se lahko kaj podobnega, kot se je zgodilo z ekonomijo finančnih trgov, dogodi tudi umetnosti. Pri tem pa nas tukaj ne zanima samo ekonomska razsežnost problema, temveč sámo (ontološko in konceptualno) jedro umetniškega oblikovanja, osnovanega na storitvah, procesih in dematerializaciji objekta. Vsekakor smo tudi na umetnostnem področju sodobniki številnim »balonom«, nekritičnim pretiravanjem s hiperprodukcijo (recimo na področju slovenske poezije), kar je vse privedlo do relativiranja določenih umetniških praks, ki so bile nekdaj obdane z avro (ta verjetno edino še na Slovenskem obdaja nacionalne literate). Če skušamo biti vsaj malo kritični do sodobnejše likovne umetnosti, pa lahko zapišemo, da hiperprodukcija na tem področju (množično reproduciranje »težko-artefaktskih« del kake usmeritve modernistične umetnosti) lahko prispeva celo k onesnaženju okolja.

Umetnostno brezkonfliktno prilagajanje različnim izzivom

rgi, finančni kapital, znamke, investicije, rizičnost, razmah nematerialne produkcije, ideje, napihnjeni baloni in njihovo sesutje ne sodijo le v dinamiko ožjega ekonomskega sektorja, ampak vplivajo tudi na druga področja sodobne materialne in duhovne kulture, v katerih se ob že omenjeni dvojici kultura – ekonomija, vzpostavljajo tudi dvojice šport – ekonomija, politika – ekonomija, moda – ekonomija in prostočasne dejavnosti – ekonomija. Na umetnostnem področju je mesto, kjer se ekonomija polašča umetnosti in se hkrati tudi slednja brez zadrege odpira k njej, predvsem ustanova (sodobnega) umetnostnega muzeja, zasnovanega kot iniciacijsko mesto umetnosti (v smislu teorije Borisa Groysa). Priti v muzej sodobne umetnosti – to ni imperativ le sodobnim (vizualnim) umetnikom, temveč tudi posameznikom, skupinam in celo korporacijam z drugih področij. V newyorškem Guggenheimu se je predstavil modni kreator Armani (leta 2000), v tamkajšnji Muzej moderne umetnosti (Moma) pa so že pred dvema desetletjema stopili ferrariji, se pravi pološčeni rdeči dirkalniki. Tudi v losangeleškem muzeju sodobne umetnosti Moca so

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 55

6 naj / 6 Pri / 6 svetu / 6 t / 6 tega / 6 umetniških / 6 veliko / 6 vendar / 6 ZDA / 6 zelo / 6 znamke / 5 čas / 5 če / 5 čemer / 5 del / 5 delo /

pred desetletjem razstavljali eksponate Husseina Chalayana kot kreatorja-novomedijskega umetnika, ki se ob vsakoletnih rutinskih modnih kolekcijah (pomlad-poletje, jesen-zima) usmerja k pravcatim modelom-artefaktom-umetninam v smislu, da manekenko obleče v pametno obleko, oprto na softver, ki omogoča preigravanje različnih trendovskih oblik, vzetih iz različnih obdobij. Hkrati pa ta avtor ob drugi priložnosti obteži manekenko z obleko, recimo s krilom iz lesa, in jo petrificira v pravcati muzejski eksponat, kar pomeni, da funkcijo obleke in oblačenja podaljša na nov, izrazito umetniški teritorij. Pomembnost muzeja se zrcali tudi v tem, kar se dogaja celo robnim umetniškim praksam, recimo eksperimentalni literaturi – od konkretne in vizualne poezije do novomedijskih besedilnih del. Če tu posežemo k slovenski konkretni in vizualni poeziji ter k drugim praksam z literarnimi ambicijami pisane besedilnosti onstran tiskane strani, ki so bile blizu recimo Franciju Zagoričniku, vidimo, da te stvari komaj kaj zanimajo slovensko literarno znanost in konvencionalne literarne ustanove, ampak je tako rekoč edina ustanova, ki bdi nad tem področjem, Bežigrajska galerija v Ljubljani, ki občasno pripravlja vrsto razstav o tej neoavantgardistični ustvarjalnosti. Tudi novomedijska iskanja v besedilnem eksperimentiranju odkrivajo v mediju (interaktivnih) novomedijskih instalacij odlično možnost za svoje prezentiranje v muzejih sodobne umetnosti, kar demonstrirajo projekti Jeffreyja Shawa, Camille Utterback in Simona Biggsa. Dogajanje v sodobni in novomedijski umetnosti je že daljše obdobje namenjeno aktivizmu, usmerjenemu h kritiki neoliberalizma, multinacionalnih korporacij in globalnih nosilcev finančnega kapitalizma, vendar lahko vidimo, da so bili pri tem uspešni predvsem s hektivizmom povezani projekti (hektivizem temelji na povezavi umetniškega aktivizma in hekerstva), ki so se usmerjali k različnim oblikam napadov na strežnike korporacij in političnih subjektov (t. i. angl. sit-ins). Če posežemo v zgodovino tega področja, omenimo npr. projekta Floodnet, usmerjen v podporo mehiškemu zapatističnemu gibanju, in Toywar, ko se je umetniška skupina etoy spopadla z družbo eToys. V sedanji umetnosti so zato zanimivi tisti projekti, ki izhajajo iz spoznanja, da se v njej bistvene stvari dogajajo prav v kontekstu dvojice umetnost – ekonomija in se usmerjajo k, recimo kar alternativnim in singularnim umetnostnim ekonomijam. Tu je opazno vlogo vsekakor opravila spletna umetnost, ki je pod vprašaj postavila tradicionalno umetnostno ekonomijo in njeno trženje unikatnih artefaktov. Iznenada je usmerila pozornost na digitalna umetniška kot-da-dela in storitve (izraza avtorja tega eseja), ki so prek številnih strežnikov dostopna na milijonih osebnih računalnikov, mogoče jih je reproducirati in pod določenimi pogoji tudi spreminjati. Srečujemo se s proizvodnjo, hranjenjem in distribucijo, ki so neskončno tuji tradicionalnim umetnostnim artefaktom kot tempeljskim delom v smislu Heideggrovega eseja o izvoru umetniškega dela. Hajp, povezan s spletno umetnostjo, je danes že mimo, vendar pa izzivi nove umetnostne ekonomije kot področja, ki se upira večinski korporativni produkciji in tudi finančnim trgom dematerializiranih produktov, vsekakor ostajajo relevantni.

5 6 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

Od spletne (in aktivistične) umetnosti h kritičnemu popu: iskanje ironičnega in ustvarjalnega presežka

odobni umetniki, ki se zavedajo temeljnih kulturnih (in družbenih) obratov v sedanjosti, se ustvarjalno opredeljujejo do novih paradigem, ki zadevajo tako ekonomijo kot sodobne pojave globalizacije, imperija, multitude, aktivizma, novih družbenih gibanj, kvir manjšin, problematiko migrantov (tudi v luči Agambenovega koncepta golega življenja), ekoloških problemov in novih oblik distribuirane moči. Vsekakor pa so kritični tudi do svojega (umetnostnega) področja in ga skušajo tako rekoč z vsakim projektom definirati na novo in širiti njegove meje še posebej z uporabo različnih, na umetniških taktikah temelječih praks (na Slovenskem recimo projekti treh Janezov Janš). Ob sicer relevantni aktivistično in političnoumetniški dejavnosti upiranja neoliberalnemu kapitalizmu (in njegovim globalnim žandarskim ustanovam) in taktičnomedijski aktivnosti, ki jo opredeljujejo imena skupin, kot so Electronic Disturbance Theater, Critical Art Ensemble, ®TMark in Yes Men, pa se v sedanjosti srečujemo tudi z novimi umetnostnimi taktikami in postopki, ki segajo onstran neposrednih konfrontacij z globalizacijskimi političnimi subjekti in korporacijami. Usmerjajo se k ekonomskim podlagam umetnikovega dela, ki nikakor niso nebistvene za kapitalizem, nasprotno, zanj so lahko celo paradigmatične in izzivalne. Tu je vsekakor relevanten primer Alexeija Shulgina ter njegovega koncepta in prakse kritičnega popa (angl. criti-pop). Gre namreč za umetnika, ki je bil eden pionirjev spletne umetnosti, vendar pa je to področje zapustil (se na njem, recimo temu, upokojil podobno kot Vuk Čosić) in bil potem krajši čas aktiven na področju t. i. softverske umetnosti, ki jo je skupaj z Olgo Goriunovo pomagal promovirati z vrsto Read_me konferenc in festivalov. Iz spleta in sveta digitaliziranih entitet, se pravi nematerialnih podatkov, nadzorovanih s programsko opremo, se je preusmeril na, pogojno rečeno, področje muzejske umetnosti in k izdelovanju artefaktov, ki so praviloma všečni, glamurozni in funkcionalni; spogledujejo se s popom in popularnimi tehnologijami (recimo LED zasloni) in zahtevajo le enostavne, uporabnikom prijazne oblike interaktivnosti. Ker spletna umetnost ni uspela razviti lastne ekonomije (s pomočjo umetnikom naklonjenega sistema subvencioniranja je na tem področju preživela le nizozemska dvojica Jodi), se je odločil za na samosvojo ekonomijo oprto proizvodnjo »kritipop« umetniških artefaktov, namenjeno projektu Elektrobutik8, ki je začel svojo dejavnost v letu 2005. Ob Shulginu je pri tem projektu pomemben tudi njegov sodelavec Aristarkh Chernyshev, s katerim sta začela izdelovati dela, ki so hkrati zanimive umetnine in všečni, dobro prodajani artefakti. Vsekakor gre za marketing in komercializacijo, ki pa (prav zato ime kritični pop) predpostavlja določen umetniški presežek, ki ga Shulgin 8

Glej spletno predstavitev Elektrobutika na http://www.electroboutique.com/ (dostopno 30. septembra 2009).

5 drugih / 5 izhajajo / 5 izraz / 5 kapitalizma / 5 kateri / 5 materialnih / 5 mogoče / 5 mreženje / 5 nedvomno / 5 nikakor / 5 niso / 5 njej /

razume kot komercialni protest9 in vključuje tudi posmeh do tradicionalno razumljene muzealizacije. Kot značilno delo iz konceptualno bogatega Elektrobutika naj omenimo Info bombo, ki usmerja k raziskavi odnosov med sodobno tehnologijo, hitrostjo, vojno in informacijami; slednje so tiste, ki aktivirajo bombo, one usmerjajo k eksploziji. Druga relevantna usmeritev na področju sodobne umetnosti, ki opušča intervencije samo na orto spletnem področju in v okviru umetnostnega aktivizma, pa so projekti, ki se osredotočajo na ponovno aktualiziranje uporabne vrednosti v umetnosti. Seveda so tudi tukaj zanimivi le tisti, ki ne opravljajo takšnega premika naivno, se pravi, da ne zapuščajo enega področja panično, na vrat na nos, ampak kar se da reflektirano. Preusmerjajo se k uporabnosti, ki pa nikakor ni preprosto samoumevna, ampak je nadgrajena s svojevrstnim umetniškim presežkom, ki je lahko v ironiji, sarkazmu ali pa, zakaj ne, kar v humorju. In umetnica, na katere projekte tukaj opozarjamo, je Joo Youn Paek (doma iz Južne Koreje, sedaj pa ustvarja v New Yorku), ki izdeluje uporabne stvari z dodano (umetniško) vrednostjo, kakršen je njen Vljudni dežnik. Srečujemo se z »marelo«, ki ni le nadvse koristna, ko se iznenada vsuje dež, ampak nam omogoča tudi humorno interakcijo z okoljem; spričo njenih posebnih kvalitet (v ročaju je mehanizem, ki omogoča krčenje, tako rekoč razpolavljanje prostora, ki ga sicer zavzema ob srečanju z drugo osebo v deževnem vremenu) zbudimo z igrivim ravnanjem z njo opazen interes mimoidočih. Srečujemo se z umetniškim artefaktom, ki je namenjen tudi vzpostavljanju stikov z drugimi, kajti nasmeh na lice jim prikličejo naše vljudnostne geste, ko iznenada skrčimo obseg dežnikovega klobuka nad sabo, kar ni le praktično-uporabna gesta, ampak tudi svojevrsten nagovor mimoidočemu, ki ga upoštevamo, ga nočemo ovirati na njegovi poti.10 Po besedah umetnice je jedro tega projekta v njegovi vsestranski uporabnosti, ki ne predpostavlja le zaščite pred dežjem, ampak je spodbujevalec prijazne komunikacije z mimoidočim, k čemur ga nagovarja tudi humorni aspekt manevriranja z njim. Sicer pa ima avtorica tudi smisel za konkretno poezijo, za njen revival v okviru projektov, ki jih je naslovila s Športna poezija. Ni nujno, da je športni copat videti le tako, kot ga oblikujejo znani proizvajalci športne opreme, lahko ima tudi humorni videz (kot npr. Powersoccershoe_02 iz cikla Športna poezija). Paekova izhaja iz drugačne, ne srednjeevropske umetnostne tradicije, zato lahko njene projekte povežemo z usmeritvijo sodobnih japonskih umetnikov, ki so dejavni na področju t. i. umetnosti naprav, o čemer piše teoretičarka Machiko Kusahara (2008). Gre za umetnost igrivih naprav-igračk (kar označuje angl. izraz device art), ki se prodajajo kot umetnost in hkrati kot praktični uporabi namenjene stvari, kar pomeni, da smo pri umetnostni usmeritvi, ki predpostavlja umetnikovo vključitev 9

Glej Brian Droitcour, intervju z Alexeijem Shulginom, 19. november 2008: http:// rhizome.org/editorial/2099 (dostopno 3. oktobra 2009). 10 Joo Youn Paek, Polite Umbrella, http://www.jooyounpaek.com/umb.html (dostopno 3. oktobra 2009).

levator pitch je angleški izraz za ekonomično in prepričljivo predstavitev osebe, izdelka ali storitve, ki mora biti zgoščeno artikulirana v (kratkem, intenzivnem) času tridesetih sekund oziroma v 100 do 150 besedah. Gre za mobilizacijski čas, ki ga lahko primerjamo s časom vožnje z dvigalom v kaki sodobni stolpnici (to vlogo ima angl. elevator v tej sestavljenki). Posameznikova pozornost namreč postaja vse bolj okrnjena spričo zahtev, ki izhajajo iz njegovega terminalskega položaja, ko mora tekoče, brezkonfliktno preskakovati s področja na področje. Elevator pitch stavi vse na prvi vtis v smislu, da je treba od sogovornika oziroma potrošnika zelo hitro pridobiti pozitivni odgovor, kar pomeni, da pokaže interes za tisto, kar mu predstavljamo, in hoče o tem izvedeti še več. TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 57

5 njih / 5 omenjamo / 5 omogoča / 5 oziroma / 5 pitch / 5 podobno / 5 politika / 5 pred / 5 produktov / 5 proizvodnjo / 5 projekti /

odobno kot hedgerji (posredniki pri t. i. hedge skladih) špekulirajo (z namenom varovanja svojih naložb) tudi umetniki, kajti ves čas računajo na gledalca, bralca in poslušalca, ki ga še ni, vendar bo dodal presežno vrednost njihovemu izdelku. Stavijo na prihodnost, živijo iz negotovosti in so v njej, špekulativno igrajo in stavijo nanjo; prepričani so, da bo razplet dogodkov, ki zadevajo ustanovo umetnosti, v prihodnosti dodal presežek njihovemu delu. Njihova opcijska pogodba se nanaša na nek prihodnji čas, kajti računajo, da se bodo razmere na trgu oziroma sceni umetniških del spremenile njim v prid. Oblikujejo dela, ki se usmerjajo k novemu, hkrati pa je njihova vrednostna podlaga v referenci na ustanovo umetnosti, na njena že preverjena dela (gre za citat, remake, remiks), s čimer se vsaj do neke mere zavarujejo. 5 8 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

v širši kontekst interakcij z zabavo, dizajnom in komercialno produkcijo, prav tako pa takšna dela izražajo tudi njegovo pozitivno stališče do sodobnih tehnologij.11 Kratek skok h kritičnemu popu ter k humornim in hkrati uporabnim izdelkom Paekove omenjamo le kot dve možnosti, ki se odpirata v sedanji umetnosti. Nikakor nista edini (Vuk Čosić je, recimo, po opustitvi spletne umetnosti nadaljeval svojo ustvarjalnost v mediju t. i. Ascii filmov), vsekakor pa kažeta na veliko fleksibilnost umetnostnega družbenega (pod)sistema, ki ima več središč, ki fleksibilno, odvisno od vsakokratnih interakcij z okoljem, prevzemajo kot poglavitno zdaj to vlogo in drugič drugo. Brez večjih zadreg pa pošljejo na obrobje ali kar v pozabo funkcijo, ki je bila še pred kratkim videti središčna. V okviru tovrstnih tendenc v sodobni umetnosti naj opozorimo na projekt Socialna obleka Marije Mojce Pungerčar (2006), ki označuje oblačila, za katera je značilno, da delujejo povezovalno v smislu skupnosti. Delavnice s področja socialnih oblek širijo znanje o izdelovanju oblek, hkrati pa krepijo zavedanje o posledicah globalizacije za domačo tekstilno industrijo ter izginevanja rokodelskega znanja in spretnosti. Na delavnicah nastajajo duhovita in funkcionalna oblačila, ki jih je enostavno izdelati, vendar niso naprodaj. Fleksibilnost na področju sodobne umetnosti brez težav sledi dinamiki, s katero se srečujemo na področju na mreženje oprte ekonomije finančnih trgov, kjer novi finančni produkti vnašajo dinamiko v spektakel globalnega 24-urnega trženja, ki smo ga uvodoma omenili. Ker je vsaj na kratek rok mogoče bistveno hitreje in več zaslužiti na finančnih trgih, se na njih pojavljajo novi in novi produkti, ki privlačijo kupce in špekulante, med katerimi imajo še posebej pomembno mesto hedge skladi in izvedeni finančni inštrumenti (opcije, terminske pogodbe), ki na te trge vnašajo novo kvaliteto. To še posebej velja za trgovanje z izvedenimi vrednostnimi papirji (derivati) kot finančnimi inštrumenti, katerih cena je odvisna od osnovnega premoženja (blago, valute, zavarovanje), referenčnega tečaja ali indeksa, na katerega se nanašajo. Pri tem se srečujemo s položajem, ko skušajo hedgerski posredniki zmanjšati tveganje, špekulanti pa tveganje povečujejo z namenom, da bi maksimirali svoje dobičke. Skratka, gre za situacijo, ko imamo nesporno vrednostno osnovo, preko katere skušamo v prihodnosti povečati svoje premoženje (ali ga zavarovati). Ko se srečujemo z nekaterimi deli sodobne in še posebej novomedijske umetnosti, lahko vidimo, da se tudi tam umetniki osredotočajo okrog referenčne osnovne vrednosti (angl. underlaying asset) in referirajo nanjo, da bi s tem zavarovali svoje interese in celo profitirali od nje. Naredijo derivatska dela v smislu, da se sklicujejo na nesporno vrednost podloženega, referenčnega dela, ki posredno s svojo vrednostno prepoznavnostjo jamči tudi za prepoznavnost njegove izvedenke, kajti »vprašanje o vrednosti dela je vprašanje o njegovem razmerju 11

Glej Machiko Kusahara, »Making Art as Commercial Products: An Ongoing Challenge of Device Art«, ISEA 2008 Proceedings, Singapore, 2008.

5 skušajo / 5 Stallabrass / 5 storitve / 5 te / 5 tisti / 5 trgih / 5 Tudi / 5 umetnostni / 5 Vsekakor / 5 zato / 4 aktivizma / 4 bili / 4 bistveno /

Electroboutique: Info Bomb, info-sculpture, 2008 Photo: Aristarkh Chernyshev

do tradicionalnih zgledov in ne do zunajkulturnih profanosti«.12 Tu naj omenimo slovenskega novomedijskega umetnika Marka Peljhana, ki je v sodelovanju s Carstenom Nicolaijem in Canon Artlab oblikoval projekt Polar (2000), ki stopa v neposredni dialog z Lemovim romanom Solaris (1961). Čeprav je Polar vraščen v bistveno spremenjen svet informatične družbe in novih zgodb, išče stik z nesporno prepoznanim, v umetnostne vrednostne arhive že vključenim Solarisom.

agens in motiv v njihovo ustvarjalnost, kar je simptomatično demonstriral že Michael Goldberg v projektu Catching a Falling Knife, ki je raziskoval spekulativni kapital in trgovanje z delnicami News Corporation. Umetnik, ki je prej nekaj časa deloval kot borzni posrednik, je novembra 2002 tri tedne trgoval z delnicami in skušal oplemenititi 50.000 dolarski znesek, ki je bil podlaga njegovemu trgovanju. Naslov projekta sicer referira na zapoved wallstreetskih trgovcev z delnicami iz osemdesetih let prejšnjega stoletja »Never try to catch a falling knife«. ..

Podobno kot hedgerji (posredniki pri t. i. hedge skladih) špekulirajo (z namenom varovanja svojih naložb) tudi umetniki, kajti ves čas računajo na gledalca, bralca in poslušalca, ki ga še ni, vendar bo dodal presežno vrednost njihovemu izdelku. Stavijo na prihodnost, živijo iz negotovosti in so v njej, špekulativno igrajo in stavijo nanjo; prepričani so, da bo razplet dogodkov, ki zadevajo ustanovo umetnosti, v prihodnosti dodal presežek njihovemu delu. Njihova opcijska pogodba se nanaša na nek prihodnji čas, kajti računajo, da se bodo razmere na trgu oziroma sceni umetniških del spremenile njim v prid. Oblikujejo dela, ki se usmerjajo k novemu, hkrati pa je njihova vrednostna podlaga v referenci na ustanovo umetnosti, na njena že preverjena dela (gre za citat, remake, remiks), s čimer se vsaj do neke mere zavarujejo. Kot primer lahko navedemo umetniški projekt Natalie Bookchin Vsiljivka, oblikovan v instantnem in negotovem mediju video igre, v kateri pa poseže po stabilni, arhetipski in arhivski referenci v Borgesovi noveli La intrusa z namenom, da bi sklic na to delo dodal vrednostni presežek njenemu negotovemu, v novem mediju sicer pionirsko tipajočemu delu, ki sodi med »mods«, se pravi umetniške izpeljanke komercialnih video iger. Tudi v poslu novomedijske umetnosti se prepletajo rizične taktike novega s poskusi, ki vodijo k stabilnosti in varnosti; tudi umetniki se hočejo, podobno kot trgovci z dobrinami, zavarovati in storiti vse za preživetje. Ekonomija stopa kot podlaga, 12 Glej Boris Groys, Űber das Neue, München: Založba Carl Hanser, 1992, str. 161.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 59

412 the / 266 of / 229 and / 198 to / 188 in / 134 a / 98 art / 86 that / 85 is / 69 as / 57 by / 46 economy / 43 also / 43 which / 42 new / 41 with /

13 :

13 :3 0

:2 5

:15

13 :10

12:4 0 1 2: 45 12: 50 12 :55 13 :00 13 :05

12:3

12:20

12:25

12:10

12:15

12:00

12:05

The Work of Art in the Age of Turmoil in the Financial Markets

The artistic artefact between materialisation and dematerialisation in the world of economy as culture

:5 13

:00 14 :05 14 10 14: 15 14: 0 14:2

Janez Strehovec

5 14:2 0 14:3 14:35

Translated by Melita SiliÄ?

14:40 14:45

14:50

14:55 15:00

15:05 15:10 15:15

15:20 15:25

15:3

15:3 15:4

20:2

15:

:15

:55

:10

19 16

0 :3 16 5 :3 16 0 :4 16

:00

:55

:05

:3 0

5 :4 16 0 :5 16 :55

:00 17

05 17: 10 17:

5 17:1 0 17:2

5 17:2 17:30

17:40

17:35

17:50

17:45

18:00

17:55

18:05

18:10

18:15

18:20

1 8 :2 5 18 :3 0 18:3 5

18:4 0 1 : 8 45 18: 50 18 :55 19 :00 19 :05 19 :10

:15

6 0 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

:15

16 0

:00

:05

:10

38 s / 35 field / 34 are / 32 contemporary / 32 on / 31 an / 31 for / 31 it / 30 their / 29 from / 29 we / 28 financial / 28 its / 27 be / 26 this /

othing that’s happening in contemporary art is excluded from the social text and context determined by the findings of contemporary sciences, new media and technologies, as well as the new, networking-supported economy and post-political politics (Paolo Virno’s term from A Grammar of the Multitude). In the era of globalisation and its scenarios that lead to one-dimensional, globally established modes of judgement and behaviour (in the field of culture, they are dictated by McDonaldization, CNNism, Microsoftism, Benettonism, Googlism and other trends imposed by transnational corporations and their brands, which interfere in the individual’s lebenswelt and profile her needs), we are the contemporaries of a series of new cultural shifts, among which a relevant role is played by the transition from a cultural dominance connected particularly to aesthetic art to the economy being the new priority area, in terms of both the broader society and culture alike. We might also claim that the prioritised social position occupied in the developed Western world a decade and more ago by politics – and in Slovenia by culture in its role as a political proxy (we refer to “culture as an alibi” used to define political anti-concepts) – has these days been taken over by the economy, more precisely by the new economy supported by financial markets that is, in a way, also becoming cultural; it plays a productive role in the current globalised society and the generation of its images and rituals. (Here we have to be more precise and point out that in the field of art in particular, which is our major interest in this text, we are dealing with the replacement of the flexible art–politics duo with the art–economy duo, which is also highly dynamic and incorporates a series of interactions and feedback loops between both fields.)

From Spectacle Economy To Economy of Art

conomy as culture is not just any economy but is in particular that which drew attention due to the crisis events over the recent years (the first pinnacle was reached in mid-September 2008 with the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers bank, which so far has been the largest bankruptcy in the USA, whereas, in 2010, we witnessed the attack on the euro in global financial markets due to Greece’s economic and financial problems, as well as the beginning of a global currency war), and this is the economy of financial markets produced by the shift from a product (mainly material) exchange-oriented economy to the economy of financial affairs, financial instruments and new products aimed at stock exchange trading. We encounter a paradigm shift that isn’t any less important than other paradigm shifts in the field of politics, society and culture (such as from industrial to post-industrial society and from the politics of national states to globalised politics based on the interests of multinational corporations). At present, the economy as culture is also affected by huge changes in the field of economy and even its destabilization,

which started with the abandoning of the guidelines outlined by the Bretton Woods Agreement (the period between 1947 and 1971), adopted to provide security of monetary transactions. When this security was gone (transition from currencies being pegged to gold to the U.S. dollar as the international reserve currency), monetary volatility followed, as well as a unique financial market dynamics based on daring stock exchange speculations, which resulted in the stock market boom in the 1980s, the swing of the dot-com economy a decade later and the balloons in the American real-estate market (as the inducer of the penultimate crisis, the consequences of which are also felt in Slovenia). When money is mentioned in today’s global economy and postFordist production determined by the large impact of software and information technologies and related cybernetic management and control processes located as a rule in the invisible and latent structure of protocollary power (Alexander Galloway’s term), we have to understand that today the question of power is to be addressed within a code that also has long-term effects on the notion of money that circulates, depreciates and grows within the networking-supported economic processes. Therefore, the issue of money actually shifts to being the issue of the (latent) money code, which is subtly protected; it can be attacked (which happens in global stock exchange markets, the most recent case being the euro in the Greek crisis in the spring of 2010), but it cannot be simply “hacked”, because the “respected” currencies are not – to put it ironically – open-code entities. The bloom of financial capitalism contributed to the establishment of post-industrial society, which presumes the transition from the Fordist to the post-Fordist mode of production. Its principal characteristic is that it incorporates ever more knowledge and also that it is related to the modification of capitalism itself in the direction of the so-called cognitive capitalism, which, in the era of precarious labour, affects the entire 24-hour individual workday and constantly reinvents new forms of subtle exploitation convenient for the postKeynesian neoliberal model of the disposal of social and, in particular, immaterial wealth. Further to this, the huge impact of new technologies’ (also in the sense of their cultural, so to speak, spectacle) functions on contemporary social life, politics and economy cannot be neglected; a particularly relevant role is played by social networking and information technologies, so that an important aspect of contemporary society can also be considered within the transition to a software society (popular browsers are also distinctive social and cultural tools). In the 1980s and ’90s, not only the USA and Western Europe, but also China and developing countries, witnessed a huge boom in the financial markets, which were “flooded” by the capital from all economic sectors. Indeed, it became crystal clear that said markets – particularly in the short-term – allow making profits faster and with significantly higher yields than in the commodities and material product markets (these processes

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 6 1

23 they / 22 at / 21 but / 19 not / 18 being / 18 markets / 18 or / 18 works / 17 only / 17 The / 16 production / 16 such / 16 value / 16 well /

Electroboutique: Info Bomb, info-sculpture, 2008 Photo: Aristarkh Chernyshev

became the target of the 99% vs. 1% protests on Wall Street and in Ljubljana in autumn 2011). The growth in this field can undoubtedly also be attributed to technical progress, particularly in the field of software and global networking, which allows today’s spectacular events in financial markets worldwide; soon after the most famous one on Wall Street closes, the Far East financial markets start to open (the Tokyo stock exchange opens at 2 a.m. CET) and the staged spectacle indexed in the American Dow Jones and composite Nasdaq, as well as in the European equivalents (such as the DAX and FTSE), continues with events measured by the Hang Seng, Shanghai composite index, the Japanese Nikkei and other Asian indices. In terms of content, we are the contemporaries of a visible transformation of an (industrial) economy focused on artefact production into an economy based on service provision and finances. To put it simply: the latter is a far more abstract economy, where the exchange of commodities is being replaced by a series of new financial instruments and their derivatives; more than with stable items, we deal with unstable concepts, ideas and, of course, a code (that we’ve already mentioned with money). In drawing attention to this paradigm shift, let us point out that those involved in analyses of contemporary culture and art and its principal movements are no strangers to the above. If there is any field that is constantly subject to destabilisations, volatility, introduction of news, hybridisation, mixing and remixing, the jacking up of (exchange) value and rapid decline of particular trends (and value), this is contemporary art, in which the object’s dematerialisation played a similar role as that played in the field of economy by the transition from the (material) artefacts-oriented production economy to the economy of (far more abstract) financial products and services. However, art did not just passively follow the changes determined by social and economic shifts, but accomplished a pioneer work itself. Just think of Marcel Duchamp and his

6 2 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

ready-mades that drew attention to the relevance of the authorbrand (as a potential logo) in the field of modern art, as well as the broader effects of the institution of art as the one having the mechanisms to jack up the exchange value of certain products and pushing others to the margins. That the artistic context and its initiation by branding allows an ordinary object manufactured for a specific use to enter a completely new and different life was Duchamp’s message with his “urinal project” Fountain from 1917. As to theory, Boris Groys’ work Űber das Neue (1992) is one of the rare ones that followed the economy of art in the sense that it is a field that is constantly subject to evaluations and devaluations as well as dynamic transitions between profanity and value (cultural) archives.

Abstractness, Dematerialisation, Performativity and Speculativity in the Field of Economy and Art

his transposition and drawing attention to the role of the author’s brand is a field that is close to the principal subject of Naomi Klein’s bestseller No Logo, which has also contributed to the conceptualisation of the current economy as culture: “Since many of today’s best-known manufacturers no longer produce products and advertise them but rather buy products and ‘brand’ them, these companies are forever on the prowl for creative new ways to build and strengthen their brand images.”1 Similarly, the theoretician Julian Stallabrass states that “branding in the art world has flourished. Galleries and museums burnish their new logos, striving to impress the character of their brand upon the public.”2 He refers to the

1 2

Compare Naomi Klein, No Space. No Choice. No Jobs. No Logo, London: Flamingo, 2001, p. 5. See Julian Stallabrass, Contemporary Art: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, 2006, p. 97.

15 artistic / 15 attention / 15 In / 14 artist / 14 has / 14 media / 14 so / 14 social / 13 can / 13 more / 13 other / 13 particular / 13 political /

British Tate gallery, and another player in the same game is Guggenheim. Nowadays, the manufacture of commodities in the form of (material) artefacts has in a number of areas given way to branding; thus, instead of manufacturing things, wellknown multinational corporations have started to produce “their brand images”. It can be noticed though that things have not only started giving way to images of attractive brands (from Coca Cola and Benetton to McDonald’s, Microsoft, Google and Nike), but also to concepts, ideas, hybrids and derivatives (such as options at financial markets), which is undoubtedly also close to contemporary art significantly marked by the conceptualist (Sol LeWitt, together with his fellow colleagues and successors, such as Joseph Kosuth) notion that contemporary art refers to the definition of art itself. One of the principal areas of post-industrial society, the service economy, is actually as close as can possibly be to contemporary art, in which the production of a stable, material kunstwerk gives way to a flexible service organised by algorithmic procedures – a topic addressed by the author of this text in the book Besedilo In Novi Mediji [Text and New Media] and some scientific articles published abroad.3 This cultural shift has also visibly affected the definition of the current social situation of the artist, which has transformed from the role of the artefact’s manufacturer to – in terms of concept – the considerably more exigent activity of art process organisation. Rather than being a genius individual, the artist becomes a highly qualified person that controls a complex project-in-progress that is often structured in algorithms and is aimed at solving particular problems, this or that intervention in the field that, in a hybrid-like manner, crosses various disciplines. Undoubtedly, today, a series of parallels can be drawn between the main social spheres, such as economy, politics, science and culture. Indeed, in all of them, we are the contemporaries of unique dematerialisations, conceptualisations and speculativities attributable to the fact that science abandons “the reading of the open book of nature” (and becomes considerably more conceptual and creative), politics abandons its foundations in national parliaments, economy abandons exchange of (material, industrial) products, art abandons the production of artefacts, i.e. “kunstwerks”, and technology substitutes its being a tool and in service of with spectacle and performative functions.

f there is any field that is constantly subject to destabilisations, volatility, introduction of news, hybridisation, mixing and remixing, the jacking up of (exchange) value and rapid decline of particular trends (and value), this is contemporary art, in which the object’s dematerialisation played a similar role as that played in the field of economy by the transition from the (material) objectsoriented production economy to the economy of (far more abstract) financial products and services.

We live in an artificial and speculative world “by nature” dominated by services, concepts, networking and rush decisions related to attention economy.4 When we mention rush, i.e. the transfer of attention to real time and thereby to a terminal position when decisions have to be made as fast as possible, let us draw attention to the elevator pitch effect, originating 3

See Janez Strehovec, Besedilo in novi mediji, Ljubljana: Literatura (Novi pristopi), 2007 and Janez Strehovec, “New Media Art as Research: Art-making Beyond the Autonomy of Art and Aesthetics”, Technoetic Arts, vol. 6, no. 3, 2008, pp. 233–250. Concept by Michael H. Goldhaber.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 6 3

13 post / 13 work / 12 culture / 12 have / 12 one / 12 products / 12 project / 12 projects / 11 Art / 11 cultural / 11 economic / 11 politics /

his cultural shift has also visibly affected the definition of the current social situation of the artist, which has transformed from the role of the artefact’s manufacturer to – in terms of concept – the considerably more exigent activity of art process organisation. Rather than being a genius individual, the artist becomes a highly qualified person that controls a complex project-in-progress that is often structured in algorithms and is aimed at solving particular problems, this or that intervention in the field that, in a hybridlike manner, crosses various disciplines.

from contemporary slang of the PR economy, which has a number of cultural implications. What is this effect all about? The point is that, today, the individual, in the role of a consumer or (business, political, etc.) partner has to be most intensively addressed in the shortest temporal interval possible. When surfing the Internet, we realise that only attractive and visually appealing contents make us click and visit the site; otherwise, we simply go on surfing without being at all embarrassed (or guilty). Elevator pitch is a term for an economical and convincing presentation of a person, product or service that needs to be articulated in (a short, intensive) 30 seconds, or 100 to 150 words. This is a mobilisation time that can be compared to an elevator ride in a contemporary skyscraper (hence the role of “elevator” in the expression); indeed, due to demands related to her terminal position where an individual has to swiftly and without any conflict switch from one area to another, her attention gets ever more curtailed. The elevator pitch bets everything on the first impression where one needs to rapidly get a positive response from the person she is talking to or a consumer, i.e. the other party has to show interest in what is being presented to him and wants to know more about it. The world of the elevator pitch and other effects originating in the present and determined by the (new, networked) economy of financial markets is no stranger to art – on the contrary. (Contemporary) art promotes and forms a series of procedures, devices and tactics that the analysts and designers of new political, economic and scientific paradigms can (and do) find interesting. In order to illustrate post-Fordist labour, Paolo Virno used in his book A Grammar of the Multitude5 an example from art; he said that, from the structural perspective, those who generate surplus value in post-Fordism behave like pianists and dancers. What is characteristic of the core activity of, let’s just say, the performance of virtuosi, which is becoming a metaphor for a contemporary form of labour in immaterial production? It is an activity that finds its accomplishment (i.e. its own purpose) within itself without being objectivised in an end product, hence without being placed in an “end product” or an object that would remain after the end of the performance; simultaneously, it is an activity that requires the presence of others, meaning it only exists in the presence of an audience. In contemporary new media art and digital literature, the elevator pitch is indubitably at work when the authors strive to animate the user and reader in works (actually projects and processes) or texts taking place in short temporal intervals wherein they also employ a number of special effects in order to intensify the action. Further to this, the field of art is also the cradle of issues that should be of interest to contemporary political thought (and practice). Just think of the Slovenian trio of Janez Janšas, who (re)defined the forms of art-borne political 5

6 4 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

See Paolo Virno, A Grammar of the Multitude: For an Analysis of Contemporary Forms of Life, Los Angeles: Semiotext(e), 2004.

11 role / 11 series / 11 who / 10 exchange / 10 global / 10 his / 10 market / 10 museum / 10 related / 10 society / 10 was / 10 where / 9 artists /

disapproval (these should also interest professional politologists, the same as other phenomena of art activism). Indeed, they drew attention to the tactics of the excessive emphasising of a name-brand in a certain context being illustrative of the fact that there’s something very wrong with the name, brand and political enterprise in its background. Rather than being a mere provocation or infantile artistic instigation, the Janez Janšas were one of the reflected artistic-political tactics arising from art going beyond its bourgeois-related concept of autonomy.

From Fine Art to Post-Aesthetic and “Dirty” Art

ontemporary art is no longer substantiated on the beautiful and it abandons its articulations in the material, sense-fascinating artefacts; it is post-aesthetic, post-political and established in a new, considerably more complex relation to social and economic reality. It is no longer “the social antithesis of society” (as termed by Adorno), but rather a field ever more contaminated day after day with Warholian logic: instead of a dissident and absolute “no”, it is not too embarrassed to say “yes” to the existing reality; critical contemporary artists try to secure a unique surplus in an ironic distance, in nuances, in subtle mocking at corporations and in drawing attention to noises and cracks in high-tech (which was, for example, in the field of net art, accomplished by the Jodi duo). The already mentioned theoretician Julian Stallabrass wittily entitled his book Art Incorporated and provided further evidence to insights illustrated in his previous work (also available in Slovene translation), where, through a series of examples, he substantiated his thesis that the economy of art closely reflects the economy of finance capital. “Culturally dominant states have abundant local production that meets the demands of their home markets, importing little and successfully exporting much. In the nineteenth century, France and Britain were the dominant literary powers. The U.S. is now by far the most dominant cultural state, exporting its products globally while importing very little.”6 Stallabrass is also very explicit in that a number of art practices is being increasingly commercialised; we witness the boom of contemporary art museum construction and the introduction of a series of biennial events that strive to establish audiences, promote cultural tourism and contribute to the identity (we might as well say the brand) of the city where they take place. It is also relevant that installation art makes a constituent part of the attractive offer of such museum-temples, installation art that is explicitly related to a particular museum venue and setting, i.e. it is in dialogue with the architectural and conceptual design of that museum so that the art lovers (in the role of consumers) are forced to visit that particular museum in order to see a particular installation by Louise Bourgeois or Joseph Beuys (for example, to

Stallabrass, as cited, p. 3.

London’s Tate Modern). Without any prejudice, instead of the form, style, artist, artistic value, idea, influence and innovation, Stallabrass introduces us to the world of art import and export, market and exchange, money laundering, investments, interest and financial machinations and most legitimately exposes the U.S. as the leading exporter of art commodities and at the same time a lousy importer. Indeed, the U.S. is extremely privileged in the field of art; artists from around the globe come to live in the States and start – practically without any compensation for their past work (or costs of education) – producing new products and services that are – if competitive – exported by this superpower, whilst the mother country that educated as well as profiled the artist/ author not only gets nothing but has to acquire their new works at market price. In the unfair global business where the U.S. issues invoices to the whole world, including the poorest countries, for its military services and its attempts to provide global safety, the field of art is no exception. Stallabrass further points out the economic profanity of the business called art, actually art market, with the following statement: “Art prices and the volume of art sales tend to match the stock markets closely, and it is no accident that the world’s major financial centres are also the principle centres for the sale of art. To raise this parallel is to see art not only as a zone of purposeless free play but as a minor speculative market in which art works are used for a variety of instrumental purposes, including investment, tax avoidance, and money laundering.”7 When referring to art and literature, words such as speculative market, tax avoidance and money laundering are undoubtedly unfamiliar to the Slovenian protagonists in this field integrated in the machinery of national (state) subventions aimed at art. Nonetheless, a unique economic logic can also be detected in Slovenia when it comes to inventing sophisticated mechanisms for how to be the most successful in taking hold of the millions of euros available from the annual calls for subventions, i.e. how to get to them first (or among the first) and how to, in a most rough manner, beat out the competition. In the field of Slovenian contemporary literature, we witness the transition from the nationalliteraturism (an ironic neologism coined by the author of this text that, to a certain extent, also refers to the national socialist forcing of literature as a promotional and national-identity-building element of the nation, comprehended also in its ethno-specifics) to the juppified literaturism of an influential group of authors who do poetry and prose in the manner of genuine financial experts because they not only constantly issue invoices to the state for their works but also for a series of derivatives that accompany their business (year after year, the state gives them grants, rewards and often pays for the translation and printing of their works abroad, where their mainly conformist stuff is hardly ever read).

Ibid., p. 4.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 6 5

9 brand / 9 e / 9 example / 9 i / 9 most / 9 stock / 9 than / 9 us / 9 world / 8 aimed / 8 artefacts / 8 based / 8 called / 8 capitalism /

Contrary to the great majority of influential Slovenian literary figures, some local new media artists consider in their projects the reality of post-Fordist labour, globalisation post-politics and financial and cognitive capitalism. Back in 2001, Igor Štromajer and Janez Janša (Davide Grassi) entered this field with their Problemmarket, and we should also draw attention to a number of references to commodity production and capitalism in XXX Sale by the Kitch duo presented at the 7th International Festival of Computer Arts in Maribor (2001). This text is being written in the period following the financial crises that started in 2008, the consequences of which will be felt – in particular by small countries – for a long time (for example, in the labour market). Being interested in the parallels between economy and art, we wonder whether something similar to what happened to the economy of financial markets might also strike art. Other than the mere economic dimension of the problem, we find of interest the very (ontological and conceptual) nucleus of art production based on services, processes and object dematerialisation. In the field of art, too, we are contemporaries of a number of “balloons”, non-critical exaggerations by hyperproduction (for example, in Slovenian poetry), which have resulted in a relativisation of particular art practices that used to be surrounded by an aura (which, most likely only in Slovenia, still surrounds national literary figures). In an attempt to be at least somewhat critical to contemporary fine art, we might say that hyperproduction in this field (mass reproduction of “heavy-artefact” works by some modernist art movements) can be considered environmental pollution.

Artistic Non-Conflict Adjustment to Different Challenges

arkets, financial capital, brands, investments, risk factors, the expansion of immaterial production, ideas, blown up balloons and their collapse not only fit the dynamics of the strictly economic sector but also affect other fields of contemporary material and spiritual culture in which – in addition to the already mentioned culture–economy duo – other duos are being established, such as, sport–economy, politics– economy, fashion–economy and spare time activities–economy. The place in the field of art where economy penetrates art – and the latter shamelessly reaches out to it – is in particular the institution of the (contemporary) art museum, designed as the initiation venue of art (in the sense of Boris Groys’ theory). Visiting the museum of contemporary art is not only an imperative for contemporary (visual) artists, but individuals, groups and even corporations from other fields alike. New York’s Guggenheim hosted the presentation of fashion designer Armani (2000), while the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) was already two decades ago “invaded” by Ferraris – red, polished Formula One cars. A decade ago, the Los Angeles Museum of

6 6 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

Contemporary Art (MoCA) as well exhibited works by Hussein Chalayan, a fashion designer-new media artist who, in addition to the regular annual fashion collections (spring/summer, autumn/winter), designs genuine models-artefacts-artworks; he dresses the model in a smart, software-supported dress that allows playing with various trendy forms taken from various periods. Or on another occasion, the same designer “loads” a model with a dress, for example, a wood dress, and petrifies her in a true museum exhibit, thereby extending the dress function to a new, explicitly artistic territory. The relevance of the museum is also reflected even in what is happening to marginal art practices, such as experimental literature – from concrete and visual poetry to new media texts. When referring to the Slovenian concrete and visual poetry as well as other practices, other than printed works, of written texts with literary ambitions – one example of such a practice was Franci Zagoričnik’s work – it is evident that Slovenian literary criticism and conventional literary institutions are hardly interested in these things; the only “dedicated” institution is the Bežigrad Gallery in Ljubljana, which occasionally organises a series of exhibitions on this neo-avant-garde creative activity. As (interactive) new media installations, new media textual experiments find an excellent opportunity to be presented in contemporary art museums, which is demonstrated by Jeffrey Shaw’s, Camille Utterback’s and Simon Biggs’ projects. For a longer period, the activity in contemporary and new media art has been aimed at activism oriented to the critique of neoliberalism, multinational corporations and global holders of financial capitalism. However, only mainly hacktivism-related projects (hacktivism is based on the connection between art activism and hackerism) featuring various forms of attacks on corporations’ and political entities’ servers (the so-called sit-ins) have succeeded in their efforts. Looking back at the history of this field, there was the Floodnet project aimed at supporting the Zapatista movement, and Toywar, when the etoy art group confronted the eToys company. Hence, in today’s art, we find the projects based on the knowledge that essential things in art happen in the context of the art–economy duo very interesting; these are projects involved in alternative and singular economies of art. In this context, a noticeable role was definitely played by net art, which questioned the traditional economy of art and its marketing of unique artefacts. It suddenly drew attention to the digital artistic as-if-works and services (termed by the author of this text), which are through a number of servers available on millions of personal computers, they can be reproduced and under certain terms also changed. We witness a production, storage and distribution that are totally unfamiliar to the traditional works of art as the temple works in the sense of Heidegger’s article on the origin of the work of art. Today, the hype related to net art is passé, but the challenges of a new economy of art as a field resisting the majority corporate production as well as financial markets of dematerialised products definitely remain relevant.

8 corporations / 8 derivatives / 8 interest / 8 material / 8 money / 8 net / 8 no / 8 Slovenian / 8 time / 8 when / 7 activity / 7 between /

From Net (and Activist) Art to Critical Pop Art: The Search for Ironic and Creative Surplus

ontemporary artists aware of basic cultural (and social) shifts in the present take a creative attitude to new paradigms related to economy and contemporary phenomena of globalisation, empire, multitude, activism, new social movements, queer minorities, immigrant problems (also in light of Agamben’s concept of bare life), ecological issues and new forms of power distribution. They are also critical to their (art) field and with every new project they try to redefine it and expand its limits, in particular by using various art-tactic-based practices (in Slovenia, the projects by the three Janez Janšas). Further to otherwise relevant activist and political-artistic opposition to neoliberal capitalism (and its global gendarme institutions) and tactical-media activity determined by groups such as Electronic Disturbance Theater, Critical Art Ensemble, ®TMark and Yes Men, we also encounter new art tactics and procedures that reach beyond direct confrontations with globalisation political subjects and corporations. They address the economic basis of the artist’s work, which are anything but irrelevant for capitalism; quite the opposite, they might even be paradigmatic and provocative. Let us draw attention to Alexei Shulgin and his criti-pop concept and practice, one of the pioneers of net art who abandoned this field (he, so to speak, retired, similar to Vuk Čosić) and was then active for a short time in the field of the so-called software art, which he – together with Olga Goriunova – promoted through a series of Read_me conferences and festivals. He moved from net and the world of digitalised entities, i.e. nonmaterial data controlled by software, to – conditionally said – the field of museum art and the production of artworks that are as a rule pleasing, glamorous and functional; they flirt with pop and popular technologies (such as LED displays) and require simple, user-friendly forms of interactivity. Due to the fact that net art failed to develop its own economy (thanks to the artist-favourable subvention system, only the Dutch Jodi duo survived in this field), he decided to engage in the production of criti-pop artefacts, supported by a unique economy and aimed at the Electroboutique8 project launched in 2005. A relevant part of this project is also Shulgin’s collaborator Aristarkh Chernyshev; they started to produce works that are simultaneously interesting works of art as well as pleasing and well-sold artefacts. We definitely deal with marketing and commercialisation (that’s why the name criti-pop) that nevertheless presumes a certain artistic surplus that Shulgin considers a commercial protest9 and mockery to musealisation in the traditional sense. Let us mention Info Bomb as a typical work from the conceptually rich Electroboutique that leads to 8 9

See online presentation of Electroboutique: http://www.electroboutique.com/. (Accessed September 30, 2009). See Brian Droitcour, Interview with Alexei Shulgin, November 19, 2008: http://rhizome.org/editorial/2099. (Accessed October 3, 2009).

levator pitch is a term for an economical and convincing presentation of a person, product or service that needs to be articulated in (a short, intensive) 30 seconds, or 100 to 150 words. This is a mobilisation time that can be compared to an elevator ride in a contemporary skyscraper (hence the role of “elevator” in the expression); indeed, due to demands related to her terminal position where an individual has to swiftly and without any conflict switch from one area to another, her attention gets ever more curtailed. The elevator pitch bets everything on the first impression where one needs to rapidly get a positive response from the person she is talking to or a consumer, i.e. the other party has to show interest in what is being presented to him and wants to know more about it. TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 67

7 duo / 7 forms / 7 It / 7 number / 7 order / 7 relevant / 7 sense / 7 t / 7 them / 7 They / 7 today / 7 unique / 7 various / 6 A / 6 abandons /

he hedgers (brokers in the so-called hedge funds) speculate (in order to secure their investments) and so do artists; they keep counting on the spectator, reader or listener who isn’t here yet but who will add surplus value to their product. They bet on the future, they live by insecurity and in it, they speculate and bet on it; they are convinced that the course of events regarding the institution of art will add surplus to their work in the future. Their option contract refers to some time in the future; they reckon the situation in the market or artworks scene will change to their benefit. They design works oriented to the new and at the same time their value basis refers to the institution of art, to its “proved” works (quote, remake, remix), which gives them a certain amount of security. 6 8 TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY

investigating the relations between contemporary technology, speed, war and informations; the latter activate a bomb, they lead to an explosion. Another relevant movement in the field of contemporary art that abandons interventions in orthodox net art and within art activism are projects focused on the re-actualisation of use value in art. Of course, only projects that don’t make such a shift naively, i.e. they don’t leave one field in panic, head over heels, but in a highly reflective manner, are of interest to us. They redirect to applicability that is – rather than being taken for granted – upgraded with a unique artistic surplus, which might be irony, sarcasm or – why not – plain humour. The artist whose projects we would like to draw attention to is Joo Youn Paek (born in South Korea and now based in New York), who makes useful things with (artistic) value added; such is her Polite Umbrella. It is an umbrella that is not just most useful when it’s pouring down but also allows humorous interaction with the surroundings; due to its special qualities (a control in the handle allows shrinking, so to speak, halving the space it usually occupies when meeting a person in rainy weather), its handling excites a visible interest in passers-by. This is an artistic artefact also aimed at establishing contact with other people; our polite gestures when we suddenly shrink the circumference of an umbrella above is not just a practical and useful gesture, but also an original communication to a passerby who we are paying regard to and don’t want to hinder along his way.10 According to the artist, the point of this project is its multifunctionality, which not only provides protection against rain but also promotes friendly communication with a passer-by that is additionally enhanced by the humorous aspect of the umbrella’s handling. The artist is also engaged in concrete poetry, its revival within projects she calls Sports Tool Poetry. A sneaker doesn’t have to look like the one designed by major sportswear manufacturers; it may have a humorous appearance (like Powersoccershoe_02, Sports Tool Poetry series). Paek comes from a different, other than Central European, artistic tradition, thus her projects can be related to the movement of contemporary Japanese artists active in the field of so-called device art addressed by the theoretician Machiko Kusahara (2008). It is the art of playful device-toys sold simultaneously as works of art and things aimed at practical use, which means that we are dealing with an art movement that assumes the artist’s integration in a broader context of interactions with fun, design and commercial production; in addition, such works also express the artist’s positive attitude toward contemporary technologies.11 A brief reference to criti-pop and the simultaneously humorous 10 Joo Youn Paek, Polite Umbrella, http://www.jooyounpaek.com/umb.html. (Accessed October 3, 2009). 11 See Machiko Kusahara, “Making Art as Commercial Products: An Ongoing Challenge of Device Art”, ISEA 2008 Proceedings, Singapore, 2008.

6 any / 6 author / 6 certain / 6 context / 6 elevator / 6 even / 6 he / 6 industrial / 6 literary / 6 mentioned / 6 might / 6 national /

and useful products by Paek are mentioned as only two possibilities in present-day art. They are definitely not the only ones (Vuk Čosić, for example, employed his creativity after abandoning net art in the media of so-called Ascii films), but they do illustrate a large flexibility of an artistic social (sub) system comprised of several centres that flexibly – depending on actual interactions with the environment – take on various principal roles at various times. However, they don’t hesitate to marginalise or even fully abandon a function that seemed to be central not long ago. Within such tendencies in contemporary art, let us draw attention to the Socialdress project by Marija Mojca Pungerčar (2006), referring to clothes with a strong community note. Further to disseminating clothes-making know-how, the Socialdress workshops raise knowledge on the impacts of globalisation on the local textile industry and the decline of handicraft know-how and skills. Humorous and functional clothes produced at workshops are easy to make but not for sale. Flexibility in the field of contemporary art finds it easy to follow the dynamics of the networking-supported economy of financial markets, where new financial products bring dynamics into the spectacle of the global, 24-hour marketing mentioned earlier. Due to the fact that – at least in the short-term – financial markets allow significantly faster and larger profits, they generate new and new products that attract buyers and speculators; hedge funds and derivatives (options, futures contracts) have a special place and bring new quality to said markets. This is particularly true for trading in derivatives as financial instruments, the price of which depends on the underlying asset (commodity, currencies, and securities), reference rate or index they refer to. There are situations when hedge brokers try to reduce the risk whilst speculators increase it in order to maximise their profits. In short – it is a situation where we have an indisputable value basis that we use to increase our assets in the future (or secure it).

The hedgers (brokers in the so-called hedge funds) speculate (in order to secure their investments) and so do artists; they keep counting on the spectator, reader or listener who isn’t here yet but who will add surplus value to their product. They bet on the future, they live by insecurity and in it, they speculate and bet on it; they are convinced that the course of events regarding the institution of art will add surplus to their work in the future. Their option contract refers to some time in the future; they reckon the situation in the market or artworks scene will change to their benefit. They design works oriented to the new and at the same time their value basis refers to the institution of art, to its “proved” works (quote, remake, remix), which gives them a certain amount of security. Such, for example, is Natalie Bookchin’s art project The Intruder, produced in the instant and insecure medium of video games, in which she establishes a stable, archetypal and archive reference to Borges’ novel La Intrusa in order to provide value added to her uncertain, new media pioneer work in the so-called “mods”, i.e. artistic derivatives of commercial video games. The business of new media art is as well intertwined with hazardous new tactics and attempts to reach stability and security; similar to merchants with commodities, the artists want to secure themselves and do everything to survive. The economy enters their creativity as a basis, agent and motive, which was symptomatically demonstrated by Michael Goldberg in the project Catching a Falling Knife, investigating speculative capital and trading with stocks of News Corporation. In November 2002, the artist, who had worked for a while as a stock broker, traded in stock for three weeks with the initial capital of AUD $50,000 dollars. The project title refers to the rule of Wall Street stock brokers from 1980s stating: “Never try to catch a falling knife.” ..

With some works of contemporary and in particular new media art, one can notice that in this field as well the artists focus on the reference underlying asset and refer to it in order to secure their interests and even make a profit. They produce derivatives in the sense that they refer to the indisputable value of the underlying, reference work, which indirectly – through its “branding value” – also guarantees the “branding” of their derivatives; indeed, “a question about the value of a work is a question about its relation to traditional examples and not to extracultural profanities.”12 Let us mention the Slovenian new media artist Marko Peljhan, who, in collaboration with Carsten Nikolai and Canon Artlab, designed the Polar project (2000), entering in indirect dialogue with Lem’s novel Solaris (1961). Despite being rooted in a significantly transformed world of information society and new stories, Polar strives to establish contacts with the unquestionably recognised Solaris, which is already included in the artistic value archives. 12 See Boris Groys, Űber das Neue, München: Carl Hanser Publisher, 1992, p. 161.

TEORETSKI BLOK / T HEORY 6 9

166 in / 136 v / 109 je / 87 ki / 56 kot / 53 na / 52 se / 39 ne / 38 da / 36 pa / 36 za / 33 Noordung / 33 oz / 32 kar / 28 lahko / 28 tudi / 28 z /

Tehnodispozitivi konceptualnega časovnega stroja Noordung1 The Technodispositifs of the Conceptual Time Machine Noordung see page 78

Bojan Andjelković

70 Teor ije u pr izoritvenih praks / T heo ries o f Perfo rm i n g A rts

Besedilo je predelava in razširitev prispevka, predstavljenega na mednarodni konferenci raziskovalnega projekta ELMCIP (Electronic Literature as a Model of Creativity and Innovation in Practice) z naslovom »Electronic Literature and New Media Art«, ki je 22. in 23. septembra 2011 potekala v Ljubljani. http://elmcip.net/.

24 o / 24 s / 23 bi / 22 so / 21 med / 21 projekta / 20 bo / 20 ni / 20 še / 19 iz / 19 jih / 19 tako / 18 od / 17 pri / 17 silami / 17 sile / 16 to / 15 bodo /

V vsakem dispozitivu je treba razlikovati med tistim, kar smo (tistim, kar nismo več), in tistim, kar bomo ravnokar postali: delež zgodovine in delež aktualnega. Gilles Deleuze

Gesamtkunstwerk Noordung 1995–2045

recej zanimivo je, da delo Dragana Živadinova, ki sodi med maloštevilne slovenske umetnike, o katerih se je tako v strokovni literaturi kot v poljudni publicistiki veliko pisalo in se še piše, doslej nikoli ni bilo celostno obravnavano. O njem in njegovem delu, za razliko od preostalih dveh ključnih članov kolektiva NSK Laibacha in Irwinov, ni znanstvene monografije, čeprav je bil Oddelek za gledališče, opero in balet NSK ključen pri povezovanju vseh skupin NSK v »enotno« umetniško stilno formacijo, imenovano retrogardizem2. To je dokaj problematično predvsem iz dveh razlogov. Prvič, gre za umetniško delo, ki stavi prav na svojo celovitost, kar pomeni, da so parcialne analize posameznih delov (npr. posamezne gledališke predstave, umetniške razstave, predavanja ipd.) ali katerega od aspektov (gledališkega oz. umetniškega, tehnoznanstvenega, družbenopolitičnega) nezadostne, da bi ga razumeli v celoti; še več, brez globljega uvida v celoto njegovega dela parcialna analiza posameznih del in aspektov sploh ni mogoča. In drugič, pri Živadinovu od samega začetka ne gre zgolj za režiranje gledaliških predstav, ampak za ustvarjanje konceptualne celostne umetnine, za katero je značilno predvsem to, da je procesualna oz. da nastaja v času in skozi čas. To velja za vse njegove razvojne faze: Gledališče Sester Scipion Nasice (1983–1987), Kozmokinetično gledališče Rdeči pilot (1987–1990) in Kozmokinetični kabinet Noordung (1990–zdaj), pri čemer med temi tremi fazami ne obstajajo jasne ločnice, v kar bi nas Živadinov rad prepričal, ampak so v določenem smislu formalno, vsebinsko in strateško neločljivo povezane. Skratka, gre za ultimativni Gesamtkunstwerk oz. celostno umetnino, ki je neločljivo povezana z življenjem avtorja in družbenozgodovinskim kontekstom, v katerem nastaja – kar seveda še posebej velja za njegovo aktualno 50-letno delo v nastajanju Noordung 1995–2045. 50-letni »gledališki« proces Noordung Živadinova, Dunje Zupančič in Mihe Turšiča je kompleksen, dolgoročen raziskovalni projekt, ki se je uradno začel 20. aprila 1995 ob deseti uri zvečer, s premiero, zasnovano na konceptu petih ponovitev, ki se bodo vse do leta 2045 odigrale vsakih 10 let (2005–2015– 2025–2035–) na isti datum, ob isti uri in z istimi igralci. Za naš namen je pomembno, da predstava vsebuje proces zamenjave teles igralcev, ki bodo medtem umrli, z daljinsko vodenimi 2

Laibach so pred tem uporabljali termin »retro-avant-garda«, Irwin so kasneje »patentirali« termin »retro princip,« termin »retrogarda« pa je Živadinovov. Za problematiziranje pričujoče terminologije glej: Tine Hribar, »Postmodernizem, transavantgarda in retrogardizem«, Nova revija, 1986.

tehnološkimi abstrakti. V prvi fazi bodo telesa mrtvih igralcev nadomeščena z daljinsko vodenim znakom, ki bo v svoji gledališki mizansceni substituiral igralca, vseboval pa bo tudi programsko opremo za prevajanje dramskih replik v glasbo: ko bo umrla igralka, bodo njene gledališke replike prevedene v melodijo, ko bo umrl igralec, bodo njegove replike prevedene v ritem. V končni fazi, na koncu vseh procesualnih in konceptualnih etap 50-letnega projekta – ko bodo že vsi igralci mrtvi, Živadinov pa še živ (takšen je scenarij) – naj bi bili ti tehnološki substituti igralcev nameščeni v vesolje na geostacionarno orbito kot 14 komunikacijskih satelitov, lebdeče razporejenih v 14 kapsulah v dveh cevnih linijah geostacionarne vesoljske postaje. Scenarij Živadinova nadalje načrtuje, da bodo ti umetniški sateliti, imenovani umboti (um oz. umetnost + robot), vsebovali programsko opremo, imenovano syntapiens (sintetični homo sapiens), ki bo sestavljena iz treh nosilnih programov z naslednjimi podatki o igralcu: mikronskim izrisom igralčevega obraza, naborom igralčevih mimov in gensko strukturo igralca, ki bodo skupaj z bio-bibliografskimi podatki posameznega igralca telemitirani na planet Zemlja in v globino vesolja. Po besedah Živadinova naj bi umbot posedoval tudi neke vrste inteligenco in bil sposoben razvijati zavest o samem sebi. Te postgravitacijske oblike – tako kot Malevičevi planiti – pa »ne bodo imele več nobene neposredne zveze z Zemljo in jih bo možno opazovati in raziskovati kot vse druge planete ali celo planetarne sisteme.«3 Scenarij še načrtuje, da bo Živadinov po dokončanju projekta, 1. maja 2045, v vesolju naredil samomor.4 Trenutno lahko navedemo vsaj tri razloge, zaradi katerih je projekt Noordung zastavljen kot 50-letni proces. Prvič, zaradi gledališke demonstracije prekinitve s tradicionalnim modelom gledališča, ki sloni na dramskem tekstu, in sicer skozi njegovo procesualno ukinitev (replike umrlih igralcev bodo nadomeščene z glasbo). Drugič, zaradi gledališke »reprezentacije« nestabilnega razmerja med sodobnim subjektom oz. telesom in tehnologijo, in sicer skozi procesualno nadomestitev teles mrtvih igralcev s tehnološkimi substituti. In tretjič, kar je tudi najgloblji smisel dela, zaradi gledališke »reprezentacije« samega časa. Pri slednjem ne gre enostavno za reprezentacijo linearnega časa, ki gre iz preteklosti v prihodnost (igralci umirajo – čas teče), ampak za neke vrste gledališko »reprezentacijo« Nietzschejeve ideje večnega vračanja (igralci umirajo, vendar mi še naprej, tudi po 50 letih, igramo isto predstavo – torej čas stoji oz. natančneje, čas se vrača).5 Ta skrivnostna Nietzscheje3

Prim. »koordinati« 26. Planiti in 31. Emancipacija tehnološkega v: Dragan Živadinov, »50 koordinat postgravitacijske umetnosti«, 2010. http://www.scribd. com/doc/31097592/50-kordinat. Tukaj se seveda ne ukvarjamo s tem, ali se bo načrt Živadinova zares uresničil ali ne, saj tega ne moremo vedeti, ampak nas zanima predvsem miselni – tehnoumetniški, družbenopolitični in ne nazadnje ontološki potencial, lasten projektu. Čeprav scenarij spominja na kak znanstvenofantastični roman, vsekakor ni neuresničljiv, čeprav je zaradi številnih nepredvidljivih parametrov, od katerih je odvisen, statistično malo verjeten – in prav na tem stoji celotna stava in stavba projekta. Drugače povedano, projekt Noordung tukaj obravnavamo kot tisto, kar v resnici je: kot konceptualno umetniško delo, torej kot čisto virtualnost, ki vendarle poseduje minimalno možnost aktualizacije (ta možnost se, mimogrede, z razvojem dogodkov iz leta v leto povečuje), ki pa ne glede na končni izid vseeno lahko veliko pove o medsebojnem razmerju med današnjim človekom in sodobno tehnologijo: o naši »ujetosti« v dispozitivih globalizirane visokotehnološke družbe, ki jim pripadamo, v katerih delujemo in ki iz nas delajo tisto, kar smo. Prim. Živadinovovo razlago »koordinate« 17. Spojni mehanizem: »Ko se sistem

Teo rije up rizo ri t v en i h p raks / Theo ri es o f P e r for m i n g A r ts 7 1

15 Deleuze / 15 dispozitive / 15 projekt / 15 tem / 14 ampak / 14 dispozitiv / 14 V / 13 ali / 13 živadinova / 12 dispozitivi / 12 prav / 12 To /

va ideja, kot to pokaže Deleuze v svojem najbolj sistematičnem delu, sloni prav na razliki in ponavljanju – natančneje na ponavljanju, ki edino lahko naredi razliko in ustvari nekaj novega, kar je tudi osnovno izhodišče koncepta projekta Noordung. To je mogoče zaradi tega, ker »kar to ponavljanje ponavlja, ni to, kakšna je preteklost ‘zares bila’, ampak virtualnost, inherentna preteklosti in izdana s strani svoje pretekle aktualizacije. V tem specifičnem smislu nastanek Novega spremeni samo preteklost oziroma retroaktivno ne spremeni resnične preteklosti – saj nismo v znanstveni fantastiki –, temveč ravnotežje med aktualnostjo in virtualnostjo preteklosti.«6 Paralele med Deleuzovo filozofsko in Živadinovo umetniško konceptualizacijo razlike in ponavljanja pa se tukaj ne končajo; kot je ena osnovnih tez Deleuzove knjige ta, da je ponavljanje v strogem nasprotju z reprezentacijo, tako so konceptualne gledališke strategije ponavljanja pri projektu Noordung postavljene strogo nasproti klasičnemu gledališkemu ponavljanju oz. reprezentaciji, ki sloni na mimezisu.7 Zaradi visokotehnološke pogojenosti je projekt Noordung tesno povezan s sodobno znanostjo – še posebej z raziskavami v polju kognitivnih znanosti ter komunikacijskih, informacijskih, vesoljskih in biotehnologij –, po drugi strani pa vključuje širok spekter raziskovalnih umetniških praks, saj so, poleg šestih predstav, ki tvorijo izhodiščno časovno strukturo projekta, njegov integralni del tudi številne druge predstave, intermedijske in konceptualne razstave, knjižne izdaje in restavratorska dela, predavanja in seminarji, performansi in informansi, ki razsvetljujejo in osvetljujejo posamezne aspekte projekta. Kompleksnost projekta torej zahteva transdisciplinarni pristop, ki bi kombiniral sodobne filozofske, družbenopolitične in kognitivne teorije, antropološke, novomedijske in softverske študije ter sodobne teorije umetnosti, gledališča in performansa. Prepričani smo, da bi takšen pristop omogočili, če v osnovno teoretsko izhodišče raziskave postavimo Foucaultov pojem dispozitiva.

začne povezovati, nastopi smrtna zbranost. Zbranost, znakovnost in nadzor. Zbranost v orbiti in nadzor v nevarnih zaporedjih. V modulu drsimo proti zadnjemu razdelku uma. Sledi akt načrtovanega: zaradi spojnega procesa smo v energetskem središču dogodka. Nikjer ni več prostora za našo identifikacijo, smo univerzalni, ker je spojni mehanizem procesiran s shemo sistemske planetarne organizacije. Zato modularni vzorci različnih časovnih razpršenosti določajo našo sedanjost, nameščeno v spojnih protokolih univerzalnega! Zato ni preteklosti, ni bodočnosti, je samo absolutni zdaj! Gledališče je absolutni zdaj!« Prav tam. Slavoj Žižek, Organs Without Bodies: Deleuze and Consequences, New York/ London: Routledge, 2004, str. 12. Mimogrede, s številnimi Žižkovimi izpeljavami v tej knjigi – od katerih je najbolj škandalozna vsekakor ta, da naj bi bil Deleuze nekakšen »ideolog poznega kapitalizma« (str. 184.) – se ne moremo strinjati, čeprav je bil Žižkov namen (po lastnih besedah) priti Deleuzu »od zadaj« in mu po lastnem (Deleuzovem) filozofskem receptu »narediti nezakonitega otroka«. Gre namreč za to, da Žižek prihaja Deleuzu »od zadaj« s Heglovim filozofskim aparatom in ne recimo »od spredaj« s Spinozovim, Bergsonovim ali Nietzschejevim, kar bi bilo veliko bolj logično in udobno, ko se poglabljamo v Deleuzovo filozofijo. Dovolj bo, če rečemo, da je Nietzsche, brez katerega sploh ne moremo razumeti Deleuzove filozofije, v celotni knjigi omenjen samo dvakrat ali trikrat, in sicer mimogrede, kar je skoraj natanko tako, kot da bi nekdo v knjigi, ki tolmači Žižkovo teorijo, le na dveh mestih bežno omenil Lacana in enkrat Marxa. Tukaj napotujemo na odlični tekst Alenke Zupančič, v katerem razdela in poveže različne filozofske oz. psihoanalitične spoprijeme s konceptom ponavljanja – od Kierkegaarda in Marxa do Deleuza in Lacana – ter pokaže, kako je koncept ponavljanja eno glavnih »odkritij« moderne misli, hkrati pa tudi bistveni mehanizem komedije kot gledališkega žanra: »Ponavljanje«, Filozofski vestnik, letn. XXVIII, št. 1, Ljubljana, 2007, str. 57–79.

72 Teor ije u pr izor i tvenih praks / T heo ries o f Perfo r m in g A rts

Kaj je dispozitiv?

pojmom dispozitiv (v njegovem delu se prvič pojavi nekje po letu 1970) skuša Foucault zaobjeti dve široki in heterogeni polji, ki vsakič skozi medsebojno razmerje strukturirata realnost, vendar sta nezvedljivi eno na drugo: tisto izrekljivo ni nikoli v tem, kar vidimo, in obratno: tisto, kar vidimo, ni nikoli v tem, kar izrečemo. Za besede in reči torej ne obstaja nikakršen skupni medij, nikakršen objektivni pogled od zunaj, ampak je tisto, kar jih drži skupaj, vselej le strukturiranje njihovega razmerja v okviru vednostno-oblastnih mehanizmov določenega dispozitiva. Drugače povedano, dispozitiv je neko polje sil, neki »heterogeni skupek diskurzivnih strategij in neke nediskurzivne organizacije vidljivosti«,8 ki omogoča ustvarjanje točno določenih epistemoloških polj oz. točno določene procese subjektivacije. Površno branje Foucaulta bi lahko koga privedlo do zaključka, da z besedo dispozitiv Foucault označuje le velike dispozitive oblasti, kot so norišnica, klinika, zapor, šola, policija, cerkev, tovarna, pravni ukrepi, seksualnost itn., vendar – kot predlaga Agamben v svojem tekstu Kaj je dispozitiv? – pojem dispozitiva lahko zaobjame »dobesedno vse, kar ima zmožnost ujeti, usmerjati, oblikovati, nadzorovati in zagotavljati geste, vedenja, mnenja in diskurze živih bitij«.9 Tako Agamben kot dispozitive navaja tudi pisalo, pisavo, literaturo, filozofijo, kmetijstvo, cigareto, plovbo, računalnike, mobilni telefon (kot ultimativni dispozitiv) in na koncu tudi sam jezik kot morda najstarejši izmed vseh dispozitivov. Agamben v omenjenem tekstu celo predlaga splošno delitev vsega obstoječega na dve veliki skupini: prvo skupino tvorijo živa bitja (ali substance), druga pa so dispozitivi, v katere so prva vselej ujeta. Po tej splošni delitvi vsega obstoječega na dve veliki skupini pa uvaja Agamben še tretjo: »Vmes med obema pa je še tretja skupina, skupina subjektov. Subjekt imenujem to, kar je rezultat razmerja med živimi bitji in dispozitivi.«10 Subjekt je torej rezultat, učinek dispozitivov, a je hkrati tudi njihov pogoj (mobilni telefon ne bi bil nikakršen dispozitiv, ampak navaden mrtev predmet, če ne bi bilo subjektov, ki prek njega komunicirajo). Tako recimo »kino kot dispozitiv subjekt konstruira, a tudi vključuje […]: subjekt je učinek in pogoj hkrati.«11 Vsaka tehnologija torej »predpisuje« določeni dispozitiv. Pa vendar določena tehnologija lahko nastane samo v okviru dispozitiva, ki jo omogoča: »Foucault pokaže, kako puška kot orožje v tem smislu obstaja šele v okviru ‘ustroja, čigar princip ni več gibljiva ali negibljiva masa, temveč geometrija deljivih in sestavljivih segmentov’. Tehnologija je torej družbena, preden postane tehnična.«12 »To je Foucaultova povezava s sodobnimi zgodovinarji: glede palice za kopanje itn. Braudel pravi, da je ‘orodje posledica in ne vzrok’. Glede orožja grške pehote Detienne pravi, da je ‘tehnika na nek način znotraj socialnega 8

Prim. Mladen Dolar, Kralju odsekati glavo: Foucaultova dediščina, Ljubljana: Krtina, 2010, str. 28. 9 Giorgio Agamben, »Kaj je dispozitiv?«, Problemi, št. 8–9, Ljubljana, 2007, str. 23. 10 Prav tam. 11 Melita Zajc, Tehnologije in družbe, Ljubljana: ISH Fakulteta za podiplomski humanistični študij, 2000, str. 125. 12 Gilles Deleuze, Foucault, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988, str. 40.

12 torej / 11 itn / 11 politične / 11 smislu / 10 dispozitiva / 10 ko / 9 človeku / 9 druge / 9 ga / 9 le / 9 po / 9 seveda / 9 sta / 8 brez / 8 človeka /

in mentalnega’.«13 To, da je tehnologija posledica in ne vzrok, pa v tem smislu nikakor ne pomeni, da so tehnologije nastale po nekakšnem družbenem načrtu, v skladu z nekakšnimi družbenimi pričakovanji, glede na oblike družbene organizacije itn., saj bi to pomenilo, da je tehnika ločena od družbenega. Deleuzova/Foucaultova poanta pa je prav v tem, da sta tehnika in tehnologija globoko in primarno družbeni, celo mentalni, in da nas prav določene tehnike in tehnologije, ki jih »predpisujejo« določeni dispozitivi, delajo to, kar smo. Skratka, dispozitiv je »imanentni vzrok« določene tehnologije.14 Dispozitiv torej ni enostavno neka mrtva stvar, skupek predpisov in navodil za uporabo – je neka časovna struktura, nek temporalni, dinamični proces, je dogodek, v katerega je subjekt »ujet«. Natančneje, kot opozarja Deleuze, subjekta sta najmanj dva oz. trije: tisti, ki je (tisti, ki ga več ni), in tisti, ki bo ravnokar postal: »Pripadamo dispozitivom in delujemo znotraj njih. Novost nekega dispozitiva v razmerju do predhodnih bomo imenovali njegova aktualnost, naša aktualnost. Novo, to je aktualno. Aktualno ni tisto, kar smo mi, temveč prej tisto, kar postajamo, kar bomo ravnokar postali, se pravi Drugi, naše postajanje-drugi. V vsakem dispozitivu je treba razlikovati med tistim, kar smo (tistim, kar več nismo), in tistim, kar bomo ravnokar postali: delež zgodovine in delež aktualnega.«15 Ko govorimo o dispozitivih, je v tem smislu mogoče bolje, da govorimo o procesih oziroma – kot predlaga Deleuze – o črtah subjektivacije kot pa o subjektih. To med drugim tudi pomeni, da je vsakemu dispozitivu imanentna določena zgodovinska formacija oz. določen zgodovinski paket instrumentalnih in interpretativnih ravnanj, ki na nek način »programira« možne procese subjektivacije. To »programiranje« pa se seveda ne izvaja s pomočjo nekakšnega čipa, ki se enostavno implantira neposredno v cogito, ampak se, kot je to neponovljivo jasno in podrobno pokazal Foucault, zgodovinski procesi discipliniranja subjekta vedno izvajajo prek telesa in skozi telo.

Dispozitivi »ustroja« Noordung

eprav se v številnih teoretskih konceptualizacijah projekta Noordung nikjer ne omenjata ne Foucault ne Deleuze – tako da ni jasno, ali je Živadinov sploh seznanjen z njunimi koncepti in konkretno s pojmom dispozitiva – so umetniške, družbenopolitične in tehnoznanstvene strukture in strategije v projektu razumljene kot dispozitivi oz. polja sil, vednostno-oblastni mehanizmi, ki omogočajo ene in onemogočajo druge procese subjektivacije.16 To je razvidno iz same ideje projekta in številnih intervjujev Živadinova, posebej pa iz njegovega spisa iz leta 2010 »50 koordinat post13 Prav tam. 14 »Kaj tukaj pomeni imanentni vzrok? To je vzrok, ki se uresničuje v svoji posledici, ki se staplja s svojo posledico, ki se opaža v svoji posledici. Ali natančneje, imanentni vzrok je vzrok, ki ga posledica uresniči, zedini in izdvoji.« Prav tam, str. 37. 15 Gilles Deleuze, »Kaj je dispozitiv?«, Problemi, št 8–9, Ljubljana, 2007, str. 11–12. 16 Poznavanje Deleuzovih in Foucaultovih idej pri tem niti ni nujno, saj v določenem smislu lahko rečemo, da je problematiziranje razmerja med subjektom in tehnologijo hkrati tudi osnovno izhodišče zgodovinskih avantgard, na katere se projekt Noordung neposredno sklicuje, kot tudi sodobne tehnoumetnosti in tehnoznanosti v celoti.

gravitacijske umetnosti«, v katerem je določil in razdelal 50 pojmov, ključnih za razumevanje celotnega projekta. V njem, med drugim, definira umetnost kot »stroj vseh strojev, ki proizvaja druge stroje«, tehnologijo pa kot »nadaljevanje biološke evolucije«, ki lahko ustvari drugačna bitja, ki bodo namesto »bioloških celic imela neorganske materiale«17 – ideji, ki bi ju lahko podpisala tudi Deleuze in Guattari.18 Skratka, umetnost in znanost sta razumljeni kot tisti polji vednosti, ki edini lahko ustvarita nove in drugačne oblike življenja oz. nove in drugačne možnosti subjektivacije. Da bi se to zgodilo, pa ju je treba osvoboditi tistih (ekonomsko-političnih) sil, ki si ju trenutno lastijo, in ju povezati z nekimi drugimi silami – z (nečloveškimi) silami tehnologije –, saj tehnologija v končni fazi, kot to implicitno povedo naslednji Deleuzovi stavki v njegovi knjigi o Foucaultu, ni nič drugega kot sila: »Sile v človeku stopajo v odnos s silami zunanjosti, silami silicija, ki dobivajo prednost pred ogljikovimi silami, silami genskih faktorjev, ki dobivajo prednost pred organizmom, silami agramatičnosti, ki se prebijajo pred označevalcem.«19 Silno je zanimivo, da projekt Noordung, tako kot je opisan v prvem razdelku tega teksta, računa prav z računalniškimi, genetskimi in agramatičnimi (tehnološkimi) strukturami oz. silami, o katerih piše Deleuze. Preden preidemo na problematiko dispozitivov, ki jih zasledimo v samem projektu Noordung, uvajamo še eno terminološko pojasnilo: pod pojmom dispozitiv bodo tukaj mišljeni tako konkretni, realno obstoječi dispozitivi kot tudi (zaenkrat le) konceptualni, miselni dispozitivi. V strogem foucaultovskem smislu je vsak dispozitiv po definiciji zelo konkreten, čeprav neviden stroj. Vendar v določenem smislu lahko govorimo tudi o miselnih dispozitivih, če gre za zelo kompleksno miselno strukturo, ki odpira nove in drugačne načine mišljenja oz. omogoča nove in drugačne oblike subjektivacije. To drugo zvrst dispozitivov seveda najpogosteje najdemo prav v umetniški miselnosti: tako recimo Alain Badiou v zvezi s heteronimnim pisateljskim postopkom Fernanda Pessoe govori o »dispozitivih misli«, Gerard Wajcman pa v zvezi s statusom objekta pri Duchampu omenja »logični dispozitiv«.20 Poleg tega pa je pri analizi projekta Noordung še posebej smiselno uvesti operativno kategorijo konceptualnih dispozitivov, ker večina Noordungovih miselnih dispozitivov načeloma vedno predstavlja potencialno konkretne gledališkoumetniške, tehnoznanstvene in družbenopolitične dispozitive. Gre namreč za dispozitive, na katere se projekt 17 18

Živadinov, »50 koordinat postgravitacijske umetnosti«. Prim. glede umetnosti kot stroja vseh strojev: »Glede prve svetovne vojne so se tako spopadla štiri stališča do stroja: veliko molarno poveličevanje stroja kot stališče italijanskega futurizma […]; stališče ruskega futurizma in konstruktivizma, ki stroj premišljuje v funkciji novih proizvodnih odnosov […]; dadaistični molekularni ustroj, ki na svoj račun vrši nek prevrat kot revolucijo želje […]; in končno, nek humanistični antimašinizem, ki skuša rešiti imaginarno in simbolično željo, jo obrniti proti stroju […]« (Gilles Deleuze in Félix Guattari, »Zaključni program za želeće mašine«; dodatek v: Anti-Edip. Kapitalizam i šizofrenija 1, Sremski Karlovci: Izdavačka knjižarnica Zorana Stojanovića, 1990, str. 330); glede neorganskega življenja pa: »Vsak organizem ni cerebralen in vsako življenje ni organsko, vendarle pa so vsepovsod sile, ki tvorijo mikromožgane oziroma neorgansko življenje reči.« Gilles Deleuze in Félix Guattari, Kaj je filozofija?, Ljubljana: Študentska založba, 1999, str. 220. 19 Deleuze, Foucault, str. 131–132. 20 Navajamo po: Miklavž Komelj, »Pessoa, kraj, kjer se čuti ali misli«, v: Fernando Pessoa, Psihotipija, Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga, 2008, str. 446; oz. Gerard Wajcman, Objekt stoletja, Ljubljana: Analecta, 2007, str. 57.

Teo rije up rizo ri t v en i h p raks / Theo ri es o f P e r for m i n g A r ts 73

8 delo / 8 gre / 8 namreč / 8 razmerje / 8 tehnologija / 8 tehnologije / 8 tisti / 8 tukaj / 8 več / 8 živadinov / 7 če / 7 človek / 7 celo /

tem smislu mi se zdi zelo zanimiv odgovor Dragana

Živadinova (torej umetnika, ki za konec svojega življenjskega projekta v letu 2045 načrtuje prav postavitev daljinsko usmerjenega letala brez človeške posadke v geostacionarno orbito, 35.900 km daleč od planeta Zemlje) na moje vprašanje, kaj pomeni veliki napis TEHNO, ki se pojavlja na koncu njegove predstave Marlowe, s katerim se bo tudi končala prihajajoča deveturna uprizoritev Stojsavljevićeve Elizabetinske trilogije, ko bo uprizorjena v celoti v enem kosu. Živadinov razločuje izraz »tehno« tako od grškega »techne« kot od angleškega »technology« in ga definira kot »emancipirano tehnologijo; nekaj, kar bo postalo neodvisno od nas biološkega«. Tehno je zanj »naravna emancipacija«, »emancipirana entiteta, ki ima popolnoma svoje življenje«. In še: »Tehno je evolucijski proces biološkega. Da se razumemo, jaz nisem futurolog, ne govorim o tem, kaj bo, ampak o tem, kaj ima potencial.«

74 Teor ije u pr izor itvenih praks / T heo ries o f Perfo r m i n g A rts

Noordung sklicuje oz. jih sam predvideva in konceptualizira, ki pa se še niso uresničili oz. realno še ne obstajajo – tukaj mislimo tako na potencialno konkretne tehnodispozitive prihodnosti, ki še ne obstajajo, kot tudi na številne potencialno konkretne dispozitive preteklosti, kot so jih načrtovale zgodovinske avantgarde, ki pa se nikoli niso zares uresničili oz. jih je izdala njihova pretekla aktualizacija. Če zdaj pustimo ob strani delitev na konkretne in konceptualne dispozitive, lahko dispozitive, na katere projekt Noordung referira, in tiste, ki jih sam ustvarja oz. bi jih rad ustvaril, »pogojno« razdelimo na politične, umetniške in tehnološke. »Pogojno«, ker med njimi ne moremo začrtati jasne ločnice, saj je ideja postgravitacijske umetnosti neločljiva od znanosti in politike.21 Umetnost je namreč tukaj povezana z znanostjo oz. tehnologijo, ta povezava pa ima nujno politične posledice. In obratno: politične strategije projekta Noordung imajo vedno umetniške in/ali znanstvene implikacije in so v službi umetnosti in/ali znanosti. Povedano drugače, črte oz. silnice določenega dispozitiva, ki primarno pripada enemu področju, se vedno križajo s črtami dispozitivov z drugih dveh področij. Kot opozarja Deleuze: »Črte v vsakemu dispozitivu prestopajo pragove, kar jih naredi za estetske, znanstvene, politične itn.«, te črte pa se »prepletajo in zapletajo, ene druge prinašajo na dan ali jih v tem povzročajo, preko variacij ali celo mutacij ustroja.«22 Nekaj podobnega pravi tudi Flusser, ki sicer govori o klasifikaciji informacij, ki jih razdeli na znanstvene oz. indikativne (»A« je »A«), politične oz. imperativne (»A« mora biti »A«) in estetske oz. optativne (»A« naj bo »A«), vendar gre pri tem po Flusserju le za teoretsko razdelitev, saj se informacije distribuirajo skozi distributivne družbene aparate, kar je seveda le druga beseda za dispozitive: »Vsak znanstveni indikativ ima obenem politične in estetske vidike, vsak politični imperativ znanstvene in estetske vidike, vsak optativ (umetniško delo) znanstvene in politične vidike.«23 Skratka, »ustroj« Noordung je konceptualno-konkreten stroj-trikotnik, ki nujno potrebuje vse tri dimenzije, da bi konstruiral četrto, ki se nahaja na utopični točki »gravitacije nič«, kjer naj bi bili umetnost in subjekt, posledično pa tudi svet gravitacije 1, ukinjeni in vzpostavljeni na novo. Zato bo natančneje, če rečemo, da dispozitive »dispozitiva Noordung« lahko razdelimo na primarno politične, primarno umetniške in primarno tehnološke – čeprav igra tehnologija, kot bomo videli, središčno vlogo. Tehnopolitični dispozitivi projekta Noordung zaobjemajo vse tiste diskurzivne in nediskurzivne politične prakse in strukture, ki si jih umetnost v Sloveniji »prilasti« na začetku osemdesetih 21 Prim.: »Postgravitacijska umetnost je kategorično vsa umetnost, ki se bo izoblikovala v pogojih breztežnosti ter bo v novih pogojih bivanja oblikovala sisteme, ki jih še ne poznamo. Postgravitacijska umetnost ni umetniška stilna formacija in tudi nima namena postati. Tisočletja v gravitaciji 1 so izoblikovala vse živo in neživo ter posredno in neposredno tudi umetnost, predvsem pa njene strukturne elemente. Šele umetnost XX. stoletja je z mišljenjem o antimimezisu, konceptualizaciji in telelogiji odprla polje gravitaciji 0. XXI. stoletje iz avantgardnih metodologij prejšnjega stoletja razvija mišljenje o postgravitacijski umetnosti.« Živadinov, »50 koordinat postgravitacijske umetnosti«. 22 Prim. Deleuze, »Kaj je dispozitiv?«, str. 6 in 9. 23 Vilém Flusser, K filozofiji fotografije, Ljubljana: ZSKZ: Društvo za oživljanje zgodbe 2 koluta, 2010, str. 57.

7 dispozitivov / 7 gledališke / 7 okviru / 7 pomeni / 7 sil / 7 smo / 7 telo / 7 vedno / 7 vse / 7 zelo / 6 A / 6 čeprav / 6 dela / 6 drugo / 6 dveh /

let. Govorimo seveda o medijsko-manipulativnih in organizacijskih strategijah umetniškega kolektiva Neue Slowenische Kunst, posebej pa strategijah Gledališča Sester Scipion Nasice iz retrogardističnega obdobja Živadinova z vsemi njegovimi razvojnimi fazami: ilegalna (Hinkemann, 1984), eksorcistična (Marija Nablocka, 1985) in klasična faza (Krst pod Triglavom, 1986) ter samouničenje (Dan mladosti, 1987). S takšnimi in podobnimi strategijami namreč Živadinov, ki zelo rad govori o svojih dveh (umetniških) življenjih, ne prekine po izstopu iz kolektiva NSK, v kar bi nas rad prepričal, ampak obstaja jasna kontinuiteta med prvo in dvema kasnejšima razvojnima fazama v okviru Kozmokinetičnega gledališča Rdeči pilot (1987–1990) in Kozmokinetičnega kabineta Noordung (1990–zdaj). Njegovi gledališkoumetniški postopki in strategije so – tako nekoč kot danes – skrajno politični, in sicer v najširšem in najglobljem, lahko bi celo rekli ničejansko-artaudovskem pomenu besede. Ni namreč nobeno naključje, da Živadinov nenehno uprizarja prav dramo Ljubezen in država,24 ki v bistvu govori o razmerju med umetnostjo in oblastjo in bi se prav lahko imenovala Gledališče in država, kar bi celo bolj ustrezalo njeni vsebini. Gre torej za razmerje, ki je z izjavo »gledališče je država«, ki jo lahko preberemo že v Prvem sestrskem pismu Gledališča Sester Scipion Nasice iz leta 1983, postavljeno kot temeljno izhodišče retrogardističnega obdobja Živadinova – in hkrati tudi vseh njegovih nadaljnjih, tehno in postgravitacijskih metamorfoz –, pri čemer lahko rečemo, da iz predvsem umetniško-estetske z najnovejšim razvojem dogodkov danes postopoma prehaja tudi v realno družbenopolitično in tehnoznanstveno sfero. Projekti Živadinova namreč vedno znova postavljajo pod vprašaj aktualno razmerje med umetnostjo in politiko, v končni fazi pa tudi med umetnostjo in resničnostjo, o čemer dovolj zgovorno priča tudi strateška in ekonomska vpletenost projekta Noordung v številne realne družbenopolitične in tehnoznanstvene strukture, kot so Center za usposabljanje kozmonavtov Jurija Gagarina, Mestna občina Vitanje, Evropska vesoljska agencija, Kulturno središče evropskih vesoljskih agencij, Asociacija avtonomnih astronavtov itn. Poleg tega lahko kot posebne konceptualne politične dispozitive tukaj izpostavimo še nekdanja in sedanja družbenopolitična gibanja, na katera Živadinov referira v okviru projekta Noordung: ruski kozmizem s konca 19. stoletja ter njegova novejša dediča, anarhokozmizem in transhumanizem. 24 Živadinov je ta Stojsavljevićev tekst prvič skušal uprizoriti že pred kakimi tridesetimi leti kot diplomsko predstavo na ljubljanski Akademiji za gledališče, radio, film in televizijo, vendar je tik pred diplomo z akademije radikalno izstopil s tekstom, ki ga je pomenljivo naslovil »Pismo lažnim učiteljem«. Prav drama Ljubezen in država mu je služila kot predloga za predstavo Naseljena skulptura ena proti ena iz leta 1995, ki je izvirna predstava in torej matrica celotnega projekta Noordung. Zadnjič jo je uprizoril pred kratkim v SNG Drami, vendar z dokaj drugačnim namenom: če je namreč eden izmed osnovnih namenov 50-letne gledališke predstave demonstrativno uničiti pričujočo dramsko predlogo – in sicer skozi procesualno nadomestitev replik umrlih igralcev z glasbo –, si je tokrat Živadinov zadal povsem drugačno, diametralno nasprotno nalogo: uprizoriti to isto dramsko besedilo v celoti in dobesedno, od začetka do konca, brez večjih posegov v tekst. Še več, uprizoriti je bilo treba ne le dramo Ljubezen in država, ampak celotno Stojsavljevićevo Elizabetinsko trilogijo, v katero sodita še drami Marlowe in Prepovedano gledališče – teksta, ki ju je Živadinov že uprizoril v prejšnjih letih, vključno s prologom, tako da zdaj vse skupaj tvori nekakšno prihajajočo predstavo-pošast, ki naj bi trajala celih devet ur in ki se jo bo, po avtorjevih besedah, igralo cel teden. Tako projekt Elizabetinska trilogija v okviru celostne umetnine Noordung funkcionira kot – pogojno rečeno – klasično gledališka reprezentacija teksta, ki se ga namerava demonstrativno procesualno ukiniti.

Tehnoumetniške dispozitive projekta Noordung lahko razdelimo v dve skupini, in sicer na zgodovinske in dispozitive, lastne samemu projektu. V prvo skupino sodijo vsi tisti umetniški oz. gledališki dispozitivi, ki izhajajo iz stilnih formacij in idej, na katere projekt neposredno ali posredno referira kot na »zgodovinske podpore«: konstruktivizem, suprematizem, konceptualizem, zenitizem, futurizem, retrogardizem oz. Artaudovo gledališče krutosti, Craigovo gledališče nadmarionet, Mejerholdovo biomehanično gledališče itn. V drugo skupino pa sodijo vsi tisti umetniški in gledališki dispozitivi, ki jih projekt sam ustvarja in konceptualizira: praznotelesna režija, vektorska režija, emomehanika, mikrokoreografija, vizualno-lingvistična abstrakcija, telelogija, telekozmizem, »panoptična« gledališka struktura, informansi itn. Poleg konstruktivizma, suprematizma in seveda konceptualizma je za projekt Noordung pomemben predvsem Artaudov koncept gledališča krutosti, ki je vsekakor ključna referenca pri kakršnikoli resnejši analizi dela Živadinova, tako v okviru Gledališča Sester Scipion Nasice, katerega poimenovanje je jasna aluzija na Artauda, kot v zadnjih dveh desetletjih v času kozmokinetičnega kabineta Noordung. Pri tem pa se nam zdi pomembna predvsem Artaudova konceptualizacija telesa brez organov, ki ga Deleuze in Guattari vpeljeta kot enega osrednjih filozofskih konceptov že v prvem poglavju prve skupne knjige: »Telo brez organov ni priča nekega izvirnega niča, kakor ni ostanek neke izgubljene totalitete. Predvsem pa ni projekcija; vse to nima nobene zveze z lastnim telesom ali s podobo telesa. Telo brez organov je telo brez podobe.«25 Na kratko, telo je tukaj razumljeno tako kot pri Nietzscheju, kot kombinacija razmerja sil: telo ni enostavna fizična danost v smislu biološkega organizma, ampak predvsem nekakšna »virtualna« razsežnost, imanentna fizični realnosti, okoli katere se bojuje mnoštvo sil. Ta tehnični termin se namreč lahko smiselno aplicira na številne gledališke in performativne strategije Živadinova (biomehanika oz. biomehatronika, mikrokoreografske cone, emomehanika itn.), posebej pa je lahko uporaben pri analizi in razdelavi njegovih konceptualizacij praznotelesne in vektorske režije, ki sta izpostavljeni kot ključni strategiji režije v postgravitacijskem gledališču. V prvem primeru, pri praznotelesni režiji, telo brez organov izhaja iz samega koncepta 50-letnega projekta, ki vključuje procesualno izginjanje telesnosti igralcev. V drugem primeru, pri vektorski režiji, pa telo brez organov izvira iz neposredne scenske prakse, ko sta igralčeva in gledalčeva telesnost v pogojih breztežnosti – torej v okolju, v katerem ni obzorja, kjer dimenzije ne pomenijo veliko in smeri zgoraj-spodaj, levo-desno izgubijo pomen, hkrati pa v trenutku, ko se znajdeta v levitaciji gravitacije nič, izgubi pomen tudi razlika med igralcem in gledalcem, torej med gledališkim »objektom« in »subjektom« – tako rekoč izven svoje telesnosti (takšna so tudi pričevanja gledalcev ali, natančneje, udeležencev predstave Gravitacija nič: Biomehanika Noordung iz leta 1999, ki je bila izvedena v pogojih breztežnosti v ruskem letalu za parabolične polete, ki se uporablja za trening kozmonavtov).

25 Deleuze in Guattari, Anti-Edip. Kapitalizam i šizofrenija 1, str. 10.

Teo rije up rizo ri t v en i h p raks / Theo ri es o f P e r for m i n g A r ts 75

6 gledališče / 6 igralcev / 6 posebej / 6 pravi / 6 pred / 6 predvsem / 6 razmerja / 6 saj / 6 sicer / 6 skozi / 6 šele / 6 subjektivacije /

Tehnoznanstvene dispozitive projekta Noordung lahko prav tako razdelimo na »zunanje« dispozitive, ki jih projekt integrira vase, in dispozitive, ki jih sam projekt vzpostavlja in konceptualizira. Najpomembnejši (zaenkrat le konceptualni) tehnodispozitivi iz prve skupine so vsekakor dispozitivi, ki izvirajo iz ideje vesoljske geostacionarne postaje Hermana Potočnika Noordunga in Clarkove ideje »kvantnega računalnika« (kar v specifični terminologiji Živadinova pomeni računalnik, ki je sposoben samostojnega mišljenja), pri čemer je slednja pri projektu Noordung v tesni navezavi na kognitivno teorijo Mitje Peruša, obe ideji pa sta uprizorjeni v slavnem Kubrickovem filmu Odiseja 2001.26 V to skupino prav tako sodijo tudi številni drugi, bolj običajni in realno že obstoječi dispozitivi sodobnih informacijskih, komunikacijskih, vesoljskih in biotehnologij. V drugo skupino pa sodijo (zaenkrat le konceptualni) tehnoznanstveni dispozitivi, ki izhajajo iz pojmov, ustvarjenih za potrebe projekta: syntapiens, umbot, biomehatronski objektil itn. To, da večina tehnodispozitivov, s katerimi računa projekt Noordung, realno še ne obstaja, pa nikakor ne pomeni, da sile tehnologije »prihodnosti« že niso na delu: z vpeljevanjem tehnologij in naprav, kot so virtualna resničnost, internet, mobilni telefon, dlančnik, prenosni računalnik, GPS navigator, prenosni medijski predvajalnik oz. iPod, tablet računalnik oz. iPad itn. meje med aktualnim in virtualnim postajajo nestabilne; nismo zapustili svojih teles in fizične realnosti ter se podali na brezkončna duhovna potepanja po virtualnih svetovih, kot je bilo napovedovano, ko so bile pametne tehnologije še na začetku, ampak prav nasprotno: virtualnost je prišla k nam, tukaj je, v aktualnem svetu, obdaja naša fizična telesa in jih spreminja. Razložili smo, kaj mislimo s terminom dispozitiv, toda na kaj merimo z izrazom »tehno«, ki ga ves čas uporabljamo kot prefiks? Ne najdemo boljšega odgovora na to vprašanje, kot ga v svoji knjigi o tehnokulturi ponuja Janez Strehovec, ki tam seveda ne razumeva tehna le v smislu glasbene oblike, »ampak bistveno širše, kot načelo današnjega sveta, oblikovanega v paradigmi umetnega druge generacije. Mišljeno je umetno, ki je prestopilo prag mehanskega in se usmerilo na področje kibernetskega in celo v paradigmo bio, se pravi, k življenju podobnim procesom na neorganskih nosilcih […]. Tehno pomeni stopnjevano in pospešeno sintetičnost, umetelnost na kvadrat in širitev resničnosti v smislu njenega povečanja, nadgraditve. Z njim smo v paradigmi umetnega druge generacije […], ob katerem se oblikuje nov tip tehnomodelirane zaznave in njen subjekt: estetski človek v paradigmi tehna.«27 Gre torej za razširjeni koncept tehnologije, kot se ta pojavlja recimo v delih Walterja Benjamina, Martina Heideggerja ali Viléma Flusserja: »Tovrstna tehnologija je – v Benjaminovi terminologiji – druga tehnologija; temelji na posameznikovem distanciranju od narave, konkretno od reproduciranja naravnih oblik, v kar je bila 26 Mimogrede, med filmom Odiseja 2001 in projektom Noordung 1995–2045 obstajajo tudi številne druge konceptualne in strateške vzporednice (perspektiva nesodobnosti, genealogija tehnologije/subjekta, črni monolit/črni kvadrat, posthumanizem itn.), kar nikakor ni naključje, saj tako Kubrickov film kot projekt Živadinova postavljata in poskušata na podoben način razrešiti natančno določeni ničejanski problem, o katerem bo več povedano v zadnjem razdelku tega teksta. 27 Prim. Janez Strehovec, Tehnokultura – kultura tehna, Ljubljana: Študentska založba, 1998, str. 17.

76 Teor ije u pr izor itvenih praks / T heo ries o f Perfo r m in g A rts

ujeta t. i. prva tehnika. Za dosežke prve tehnike lahko rečemo, da ‘kulminirajo v človeškem žrtvovanju; tisti druge tehnike pa v daljinsko usmerjenem letalu, ki ne potrebuje človeške posadke.’«28 [moj poudarek] V tem smislu mi se zdi zelo zanimiv odgovor Dragana Živadinova (torej umetnika, ki za konec svojega življenjskega projekta v letu 2045 načrtuje prav postavitev daljinsko usmerjenega letala brez človeške posadke v geostacionarno orbito, 35.900 km daleč od planeta Zemlje) na moje vprašanje, kaj pomeni veliki napis TEHNO, ki se pojavlja na koncu njegove predstave Marlowe, s katerim se bo tudi končala prihajajoča deveturna uprizoritev Stojsavljevićeve Elizabetinske trilogije, ko bo uprizorjena v celoti v enem kosu. Živadinov razločuje izraz »tehno« tako od grškega »techne« kot od angleškega »technology« in ga definira kot »emancipirano tehnologijo; nekaj, kar bo postalo neodvisno od nas biološkega«. Tehno je zanj »naravna emancipacija«, »emancipirana entiteta, ki ima popolnoma svoje življenje«. In še: »Tehno je evolucijski proces biološkega. Da se razumemo, jaz nisem futurolog, ne govorim o tem, kaj bo, ampak o tem, kaj ima potencial.«29

»O smrti človeka in o nadčloveku«

roblematiziranje razmerja med sodobnim subjektom oz. telesom in tehnologijo je vsekakor predmet številnih sodobnih raziskovalnih gledaliških in umetniških praks, vendar so v tem nepreglednem številu zelo redka dela, ki ponujajo tudi odgovore, in sicer s takšno, skorajda znanstveno doslednostjo, metodičnostjo in jasnostjo, kot je to 50-letni projekt Dragana Živadinova. Skrajno zanimivo je namreč, da projekt Noordung 1995-2045 – tako kot je opisan v prvem razdelku tega teksta – postavlja in na podoben način skuša razrešiti problem, identičen Foucaultovemu ničejanskemu problemu, kot ga formulira Deleuze v zelo pomembnem aneksu k svoji knjigi o Foucaultu z naslovom »O smrti človeka in o nadčloveku«. 30

Vsako telo oz. vsaka forma je kombinacija razmerja sil v okviru določenega dispozitiva. To je splošno Foucaultovo načelo. Te sile so vedno v razmerju s silami, ki prihajajo od zunaj, iz nekega drugega dispozitiva. Tako nastane nova forma. Če vzamemo za primer sile v človeku (sile predstavljanja, pomnjenja, hotenja itn.), lahko rečemo, da takšne sile nujno stopajo v kompozicijo forme človeka. Vendar se te iste sile lahko investirajo tudi drugače, v neko drugo kombinacijo sil, v neko drugo formo. Tudi če vzamemo neko kratko obdobje, pravi Deleuze, človek ni obstajal od nekdaj in ne bo obstajal za vedno (tukaj se seveda ne misli človeški rod, ampak človek kot predmet znanosti – objekt spoznanja, ki ga konstituirajo šele Kantov kopernikanski 28 Prav tam, str. 299–300. 29 Intervju se v zvočni obliki nahaja na spletni strani Radia Študent: http://www.radiostudent.si/article.php?sid=20488. Dostopno 18. 10. 2011. 30 Deleuze, Foucault, str. 124–132. Tukaj povzemamo ta aneks.

6 ter / 6 tistim / 6 vendar / 6 znanstvene / 5 bomo / 5 čas / 5 čemer / 5 estetske / 5 Foucault / 5 ima / 5 kaj / 5 katere / 5 katerem /

obrat in humanistične vede, nastale v devetnajstem stoletju: biologija, politična ekonomija in lingvistika).31 Da bi se pojavila forma človeka, so morale sile v človeku stopiti v razmerje z natančno določenimi silami od zunaj. Deleuze potem, sledeč Foucaultu, opiše tri velike metadispozitive oz. zgodovinske formacije: prva je klasicistična zgodovinska formacija, druga zgodovinska formacija devetnajstega stoletja, tretja pa je nekakšna zgodovinska formacija prihodnosti. Slednja je šele v nastajanju, zato še ne moremo predvideti, kakšna bo. Gre za konkreten problem, ki ga je Nietzsche imenoval »nadčlovek«. Pri Nietzschejevi ideji nadčloveka namreč ne gre za nikakršnega izpopolnjenega človeka, za nikakršnega supermana. Čeprav slovenski prefiks »nad« napotuje na nekaj, kar naj bi bilo nad človekom, je Nietzschejev Übermensch enostavno nekaj, kar ni človek – je onstran človeka. Nietzsche se nikoli ni naveličal ponavljati, da je človek le most, nekaj, prek česar edino lahko nastane nadčlovek. Skratka, nadčlovek je nova forma, ki bo nastala, ko sile, ki formirajo formo človeka, stopijo v razmerje z nekimi drugimi, zgodovinsko natančno določenimi silami od zunaj. Nietzsche je govoril: človek je zasužnjil življenje, delo in jezik – nadčlovek je tisti, ki jih bo osvobodil v samem človeku v korist neke druge forme.

jeno število raznovrstnih kombinacij. […] Sile v človeku stopajo v odnos s silami zunanjosti, silami silicija, ki dobivajo prednost pred ogljikovimi silami, silami genskih faktorjev, ki dobivajo prednost pred organizmom, silami agramatičnosti, ki se prebijajo pred označevalcem.«33 Povezava med konceptualno spekulativnostjo projekta Noordung ter računalniškimi, genetskimi in agramatičnimi (tehnološkimi) strukturami oz. silami »prihodnosti«, o katerih piše Deleuze v pravkar navedenem besedilu, ne bi mogla biti bolj jasna; pri čemer si projekt Noordung za raziskovanje njihovega vpliva na človeka zastavi nič manj kot petdesetletno zgodovinsko obdobje, kar je več kot dovolj, da bi se določeni procesi, ki so se v času Deleuzovega pisanja oz. času začetka projekta Noordung šele začeli, tudi jasneje pokazali. ..

Kot opozarja Deleuze, je to problem, pri katerem se moramo zadovoljiti z zelo diskretnimi oznakami, v nasprotnem primeru lahko zapademo v strip. Čeprav še ne moremo govoriti o tej novi formi, lahko zaznamo sile zunanjosti, s katerimi sile v človeku stopajo v razmerje. Človek je zasužnjil sile življenja, dela in jezika, tako da jih je s pomočjo novih znanstvenih disciplin – ki izvirajo iz biologije, politične ekonomije in lingvistike – razdrobil in razbil: »[…] Lingvistika humanističnega devetnajstega stoletja se je konstituirala na razbitosti različnih jezikov kot pogoja za ‘niveliranje govora’ kot predmeta […].«32 Enako velja za biologijo, ki je nivelirala življenje, in politično ekonomijo, ki je nivelirala delo. Danes je problem seveda v tem, kako znova zbrati razbite sile v človeku. Te naloge Deleuze ne prepušča ne znanosti, ne politiki, ne filozofiji, ne umetnosti. Sile, ki bodo lahko zbrale razbite sile v človeku in s katerimi te danes stopajo v razmerje, so sile tehnologije: »Zdi se nam, da sta se lahko delo in življenje zbrala šele, ko sta se odlepila od ekonomije in biologije, tako kot se je jezik zbral šele, ko se je književnost ločila od lingvistike. Bilo je potrebno, da biologija vskoči v molekularno biologijo oziroma da se razbito življenje zbere v genetičnem kodu. Bilo je potrebno, da se razbito delo zbere in ponovno umesti v strojih tretje vrste, kibernetičnih in informatičnih. Katere bodo potem sile, s katerimi bodo sile v človeku stopile v razmerje? To ne bo več dvigovanje do neskončnega, niti ne bo končnost, ampak neomejeno-končno; tako pa imenujemo vsako situacijo sile, v kateri daje neko končno število dejavnikov praktično neome31 Prim.: »Epistemološko polje, v katerem se gibljejo humanistične znanosti, ni bilo vnaprej določeno: v 17. oziroma 18. stoletju ni nobena filozofija, nobena politična ali moralna opcija, nobena empirična znanost, nobeno opazovanje človeškega telesa, nobena analiza občutja, imaginacije ali strasti nikoli naletela na kaj takšnega, kakor je človek. Človeka namreč sploh ni bilo (prav kakor ni bilo življenja, govorice in dela) […] [Č]lovek, vzet ločeno ali v skupini, [je] prvič, odkar človeška bitja obstajajo in živijo v družbi, postal predmet znanosti […]: gre za dogodek v polju vednosti.« Michel Foucault, Besede in reči, Ljubljana: Studia Humanitatis, 2010, str. 417–418. 32 Deleuze, Foucault, str. 130–131.

33 Prav tam, str. 131–132.

Teo ri je up rizo ri t v en i h p raks / Theo ri es o f P e r for m i n g A r ts 77

432 the / 268 of / 178 and / 125 is / 117 a / 110 in / 87 to / 81 that / 67 which / 65 as / 47 are / 47 we / 46 or / 45 with / 43 it / 37 dispositifs /

The Technodispositifs of the Conceptual Time Machine Noordung1

Bojan Andjelković Translated by Špela Drnovšek Zorko

78 Teor ije u pr izor i tvenih praks / T heo ries o f Perfo r m in g A rts

This text is an adapted and expanded version of a paper presented at the international conference of the ELMCIP (Electronic Literature as a Model of Creativity and Innovation in Practice) research project bearing the title “Electronic Literature and New Media Art”, which took place in Ljubljana on the 22nd and 23rd of September 2011. http://elmcip.net/

36 Noordung / 35 project / 34 forces / 34 into / 31 from / 30 not / 27 for / 27 on / 26 an / 26 be / 25 The / 25 živadinov / 24 dispositif /

In every dispositif, we have to distinguish between what we are (what we no longer are) and what we are becoming: the part of history, the part of currentness. Gilles Deleuze

Gesamtkunstwerk Noordung 1995–2045

t is rather interesting that the work of Dragan Živadinov, who belongs to the underpopulated ranks of those Slovenian artists of whom much has been written, and continues to be written, in both scientific literature and the popular press, has yet to be fully investigated. Unlike the other two key members of the NSK collective, Laibach and Irwin, there is no scientific monograph on Živadinov and his work, despite the fact that the NSK Department for Theatre, Opera and Ballet played a crucial role in linking the NSK groups into a “unified” artistic-stylistic formation known as retrogardism.2 This is particularly problematic for two reasons. First, we are dealing with an art work that hinges precisely on its unity, which means that partial analyses of its constitutive parts (for example, individual theatre performances, art exhibitions, lectures, etc.), or one of its aspects (theatrical, that is, artistic, techno-scientific, socio-political), are inadequate to understand it in its entirety; even worse, lacking deeper insight into the entirety of the work, such a partial analysis of constitutive parts and aspects cannot even be possible. And second, Živadinov was, from the very beginning, less interested in simply directing theatre performances than he was in creating a conceptual, unified piece of art, which is characterised particularly by the fact that it is processual, or rather, that it comes into being in and through time. This holds true for all of its stages of evolution – the Scipion Nasice Sisters Theatre (1983–1987), the Red Pilot Cosmokinetic Theatre (1987–1990) and the Cosmokinetic Cabinet Noordung (1990–present) – where these phases are not separated by any clear boundaries signalling Živadinov’s intent. Rather, these phases are, in a certain sense, formally, thematically and strategically inseparably linked. In other words, it is the ultimate Gesamtkunstwerk, a unified art work, which is inseparably linked to both the life of its artist and the socio-historical context in which it emerges – which of course holds especially true for Živadinov’s current 50-year work-in-progress, Noordung 1995–2045. The 50-year “theatrical” process Noordung created by Živadinov, Dunja Zupančič and Miha Turšič is a complex, long-ranging investigative project, which officially began on 20 April 1995 at 10 p.m., with a premiere and five imagined encores to take place every 10 years (2005…2015…2025…2035…) on the same date, at the same time, and with the same actors, until the year 2045. 2

Until then, Laibach had used the term “retro-avant-garde”, and Irwin later “patented” the term “retro principle”, but the term “retro-garde” is Živadinov’s. For a problematisation of this terminology, see: Tine Hribar, “Postmodernizem, transavantgarda in retrogardizem”, Nova revija, 1986.

It is important for our purposes that the performance involves the process of substituting the bodies of actors, who will by then have died, with remote-control technological abstractions. In the first phase, the bodies of the deceased actors will be replaced by a remote-controlled sign, which will replace the actor in his or her mise-en-scène; but it will also include software capable of translating theatrical scripts into music – when an actress dies, her script will be translated into a melody, when an actor dies, his script will be translated into a rhythm. In the final phase, at the end of all the processual and conceptual stages of the 50-year project – when all the actors have died, but Živadinov is still alive (so goes the script) – these technological actor substitutes are supposed to end in space, in a geostatic orbit, as 14 communication satellites floating in an arrangement inside 14 capsules within two tubular lines of a geostatic space station. Živadinov’s script further dictates that these artistic satellites, named umbots,3 should include software known as syntapiens (synthetic homo sapiens), made up of three core programs encoded with the following information about the actors: a micronic sketch of the actor’s face, a collection of the actor’s movements, and the actor’s genetic code – these will be, in conjunction with the bio-bibliographical information about each actor, beamed onto the planet Earth and into the depths of space. According to Živadinov, the umbot should also possess a certain intelligence, and should be capable of developing selfconsciousness. These post-gravitational forms – like Malevich’s planits – will “no longer have any immediate connection to Earth, and it will be possible to observe and investigate them as any other planets or even planetary systems.”4 The script further intends that following the conclusion of the project on 1st May 2045, Živadinov should commit suicide in space.5 We can currently point to at least three fundamental reasons why Noordung is a 50-year process. First, because of the theatrical demonstration of rupture with the traditional theatrical model, which is based on a dramatic text, in the form of its ritualised cessation (the actors’ scripts replaced with music). Second, due to the theatrical “representation” of the unstable relationship between the contemporary subject, that is, the body, and technology, through the processual replacement of deceased actors’ bodies with technological substitutes. And third, which also constitutes the deepest meaning of the work, due to the theatrical “representation” of time itself. Yet, the latter is not merely a rep3 4

Trans. note: “umbot” = um + robot, that is, mind + robot. Cf. “Coordinates” 26, Planits, and 31, Emancipation of the technological, in Dragan Živadinov, “50 Coordinates of Postgravitational Art”, 2010, http://www.scribd.com/ doc/31097592/50-kordinat. Here, we are, of course, not interested in whether his plan will come to fruition, since we cannot know in advance, but are dealing primarily with the mental – techno-artistic, socio-political, and not least of all, ontological potential inherent in the project. Despite the fact that the script itself resembles a science fiction novel, it is by no means impossible, even though the numerous unpredictable parameters on which it depends make it statistically unlikely – and this is precisely the basis of the project’s construction, and its stake. In other words, we are here dealing with the Noordung project as what it really is: a conceptual art work, that is, as absolute virtuality, which nevertheless possesses a minimal probability of self-actualisation (this probability, incidentally, grows higher every year as events develop), which, regardless of its final outcome, says a lot about the intersubjective relation between today’s man and contemporary technology: about our “entrapment” by the dispositifs of the globalised, highly technologised society to which we belong, within which we work, and which make us what we are.

Teo rije up rizo ri t v en i h p raks / Theo ri es o f P e r for m i n g A r ts 79

24 other / 23 political / 23 technology / 22 by / 22 within / 21 what / 20 can / 20 its / 20 man / 19 but / 18 artistic / 18 between / 18 In /

n this sense, I am very interested in the answer that Dragan Živadinov

gives (as an artist planning to place a remote-controlled, crewless airplane into a geostatic orbit 35,900 km from Earth as a culmination of his lifelong project) to my question about the meaning of the large sign spelling out TECHNO that appears at the end of his performance of Marlowe and which will also conclude his upcoming ninehour performance of Stojsavljević’s Elizabethan Trilogy when it is staged in its entirety. Živadinov draws a distinction between the term “techno” and the Greek “techne”, as well as the English “technology”, and defines it as “emancipated technology; something that will become independent of

resentation of linear time (actors die – time passes), but some kind of theatrical “representation” of Nietzsche’s idea of eternal return (actors die, but we continue, 50 years later, to act out the same performance – thus time stands still, or more precisely, time returns).6 Nietzsche’s mysterious idea, as Deleuze shows in his own most systemic work, is based precisely on difference and repetition – more to the point, on repetition that alone creates difference, and thus creates something new – which is the also the central starting point of the Noordung concept. This is made possible because “what the repetition repeats is not what the past ‘effectively was’, but the virtuality inherent to the past and betrayed by its past actualization. In this precise sense, the emergence of the New changes the past itself, that is, it retroactively changes not the actual past – we are not in science fiction – but the balance between actuality and virtuality in the past.”7 The parallels between Deleuze’s philosophical and Živadinov’s artistic conceptualisations of difference and repetition do not end there: just as one of the strongest theses of Deleuze’s book is that repetition is in strict opposition to representation, so the conceptual theatrical repetitions within the Noordung project stand in strict opposition to classical theatrical repetition, that is, representation based on mimesis.8 Conditioned as it is by high technology, the Noordung project is closely linked to contemporary science – particularly to investigations in the field of cognitive sciences, along with communication, information, space and biotechnological sciences – while, on the other hand, involving a broad spectrum of investigative artistic practices: alongside the six performances that form the core time-structure of the project, there are numerous other integral parts, such as performances, informances, intermedial and conceptual exhibitions, book publications and conservation works, lectures and seminars, which enlighten and illuminate individual aspects of the project. The complexity of the project thus demands an interdisciplinary approach combining current 6

us as biological”. For him, techno denotes a “natural emancipation”, “an emancipated entity, which has its

entirely own life”. And more: “Techno is the evolutionary process of the biological. Just so we are clear, I am not a futurologist, I do not speak of what will be, but of what has potential.”

8 0 Teor ije u pr izoritvenih praks / T heo ries o f Perform in g A rts

Cf. Živadinov’s explanation of “coordinate” 17, Docking mechanism: “When the system begins to connect, a deadly concentration sets in. Concentration, signification and control; concentration in orbit and control in dangerous sequences. In the module, we are sliding towards the last division of the intellect. The planned act follows: due to the docking process, we are in the energy hub of the event. There is no more room for our identification – we are universal because the docking mechanism is processed with the scheme of systematic planetary organisation. That is why modular patterns of different time dispersions determine our present, which is located in the docking protocols of the universal! That is why there is no past and no future, only the absolute present! Theatre is the absolute present!” Ibid. Slavoj Žižek, Organs Without Bodies: Deleuze and Consequences, New York/London: Routledge, 2004, p. 12. Incidentally, in this book, Žižek makes a number of claims – the most scandalous of which is definitely the assertion that Deleuze was an “ideologue of late capitalism” (p. 184) – with which we cannot agree, even though Žižek’s intention was, in his own words, to approach Deleuze “from behind” and to produce, according to Deleuze’s philosophical recipe, his own “illegitimate child”. The problem at hand is that Žižek comes at Deleuze “from behind” with Hegel’s philosophical apparatus and not, for example, “from in front” with Spinoza’s, Bergson’s or Nietzsche’s, which would be much more logical and comfortable when penetrating Deleuze’s philosophy. Suffice it to say that Nietzsche, without whom it is impossible to comprehend Deleuze’s philosophy, has only two or three passing mentions in the entire book, which would be akin to somebody writing a book on Žižek’s own theory, and only briefly mentioning Lacan twice and Marx once. Here, I am gesturing toward an excellent text by Alenka Zupančič, in which she deconstructs and connects various philosophical and psychoanalytical attempts to grapple with the concept of repetition – from Kierkegaard and Marx to Deleuze and Lacan – and shows how the concept of repetition is one of the main “discoveries” of modern thought, while simultaneously a crucial mechanism of comedy as a theatrical genre. “Ponavljanje”, Filozofski vestnik, XXVIII: 1, Ljubljana 2007, pp. 57–79.

18 this / 17 Deleuze / 17 his / 17 theatrical / 17 will / 16 also / 16 art / 16 has / 15 all / 15 body / 15 first / 15 scientific / 14 no / 14 sense /

philosophical, socio-political and cognitive theories, anthropological, new media and software studies, and contemporary theory of art, theatre and performance. We are convinced that such an approach is possible if we position Foucault’s concept of the dispositif as the study’s central theoretical point of departure.

What is a Dispositif?

oucault uses the term dispositif (it first appears in his work sometime after the year 1970) in an attempt to contain two broad and heterogeneous fields, which, through their intersubjective relation, continuously structure reality but are never reducible to each other: the sayable is never within the visible, and vice versa: the visible is never within the sayable. There is thus no common ground for words and things, no objective view from the outside; rather, what only ever holds them together is the structuring of their relationship within the frame of knowledge-power mechanisms of a given dispositif. In other words, a dispositif is in a sense a field of forces, a “heterogeneous cluster of discursive strategies and a non-discursive organisation of the visible”,9 which enables the creation of precisely defined epistemological fields, that is, precisely defined processes of subjectivation. A careless reading of Foucault could lead one to conclude that he uses the word dispositif to denote only those large dispositifs of power such as the asylum, the clinic, the prison, the school, the police, the church, the factory, the law, sexuality, and so forth, and yet – as Agamben suggests in his text “What is a Dispositif?” – the term can also encompass “literally anything that has in some way the capacity to capture, orient, determine, intercept, model, control, or secure the gestures, behaviors, opinions, or discourses of living beings.”10 Thus Agamben sees all of the following as dispositifs: the pen, writing, literature, philosophy, agriculture, the cigarette, navigation, computers, the mobile telephone (as the ultimate dispositif), and finally even language itself, perhaps as the most ancient of all dispositifs. In the cited text, Agamben even suggests a general partitioning of all existence into two large groups: the first group consisting of living beings (or substances), and the other the dispositifs by which the first group is always captured. Following this generalised division of all things into two large groups, Agamben introduces a third: “And, between these two, as a third class, subjects. I call a subject that which results from the relation and, so to speak, from the relentless fight between living beings and apparatuses.”11 The subject is therefore the result, the effect of dispositifs, but simultaneously also a condition of their existence (the mobile telephone would not be any kind of dispositif, but merely an ordinary inanimate thing, were it not for the subjects who use it to communicate). Thus, for example, “as a dispositif, the cinema creates the subject, but also contains it […]: the subject is both 9

Cf. Mladen Dolar, Kralju odsekati glavo: Foucaultova dediščina, Ljubljana: Krtina, 2010, p. 28. 10 Giorgio Agamben, “What is an Apparatus?” in: What is an Apparatus? and Other Essays, Stanford University Press, 2009, p. 14 11 Ibid.

the effect and condition.”12 All technology thus “prescribes” a given dispositif. And yet a given technology can come into being only within the frame of the dispositif that enables it: “Foucault shows how the rifle exists as a tool only in the sense that it is ‘a machinery whose principle would no longer be the mobile or immobile mass, but a geometry of divisible [and composable] segments’. Technology is thus social before it is technical.”13 “This is one of the links between Foucault and contemporary historians: on the subject of the flail, etc., Braudel says that ‘the tool is a consequence and no longer a cause.’ On the subject of hoplitic arms, Detienne says that ‘technique is in some way internal to the social and the mental.’”14 That technology is the consequence rather than the cause in no way signifies that technologies came into being following some sort of social plan, in line with social expectations, contingent on social organisation, etc., since that would mean that technology is in fact separate from the social. Deleuze and Foucault’s point lies precisely in the fact that technologies are deeply and primarily social, even mental, and that it is specific technologies, “prescribed” by specific dispositifs, which make us what we are. In summary, the dispositif is the “immanent cause” of a given technology.15 A dispositif is thus not merely an inanimate thing, a cluster of prescriptions and user manuals – it is a form of time structure, a temporal, dynamic process, it is an event within which the subject is “captured”. More precisely, as Deleuze points out, there are a minimum of two, even three subjects: the one who is (the one who no longer is), and the one who is about to become: “We belong in these apparatuses and act in them. The newness of an apparatus in relation to those preceding it is what we call its currency, our currency. The new is the current. The current is not what we are but rather what we become, what we are in the process of becoming, in other words the Other, our becoming-other. In every apparatus, we have to distinguish between what we are (what we no longer are) and what we are becoming: the part of history, the part of currentness.”16 When we speak of dispositifs, it may in this sense be better to speak of processes, or rather – as Deleuze suggests – about the lines of subjectivation, rather than subjects. Among other things, this means that every dispositif has an immanent specific historical formation, a specific historical package of instrumental and interpretative actions, which in some sense “program” the possible processes of subjectivation. This “programming” does not, of course, act with the aid of a chip implanted directly into the cogito; rather, as Foucault showed with incomparable clarity and detail, the historical processes of disciplining the subject are always carried out with and through the body.

12 Melita Zajc, Tehnologije in družbe, Ljubljana: ISH Fakulteta za podiplomski humanistični študij, 2000, p. 125. 13 Gilles Deleuze, Foucault, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988, p. 40. 14 Ibid., p. 138. 15 “What do we mean here by immanent cause? It is a cause which is realized, integrated and distinguished in its effect. Or rather the immanent cause is realized, integrated and distinguished by its effect.” Ibid, p. 37. 16 Gilles Deleuze, “What is a Dispositif?” in: Two Regimes of Madness: Texts and Interviews, 1975–1995, New York: Semiotext(e); London: MIT Press, 2007, p. 345.

Teo rije up rizo ri t v en i h p raks / Theo ri es o f P e r for m i n g A r ts 8 1

14 some / 13 even / 13 have / 13 itself / 13 new / 13 relation / 13 subject / 13 work / 12 form / 12 historical / 12 precisely / 12 techno /

The Dispositifs of the “Assemblage” Noordung

espite the fact that the numerous theoretical conceptualisations of the Noordung project never mention Foucault or Deleuze – it remains unclear whether Živadinov is even familiar with their concepts, and concretely, with the concept of the dispositif – their artistic, socio-political, and techno-scientific structures and strategies are understood exactly in the sense of dispositifs, that is, as fields of power, knowledge-power mechanisms, which enable some and disable other processes of subjectivation.17 This is clear in the very idea of the project as well as in Živadinov’s numerous interviews, and especially in his text from the year 2010, “50 Coordinates of Postgravitational Art”, in which he determines and deconstructs 50 terms crucial for the comprehension of the entire project, and which we are referencing here. There, among other things, art is defined as “the machine of all machines, the machine, which fabricates other machines”, while technology is “the continuation of biological evolution”, which can create different kinds of beings, “made up of non-organic materials instead of biological cells”18 – ideas that could have been undersigned by Deleuze and Guattari.19 In other words, art and science are here understood as the only fields of knowledge that can create new and different forms of life, that is, new and different possibilities for subjectivation. For this to occur, it is necessary to free them from those (economicopolitical) forces that currently possess them, and link them with other forces – with the (inhuman) forces of technology – since, in the final phase, technology, as Deleuze implicitly states in his book on Foucault, is nothing more than a force: “The forces within man enter into a relation with forces from the outside, those of silicon which supersedes carbon, or genetic components which supersede the organism, or agrammaticalities which supersede the signifier.”20 It is extremely interesting that the Noordung project, as it was described in the first part of this text, counts on precisely the computing, genetic and agrammatical structures or forces that Deleuze writes about. Before we move on to the problematic of the dispositifs that can be traced within the Noordung project itself, allow us to introduce another terminological explanation: the rubric of dispositif will hereby include both concrete dispositifs that exist in reality, 17 Knowledge of Deleuze’s and Foucault’s ideas is not even particularly necessary, since we can claim that, in a certain sense, the problematisation of the relation between subject and technology also forms the central starting point of the historical avant-gardes which Noordung directly refers to, as well as of contemporary technoart and technoscience in general. 18 Dragan Živadinov, op. cit. 19 Cf.: with regard to art as “the machine of all machines”: “The epoch of the First World War was the meeting ground of the four great attitudes centering around the machine: the great molar exaltation of Italian futurism […]; that of Russian Futurism and Constructivism, which conceive the machine in terms of new relations of production […]; the Dadaist molecular machinery, which, for its part, brings about a reversal in the form of a revolution of desire […]; and lastly, a humanist antimachinism, which wants to rescue imaginary or symbolic desire, to turn it back against the machine […].” (Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, “Balance-Sheet Program for Desiring-Machines”, in: Chaosophy: Texts and Interviews 1972–1977, Los Angeles: Semiotext(e), 2009, pp. 114–115); and as regards inorganic life: “Not every organism has a brain, and not all life is organic, but everywhere there are forces that constitute microbrains, or an inorganic life of brains.” (Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, What is Philosophy?, New York: Columbia University Press, 1996, p. 213.) 20 Deleuze, Foucault, pp. 131–132.

8 2 Teor ije u pr izoritvenih praks / T heo ries o f Perfo rm in g A rts

as well as (at least currently) conceptual, mental dispositifs. In the strictest Foucauldian sense, each dispositif is by definition a highly concrete if invisible machine. But in a certain sense, we can also speak of mental dispositifs insofar as we are dealing with a highly complex mental structure that opens new and different forms of thinking, that is, enables new and different forms of subjectivation. This second genre of dispositifs is of course most frequently found precisely in artistic thinking: that is how Alain Badiou, for example, in connection with the heteronymous writing process of Fernando Pessoa, speaks of “dispositifs for thinking”, while Gerard Wajcman, speaking of the status of the object in Duchamp, mentions the “logical dispositif”.21 Additionally, it makes particularly pertinent sense for an analysis of the Noordung project to introduce the operative category of conceptual dispositifs, since the majority of Noordung’s mental dispositifs generally always represent potentially concrete theatrical-artistic, techno-scientific and socio-political dispositifs. We are dealing with dispositifs that Noordung references, or rather, that it anticipates and conceptualises, but which have yet to occur and that do not exist in reality – here we mean both the potentially concrete technodispositifs of the future, which have yet to come into being, as well as the numerous potential dispositifs of the past, planned by historical avant-gardes yet failing to truly materialise or betrayed on the part of their past actualisation. If we now leave aside the division of dispositifs into the concrete and the conceptual, we can conditionally separate the dispositifs that the Noordung project references and creates (or would like to create) into the political, artistic and technological. “Conditionally” because we are unable to draw clear distinctions, since the idea of postgravitational art is inseparable from science or politics.22 Art is here namely linked with science and technology, a link that has urgent political consequences. And in reverse: the political strategies of the Noordung project always have artistic and/or scientific implications, or rather, they are in the service of art and/or science. In other words, the lines or vectors of a specific dispositif, which primarily belongs to one field, always intersect the lines of the dispositifs from the other two spheres. As Deleuze points out: “in each dispositif, the lines cross thresholds that make them either aesthetic, scientific, political, etc.”; these lines “intertwine and mix together [where] some augment the others or elicit others through variations and even mutations of the assemblage.”23 Flusser notes something similar when speaking of the classification of information – which he divides into scientific or indicative (“A” is “A”), political or imperative (“A” ought to be “A”), and aesthetic or optative (let “A” be “A”). But 21

Cited from: Miklavž Komelj, “Pessoa, kraj, kjer se čuti ali misli”, in: Fernando Pessoa, Psihotipija, Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga, 2008, p. 446; and Gerard Wajcman, Objekt stoletja, Ljubljana: Analecta, 2007, p. 57. 22 “Postgravitational art is, categorically, all art that will shape itself under conditions of zero gravity, and that will shape, under new living conditions, systems that we do not yet know. Postgravitational art is not an artistic stylistic formation and has no intention of becoming one. Thousands of years in gravity 1 have shaped all living and non-living things, and directly and indirectly have also shaped art, particularly its structural elements. Only the art of the twentieth century, in thinking through anti-Semitism, conceptualisation, and teleology, opened up the field to gravity 0. The twenty-first century is developing its thinking about postgravitational art on the basis of avant-garde strategies of the previous century.” Dragan Živadinov, op. cit. 23 Cf. Gilles Deleuze, “What is a Dispositif?” op. cit, pp. 339 and 344.

12 This / 12 thus / 12 time / 12 two / 12 year / 12 yet / 11 at / 11 conceptual / 11 one / 10 It / 10 more / 10 out / 10 rather / 10 second / 10 Theatre /

following Flusser, since the information diffuses itself through distributive social apparatuses, which is of course merely another word for dispositifs, this is merely a theoretical division: every scientific indicative has political and aesthetic aspects, every political imperative has scientific and aesthetic aspects, and every optative (a work of art) has scientific and political aspects.”24 The “assemblage” Noordung is thus a conceptually concrete apparatus-triangle, which urgently requires all three dimensions to construe a fourth, located on the utopian point of “gravity zero” where art and the subject, along with the world of gravity 1, are supposedly abolished and established anew. From here on, it would be more precise to say that the dispositifs of the “dispositif Noordung” can be divided into the primarily political, primarily artistic and primarily technological – even though technology, as we will see, plays a central role. The technopolitical dispositifs of the Noordung project encompass all those discursive and non-discursive political practices and structures that art in Slovenia “appropriated” at the beginning of the eighties. We are of course referring to the media-manipulative and organisational structures of the artistic collective Neue Slowenische Kunst, particularly the strategies of the Sisters Scipion Nasice Theatre from Živadinov’s retrogardistic period, with all its evolutionary stages: the illegal (Hinkemann, 1984), the exorcistic (Marija Nablocka, 1985) and the classic phases (Krst pod Triglavom, 1986), as well as self-destruction (Dan mladosti, 1987). These and similar strategies are not discarded by Živadinov, who often likes to talk about his two (artistic) lives, after he leaves the NSK collective, as he would have us think. Rather, there exists a clear continuity between the first and the two later evolutionary stages, within the framework of the Red Pilot Cosmokinetic Theatre (1987–1990) and the Cosmokinetic Cabinet Noordung (1990–present). His theatrical-artistic methods and strategies are – both then and now – highly political, in the broadest and deepest, we could even say the NietzscheanArtaudian sense of the word. It is no coincidence that Živadinov continually stages the playLove and Sovereignity (Ljubezen in država),25 which at its core speaks of the relationship between art and power, and could just as well be called Theatre and Sov24 Vilém Flusser, Toward a Philosophy of Photography, London: Reaktion Books, 2000, p. 53. 25 Živadinov first attempted to stage Stojsavljević’s text approximately 30 years ago as his graduate performance at the Ljubljana Academy for Theatre, Radio, Film, and Television. However, just before graduating, he radically withdrew from the academy with a text meaningfully entitled “A Letter to False Teachers”. It was Love and Nation that served as the basis for the performance A Settled Sculpture One Against One (Naseljena skulptura ena proti ena), which is the originary show and thus the matrix of the entire Noordung project. He last recently staged Stojsavljević’s play at the Slovenian National Drama Theatre, but with a very different intent: if it is one of the core intentions of the 50-year theatrical performance to demonstrably destroy the present dramatic template – through a ritual replacement of the scripts of deceased actors with music – then this time, Živadinov set himself an entirely different, diametrically opposed task: to stage this same dramatic text, wholly and literally, from beginning to end, without any major interventions. Even more, it was necessary to stage not only Love and Nation, but also Stojsavljević’s entire Elizabethan Trilogy, which also includes the plays Marlowe and Forbidden Theatre – two dramas that Živadinov had already staged in previous years, including a prologue, so that it now all forms some sort of looming monster of a performance, almost nine hours long, which will be, according to the artist, staged over the course of an entire week. The Elizabethan Trilogy project thus functions in the framework of the Noordung art work as a – speaking conditionally – classical-theatrical representation of a text, which is intended for demonstrative, ritual destruction.

ereignity and thus better reflect its contents. We are thus dealing with a relationship that, with the phrase “theatre is nation”, which we can already read in The First Sisterly Letter of the Sisters Scipion Nasice Theatre from the year 1983, becomes positioned as a fundamental starting point for Živadinov’s retrogardistic period – and simultaneously also his later, techno and postgravitational metamorphoses – where we can say that it is gradually crossing over, with the new development of events, from a largely artistic-aesthetic sphere into the real socio-political and techno-scientific sphere. Again and again, Živadinov’s projects pose questions about the actual relationship between art and politics, and in the final phase, between art and reality, which is also clearly articulated by the strategic and economic involvement of the Noordung project in numerous socio-political and techno-scientific structures such as the Yuri Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Centre, the County of Vitanje, the European Space Agency, the Cultural Centre of European Space Technologies, the Association of Autonomous Astronauts, etc. We can additionally highlight, as special conceptual political dispositifs, the past and current socio-political movements that Živadinov references in the frame of the Noordung project: Russian Cosmism from the end of the 19th century and its younger heirs, anarcho-cosmism, and transhumanism. The technoartistic dispositifs of the Noordung project can be divided into two groups: the historical and the dispositifs inherent to the project itself. In the first group, we have all those artistic or theatrical dispositifs that arise from stylistic formations and ideas which the project indirectly or directly references as its “historical supports”: Constructivism, Suprematism, Conceptualism, Zenitism, Futurism, retrogardism, and Artaud’s Theatre of Cruelty, Craig’s theatre of the uber-marionettes, Meyerhold’s Biomechanics, etc. The second group consists of all those artistic or theatrical dispositifs that the project creates or conceptualises itself: blank-body directing, vector directing, emo-mechanics, microchoreography, visually linguistic abstraction, teleology, telecosmism, “panoptical” theatrical structures, informances, and so on. Along with Constructivism, Suprematism and, of course, Conceptualism, Artaud’s Theatre of Cruelty is an important reference point for Noordung and crucial for any serious analysis of Živadinov’s work, both in the framework of the Sisters Scipion Nasice Theatre, whose name is a clear Artaud reference, and over the last twenty years, within the timeframe of the Cosmokinetic Cabinet Noordung. Here Artaud’s conceptualisation of bodies without organs seems particularly important; it was introduced by Deleuze and Guattari as one of their core philosophical concepts in the very first chapter of their first joint book: “The body without organs is not the proof of an original nothingness, nor is it what remains of a lost totality. Above all, it is not a projection; it has nothing whatsoever to do with the body itself, or with an image of the body. It is the body without an image.”26 In short, the body is understood as it is in Nietzsche, as a combination of the balance of forces: the body is not a simple physical given, in the sense of a biological organism, but primarily as some sort 26 Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, Anti-Oedipus, London: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2004, p. 9.

Teo rije up rizo ri t v en i h p raks / Theo ri es o f P e r for m i n g A r ts 8 3

10 their / 10 them / 10 those / 9 A / 9 about / 9 course / 9 etc / 9 every / 9 Foucault / 9 life / 9 only / 9 past / 9 reality / 9 so / 9 such /

of “virtual” dimension, immanent to this physical reality, around which a team of forces engages in battle. This technical term can be meaningfully applied to a number of Živadinov’s theatrical and performative strategies (biomechanics or biomechatronics, microchoreographic zones, emo-mechanics, etc.), and it is particularly useful in the analysis and deconstruction of his conceptualisations of blank-body and vector direction, which are highlighted as crucial strategies of direction in postgravitational theatre. In the first case, in blank-body direction, the body without organs arises out of the very concept of a 50-year project that includes the ritual disappearance of the actors’ physicality. In the second case, in vector directing, the body without organs arises out of a direct scenic practice in which the actor’s and the viewer’s physicality exists in conditions of zero gravity – that is, in an environment where there is no horizon, where dimensions don’t mean much, and up-down, left-right lose all meaning – and where the distinction between actor and viewer, thus, between the theatrical “object” and “subject”, loses meaning in the moment that they find themselves in zero-gravity levitation, in a manner of speaking, outside their physicality (such are also the reports of viewers, or more precisely, participants of the performance Gravity Zero: Biomechanics Noordung (Gravitacija nič: Biomehanika Noordung) from the year 1999, which took place in conditions of zero gravity in a Russian aircraft for parabolic flights used to train cosmonauts).

virtual are becoming unstable; we have not abandoned our bodies and our physical reality to set out on never-ending spiritual wanderings across virtual worlds, as it was forecast when intelligent technology was in its initial stages – quite to the contrary, virtuality came to us, it is here in the actual world, surrounding and changing our physical bodies. We have explained what we mean by the term dispositif, but what are we pointing to with the word “techno”, which we continually use as a prefix? We cannot find a better answer to this question than the one given by Janez Strehovec in his book on technoculture, where techno is of course understood not only as a musical genre, “but significantly broader, as a principle of today’s world formed in the paradigm of the second order artificial. What is meant here is the artificial that has crossed the boundary of the mechanical and directed itself toward the field of cybernetics, and even toward the paradigm of bio, that is to say, toward life-resembling processes borne by inorganic bearers. […] Techno means an intensified and accelerated syntheticity, artistry squared, and an expansion of reality in terms of its increase, its upgrade. With this upgrade we are within the paradigm of the second order artificial […], alongside which a new type of techno-modelled perception is being shaped, along with its subject: the aesthetic man in the techno paradigm.”28It thus refers to a broader concept of technology, such as occurs, for example, in the works of Walter Benjamin, Martin Heidegger or Vilém Flusser: “This type of technology is – using Benjamin’s terminology – second order technology; it is based on the individual’s distancing from nature, more concretely, from the reproduction of natural forms, within which the so-called first order technology was trapped. Of the achievements of this first technology we can say that they ‘culminate in human sacrifice; while those of the second order culminate in a remote-controlled airplane, which does not require a human crew.’ (emphasis mine).”29

The technoscientific dispositifs of the Noordung project can also be divided into “external” dispositifs, which the project integrates into itself, and the dispositifs that the project itself establishes and conceptualises. The most important (for now merely conceptual) technodispositifs from the first group are certainly the dispositifs that stem from Herman Potočnik Noordung’s idea of a geostationary space station, and from Clark’s “quantum computer” (which in Živadinov’s specific terminology denotes a computer capable of independent thought), where the latter, in the context of the Noordung project, is closely connected to the cognitive theory of Mitja Peruš – while both ideas are staged in Kubrick’s famous film 2001: A Space Odyssey.27 This group also includes numerous other, more commonplace dispositifs that already exist in reality, dispositifs from information-, communication-, space-, and bio-technologies. The second group, on the other hand, includes (currently conceptual) technoscientific dispositifs, which arise out of terms created for the purposes of this project: syntapiens, umbot, biomechatronic objectiles, etc. That the majority of tecnodispositifs which the Noordung project depends on does not yet exist does not mean that the technological forces of “the future” are not already hard at work: with the introduction of technologies and gadgets such as virtual reality, the Internet, the mobile telephone, the handheld computer, GPS navigator, portable media player or iPod, tablet computer or iPad, and so on and so forth, the borders between the actual and the

In this sense, I am very interested in the answer that Dragan Živadinov gives (as an artist planning to place a remote-controlled, crewless airplane into a geostatic orbit 35,900 km from Earth as a culmination of his lifelong project) to my question about the meaning of the large sign spelling out TECHNO that appears at the end of his performance of Marlowe and which will also conclude his upcoming nine-hour performance of Stojsavljević’s Elizabethan Trilogy when it is staged in its entirety. Živadinov draws a distinction between the term “techno” and the Greek “techne”, as well as the English “technology”, and defines it as “emancipated technology; something that will become independent of us as biological”. For him, techno denotes a “natural emancipation”, “an emancipated entity, which has its entirely own life”. And more: “Techno is the evolutionary process of the biological. Just so we are clear, I am not a futurologist, I do not speak of what will be, but of what has potential.”30

27 Incidentally, there exist numerous other conceptual and strategic parallels between 2001: A Space Odyssey and the Noordung project (the perspective on noncontemporaneity, a genealogy of technology/the subject, the black monolith/black square, posthumanism, etc.), which is certainly no coincidence: both Kubrick’s film and Živadinov’s project pose and attempt to solve, in similar ways, a precisely delineated Nietzschean problem that I will return to in the final portion of this text.

28 29 Cf. Janez Strehovec, Tehnokultura – kultura tehna, Ljubljana: Študentska založba, 1998, p. 17. 29 Ibid., pp. 299–300. 30 The interview can be heard on the Radio Študent website: http://www.radiostudent. si/article.php?sid=20488. Accessed on 18 October 2011.

8 4 Teor ije u pr izoritvenih praks / T heo ries o f Perform in g A rts

9 these / 9 was / 9 We / 9 when / 9 where / 9 would / 8 both / 8 here / 8 outside / 8 point / 8 process / 8 science / 8 social / 8 socio /

“On the Death of Man and Superman”

he problematisation of the relation between the contemporary subject, that is, the body, and technology, is certainly the general position of numerous contemporary investigative theatre and artistic practices, and yet there are few works within this multitude that also offer answers – or offer them with the kind of almost scientific consistency, methodicalness and clarity as Dragan Živadinov’s 50-year Noordung project. It is extremely interesting that Noordung 1995–2045, the way we described it in the first section of this text, sets and similarly attempts to solve a problem identical to Foucault’s Nietzschean problem as it was formulated by Deleuze in the highly important annex to his Foucault book entitled “On the Death of Man and Superman”.31

Every body, or every form, is a combination of the relation of forces in the frame of a given dispositif. This is a general Foucauldian principle. These forces are always in relation to forces that come from the outside, from some other dispositif. This is how a new form is created. If we take, for example, the forces within man (the forces of imagining, remembering, desiring, etc.), we can say that such forces necessarily intervene in the composition of human form. And yet these same forces can also be invested differently, into some different combination of forces, into some different form. Even if we take a short period of time, says Deleuze, man has not always existed and will not exist forever (what is meant here, of course, is not the human race, but man as an object of science – an object of knowledge, constituted by Kant’s Copernican turn and the humanistic sciences created in the nineteenth century: biology, political economy and linguistics.32 For the human form to appear, it is necessary for forces within man to enter into a relation with precisely determined forces from the outside. Deleuze, following Foucault, describes three large metadispositifs or historical formations: the first is a classical historical formation, the second a historical formation of the nineteenth century, and the third a historical formation of the future. Since the latter is yet in the process of generation, we are unable to predict what it will look like. It is a concrete problem which Nietzsche named the “superman” [Übermensch]. Nietzsche’s idea of the Übermensch has nothing to do with a perfected man, with some kind of superhero. Even though the Slovenian prefix “nad”33 denotes something above man, Nietzsche’s

enter into a relation with some other, historically precisely determined outside forces. Nietzsche said: man has enslaved life, labour and language – the superman is the one who will free them within man himself, to the benefit of some other form. As Deleuze points out, this is a problem around which we must satisfy ourselves with highly tentative signifiers, lest we descend to the level of cartoon. However, even though we are as yet unable to speak about this new form, we can sense the forces from the outside with which the forces within man enter into a relation. Man has enslaved the forces of life, labour and language by fragmenting and dispersing them with the aid of new scientific disciplines – which stem from biology, political economy and linguistics: “[...] nineteenth century humanist linguistics was based on the dissemination of languages, as the condition for a ‘demotion of language’ as an object [...].”34 The same holds true for biology, which demoted life, and political economy, which demoted labour. Today, of course, the problem lies in how to regroup the dispersed forces within man. Deleuze does not leave this task to science, nor to politics, philosophy or art. The forces capable of regrouping dispersed forces within man, and with which the latter now enter into a relation, are the forces of technology: “It seems to us, though, that when dispersed labour and life were each able to unify themselves only by somehow breaking free from economics or biology, just as language managed to regroup itself only when literature broke free from linguistics. Biology had to take a leap into molecular biology, or dispersed life regroup in the genetic code. Dispersed work had to regroup in third-generation machines, cybernetics and information technology. What would be the forces in play, with which the forces within man would then enter into a relation? It would no longer involve raising to infinity or finitude but an unlimited finity, thereby evoking every situation of force in which a finite number of components yields a practically unlimited diversity of combinations. [...] The forces within man enter into a relation with forces from the outside, those of silicon which supersedes carbon, or genetic components which supersede the organism, or agrammaticalities which supersede the signifier.”35

Übermensch is simply something that is not man – is beyond man. Nietzsche never tired of repeating that man is merely a bridge, something over/through which the superman can come into existence. In other words, the superman is a new form that is yet to be generated, when the forces that form the shape of man

The link between the conceptual speculation of the Noordung project and the computer, genetic and agrammatical (technological) structures or forces of “the future”, which Deleuze describes in the above-cited text, could not be clearer; the Noordung project sets itself no less than a 50-year historical period in which to investigate their impact on man, which is more than enough time for the specific processes which were only coming into effect at the time of Deleuze’s writing, and at the start of the Noordung project, to make themselves more clearly visible. ..

31 Deleuze, Foucault, pp. 124–132. This annex is hereby summarized. 32 Cf.: “The epistemological field traversed by the human sciences was not laid down in advance: no philosophy, no political or moral option, no empirical science of any kind, no analysis of sensation, imagination, or the passions, had ever encountered, in the seventeenth or eighteenth century, anything like man; for man did not exist (any more than life, or language, or labour); […] [M]an, whether in isolation or as a group, and for the first time since human beings have existed and have lived together in societies, should have become the object of science […]: it is an event in the order of knowledge.” Michel Foucault, The Order of Things, Routledge, 2001, pp. 375–376. 33 Trans. note: “nadčlovek” = “superman”.

34 Deleuze, Foucault, pp. 130–131. 35 Ibid., pp. 131–132.

Teo ri je up rizo ri t v en i h p raks / Theo ri es o f P e r for m i n g A r ts 8 5

145 in / 110 v / 105 je / 92 ki / 87 se / 84 da / 74 na / 43 pa / 39 lahko / 38 ali / 38 kot / 38 telesa / 38 za / 37 so / 37 telo / 33 s / 33 z / 32 bi /

KAKO PRISTOPITI K UMETNOSTI V POST … IN POST-POST … DOBI ali (POST)MODERNIZEM JE MRTEV, NAJ ŽIVI (POST)MODERNIZEM? How to Approach Art in a Post … and PostPost … Era or (Post)Modernism Is Dead, Long Live (Post)Modernism? see page 90

Tomaž Toporišič Prevedla Tanja Passoni

8 6 Teor ije u pr izoritvenih praks / T heo ries o f Perfo rm i n g A rts

32 to / 27 med / 27 sem / 27 tem / 26 ne / 26 o / 20 jih / 20 od / 20 tudi / 19 plesa / 19 telesu / 19 V / 18 Ali / 18 ga / 17 najetega / 16 kar / 15 kako /

arafraza znane izjave »Le Roi est mort, vive le Roi!«, ki jo je tradicionalno izrekel francoski plemič Duc d’Uzès kmalu zatem, ko je bila krsta z ostanki nekdanjega kralja položena v grobnico bazilike Saint-Denis, služi za opis paradoksa, povezanega s pojavom modernizma in postmodernizma: če soglasno razglasimo, da postmodernega stanja ni več, pa v nadaljevanju nismo toliko složni glede vprašanja, kaj naj s stanjem, ki je povzročilo njegov odhod. Kot da nismo zmožni najti telesa v krsti in naslednika, kateremu bi podelili suverenost. Le mort saisit le vif enostavno nima učinka, saj za frazo sámo ni neposrednega prenosa moči.

Altermoderni manifest POSTMODERNIZEM JE MRTEV Nova modernost vznika, prilagojena dobi globalizacije – kakor jo razumemo z ekonomskega, političnega in kulturnega vidika: to je altermoderna kultura. Porast komunikacije, potovanj in migracij vpliva na naš način življenja.

Situacijo bom ponazoril s tremi izjavami o smrti postmodernizma, ki so jih izrekli trije sodobni teoretiki umetnosti in kulture: Linda Hutcheon, Mikhail Epstein in Nicolas Bourriaud.

Naš vsakdan je sestavljen iz potovanj v kaotičnem in natrpanem vesoljstvu. Multikulturalizem in identiteto je nadomestila kreolizacija: umetniki izhajajo iz globaliziranega položaja kulture.

1) Kanadska literarna teoretičarka Linda Hutcheon zaključi epilog druge izdaje knjige The Politics of Postmodernism (Politika postmodernizma) s perečim vprašanjem: »Postmoderni trenutek je minil, čeprav njegove diskurzivne strategije in ideološka kritika, tako kot diskurzivne strategije in ideološka kritika modernizma, živijo dalje v sodobnem svetu 21. stoletja. Literarnozgodovinske kategorije, kot sta modernizem in postmodernizem, so ne nazadnje le hevristične oznake, ki jih ustvarjamo v poskusih, da bi kartografirali kulturne spremembe in kontinuitete. Post-postmodernizem potrebuje novo oznako, zato ob zaključku pozivam bralce, da jo poiščejo in poimenujejo 21. stoletje.«1 2) V knjigi iz leta 1999 z naslovom Russian Postmodernism. New Perspectives on Post-Soviet Culture (Ruski postmodernizem. Novi pogledi na postsovjetsko kulturo) slavist ruskoameriškega rodu Mikhail Epstein razmišlja o oznakah za novo obdobje, ki sledi »postmodernizmu«. Odloči se za predpono »trans«: »Zadnja tretjina 20. stoletja se je razvila pod oznako ‘post’, ki je napovedovala zaton pojmov, značilnih za modernost, kot so ‘resnica’ in ‘objektivnost’, ‘duša’ in ‘subjektivnost’, ‘utopija’ in ‘idealnost’, ‘primarni izvor’ in ‘originalnost’, ‘iskrenost’ in ‘sentimentalnost’. Vsi ti pojmi se zdaj na novo pojavljajo v obliki ‘trans-subjektivnosti’, ‘trans-idealizma’, ‘trans-utopizma’, ‘transoriginalnosti’, ‘trans-liričnosti’, ‘trans-sentimentalnosti’ itn.«2 3) V svojem manifestu z naslovom Altermodern Manifesto (Altermoderni manifest) je francoski teoretik in kurator Nicolas Bourriaud skoval nov izraz, ki po njegovem mnenju označuje novo umetnost: altermoderno. A pojdimo v London leta 2009. Ko je kot kurator londonskega Tate trienala in kot kulturni teoretik skoval izraza altermoderno in altermodernizem, je izpostavil specifičnost sodobne umetnosti in umetniškega trga: v Altermodernem manifestu, ki ga je napisal ob tej priložnosti, je oznanil: POSTMODERNIZEM JE MRTEV. 1 2

Linda Hutcheon, The Politics of Postmodernism, New York/London: Routledge, 2002, str. 181. Mikhail Epstein, Alexander Genis, Slobodanka Vladiv-Glover, Russian Postmodernism. New Perspectives on Post-Soviet Culture, New York: Berghahn Books, 1999. Citirano po: http://www.focusing.org/apm_papers/epstein.html, 12. 9. 2011.

Ta novi univerzalizem temelji na prevajanju, podnaslavljanju in vsesplošni sinhronizaciji. Umetnost danes raziskuje vezi, ki se pletejo med besedo in sliko, časom in prostorom, med sabo. Umetniki se odzivajo na novo globalizirano percepcijo. Prehajajo kulturne krajine, prenasičene z znaki, in ustvarjajo nove poti med množico izraznih in komunikacijskih oblik.3

V uvodu k razstavi je Bourriaud zapisal:3 »Običajno se razstava začne z miselno predstavo, do katere je treba poiskati povezave in katere pomeni predstavljajo temelj za diskusijo z umetniki. Raziskava, ki je predhodila trienalu 2009, pa je izhajala iz dvojega: iz ideje o arhipelagu in iz zapisov nemškega priseljenca v Veliki Britaniji Winfreda Georga Sebalda. Arhipelag (in njemu podobne oblike, konstelacija in množica) služi tukaj kot model, ki predstavlja mnogoterost globalnih kultur …«4 »Sebaldovi zapisi – tavanja med ‘znaki’, poudarjenimi s črnobelimi fotografijami – se mi zdijo tipični za spremembo v našem dojemanju časa in prostora, v katerem se zgodovina in geografija vzajemno oplajata, zarisujeta poti in pleteta mreže: to je kulturna evolucija, ki je v samem središču te razstave. Oba pojma – arhipelag in Sebaldova popotovanja – se ne prepletata naključno: predstavljata poti, ki sem jim sledil na podlagi svoje prvotne intuicije: to je smrt postmodernizma kot izhodiščne točke za tolmačenje sedanjosti.«5 Kot zgled Nicolas Bourriaud izbere nemškega romanopisca W. G. Sebalda, ki po njegovem mnenju pripravi teren za tisto, kar imenuje »altermoderno«, »druga« modernost – modernizem brez korenin za 21. stoletje, sinteza modernizma in postkolonializma, v kate3 4 5

http://www.tate.org.uk/britain/exhibitions/altermodern/manifesto.shtm, 10. 10. 2011. http://www.scribd.com/doc/29398878/Bourriaud-Altermodern, 12. 10. 2011 Prav tam.

Teo ri je up rizo ri t v en i h p raks / Theo ri es o f P e r for m i n g A r ts 87

22 dancing / 22 from / 22 movement / 21 but / 20 industrial / 20 more / 19 also / 19 different / 19 do / 19 The / 18 all / 18 could / 18 he /

rem se umetnik »prelevi v kulturnega nomada«. Z odmaknjenim emocionalnim tonom nas Sebaldove knjige popeljejo na popotovanje okoli Evrope, v preteklost in po negotovih poteh spomina, zgodovine in fikcije. »Umetniški jezik nima več korenin, ki bi podpirale oblike, kakor tudi ne natančne kulturne podlage, ki bi služila kot merilo za odstopanja, nima ne središča in ne mej,« pravi Bourriaud. Sebald v svojih zapisih sledi podobni brezciljni poti kot tukajšnji umetniki v svojih resničnih in namišljenih popotovanjih. Nadalje zapiše: »Če je bil modernizem dvajsetega stoletja predvsem zahodni kulturni pojav, je altermodernost posledica svetovnih pogajanj, razprav med predstavniki različnih kultur. Ker je brez središča, je lahko le poliglotska. Za razliko od modernizma 20. stoletja, ki je govoril abstraktni jezik kolonialnega zahoda, in postmodernizma, ki umetniške pojave omejuje z izvori in identitetami, altermodernost zaznamuje prevajanje.«6 V intervjuju z Bartholomewom Ryanom (objavljenem v reviji Art in America) je avtor pomenljive knjige Relacijska estetika in kurator četrtega Tateovega trienala dodal še nekaj dejstev, ki utegnejo nekoliko pojasniti njegove poglede na modernizme in stanje sodobne umetnosti. Altermoderno opredeli kot »poskus ponovne preučitve naše sedanjosti z zamenjavo enega periodizacijskega orodja z drugim. Po tridesetih letih ‘postšoka’ modernizma in žalovanja za njim, ki mu je sledila neizogibna postkolonialna ponovna preučitev naših kulturnih okvirjev, je ‘altermoderno’ izraz, ki želi podati definicijo specifične modernosti v skladu s specifičnim kontekstom, v katerem živimo – to je globalizacija in njene ekonomske, politične in kulturne okoliščine.« Predpona »alter« pomeni, da se zgodovinsko obdobje, opredeljeno kot postmodernizem, izteka, in hkrati namiguje na lokalne boje proti standardizaciji. Temelj te nove modernosti je po Bourriaudovem mnenju »izkušnja brezciljnega potovanja — skozi čas, prostor in medije.«7 Dodaja pa, da ta definicija še zdaleč ni popolna. Bourriaud nadalje sugerira, da je multikulturalizem in identiteto nadomestila »kreolizacija« in da umetniki izhajajo iz »globalnega stanja kulture«. Pojem kulturne kreolizacije, ki ga je v antropologijo vpeljal Ulf Hannerz,8 se nanaša na prepletanje in združevanje dveh ali več 6

Nicolas Bourriaud: »Atermodern Manifesto«. http://www.tate.org.uk/britain/exhibitions/altermodern/manifesto.shtm, zadnji dostop 2. 7. 2009. 7 http://www.artinamericamagazine.com/news-opinion/conversations/2009-03-17/ altermodern-a-conversation-with-nicolas-bourriaud/, 13. 10. 2011 8 Glej: Ulf Hannerz, Cultural Complexity, New York in Chichester: Columbia University Press, 1992. Hannerz definira kreolske kulture takole: »Kreolske kulture – kot tudi kreolski jeziki – so pravzaprav kulture mešanega porekla, stičišče dveh ali več ločenih zgodovinskih tokov, med katerimi poteka interakcija na relaciji center/periferija. [Vendar] kulturni procesi kreolizacije niso zgolj stvar nenehnega

8 8 Teor ije u pr izoritvenih praks / T heo ries o f Perfo rm i n g A rts

nekdaj ločenih tradicij ali kultur. V času globalne množične komunikacije in kapitalizma je kreolizacija prisotna skoraj povsod v svetu, toda obstajajo pomembne razlike v stopnji prepletenosti. Pojem je doživel kritiko, češ da esencializira kulture (kot da so bile tradicije, ki se združujejo, sprva »neomadeževane«). Čeprav je ta kritika mestoma povsem na mestu, pojem kljub temu pojasnjuje številne sodobne kulturne procese, ki jih zaznamujejo gibanje, spremembe in zabrisane meje. Kreolizacija, kakor jo uporabljajo nekateri antropologi, je analogija, vzeta iz jezikoslovja. Ta izraz obravnava z določenega vidika kolonializma, natančneje s stališča izkoreninjenja in premeščanja velikega števila ljudi v plantažnih gospodarstvih nekaterih kolonij, kot so Louisiana, Jamajka, Trinidad, Réunion in Mauritius. Na tem mestu bi se rad osredotočil na Sredozemlje: oprl se bom na znani članek »Metaphors for the Mediterranean: Creolization or Polyphony?« (Metafore za Sredozemlje: kreolizacija ali polifonija?), ki ga je napisal Thierry Fabre in je izšel v reviji Mediterranean Historical Review (2002).9 Članek govori o »kreolizaciji«, ki jo Edouard Glissant uporabi kot metaforo za sredozemski svet, in v tem smislu Sredozemlje primerja z Zahodno Indijo. Avtor sicer izrazi dvom glede uporabe teh dveh izrazov za razlago Sredozemlja, čeprav v zameno ne ponudi nobene alternative. Sam meni, da nam kreolizacija, to je proces prilagajanja celotnemu svetu, ne pomaga razumeti igre identitet v sodobnem sredozemskem svetu, saj sta tukaj ključni genealogija in transcendenca. Kot mogočo alternativo analizira pojem polifonije, v kateri se glasovi združujejo, ne da bi se zares pomešali med seboj. Toda kljub trenutnemu političnemu, kulturnemu in verskemu konfliktu in nenehnemu zamenjavanju pravšnjega z neomadeževanim, polifonijo prej kot ustrezno metaforo razume kot možnost. Iz tega lahko torej povzamemo, da je kreolizacija vendarle povsem prikladen pojem, ki pomaga pojasniti vsaj nekatere značilnosti sredozemskega kulturnega prostora ali drugih specifičnih kulturnih prostorov. Toda taki pogledi nas utegnejo zanesti stran od teme tega prispevka. Naj se zato vrnem k altermodernizmu. Po Bourriaudovem mnenju sodobni umetniki ali vsaj nekateri med njimi vidijo »globalizirano stanje kulture« kot nekaj danega: novi kulturni sloj lahko najdemo na čisto vsakem koncu sveta, kjer sobiva s tradicionalno kulturo in nekaterimi lokalno specifičnimi sodobnimi elementi. Reči, da gre za privilegij umetniške elite, pomeni v celoti zanikati svetovno nasilje kapitalističnega sistema ali pa izkazati izjemno stopnjo naivnosti. Bourriaud meni – in tukaj vnovič povzemam njegove besede – »da ta teoretski odpor, ki je pripet na multikulturalistično dogmo, skriva paternalistični vzorec: posameznike vklenja v njihov t. i.

pritiska, ki ga center izvaja nad periferijo, temveč gre za veliko bolj kreativno medsebojno delovanje. [...] Kreolske kulture izhajajo iz večrazsežnostnih kulturnih srečevanj in so zmožne stvari postaviti na nove načine.« (str. 264–265). Thierry Fabre, »Metaphors for the Mediterranean: Creolization or Polyphony?«, Mediterranean Historical Review, letn. 17, št. 1, 2002, str. 15–24.

18 how / 18 stage / 18 there / 17 an / 17 by / 17 can / 17 has / 17 would / 16 its / 16 performance / 16 we / 15 between / 15 example / 15 seen /

‘izvor’ in ‘identiteto’. Bodimo iskreni: danes imajo umetniki dostop do informacij in vsi, od Stockholma do Bangkoka, uporabljajo enak instrumentarij. Mar ne bi smeli?«10 Bourriaud še dodaja, da se moramo izviti iz te dialektične zanke med globalnim in lokalnim ter se znebiti binarne opozicije med globalizacijo in tradicijami. »In kako se imenuje tretja pot? Modernost, katere historična dvoumnost je usmerjena tako proti standardizaciji kot nostalgiji.«11 Z gotovostjo lahko zatrdimo, da je predlagati teorijo o tretji poti, torej o altermodernizmu, ki se bo zmožen izogniti binarni logiki, predrzno ali v najboljšem primeru naivno dejanje. A kljub vsemu, kot v svoji knjigi Theatre at the Crossroads of Culture (Gledališče na križpotjih kulture) zapiše francoski teoretik uprizoritvenih umetnosti Patrice Pavis:12 vsi zasilni odgovori na vprašanja o stanju sodobne kulture, altermodernizem, interkulturalizem tvegajo zdrs v pretirano poenostavljanje: zlasti zaradi zapletenosti obravnavanih dejavnikov pri celotni kulturni izmenjavi in težavnosti njihove formalizacije. Vsaka tipologija kulturnih odnosov zahteva metajezik, ki bi bil tako rekoč »nad« temi odnosi in bi jih obenem tudi že vseboval. Težko si je predstavljati, kje bodo teoretiki našli tak metajezik, še zlasti ker so tudi sami ujeti v nek jezik in neko kulturo, do katerih je težko vzpostaviti distanco. Še več, ne obstaja splošna teorija kulture, ki bi pravilno upoštevala zgodovinske, družbene in ideološke dejavnike, ne da bi se zvedla nanje. Kulturni študiji imajo zaslugo za rehabilitacijo pojavov, ki niso umeščeni v družbenoekonomsko infrastrukturo in ki niso opredeljivi v čistem ekonomskem ali sociološkem smislu. Obratno pa so ti študiji včasih tudi nagnjeni k temu, da razrešijo vse družbenoekonomske politične in ideološke dejavnike v kulturi, kulturno pa predstavijo kot družbeni element posameznikovega vedenja in postavijo v ospredje vpliv posameznikovega nezavednega na kulturne pojave. Kot zapiše Pavis: »Izogniti se moramo dvema pretiravanjema: tistemu o mehanskem nerekonstruiranem marksizmu, ki zanemarja pomen kulturnih pojavov in njihove relativne avtonomnosti, in tistemu o pomenu kulturalizma, ki ekonomsko in ideološko infrastrukturo spremeni v obliko nezavedne diskurzivne nadstrukture.«13 Ne nameravam načeti razprave o tem, ali Bourriaudov novi izraz pomeni preboj v trenutnih razpravah o novi post-postmoderni dobi globalizacije ali ne. Moj namen tudi ni razpravljati, ali je altermodernizem še ena v vrsti žrtev tistega, kar bi Edward Said poimenoval nova različica kulturnih bojev med imperialnimi in podrejenimi družbami, ki se nadaljujejo v sedanjosti. Zdi se, da se Bourriaud poskuša izogniti klasičnemu vprašanju postkolonialne teorije, ki se ukvarja z množico kulturnih angažmajev: z vplivom imperialističnih jezikov na kolonizirane 10 http://www.artinamericamagazine.com/news-opinion/conversations/2009-03-17/ altermodern-a-conversation-with-nicolas-bourriaud/, 13. 10. 2011. 11 Prav tam. 12 Patrice Pavis, Theatre at the Crossroads of Culture, London, New York: Routledge, 1992. 13 Prav tam, str. 183.

družbe; z učinki evropskih »velikih zgodb«, kot sta zgodovina in filozofija; z značajem in s posledicami kolonialnega izobraževanja ter povezavami med zahodno vednostjo in kolonialnim vplivom. Še zlasti pa se posveča odzivom koloniziranih: boju za nadzor nad samoreprezentacijo prek prilaščanja dominantnih jezikov, diskurzov in oblik pripovedi; boju proti reprezentaciji prostora, zgodovine, rase in etnične pripadnosti; in boju za predstavitev lokalne stvarnosti globalnemu občinstvu. Rad bi namreč izpostavil dejstvo, da z definicijo altermodernizma kot »redefinicije modernosti v nastajanju v dobi globalizacije in poudarjanja izkušnje brezciljnega potovanja skozi čas, prostor in medij« Bourriaud nemara govori tudi o dilemah, s katerimi se v zadnjih desetletjih soočajo tako teoretiki kot umetniki. Zaključil bom s kratkim manifestom POSTGRAVITACIJSKE UMETNOSTI Dragana Živadinova, ki odseva dvome in protislovja »post« dobe: nemožnost transgresije, dejstvo, da smo ob vsakem poskusu definicije »post« umetnosti primorani poseči po besednjaku modernizma in avantgarde. »Postgravitacijska umetnost je kategorično vsa umetnost, ki se bo izoblikovala v pogojih breztežnosti ter bo v novih pogojih bivanja oblikovala sisteme, ki jih še ne poznamo. Postgravitacijska umetnost ni umetniška stilna formacija in tudi nima namena postati. Tisočletja v gravitaciji ‘1’ so izoblikovala vse živo in neživo ter posredno in neposredno tudi umetnost, predvsem pa njene strukturne elemente. Šele umetnost XX. stoletja je z mišljenjem o antimimezisu, konceptualizaciji in telelogiji odprla polje ‘gravitaciji 0’. XXI. stoletje iz avantgardnih metodologij prejšnjega stoletja razvija mišljenje o postgravitacijski umetnosti.«14 Potemtakem ostaja ključno vprašanje, ali se ne poslužujemo vsi avantgardnih in modernističnih metodologij in orodij, da bi razvili ideje o post-, alter-, trans- itn. moderni umetnosti? In mar nismo vsi mi, če parafraziram Mikhaila Epsteina, postpostmodernistične priče preporoda utopije po njeni lastni smrti, po njeni podreditvi ostremu skepticizmu, relativizmu in antiutopični zavesti postmodernizma – utopij »postgravitacijske umetnosti« Živadinova, Bourriaudove altermodernistične umetnosti, »digimodernizma« Alana Kirbyja in še bi lahko naštevali. Zdi se, da so »post-post« teorije ambiciozni tekmeci v upanju, da bodo podedovale dediščino postmodernizma, še preden nas ta zares povsem zapusti. Vse te teorije namigujejo na dejstvo, da se je zgodilo tisto, čemur bi lahko rekli »smrt postmodernizma« in da je postmodernizem dobil naslednika – najbrž kot odziv nanj, morda povezan z globalizacijo – ali bolje rečeno, njegov naslednik je na poti. Ne preostane nam torej drugega, kot da rečemo: (POST)MODERNIZEM JE MRTEV, NAJ ŽIVI (POST)MODERNIZEM? .. 14 http://www.scribd.com/doc/31097592/50-kordinat; glej tudi: http://www.scribd. com/doc/31079708/50-Topics, 13. 10. 2011, in http://reformmedia.blogspot. com/2010/07/noordung-1995-2045_15.html.

Teo ri je up rizo ri t v en i h p raks / Theo ri es o f P e r for m i n g A r ts 8 9

99 in / 52 je / 51 v / 40 ki / 34 se / 28 da / 25 kot / 21 na / 21 z / 19 za / 16 bi / 15 o / 14 ali / 14 ne / 12 s / 11 med / 10 Bourriaud / 10 iz / 10 še / 9 so /

How to Approach Art in a Post … and PostPost … Era or (Post)Modernism Is Dead, Long Live (Post)Modernism?

Tomaž Toporišič

9 0 Teor ije u pr izoritvenih praks / T heo ries o f Perform i n g A rts

9 umetnosti / 8 kulture / 8 pa / 8 post / 8 postmodernizma / 8 trans / 8 tudi / 7 kulturne / 7 po / 7 POST / 7 umetniki / 6 kreolizacija /

he paraphrase of the famous statement “Le Roi est mort, vive le Roi!”, the declaration traditionally made by the Duc d’Uzès, a senior Peer of France, as soon as the coffin containing the remains of the previous king descended into the vault of Saint Denis Basilica, is used to describe a paradox connected to the phenomena of modernism and postmodernism: If we all proclaim that the postmodern condition has been abandoned, we appear to be in much less accord as to what to make of the state it has been abandoned for. It’s as if we were not able to find the body in the coffin or to locate the successor to which we would transfer the sovereignty. Le mort saisit le vif simply does not work. We have no immediate transferral of power behind this phrase. 1) I will illustrate this situation with three statements about the death of postmodernism pronounced by three contemporary theorists of art and culture: Linda Hutcheon, Mihkail Epstein and Nicolas Bourriaud. Linda Hutcheon, the Canadian literary critic, concludes the epilogue of the second edition of The Politics of Postmodernity with a pressing question: “The postmodern moment has passed, even if its discursive strategies and its ideological critique continue to live on as do those of modernism in our contemporary twenty-first century world. Literary historical categories like modernism and postmodernism are, after all, only heuristic labels that we create in our attempts to chart cultural changes and continuities. Postpostmodernism needs a new label of its own, and I conclude, therefore, with this challenge to readers to find it and name it for the twenty-first century.”1 2) In the 1999 book Russian Postmodernism: New Perspectives on Post-Soviet Culture, the Russian-American Slavist Mikhail Epstein considers the names that might be used to designate the new era following “postmodernism”. He decides for the prefix “trans”. I quote: “The last third of the 20th century developed under the sign of ‘post’, which signalled the demise of such concepts of modernity as ‘truth’ and ‘objectivity’, ‘soul’ and ‘subjectivity’, ‘utopia’ and ‘ideality’, ‘primary origin’ and ‘originality’, ‘sincerity’ and ‘sentimentality’. All of these concepts are now being reborn in the form of ‘trans-subjectivity’, ‘trans-idealism’, ‘trans-utopianism’, ‘trans-originality’, ‘trans-lyricism,’ ‘trans-sentimentality’, etc.”2

1 2

Altermodern Manifesto POSTMODERNISM IS DEAD A new modernity is emerging, reconfigured to an age of globalisation – understood in its economic, political and cultural aspects: an altermodern culture Increased communication, travel and migration are affecting the way we live Our daily lives consist of journeys in a chaotic and teeming universe Multiculturalism and identity is being overtaken by creolisation: Artists are now starting from a globalised state of culture This new universalism is based on translations, subtitling and generalised dubbing Today’s art explores the bonds that text and image, time and space, weave between themselves Artists are responding to a new globalised perception. They traverse a cultural landscape saturated with signs and create new pathways between multiple formats of expression and communication.3

In the introduction to the exhibition, Bourriaud wrote: 3 “Usually an exhibition begins with a mental image with which we need to reconnect, and whose meanings constitute a basis for discussion with the artists. The research that has preceded the Triennial 2009, however, had its origins in two elements: the idea of the archipelago, and the writings of a German émigré to the UK, Winfred Georg Sebald. The archipelago (and its kindred forms, the constellation and the cluster) functions here as a model representing the multiplicity of global cultures …”4

3) In his “Altermodern Manifesto”, French theoretician and curator Nicolas Bourriaud coins a new term that he thinks could define the new art: altermodern. Let us go back to 2009 and London. When Nicolas Bourriaud, as London Tate Triennial exhibition curator and a cultural theorist, coined the terms altermodern and altermodernism, he pointed out the specificity of contemporary art and the art market: In his “Altermodern Manifesto”, written for this occasion, he declared: POSTMODERNISM IS DEAD. I quote:

“As for Sebald’s writings – wanderings between ‘signs’, punctuated by black and white photographs – they appear to me as emblematic of a mutation in our perception of space and time, in which history and geography operate a cross-fertilisation, tracing out paths and weaving networks: a cultural evolution at the very heart of this exhibition. The two concepts – the archipelago and Sebald’s excursions – do not intertwine arbitrarily: they represent the paths I followed led by my initial intuition: that of the death of postmodernism as the starting point for reading the present.”5

Linda Hutcheon, The Politics of Postmodernism, New York/London: Routledge, 2002, p. 181. Mikhail Epstein, Alexander Genis, Slobodanka Vladiv-Glover, Russian Postmodernism: New Perspectives on Post-Soviet Culture, New York: Berghahn Books, 1999. http://www.focusing.org/apm_papers/epstein.html, (accessed on Sept. 12, 2011).

3 http://www.tate.org.uk/britain/exhibitions/altermodern/manifesto.shtm, (accessed on Oct. 10, 2011). 4 http://www.scribd.com/doc/29398878/Bourriaud-Altermodern, (accessed on Oct. 12, 2011). 5 Ibid.

Teo rije up rizo ri t v en i h p raks / Theo ri es o f P e r for m i n g A r ts 9 1

6 kulturnih / 6 lahko / 6 modernizma / 6 poti / 6 stoletja / 6 to / 6 umetnost / 6 V / 5 jih / 5 jo / 5 ni / 5 novo / 5 Post / 5 postmodernizem /

Nicolas Bourriaud chooses as an exemplary artist a German novelist WG Sebald, who, according to his view, invokes the laying out of the territory of what he calls the “Altermodern”, an “other” modern – a rootless modernism for the 21st century, a synthesis of modernism and post-colonialism, in which the artist “turns cultural nomad”. With their detached emotional tone, Sebald’s books take us on journeys around Europe, into the past and across the uncertain terrains of memory, history and fiction. “There are no longer roots to sustain forms, no exact cultural base to serve as a benchmark for variations, no nucleus, no boundaries for artistic language,” says Bourriaud. Sebald’s writings follow a similar wandering path, as do the real and imaginary journeys of the artists here. He also wrote, and I quote again: “If twentieth-century modernism was above all a western cultural phenomenon, altermodernity arises out of planetary negotiations, discussions between agents from different cultures. Stripped of a centre, it can only be polyglot. Altermodernity is characterized by translation, unlike the modernism of the twentieth century which spoke the abstract language of the colonial west, and postmodernism, which encloses artistic phenomena in origins and identities.”6 In an interview with Bartholomew Ryan (published in the magazine Art in America), the author of the seminal book Relational Aesthetics and curator of the fourth Tate Triennial added some more facts that can clear up his views a little bit on modernisms and the state of contemporary art. He explains altermodern as “an attempt to reexamine our present, by replacing one periodizing tool with another. After 30 years into the ‘aftershock’ of modernism and its mourning, then into the necessary post-colonial reexamination of our cultural frames, ‘Altermodern’ is a word that intends to define the specific modernity according to the specific context we live in – globalization, and its economic, political and cultural conditions.” The use of the prefix “alter” means that the historical period defined by postmodernism is coming to an end, and alludes to the local struggles against standardization. The core of this new modernity is, according to him, the experience of wandering – in time, space and mediums.”7 But he also states that the definition is far from being complete. He furthermore suggests that multiculturism and identity are being overtaken by “creolization”, that artists start from a “global state of culture”.

several formerly discrete traditions or cultures. In an era of global mass communication and capitalism, creolisation can be identified nearly everywhere in the world, but there are important differences as to the degree of mixing. The concept has been criticized for essentialising cultures (as if the merging traditions were “pure” at the outset). Although this critique may sometimes be relevant, the concept nevertheless helps to make sense of a great number of contemporary cultural processes, characterised by movement, change and fuzzy boundaries. Creolisation, as it is used by some anthropologists, is an analogy taken from linguistics. This discipline in turn took the term from a particular aspect of colonialism, namely the uprooting and displacement of large numbers of people in the plantation economies of certain colonies, such as Louisiana, Jamaica, Trinidad, Réunion and Mauritius. At this point, I would like to move our focus to the Mediterranean basin: I will make allusion to the well-known article “Metaphors for the Mediterranean: Creolization or Polyphony?”, written by Thierry Fabre and published in the Mediterranean Historical Review (2002).9 The article explores Edouard Glissant’s notion of “creolization” as a metaphor for the Mediterranean world. It compares the Mediterranean with the West Indies in this regard. The author is sceptical about the usage of the two terms in order to explain the Mediterranean, yet nevertheless, he does not give us an alternative to the two usages. He thinks creolisation, a process of adaptation to the whole world, does not help us to understand the play of identity in the contemporary Mediterranean world, for here genealogy and transcendence remain central. Therefore he examines the notion of polyphony, in which the voices come together without melding, as a possible alternative. But given the current political, cultural and religious conflict and the constant confusion between the proper and the pure, however, polyphony seems to him less an appropriate metaphor than a promise. This could lead to the conclusion that creolisation is nevertheless quite an appropriate notion that helps to explain at least some of the characteristics of the Mediterranean cultural space or those of any other specific cultural space. But these thoughts could lead us far from the theme of this lecture. So let us return to Altermodernism. According to Bourriaud’s view, contemporary artists, or at least some groups among them, see the “globalised state of culture” as something that is already a matter of fact: in every spot on the planet, you can see this new cultural stratus, coexisting with the layer of traditional culture and some local, specific contemporary elements. Saying that it is the privilege of the artistic jet set is a pure denial of the worldwide violence of the capitalist system, or extreme naïveté.

The concept of cultural creolisation, introduced in anthropology by Ulf Hannerz,8 refers to the intermingling and mixing of two or 6

Nicolas Bourriaud, “Altermodern Manifesto”. http://www.tate.org.uk/britain/exhibitions/altermodern/manifesto.shtm, last seen on July 2, 2009. 7 http://www.artinamericamagazine.com/news-opinion/conversations/2009-03-17/ altermodern-a-conversation-with-nicolas-bourriaud/, (accessed on Oct. 13, 2011). 8 See Ulf Hannerz, Cultural Complexity, New York and Chichester: Columbia

9 2 Teor ije u pr izoritvenih praks / T heo ries o f Perform i n g A rts

University Press, 1992. He defines creole cultures as follows: “Creole cultures – like creole languages – are intrinsically of mixed origin, the confluence of two or more widely separated historical currents which interact in what is basically a center/periphery relationship. [However,] the cultural processes of creolization are not simply a matter of constant pressure from the center toward the periphery, but a much more creative interplay. [...] Creole cultures come out of multi-dimensional cultural encounters and can put things together in new ways.” (pp. 264–5). Thierry Fabre, “Metaphors for the Mediterranean: Creolization or Polyphony?”, Mediterranean Historical Review, 17 (1), 2002, pp. 15–24.

4 altermoderno / 4 do / 4 izraz / 4 JE / 4 Kot / 4 kulturni / 4 le / 4 mnenju / 4 MODERNIZEM / 4 MRTEV / 4 nima / 4 novi / 4 pomeni / 4 sodobne /

He thinks – and here I quote him again – “that this theoretical resistance, which consists in sticking to the multiculturalist dogma, is hiding a paternalist pattern: it jails the individuals into their socalled ‘origins’ and their ‘identities’. Let’s face it: artists now have access to information, and they all use the same toolbox, from Stockholm to Bangkok. Or shouldn’t they?”10 Bourriaud thinks that we have to get out of this dialectical loop between the global and the local, to get rid of the binary opposition between globalization and traditions. “And what is the name of this third way? Modernity, whose historical ambiguity is directed against both standardization and nostalgia.”11 We might be quite certain that there is something presumptuous or at best naïve in proposing a theory of this third way, the altermodernity that can be able to avoid the binary logic. But nevertheless, as Patrice Pavis, French theorist of performing arts, states in his book Theatre at the Crossroads of Culture:12 all provisory answers to questions about the status of contemporary culture, altermodernism, interculturalism, bear in themselves the dangers of oversimplifications given the complexity of the factors at stake in all cultural exchange and the difficulty of formalizing them. Every typology of cultural relations requires a metalanguage that would be, as it were, “above” these relations, encompassing them all. It is hard to imagine where theorists would find this metalanguage, especially since they are themselves caught up in a language and culture from which it is difficult to disengage. Furthermore, there is no general theory of culture that correctly integrates historical, social and ideological factors without being reduced to them. Cultural studies have had the merit of rehabilitating phenomena that are not situated in the socioeconomic infrastructure and that cannot be described in purely economic or sociological terms. Conversely, however, they sometimes tend to dissolve all socioeconomic political and ideological factors in culture, to present the cultural as the social element in individual behavior, foregrounding the influence of the individual unconscious on cultural phenomena. As Pavis puts it: “We must avoid two exaggerations: that of a mechanical and unreconstructed Marxism that neglects the importance of cultural phenomena and their relative autonomy, and that of a culturalism that turns the economic and ideological infrastructure into a form of unconscious discursive superstructure.”13 It is not my aim to enter into a discussion as to whether his new term is a breakthrough in current discussions about the new post-postmodern era of globalization, as it is not my aim to discuss whether altermodernism is another in the line of victims of what Edward Said would name a new version of the cultural struggles between imperial and dominated societies that continue into the present. Bourriaud seems to be avoiding the classical question of post-colonial theory, namely the concern with a range of cultural engage10 http://www.artinamericamagazine.com/news-opinion/conversations/2009-03-17/ altermodern-a-conversation-with-nicolas-bourriaud/, (accessed on Oct. 13, 2011). 11 Ibid. 12 Patrice Pavis, Theatre at the Crossroads of Culture, London, New York: Routledge, 1992. 13 Ibid., p. 183.

ments: the impact of imperial languages upon colonised societies; the effects of European “master-discourses” such as history and philosophy; the nature and consequences of colonial education and the links between Western knowledge and colonial power. In particular, it is concerned with the responses of the colonised: the struggle to control self-representation through the appropriation of dominant languages, discourses and forms of narrative; the struggle over representations of place, history, race and ethnicity; and the struggle to present a local reality to a global audience. What I would like to point out is the fact that with his definition of altermodernism as “the in-progress redefinition of modernity in the era of globalization, stressing the experience of wandering in time, space and medium” Bourriaud could also be speaking about the dilemmas both theorists and artists have been facing over the last decades. I will conclude with a small manifesto of Dragan Živadinov’s, POSTGRAVITY ART, which reflects the ambiguities and controversies of the “post” era. The impossibility of transgression, the fact that whenever we define post art we have to use the very vocabulary of modernism and the avant-garde. I quote: Postgravity art is defined as all art created in zero-gravity conditions. In these new living conditions, it will create systems that we are not yet aware of. Postgravity art is not a stylistic formation and does not intend to become that either. Millennia spent in gravity “1” have created everything, whether living or inanimate. Directly or indirectly, art too has been shaped in this way, above all its structural elements. Only 20th century art, with its thoughts on anti-mimesis, conceptualisation and teleology, has opened up the field of gravity “0”. The 21st century is using avant-garde methodologies of the previous century to develop ideas on postgravity art.14 The crucial question therefore remains. Are we all not using the avant-garde and modernist methodologies and tools to develop ideas of post, alter, trans-, etc., modern art? And are we not all, to paraphrase Mikhail Epstein, the post-postmodernist witnesses of the re-birth of utopia after its own death, after its subjection to postmodernism’s severe scepticism, relativism and its anti-utopian consciousness: the utopia of Živadinov’s “postgravity art”, Bourriaud’s altermodernist art, Alan Kirby’s “digimodernism”, ETC., ETC., ETC.? It seems that all the “postpost” theories feel a bit like ambitious rivals hoping to inherit postmodernism’s estate before the body is even cold. They all hint to the fact that something that could be called the “death of postmodernism” seems to have happened, and that something – probably in reaction against it, possibly connected to globalisation – has replaced it, or better to say, is on its way to replacing it. All we can say is: (POST)MODERNISM IS DEAD, LONG LIVE (POST)MODERNISM? .. 14 http://www.scribd.com/doc/31079708/50-Topics (accessed on Oct. 13, 2011); see also http://reformmedia.blogspot.com/2010/07/noordung-1995-2045_15.html.

Teo rije up rizo ri t v en i h p raks / Theo ri es o f P e r for m i n g A r ts 9 3

29 v / 28 in / 18 na / 17 je / 15 ki / 12 ne / 11 skupnosti / 9 kot / 9 umetnosti / 8 se / 8 z / 8 za / 7 ali / 7 iz / 7 med / 7 s / 6 bi / 6 dogodka / 6 te /

efleksija prvenca Mojce Puncer, Sodobna umetnost in estetika, se začenja z opozorilom na užitek, ki ga nudi branje te »akademsko nečiste« knjige, nekje na meji med filozofijo, teorijo in delom na terenu. Bralka sem po osnovni izobrazbi umetnostna zgodovinarka, tako da sem se sprva morala privaditi na piskino atletsko razmigavanje po ključnih imenih tistih, brez katerih danes diskurz sodobne umetnosti ne bi obstajal. Bourdieu, Lacan, Benjamin, Foucault, Lotman, Bürger, Danto, Mitchell pa tudi Žižek, Gržinić Mauhler, Kreft, Erjavec, Strehovec in še Brejc, Zabel ter celo Muhovič so prebrani, predelani, premišljeni in komentirani v tej doktorski disertaciji, ki jo je v zbirki Eos izdal ZAK. Ker gre za prvo knjigo v zbirki, velja tudi zapisati, da bodo Eos sestavljali prvenci avtorjev, ki »si ne zgolj šele utirajo pot v svet znanstvene in akademske publicistike, temveč si prizadevajo ubraniti raziskovalno širino in mišljenjsko odprtost, ki ju je ta svet nekoč že imel oziroma sta bili že izborjeni.«1

Užitki in spoznanja ob branju akademsko nečistega prvenca Mojca Puncer: Sodobna umetnost in estetika, Ljubljana: Publicistično društvo ZAK, Društvo za proučevanje zgodovine, antropologije in književnosti; Maribor: Pedagoška fakulteta, 2010 Petja Grafenauer

Po skorajda letu dni trajajoči odmaknjenosti od polj sodobne umetnosti je bilo prebiranje prvih poglavij precej naporno in počasno. V njih avtorica precizno secira ključne pojme, ki zamejujejo njeno raziskavo. Sprva ponudi natančno analizo polja filozofske estetike in bralcu s pomočjo Bourdieujeve misli razloži vlogo in pomen empiričnih raziskav v refleksiji o umetnosti. S poudarjanjem nujnosti hkratnega razumevanja polja, dela na terenu in zavesti o vpetosti vseh polj v družbene odnose Puncerjeva zastavi ritem branja, ki terja obilo miselne atletike, hkrati pa je vse bolj željan novih avtoričinih zaključkov. Toda ob branju Sodobne umetnosti in estetike ne gre hiteti, saj lahko preskok vrstice pomeni zamudo natančno usmerjene kritične puščice. Naslednje poglavje ponuja analizo pojmov, ki govorijo o vizualni umetnosti in kulturi. Avtorica jih ne le natančno secira, ampak spregovori tudi o njihovi zgodovini in rabi, posebej pozorno seveda v raziskovanih družbenopolitičnih okvirih. Dokončno razreši dolga leta trajajočo dilemo o vizualnem in likovnem v umetnosti, tako da bo to delo koristno tudi vsem zaposlenim v občinski in državni, umetnosti posvečeni upravi. Ta pregled nam, vsaj zame prvič, natančno in zgodovinsko korektno predstavi tudi zgodovino in stanje na področju študij in študijev, ki se posvečajo slovenski umetnosti. Od stanja raziskav pred nastankom Slovenskega društva za estetiko, geneze društva in raziskav njegovih ustanovnih članov Aleša Erjavca, Janeza Strehovca, Leva Krefta ter drugih filozofov, ki so se na raznolike načine, od analitične estetike do teoretske psihoanalize vsaj v delu svojih raziskav posvetili vprašanju umetnosti, knjiga preide v samo srž raziskovane tematike, v polje vizualne umetnosti v slovenskem prostoru. Tudi tu avtorica poskrbi za bralčevo seznanjanje s stanjem in zgodovino obravnavanega, pri čemer ji gre morda le drobno očitati zapis, da se je »v šestdesetih letih zgodil premik v kritiškem pisanju in premik od presojanja skozi pojma stila in strukture k vprašanjem pomena.« Stanje na področju kritiškega 1

9 4 Rece n zije , r e fleksij e / Review s, Extensio ns

Mojca Puncer, Sodobna umetnost in estetika, zapis na platnici.

6 temveč / 6 umetniškega / 6 vse / 5 bolj / 5 da / 5 dogodek / 5 forme / 5 od / 5 participacije / 5 umetnost / 4 moč / 4 ni / 4 po / 4 prostor /

pisanja je bilo namreč na prelomu šestega v sedmo desetletje tako raznoliko in kaotično, da so npr. polje slovenske umetnosti strokovnjaki ocenjevali takole: »Mogoče je opaziti, da se odsevi prevladujočih likovnih jezikov v splošni mednarodni panorami v zadnjem desetletju (v alternativah od raznih različic pop arta tja do optične in kinetične umetnosti) v umetnosti ljubljanskega središča niso močneje čutili,«2 pa tudi takole: »Ena bistvenih potez slovenskega plemenskega značaja so gotovo liričnost, sanjavost, rahla otožnost v nasprotju z materialno stvarnostjo in racionalistično preračunljivostjo.«3 Hkrati pa je bil prelom šestega desetletja seveda tudi čas prvih objav Tomaža Brejca in Braca Rotarja, pa Andreja Medveda in Jureta Mikuža, na katere verjetno cilja avtorica. Toda slovensko kritiko so (morda celo v količinsko večjem delu) tvorila tudi ideološka, poljudna ali celo neuka besedila nekaterih drugih avtorjev. Toda stanje v polju likovne kritike in akademske umetnostne zgodovine je v težavah vse do današnjih dni. Na slednje pravzaprav opozori tudi filozofinja, ki si za ključno literaturo seveda izbira obstoječe umetnostnozgodovinske preglede slovenske umetnosti po drugi svetovni vojni: razstavne kataloge Moderne galerije. Med ključnimi avtorji, ki jih uporablja kot reference, pa se zelo redko sklicuje na avtorje, ki so delovali ali delujejo v okvirih akademskih inštitucij za umetnostno zgodovino. Tudi v polju umetnostne zgodovine je avtorica torej (delno seveda tudi zaradi nedelujočih struktur, ki ne proizvajajo vednosti o sodobni umetnosti) izbrala avtorje, ki so, kakor nekateri filozofi in med njimi tudi ona sama, »opravili z akademsko čistostjo«.4 Tudi sama v naslednjem poglavju opozori na problem slovenske likovne kritike, ki ga na eni strani poveže z globalno krizo kritike vizualne umetnosti, na drugi pa natančno opiše težave z likovno kritiko in umetnostno zgodovino v slovenskih okvirih. Devetdeseta leta so z novimi pogledi na zgodovino umetnosti naplavila vsaj dva vršaca slovenske umetnosti, skupini OHO in NSK. Kot predmeta analize za razlago oblikovanja interpretacijskih sistemov, postopnega razvoja terminologije in tipologije umetnosti glede na razmerje predmet – teorija oz. umetniška proizvodnja – teoretski kontekst si Mojca Puncer izbere prav ta medsebojno retrogradno povezana simbola kanona nove umetnostne zgodovine. Ob OHO nakaže, kako se je že tu izoblikovala postobjektna koncepcija umetnosti, ki vodi vse do vprašanj relacijske umetnosti v devetdesetih letih. Čas ljubljanske alternativne scene, iz nje izhajajočega NSK in njihove vizualnoumetniške skupine Irwin je prinesel številne nove spremembe v umetnosti in njenem razumevanju, ki nas sledeč knjigi vodijo v devetdeseta leta. Že tu se kaže interes za povezovanje umetnosti z vprašanjem realnega. Naslednje poglavje vstopa v heterogene umetnostne kontekste devetdesetih let, a seveda metoda najprej zahteva opredelitev 2

3 4

Ješa Denegri, »Sodobna slovenska umetnost«, Sinteza, 10/11, III, Ljubljana: Zveza društev arhitektov Slovenije, Zveza društev slovenskih likovnih umetnikov, Društvo oblikovalcev Slovenije, 1968, str. 146. France Stele, Oris zgodovine umetnosti pri Slovencih. Kulturnozgodovinski poskus, Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga, 1966. Mojca Puncer, prav tam, str. 11.

pojmov. Z njimi pokaže, da so za umetnost danes značilna ekstrovertna estetska funkcija, ki je »usmerjena k nekemu zunanjemu cilju, ki presega svet umetnosti, in je kot taka lahko pripeta na neko ideologijo, politiko, propagando, ekonomsko logiko trženja ipd.«5 Vstopi v srž raziskovanega problema: vprašanje estetske strategije, ki izrablja estetsko v umetnosti za vzpostavitev kritičnega pogleda. Avtorica poudarja, da skuša z izbranimi primeri razkriti estetsko logiko, ki jo izdajajo umetniška dela sodobne umetnosti. Ob pomoči Žižka in Inke Arns ugotavlja, da je kolektiv NSK uporabljal strategiji nadidentifikacije in subverzivne afirmacije in »reproduciral latentne diskurze uradne ideologije na način, da je sama postala ‘totalnejša od totalitarizma’.«6 Ne le, da njihovi projekti služijo kot odličen prikaz estetske strategije, Puncerjeva razdela tudi njihovo metaumetniško strategijo (samo)historizacije. Eclipse, drugi izbrani raziskovalni primer, pa je od konca devetdesetih, prav tako ob pomoči razširjenih sredstev likovnih/ vizualnih umetnosti, dvomil o referenčnosti in simbolni moči podobe. Po mnenju avtorice je njuna estetska strategija znova subverzivna afirmacija, ki tokrat ne izbere teme države, nacije ali umetnostnega sistema, temveč žensko telo pornografije, ki pa ga parodira in ironizira do te mere, da postane popredmeteno, banalno in nič več erotično. Prek vprašanj primarnega kraja podobe v sodobni umetnosti – medija, v katerem se ta pojavi: fotografije, filma, videa, performansa in oblik elektronske, novomedijske, multimedijske in intermedijske umetnosti – nas avtorica brez večjih pretresov popelje do kraja, kjer se nahaja umetnina: bele kocke ali pa črne škatle, pri čemer predvsem prva še vedno ostaja ključni referenčni okvir tudi takrat, kadar se ji umetniški projekt strateško odreče. V tem poglavju je najbolj očitno spogledovanje Mojce Puncer s prehodom od sodobne vizualne umetnosti k sodobnim scenskim umetnostim, kar znova odgovarja tudi razmeram v nacionalnem svetu umetnosti, kjer se prek različnih strokovnih in socialnih mrež ta dva svetova večkrat srečata.7 S primeri Muzeuma, Vie negative in Galerije Kapelica pokaže, da so nekateri prostori umetnosti prestopili svoje običajne, s konvencijo utrjene meje, postali so prostori komunikacije in zahtevajo, da se med umetnostjo in življenjem vzpostavi vitalno razmerje. Toda prestopanje meja ni vidno le v okvirih vprašanj krajev podobe in prostorov njenega prikaza, ampak tudi v nomadstvu umetniških subjektivitet. Zadnja faza zgodovinskega traku, ki na primeru sodobnih umetnostnih praks v slovenskem prostoru kaže na disperzijo in izginjanje estetskega, pokaže, da je pri Poloni Tratnik, Uršuli Berlot, Marku Peljhanu in Polonci Lovšin estetska funkcija že sekundarna ali pa le stranski produkt umetniškega dela. Čeprav bi si morda nekateri izmed obdelanih projektov zaslužili temeljitejšo obravnavo estetizacije umetnine v konkretnih 5 6 7

Prav tam, str. 153. prav tam, str. 156. Sodelovanje institucij in programov, odpiranje prostorov izjavljanja sodobnih scenskih umetnosti tudi za diskurze sodobne vizualne umetnosti, sodelovanje ustvarjalcev, prisotnost umetniških stvaritev iz enega polja v krajih, ki so navadno namenjeni za uporabo drugega polja …

R ec en zije, refl eks ije / R ev i e w s , E x t e n s i on s 9 5

131 the / 82 of / 31 and / 24 to / 22 is / 21 a / 21 art / 19 in / 16 community / 14 from / 13 by / 12 this / 11 be / 11 event / 11 that / 9 artistic / 9 form

odobna umetnost in estetika je branje, ki je pokazalo, da v slovenskem prostoru obstajajo avtorji, ki pred sodobno umetnostjo ne pobegnejo za vrata svojih kabinetov. Prav zaradi tega, pa tudi zaradi natančnega poznavanja teorije umetnosti ta knjiga zareže v polje sodobne umetnosti veliko globlje in koreniteje, kot je tega zmožen akademski svet zgodovine umetnosti, morda pa tudi filozofije.

primerih, pa velja, da se skladajo z avtoričino tezo in se osredotočajo na umetniško rokovanje z življenjskimi oblikami ter so tako bližje in bližje brisanju ločnice med življenjem in umetnostjo. Pomembno se tudi zdi, da ob koncu poglavja Mojca Puncer previdno opozori na še vedno aktualni vprašanji o zmožnosti posega umetnosti v življenje in etiki, ki bi se spraševala, »katere ovire umetnik v resnici lahko prečka, da nam s svojimi projekti omogoča uživanje v zmešnjavi meja, ne pa tudi pozabe na odgovornost pri njihovem prestopanju.«8 Avtorica zaključi, da so za sodobno umetnost, za katero zatrdi, da je eno od pomembnejših polj, kjer se oblikuje način, kako misliti odnos do realnega, značilni dogodkovnost, trajanje, procesnost, performativnost, izginjanje objektnosti in primat dejanja nad izdelkom, ki vsi služijo razkrivanju realnega. Še enkrat bralca opozori na inspiracijo, ki ji je bila v pomoč pri snovanju knjige in se s tem pokloni dramaturginji, kuratorici in publicistki Edi Čufer, ki je nasproti konformizmu čutil, ki jih nudi naš svet, ponudila atletiko očesa v umetnosti. Specifika take atletike v tistih vizualnoumetniških praksah, ki delujejo po načelih komunikacije in participacije in vstopajo v povezavo s stvarnostjo, je tako odmaknjena od tradicije sveta umetnosti modernizma, da, trdi Mojca Puncer, odpirajo nov prostor na premici umetnostnih obdobij. Tisto, kar je poleg natančnega seciranja, užitka polnega opisa razvoja in dostojnega zagovora obravnavane teme kvaliteta teoretskega prvenca Mojce Puncer, je, da ji je uspelo povezati delo na terenu z odličnim poznavanjem relevantne teorije. Primeri, ob katerih razvija svojo tezo, so dejansko le ena od možnih izbir, saj bi avtorica za analizo tematike z enakim rezultatom lahko izbrala številne druge projekte, opuse ali prostore. Sodobna umetnost in estetika je knjiga, kakršne zagovarja avtorica sama in ki si jih lahko želimo samo več in več. Knjiga Mojce Puncer v slovenski prostor po dolgih letih – morda celo vse od knjige Ljubljana, Ljubljana9 – vnaša mišljenje, ki smiselno in natančno poveže relevantne filozofske in teoretske misli s konkretnim poljem sodobne umetnosti. V roke jo bomo morali vzeti vsi prebivalci in obiskovalci svetov umetnosti in svetov estetike, saj je s pridom uporabila in povezala misli, ki so jih naplavljala zadnja desetletja. Morda bomo tisti z bregov sodobne umetnosti tu in tam opazili drobno umetnostnozgodovinsko nekorektnost, a to je zanemarljivo. Sodobna umetnost in estetika je branje, ki je pokazalo, da v slovenskem prostoru obstajajo avtorji, ki pred sodobno umetnostjo ne pobegnejo za vrata svojih kabinetov. Prav zaradi tega, pa tudi zaradi natančnega poznavanja teorije umetnosti ta knjiga zareže v polje sodobne umetnosti veliko globlje in koreniteje, kot je tega zmožen akademski svet zgodovine umetnosti, morda pa tudi filozofije. ..

8 9

9 6 Rece n zije , r e fleksij e / Reviews, Extensio ns

Mojca Puncer, prav tam, str. 266. Aleš Erjavec, Marina Gržinić, Ljubljana, Ljubljana (osemdeseta leta v umetnosti in kulturi), Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga, 1990.

/ 9 or / 9 s / 8 an / 8 its / 7 between / 7 but / 7 not / 7 political / 7 projects / 7 public / 7 The / 6 activity / 6 In / 6 more / 6 participation /

his reflection on Mojca Puncer’s debut, Contemporary Art and Aesthetics, begins by pointing to the pleasure afforded by reading this “academically unclean” book, somewhere on the border between philosophy, theory and fieldwork. As the reader, I am an art historian by basic training, so I had to first get used to the writer’s athletic exercising through the key names of those without whom the discourse of contemporary art today would not exist. Bourdieu, Lacan, Benjamin, Foucault, Lotman, Bürger, Danto, Mitchell, as well as Žižek, Gržinić Mauhler, Kreft, Erjavec, Strehovec and Brejc, Zabel and even Muhovič have been read, processed, deliberated and commented upon in this doctoral thesis, which ZAK has issued in its Eos collection. Since this is the first book in the collection, it must also be noted that Eos will consist of debuts by authors who “are not only paving their way in the world of scientific and scholarly publications, but are also trying to defend the breadth of research and openness of thinking that this world has already had or which have already been won.”1

Delights and Insights From Reading an Academically Unclean Debut Mojca Puncer: Sodobna umetnost in estetika [Contemporary Art and Aesthetics], Ljubljana: Publicistično društvo ZAK, Društvo za proučevanje zgodovine, antropo-logije in književnosti; Maribor: Pedagoška fakulteta, 2010 Petja Grafenauer Translated by Urška Sterle

After almost a year-long isolation from the fields of contemporary art, reading the first few chapters was rather arduous and slow. In them, the author precisely dissects the key concepts that delimit her research. Initially, she offers a detailed analysis of the field of philosophical aesthetics and explains to the reader, through Bourdieu’s thought, the role and importance of empirical research in reflection on art. By emphasizing the simultaneous need for an understanding of the field and at the same time ground work and the sense of involvement in all fields of social relations, Puncer sets a tempo of reading that requires plenty of mental athletics and at the same time a craving for even more new conclusions by the author. But reading Contemporary Art and Aesthetics should not be rushed, since skipping a line could mean overlooking a precisely pinpointed critical arrow. The chapter that follows provides an analysis of concepts that deal with the visual arts and culture. The author not only dissects them precisely, but also speaks about their history and use, with special attention, of course, paid to the studied socio-political contexts. She finally resolves the dilemma that has lasted for years on the visual and fine art in art, so that this work will also be beneficial for all employees in the municipal and state artdedicated administrations. This overview presents to us for the first time, at least this happened in my case, an accurately and historically correct presentation of the history and status of study and studies dedicated to Slovenian art. From the status of research before the formation of the Slovenian Society of Aesthetics, the genesis of this association and the research of its founding members Aleš Erjavec, Janez Strehovec, Lev Kreft and other philosophers who, in many ways, from analytical aesthetics to theory of psychoanalysis, at least in part of their research, gave attention to the issue of art, the book moves into the very heart of researched topics in the field of visual arts in the Slovenian environment. 1

Mojca Puncer, Sodobna umetnost in estetika [Contemporary Art and Aesthetics], sleeve notes.

R ec en zije, refl eks ije / R ev i e w s , E x t e n s i on s 97

31 je / 19 v / 16 na / 15 in / 12 ki / 10 nagrade / 9 pa / 9 se / 9 so / 8 z / 8 za / 7 med / 7 stvarnosti / 6 kot / 6 po / 6 s / 5 bi / 5 bilo / 5 gledališke /

Even here, the author arranges for a reader to become acquainted with the state and the history of the addressed and we may slightly criticize only a statement that “a shift in the critical writing and the shift from assessment through the concept of style and structure to the question of meaning took place in the sixties.” The status in critical writing at the turn of the sixth and seventh decades was so diverse and chaotic that, for example, the Slovenian arts field was evaluated by the experts as follows: “It may be observed that the reflections of the dominant language of fine art in the general international panorama of the last decade (in alternatives from the various versions of pop art to optical and kinetic art) in the art of the Ljubljana centre have not been felt more strongly.”2 But also this: “One of the essential features of the Slovenian tribal character is most certainly lyricism, a dreaminess, a slight wistfulness as opposed to material reality and rationalistic opportunism.”3 At the same time, the close of the sixth decade was also the time of the first publications by Tomaž Brejc and Braco Rotar, Andrej Medved and Jure Mikuž, whom the author appears to target. But Slovenian criticism was (possibly in even larger part quantitatively) also formed of ideological, popular or even uneducated texts by some other authors. But the situation in the field of fine art criticism and academic art history is in trouble to this day. The latter is actually noted by the philosopher, who of course chooses as the key reference of the literature the existing art-historical overviews of Slovenian art after the Second World War: the Museum of Modern Art exhibition catalogs. Of the key authors she uses as references, she very rarely refers to authors who worked or work within the limits of the academic institutions of art history. In the field of art history, the author (partly because of inert structures, which do not produce knowledge of contemporary art) also selects authors who are, like some philosophers and among them herself, “done with academic purity.”4 In the next section, she draws attention to the problem of Slovenian art criticism, which, on the one side, she connects to the global crisis of criticism of visual arts, while on the other, she precisely describes the problem with art criticism and art history in the Slovenian framework. The nineties, with the new views on art history, washed ashore at least two leading Slovenian art groups – OHO and NSK. As the object of analysis for the interpretation of interpretational systems design, progressive development of art terminology and typology of art in relationship to the subject-theory or artistic production-theoretical contexts, Mojca Puncer selects precisely those mutually retrogradely associated symbols of the new canon of art history. Regarding OHO, she indicates how the post-objective conception of art, which led to the issues of relational art in the nineties, had already been created here. The times of Ljubljana’s alternative scene, from which ensued NSK and their visual artistic group Irwin, brought many new changes 2

3 4

Ješa Denegri, “Sodobna slovenska umetnost”, Sinteza, 10/11, III, Ljubljana: Zveza društev arhitektov Slovenije, Zveza društev slovenskih likovnih umetnikov, Društvo oblikovalcev Slovenije, 1968, p. 146. France Stele, Oris zgodovine umetnosti pri Slovencih. Kulturnozgodovinski poskus, Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga, 1966. Mojca Puncer, work cited, p. 11.

9 8 Rece n zije , r e fleksij e / Reviews, Extensio ns

in art and the understanding of it that, by following the book, lead us through the nineties. Already there, an interest in connecting the art with the question of the real is shown. The next chapter enters into the heterogeneous art contexts of the nineties, but, of course, the method first requires a definition of terms. With them, she shows that the art of today is characterized by an extroverted aesthetic function that is “directed towards a specific external goal that goes beyond the art world, and as such may be attached to an ideology, politics, propaganda, economic logic of marketing and the like.”5 She enters the heart of the researched problem: the question of aesthetic strategy that exploits the aesthetic in art for creating a critical view. The author points out that, with selected examples, she is attempting to reveal the aesthetic logic issued by the artwork of contemporary art. With the help of Žižek and Inke Arns, she notes that the collective NSK used strategies of overidentification and subversive affirmation and “reproduced latent discourses of official ideology in a way that it has itself become ‘more total than totalitarianism.’”6 Not only do their projects serve as an excellent example of aesthetic strategy, but Puncer elaborates on their meta-artistic strategy of (self)historization as well. Eclipse, another selected research example, has been, also with the assistance of the expanded resources of fine/visual arts, questioning reference and the power of symbolic images since the end of the nineties. According to the author, their aesthetic strategy is once again a subversive affirmation – only this time, they do not choose the topic of state, nation, or the art system, but a woman’s body as depicted in pornography, which they parody and ironize to the extent that it becomes objectified, banal and no longer erotic. Through the issue of the primary place of the image in contemporary art – the medium in which it occurs: photography, film, video, performance, and forms of electronic, new media, multimedia and intermedia art – the author takes us, without major upsets, to the place where a work of art is located – white cubes or black boxes; the first, in particular, is still a key reference, even when it is strategically relinquished by an art project. In this chapter, Mojca Puncer’s flirting with the transition from contemporary visual art to contemporary performing arts is most obvious, which again also responds to the situation in the national art world, where, through various professional and social networks, these two worlds often collide.7 With the examples of Muzeum, Via Negativa and the Kapelica Gallery, she shows that some art areas have crossed their traditional, by convention fortified borders, they have become areas of communication and require a vital relationship between art and life to be established. But crossing the border is visible not only in the context of the questioning of places of the image and its display space, but also 5 6 7

Ibid, p. 153. Ibid, p. 156. Cooperation of institutions and programs, opening of spaces, stating of contemporary performing arts for the discourses of contemporary visual arts, cooperation of creators, the presence of artistic creations from one field to places that are usually designed for the use of another field ...

5 k / 5 nagrajencev / 5 ob / 5 tudi / 4 da / 4 gledališka / 4 predstave / 4 različnih / 4 sicer / 4 še / 4 že / 3 če / 3 delu / 3 denimo / 3 drugim /

in the nomadism of artistic subjects. The last phase of the historical timeline, which in the case of contemporary art practices in the Slovenian space shows the dispersion and loss of aesthetics, demonstrates that in the case of Polona Tratnik, Uršula Berlot, Marko Peljhan and Polonca Lovšin, the aesthetic function is already secondary or is just a by-product of the artwork. Although some of the discussed projects should have earned a more thorough treatment of art aesthetization in specific cases, they are considered to be consistent with the author’s thesis, focusing on the artistic manipulation of life forms, and are thus closer and closer to deleting the dividing line between life and art. It also seems important that, at the end of the chapter, Mojca Puncer carefully notes the still existent issue of the ability of art affecting life and ethics that wonders “which barriers can actually be crossed by the artist to provide us with their projects the enjoyment of the confusion of borders but not forgetting the responsibility for their transgression.”8 The author concludes that for contemporary art, which she claims is one of the most important fields in which to create a way to think about the relationship to the real, eventfulness, duration, process, performativity, disappearance of objectness and the primacy of the act over product, all of which serve to disclose the real, are typical. She alerts the reader once again of the inspiration that has been helpful in designing the book and thus pays homage to the dramaturge, curator and writer Eda Čufer, who, opposite the conformism of the senses offered by our world, put the athletics of the eye in the art. The specifics of such athletics in those visual artistic practices, which operate under the principles of communication and participation and enter in connection with reality, are so far away from the tradition of the modernist art world that, argues Mojca Puncer, they are opening a new space on the timeline of art periods. In addition to a detailed dissection, the pleasure of a description of the development and a decent defense of the topic, the quality of Mojca Puncer’s theoretical debut is that she has managed to integrate field work with an excellent knowledge of relevant theory. Examples on which she develops her thesis are actually just some of the possible choices, as the author could achieve the same result by selecting a number of other projects, works or facilities for the analysis. Contemporary Art and Aesthetics is the kind of book this author advocates and that we can only want more and more of. The book by Mojca Puncer has, after many years, brought into the Slovenian space – perhaps for even the first time since the book Ljubljana, Ljubljana9 – the thinking that meaningfully and accurately links the relevant philosophical and theoretical thinking to the specific field of contemporary art. All of us, residents and visitors to art worlds and worlds of aesthetics, will need to take it in hand, since she has put to good use and linked the thoughts that have been washed ashore by the last decades. Perhaps those of us from the banks of contemporary 8 9

Mojca Puncer, cited work, p. 266. Aleš Erjavec, Marina Gržinić, Ljubljana, Ljubljana (osemdeseta leta v umetnosti in kulturi), Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga, 1990.

art will here and there see a slight art-historical inaccuracy, but this is negligible. Contemporary Art and Aesthetics is a reading that shows that there are authors in Slovenia who do not escape from contemporary art behind the doors of their studies. For this reason, as well as its detailed knowledge of art theory, this book cuts much deeper and more radically in the field of contemporary art than academic art history and perhaps philosophy could. ..

ontemporary Art and Aesthetics is a reading that shows that there are authors in Slovenia who do not escape from contemporary art behind the doors of their studies. For this reason, as well as its detailed knowledge of art theory, this book cuts much deeper and more radically in the field of contemporary art than academic art history and perhaps philosophy could. R ec en zije, refl eks ije / R ev i e w s , E x t e n s i on s 9 9

84 the / 48 of / 32 a / 32 to / 20 in / 17 and / 13 as / 12 prize / 12 theatre / 11 be / 11 for / 11 The / 9 is / 9 was / 9 which / 8 new / 8 this / 7 by /

Matija Ferlin: Sad sam /almost six/ Photo: Nada Žgank

Postajanje-otrok gledališča Vloga otroškega amaterizma in performativne infantilnosti v sodobnem gledališču in plesu Pia Brezavšček

»It’s time the tale were told Of how you took a child And you made him old.« The Smiths

Kocka se zakotali, mehurček poči

a odru monumentalnega teatrskega ambienta se strnjena gruča ljudi počasi umika z odra. Razkrijejo transparentno kocko v velikosti manjše sobe. V njej je pol ducata otrok, starih približno dve ali tri leta, ki se igrajo s kockami ter se zavzeto pogovarjajo med seboj. Očitno je, da je tehnologija steklene kocke takšna, da otrokom onemogoča fizično zavedanje zunanjega dogajanja. Njihovo obnašanje je kot navadna, ready-made situacija v vrtcu. Glasovi otrok so iz zvočno izolirane steklene sobe ojačani in predvajani v avditoriju, tako da publika otroško čebljanje, ki ga malčki dojemajo kot naravni govor, sliši v ojačani različici. Gre za prizor iz predstave Romea Castelluccija Inferno, dela trilogije gledališkega projekta Societas Rafaelo Sanzio, ki je bila ustvarjena po Dantejevi Božanski komediji. Pri omenjenem prizoru se »zamrznjen« prostorsko-časovni blok realnega v resničnem času zakotali naravnost v fiktivno gledališko situacijo. Otroška nedolžnost in nevednost (vsaj glede dogajanja na odru) je sterilno izolirana in lahko izpostavljena samo kot razstavni eksponat, samozadostni objekt brez dvosmerne komunikacijske funkcije. V Castelluccijevem estetiziranem spektakelskem aparatu imajo takšni vdori pomembno vlogo; na oder pogosto vodi ne le otroke, ampak tudi živali. Po Eriki Fischer-Lichte naj bi »gledalec /.../ žival na odru zaznal kot vdor realnega v fiktivno, kot vdor naključja v red, kot vdor narave v kulturo.«1 Samo žival

100 Rece n zije , r e fleksij e / Reviews, Extensio ns

Erika Fischer-Lichte, Estetika performativnega, Ljubljana: Študentska založba (zbirka Koda), 2008, str. 162.

7 Theatre / 6 an / 6 director / 6 some / 6 that / 6 winners / 6 with / 5 also / 5 artistic / 5 at / 5 being / 5 its / 5 Prize / 5 realities / 5 various /

Borut Šeparović: Generacija 91-95 (Generation 1991-95) Photo: Mara Bratoš

naj bi bila torej sposobna biti neobremenjeno prisotna, saj ni »jedla z drevesa spoznanja«. Pa je res žival na odru zgolj čista prezenca? Britanski gledališki teoretik Alan Read je nekoč v intervjuju2 dejal, da žival na odru spomni, kako je človeška žival pravzaprav inferiorna, saj je edina, ki lahko razočara. Njegova kultura, skupaj z »gledališko kulturo«, je pravzaprav njegova hiba. To pa je tudi tista hiba, ki ga žene k proizvajanju in ustvarjanju novih reprezentacijskih mehanizmov, v katere bi sebe kot nosilca razočaranja (zaradi dialektičnega premeščanja samozavedanja) prelagal. Otroci v gledališču pa predstavljajo še bolj kompleksen problem. So kot še ne povsem pravi ljudje, so šele v postopku iniciacije v človeško kulturo. Bolj kot vdor naključja v red tako kot tak fluiden, prehoden člen pod vprašaj postavljajo sámo možnost čistega reda in kulture, izpostavljajo gledališču že vselej inherentni paradoks. Je spontanost in tehniko mogoče tako polarno ločiti? Kaj pa, če je prav tehnika bližje spontanosti, kot se nam pravzaprav zdi? Kocka otroškosti ima pri Castellucciju rahlo sprevrnjeno funkcijo. »Iluzijski stroj«,3 kakor gledališko situacijo poimenuje Hans-Thies Lehman, deluje dobro le z vsakokratnimi tehničnimi sredstvi, ki so imanentni del njegove funkcije proizvajanja iluzije. Nasprotno pa so prav ta imanentno gledališka sredstva tokrat uporabljena, da pokažejo na realnost onkraj iluzije znotraj iluzije same. Za hip se čez oder pokotali realno (v času in prostoru), ne da bi se umazalo s fikcijo odra in na ta način subvertira gledališki stroj kot proizvajalca iluzije ter mu z lastnimi mehanizmi tokrat omogoča ustvariti najglobljo fantazmo – realno samo. Tak scenarij pa je mogoč le v redkih gledaliških situacijah, kakršen je estetiziran svet teatra Romea Castelluccija. V produkcijsko enostavnejših predstavah, ki ne pretendirajo tako monumentalnih učinkov, se steklo tehnike, ki blokira intersubjektivnost, pogosto »razbije«. Mehurček t. i. naravnega okolja otrok poči in otroci se znajdejo pred nemilostjo občinstva, 2 3

Glej: http://www.radiostudent.si/article.php?sid=18439. Hans-Thies Lehman, Postdramsko gledališče, Ljubljana: Maska, 2003, str. 274.

posrkani v gledališki dispozitiv. Z nekoliko domišljije in redukcije in če vzamemo v ozir gledališko metaforo, bi lahko rekli, da je Castelluccijeva kocka podobna mehurčku okolja, kakor ga opisuje biolog Jakob von Uexküll na primeru klopa, ki sestoji iz samo treh afektivnih funkcij. Vsaka vrsta, celo vsak individuum, ima svoj okoljski mehurček, ki mu zarisuje območje, domet in kvaliteto zaznave in delovanja, njegovega »naravnega okolja«, ki ga potrebuje za funkcioniranje. Kakor to vidi filozof Gilles Deleuze pa, če citiram Bretta Buchanana, »tovrsten mehurček poči«.4 Ne gre več za centriranje na individuume ali posamezne vrste, ampak za telesa, ki so skupki afektov. Po Spinozi so afekti tisto, kar na telo vpliva, ga premakne, gane in je tudi povzročitelj takšnih premikov. Center dogajanja se premesti s posameznih teles na relacije med njimi. Otroci na odru ne predstavljajo več nekakšnega lastnega sveta nedolžnosti, ampak se s svojimi specifičnimi afektiranimi telesi inkorporirajo v večje gledališko telo. »Spinozist je postajanje-otrok filozofa,«5 pravita Deleuze in Guattari v Tisoč platojih. Je tudi postajanje-otrok gledališča? Zdi se tako, ampak ravno takrat, ko otrokom v gledališču jemlje nedolžnost. Tako situacijo je slovensko občinstvo pred kratkim lahko izkusilo v kontekstu predstave Teje Reba 650 izkušenj (zgodovine telesa, ki še ni bilo oropano), v kateri oder naselijo odrasli in otroci različnih starosti, ki sredi predstave na njem uprizorijo nekakšen piknik. Nasprotno kot v prostorskem ready-madeu v realnem času pri Castellucciju se tokrat otroci nikakor ne obnašajo kot v njim lastnem okolju. Z ustnicami, zakrčenimi v sramežljiv nasmeh, se precej okorno podijo v vse preveč urejeni krožni liniji odra. Tokrat niso zgolj mehanizem v aparatu teatra, ampak aparat vpliva nanje in jih tako na afektivni ravni preobraža. Kakor ugotavlja Heinrich von Kleist v svojem slavnem fiktivnem dialogu O marionetnem gledališču iz leta 1801: performativna 4 5

Brett Buchanan, Onto-ethologies, The Animal Environments of Uexküll, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty and Deleuze, New York, 2008, str. 154–156. Gilles Deleuze in Félix Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus, London in New York: Continuum, 2004, str. 283.

R ec en zi je, refl eks ije / R ev ie w s , E x t e n s i on s 1 0 1

65 in / 49 v / 38 je / 32 ki / 28 se / 25 na / 20 da / 15 s / 15 tudi / 14 ne / 14 so / 12 bi / 12 za / 11 kot / 10 pa / 9 pri / 9 stvari / 8 jih / 8 kar / 8 ko /

repeticija spontanega, nadvse gracioznega giba šestnajstletnega dečka, ki je v originalu spominjala celo na slavno grško skulpturo dečka s trnjem v nogi, je popolnoma jalova, proizvede nelagodje in zadrego, celo komičen učinek. V predstavi Teje Reba prizor z otroki učinkuje kot grozljivo nefunkcionalen kontrast sicer zelo učinkovitim likom ter performativnim gestam iz prizorov profesionalnih akterjev. Amaterizem otrok je kladivo, ki razbija tehniko, ki je gledališču imanentna. Razgali ostale akterje, ki so pod obleko gledališki stroji. Ti kljub uporu proti tehnikam, ki je tako značilen za sodobni ples in gledališče, pod vladavino gledališkega dispozitiva stopajo proti perfekciji marionete, temu idealu gravitacijske spontanosti, ki je brez kančka zavesti oz. samozavedanja. Težnja po (videzu) spontanosti je tako pravzaprav paradoksalno prav dejstvo tehnike, ki je tista imanentna resnica vsakokratnega dispozitiva. Tudi predstava Nihče ni nedolžen hrvaške koreografinje Nataše Mihoci se poigra z razmerjem med otroškim amaterizmom in profesionalnim odraslim nastopom. Dekleta na odru so ob srečanju s pogledom očesa publike, tega stroja gledališkega dispozitiva, pravzaprav posiljena, vzame jim nedolžnost, spontanost, če to ni že a priori bil le mit. Če sta se telesi odraslih akterk popolnoma zlili z mehanizmom odra in zaigrali spontanost, dokler se ni uresničila, pa je zareza med telesnim označevalcem, ki si ga nadenejo dekleta, in njihovim nedoraslim telesom samim, stvarjo samo, pri trinajstletnih dekletih na odru tisti zamik, ki jim nedolžnost krade. Ko se v plesno-gledališkem biografskem utrinku Andreje Podrzavnik z naslovom Torek poleg plesalke Suzane na odru pojavi še njen sin Jan, vdira v posamezne prizore, jih spreobrača in njegova igra hkrati prerašča v koreografijo, se znajdemo na točki, ki razpira predstavo kot intersekcijski moment. Kljub povsem jasnim referencam iz življenja, začenši z dejstvom, da sta Suzana in Jan tudi izza odra mati in sin, pa prav zaradi odra samega, tehnične stilizacije, kljub temu da se ta često preliva v amaterizem in tako ustvarja rahle zastoje v mediju, nikoli ne sprevrže v izpovedovanje. Jan kot otroški amater vzpostavlja prav tisto krhkost ravnovesja, posebnega afekta predstave, ki pa je nazadnje v celoti inkorporiran v fikcijski dispozitiv gledališča. Gre za spodmikanje tal mediju, a zgolj na račun dinamike in intenzivnosti, ne pa z namenom, da bi se iluzijski stroj pokvaril. Gilles Deleuze v svojem tekstu Kaj je dispozitiv?6 opisuje, da je Foucaultova koncepcija dispozitiva sestavljena iz zavojev vidnosti in oznanjanja, gre torej za to, kaj nek določen dispozitiv izpostavi kot vidno in kako to poimenujemo. Gre za režime, ki jih gre pojmovati skozi spreminjanje, mutacije, transformacije. Med obema ravnema, med videnjem in rekanjem, med besedami in stvarmi, se ustvarjajo linije sil, ki se napajajo iz vedenja, vendar so vzvratno pogojene z režimi, lastnimi posameznemu dispozitivu v določeni zgodovinski variabli. Nazadnje so tu še linije subjektivacije, ki dispozitiva ne predirajo, so kot mimobežnice, ki ustvarjajo nove formacije, gre za procesne linije. To so linije pobega in ni nujno, da jih vsak dispozitiv sploh 6

Gilles Deleuze, »What is a dispositif?«, v: Michel Foucault philosopher, New York: Routledge, 1991, str. 159–168.

102 Rece n z ije , r e fleksij e / Reviews, Extensio ns

ustvarja. Vendar jih ne gre enačiti z razmerji moči in silami, jaz je ločen od vedenja in moči. Če bi po tem modelu torej tudi gledališču, v kolikor gre za nekakšno relacijsko zapletanje vseh teh linij, lahko rekli dispozitiv, se moramo vprašati, kaj pomeni za ta dispozitiv otroški amaterizem, kakor je bil opisan. To je linija sile, ki vzvratno reartikulira dispozitiv sam. Linije subjektivacij otrok na odru, kjer gre v nekaterih primerih pravzaprav za zaobrnitev njihove afektivnosti, ki dobi značaj sramu, niso tiste, ki neposredno vplivajo na spremembo gledališkega dispozitiva samega. Neodvisno od razdevičenja partikularnih jazov, postaranja otrok na odru se – nasprotno – medij sam pomladi. Zaradi otroškega amaterizma se tvorijo linije sil, gledališče sámo postaja otrok, ki teži k novim krivuljam vidnosti in označevanja.

Suspenz tehnike kot nostalgija po otroštvu

predstavi Generacija 91–95 Boruta Šeparovića nastopa 12 najstnikov, rojenih v obdobju domovinske vojne. Za to generacijo je značilno, da je njihov odnos do vojne izoblikovan prek posredovanja starejših generacij, izobraževalnega sistema ali medijev. Vsi so gledališki amaterji, izbrani na avdiciji, razpisani posebej za to predstavo. Ta dvojna distanca šele omogoči razmeroma neobremenjen govor o vojni, saj po eni strani generacija ni vpletena v neposredne travmatične izkušnje, po drugi pa amaterizem zagotavlja svež pristop k igri, ki ne privede do popolnega suspenza deške iskrivosti pod liki Dežulovićevega romana, po katerem je del predstave narejen. Pri tem efektu je fantom v veliko pomoč kamera, s katero nekdo od njih snema ter tako kadrira na zadnjo steno projiciran close-up gledališkega dogajanja. Digitalni filmski medij, ki postaja vse bolj tudi sredstvo amaterskih uspešnic na spletnih socialnih platformah, kakršen je YouTube, je mladim igralcem domač. Omogoča jim večjo vpetost v iluzijski mediatizirani stroj in jih med predstavo iniciira v odraslost, v profesionalnost. Izključni amaterizem je v tej predstavi konsistentni del konceptualne zasnove predstave. Verjetno je bil že sam proces postavitve predstave kot iniciacijski obred pospešitve odraslosti, podoben tistemu, ki se zgodi pri nenadni vojaški obveznosti. Samo dejstvo iniciacije se sprevrže v pogoj za učinkovitost in kvaliteto, torej za »profesionalnost« predstave. Zanimivo je tudi, da kar nekaj fantov zdaj študira na igralski akademiji, ki jih bo nepreklicno »de-amaterizirala«. Nasprotno pa se plesalec in koreograf Matija Ferlin želi plesne tehnike, ki se je je naučil v letih svojega izobraževanja, od-učiti. Pred nekaj leti smo si pri nas lahko premierno ogledali predstavo Sad sam (almost six), ki se ukvarja s problemom otroštva kot dobe v življenju ter s temo spominjanja in natančnosti spomina. Ferlin dobršni del predstave zaseda notranjost kroga, izoblikovanega iz majhnih plastičnih igrač – živali. Ta je kot inkubator, v katerem je Ferlin popolnoma zatopljen v igro. Introvertna dramaturgija se ne želi razkleniti in razpreti publiki. Na ta način Ferlin prakticira nekaj, čemur pravi točka nič telesa, čista prezenca, ki ni zaznamovana s tehnikami in abstrakcijami, saj je, kakor

8 prav / 8 tako / 8 z / 7 ali / 7 dotika / 7 k / 7 objekti / 7 objektov / 7 tem / 6 do / 6 gre / 6 Vujinović / 5 ampak / 5 ga / 5 med / 5 peskovniku /

troci na odru ne predstavljajo več nekakšnega lastnega sveta nedolžnosti, ampak se s svojimi specifičnimi afektiranimi telesi inkorporirajo v večje gledališko telo. »Spinozist je postajanje-otrok filozofa,« pravita Deleuze in Guattari v Tisoč platojih. Je tudi postajanje-otrok gledališča? Zdi se tako, ampak ravno takrat, ko otrokom v gledališču jemlje nedolžnost.

pravi, pogosto dovolj že, ko ničesar ne izraža. Ples je zanj zadnje pribežališče, vsak gib mora biti dobro utemeljen, saj se pogosto stvari da povedati bolje kot s plesom. Ko se ga že posluži, je ta pogosto v funkciji plesa samega in ne konotira in razlaga nečesa drugega. Ples je zanj zadnje zatočišče komunikacije.7 Zanimivo je, da je skozi pristop »žive naravnosti nemodificiranega telesa«, ki je nekakšen upor virtuoznosti in reprezentaciji, Ferlin prispel prav do teme otroštva in performiranja infantilnosti. Tu se ponovno zgodi spoj vsebine in forme in razklene problematika z dveh različnih perspektiv, ki pa se stekata ena v drugo, kot Möbiusov trak.

papigo, ki reproducira določene besede, ne da bi govorila jezik«.10 To ni bil akt plagiatorja, v neizogibnem zamiku in okornosti je razkril željo, ki je vedno individualna. S produkcijo sramote je postal »plemeniti diletant«, šele manko je povzročil možnost lika, kakor piše B. Cvejić. Spångberg se postavi v situacijo lacanovskega otroka pred ogledalom, ki je razočaran, ker ne uzre tistega, za kar se ima, prav to pa poganja željo, njegovo osebnost oblikuje prav razkorak, »manko biti«. Spångberg lahko tudi v ekscesu plesa, ne le v čisti otrpli prezenci, najde afirmativno nostalgijo (osebno in širše plesno zgodovinsko), najde zarezo v mediju, kjer lahko sam postaja otrok.

Popolno postrganje tehnike s telesa do njegove čiste in enostavne prezence pa se zdi idealistična težnja, ki se je kot taka izkazala že s projekti Yvonne Rainer konec šestdesetih. Njen NOmanifesto, ki odklanja spektakel, virtuoznost, ekscentričnost in stilizacijo, je takšna težnja po izločitvi esence telesa kot točke nič. Gibanje svojih plesalcev koreografinja opisuje kot neprizadeto/ nezaznamovano, popolnoma navadno, kakršno je telo pešcev.8 Vendar je jasno, da je njen Trio A vseeno kulminacija nekakšne tehnike, posebne estetike čistosti, saj ga kljub temu, da je bil koreografiran s posebnim ozirom na netrenirano telo, amaterji nikakor niso izvajali tako suvereno kot sama. V tem oziru se lahko spomnimo na tezo Andrewa Hewitta iz njegovega dela Social Choreography, ki detektira, da se koreografija nemara skriva v vsakem premiku, saj sta »telo, s katerim plešem, in telo, s katerim delam in hodim, eno in isto.«9 Bojana Cvejić v svojem

Gledališče je igra tudi še v odsotnosti igre, v njeni ustavitvi, saj takrat celoten medij gledališča igrivo premešča svoj dispozitiv. Otroški amaterizem cuka za rokav ustaljeno navado tehnike, ki prerašča že v mit spontanosti in samoumevnosti, da se ta ustavlja in ustvarja nove načine afektivne produkcije. Performativna infantilnost, če jo smem tako poimenovati, pa lahko vliva dogodkovnost v socialno koreografijo, ki se razširja tudi še onkraj gledališča. ..

tekstu Amaterski plesi in manifestne koreografije piše o primeru Mårtena Spångberga, ki je v solu Powered by Emotion izvedel Paxtonovo improvizacijo na Goldbergove variacije, kot bi bila to napisana koreografija. Pri tem je »pokazal zdrs, igral nepismeno 7 8 9

Iz intervjuja Marjane Krajac v: Akseli Virtanen et al., The Swedish dance history, Stockholm: INPEX, MyChoreography.org, 2009, str. 847–855. Catherine Wood, Yvonne Rainer, The Mind is a Muscle, London: Afterall Books, 2007, str. 15–16. Bojana Cvejić, »Amaterski plesi in manifestne koreografije«, v: Amfiteater in Maska: Procesi dela in sodelovanja v sodobnih scenskih umetnostih, pomlad 2010, str. 175.

10 Prav tam, str. 182.

R ec en zije, refl eks ije / R ev ie w s , E x t e n s i on s 1 0 3

5 sicer / 5 Superohm / 5 tega / 5 to / 4 drugih / 4 kako / 4 kamerami / 4 lahko / 4 le / 4 mu / 4 ni / 4 njegovo / 4 pred / 4 tu / 4 življenja /

Andreja Podrzavnik: Torek (Tuesday) Photo: Nada Žgank / Mesto žensk 2010

The Becoming-Child of the Theatre The role of children’s amateurism and performative infantility in contemporary theatre and dance Pia Brezavšček Translated by Polona Petek

It’s time the tale were told Of how you took a child And you made him old The Smiths

The dice rolls, the bubble bursts

n a monumental theatrical ambient, a dense group of people is slowly withdrawing from the stage. They reveal a transparent cube the size of a smaller room. In the cube, there are half a dozen of children, approximately two to three years of age, playing with building bricks and immersed in a conversation with one another. It is obvious that the technology of the glass cube prevents the children from physically perceiving what is going on outside the cube. Their behaviour resembles the usual, ready-made situation of the kindergarten. The voices of the children in the soundproof glass room are magnified and broadcast in the auditorium, so that the audience hears a magnified version of the children’s clatter, while the children themselves perceive it as normal speech. This is a scene from the performance by Romeo Castellucci, Inferno, which is part of the theatrical trilogy project by Societas Rafaello Sanzio, based on The Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri. After this scene, the “frozen” spatio-temporal bloc of the real rolls straight into a fictional theatrical situation in real time. The children’s innocence and ignorance (at least as regards the action on stage) are isolated in a sterile way and can only be set out as an exhibit, a self-sufficient object with no two-way communication function. In Castellucci’s aestheticised spectacle apparatus, such incursions play an important role; he often brings not only children but also animals onto the stage. According to Erika Fischer-Lichte, “[w]hat fascinates the audience about the animal’s appearance onstage is the sense

104 Rece n zije , r e fleksij e / Reviews, Extensio ns

103 the / 65 and / 65 of / 55 in / 48 a / 38 to / 37 is / 23 that / 22 it / 19 as / 19 this / 18 which / 17 are / 16 objects / 15 touch / 14 by / 13 user

of unpredictability. With the animal onstage reality invades into fiction, chance enters into order, nature into culture.”1 Only the animal, then, is supposedly capable of being present unburdened, for “it has not eaten from the tree of knowledge.” However, is the animal on stage indeed merely pure presence? In an interview,2 British theatre theorist Alan Read once stated that the animal on stage reminded one of how the human animal was actually rather inferior, for only s/he could bring on disappointment. The human animal’s culture, together with the “theatrical culture”, is in fact his/her flaw. It is, however, also the flaw that drives the human animal to produce and create new representational mechanisms, into which s/he could transfer him/herself as the bearer of disappointment (due to the dialectical transference of self-awareness). Children in the theatre, however, are an even more complex problem. They are not quite people yet; they are in the process of being initiated into human culture. As such a fluid, transitional element, they are less an incursion of chance into order than they are a challenge to the possibility of pure order and culture; they expose a paradox that has always been inherent in the theatre. Can spontaneity and technique be polarised to such an extent? What if technique is closer to spontaneity than it seems to be? Castellucci’s cube of infancy has a slightly perverted function. The illusionary machine,3 as Hans-Thies Lehmann describes the theatrical situation, works well only as a result of varying technical means, which are immanent in the theatre’s function of producing illusion. Here, in contrast, these immanent theatrical means are used, within illusion, to point to a reality beyond illusion. For a brief moment, the real (in time and space) rolls over the stage, without being tarnished by the fiction of the stage; in so doing, the real subverts the theatrical machine as the producer of illusion and enables it, with its own mechanisms, to create the most profound phantasm of all – the real itself. This scenario, however, is only feasible in rare theatrical situations, such as the aestheticised world of Romeo Castellucci’s theatre. In performances, whose production is less complicated and which do not aspire to such monumental effects, the “glass” of the technique, which bars intersubjectivity, often “shatters”. The bubble of the children’s so-called natural environment bursts and the children, absorbed by the theatrical dispositif, are left at the mercy of the audience. Using a tad of imagination and reduction, and taking into account the theatrical metaphor, we could say that Castellucci’s cube resembles the environmental bubble as described by biologist Jakob von Uexküll, who uses the example of the tick; the bubble is comprised of only three affective functions. Every species, even every individual, has its own environmental bubble, which delineates its sphere, range and quality of perception and action, its “natural environment”, which is required for its functioning. However, as philosopher Erika Fischer-Lichte, The Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics (Ästhetik des Performativen), New York: Routledge, 2008, p. 106. 2 http://www.radiostudent.si/article.php?sid=18439. 3 Hans-Thies Lehmann, Postdramatic Theatre (Postdramatisches Theater), New York: Routledge, 2006.

Gilles Deleuze understands this, to quote Brett Buchanan, the “bubble has burst”.4 This no longer concerns the individual or the species; rather, it concerns bodies, which are clusters of affects. According to Spinoza, affect is what affects the body, what influences it and moves it physically or emotionally; affect is the cause of such shifts. The centre of activity shifts from individual bodies to the relations between them. The children on stage no longer represent a separate world of innocence; rather, with their own specific affected bodies, they are incorporated into the bigger theatrical body. “Spinozism is the becoming-child of the philosopher,” Deleuze and Guattari maintain in A Thousand Plateaus.5 Is it also the becoming-child of the theatre? It seems so; however, this is so precisely when it strips children in the theatre of their innocence. Slovenian audiences have recently had the opportunity to see such a situation in the context of the performance by Teja Reba, 650 Experiences (History of the Body Not Yet Stolen) (650 izkušenj [zgodovine telesa, ki še ni bilo oropano]), in which children of different ages and adults occupy the stage and, in the middle of the performance, stage a picnic of sorts. In contrast to Castellucci’s spatial ready-made in real time, children here do not act as if they were in their own environment. With stiff, shy smiles on their lips, they run clumsily along the all too orderly circular edge of the stage. Here, children are not merely a mechanism within the theatrical apparatus; rather, the apparatus also exerts an influence on them and thus transforms them affectively. As Heinrich von Kleist maintains in his famous fictional dialogue On the Marionette Theatre (Über das Marionettentheater), written in 1801, performative repetition of a spontaneous, utterly graceful gesture of a sixteen-yearold boy, which in the original even resembled the famous Greek sculpture of the boy pulling a thorn out of his foot, is completely futile; it produces unease and embarrassment, even a comic effect. In Teja Reba’s performance, the scene with the children functions as a frighteningly non-functional contrast to the otherwise very effective characters and performative gestures in the scenes performed by professional actors. The amateurism of the children is the hammer that smashes technique, which is immanent in the theatre. It lays bare the other actors, who, underneath their garments, are theatrical machines. Despite the revolt against technique, which is so typical of contemporary dance and theatre, the actors under the reign of the theatrical dispositif move towards the perfection of the marionette, the ideal of gravitational spontaneity, which has no consciousness or self-awareness. The striving for (the appearance of) spontaneity is thus, in fact, a paradoxical fact of technique, which is the immanent truth of every dispositif. The performance by Nataša Mihoci, Nobody is Innocent (Nitko nije nevin), also brings into play the relation between children’s amateurism and adult professionalism. When they meet the 4

Brett Buchanan, Onto-Ethologies: The Animal Environments of Uexküll, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty and Deleuze, New York: State University of New York Press, 2008, p. 175. Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia (Mille Plateaux: Capitalisme et schizophrénie), London and New York: Continuum, 2004, p. 283.

R ec en zije, refl eks ije / R ev ie w s , E x t e n s i on s 1 0 5

/ 12 an / 12 The / 12 they / 10 on / 9 not / 9 or / 9 things / 9 with / 8 her / 8 installation / 8 perception / 8 Superohm / 7 also / 7 be / 7 but /

gaze of the audience, the machine of the theatrical dispositif, the girls on stage are raped, so to speak; the gaze takes away their innocence, their spontaneity, insofar as the latter had not been a myth to begin with. While the bodies of the two adult female actors have merged completely with the mechanism of the stage and they perform spontaneity until it comes true, the gap between the bodily signifier adopted by the girls and their own immature bodies, the thing itself, constitutes the deferral that robs them of their innocence. When, in the dance-theatrical biographical piece by Andreja Podrzavnik, Tuesday (Torek), the dancer Suzana’s son Jan appears on stage next to his mother and interrupts individual scenes and perverts them, while his play starts to resemble choreography, we are at the point where the performance is laid bare as an intersectional moment. Yet, despite totally clear references to life, beginning with the fact that Suzana and Jan are mother and son off stage, too, it is precisely because of the stage itself, its technical stylisation (which, admittedly, is often amateurish and, as such, it jams the medium), that the performance never turns into a confession. Jan as a child amateur establishes the fragility of balance, the special affect of the performance, which, however, is eventually fully incorporated into the fictional dispositif of the theatre. The performance challenges the medium; however, it does so only in terms of the dynamics and intensity and not with the purpose of causing the illusionary machine to break down. In his text “What is a Dispositif?”,6 Gilles Deleuze describes Foucault’s concept of the dispositif as comprised of curves of visibility and curves of enunciation; in other words, this concerns what a specific dispositif makes visible and how we designate it. This concerns the regimes that should be understood in terms of change, mutations, transformations. Between the two levels, between visibility and enunciation, between words and things, lines of force emerge, which are fuelled by knowledge; yet, they are retroactively conditioned by the regimes that are unique to each specific dispositif within a specific historical variable. Finally, there are also lines of subjectification, which do not penetrate the dispositif; they are skew lines of sorts, which generate new formations; they are processual lines. They are lines of flight and they are not necessarily produced by every dispositif. Yet, they should not be equated with power relations and forces, for the self is separate from knowledge and power. If, using this model, we could see the theatre – insofar as it concerns a relational entanglement of all these lines – as a dispositif, we should ask ourselves what children’s amateurism, as described above, means for this dispositif. This is a line of force, which retroactively rearticulates the dispositif itself. The lines of subjectification of the children on stage – which, in some cases, are merely a reversal of their affectivity, which acquires the character of shame – do not effect directly a change of the theatrical dispositif as such. Independently of the deflowering of particular selves, of the aging of the children on 6

Gilles Deleuze, “What is a Dispositif?” (“Qu’est-ce qu’un dispositif?”), in: Michel Foucault: Philosopher, New York: Routledge, 1991, pp. 159–168.

106 Rece n z ije , r e fleksij e / Reviews, Extensio ns

stage, the medium makes itself younger. Thanks to children’s amateurism, lines of force emerge and the theatre itself is a becoming-child, striving for new curves of visibility and enunciation.

Suspension of technique as a nostalgia for childhood

welve teenagers, born during the patriotic war, appear in the performance by Borut Šeparović, Generation 91–95 (Generacija 91–95). It is characteristic of this generation that their relationship to the war has been shaped via older generations, the education system or the media. All teenagers in the show are amateurs; they were chosen at an audition held specifically for this performance. This double distance has, at last, enabled a relatively unburdened discourse on the war, for, on the one hand, this generation does not have an immediate traumatic experience of it and, on the other hand, their amateurism warrants a fresh approach to acting, which does not lead into a total suspension of the boyish spark that infuses the characters of Dežulović’s novel, which was the basis for a part of this performance. In achieving this effect, the boys are greatly assisted by the camera, used by one of them to record theatrical action and project it in close-up on the back wall. The medium of digital film, which is increasingly the tool used in amateur hits on web-based social platforms, such as YouTube, is familiar to the young actors. It enables their greater incorporation into the illusionary mediatised machine and initiates them into adulthood, into professionalism, during the performance. The exclusive amateurism of this performance has been a consistent part of its conceptual plan. Probably, the very making of the performance was like an initiation ritual that ushers in adulthood, a ritual similar to the one that accompanies imminent national military service. The fact of initiation itself becomes a precondition for efficiency and quality, that is, the “professionalism” of the performance. It is also interesting to note that some of the boys are now students at the acting academy, which will “deamateurise” them irrevocably. In contrast, dancer and choreographer Matija Ferlin wishes to unlearn the dance technique that he acquired during his education. A few years ago, his performance Sad Sam (almost six) opened in Slovenia; it explores the problem of childhood as a stage in life and the theme of memory and its accuracy. For the good part of the performance, Ferlin occupies the inside of a circle made up of small plastic toy animals. The circle reminds one of an incubator, in which Ferlin is totally immersed in play. The introverted dramaturgy refuses to open up and reveal itself to the audience. Thus, Ferlin practises something that he calls the zero point of the body, pure presence, which is not marked by techniques and abstractions, for, as Ferlin says, it often suffices as such, without expressing anything. Dance, according to Ferlin, is the last resort; every move must be justified, for things are often better expressed in language

7 components / 7 life / 7 new / 7 sandbox / 7 she / 7 They / 7 visitor / 7 when / 6 artificial / 6 if / 6 only / 6 project / 6 such / 6 tactile /

he children on stage no longer represent a separate world of innocence; rather, with their own specific affected bodies, they are incorporated into the bigger theatrical body. “Spinozism is the becoming-child of the philosopher,” Deleuze and Guattari maintain in A Thousand Plateaus. Is it also the becoming-child of the theatre? It seems so; however, this is so precisely when it strips children in the theatre of their innocence.

than through dance. When dance is used, however, it is often for the sake of dance itself and it does not connote or explain anything. Dance, according to Ferlin, is the ultimate refuge of communication.7 It is interesting that Ferlin – using the approach of “live naturalness of the unmodified body”, which is a revolt of sorts against virtuosity and representation – has reached the topic of childhood and performative infantility. This is where the merging of content and form occurs again and it sheds light on the problem from two different yet convergent perspectives, like the Möbius strip. The total scraping of the technique from the body to reveal its pure and simple presence seems like an idealistic aspiration of the kind manifested in Yvonne Rainer’s projects at the end of the sixties. Her NO-manifesto, which rejects spectacle, virtuosity, eccentricity and stylisation, is an example of such an aspiration to set apart the essence of the body as the zero point. The choreographer describes the movement of her dancers as unaffected/unmarked, totally ordinary, resembling the body of pedestrians.8 Yet, it is clear that her Trio A is the culmination of a technique of sorts, of a special aesthetics of purity, for despite the fact that it was choreographed with special attention to the untrained body, the amateurs did not perform it with the same level of sovereignty as she did. In this respect, we should be reminded of Andrew Hewitt’s thesis in his Social Choreography, where he argues that choreography may well reside in every move, for “the body with which I dance and the body with which I work and walk are one and the same body.”9 In her text

Goldberg’s variations as if it were choreography. In so doing, he “revealed a slippage; he played an illiterate parrot reproducing certain words without speaking the language.”10 This was not a plagiarist’s act; with the inevitable deferral and awkwardness, Spångberg revealed desire, which is always individual. By producing shame, he became a “noble dilettante”; it was only with the lack that the possibility of the character was created, Bojana Cvejić argues. Spångberg put himself in the position of the Lacanian child in front of the mirror, who is disappointed, for he does not see what he thinks he is; this disillusion fuels desire and the child’s personality is shaped by the gap, the “lack of the self”. Spångberg was able to find an affirmative nostalgia not only in pure, stiff presence, but also in the excess of dance; he found a gap in the medium in which he was able to set off becoming a child. The theatre is play even when acting is absent or suspended, for then, the entire medium of the theatre playfully rearranges its dispositif. Children’s amateurism disrupts the established practice of technique – which is becoming a myth of spontaneity and self-evidence – to make it stop and generate new modes of affective production. And performative infantility, if I may call it that, can add eventfulness to social choreography, which extends beyond the theatre. ..

“Amateur Dance and Manifesto Choreographies”, Bojana Cvejić writes about Mårten Spångberg, who, in his solo performance Powered by Emotion, performed Paxton’s improvisation on 7 8 9

From the interview by Marjana Krajač, in: Akseli Virtanen et al., The Swedish dance history, Stockholm: INPEX, MyChoreography.org, 2009, pp. 847–855. Catherine Wood, Yvonne Rainer: The Mind is a Muscle, London: Afterall Books, 2007, pp. 15–16. Bojana Cvejić, “Amaterski plesi in manifestne koreografije”, in: Amfiteater and Maska: Procesi dela in sodelovanja v sodobnih scenskih umetnostih, Spring 2010, p. 175.

10 Ibid., p. 182.

R ec en zije, refl eks ije / R ev ie w s , E x t e n s i on s 107

7€

145-146

pomlad/spring

2012

Iz naslednje številke / From the forthcoming issue

Teorije uprizoritvenih praks / Theory of Performing Arts Emancipatorni potencial VALIE EXPORT v akciji s prsmi na dotik / VALIE EXPORT’s emancipation potential in her performance in which she allows her breasts to be touched / Alenka Spacal Performativni manifest: kontrapunktno tvorjenje pomena. »Cheap Lecture« Johnathana Burrowsa in Mattea Fargiona / A Performative Manifesto: No Concept, No Referentiality. The “Cheap Lecture” by Jonathan Burrows and Matteo Fargion / Katja Čičigoj

Teorije novih medijev / New Media Theory »Veliki brat te zares gleda!« / “Big Brother really is watching you!” / Beat Suter Reversed Remediation / Saskia Korsten

GPS sledenje je omogočilo podjetje ISOFT računalniški inženiring, Marko Kastelic s. p., na portalu GPS sledenje vozil in oseb: www.track.si. / GPS tracking was provided by ISOFT računalniški inženiring, Marko Kastelic s. p., at the portal GPS tracking of vehicles and people: www.track.si. www.track.si.

VSE, KAR VAS ZANIMA O DIGITALNI JI I F A R G O T O F

hopa Šola Photos

DSLR VEŠČINE

K L I K

pravil, da Prekršite nekaj vo dobite presunlji pokrajino. minimalistično

DSLR VEŠČINE

NASVET

a ool hop Sch tos hop Pho Pho Šolatos INES P BASIC VEŠČ EDNE NAPROSHO PHOT

rtrete v stilu je Retuširajte po ne fotografi od m e sodobn KORAKOM KORAK ZA

ljšanje racije za izbo venčne sepa vse skupaj videti ti tehniko frek bilo , kako uporabi nepravilnosti, ne da bi POTEM Razkrivamo e in odstranitev teksture kož BUJETE KAJ POTRE Photoshop CS5 NAUČILI jo in KAJ SE BOSTE obdelati fotografi za Kako detajlno nabor tehnik uporabiti nov je obdelavo fotografi BO TRAJALO 30 minut

Reugels

A DELAVNIC

je to? gibanja mlečnih Oh! Kaj pa ija zamrznjenega itrostne „To je fotograf s pomočjo visokoh njegove kapljic, nastala uporabljam zaradi . Barve so bliskavice. Mleko absorpcije svetlobe gostote in dobre modrega in rumenega gela , posledica rdečega na bliskavicah.“

? dobil „gobo“ mleka, ki ji Kako si sploh sem spustil kapljico je trčila s „Z višine 60 cm kapljica kapljica. Druga in tako je nastala je sledila večja pljusknila navzgor prvo, ko je ta oblika gobe.“ il? o si uporab oprem AF 100 Katero objektivom Minolta ami Vivitar “Sony A700 z tremi bliskavic in Macro l „rilec“, mm f/2.8 e sem namesti 285-HV. Na bliskavic o usmeril obarvano natančn z brezžičnim s katerim sem pa sem sprožil svetlobo, vse skupajm Yongnuo RF-602. Kapljice c daljinskim sprožilce elektronski sprožile je nadzoroval in fotoaparat t.” Cognisys StopSho

etnost Zen in um ajin pokr skih ori vam mazal biti kreativen il kako bomo, njem prav

NO SKO POKRAJI umetniški diptih KTNO MOR beline, da ustvarite VARITI ABSTRA in ravnotežjem Kako … UST osvetlitvenim časom z Eksperimentirajte

A CONA KREATIVN

Pok beline – s krše od zlatih pravil prelomili eno z ravnotežjem je učinkovit S tem smo

LKE I V E T Š E V IZ NO r , In nastavitve? čas 1/160 sekunde in osvetlitveni teh “Zaslonka f/16 odlično prav pri saj sprožilci delujejo e sem nastavil na 1/32 in 1/64 kar nastavitvah. Bliskavic traja le 1/22.000 sekunde, blisk v zraku.“ moči, saj tako da ustavi kapljico je dovolj kratko,

Digitalna Kamera

j toda ta pristop umirjenosti. je še posebe kompozicije, fe, ti občutek Morska obala številne fotogra in pomaga ustvari moder nadih, smo privlačna za iti, globok težko ugotov Da bi dobili in sicer izbiro seveda pa ni eno pravilo, njajočega itev prelomili še tičnost spremi žja beline. Nastav bi nakazali zakaj. Drama napačnega ravnote izkoristiti, da bi običajno h do morja je možno scent/tungsten viharni od svetlobe incande čustev, nadih zaradi širok razpon na tem posnetku je ohladila topel žarnic, toda tukaj je je sublimnih. Voda navadnih govorico pa iz poudarila fsko luči fotogra precej močno različna zenovski umirjena, s o ta nastavitev lističen, skoraj Dva nekolik umirjajoč že scene. nastal minima drug o in n jena modrin je privlače scene sta postavl diptih. posnetek, ki ljiv posnetka iste . zicijo s in tvorita presun na prvi pogled ob drugega preprosto kompo Izbrali smo tnega izreza. na sredini kvadra horizontom

ijo

rata ali Umirite situac ili tresenje fotoapatrden iti Da bi prepreč morate uporab neželeno gibanje, svoj DSLR na ročno te jte z tripod. Nastavi eksperimentira ostrenje ter je bila osvetlitev in enimi časi. Tukaj dolgimi osvetlitv f/8. pri osvetlitev 5 sekund

beline žje beline Ravnotežje nastavite ravnote Kot naslednje bo posnetek ngsten. Tako z Včasih lahko na incandescent/tu no moder nadih. beline dodate dobil intenziv žja lnega ravnote ega pridiha. izbiro nepravi fijam malce kreativn svojim fotogra

ali CS, da Naredite diptih op Elements

Uporabite Photosh in postavite posnetka en izrez naredite kvadrat in ustvarite diptih. To je drug ob drugega fotografije v da spremenite sti. dober način, k sodobne umetno dober primere

Digitalna Kamera

frekvenč Obstaja i uporabite tehniko postopka retuše jo lahko kot začetni ali zaključnPrvo, ite žje. separacije. Uporab vsak svoje ravnote ijo. gledano najde izvirno fotograf korak. Splošno je seveda naložiti kar morate narediti,

PREJ

Pljusk mlečne kapljice

af Markus Nemški fotogr neča s Reugels prese , mlečnih kapljic fotografijami tno bliskavico hitros nastalih z visoko

tek začetni posne v sklopu Odprite nešteto načinov, kjer lahko ne

2012 Januar/februar

John Glove 30-letnih izkušenj na ot Zaradi več k raﬁranja vrtov ima John g področju foto raktičnih nasvetov za op Glover obilic grafe ... foto nadebudne

fij ljudi etuširanje fotogra prefinjenjost o zahteva določen žja med tem, in lovljenje ravnote in naj bo model i kako popoln a želite izgubit koliko realizm e. kom obdelav med postop in neposrednim S temnenjem do hitro pridete vsem barvanjem kože a videza in tiste ničeneg “ izumet o „fotošopiranem fije znane kritike fotogra so kljub temu a u, posnetk obdelane povsem v modnih revijahda bi pri tem izgubili tisto ne pristno. nerealistično, še vedno naredi ena le nekaj, kar jih separacija je V Frekvenčna umetnosti retuše. od oblik črne le delitev obliki je to količino najpreprostejši plast z veliko količino posnetka na plast z majhno nato in v detajlo se ločeni plasti detajlov. Ti o rekonstrukcijo popoln v združita ka. Prednost izvirnega posnetda lahko ločeno a je, bo na vsaki tega pristop o s tistim, kaj manipuliram (ali od plasti. količino detajlov Plast z majhno sko frekvenco) prostor in tonske plast z nizko osnovne barvne močno vsebuje vse kar plast lahko To svetle predele informacije. bi spremenili obdelamo, da kože in grobo ilnosti detajlov ali zgladili neprav z veliko količino ki so teksturo. Plast detajle, in e tekstur en prikaz vsebuje fine a za realistič ključnega pomen

pokazali kože in las. ku vam bomo z V tem prispev i postopek retuše preprost delovn frekvenčne separacije, uporabo tehnike vito izostritev in učinko ki omogoča učinka med ne da bi se glajenje kože,

„Plast z nizko rite frekvenco ustva ost na zelo prepr bite le način – upora Blur, filter Gaussian nato z radijem pa ite, kje bo točno določ obema med a ločnic no plastema. Sploš kože ti vilnos mora biti z osnovno retušo. lo Odstranitečenepra pravilo je, da da se najprej začnete pomaga Dobro je, čemer vam bo radij tako velik, ijo, ko robovom, pri si posnetek Izogibajte se opu. Oglejte Brush v Photosh opazite nepravilnosti ni detajli izgub tek fi kjer orodje Healing velikosti in tam, v bližini, si ogledate posne v 100-odstotni eževan vzorec sti.“ najprej neomad jte madež. veliko polni kože, vzemite pri pobarva in kliknite ter

držite Alt

e ustvariti ijo moramo Podvojite ozadj frekvenčno separac pritisnite

hitro Za uspešno a, plasti. Dvakrat dve kopiji slikovne srednjo plast Nizka frekvenc poimenujte na plast Nizka Ctrl+J. Sedaj frekvenca. Kliknite zgornjo pa Visoka začnete z delom. frekvenca, da

nco z nizko frekvecije z visoko iti informa Pripravite plast li filter je treba odstran

to uporabi Iz te plasti bomo prepros in uporabite frekvenco, zato meniju Filter , kje bo Izberite ga v Gaussian Blur. 5 pikslov. Tako namreč določite ti o. nizko frekvenc Radius vrednos med visoko in potekala meja

Spoznajte terminologijo

nca Prostorska frekve

ske oncept prostor dokaj težek frekvence je En način za za razumevanje. si zamislite da razlago je ta, je vrisana v fotografijo, ki najsvetlejši pokrajino, kjer vljajo vrhove piksli predsta ejši pa tla. gora, najtemn z veliko Vsa področja bodo zelo količino detajlov obrisi pa kontrastna, gladki i. bodo postopn

K nco z visoko frekve Image a in izberite Pripravite plast plast plast Visoka frekvenc

Kliknite na meniju izberite V spustnem Add. > Apply Image. tih spajanja pa t 2, Offset a, pri možnos na na vrednos Nizka frekvenc naj bo nastavlje in kliknite OK. Možnost Scale ajte polje Invert pa na 0. Obkljuk

Ben Secret

Fotografija: Markus

5-MIN UTNA

ACIJE ENČNE SEPAR TEHNIKA FREKV

ja a način spajan Visoka frekvenc Spremenitenačin spajanja plasti biti

k bi moral Spremenite in izvirni posnete vsebino z na Linear Light imamo sedaj ruiran, le da plasti, kjer popolnoma rekonst in malo detajli na drugi na eni veliko detajli mo ločeno. jo lahko obdeluje

Digitalna Kamera

2012 Januar/februar

vala. seboj izključe

rtrete v stilu o p e jt a ir š Retu otograﬁje f e n d o m e sodobn iti tehniko b a r o p u o it r Kako prik a izboljšanje z e ij c a r a p e s ravilnosti p e n frekvenčne v e it n a tr in ods teksture kože Digitalna Kamera

2012 Januar/februar

Videotop Color Media, Trg revolucije 2, 2000 Maribor

K L I K

NAZADNJE IZŠLO Informacije in naročila: ana.ivanek@maska.si. Alexander R. Galloway Teorija video iger. Eseji o algoritemski kulturi

www.maska.si

ideo igre so v zadnjih dvajsetih letih postale eden osrednjih kulturnih pojavov in danes po svoji popularnosti ter vplivu uspešno tekmujejo s starejšimi mediji, kot so film, televizija in popularna glasba. Galloway je eno osrednjih svetovnih teoretskih imen na tem področju. V knjigi obravnavani fenomen reflektira v različnih kontekstih – elektronske kulture, tehnologij, skozi njegove družbenopolitične implikacije ter v kontekstu drugih umetnostnih in kulturnih praks. Izdaja knjige v slovenskem jeziku pomeni edinstveno priložnost za slovenski prostor, da se seznani z vedno težje spregledljivim področjem teorije video in računalniških iger. Posebej za slovenske bralce je avtor napisal uvod ter v njem razširil svoj pogled na obravnavane teme. Knjigi je dodana spremna študija dr. Janeza Strehovca. 15 € Jonathan Burrows KOREOGRAFOV PRIROČNIK

oreografov priročnik bralca vabi k raziskovanju načinov in vzrokov za pripravo plesne predstave. Mednarodno priznani plesalec, koreograf in učitelj Jonathan Burrows nam v navdihujočem in nenavadno spodbudnem nizu zgodbic razlaga, kako je mogoče pluti skozi ta kompleksni proces. Gre za osupljivo razmišljanje o osebni praksi in poklicni poti, ki se napaja iz petletnih izkušenj z delavnic, ki jih je vodil. Burrowsova odkrita in iskrena proza ponuja bralcu dostop do vrste vaj, razmišljanj, načel in idej o koreografiji, ki umetnikom in ustvarjalcem plesa omogoča iskanje lastnega estetskega procesa. Gledalcu plesnih in drugih predstav ponuja impresiven nabor vprašanj, s katerimi se vsaka predstava sooča, ko ga nagovarja. To je knjiga za vsakogar, ki ga zanima ustvarjanje predstav, ne glede na raven ali slog. To je knjiga za vsakogar, ki ga zanima ustvarjanje in delovanje sodobne scenske umetnosti.Skupna izdaja Maske in JSKD. 12 € Marc Augé Nekraji. Uvod v antropologijo nadmodernosti

njiga Nekraji. Uvod v antropologijo nadmodernosti je temeljno delo urbane antropologije (izvirno objavljeno leta 1992 pri francoski založbi Seuil), ki je doživelo že številne prevode. V njej avtor tematizira aktualne pojave v sodobni globalni družbi; ukvarja se zlasti s prostori, ki jih imenuje nekraji. To so zanj letališča, nakupovalna središča, hoteli, avtoceste itn. V teh ambivalentnih prostorih poteka nenehno gibanje, potrošnja, komunikacija; v njih ni sorodnih simbolnih povezav, ni igre identitet. Obstajajo kot prehodni, anonimni, funkcionalni prostori, ki jih zaznavamo le parcialno in nepovezano. Nasprotni pol nekraja zanj predstavlja antropološki kraj, ki je nosilec identitete, razmerij in zgodovine ter si ga najlaže zamišljamo v obliki konkretnega prostora, ki za nekoga predstavlja pomembno simbolično vozlišče kulturnih pomenov, spominov, doživljajev, izkustev (npr. žrtveni oltar, rojstni kraj, javni trg ipd.). Gre za prvo knjižno objavo tega avtorja v slovenščini. Knjigi je dodana spremna študija dr. Matjaža Uršiča. 15 € Uredili: Barbara Sušec Michieli, Blaž Lukan in Maja Šorli Dinamika sprememb v slovenskem gledališču 20. stoletja

nanstvena monografija Dinamika sprememb v slovenskem gledališču 20. stoletja si jemlje za predmet svojih raziskav slovensko gledališče v preteklem stoletju. Gre za konstitutivno stoletje slovenskega gledališča, saj ga je to dokončno utrdilo in potrdilo kot moderno, evropsko in profesionalno utemeljeno družbeno, kulturno in umetniško institucijo. Dejstvo, da je monografija nastala natanko deset let po koncu stoletja, je nemara razlog, da se njeni prispevki lahko odmaknejo od doslej prevladujočih modelov slovenskega gledališkega zgodovinopisja. Študije v tej knjigi tako predstavljajo pomembno širitev, dopolnilo in revizijo gledališke zgodovine na Slovenskem, hkrati pa prispevajo k nadaljevanju razprave o vrednotenju posameznih gledaliških zvrsti, obdobij, dosežkov in osebnosti obravnavanega časa. V primerjavi z dosedanjimi publikacijami ponujajo prispevki tudi temeljitejši vpogled v tradicionalno marginalizirane gledališke pojave, v recepcijo in družbeno kontekstualizacijo gledališke umetnosti. 25 €