Contact persons
General presentation
Storytelling, avoiding, beating around the bush, making diversion, detours and narrative derives, circonvolutions, paratexts, indexed conversations
Just like other learning objects, the work of art can`t be thought as an autonomous knowledge that is getting passed around without being contaminated and transformed from the inside by these displacements.
It`s not an object of aquirement transfusing itself within an ideal of « transparent thought ».
It`s an object to be shared and cohabited, depending on a complex network of broadcasting and receiving, and it doesn`t belong neither totally to its author, nor totally to its spectator.
It`s rather an intermediate object between us and the world.
The « partenaire particulier » (specific partner) exhibitions organised after a master degree about unique spectator devices at the london consortium drew a typology of artworks that are directed to only one spectator at a time (and by that turn an unknown spectator into a priveliged receiver who maintains a contractual, symbiotic and negotional relation to the work). I now continue this reflection on the adress by focusing my attention on works that use forms of « beating around the bush »
playing eloquent and blithering storytellers, the « contact persons » artists avoid carefully to deliver us the object of their covetousness. They deploy a whole arsenal of evasion, detour and narrative derive strategies, of interjections and linguistic convolutions, applied in order to never reveal the conversation's subject.
Using (stylistic) ways such as allusion, (http://www.google.de/search?q=define%3Apreterition&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:de:official&client=firefox-a), periphrasis or extension, they inverse the process of a scientific language that would give a definition of the object of analysis in the first place and only then challenge it. They don't care about such an intermediate stage, they for sure prefere the surface to the core in order to construct traverse ways. So the object in the words grammatic sense redirects, withdraws and peculates itself to those who would like to apropriate it.
This artifice language never frontally treats the subject in question but bypasses it by touching it and criticises it without naming it. Soon it illustrates a simple gesture, later it languishes because of the very own conditions of its realisation, or it produces unique forms of analysis and lecture of the world.
From representation of failed interviews with a documentary touch by jeanne faust to loquacious but unseizable public shows by jochen dehn, from volko kamensky`s testimonial exhortations supposed to represent various desert places that he investigates with his camera, to loreto martinez troncoso`s annihilated adresses to his public or charlotte moth`s orchestrated and filmed image- commenting routines: language -staged, described or in progress is a flow carrying stories and sense (including its stack of counter sense, diversions, misunderstandings and failures) that circulates
remorseless, though refusing to deliver the conversation`s actual object.
no matter if the artists represent language within films or if they embody it directly, if they produce their own auto- reflexive comment in order to create a customized adress or if they act as explaining teachers by using the ways of learning, their works don`t stop to evolve in a paradox movement: being full of desire to speak about the world, to adress to us and to teach us, they iredeemably create partial and faint communication. interview, chorus, lecture, performance, conference, class... the exhibit`s works talk to us, but what are they talking about?
by intensifying the relations between spoken language and graphic language, by turning the spoken language into the artists first choice of expression and by using forms of discourse such as description, explication, circonvolution or auto-comment, the project has a desire to make a statement against the aeres reforms. these are resulting from the gouvernment`s wish to standardise the european model concerning the arts education system (bologna-process) by favouring the discourse to the plastic form and seperate those two elements whereas each of it should build on the other.
willing to transfer the education dispensed in art schooles to that of the university model, they deepen the gap between plastic work and its comment, between the text and its shape by demanding students to produce a paper which would be evaluated prior to the plastic work by a particular jury composed to some extent with university doctorates and by that giving the "discourse about" a supremacy or at least equivalence, and turning the plastic work into something reducible to simple writing.
ben, ça manque grave du streamlining, si quelqu`un veut s`en charger de ça, je ferais la dernier partie 2main. à+!
Inscription à :
Publier les commentaires (Atom)
la suite
RépondreSupprimerThe exhibit is conceived as an eternal development and is becoming in the course of time.
fitting to the various shapes that traverse it, it wants to make the spectator adopt diverse attitudes: listening alone to an accoustic work, watching a public performance, lying down in front of a movie, reading books or consulting documentation of performances.
Contact partners wants to reverse the spectator's vertical position into a horizontal by inviting him to take some time, to sit down or lay back, to make himself comfortable in a time of reading, thinking or dreaming.
An exhibition divided into three times and three locations
contact partners will take place within three legs
it will start in two locations related by their type: (1) in june at « la vitrine », the exhibition space of the art school of paris-cergy, (2) in july and august in the « palais des arts » of the toulouse art school. (3) In the course of the « printemps de septembre » (annual art event in toulouse), the « ecole publique » of paris will move to the toulouse art school to constitute the third leg of the exhibit.
Two forms of temporality will meet within the project: on one hand the ephemeral and moving form of the event and on the other the fixed and constant form of the exhibit.
The project is conceived as a modulary cell that can ramify, convert and cut itself or grow as well as be fixed or activated. Each exhibit will take care to fit to the location and its given context and will construct itself accordingly, formulating complementary propositions.
This ushering of the exhibit as well as the particular attention brought to the spectator's position will be expressed with the help of a specific disposition device.
The disposition device
the device doesn't contradict the exhibit but adapts to it and proceeds from it.
It incarnates the potential transactions and rearrangements of the exhibit.
As a dry but comfortable, modular and multidirectional structure, it will invite the spectator to participate and activate, or just to lie down.
It's a showing and inquiring spot. It draws a space within a space, physically tightening the proximity relations between the works captured in a commun nomad territory -between the works and the spectators and between the spectators themselves.
It's becoming by the degrees in which it will receive the works (highlighting the idea that the work contaminates and constructs space) and the performances that are going to take place there.
As an adjustable and discreet structure receiving the works as well as the spectators, the device would consist of ranks, a library and some screens.
The device should be flexible enough so that the artists can use it as a scenic space or for showing purposes. However it must not prevail their proposition (simple rank to receive the public in case they don't want to use it). Certain materials resulting out of performances might as well find their place within the exhibit.
quel surprise, des phrases beaucoup plus court et tout... cette partie peut rester comme ça, non?
génial merci beaucoup!!
RépondreSupprimer