Nova

PRELOM
bRoj 8
NOVINE GALERIJE NOVA 08
FINALNA IZLO@BAnastaje u kontekstu obiljeènom rascijepom u recep-
ciji djelovanja izvaninstitucionalne scene u lokalnom kontekstu gdje je
smatrana alternativom i kao takva marginalizirana i u tzv. me|unarod-
nom kontekstu, u kojem je ta scena sve prisutnija, premda naj~e{}e mar-
ginalizirana kako poretkom geo-politi~kih instrumentalizacija kulture, tako
i razinom o~ekivanja koja se temelji na fantazmi o vitalnosti, dinamizmu i
autenti~nom ìvotu koji bi trebali izazvati isprazni zapadni konzumerizam
i njegov dekadentni umjetni~ki svijet. U situaciji rastu}e internacionalizaci-
je umjetni~kog trì{ta, koja, dakako, nije jednostavan, izravan oblik dijalo-
ga ili multikulturalizam, nego skup odnosa koji se oblikuju oko mo}i, mar-
ketinga i pakiranja, geo-politike i karijernih strategija, FINALNA IZLO@BA
usmjerena je osobito na dva fenomena trenutno kurentna na me|unarod-
nom trì{tu kulturnog kapitala, a utoliko i u lokalnom kontekstu, premda
bez institucionalne podr{ke i stvarnog utjecaja na konceptualnu umjet-
nost 70-ih godina i suvremene kolaboracijske prakse nezavisnih kulturnih
inicijativa i organizacija.
FINALNA IZLO@BA ne ozna~ava ni zavr{etak ni finale suradni~kih proce-
sa koji su pod imenom Zagreb Kulturni Kapital Evrope 3000 po~eli dje-
lovati 2003., nego je rije~ o poku{aju redefinicije institucija i njihove uloge
prezentiranja produkcije i reproduciranja prezentabilnosti, te o nizu modu-
lacija koje predstavljaju izazov pojmu umjetnosti koji odre|uje reìm javne
vidljivosti. FINALNA IZLO@BA je suradni~ki projekt u kojem je tradicio-
nalna uloga kustosa kao autoriteta koji odabire i naru~je umjetni~ka djela
transformirana u kolektivni proces u~enja, analize, rasprave, dokumentira-
nja itd. FINALNA IZLO@BA odvija se u Galeriji Nova od 22.12. 2005. do
14.03.2006. i sastoji se od izlo`bi, performansa, publikacija, predavanja,
prezentacija, radionica itd. koje konceptualiziraju i organiziraju partnerske
organizacije CK3000 i srodne inicijative u regiji (Proba, Sarajevo; Kuda.org,
Novi Sad; PRELOM, Beograd).
U sklopu velikog projekta pribliàvanja Balkana standardima zapadnog libe-
ralno-kapitalisti~kog poretka upravo kultura igra klju~nu ulogu, a regional-
ne suradnje omiljeni su model. U takvoj situaciji pitanje kulturnog kapitala
koji nastaje tim transakcijama postaje urgentno. Time se bavi ovaj broj No-
vina Galerije Nova, koji je u sklopu FINALNE IZLO@BE uredio beogradski
~asopis PRELOM.
Zagreb, prosinac 2005.
l [TO, KAKO I ZA KOGA / WHW je nezavisni kustoski kolektiv koji or-
ganizira produkcijske, izlo`bene i izdava~ke projekte te vodi Galeriju Nova
u Zagrebu.
FINALNA IZLO@BA je projekt u sklopu platforme Zagreb Kulturni Kapi-
tal Evrope 3000 (CK3000), dugoro~ne intenzivne suradni~ke platforme ne-
zavisnih organizacija u kulturi, ~iji su ~lanovi trenutno Baca~i sjenki, BLOK
(lokalna baza za osvjeènje kulture), Centar za dramsku umjetnost (CDU),
Community Art, Kontejner (biro suvremene umjetni~ke prakse), Multimedi-
jalni institut (mi2), Platforma 9,81 i [to, kako i za koga / WHW. Ono {to po-
vezuje razli~ite fenomene progresivne, kolaborativne, dru{tveno angaìrane
izvaninstitucinalne kulturne prakse je opozicija dominantnim modelima re-
prezentacije i poku{aji o~uvanja i stvaranja javnog prostora koji je ugroèn
privatizacijom, kapitalom, ideologijom nacionalne kulture i pragmati~nim
zahtjevima koji se postavljaju na putu prema Evropskoj uniji. Te inicijative
inzistiraju na dru{tvenoj i komunikacijskoj ulozi umjetnosti i sustavno se
bave definiranjem dugoro~ne kulturne politike za razvoj nezavisne kulturne
produkcije, u smislu infrastrukture i u smislu institucionalnog okvira u ko-
jem nezavisna scena djeluje i koji bi omogu}io ne samo njezin razvoj i odr-
ìvost, nego i transformaciju ~itavog sustava kulture.
FINALNA IZLO@BA nije reprezentacija suradni~kih projekata niti organi-
zacijskog modela ili ciljeva CK3000, nego trasiranje odre|enog kulturnog
terena na kojem se u razdoblju trenutne ideologije normalizacije, koja dje-
luje u podru~ju simboli~kog i produkcije zna~enja proizvode}i konsenzus i
pristanak, sukobljavaju i rekonfiguriraju pozicije instituticionalnog i izvanin-
stitucionalnog kulturnog sektora i {ireg shva}anja kulture i umjetnosti.
Dominantno shva}anje kulture temelji se na identitetu, osobito nacional-
nom identitetu, s modelom kulture ~ije se institucije, trì{ta i koncepti te-
melje na modelima Zapada, ali mnogi elementi modernisti~ke paradigme
koji su na Zapadu davno prevladani i dalje temeljno oblikuju sustav umjet-
ni~kih institucija, i to ne pojedinih umjetni~kih institucija, nego ponajvi{e
instituciju umjetnosti kao takve.
Izvaninstitucionalna kulturna scena nastaje u opoziciji i kao implicitna kri-
tika aktivnosti i neaktivnosti postoje}ih institucija. Ta je frustriraju}a situa-
cija uvjetovala kataliziranje i kristaliziranje ciljeva nezavisne scene, stvara-
nje jakih me|unarodnih kontakata, uvo|enje novih sadràja i novih organi-
zacijskih modela. No, to paralelno funkcioniranje problemati~no je kao do-
prinos normalizaciji, u smislu opasnosti da izvaninstitucionalna scena dje-
luje tek kao korektiv i testing ground za modele nu`ne za prilago|avanje
standardima Europske unije, koji umjetnost i kulturu koriste kao sredstvo
medijacije izme|u razvijenog liberalno-kapitalisti~kog Zapada i post-komu-
nisti~kih dru{tava koje tek treba integrirati u liberalno-demokratski svijet
slobodnog trì{ta i ljudskih prava. Ipak, upravo je vrednovanje Zapada ~e-
sto jedini kanal otvoren za osiguranje i pove}anje kulturnog kapitala u lo-
kalnom kontekstu.
GALERIJSKE NOVINE BR 8 / GALLERY NOVA NEWSPAPERS NO. 8
Zagreb, prosinac/Zagreb, December 2005
suizdava~i/co-publishers:
[TO, KAKO I ZA KOGA / WHAT, HOW AND FOR WHOM / WHW
B. Trenka 4 . 10 000 Zagreb . Hrvatska/Croatia . tel/fax +385(0)1/4922478
AGM
Mihanovi}eva 28 . 10 000 Zagreb . Hrvatska/Croatia . tel + 385(0)1/4856303 . fax + 385 (0)1/4856316
urednici novina/editors:
Prelom kolektiv
[Zorana Doji}, Andrej Dolinka, Du{an Grlja, Radmila Joksimovi}, Slobodan Karamani}, Dragana Kitanovi},
Vesna Madòski, Vladimir Markovi}, Sini{a Mitrovi}, Ana Nikitovi}, Ozren Pupovac, Milan Rakita, Jelena Vesi}]
izvr{ni urednici: Jelena Vesi}, Zorana Doji}
kontakt/contact: magazine$prelomkolektiv.org / kolektiv$prelomkolektiv.org
prijevodi/translation: Susan Jakopec, Jelena Maksimovi}, Branka ]ur~i}, Vladimir Jeri}, Prelom
lektura/proofreading: Jelena Maksimovi}, Vladimir Markovi}, Dragana Kitanovi}, Susan Jakopec
dizajn/design: Andrej Dolinka
tisak/print: GIPA, Zagreb
naklada/edition: 1000
Na naslovnici: Mladen Stilinovi}, Nemam vremena, 1979
Suradnja PRELOMa i [TO, KAKO I ZA KOGA / WHW realizirana je u okviru
projekta ALMOSTREAL.
Projekt ALMOSTREAL inicirala je Evropska kulturna fondacija kao dio svog
umjetni~kog programa.
This collaboration between PRELOMand WHW takes place in the framework of
ALMOSTREAL. ALMOSTREAL (www.almostreal.org
[http://www.almostreal.org]) is a project initiated by the European Cultural
Foundation and it is an integral part of its arts programme.
FINALNA IZLO@BA je dio projekta Zagreb Kulturni kapital Evrope 3000 koji
se odvija u okviru projekta relations. Projekt relations inicirao je Kulturstiftung
des Bundes (njema~ka Savezna zaklada za kulturu) www.projekt-relations.de
FINAL EXHIBITION takes place in the framework of relations. relations is a proj-
ect initiated by the German Federal Cultural Foundation.
Kontakt. The Arts and Civil Society Program of Erste Bank Group in Central
Europe.
Program Galerije Nova podràvaju/Gallery Nova program is supported by:
Gradski ured za kulturu, obrazovanje i {port Grada Zagreba/Zagreb City Office for
Culture, Education and Sport
Ministarstvo kulture RH/The Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Croatia
Nacionalna zaklada za razvoj civilnog drustva/The National Foundation for Civil
Society Development
Sezgin Bojnik _ NEMI ALBANCI BORISA BUDENA _ 3
JEDAN OD OBLIKA nove kolonizacije odvija se pomo}u tehnika
reprezentacije. To je novi oblik kulturne i klasne kontrole koja se
moze uo~iti u svim oblastima savremenog znanja, od antropolo-
gije do video umetnosti.
Kao {to je poznato, reprezentacija je na~in predstavljanja
drugog (kao odsutnog) u vlastitom sistemu.
Re~i koje se susre}u u ovoj definiciji: predstava, drugi,
odsustvo i sistem, jesu dovoljne za razumevanje politi~ke ko-
notacije reprezentacije.
Ovde bih hteo da analiziram reprezentaciju Albanaca sa Ko-
sove i njihovu interpelaciju u velikoj ideologiji isklju~enja.
l l l
Boris Buden je, negde po~etkom 1990. godine, u kafeu B|ue Bcx u
Be~u gledao neke slike sa dijaprojektora uz pratnju rccr muzike i,
na njegovo vlastito iznena|enje, na zidu primetio za ~asak ispisa-
no Krv i Smrt na hrvatsko-srpskom.
Ta neizreciva re~ bez vokala Austrijance ne moè asocirati ni
na {ta; ali Budena ova re~ vodi na njegov Jug, i on se tu`no se}a
svoje Jugoslavije. A ova asocijacija ga vodi do Kosove na kojoj
se ba{ tada desavaju veoma te{ke neprilike kosovskim Albancima
do \akovice i, do tada bezna~ajne, Mhalla e Grs, gde su se
pomije{ali ànrovi ìvota i smrti, nehoti~no nastale visoke
umjetnosti i rituala.
Naime, ovde je re~ o duga~kom ~lanku koji je Buden napisao
1990. godine, pod imenom Inconscientia Iugoslavica (Jugoslo-
vensko Nesvesno)
1
. U tom ~lanku je analizirao probleme na Koso-
vi kao jedan od vaznih ~inilaca jugoslovenskog problema. To, na-
ravno, nije jedini ~lanak koji analizira krah Jugoslavije sa stanovi-
{ta kosovskog sindroma; a tako|e, to nije ni na{a tema u ovom
eseju. Va`nije je ista}i i precizirati kako Buden reprezentuje Al-
bance tokom demonstracija po~etkom 1990. godine; ili kako ih
estetizuje.
Boris Buden je simbol jugoslovenske solidarnosti i nostalgije
izgubljene demokratije. Ne samo kao analiti~ar nego i kao novi-
nar, on se uvek borio protiv uskogrudog nacionalizma i mafiozo-
provincijalizma. On je jedan od retkih intelektualaca koji je jasno
i glasno kritikovao fa{isti~ku vladu Franje Tu|mana tokom rata.
Buden je progresivni antinacionalista i levi~arski orijentisan kriti-
~ar. Zbog toga je interesantno analizirati kako on reprezentuje Al-
bance u svom eseju.
Na samom po~etku teksta, Buden shvata ove neprilike na Ko-
sovi, citiraju}i zagreba~kog novinara iz 5tcrtc, kao visoke umet-
ni~ke performanse i ritualne akcije. Njemu nije toliko va`no koji
su nacionalno-klasni, ekonomsko-politi~ki i istorijski ~inioci u to-
ku, nego samo koji su simptomi ovih demonstracija.
Te demonstracije za Budena su rituc| koji se odvija u predje-
zi~kom stanju svesti.
Naravno da je svima jasno da Budenova prava intencija u
ovom ~lanku jeste da analizira uslove isklju~enja Albanaca iz jcv-
ne sjere i iz jcvnc Jisrursc na Kosovi.
To su, podseti}emo, godine masovnog isklju~enja Albanaca
iz moderne javne sfere i getoizacije u paralelnim institucijama.
Buden je ~ak veoma jasan kada obja{njava da je ovo isklju~enje
direktno planirano i uvedeno u praksu od strane srpske policijske
politike (etimolo{ki istog zna~enja).
Tako je kosovski Albanac kao ~ovjek potonuo u najmra~niju
dubinu konkretnoga (str. 10), i u ovoj dubini on je izgubio svoju
ljudskost (koja po~inje s re~ima i jezikom) i po~eo da se izraàva ri-
tualima (predjezi~ko stanje).
A najva`niji ozna~itelj u ovom ritualu su Krv i Smrt koji se po-
vezuju sa slikom dva demonstranata Albanca, dva stvarna ~ovjeka
s njihovim imenima i prezimenima, Fatmira Kaleshija i Xhevata
Hoxhe. To mjesto pogibije, obiljeèno lokvom krvi, njihovi su alban-
ski sugra|ani okruìli svije}ama, i u tom krugu podigli neku vrstu ol-
tara sloènog od vaza, svije}a, vrpci, nabacanih stvari kojima su se
za ìvota sluìli pokojnici, njihovim fotografijama, itd..
Zna~i, to je slika (Buden je psihoanaliti~ko-kinematografski
naziva Drecm 5creen; bez ironije ovo moèmo ~itati kao skrivenu
oma{ku) koju on shvata ritualisti~ki i umetni~ki, a to je njegova
jedina istorijska ~injenica u celom ~lanku.
Ne upu{taju}i se u raspravljanje ove prakse nekrosimboli-
zma (koji je univerzalna praksa simboli~ne alteracije politi~ke
smrti {irom sveta), nastavljamo sa poja{njavanjem lika (~oveka)
Albanca u Budenovom sistemu.
Taj Albanac vi{e nije ~ovek, on ne moze da govori, isklju~en je
iz svih javnih sfera, i njemu je preostala jedino praksa koja se zo-
ve rituc|. To je Afrikanac, to je drugi, mnoìna, hcmc sccer (ogolje-
ni ~ovek), primitivac... To je Nesvesno.
To je Nemi Albanac.
âk i parola Kosovo Republika vi{e nije u diskurzivnom
planu èlja za zaustavljanjem nepravde, nego ritualna insenaci-
ja kolektivnog identiteta. âk se tvrdi da ovaj sadrzaj progovara
u getu predjezi~nog, osjetilno neposrednog simbola, nalazi svoj iz-
raz na dubljoj, nesvjesnoj razini smisla u vidu svog tjelesnog sup-
strata (str. 12).
Taj telesni supstrat Albanaca jeste, prema Budenu, vidljiv ~ak
i na nivou potpuno instrumentalne i racionalne prakse kao {to je
{trajk.
[trajk koji su 1989. godine albanski rudari zapo~eli u devetom
horizontu rudnika Stari Trg (najspektakularniji radni~ki {trajk po-
sleratne Jugoslavije), jeste tako|e, prema Budenu, pre-diskurzivan
i neposredno osjetilan. Nastavljamo: Albanac ono {to je godinu
dana ranije poru~io si{av{i u dubinu rudni~kog podzemlja, sada
simboli~ki ponavlja silaze}i na deveti horizont nesvjesnog, tamo
gdje èlja progovara jezikom tijela, tamo gdje se ìvot stapa s vla-
stitim opona{anjem, gdje fantazija postaje iluzija, a simbol se pre-
tvara u simptom (str. 15).
Ova anatomizacija i telesnost politi~kog diskursa je zapravo
jedan od najstarih i najpopularnijuh metoda kolonizatorske re-
prezentacije. Nastavljaju}i ovu psihoanaliti~ku simptomologiju,
Buden ~ak dolazi do zaklju~ka da, kao rezultat ovih potiskivanja,
Albanac (ponovo telesno) doìvljava potpunu ekspresiju svog to-
talno nadmo}nog tela.
Kako to Buden prime}uje, srpstvo pada kao
sjenka, a na njegovu mjestu podiè se u sjaju, kao
zamjena, u svojoj ogoljeloj bujnoj prirodnosti al-
banstvo, u identi~noj situaciji ritualno-mitske in-
scenacije kolektivnog identiteta (str. 19).
NEMI ALBANCI BORISA BUDENA
POLITIKA KAO NEDISKURZIVNOST
Sezgin Bojnik
1 Navodi ovog teksta koji sle-
de dati su prema: Boris Bu-
den, Kaptolski kolodvor: poli-
ti~ki eseji, CSUb, Beograd,
2002, str. 7-25
4 _ PRELOM_ _ PRELOM, PRELOM _
Albanac koji je nem u psihoanaliti~kom diskursu sada je ta-
ko|e i u ogoljenoj bujnoj prirodnosti sveden na nivo pre-huma-
nog i pre-civilizovanog stanja. On je sada mo}na ìvotinja.
Ovaj anatomski ma~oizam, zajedno sa prediskurzivnim po-
litikama rituala, jeste ccmmcn skoro svih elitnih i mcinstrecm
diskursa.
Interesantno je da Buden, koji èli da analizira razloge isklju-
~enja Albanaca iz modernog javnog prostora ex-Jugoslavije, upa-
da u istu semanti~ku reprezentaciju isklju~ivaoca (ovim moèmo
videti da isklju~ivanje Kosove nije bilo problem samo Srbije nego
i cele Jugoslavije), koja se moè jasno videti u dva motiva: ~ovek
koji ne moè govoriti i ogoljeni ~ovek u svojoj prirodnosti, gde se
drugost formuli{e u pre-ljudskosti, skoro u animalnosti.
Problem sa Budenom i sa velikim brojem drugih pop-levi~ar-
skih teoreti~ara jeste taj {to u njihovim univerzalnim teorijama
uvek leì taj potencijal za prihvatanje op{teprihva}ene reprezen-
tacije. Razlozi za ovo su razli~iti od slabe informisanosti do ide-
olo{kog c pricri neoliberalizma, koji prihvata zapadnu kulturu
kao apsolutnu i jedinu kognitivnu kulturu, a odbacuje sve druge
politi~ke akte kao pre-civilizovane, i pre-verbalne. Zapravo, kultu-
rizacija politike koju Buden kritikuje u vi{e navrata, ovde nije ni
uo~ljiva, po{to su na snazi sasvim druge kategorije, i po{to je to si-
stem koji jo{ uvek nije stigao da se kulturizuje (re~i i kognitivni
diskurs jo{ uvek nedostaju) i zbog toga se sve ritualizuje.
Za Budena uop{te nisu va`ne ekonomsko-politi~ke prilike
Kosove u komparaciji s drugim biv{im republikama Jugoslavije.
Ovde }emo ponovo napraviti digresiju, jer moramo da istaknemo
kako Buden nije jedini kriti~ar koji upada u ovakvu anomaliju re-
prezentacije, ve} samo sluì kao primer jednog kulturnog eksper-
ta i humaniste s problemima reprezentacije.
S druge strane, jo{ jedna Hrvatica, Branka Maga{, redak je
primer spisateljice koja, iako je analizirala raspad Jugoslavije s Ko-
sovom kao simptomom, nije zapala u ovakve probleme (ne)kul-
turne reprezentacije.
^lanak Branke Maga{, napisan jos 1989. godine za New |ejt
keview s naslovom Yugoslavia: The Specter of Balkanization, od
po~etka do kraja je analiza s aspekta klasnog problema.
Razlika je uo~ljiva ve} na po~etka, jer se ovde problem ne po-
stavlja kao nesvesno, nego kao sablasno. Sablast je, kao {to
znamo, od Marxa pa naovamo, ono politi~ki drugo, a ne egzoti~na
drugost.
Maga{ prime}uje da su 1989. godine albanski rudari stvorili
najve}i radni~ki pokret posleratne revolucionarne Jugoslavije.
Ono {to je Buden komentarisao kao psihoanaliti~ku praksu, ovde
vidimo u svetlu klasnog pokreta radnika.
Tokom celog izlaganja Maga{ intenzivno prikazuje kako je Ko-
sova uvek patila od slabe ekonomije, i kako su rudari pre bili zain-
teresovani za svoje slabe plate i lo{e ìvotne i radne uslove, nego za
ritualne performanse, koji su bili tako privla~ni za novinare 5tcr-
tc i za Budena. Maga{ ~ak citira jednog starog rudara koji sve ove
demonstracije vidi kao praznik bez mesa i kao pravu politiku.
Tako|e, ona vidi ove demonstracije kao sasvim disciplinova-
ne, i sa sasvim kognitivnim demokratskim i novim politi~kim
zahtevima (imajmo na umu da se tada cela Jugoslavija kome{ala).
Maga{, pored svega, prime}uje da su na Kosovi u tom perio-
du, od trideset jugoslovenskih novinara samo trojica znala da go-
vore albanski. Na posletku je logi~no to {to se cela pri~a bazirala
na nekognitivnom i egzoti~nom scenariju.
Ali, ovo nije pri~a o Budenovoj Kosovi vs. Kosovi Maga{eve,
nego o dve politike reprezentacije.
Prva je ona Budenova, koja, èle}i da sa~uva lokalnu drugost
u svojoj totalnosti i strukturi, upada u apsolutnu telesnost. To je
mo}ni, nekulturni, egzoti~ni, nerazumljivi, pa, prema tome, i ne-
mogu}i Drugi.
Mi smo se u ovom ~lanku vi{e bavili prvom semantikom re-
prezentacije, a ona druga, koju razvija Branka Maga{ termino-
lo{ki re~eno, marksisti~ka ustvari je protiv bilo kakve reprezen-
tacije. Kada ona anlizira razloge isklju~ivanja, to se odnosi isklju-
~ivo na ekonomsko-politi~ke ~inioce, a reprezentacija je samo pro-
dukt ili simptom ovih ~inilaca. To je metoda koja analizira ~ak i
drugost i lokalnost sa stanovi{ta univerzalnosti politike, i koja
upore|uje kulturu, naciju i diskurs s pozicija klasnih razlika.
Naravno da u tekstu Branke Maga{, koji je neka vrsta novo-
levi~arskog izve{taja za internacionalni levicarski ~asopis (N|k),
nije razvijen ~itav kompleks odnosa izme|u kulturolo{kih nus-
produkata i ekonomske politike.
Ali stav koji Maga{ brani jeste onaj univerzalni, metodolo{ki
i kriti~ki, koji se zove marksizam, i koji se razlikuje od senzualne
sentimentalnosti Budenove egzoti~ne esejistike.
Situacija }e biti jo{ zamr{enija, ali i interesantnija, ako bismo
marksisiti~kom metodom analizirali koncept nacije, naro~ito ka-
da je u pitanju Kosova i celi Balkan, gde su svi problemi redukova-
ni na naciju ili nacionalnost. Nacija je, s druge strane, povezana s
toliko puno asocijacija da je prosto nemogu}e redukovati je samo
na jedan faktor, u ovom slu~aju na ekonomsko-politi~ki.
Marksizam je u svojoj istoriji imao mno{tvo gre{aka u vezi s
nacijom: od Engelsa, koji je verovao da Sloveni nisu sposobni za
socijalizam (istorija je pokazala sasvim suprotno), do Marxovog
katastrofalnog shvatanja o azijskom na~inu proizvodnje, itd. Ali
teorija Erica Hobsbawma, koja se razlikuje od Andersonove kultu-
rizacije nacionalnog pitanja, pojasnila je stvar time {to je pojam
nacije kao izmi{ljene tradicije razvila do razumevanja klasne
razlike izme|u etni~kih entiteta. Prostije re~eno, ako je kolonijali-
zam stvar ekonomije, onda su kolonizator i kolonizovani dve raz-
li~ite ekonomske klase.
Hobsbawm je renesansu nacionalnosti u XIX veku uspeo da
objasni time {to je celi ovaj razvitak uporedio s modernizovanim
ekonomijama buròazije. Nove nacije XIX veka, na primer, nisu bi-
le samo produkt romanti~arske misli, nego pobuna protiv manji-
na kapitalisti~kih kolonizatorskih tla~itelja, a sve je ovo populari-
zovano u nacionalnom idealizmu i mi zajedno protiv... kli{eima.
Prema ovoj teoriji, nacionalna dijalektika izme|u Albanaca i
Srba na Kosovi nije indukovana arhai~nim motivima nesvesnosti,
nego je aktuelan i istorijski razumljiv kompleks strukture novca,
rada, produktivnosti, standarda, itd.
Zbog svega toga je teatralizovanje, senzualizovanje, rituali-
zovanje albanstva psihoanalizom ni{ta drugo nego skrivanje ove
gorenavedene dijalektike u ime neo-konzervativne politike repre-
zentacije.
Gospodin Buden je, naravno, upao u ovu zamku. l
Vladimir Markovi} _ DISIDENTSKA ETIKA I DUH KAPITALZMA _ 5
MeJu cnim mc|cbrcjnim ru|turnim vreJncstimc stvcrenim u Jru-
cj pc|cvini JvcJesetc verc, rcje ce, verujem, izJrzcti prcbu vre-
menc, nc|czi se zcrebccri ji|czcjsri ccscpis Praxis i lcrcu|cnsrc
|jetnc src|c.
REÎ KOJE STOJE NA POÊTKU ovog osvrta napisao je srpski so-
ciolog Boìdar Jak{i} u svojoj stru~no-emotivnoj reminiscenciji na
postojanje i delovanje jednog ~asopisa iz oblasti filozofije i letnjeg
filozofsko-sociolo{kog seminara koji se odvijao na ìvopisnom
dalmatinskom ostrvu.
1
Verovatno je suvi{no napominjati kako je,
u okvirima filozofsko-humanisti~ke misli u Jugoslaviji po~ev od
polovine 1960-ih godina, rcxis sa svojim seminarom na Kor~uli,
bio oli~enje disidentske aktivnosti i intelektualne kritike kako Ti-
tovog reìma tako i socijalizma uop{te. Upravo se u ispitivanju
mogu}nosti humanisti~ko-marskisti~ke kritike socijalizma nalazi-
la velika privla~nost prcxis-{kole za levo orijentisanu akademsku
javnost na Zapadu. Istini za volju, nisu samo levi~ari pokazivali
entuzijazam prema o{trini ove kritike, ali podrobnije bavljenje
tim pitanjem ve} spada u domen razmatranja buròaskog ukusa
prilikom izbora oru`ja kori{}enog u Hladnom ratu.
Kako se u datoj istorijskoj situaciji teorijsko-politi~ki pozicionirao
praksisovski marksizam-humanizam, najbolje }e ilustrovati na-
knadne rezolutne formulacije jednog od klju~nih aktera ove ori-
jentacije, hrvatskog filozofa Milana Kangrge. Prema njegovom
mi{ljenju, zahvaljuju}i naporima antidogmatskih zagreba~kih i
beogradskih filozofa, utemeljiva~a prcxis-{kole, prvi se put u Eu-
ropi i svijetu marksizam tretira u Marxovu smislu. [...] Treba re}i
da je ono {to smo mi radili bila jedina prava renesansa Marxa u
svijetu. Jer ono {to smo ja i drugi pratili od radova sa Zapada, to je
bilo ispod nivoa onoga {to smo mi uradili. I to treba re}i.
2
Da bi upotpunili sliku o{trine ove borbe za nasle|e autenti~nog
marksizma, nastavljamo sa izlaganjem profesora Kangrge: To
}u pokazati na slu~aju koji nam se dogodio 1965. godine, kada se
ve} radilo na me|unarodnom izdanju rcxisc. Dobili smo 50 stra-
nica teksta Luja Altisera (Louis Althusser). Rudi Supek i ja trebalo
je da damo recenziju tog teksta. Rudi je napisao da se tu radi o sta-
ljinisti~kom pozitivizmu. I ja sam napisao razornu kritiku ocije-
niv{i da je rad ispod nivoa, da je staljinisti~ki. Mi taj tekst nismo
objavili, ali ga je Altiser objavio u komunisti~kom listu |c ensee i
na temelju tog ~lanka Altiser postaje zvijezda marksizma na Zapa-
du.
3
U istom tonu nadovezuje se na ovu anegdotu i srpska socio-
lo{kinja Zagorka Golubovi}: Ja sam u to vreme predavala u [ved-
skoj po{to sam ovde sa kolegama isklju~ena sa fakulteta. To je bi-
lo vi{e godina posle ga{enja rcxisc, ali je u to vreme Altiser bio
veoma popularan, tako da su me pitali da li sam altiserovac. Od-
govarala bih da je za mene njegovo stanovi{te pozitivisti~ki mark-
sizam, odnosno za mene je to staljinizam.
4
Figura staljinizma, kao praznog ozna~itelja u diskursu jugosloven-
skog dràvnog ideolo{kog i represivnog aparata jo{ od 1948. godi-
ne, ovde je upotrebljena kako bi se teorijski antihumanizam drào
na bezbednoj udaljenosti od obala Kor~ule. Daleko od hladno}e re-
alnog ili imaginarnog Gulaga, ovo ostrvo moralo je po svaku cenu
da zadrì status uto~i{ta humanisti~kih disidenata. Disidentsko
ostrvo slobode u moru totalitarizma dominantna je samorepre-
zentacija cele ove, ne ba{ kratkotrajne, intelektualne avanture
prcxis-{kole, budu}i da, prema mi{ljenju Boìdara Jak{i}a, disi-
denti na{eg doba pojava su autoritarnih i totalitarnih reìma, na-
ro~ito druge Evrope. înili su ih pojedinci i grupe koji nisu prista-
jali na ideju zarobljenog uma.
5
Ra|anju mita o Kor~ulanskoj
ljetnoj {koli doprinelo je i prisustvo na seminaru takvih veli~ina
filozofije i dru{tvene nauke, kao {to su: Ernst Bloch, Erich Fromm,
Herbert Marcuse, Lucien Goldmann, Eugen Fink, Leszek Kolakow-
ski, gnes Heller, Karel Kosik, Jrgen Habermas i drugi. Mitologi-
zovanje se nastavlja, kako se moè videti,
6
~ak i posle neslavnog
napu{tanja teorijskog lcmpjp|ctzc jugoslovenskih disidenata
prcxis provenijencije, ~iji su se predstavnici razi{li po pitanju na-
stavka delovanja nakon ukidanja ~asopisa, neki od njih prihvatili
ulogu ideologa srpskog nacionalizma (sa izrazito ne-humanisti~-
kim drànjem tokom jugoslovenskih ratova od 1991. godine), a
najve}i broj potpuno odbacio marksisti~ku orijentaciju.
Po{to nam se ne ~ini saznajno korisnim analiziranje etnocentristi~-
kih sadràja kojima su okvire svog {ovinisti~ko-humanisti~kog de-
lovanja od druge polovine 1980-ih ispunili saradnici rcxisc poput
srpskih filozofa Mihaila Markovi}a i Ljubomira Tadi}a, ovde }emo
DISIDENTSKA ETIKA I DUH
KAPITALIZMA
Vladimir Markovi}
1 Boìdar Jak{i}, Praxis i Kor~ulanska ljetna {kola. Kritike, osporavanja, napadi, u: Neboj{a Popov (ur.):
Sloboda i nasilje: Razgovor o ~asopisu Praxis i Kor~ulanskoj letnjoj {koli, Res publica, Beograd, 2003, str.
170-171
2 Vidi: Neboj{a Popov (ur.): Sloboda i nasilje: Razgovor o ~asopisu Praxis i Kor~ulanskoj letnjoj {koli, Res
publica, Beograd, 2003, str. 29
3 Ibid.
4 Ibid, str. 30
5 Boìdar Jak{i}, Balkanski paradoksi, Beogradski krug, Beograd, 2000, str. 186. Ova para-definicija sa-
stavljena je, kako se vidi, iz ritualnog referiranja na pojmove (naslove) iz publicistike poljsko-ameri~kog
knjièvnika i paradigmati~nog isto~noevropskog disidenta Czeslawa Milosza.
6 Re~nik YU mitologije, savr{eno ogladalo svakakvih mitologizacija epohe SFRJ, daje nam pod odredni-
com PRAXIS slede}i tekst koji je na web-stranicu www.leksikon-yu-mitologije.net postavio Ranko Vuk~e-
vi}: Filozofski ~asopis koji se bavio bitnim problemima savremenog sveta. Izlazio je punih deset godina
(od 1964 do 1974), i okupljao je najve}e teoreti~are/ke iz oblasti filozofije i sociologije tog vremena sa
podru~ja SFRJ, ali i mnogih delova zapadne i isto~ne Evrope. Osnova~i: Branko Bo{njak, Danko Grli}, Mi-
lan Kangrga, Rudi Supek, Gajo Petrovi}, Predrag Vranicki, Danilo Pejovi} i Ivan Kuva~i}. Tekstovi u ~aso-
pisu gajili su o{tar kriti~ki stav prema jugoslovenskoj staljinisti~koj teoriji i praksi. Ba{ zbog ovoga, ~aso-
pis je doìvljavao èstoke javne kritike i zabrane od strane tada{njeg reìma, a njegovi urednici/e i au-
tori/ke nazivani su profesionalnim antikomunistima i neprijateljima samoupravnog socijalizma. Za ~a-
sopis PRAXIS vezana je i Kor~ulanska letnja {kola; me|unarodni susreti filozofa/kinja i sociologa/{kinja
iz ~itavog sveta. Jedinstveno mesto gde su se susretali/e najve}i teoreti~ari/ke istoka i zapada i raspra-
vljali o savremenom svetu i njegovim problemima. Tekstovi i referati nastali tokom dvonedeljnog odrà-
vanja {kole, objavljivani su u ~asopisu PRAXIS. [kola i ~asopis su tokom desetogodi{njeg postojanja do-
ìveli ogromnu popularnost, a zabranjeni su 1974. Mnogi teoreti~ari/ke, vezani za ovu teorijsku {kolu,
proganjani su i tokom osamdesetih.
Sre}om po teorijski dignitet praxis-{kole i istorijsko se}anje na nju, na istoj web-stranici nalazi se i iro-
ni~ni komentar ove odrednice, delo anonimnog autora: Ba{ mi je drago {to je koleg-a/inica Ranko/a
Vuk~evi}/eva(?) imao/la prilike da se bliè upozna sa dostignu}ima na{ih filozofa/kinja, sociologa/{ki-
nja i inih. Prosto me ispunjava ponosom/skinjom {to Kor~ulanska {kola/o nije ostala besplodna/an po-
ku{aj/ica da se da zamah/ica na{oj filozofskoj misli/u. Posebno grije srce/a {to imamo tako liberalnu
i svjesnu mlade`/{kinje koja vodi ra~una/ke o jeziku/ici i rodu, semantici i semiotici, logici i razumu/ici,
tim autoritarnim i {ovinisti~kim falocentri~nim konstruktima/kinjama.
razmotriti jedan aspekt levo orijentisanog,
kosmopolitsko-slobodarskog nasle|a
prcxis-{kole. Naime, s po~etkom jugoslo-
venskog rata, iz eufori~ne, u nacionalizam
uletele mase srpskih kriti~kih intelektua-
laca koji su tokom osamdesetih tvorili je-
dinstven opozicioni front boraca za gra-
|anska prava, izdvojila se manja grupa
(me|u kojima su bili i angaòvani praksi-
sovci Miladin @ivoti}, Zagorka Golubovi},
Boìdar Jak{i}, Neboj{a Popov...) koja je
smatrala da status intelektualca obavezu-
je na javnu osudu politike {ovinizma, rata
i zlo~ina. Predstavljaju}i se kao dosledna
moralna alternativa dominiraju}em dis-
kursu u Srbiji, ova grupa je istupila pod
imenom Druga Srbija. Ta i takva Druga
Srbija imala je za cilj da promovi{e libe-
ralne i antinacionalisti~ke vrednosti jedne
intelektualno odgovorne, gra|anske i
evropske Srbije.
Ovaj obnovljeni poku{aj zauzimanja disidentske pozicije, ostao je
uglavnom neprepoznat me|u masama i, u su{tini, depolitizovan.
Depolitizacija je posledica moralizatorskog odnosa ovih intelektu-
alaca prema pojavi nacionalizma i rata u datom istorijskom mo-
mentu; u krajnjoj liniji, posledica nedostatka razumevanja za ko-
herentnost procesa u kome gra|ansko dru{tvo i liberalna dràva
ne mogu ni imati drugi legitimizacijski okvir izuzev nacionalisti~-
kog, i gde se kroz ratne sukobe re{avaju, ranije pervazi|ena, pita-
nja dràvnog suvereniteta, a ujedno kreira i nova klasna struktu-
ra u procesima postsocijalisti~ke tranzicije.
Ono {to je, me|utim, intelektualnim nosiocima i naslednicima
rcxisc preostalo kao istinsko polje teorijsko-politi~kog diskursa i
u teku}oj istorijskoj kombinaciji, jeste njihova uobi~ajena kritika
socijalizma, ovog puta sa bezbedne istorijske distance, i to ne li{e-
na ogor~enog projektovanja u sada{njicu, ~esto obeleènu ugro-
èno{}u izvesnih vlastitih interesa. Tako se, na primer, hrvatski
sociolog i nekada prominentni praksisovac Ivan Kuva~i} àli na
slabljenje uticaja intelektualaca, koje je, po njegovom mi{ljenju, u
zna~ajnoj meri uvjetovano samim proma{ajima koje su oni po~i-
nili tijekom dvadesetog stolje}a, a od kojih je najve}i njihova
podr{ka komunisti~koj utopiji koja je u praksi diskreditirana.
7
A
Zagorka Golubovi}, u svom tekstu pod naslovom Sociolo{ko-an-
tropolo{ka analiza nasle|a realnog socijalizma u postsocijalisti~-
kim dru{tvima, iznosi konstataciju koju, posle svega i uprkos
svemu, smatra validnom za situaciju krajem 1990-ih: Iz prethod-
ne analize moè se zaklju~iti da i dalje klijaju klice totalitarnog ko-
munizma u biv{im jugoslovenskim republikama.
8
Pravac u ko-
jem se ovakvo zaklju~ivanje kre}e, na izvestan na~in, dovodi u
sumnju zna~aj ranije privrènosti jedinom pravom marksizmu
i emancipatorskim, humanisti~kim idejama levice, a ~ini nesum-
njivim stepen iskrenog resantimana, na ~ijim se osnovama izvodi
kritika socijalizma i raste nekriti~nost prema kapitalizmu.
Kakve domete pokazuje evolucija ovakvih stavova tokom posled-
njih godina, u periodu fantasti~nog ubrzavanja procesa privred-
nog prestrukturiranja, privatizacije, zatvaranja ogromnog broja
fabrika, masovnog otpu{tanja radnika i radnica, u~estvovanja dr-
àvnih organa u finansijskim aferama {irokih razmera i kriminal-
nog zgrtanja ogromnih li~nih bogatstava, razja{njava nam opet
profesorka Golubovi} nedvosmislenim podvla~enjem svog disi-
dentskog bilansa: Mora}emo da menjamo navike, stav prema ì-
votu. I naravno moramo menjati odnos prema radu. Ve}ina sta-
novnika odvikla se od rada. Radnici koji su ostali bez posla i bili na
prinudnim odmorima su se okrenuli buvljaku i sada im se vi{e i
ne vra}a u fabrike. [...] Mislim da }emo morati mnogo da se pomu-
~imo, da nau~imo da radimo. [...] Danas ljudi moraju da pokaù
inicijativu, spremnost da se udruùju, da budu samopregorni i od-
govorni u poslu koji po~inju da bi uspeli, da bi se mogli prijavljiva-
ti za kredite i razvijati privatni biznis
9
.
Zaklju~imo ovaj osvrt na taj na~in {to }emo konstatovati da, kao
{to ni nosilac protestantskog pokreta u XVI i XVII veku, za Maxa
Webera paradigmati~an asketski protestantizam koji se razvijao u
krilu kalvinisti~ke crkve, nije neposredno i svesno teìo {irenju ka-
pitalisti~kog duha (ve} se gr~evito traganje za znacima bo`je mi-
losti postepeno rastvorilo u tezvenu vrlinu profesionalne delatno-
sti), tako ni marksisti~ki humanizam disidentske prcxis-{kole nije
neposredno proizvodio ideolo{ku vezivnu gra|u za tranzicione
procese kapitalisti~ke restauracije uz uspon nacionalizma i raspad
Jugoslavije, pra}en ratnim razaranjima. Nasle|e rcxisc, s obzi-
rom da je izdràlo probu vremena, ostaje, me|utim, da figurira
kao zna~ajan ideolo{ki kapital dru{tvenog sistema koji se danas
stabilizuje, oboga}uju}i spektar razli~itih oblika kritike te`nji za
revolucionarnim prevazilaènjem kapitalizma. l
7 Ivan Kuva~i}, Kako se raspao bolj{evi-
zam. Deset eseja o problemima prijela-
znog razdoblja, Naprijed, Zagreb, 1997,
str. 117
8 Vidi: Zagorka Golubovi}, Stranputice
demokratizacije u postsocijalizmu, Beo-
gradski krug, Beograd, 1999, str. 23
9 Zagorka Golubovi}, Bilans disidentki-
nje, Bulevar, br. 67, Novi Sad, 18. janu-
ar 2002, str 6-9
Mladen Stilinovi}, Pljuni to iz usta/Spit it Out of Your
Mouth, Razmi{ljanje o novcu/Reflections on Money, 1973
EMERGENCY HAMMER
IN CASE OF
EMERGENCY,
BREAK THE
SIDE WINDOWS
BY THE USE OF
THE HAMMER
AND
EXIT.
PRELOM:lnstitucijc Evrcpsrc prestcnicc ru|tu-
re prcjerct je scrcJnje vise v|cJc i jincnsircn je
cJ strcne Evrcpsre rcmisije, trenutnc rrcz prc-
rcm Culture 2000 czvcnc si Jc buJes rustcs
JccJcjc Cork: evropska prestonica kulture
2005 lcrc viJis cJncs izmeJu jincnsijerc i ji-
ncnsircnc rcJc je rec c tcrc zvcnicnim umet-
nicrim JccJcjimc rcji umrezcvcju tc|irc rcz-
|icitih interesc?
PRELOM:jer cJ|urc rustcsc nije bi|c Jc se iJe u
prcvcu prcv|jenjc iz|czbi, vec u prcvcu prcizvcJ-
nje zncnjc i|i istrczivcnjc speru|ctivnih mcuc-
ncsti ru|ture OJ|uci|i ste Jc ncprcvite Caucus
(vrstu pcr|cmentc) umestc iz|czbe, i tc je zc vcs
bic nccin Jc izbenete prcb|eme privremencsti i
nisre ejircsncsti ve|ire meJuncrcJne iz|czbe u
|crcncm rcnterstu Dc |i mczes reci nestc vise c
tcme, i rcrc se situccijc rczvijc|c Jc scmc rrcjc?
ENI FLEÊR:Pa, naravno, na~in na koji se razmi{lja o tome pristupiti ovakvim o~e-
kivanjima uvek je kranje kompleksan i problemati~an. Bili smo prili~no otvoreni pre-
ma finansijerima u odnosu na na{u èlju da kritikujemo sam pojam Evrcpsrc prestc-
nicc ru|ture i poku{amo da predloìmo druga~iji model, onaj koji ostaje zaostav{tina
gradu, pre nego da napravimo ne{to spektakularno u vidu doga|aja, a onda odemo.
Ono {to je zaista neverovatno u vezi sa city cj cu|ture jeste ~injenica da Evrop-
ska komisija, u stvari, daje relativno mali deo budèta, uprkos nazivu doga|aja. Od
samog po~etka smo kroz projekat nastojali da osporimo i{~ekivanje spektakla i pre-
stià koji sa sobom nosi naslov restcnicc ru|ture (ccpitc| cj cu|ture), kao i privre-
menu prirodu samog doga|aja. @eleli smo da se suo~imo sa ovim pitanjima na sa-
mom po~etku. Ali, gledaju}i unazad, ~ini mi se da je, ma koliko smo se trudili da se
bavimo kustoskim radom sa pozicija antiteza, ono {to smo uradili bilo ~esto shvata-
no na lokalnom planu kao deo ma{ine prestià restcnice ru|ture, i to je postala pri-
li~no frustriraju}a stvar.
ENI FLEÊR:Bili smo zaista sigurni jedino u to da ne èlimo da napravimo doga-
|aj koji se pojavi i nestane, koji nije relevantan i ima mali uticaj na lokalnu sredinu.
Bili smo zainteresovani za istraìvanje ideje o druga~ijem na~inu razmi{ljanja o gra-
du i kulturnoj inteligenciji grada, i kako to moè da se poveè sa druga~ijim isku-
stvima na {irem planu, da li pitanja koja su relevantna i va`na za ccrr na neki na-
~in mogu da budu reflektovana kroz ve}a, globalna pitanja i, uzimaju}i u obzir
prirodu globalizacije, da li ova pitanja u nekom nivou mogu da budu ~ak identi~na?
Ideja o ccucusu, {to je u stvari, termin ameri~kih indijanaca, nosi ideju sastajanja da
bi se donele va`ne odluke u vezi budu}nosti. Ovaj rani oblik demokratije tradicio-
nalno se koristio u dru{tvima ameri~kih indijanaca, a sada se koristi i u ameri~koj
partijskoj politici kao na~in za razvijanje budu}eg pristupa odre|enoj problematici.
To nam je izgledalo kao interesantan model za predlaganje, jer smo hteli da razmi-
{ljamo o umetniku kao o va`nom i vitalnom politi~kom entitetu u dru{tvu, i da te-
stiramo da li prostor umetni~ke prakse i umetni~kog razmi{ljanja moè zaista da
obezbedi i imaginativan i predlaga~ki prostor za dru{tvo.
U toku skoro devet meseci, pred intenzivan letnji tronedeljni period, rt/Nct
rt su vodili ne{to {to su malo ironi~no nazvali 1he Grcssrccts hcse Kroz serije di-
skusija, grupa za ~itanje, projekcija filmova ili jednostavno kroz prikazivanje i pra-
vljenje radova u Corku se pojavila i razvila zajednica umetnika, pesnika i drugih
zaintaresovanih za ideje koje predlaè ccucus, sa namerom da se u~estvuje i u do-
ga|ajima tokom leta. U ovom periodu smo tako|e pozvali i razli~ite umetnike koji
}e razvijati dugoro~ne projekte, kao na primer, Eoghana McTiguea, Catherine David,
Mariju Eichhorn i Surasi Kusolwonga, tako da su u vreme njihovog povratka u toku
leta me|usobni odnosi ve} uspostavljeni i dugotrajniji, u stvari, sada Bik van der Pol,
Marija Eichhorn i Phil Collins, Art/Not Art, Static i Villa K nastavljaju da razvijaju du-
goro~ne projekte u Corku. Za mene je princip produkcije radova bio tako|e izuzetno
vaàn, jer projekt, iako na mnogim nivoima baziran na diskusiji, ni na koji na~in ni-
je teìo da zameni praksu, ve} pre da razmi{lja kroz umetni~ki rad uz diskusiju.
Najintenzivnija faza je bila tokom leta, kada smo pozvali sve koji su bili aktivni
u Corku i oko trideset umetnika i mislilaca iz raznih krajeva sveta (bilo nam je jako
va`no da ne ograni~imo doga|aj u okvire isklju~ivo Corka i Evrope) da zajedno izla-
ù radove i diskutuju o umetnosti, demokratiji i njenim mogu}nostima. Pretposta-
vljam da moè da se kaè da se na{ kustoski posao sastojao od poku{aja da pozove-
mo ljude kojima su ova pitanja u izvesnoj meri va`na u njihovoj sopstvenoj praksi.
Jedan od centara gravitacije bila je ~itala~ka grupa koju je vodio Shep Steiner i ko-
ja se bavila tekstom The Coming Community Giorgia Agambena, i ova akcija je
stvarno ispala neverovatna. Sastajali su se svaka dva dana tokom tri nedelje, tako da
je to bila zaista dugotrajna i intenzivna aktivnost. Bilo je i mnogo drugih projekata:
8 _ PRELOM_ _ Temat: KULTURNI KAPITAL/PRESTONICA KULTURE _
PRESTONICA KULTURE:
MO@EMO LI IMATI POZICIJU
BEZ LOKACIJE? Intervju sa Eni Fle~er
PRELOM:lz|eJc Jc su, nc neri nccin, svi prcjer-
ti bi|i bczircni nc prccesu i crijentiscni premc
|crc|ncm rcnterstu kcJic tribinc rcju si crc-
nizcvc|c zc prcjerct Radiodays se tcrcJe bcvi|c
pitcnjimc c |crc|ncm, i tcJc si upctrebi|c, rcc
uvcJni stctement, recenicu lrit kccjj. Nemc
pczicije bez |crccije 5tc mczes Jc ncm rczes c
tecrijsrim i prcrticnim cspertimc tcrvih rustc-
srih interescvcnjc?
PRELOM:ccrr prcjert je tcrcze bic jcrusircn nc
rcmunircciju i Jemcrrctsre prccese, i rcc ru-
stcsi prcjertc uze|i ste rcc pccetnu tccru cseph
Beuyscvu pcnuJu Jc ustcncvi 5|cbcJni internc-
cicnc|ni univerzitet u lrsrcj ,o-ih, sc ci|jem Jc
istrczi Jcprincs rcji Jrustvu mcu Jc Jcnesu
ru|turni i inte|ertuc|ni zivct Mczes |i ncm reci
nestc vise c Beuyscvim iJejcmc i nccinimc nc
rcji ste strurturirc|i rcmunircciju i Jcncsenje
cJ|urc u ccrru?
Surasi Kusolwong je organizovao trodnevnu pijacu u centru grada, u Peace parku;
Bik van der Pol se bavio video istraìvanjem o fabrici automobila Ford, koja je pred-
stavljala jednu od prvih globalno razvijenih industrija prisutnih u Corku, i ispitivao
mikro-industrije koje su se razvile oko Forda. Can Altay je napravio video rad o urba-
nim ìvotinjama u gradu. Eoghan McTigue je napravio seriju razglednica sa fotogra-
fijama Helsinkija tokom mandata restcnice ru|ture, kada su mnoge galerije zatvo-
rene. Svi koji su do{li su se predstavili i napravili uvod, posle toga su razvijali radio-
nice, performanse, predavanja, ili u jednom trenutku napravili svoj rad. Svaki dan,
tokom tri nedelje, imali smo oko {est okupljanja dnevno to je bio izuzetno inten-
zivan period... Tako|e smo imali odre|ene seminare i predavanja da bi obeleìli pri-
sustvo Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak i Chantal Mouffe. Sarat Maharaj je do{ao i vodio
trodnevnu radionicu sa malom grupom iz zapadnog Corka, a Catherine David je, za-
jedno sa Smainom Laacherom i Lucasom Enseleom, razvijala seminar vezan za ideje
o estetici i politici.
ENI FLEÊR:Pretpostavljam da mi je jednostavno jako dosadila ideja o tome da ve-
liki broj umetni~kih institucija egzistira kao autonomne internacionalne zone. Po
mom mi{ljenju kustosi su, u velikoj meri medijatori i kao takvi bi trebalo da budu na
svakom nivou osetljivi na to ko u~estvuje u onome {to razvijaju. Uvek me je zanima-
la ideja o tome {ta odràva umetni~ki diskurs u odre|enoj situaciji, bilo u Ankari, bi-
lo u Belfastu. Mislim da solidarnost zajednice odràva umetnike i mislioce na mno-
gim nivoima i da je to va`na i ~esto krhka stvar koja treba da bude odràvana i za-
{ti}ena, ako je to mogu}e. Mislim da bi to mogao da bude deo kustoske prakse. Zato
smo Sarah Pierce i ja razvili OJe|jenje zc pcrceJurcciju (The Paraeducation Depart-
ment) u Witte de Withu i TENT-u u Rotterdamu 2004 godine. Pozvane smo da u~e-
stvujemo kao umetnik i kustos na izlo`bi 1rccer i tu smo po~ele da istraùjemo i da
razgovaramo sa lokalnim umetnicima o tome kako izgleda biti umetnik u Rotterda-
mu, i postalo je jasno da ono {to ljudima nedostaje jeste javni prostor. U osnovi, mi
smo preuzele jedini zajedni~ki prostor koji su dve institucije delile i proglasile ga
otvorenim za publiku, imale smo sistem rezervacija i veliku zavesu koja je mogla da
bude zatvorena ukoliko je soba zauzeta. Na jednostavan na~in smo napravile prostor
udobnim koriste}i name{taj koji je ve} bio u podrumu zgrade i tako|e smo razvile
grupu za ~itanje kao jedan od modela kako je prostor mogao da bude upotrebljen.
Mnogi umetnici su koristili prostor da ~itaju, da razgovaraju ili da se sastaju.
Htele smo da mislimo da ove umetni~ke institucije mogu da ponude prostor koji bi
gajio manje vidljive odnose sa umetni~kim diskursima, koji nastaju sporije, paralel-
no prate}i aktivnosti pravljenja izlo`be. Htele smo da obezbedimo intimniji prostor
u kojem bi ljudi mogli da zaklju~uju o stvarima da uhvate u ko{tac sa problemima i
da im je dozvoljeno da prave gre{ke to je na~in na koji u~imo i ovaj proces bi tre-
balo da bude trajan bez pritiska da uvek bude super-vidljiv. To je od samog po~etka
tako|e bila i reakcija na lokalne politi~ke kritike programa koje je u to vreme u Witte
de With vodila Catherine David koji je bio kritikovan kao nedovoljno spektakularan.
Stavljaju}i umetnost u dijalog sa drugom umetno{}u kroz izlo`bu ili neki drugi ob-
lik postavke jako ~esto i u velikoj meri mora da bude dobra stvar, ~ini mi se, i mene
uvek zanima za{to i kako se to doga|a. Citat Irit Rogoff za mene ima smisla zato {to
locira misle}u poziciju pojedinca, a ukorenjen je u ìvotu, dru{tvenim uslovima i
osetljiv na okolnosti. Mislim da ona misli lokaciju u {irem smislu, ne samo kao geo-
grafsku ~injenicu, ve} kao kontingentnu i performativnu situaciju.
ENI FLEÊR:Vra}anje na Josepha Beuysa i Free University je zaista bila druga va-
`na stvar od koje smo krenuli. Beuys je tokom ranih 70-ih imao ideju da locira Free
International University u Irskoj, i zajedno sa Caroline Tisdall formulisao je zahtev
za finansiranjem i predao ga je onome {to je 1975. bila Evropska ekonomska zajed-
nica (EEC). Beuys je zaista izazvao pa`nju u Irskoj dok se bavio istraìvanjem ovog
problema, povezuju}i se sa mirovnim pokretima u Severnoj Irskoj, koji su kasnije
uzeli u~e{}a u njegovom stodnevnom Dccumentc projektu. Beuys je imao visko ro-
manti~arski pogled na Irsku kao prostor nedodirnut Modernizmom i, na neki na~in,
jo{ uvek povezan sa svojim primitivnim, misti~nim i paganskim korenima. Ali, on
je tako|e video otvorenu ranu teku}ih prcb|emc u 5everncj lrsrcj kao vrstu paradig-
me savremenog konflikta po sebi, koji stvara jo{ ve}u potrebu za umetno{}u. Ali
ono {to postaje najneposrednije jasno kada se ~itaju njegovi razlozi za odlazak u Ir-
sku i kada se upore|uju se sa situacijom danas (~ime su se na{i kustosi Art/NotArt
Intervju sa Eni Fle~er _ MO@EMO LI IMATI POZICIJU BEZ LOKACIJE? _ 9
Surasi Kusolowong, One Euro Market, Peace Park Cork, 2005
PRELOM:l rcrc viJis buJuci rczvcj Jucrccnih
umetnicrih prcjerctc u tcm rcnterstu?
lANNIE FLETCHERje nezavisna kriti~arka i ku-
stosica. @ivi i radi u Amsterdamu.
> Radi kao direktorka kustoskog programa De Ap-
pela u Amsterdamu.
> Zajedno sa Frederiqueom Bergholtzom i Ta-
njom Elstgeest, radi kao kustos na projektu lj l
ccnt Dcnce - l Dcnt Wcnt 1c Be crt Oj Ycur ke-
vc|uticn na razli~itim lokacijama u Holandiji
(www.ificantdance.org) u periodu od 2005-2007.
> U skorije saradnje i projekte ubrajaju se: ccrr
ccucus sa Charlesom Escheom, Tarom Byrne i
Seanom Kellyem (NSF), kao i rt/Nct rt, Cork,
Irska 2005 (www.corkcaucus.org), 1he crceJu-
ccticn Depcrtment sa Sarahom Pierce, kao deo
projekta 1rccer u TENT./ Witte de With, Roter-
dam, 2004.
> Kao jedna od kustosica radila je na projektu
Ncw Whct? Drecmin c better wcr|J in six
pcrts, u oktobru 2003 sa Mariom Hlavajovom,
sa sedi{tem u BAK-u (basis voor actuele
kunst),Utreht, 2003.
> Ostali projekti: Hcw 1hins 1urn Out u irskom
muzeju moderne umetnosti 2002, 5imu|cticn
ccje sa Apolonijom [u{ter{i} kao deo Visuc|ise
programa u Carlow, Irska, zatim solo izlo`ba He-
rc|J cr ress Gerarda Byrnea, Douglas Hyde
Gallery Dublin, 2002. 1he lnterncticnc| |cnuc-
e u Belfastu 2001. i Jcm cnJ Eve, sex, tc|ercn-
ce cnJ cther JepenJencies, Stichting De Appel,
Amsterdam 2002.
> U objavljenje eseje ubrajaju se tekstovi iz kata-
loga o Gerardu Byrneu, Paddy Jolley, Susan Phi-
lipsz, Philu Collinsu, Ottou Berchemu, L.A. Rae-
ven and Apoloniji [u{ter{i} kao i intervjui sa Li-
amom Gillickom, Saratom Maharajem i Natha-
nom Coleyem.
bavili u ranoj fazi svog projekta) jeste to da se naravno, savremena Irska radikalno
promenila, naglo se industrijalizovala i doìvela je veliki ekonomski rast u me|uvre-
menu, te da se mirovni proces jo{ uvek drì i da se smatra modelom onoga {to Evrop-
ska zajednica moè da uradi za prethodno nerazvijenu zemlju. Ponovo, nama je ovo
omogu}ilo vrlo vaàn kontekst iz koga kriti~ki razmatramo vrstu situacije u kojoj de-
lujemo u savremenom svetu i diskutujemo kako umetnici mogu da doprinesu toj de-
bati. Jan Verwoert je napisao i odrào namensko predavanje razmatraju}i Beuysovu
zaostav{tinu i njegove ideje o politi~kom potencijalu umetnosti i vezama sa Irskom,
koje je bilo fantasti~no. [to se ti~e dono{enja odluka, upravo smo do{li iz Corka gde
smo imali javni sastanak na kojem smo razmatrali {ta zaista moè da bude rezultat
Cork ccucusc. Pre nego da smo napravili doga|aj koji je na neki na~in kompletiran,
èleli smo da pitamo ljude iz Corka {ta je projekat generisao u smislu aktivnosti ide-
ja i mogu}nosti. Bio je to vrlo ìvahan sastanak, ne bez svojstvenih agonija i konfli-
kata, ali se sigurno ose}alo da je ccucus omogu}io vrstu katalizatora za teku}u umet-
ni~ku aktivnost. Ono {to je restcnicc ru|ture obezbedila, jesu novac i fokus. NSF (Na-
cionalna fabrika skulpture) verovatno vi{e nikada ne}e biti u mogu}nosti da ponovo
obavi tu vrstu mobilizacije, ali ono {to je jasno jeste to da je generisano dovoljno ma-
terijala za razmi{ljanje i modela praksi za odrìviji i raznolikiji nivo odnosa u Corku
i izvan Corka kako bi se sve ovo nastavilo.
ENI FLEÊR:Pa, na dva nivoa. Jedan je taj da praksa i projekti reflektuju i komen-
tari{u situaciju u Corku na razli~ite na~ine. Bik van der Pol upravo sada objavljuju
podlistak lokalnih novina u Corku sa esejima odabranih mislilaca i umetnika o nji-
hovim istraìvanjima u Corku i ima}e izlo`bu o Ford kutijama u Triskel Arts centru
slede}e godine. Phil Collins }e uraditi projekat pod nazivom Free Photo Lab koji }e
mo`da biti projekat na tri lokacije Cork, London i Beograd, tokom 2006. godine.
Druga osnovna ideja bila je da }e mreà i kontakti koji su ostvareni ovde biti nasta-
vljeni kroz {iru umetni~ku praksu na drugim mestima. Art/Not Art ve} planiraju
knjigu o projektima i idejama koja je u jednom trenutku imala potencijal, ali se jo{
uvek nije pojavila i moè biti revidirana u smeru radionice Kunchi Centra za kultur-
ne studije i Agung Kurniawana iz Indonezije. Tako|e, pozitivni novi elementi na vr-
lo pragmati~nom nivou su ustanovljavanje novog prostora za umetni~ku inicijativu
nazvanog Villa K i, naravno, to da se Nacionalna fabrika skulptura pod rukovod-
stvom Tare Byrne mobilisala na vrlo ambiciozan na~in i napravila nove me|unarod-
ne veze i kontekte koje }e, sigurna sam, imati dugoro~an efekat. Ko zna, mo`da naj-
bolje tek dolazi!
Intervju vodila Jelena Vesi}
Preveo sa engleskog Vladimir Jeri}
Radionica Marie Eichorn/Maria Eichhorn's workshop, Cork Caucus, 2005
PITANJE:cstcje mis|jenjc Jc crective ccm-
mcns preJstcv|jc recrciju nc cnc stc se tre-
nutnc Jescvc sc ru|tuncm prcJurcijcm i Ji-
stribucijcm putem ncvih tehnc|cijc, sc u|c-
cm i pczicijcm umetnirc i sc trcJicicnc|nim
principcm cutcrstvc, cJncsnc zcstite Je|c lcji
bi, pc tvcm mis|jenju, bi|i |cvni cinicci rcji su
uspcstcvi|i cvc crruzenje, cestc pcsmctrcnc
rcc rcnj|irtnc?
1crcm jestivc|c u |jub|jcni cJrzcnc pcvcJcm |crc|izccije
crective ccmmcns |icence u 5|cveniji, imc|i smc pri|iru Jc
rczcvcrcmc sc e|irscm 5tc|Jercm, istrczivccem u pc|ju scvre-
mene ru|turne prcJurcije i prccesc umrezcvcnjc bczircnih nc
uticcju ncvih rcmunirccijsrih tehnc|cijc nc Jrustvc, ucpste
cstc smc prisustvcvc|i imp|ementcciji |icence crective ccm-
mcns, izmeJu cstc|c smc s e|irscm rczcvcrc|i c cvcm siste-
mu |icencircnjc, pri cemu je cn primetic Jc crective ccm-
mcns inicijctivc pcruscvc Jc uspcstcvi ncvi bc|cns izmeJu
s|cbcJe |juJi Jc rcriste, rcpircju i Je|e ru|turni mcterijc| i pri tc-
me zcuzmu crtivnu u|cu u prccesu ru|turne prcJurcije, i prc-
vc cutcrc Jc rcntrc|isu nere csperte upctrebe svcjih rcJcvc
FELIKS [TALDER:Creative Commons reaguje na dva trenda. Jedan je onaj da je
putem Interneta, za individaulce vrlo jednostavno da distribuiraju kulturni materi-
jal globalno, kako njihov, tako i materijal drugih ljudi. Drugi trend jse sastoji u tome
da ustoli~ene kopirajt industrije muzi~ka industrija, filmski studiji i izdava~i
zahtevaju, i ~ak i dobijaju, zna~ajnije legalne restrikcije upravo nad kori{}enjem i
deljenjem kulturnog materijala. Ovde nastaje kontradikcija: tehni~ki gledano, sva-
ko moè imati pristup i distribuirati kulturni materijal vrlo jednostavno dok, sa le-
galne strane, ovo postaje sve teè.
Ova tenzija izme|u tehni~kog i zakonskog okruènja stvara mnoge probleme.
Vrlo je jednostavno distribuirati kulturni materijal i to ~ine milioni ljudi svakodnev-
no. Ipak, veliki deo toga je ilegalan. Da li mi èlimo sve da ih kriminalizujemo? Uko-
liko ne, imperativ je kreiranje okruènja u kome je ovu svakodnevnu praksu mogu-
}e realizovati otvoreno i legalno. Ovakvo okruènje koje ~ini pristup digitalnim de-
lima jednostavnim i jeftinim, zna~ajno je ne samo za publiku, ve} tako|e i za krea-
tore, jer im pomaè da prona|u svoj put do publike.
Creative Commons razmatra ~injenicu da je tehni~ki vrlo jednostavno distri-
buirati kulturni materijal i kreirati alatke, na~ine da omogu}i legalnu podr{ku, bez
oduzimanja svih prava originalnom autoru, {to je ono {to piraterija radi.
Ovo se ti~e distribucionog aspekta Creative Commons projekta. Ipak, to nije
sve. CC tako|e razmatra produkcijsku stranu kreativnog procesa. U digitalnoj kultu-
ri, tehnike kao {to su ccpy&pcste, remiksovanje, semplovanje i druge vrste tran-
sformacija, deo su svakodnevne prakse. Dalje, ova nova kultura se zasniva na inkor-
poraciji i adaptaciji postoje}eg materijala. Uvek je bilo uobi~ajeno da su pisci obi~no
strastveni ~itaoci, a slikari obi~no pokazuju veliki interes za rad drugih slikara. Raz-
mena ideja je kriti~ki nastrojena prema razvoju kulture. U digitalnom kontekstu,
ovo je ~ak mnogo o~iglednije i jednostavnije, ali, na àlost, novo restriktivno okru-
ènje ~ini ove procese teìm. Creative Commons licence ~ine jednostavnim mo-
gu}nost da jedna osoba moè da gradi na radu druge osobe i, zatim obezbe|uje na-
vo|enje izvora materijala, ~ime se taj materijal moè bezbedno i jednostavno kori-
stiti kao sirov materijal za nove radove.
U polju razvoja kompjuterskog softvera, ovaj novi kolaborativni pristup kulturnoj
produkciji postao je bitan, poput softvera otvorenog kda (Open Source software). U
drugim poljima kulture, u muzici ili knjièvnosti, ovi procesi su vi{e eksperimentalni,
ali primeri poput Wikipedie ili muzi~kih stilova baziranih na remiksovanju, ukazuju
da tu leì ogroman potencijal. Ovo polje kulture je jo{ uvek u svojoj ranoj fazi razvoja.
Intervju sa Feliksom [talderom _ DA LI SU MOGU]I BALANSI U SAVREMENOJ KULTURNOJ PRODUKCIJI? _ 11
KULTURNI KAPITAL:
DA LI SU MOGU]I BALANSI U SAVREMENOJ KULTURNOJ
PRODUKCIJI?
Intervju sa Feliksom [talderom; realizovala Branka ]ur~i}, kuda.org
Mirko Radoji~i}/KD, Estetika/Aesthetics, 1970
PITANJE: Mncc tcc prethcJnc pcmenutc
je i Jec tvc istrczivcnjc i cini zncccjcn Jec tvc-
je ncve rnjie, u rcjcj prcvis jcsnu rcz|iru izme-
Ju cncc stc nczivcs rcbnc ru|turc i ru|turc
bez rcbc, u smis|u prcmene u ce|crupncm rcn-
ceptu ru|turne prcJurcije 1crcJe, rcbnc ru|tu-
rc bczirc svcju strcteiju nc ercncmiji, trcvin-
srcj vreJncsti ru|turnc prcizvcJc i nc rcntrc|i
sreJstcvc zc prcJurciju i njihcvu Jistribuciju
5tc bi, u tcm s|uccju, bi|e |cvne rcz|ire izmeJu
rcbne ru|ture i ru|ture bez rcbc?
PITANJE: Ovc tcrcJe JcvcJi u pitcnje u|cu
trcJicicnc|nc zcrcnc c rcpircjtu, sc jeJne
strcne, i rcJcnje mncih pcrc|e|nih sistemc |i-
cencircnjc nerc Je|c lc|irc su zcistc strirtni
rcpircjt zcrcni prcmen|jivi, urc|irc su ucpste?
Dc |i je mcuce Jc bi pritiscr |juJi rcji su cvim
prccescm, tcrcreci, rriminc|izcvcni zbc svc-
rcJnevne prcrse rczmene jcj|cvc putem lnter-
netc, mccc Jc cb|iruje pcstcjeci zcrcn?
FELIKS [TALDER:Mi zapravo doìvljavamo kulturnu tranziciju od kulture koju ka-
rakteri{u analogne tehnologije, naro~ito tehnologije {tampe, ali tako|e i tehnologi-
je poput slikarstva ili vajarstva, do kulture koju karakteri{u digitalne tehnologije.
Analogni rad, kreiran upotrebom procesa {tampanja ili kori{}enjem platna u mno-
go ~emu se razlikuje od digitalnih radova, fotografije ili mp3 muzi~kog fajla. Druga-
~iji su, u smislu da su digitalni objekti mnogo vi{e fluidni; vrlo je lako napraviti re-
miks muzi~kog fajla, ili intervenisati na digitalnoj slici na takav na~in koji je vrlo te-
{ko izvesti na fizi~koj, analognoj fotografiji, na primer. Jer, kada je izmenite, vi za-
pravo menjate original. U digitalnom kontekstu, vi uvek pravite kopije. Dakle, kopi-
rate i stvarate ne{to novo kroz proces kopiranja. Ovo omogu}uje ljudima da se po-
stavljaju u druga~iju poziciju prema kulturi koju stvaraju.
Analogni model se bazira na ideji da se kultura proizvodi iz sirovih materijala,
na primer, boja koja se aplicira na platno. Na kraju procesa, vi imate zavr{enu sliku.
Ovo ~ini jasnu razliku izme|u boje i slike, kroz linearan proces od jednog ~inioca do
drugog. U digitalnoj kulturi, ono {to uzimate kao svoj sirov materijal je rad drugih
ljudi. Na primer, uzimate gotovu pesmu i remiksujete je. Sirov materijal i novi kul-
turni proizvod su na istom nivou u oba slu~aja to je muzika koju je neko proizveo.
Ovde ne postoji linearna tranzicija od sirovog materijala do fiksiranog objekta. Vi-
{e je u pitanju proces prevo|enja i transformacije. To je mnogo vi{e lan~ana struk-
tura, gde se jedno povezuje sa drugim, gde je rezultat jednog po~etak drugog.
Kada se koristi analogni model kulture, tada se nad njim nadvija ekonomija,
koja se zasniva na kontroli kulturnih objekata od strane umetnika (ili kompanije ko-
ja je otkupila autorska prava). Na ovaj na~in funkcioni{u masovni mediji, gde su sva
prava poseduje vlasnik rada, korisnik nema prava (druga od onih koja je kupio/la).
Ukoliko smatrate kulturu beskona~nim procesom transformacija, postaje jasno da
ne moète zatvoriti kulturne proizvode, ve} da morate da prona|ete novi balans iz-
me|u prava autora koji je kreirao rad i prava publike (koja tako|e uklju~uje druge
umetnike), koji èle da korite taj rad.
U ekonomskom kontekstu, jedan model se zasniva na prodaji identi~nih kopi-
ja, dok je drugi zasnovan na unikatnoj izvedbi. Muzi~ari mogu da izvedu oba, i po-
slednjih godina, ve}i deo njihovih prihoda dolazi od koncerata nego od prodaje sni-
maka. Naravno, ovo se ne odnosi na sve, ali kao tendencija je vrlo uo~ljivo.
FELIKS [TALDER:Promena zakona je politi~ki proces. Najpre moraju postojati za-
interesovani igra~i u relevantnim politi~kim telima, u nacionalnim parlamenti-
ma ili internacionalnim organizacijama, koji bi zaklju~ili da treba da promene za-
kon. U praksi, ovo je ekstremno te{ko uraditi, prevashodno zbog jakih, organizova-
nih interesa koji postoje na ovom nivou. Industrijske asocijacije, na primer, vrlo su
iskusne u ovoj delatnosti. Problem je u tome {to one smatraju svoj utvr|eni poslov-
ni model prodaju istovetnih kopija, na primer, knjiga ugroènim novim tehno-
logijama, koje ~ine kopiranje trivijalnim. One èle da zadrè svoj analogni poslovni
model u digitalnom kontekstu. Dakle, one poku{avaju da kreiraju restrikcije na le-
galnom nivou, na tehni~kom modelu, tako da ne moète praviti kopiju CDa koji ste
kupili, ili knjige koju ste snimili sa Interneta. Boriti se protiv ovog okruènja organi-
zovanih interesa i uticati na zakon ili na legalne procese u pravcu ve}e otvorenosti
i manje restrikcije vrlo je te{ko, ali se moè realizovati, kao {to je to bio slu~aj sa po-
razom softver patenata u Evropskom parlamentu, u junu ove godine.
Ali, u me|uvremenu, moramo da ohrabrimo umetnike da druga~ije razmi{ljaju
o svom radu i da im pomognemo daju}i im legalna sredstva, tako da proces stvaranja
obavljaju slobodno. Postoje}i zakoni o kopirajtu izuzetno su sna`no vo|eni komerci-
jalnim interesima i zasnivaju se na staroj, romanti~noj ideji o umetni~koj produkciji.
Sa istorijskog aspekta, ova ideja formulisana je u XVIII i XIX veku. U osnovi, zakon o
kopirajtu koji imamo danas, jo{ uvek je ukorenjen u XIX vek. Dakle, imamo ideju kre-
ativne i umetni~ke produkcije iz XIX veka, na tada{nji na~in kulturne proizvodnje. Da-
nas, pak, imamo digitalnu kulturu u kojoj ove ideje vi{e ne mogu da opstanu.
Dakle, mi moramo da razvijemo na~in razmi{ljanja o tome {ta je potrebno ra-
diti kao umetnik u XXI veku i zatim, zapo~eti druga~iju praksu baziranu na tome.
Ube|en sam da bi umetnicima bilo lak{e da razviju nove umetni~ke prakse, muzi-
~arima da naprave muziku, kada bi ih delili sa publikom i kada bi razvili druga~iji
odnos sa publikom, {to bi potom mogli da promene zakon.
Na kraju, obe mogu}nosti }e se udruìti. Ukoliko je ono {to ljudi rade potpuno pro-
tiv legalnog okruènja, usledi}e mnogo tenzija, i to se ve} moè primetiti u procesu
Mladen Stilinovi}, U vlastitom interesu/In Self-interest, 1980
PITANJE:lu|turnc scenc trenutnc trpi brcjne
uticcje rcji Jc|cze iz Jruih sjerc scvremenc
Jrustvc Neri cJ tih uticcjc JcvcJe Jc prcmenc
u ru|turncj prcJurciji, stctusu i pcziciji umetni-
rc, rcc i u principimc scrcJnje nc rcjimc se tc
prcJurcijc sve vise zcsnivc Ovcj uticcj Jirert-
nc Jc|czi iz pcrretc zc ctvcreni rcmpjutersri
rJ i scjtver (Open 5curce mcvement) Dc |i
ncm mczes reci nestc vise c principimc rcji se
u scrcJnji pcstuju, ne scmc u pcrretu zc ctvc-
reni rJ, vec i u scvremencj, rc|cbcrctivncj ru|-
turncj prcJurciji?
PITANJE: U svcm istrczivcnju, tcrcJe, prcvis
rejerence i pczivcs se nc umetnicre i ru|turne
pcrrete rrcz istcriju, rcji su se bcvi|i izvesnim
s|cbcJcmc izrczcvcnjc i mc|i bi se pcvezcti sc
scvremenim pcrretimc u ru|turncj prcJurciji
Dc |i ncm mczes reci vise c csncvcmc pcrc|e|c
rcje prcvis, pcvezujuci cve pcrrete?
deljenja podataka, pri ~emu danas milioni ljudi dele fajlove putem Interneta, {to je
protivno zakonu. Ono {to se trenutno de{ava u SAD i Evropskoj uniji su tu`be pro-
tiv vi{e hiljada ljudi, koji su kriminalizovani zbog ne~ega {to je svakodnevna prak-
sa. Na duge staze, ovo je vrlo lo{a situacija.
Ukoliko je jaz izme|u onoga {to ljudi rade i onoga {to zakon propisuje prevelik,
ili zakon pada ili se mora primeniti kroz policijsku dràvu. Ni jedna opcija nije niti
atraktivna niti mogu}a. Jer, ono {to se sve vi{e moè primetiti jeste da postoji rastu-
}i broj poslovnih poduhvata i proizvodnji koje vi{e nisu zavisne o starom modelu
kopirajta i zapravo poku{avaju da razviju novi poslovni model u otvorenijem okru-
ènju. To }e pomo}i ja~anju politi~kih koalicija koje }e promeniti zakon, pre nego {to
on padne. Postoji ve} jedan primer u praksi kampanja protiv softverskih patena-
ta u Evropskoj uniji. U tom slu~aju je postojala koalicija programera besplatnog soft-
vera (Free Software) i kulturnih producenata, ali tako|e i malih kompanija koje zna-
ju da ja~anje zakona o kopirajtu, u ovom slu~aju zakona o softverskim patentima,
nije u njihovom interesu, jer one obavljaju posao na druga~iji na~in. Nije samo u pi-
tanju poslovni interes nasuprot kulture. Ono {to tako|e moèmo da vidimo jeste
veza sa biznisom, tako da pojedina preduze}a vi{e odgovaraju starom modelu, dok
druga poku{avaju da prona|u novi. Mislim da se politi~ki pejza` transformi{e u ve-
zi sa ovom temom, ne danas niti sutra, ali ono {to se ve} sada moè primetiti, bar u
slu~aju zakona o patentima u Evropskoj uniji, jeste da je mogu}e promeniti zakon ili
spre~iti promenu zakona na lo{ije, kao {to je ovde bio slu~aj. Pojavila se mo}na koa-
licija koja je mogla da uti~e na zakon na evropskom nivou. Zaista postoji {ansa da se
ove relacije promene, jer iza realnosti digitalne kulture, okolnosti su se duboko pro-
menile. Vrlo je te{ko ovo ignorisati. Mogu}e je, ali ne zauvek.
FELIKS [TALDER:Veliki deo softvera otvorenog kda ili drugog kulturnog sadrà-
ja se nalazi pod, takozvanom, kopileft (ccpy|ejt) licencom. Kopileft je potpuno supro-
tan kopirajtu (ccpyriht). Ova ~injenica se zasniva na ~etiri osnovne slobode, koje
garantuju da svako moè da koristi ovaj materijal u najrazli~itije, sopstvene svrhe,
da ga kopira ~esto koliko to èli i da distribuira te kopije; tre}a sloboda jeste da sva-
ko moè da izmeni taj materijal u ne{to {to mu/joj se vi{e dopada ili {to je korisni-
je, i ~etvrta sloboda je da se takve izmenjene kopije mogu slobodno distribuirati. Sve
je ovo izvodljivo pod jednim uslovom, a to je da svako mora da distribuira izmenjen
kulturni sadràj koriste}i iste ~etiri slobode. Osnovna ideja je da materijal do koga
se dolazi besplatno, mora biti dat drugima pod istim slobodama, odnosno uslovima.
To ne zna~i da mora biti bez cene ili nadoknade. Ko èli, moè da pokrene komerci-
jalni posao, ali ne moè da ga ostvari ukoliko spre~ava druge da uìvaju ista prava
koja i ta osoba ima. Ovo je osnovna ideja koja stoji iza ovog principa graditi na ne-
~emu {to je neko drugi uradio i dati pravo drugima da grade na onome {to si ti ura-
dio/la. Na ovom principu je mogu}e uspostaviti saradnju izme|u ljudi koji se ne po-
znaju i koji }e znati da im ne moète ni{ta oduzeti, jer ono {to radite zajedno po~iva
na pomenutim principima kolaboracije.
FELIKS [TALDER:Moglo bi se re}i da je tokom XX veka, ve}ina avangardnih po-
kreta na zapadu poku{ala da ode dalje od ikoni~nog, umetni~kog objekta. Bili su sve
manje i manje o proizvodnji slike ili skulpture, a sve vi{e o performansima, procesi-
ma, o poku{aju da se slome barijere izme|u umetnika i publike. Moglo bi se re}i da
je ovo po~elo dadaisti~kim pokretom u vreme Prvog svetskog rata i nastavilo se se-
rijom pokreta tokom 1950-ih i 1960-ih. Tokom 1970-ih, primera radi, pank muzika je
poku{ala da uspostavi razli~ite koncepte o tome {ta zna~i biti umetnik i {ta zna~i bi-
ti publika. Dugo vremena, ove prakse bile su relativno marginalne, jer su bile te{ko
razumljive ljudima ili su, pak, bile predstavljene putem medija kojim je to te{ko ura-
diti. Kombinovanje, remiksovanje slika, odnosno kolaì su metodi koji se koriste u
umetnosti od ranih dvadesetih godina XX veka. Ali, jedna je stvar, zapravo, isecati i
lepiti neki materijal fizi~ki. Mnogo je lak{e uraditi isto digitalnim putem. Sa digital-
nim tehnologijama, proces ccpy&pcste je postao svakodnevna praksa miliona ljudi.
Ideje koje su bile u pozadini ranih avangardnih ekperimenata, postale su {iroko ras-
prostanjene, jer je ova praksa postala uobi~ajena. Pitanja, koja su uzbu|ivala male
grupe avangardnih umetnika je odjednom postala ne{to {to uti~e na milione ljudi
u njihovom svakodnevnom ìvotu. Mnoga pitanja koja se sada postavljaju su rani-
je postavljali avangardni umetnici, ali sada se ta pitanja postavljaju u bitno druga-
~ijem kontekstu i postoji druga~ija politi~ka urgentnost vezana za njih.
Intervju sa Feliksom [talderom _ DA LI SU MOGU]I BALANSI U SAVREMENOJ KULTURNOJ PRODUKCIJI? _ 13
Mirko Radoji~i}/KD, Estetika/Aesthetics, 1970
PITANJE: Zbc cec je zncccjnc |crc|izccijc
crective ccmmcns |icence u reicnu Bc|rcnc,
nc teritcriji Je su pcs|eJnjih zo cJinc cbe|eze-
ne brutc|ncm pircterijcm nc nivcu prcJurcije,
c|i mncc vise nc nivcu Jistribucije ru|turnc
scJrzcjc? Dc |i mis|is Jc ru|turnc prcJurcijc u
cvim rrcjevimc mcze biti cstecenc zcnemcri-
vcnjem bi|c rcrvc rcnceptc v|csnistvc? l rc-
rcv zncccj cvi e|ementi imcju u rczvcju jcvnc
i ru|turnc rcpitc|c u nec|iberc|ncm, trcnzicic-
ncm rcnterstu?
l FELIKS [TALDER (*1968) je professor ekono-
mije medija na Akademiji za umetnost i dizajn
u Cirihu [ 1 ] , jedan od osniva~a i saradnika na
projektu Openj|cws [2], internacionalnoj mreì
koja je fokusirana na razvoj tehnologije i kultu-
re otvorenog kda. Tako|e je i jedan od dugo-
godi{njih moderatora nettime [3] liste za sla-
nje, koja je posve}ena kriti~kim teorijama i
praksama vezanim za kulturu umreàvanja.
@iveo je u Torontu, u Kanadi vi{e godina i radio
je na doktorskim studijama u saradnji sa Mc|u-
hcn rcrcm in cu|ture cnJ 1echnc|cy. Tre-
nutno ìvi u Be~u, gde je ko-organizovao neko-
liko konferencija i uredio jedno izdanje sa Net-
bcse to, Institutom za nove tehnologije u kultu-
ri [4]. Objavljivao je tekstove i drào predava-
nja zasnovana na {irokom opsegu tema, koje se
kre}u od politi~ke ekonomije do tehnologija
umreàvanja [5]. Njegova naredna knjiga nosi
naslov Mcnue| ccste||s, 1hecry cj the Netwcrr
5cciety c|ity ress, 2006.
@ivi zajedno sa nJrecm Mcyr i 5e|mcm Vic-
|cm, i svo troje su ponosni {to su ljudska bi}a.
[ 1 ] http://www.snm-hgkz.net
[2] http://www.openflows.org
[3] http://www.nettime.org
[4] http://www.netbase.org
[5] http://felix.openflows.org
FELIKS [TALDER:[to se vi{e region kre}e ka Evropskoj uniji, kopirajt zakoni se pri-
menjuju sve striktnije. To se ve} de{ava i nastavi}e se ~ak i vi{e. Postoje}i zakon o
kopirajtu, iako tvrdi da {titi umetnike i druge kreativne producente, u stvari favori-
zuje korporacijske igra~e, upravo zbog toga {to jedino oni imaju sredstva da pred
sud izvedu one koji ugroze kopirajt za{titu nekog sadràja. Na ve}inu pojedinaca,
ove zakone je vrlo te{ko primeniti i imaju ograni~eno vaènje. Ukoliko neko dolazi
iz siroma{nije zemlje sa manje efikasnim legalnim sistemom, tada su {anse jo{ ma-
nje. Dakle, lokalni producenti nemaju mnogo razloga da potraùju vi{e prava od ko-
pirajtom za{ti}enog rada. Uz to, tradicionalni kanali kroz koje se komercijalna kul-
tura distribuira, tako|e je strogo kontrolisana od strane onih korporacija koje oteà-
vaju umetnicima koji nisu pod ugovorom sa njima, da do|u do tih kanala.
S druge strane, ukoliko distribuirate na{ rad putem Interneta, zaista nije toliko bit-
no gde se nalazite. Sve {to je bitno jeste da radove koje stvarate, mogu prona}i ljudi
koji }e ih ceniti. Creative Commons licenca pomaè da se ovo realizuje, jer omo-
gu}uje da se rad pruì ljudima koji bi mogli biti zainteresovani za njega. Naro~ito za
one stvaraoce koji nemaju pristup tradicionalnim kulturnim industrijama i masov-
nim medijima, ove licence omogu}uju kori{}enje Interneta kao alternativnog na~i-
na gra|enja publike. Naravno, sve uvek zavisi od kvaliteta rada, ali, stvaranje kvali-
tetnog dela je ono u ~emu su umetnici najbolji.
lntervju je rec|izcvcn tcrcm prezentccije rnjie Otvorena kultura i priroda mreà e-
|irsc 5tc|Jerc nc crective ccmmcns jestivc|u u |jub|jcni, z,-z crtcbcr zoo cJi-
ne lnjic je zcjeJnicri izJcvccri prcjerct centrc zc ncve meJije_ ruJccr, Ncvi 5cJ
i prcbc, 5cc, 5crcjevc, c prcces cbjcv|jivcnjc, preJstcv|jcnjc i Jistribucije cve rnjie
je interc|ni Jec |mcstrec|: prcjertc
Mirko Radoji~i}/KD, Mirko Radoji~i}/KD, Estetika/Aesthetics, 1970
PRELOM: Mc|i bismc reci Jc scmc iz|czbc
junrcicnise rcc virus, rcc i Jc pcstcji necphcJ-
ncst institucicnc|nc crvirc (rcc Jcmccinc)
lz|czbc I Love You [rev.eng] , rcju je crcnizc-
vcc Jiitc|crcjt, uprcvc se bcvi jencmencm
rcmpjutersrih virusc Dc |i pcstcji pctrebc zc
institucicnc|nim crvircm, rcJc se pcstcv|jc pi-
tcnje upctrebe e|ertrcnsrc prcstcrc i sire pcr-
ticipccije?
PRELOM: Digitalcraft je prvcbitnc pcstcv|jen
rcc cJe|jenje Muzejc primenjenih umetncsti,
rcnrjurt, Je si ti bi|c vcJc prcjertc lcji je bic
|cvni rcncept tcrve inicijctive u crviru zvcnic-
ne muzejsre strurture?
FRANZISKA NORI:Kao kustoski tim Jiitc|crcjt, od 2000. godine, bavimo se izla-
ga~kim projektima posve}enim fenomenu digitalne kulture, jasno odabrav{i in-
stitucionalni okvir kao platformu za na{e projekte. Istorijski posmatrano, muzeji
su oduvek bili mesta u kojima se odlu~ivalo i definisalo {ta je relevantno za kultu-
ru. U okviru dru{tva, muzeji upravo zadràvaju ulogu donosioca odluke o tome
{ta }e biti smatrano na{im kolektivnim kulturnim nasle|em i samim tim {ta }e bi-
ti sa~uvano. Tokom dvadesetog veka muzeji su tako|e po~eli da se bave pitanjima
savremene umetnosti i kulture, pa tako od institucije primarno namenjene za do-
kumentaciju i konzervaciju, muzeji postaju platforma za javnu diskusiju o trenut-
nim dru{tvenim pitanjima.
Marsel Di{an je bio me|u prvim avangardnim umetnicima koji su jasno posta-
vili pitanje va`nosti definicije konteksta umetnosti. Ekstrapolacijom svakodnevih
predmeta (ready-mades: Fountain pisoar, ili Porte-Bouteilles drà~ fla{a)
iz njihovog funkcionalnog konteksta u muzejski, ovaj umetnik je obi~an predmet
pretvorio u jedinstveno umetni~ko delo. [tavi{e, Di{an upravo bira predmete iz in-
dustrijske, samim tim serijske proizvodnje, potkopavaju}i samu ideju originalno-
sti i umetnikovog remek dela ({to Valter Benjamin dalje analizira u eseju Umet-
ni~ko delo u doba mehani~ke reprodukcije).
Ali da se vratim na tvoje pitanje koje se ti~e funkcionisanja Jiitc|crcjtc: da, sa-
moironi~no govore}i, u nekom smislu pristup koji smo moj tim i ja odabrali, mogao
bi se porediti sa na~inom na koji virus funkcioni{e eksterni entitet (Jiitc|crcjt
tim) koji se infiltrira, sa svojim idejama, u telo doma}ina (u ovom slu~aju muzeja) sa
namerom da se pro{iri i prenese na{ sadràj. [to se ti~e tvog pitanja koje se odnosi
na neprekidne polemike da li primarno digitalni sadràj ima potrebu za instituci-
onalnim okvirom ili ~ak fizi~kim prostorom, odgovor je da ne postoji potreba,
osim {to se postavlja pitanje delokruga ili da formuli{emo druga~ije: do koga èlite
da stignete i u kom kulturnom kontekstu èlite biti primljeni. Naàlost, ve}ina digi-
talnih umetni~kih projekata nikada nisu bili spoznati od strane muzejskih instituci-
ja, osim kroz rad pojedinih kustosa koji su poku{ali da ih izlaù sporadi~no i u ve}i-
ni slu~ajeva u okviru muzejskog cn|ine odeljka. Ovim ne èlim naro~ito da produ-
bljujem kustosku paradigmu o legitimnosti izlaganja digitalne umetnosti, kao i o
adekvatnim na~inima izlaganja u fizi~kim prostorima, jer je to problem za sebe. Ali
mogu da potvrdim da je aktivno zalaganje za predstavljanjem digitalne kulture i
tehnolo{ki bazirane umetnosti u muzejima, jedan od zadataka kojima Jiitc|crcjt
teì. I to uglavnom iz razloga {to verujemo da bi ovakvi projekti, koji reflektuju su-
{tinska pitanja na{eg savremenog dru{tva, trebalo da dopru do svesti {ire publike i
budu diskutovani na {irem nivou dru{tva, a ne samo u relativno uskim digitalnim
umetni~kim zajednicama.
FRANZISKA NORI:Godine 1999, biv{i direktor Muzeja, Dèjms Bredburn, postavio
je promenu paradigme institucije muzeja, reaguju}i na o~iglednu krizu kroz koju
su prolazile institucije, u pogledu op{te pose}enosti, prose~ne starosti i vremena
ostanka posetilaca. U okviru {ire promene, menad`ment je predvideo i osnivanje
novog odeljenja, koje je nazvano Jiitc|crcjt Tokom ~etiri godine, misija Jiitc|crcj-
tc, se sastojala u definisanju aspekata, unutar digitalne kulture, koji vode u integra-
ciju u tradicionalni muzejski rad i u traènju adekvatnih na~ina za posredovanje sa
{irom javno{}u.
Zadaci kojima smo se bavili unutar na{ih projekata poticali su od tradicionalne
misije inherentne muzejima: istraìvanje, interpretacija, sakupljanje, konzervacija i
izlaganje. Ali izazov se sastojao u redefinisanju ovih aktivnosti u okviru savreme-
nog informacionog dru{tva i njegovih promenljivih zahteva.
Svrha muzeja jeste u tome da ~uvaju i prezentuju istorijske predmete, ispunjava-
ju}i svoju funkciju kao dela kulturne memorije. Me|utim, u informacionom dru{tvu
Intervju sa Franciskom Nori _ KAKO SE INFILTRIRATI U TELO DOMA]INA? _ 15
KULTURNI KAPITAL:
KAKO SE INFILTRIRATI
U TELO DOMA]INA?
Intervju sa Franciskom Nori
PRELOM: rc rczemc Jc se Jiit|ccrcjt vcJi
meme |circm, nc cemu se zcsnivcju vcsi prc-
jerti, u rcre|cciji sc BurJijecvcm iJejcm ru|tur-
ne reprcJurcije i rcrc se cJncse premc iJeji
ru|tunc rcpitc|c, rcji je ncrccitc prisutcn u
muzejsrcj prcrsi
suo~avaju se sa jednim potpuno novim setom pitanja koji se ti~e kulture novih medi-
ja i interneta. Kako moèmo sakupljati sadràje koji su efemerni i prolazni i koji su po
definiciji u stalnom procesu modifikacije, kao na primer sajtovi ili net crt projekti? Ko-
je bi kriterijume trebalo postaviti pri odlu~ivanju o relevantnosti nekog predmeta za
kulturnu istoriju? Kako bi digitalni objekti mogli biti trajno sa~uvani u naletu vreme-
na brzih promena hardvera i softvera? Kako }emo dokumentovati dru{tvene aspekte
poput interakcije i/ili tokova komunikacije? I najzad, kako najbolje prezentovati digi-
talne artefakte i komunikacijski fenomen u kome u~estvuju mediji, muzejskoj publici.
Na{li smo se pred izazovom kreiranja digitalne kolekcije bez mogu}nosti pore-
|enja sa ve} postoje}im muzejskim projektom. 2000. godine, pokrenuli smo proces
iznalaènja i isprobavanja razli~itih re{enja, kako u smislu tehnologije tako i samog
pristupa, u~e}i se na gre{kama i ispravljaju}i ih. S obzirom da smo radili u kontek-
stu muzeja primenjenih umetnosti, teì{te je bilo na digitalnim primenjenim umet-
nostima, takozvanom digitalnom stvarala{tvu, na objektima koji kombinuju form-
u i funkciju. Pored toga, istraìvali smo fenomene koji se odnose na sam proces pro-
izvodnje, razmi{ljaju}i o promenama uslova i prilika za samu proizvodnju, kao i fe-
nomene iz oblasti ve{tina i alata koji se koriste pri proizvodnji Jiitc|nc zcnctc.
Na{ dalji izazov je bio vo|enje pravog muzejskog odeljenja, u okviru koga bi se
uglavnom bavili preno{enjem znanja publici. Organizovali smo veliki broj radioni-
ca i aktivnosti za decu i odrasle, {to je bilo koncipirano vi{e kao neformalno u~enje
nego tradicionalna didakti~ka metoda frontalnog predavanja, koja je dosta ~esta
u muzejima.
Tako|e smo organizovali i izlo`be posve}ene pojedinim fenomenima savreme-
ne digitalne kulture, kao {to su, ve} spomenuta, izlo`ba I Love You [rev.eng], zatim
izlo`ba adonnaM.mp3, koja se bavila analizom fenomena peer-tc-peer i ji|e shcrin,
ili projekat Digital Origami koji je predstavljao takozvanu demo-scenu (kompletna
dokumentacija svih aktivnosti Jiitc|crcjtc moè se na}i na: wwwJiitc|crcjtcr).
Oko odeljenja je stvorena rastu}a zajednica korisnika i sve izlo`be su bile dosta
uspe{ne i gostovale su po internacionalnim partnerskim institucijama. Tokom tra-
janja ~itavog projekta, gradska administracija nije angaòvala Jiitc|crcjt tm za
stalno. Tm je funkcionisao kao nezavisan, {to se ispostavilo relativno lakim za no-
vog direktora, koji je preuzeo vo|enje muzeja od kraja 2003. na ovamo, da otpusti
tim. Kako su se interesi novog direktora nalazili u tradicionalnom polju primenjenih
umetnosti (keramika, grn~arstvo, tekstil), odlu~ili smo da izmestimo odeljenje novih
medija iz institucije.
FRANZISKA NORI:Upravo si postavila pitanje koje nam je bilo od velike va`nosti i
kojim smo se tako|e bavili, a odnosi se na esencijalnu ulogu koju obrazovanje ima u
dana{njem informacionom dru{tvu. Od sedamdesetih, kada je Burdije prvi put raz-
vio koncept kulturne reprodukcije, dru{tvena stvarnost se dramati~no promenila, za-
hvaljuju}i rastu}em pristupu digitalnim tehnologijama i internetu i mogu}nostima
koje su se otvorile. îtave industrije su dekonstruisane novim parametrima, koji su
postavljeni kori{}enjem interneta. Ovde bi kao najbolji primer posluìla muzi~ka in-
dustrija, koja je nakon {iroke upotrebe peer-tc-peer mreà, dramati~no izgubila svo-
ju komercijalnu osnovu. Ekonomija informacija, koja je nastala iz novih mogu}nosti
koje je postavila mreà, stvorila je radikalnu promenu tradicionalne podele izme|u
proizvo|a~a i potro{a~a, proizvodnje i distribucije robe i informacija. Informacija je
oduvek bila klju~na za dru{tveni, politi~ki i ekonomski uticaj i mo} i njen se zna~aj
drasti~no pove}ao u savremenom informacionom dobu. Monopol nad informacija-
ma, istorijski su zadràvale i kanalisale dru{tveme elite. Danas je razbijen, zahvalju-
ju}i {irem pristupu distribuiranim sistemima znanja, koji su stvorili mogu}nosti za
sve koji su dovoljno ve{ti da adekvatno koriste digitalne tehnologije i internet.
Upravo sticanje tih ve{tina, danas igra klju~nu ulogu. Kad govorim o ve{tina-
ma, ne referiram samo na kori{}enje hardvera i softvera, ve} na dublje razumevanje
vi{estrukih i kompleksnih korelacija koje konstitui{u sada{nje cn|ine dru{tvo i koje
od pasivnih korisnika stvaraju svesne i odgovorne gra|ane virtuelne sfere. Diitc|-
crcjt spoznaje svoju misiju u javnom bavljenju temama digitalne kulture, pruàju-
}i publici sve potrebne informacije i znanja. Stvaranjem mreè izukr{tanih informa-
cija, na{ cilj je da generi{emo opse`no rezumevanje publike o vi{estranim stvarno-
stima. Vode}i se idealom humanisti~kog obrazovanja, Jiitc|crcjt teì obu~ava-
nju publike pri formiranju sopstvenog stava o kontroverznim pitanjima, kao i sti-
mulisanju kriti~ke debate ispituju}i sve aspekte odre|ene teme.
PRELOM:Mis|im Jc bismc se cvJe mc|i vrctiti
nc iz|czbu I Love You [rev.eng], rcjc ispituje sve
nivce Jrustvene i inJiviJuc|ne cJcvcrncsti i
rcjc junrcicnise ne scmc rcc prcvcjJer injcrm-
ccijc, vec i rcc p|ctjcrmc zc uspcstcv|jcnje jcv-
nih Jebctc lz|eJc neizbeznc pcsmctrcti nere
semente cve iz|czbe u rcnterstu crtivizmc
Hcreri se cbicnc pc defaultu smctrcju buntcv-
nicimc, icrc nisu svi svesni pc|iticrih rcnctcci-
jc lcrc vi rczumete cve prcrse u rcnterstu cr-
tivizmc i rcrc biste ih pcsmctrc|i u cJncsu nc
njihcve rezu|tcte?
PRELOM:lcje su imp|irccije Je|cvcnjc digital-
crafta i njecvih prcjerctc nc pc|itire prcmi-
s|jcnjc muzejc?
FRANZISKA NORI:Nisu svi hakeri aktivisti, niti su svi aktivisti hakeri. Hakerska
scena je, generalno, poprili~no heterogena i motivacije pojedinaca se razlikuju. Do-
{lo je do radikalne promene od po~etaka njenog formiranja. Osamdesetih i devede-
setih, internacionalno gledano, scena je bila dosta nerazvijena i koristila je ograni-
~en broj insiJer newsrcupc i platformi za komunikaciju. Jedna od glavnih ideja za
pristupanje ovim uglavnom andergraund scenama, nije bila samo neverovatna
mogu}nost kodiranja, ve} i lojalnost hakerskom eti~kom kodu. [iri svoje znanje ili
nemoj da pu{ta{ zlo}udne programe na net su samo od nekih pravila koja su de-
lili. Kasnije generacije, kao na primer script kiddies, nisu se mnogo zanimale za
ove samonametnute kanone, ve} su bile vo|ene su{tim interesovanjem za tehni~-
ka ograni~enja, ili èljom za javnim izvo|enjem svojih sposobnosti kodiranja. Da ne
spominjemo poslednje vidove kriminogenog hakiranja, kao {to su spemovanje, pre-
vare karticama ili pretraìvanje podataka.
Govore}i o aktivizmu danas, ono implicira {iroko i otvoreno polje unutar sebe,
i hakerisanje moè biti jedno od mnogobrojnih mogu}ih aspekata, ali ne i jedini. Po
mom mi{ljenju, aktivizam ima najpre veze sa jednim utemeljenim znanjem dru-
{tvenih i politi~kih okolnosti, znanjem o korelacijama izme|u ~injenica i ljudi, a po-
tom i sa direktnom participacijom u kolektivnim protestima na netu, kao i u fizi~-
kom prostoru.
FRANZISKA NORI:Su{tina pristupa Jiitc|crcjtc izlo`bama kao i muzejskim zbirka-
ma, je upravo u njihovom shvatanju kao demokratskog (naspram elitisti~kog) delo-
vanja estetskog i intelektualnog stava sa visokim stepenom edukativnosti. Zbirke i
izlo`be doprinose stvaranju kolektivne memorije dru{tva i u isto vreme imaju odgo-
vornost generisanja ideje istorijskog mesta i zna~enja, kako je rekao Brus Sterling.
Na{e shvatanje se zasniva na ideji izlo`be kao strategijskog sistema reprezen-
tacije. U zavisnosti od sadràja (teme izlo`be), konteksta (specifi~nosti datog politi~-
kog okruènja, istorijskog konteksta i institucije ili prostora u kome je projekat pred-
stavljen) i autora, izlo`be kreiraju sopstvenu mreù zna~enja, koriste}i se raznim
stilskim elementima. Pretpostavka je sadràna u ~injenici da postoji komunikacija
ostvarena izme|u kustoskog tima (koji kreira kodirani sistem) i publike (koja zna ka-
ko da dekodira; da i{~ita su{tinske namere).
Odnos prostora u kome su pojedina~ni elementi izlo`be postavljeni, i koji otkri-
va kustosku nameru ima klju~nu ulogu. Samim tim, estetika (site-specijic i wcrr-spe-
cijic) zajedno sa postavkom izlo`be pomaè u kreiranju vizuelnog koda i metateksta
izme|u radova, {to je od su{tinskog zna~aja za odre|ivanje kustoskih ideja. Neki od
elemenata dizajna i arhiketure izlo`be bi bili, na primer, boja zidova (psiholo{ki smi-
sleno), osvetljenje (narativni element koji doprinosi dramatici) ili stvaranje prostor-
nih situacija koje nose specifi~ne konotacije (bela kocka, crna kutija, postavka po
principu Wunderkammer, na javnom mestu, na institucijalizovanom mestu, unu-
tra, napolju). [iri didakti~ki koncept koji obuhvata razli~ite nivoe kompleksnosti sa-
dràja, kao i razli~ite pomo}ne medije (vo|enja, legende, interaktivni terminali, ka-
talozi...) doprinose stvaranju èlje posetioca za dubljim razumevanjem.
Ako izlo`bu shvatimo kao komunikacijski medij, koji generi{e kodiranu struk-
turu zna~enja, koju bi publika trebalo da dekodira saglasno sa li~nim kulturnim po-
reklom, moèmo re}i da je zadatak kustosa ne samo selekcija radova i njihova po-
stavka, ve} i samim predstavljanjem, on/ona namerno stvara odnose smisla i zna-
~enja, {to dovodi do formulisanja kustoskog stava. Sposobnost publike da dekodira
taj stav je u ~vrstoj vezi sa nivoom poznavanja i uìvanja u umetnosti. Dakle, zada-
tak kustosa nije samo istraìva~ki, ve} i posredni~ki, kao i taj da ponudi posmatra~u
aparat za kasnije de{ifrovanje. To zna~i da on/ona mora da podstakne druge da
steknu potrebna znanja. U prilog tome ide i tvr|enje da je zadatak kustosa da otvo-
reno defini{e svoju poziciju i va`ne ideje, tako {to ih stavlja na javnu debatu. Pola-
ze}i od ovog argumenta, zadatak kustosa je i otvorena formulacija osnovnih ideja i
polazi{ta, kao i podsticanje javne debate oko njih.
U kontekstu napretka u komunikacijama, u dru{tvu gde se sve tehnolo{ke, na-
u~ne i socijalne promene de{avaju nepojmljivom brzinom, uloga umetnika i ljudi ko-
ji se bave kulturom je i dalje od klju~ne va`nosti za usmeravanje kolektivnih ideja. Pi-
tanja poput onih kuda na{e dru{tvo ide, ko smo i ko }emo biti, pitanja identiteta i
mogu}ih scenarija, jo{ uvek su od dru{tvenog i individualnog interesa. Zalaèm se za
originalnu utopijsku snagu umetnosti u promi{ljanju egzistencijalnih pitanja, preva-
zilaènju istori~arsko umetni~kih klasifikacija i strategija kojima upravlja trì{te.
Intervju sa Franciskom Nori _ KAKO SE INFILTRIRATI U TELO DOMA]INA? _ 17
I Love You [rev.eng], Communication Museum Kopenhagen, 2004
lFRANCISKA NORI (1968) vodi odeljenje za is-
traìvanja organizacije Jiitc|crcjtcr koja
producira i organizuje izlo`be posve}ene feno-
menu digitalne kulture. Od 2000. do 2003. radi-
la je kao kustos odeljenja za nove medije pri
Muzeju primenjene umetnosti u Frankfurtu,
gde je organizovala izlo`be kao i kolekcije digi-
talnih objekata (igara i sajtova). Franciska Nori
i njen tim su producirali slede}e izlo`be: l |cve
ycu [reven] koja istraùje svet hakera i virusa;
cJcnncMmp posve}enu P2P mreàma i ji|e-
shcrinu; i Diitc| Oricmi, projektu o demo
sceni. Tokom 1998. je radila na projektu Evrop-
ske komisije na analizi budu}e strategije za
evropske muzeje koji rade sa novim medijima.
Ne razmatraju}i ovde mnoge uzroke gubitka relevantnosti muzeja u dru{tvu,
mislim da moèmo prepoznati postepeno osve{}ivanje samih muzeja, kao i novi
stav koji zauzimaju prema sopstvenom radu. U èlji da odgovore na izazov, institu-
cije eksperimenti{u sa konceptom podre|enim samoj manifestaciji organizova-
njem mamutskih izlo`bi i eJutcinment programa za sve uzraste itd.
Iako digitalna tehnologija o~itava snaàn uticaj na sve segmente savremenog
dru{tva, kako u javnim tako i u privatnim sferama, ni javnost a ni kulturne institucije
jos nisu {ire prihvatile umetni~ku produkciju u okviru novih medija, kao podjednako
validnu umetni~ku formu.
Moèmo spekulisati da li je to slu~aj, zato {to se tehnologija uvek posmatra kao
sredstvo, a ne kao nosilac kulturnog sadràja, ili da li su oni koji se bave novomedij-
skom umetno{}u suvi{e ograni~eni svojim disciplinama i rade hermeti~no. Dalje
obja{njenje moè biti da je ogromna koli~ina informacija, kojoj smo izloèni, stvori-
la o~igledan visok stepen kompleksnosti i da je gotovo nemogu}e za prose~nu oso-
bu da razume sve faktore i odnose koji odre|uju politi~ku, ekonomsku, socijalnu i
kulturnu stvarnost danas.
U polju (medijske) umetnosti, kustosi mogu premostiti jaz izme|u razli~itih spe-
cijalnosti, povezuju}i {irok opseg stru~nih znanja. Mogu biti posrednici i moderatori,
ili prevodioci, katalizatori, izme|u eksperata/stru~njaka (kao {to su umetnici ili aka-
demici), publike i ~ak muzejskih institucija. Kustosi mogu doprineti stvaranju znanja i
zna~enja, i mogu se baviti eti~kim pitanjima. A kako? Pa, relevantnom selekcijom te-
ma i umetnika, uspostavljanjem veza me|u diskursima, kao i stvaranjem iskustava
koja su, kako vizuelna (estetska), tako i intelektualna u fizi~kom prostoru.
Dakle, fundamentalni princip Jiitc|crcjtcrc je da se upravo postavimo kao
medijatori izme|u individualnih stru~nih diskursa i javnosti kao u~esnika. To je do-
sta teàk zadatak, koji se za svaki projekat iznova postavlja, u saglasnosti sa kontek-
stom i obuhva}enim sadràjem. Razli~ite su vrste komunikacija i razli~iti nivoi kom-
pleksnosti koje bi trebalo ponuditi. Diitc|crcjtcr svojim delovanjem smatra jedan
konstantan proces eksperimentisanja sa ovakvim zadacima, kako bi se postigli naj-
bolji rezultati. Iz ovog razloga, intenzivno tragamo za razli~itim shvatanjima i sarad-
njom sa kolegama, stru~njacima i institucijama i uvereni smo da }e i ova publikaci-
ja doprineti daljoj razmeni mi{ljenja.
Intervju vodila: Zorana Doji}
Prevod sa engleskog: Zorana Doji}
I Love You [rev.eng], Virus Mapping Tool
PRELOM:kcJite rcc umetnicrc rupc pcJ ime-
ncm Oda Projesi (rcjerct.5cbc) lzncjmi|i ste
stcn u istcmbu|srcm rrcju pcznctcm rcc Gc|c-
tc, Je crcnizujete rcz|icite crtivncsti sc |juJi-
mc rcji tu zive Dc |i ncm mczete reci nestc vise
c tim crtivncstimc?
ODA PROJESI:Oda Projesi je umetni~ki kolektiv koji se bavi kreiranjem zajedni~-
kih prostora, istaìvanjem razli~itih upotreba prostora i izgra|ivanjem dru{tvenih
odnosa kroz ovakve akcije. Oda Projesi je prvo izvodila svoje aktivnosti u stanu. Me-
|utim, ne moèmo da kaèmo da smo zaista i organizovale razli~ite aktivnosti za-
to {to organizovanje aktivnosti podrazumeva ne{to razli~ito od onoga {to smo
poku{avale i {to poku{avamo da uradimo. Prostor u Galati (Istambul) nalazio se u
kraju oko Sahkulu ulice. Od 2000. godine koristile smo stan od 45 m
2
kao prostor za
realizaciju projekata. Me|utim, u samom po~etku, izme|u 1997. i 2000, stan je kori-
{}en kao atelje i nismo imale nameru da se bavimo projektima. Bile smo samo kom-
{ije, kao i drugi ljudi iz kraja. U osnovi, ta uloga kao i samo delovanje se nisu prome-
nili; samo smo poja~avali ili smanjivali intenzitet na{eg prisustva u tom kraju. Soba
u sredini stana bila je prostor u kome su projekti zapo~eli. Ozge A~ikol (zge Aikkol)
je otvorio projekat O besrcrisncm prcstcru, tako {to je ispraznio sobu i izloìo tekst
@orà Peresa (Gecres erec).
1
Od tada je Oda Projesi po~ela da koristi prostor zajed-
no sa kom{ijama, gostuju}im umetnicima i ljudima iz raznih drugih oblasti. Prostor
Ode Projesi otvoren je 22. januara 2000. godine i zatvoren 16. marta 2005. zbog pro-
cesa modernizacije koji je zahvatio ~etvrt. Oda Projesi tu ìvi od 1997.
Tokom ovog perioda bilo je realizovano uìvo nekoliko doga|aja i projekata u
kojima je Oda Projesi figurirala kao doma}in i medijator izme|u mogu}ih u~esni-
ka kao {to su kom{ije, umetnici, pisci i ljudi razli~itog porekla. Me|utim, taj pro-
stor je uvek funkcionisao kao mesto na kome se mogu razviti razli~iti odnosi koji
proizilaze iz pitanja: {ta moèmo uraditi zajedno sa odre|enim prostorom. Na-
{a pozicija je od samog po~etka varirala izme|u biti kom{ija i biti umetnik, i
poku{avale smo da menjamo ove uloge kroz razli~ite projekte. Poslednji projekat
koji smo izvele u fizi~kom prostoru bio je lokalni radio (community radio) kome su
se pridruìle sve kom{ije i razni drugi ljudi. Radio se desio u periodu dok smo se
spremale da se iselimo iz stana, tako da je predstavljao zgodno iskustvo tranzicije
od fizi~kog prema vazdu{nom prostoru. Kom{ije su pravile svoj radio program ko-
ji nije bio podvrgnut nekakvom striktnom planu. Radio je, tako|e, bio fizi~ki pro-
stor koji vam je omogu}avao da delujete bez prisustva tela, roda i godina, da se
obra}ate kroz radio medij bez zvu~nih diskriminacija. Kreiranje zajedni~kog jezika
je predstavljalo napor. Sam projekat se zapravo i sastojao u razmi{ljanju o hibrid-
nim jezicima, tre}em jeziku i tre}em prostoru.
Na kraju smo objavile knjigu pod nazivom lcmsi|ur, scbc, rcmsijc, cst za De-
veti istcmbu|sri bijenc|e kojoj smo tako|e pristupile kao Oda Projesi prostoru. U toj
knjizi smo razmi{ljale o na~inima na koji prostor knjige moè biti tretiran kao fizi~-
ki prostor koji bi postao mesto susretanja ljudi koji su strupili u kontakt sa Odom
Projesi, pri ~emu Oda Projesi figuri{e kao mesto zajedni~kih odnosa i kao medijator
za upoznavanje drugih ljudi. Skupili smo 154 osobe koje su imale razli~ite odnose sa
Odom Projesi {to na nivou ideja, {to na prakti~nom, akcionom nivou. Po~ele smo sa
lancem pitanja, tako {to smo prvo poslale kom{ijama, pitaju}i ih da razmisle o no-
vom pitanju koje moè biti poslato dalje, slede}oj osobi. Na taj na~in, ljudi su me|u-
sobno odràvali simboli~ki razgovor.
To je, zapravo, knjiga narativa, prostor naseljen mno{tvom pojedinaca, lanac
koji ~ine 154 pojedina~na narativa koji ni~im nisu ujedinjeni, ve} su povezani kroz
deljenje zajedni~kog prostora. Oni zajedno ~ine hipertekst ili hiperprostor poput or-
kestra bez dirigenta.
2
To su naratorske prakse koje, zapravo, proizvode prostor svo-
jim pisanjem. Tokom ~itanja, slika prostora dobija oblik u va{im mislima i vi posta-
jete deo proizvodnje.
3
Intervju sa OJc rcjesi _ NOVI @ANR JAVNE UMETNOSTI MOJA SOBA, VA[A KULTURNA POLITIKA _ 19
KULTURNI KAPITAL:
NOVI @ANR JAVNE UMETNOSTI
MOJA SOBA,
VA[AKULTURNA POLITIKA
1 Prostor bez upotrebe ... Nekoliko puta sam poku{avao da razmi-
{ljam o stanu u kome }e jedna soba biti beskorisna, apsolutno i inten-
cionalno beskorisna. To ne bi bila soba za gomilanje stvari, niti ekstra
spava}a soba, niti hodnik, niti mikro predsoblje, niti kutak. To ne bi bio
prostor bez funkcije. To bi bilo prostor koji bi sluìo ni~emu, koji bi se
odnosio na ni{ta. Uprkos svim mojim naporima, bilo je nemogu}e sle-
diti tu ideju do samog kraja. Sam jezik je naizgled dokazao nelagod-
nost da se opi{e to ni{ta, ta praznina, kao da smo mogli da govorimo
samo o onome {to je puno, korisno i funkcionalno.
Prostor bez funkcije. Ne bez nekakve precizne funkcije, ve} precizno
bez svake funkcije; ne multifunkcionalan prostor (svako zna kako se to
postiè), ve} a-funkcionalan prostor. To bi o~igledno bio prostor koji
bi po sebi teìo ostvarenju drugih (prostora ostave, kredenca, proso-
ra za ve{anje, depoa itd.) Ali sam prostor, ponavljam, ne bi sluìo ni-
kakvoj nameni ...
Georges Perec, Species of Spaces and Other Pieces, Penguin Books,
1997.
2 Hardt & Negri, 2004, str. 338.
3 Derya zkan, Oda Projesi produces new spaces, Ikidebir news-
paper, 9
th
Istanbul Biennale, 2005.
Intervju sa OJc rcjesi
PRELOM: Nc rcji nccin cbjcsnjcvcte cJncs iz-
meJu prcstcrc i jcvne sjere? lcrc |eJcte nc
specijiccn pcjcm jcvnc rcji se vezuje zc vcs rcJ
rcji se, pcr, cJvijc u stcnu rcc ucbiccjenc ncj-
privctnijem mestu?
PRELOM:5eccm se Jc scm neJe citc|c c pcre-
Jenju vcse prcrse sc r|csicncm jcvncm sru|ptu-
rcm, Je je vcs rcJ metcjcricri Jejiniscn rcc
Jrustvenc sru|pturc u ncstcjcnju lJejc c
Jrustvencj sru|pturi je, nc neri nccin, hercj-
src, cnc urczuje nc cJreJenu Jeterminiscncst,
cnc ncsi izvesncst ncmere, Jcr vcs rcJ, ncsu-
prct, pcseJuje cJreJenu j|ersibi|ncst
ODA PROJESI:Marija Lind (Maria Lind) kaè u jednom svom ~lanku da je rad Ode
Projesi deo promenljive umetnosti koja ima interaktivno dejstvo i korisno upotre-
bljava javni ili polu-javni prostor. Ona zaklju~uje da smo mi uspostavile situaciju
za razli~ite tipove razmene u kojima su nagla{eni intimnost i li~ni kontakt, i da se
na{ rad ~ak moè opisati kao refleksija pitanja: {ta je javna umetnost, {ta ona mo-
è biti i kako sve to funkcioni{e u savremenoj umetnosti?. Marija Lind misli da de-
finicija novi ànr javne umetnosti Sjuzen Lejsi (Suzanne Lacy) moè biti primenje-
na na rad Ode Projesi: Novi ànr javne umetnosti poziva na integrativni kriti~ki je-
zik, kroz koji, u terminima umetnosti raspravlja o vrednostima, eti~koj i dru{tvenoj
odgovornosti. U tom slu~aju, nama se ~ini va`nim da delujemo u umetni~kom smi-
slu i da posedujemo svest o tom delovanju.
Termini javno i privatno se razlikuju u zna~enju u odnosu na dru{tva o kojima
govorimo, pa ~ak i od jedne do druge ulice u Istambulu. Sve dok zaista ne etiketira-
mo svoje delovanje u terminima javnog ili privatnog, bavimo se bliskije tim termi-
nima kroz svoj rad. Kada poku{ate da sagledate Odu Projesi kao celinu, po~injete da
ose}ate gra|enje neke druge vrste javnosti javnost koja se gradi kroz projekte.
Granice izme|u privatnog i javnog vrlo su maglovite kada je u pitanju Istambul, a
tako je i sa na{im projektima. Kori{}enje nekakvog stana, koji zovemo privatnim
moè biti toliko javno da vam to pomaè da redefini{ete svoje postojanje i delova-
nje u javnosti. Prostori su organizovani kroz relacije i upotrebe, ne kroz date funkci-
je ili definicije. Veoma je va`no pogledati savremeni Istambul u tom smislu, vide-
ti kako ta~ke susretanja javnog i privatnog formiraju nove upotrebe i odnose, kako
kori{}enje ulice ~ini privatni ìvot najjavnijim mogu}im ili obratno.
Oda Projesi veruje u mikro organizacije, delovanje i taktike. Sa svakim projektom
pojam javnog se {iri i klasi~ne definicije ostaju po strani. Oda Projesi uzima dnevnu
dinamiku ìvota kom{iluka kao po~etnu ta~ku i razmi{lja dalje o razli~itim upotre-
bama prostora bilo da je re~ o mapi grada ili sobi. Dnevni ìvot reprezentuje pri-
vatno polje koje je kreirano javno i gde su prostor i vreme organizovani javno, uz na-
ravno, neka li~na usmerenja.
Pogledajmo projekat piknika koji je Erik Gengrih (Erik Gngrich) izveo u na{em
kom{iluku. Erik se pojavio sa idejom da je Istambul grad piknika i èleo je da reali-
zuje projekat. Kako moèmo napraviti piknik? [ta je za to potrebno? Projekat je po-
~eo kupovinom a onda je ~itavo dvori{te prekriveno raznobojnim plasti~nim zasti-
ra~ima koji se koriste za razli~ite namene u razli~itim urbanim prostorima. Doga|aj
je bio unapred najavljen i ljudi su pozvani. Majke su posebno zamoljene da donesu
neku hranu. Prekriveno tepisima, dvori{te iznenada postaje prostor sli~an enterije-
ru ku}e. Zahvaljuju}i arhitektonskoj strukturi, svaka transformacija je mogu}a. De-
ca skidaju svoje cipele i igraju se sve do po~etka gozbe. Po{to je piknik bio otvoren
za sve, u njemu su tako|e u~estvovali i brojni ljudi izvana. Majke su se pojavile sa
hranom koju su kuvale i zauzele su svoja mesta, dok su o~evi preferirali da u~estvu-
ju u doga|aju sa prozora. Gozba i igra trajala je tokom ~itavog dana.
ODA PROJESI:Definicija rada kao skulpture u procesu podrazumeva vreme, na~in
na koji je projekat organski razvijan tokom ovih 8 godina, i na koji smo smo mi po-
~ele da se razvijamo paralelno sa projektom. To zna~i da nismo unapred definisale
na{ metod, ve} da smo do{le do njega kroz iskustvo delovanja. Oda Projesi je sve vre-
me vezana za okruènje, za dru{tveni i privatni ìvot koji se u njemu odvija i za od-
nose me|u ljudima u samom gradu... Projekat deluje koriste}i ove relacione metode
i, pre svega, kom{ijske odnose. Dok je prostor postojao, funkcionisao je mesto susre-
tanja u kom{iluku. Mi smo imale ulogu medijatora izme|u umetnika i lokalaca. U
tom slu~aju, umetni~ka produkcija nije uobli~ila prostor kako bi sama sebi postavila
izazov, ve} kako bi postala alatka za ispitivanje postoje}ih tragova i pitanja.
Oda Projesi je delovala i deluje u situaciji, ne za ili zbog situacije. To zna~i da mi pre-
uzimamo rizik da budemo pogre{no shva}ene ili izgubljene tamo gde to ne bi trebalo
da se desi. Me|utim, upravo kroz preuzimanje tog rizika, mi razvijamo na{e taktike.
Tzv. dru{tvena skulptura uglavnom je orijentisana prema kom{iluku u kome
Oda Projesi ima stan. Arhitektonski plan prostora i mesta vrlo je dominantan: sta-
novi su okrenuti jedan prema drugom; to su privatni stanovi, ali svi imaju prozor
koji gleda u zajedni~ko dvori{te, tako da ako èli{ da bude{ nevidljiv, to ba{ i nije
jednostavno, ali nije ni nemogu}e, po{to dinamika reorganizacije koja je zahvatila
arhitekturu samog naselja po~inje da oblikuje i ljudske odnose.
[ta zna~i biti kom{ija? Kakav si ti kom{ija?
Dvori{te Ode Projesi tokom projekta
Potraga za jezikom gline, mart 2003 / Oda
Projesi courtyard during the Searching
for Clay Language project, March 2003
PRELOM: lcrc Jejinisete vcse pczicije sprcm
crtivisticrih prcrsi i sprcm muzejsrc-c|erijsrih
umetnicrih prcrsi?
PRELOM:lcrc viJite vcs rcJ u rcnterstu Jru-
ih prcrsi vezcnih zc rcmsi|ur rcc, nc primer,
|crc|ni prcb|emi, hip-hcp, |crc|ni rcJic, i Jruc?
Rad na tome poseduje neku vrstu fleksibilnosti u pogledu redefinisanja ve} de-
finisanih uloga ili taktika. Oda Projesi poku{ava da sve vreme bude upu}ena u do-
ga|anja u Istambulu. Kao {to kaè Derja Ezkan (Derya zkan), Oda Projesi deluje
prostorno i proizvodi relacionost. Va`no je da prostor postaje prostor kada ga isku-
si{ i praktikuje{. Ili, kako kaè Serto (Michel de Certeau), Prostor ncstcje kada se
prema njemu odnosi{.
ODA PROJESI:Pozicija u kojoj sebe vidimo blià je aktivisti~kim praksama, mada
mi ne defini{emo sebe kroz taj diskurs. Mi smo, tako|e, iskusile precizno definisane
i restriktivne oblasti kao {to su muzejske ili galerijske prakse, {to je bilo totalno dru-
ga~ije kako na nivou odnosa, tako i na prakti~nom nivou. Me|utim, organizacija
razli~itih upotreba i uloga prostora u samom procesu bila je zajedni~ko polazi{te. U
tom smislu, praksa koju imamo u svom okruènju, okrenuta je licem u lice prema
velikim sistemima kao {to su {kole, sistemi porodice, politike... {to je na neki na~in
sli~no tome kao kada se suo~i{ sa muzejskim sistemom u samom muzeju.
Kako da se odnosimo prema realnosti koja je pred nama? Mo`da je bolje da se
opet vratimo na projekat. Oda Projesi je pozvana da napravi izlo`bu u kontekstu se-
rije izlo`bi pod nazivom Postajati mesto i Vidi ponovo koje je organizovao Pro-
je4L i Istambulski muzej savremene umetnosti. Tim Oda Projesi radio je tokom 6
meseci za kom{iluk Giltepe (Gltepe) u kojem muzej zauzima strate{ko mesto. Gil-
tepe je jedno od prvih ecercnJu mesta gde je sme{tena prva generacija imigrana-
ta. Ispred je 4. Levent, novi finansijski centar grada. Tim Oda Projesi se locirao u Gil-
tepeu, po{to je plan bio da se iskoristi mesto izvan muzeja, ali u muzejskom kom{i-
luku. Na osnovu nekoliko poseta Giltepeu i prethodnih iskustava sa Sobom u Gala-
ti, odlu~ile smo da i tu iznajmimo stan. Izbor stana, susreti sa agentima za nekretni-
ne i programiranje dogovora u vezi sa stanom, bili su va`ni delovi projekta.
Iznajmile smo stan, a onda smo polako po~ele da uspostavljamo odnose sa lju-
dima koji ìve u zgradi. U po~etku je stan bio prazan i stanovnici su po~eli da ga ure-
|uju po sopstvenom ukusu. To je anticipiralo da }e postoje}a zajednica u zgradi da-
vati usmerenje projektu. Stan je bio situiran u inspirativnoj zoni: muzej je bio ta~no
preko puta, dok je osnovna {kola bila na istoj strani. Ba{ta {kole je predstavljala op-
{te mesto susretanja, poput dvori{ta u Galati.
Prisustvo Ode Projesi u muzeju bilo je slede}e: na jednom od zidova je pisalo
Tri sobe i dnevna soba (upravo kao najava prodaje stana) zajedno sa adresom me-
sta. Cilj je bio da se fokusiramo na stan kao centar atrakcije i da predstavimo muzej
samo kao prolazno mesto. Za muzejsku publiku je radni prostor izvan muzeja u ~ud-
noj ulici predstavljao gotovo spolja{nji organ muzeja.
Nastavak svakodnevnog ìvota i njemu svojstvenih pravila, bio je zabavniji i
dinami~niji od muzejskih i galerijskih potreba. Sa sopstvenim na~inom izvo|enja
projekata Oda Projesi je uvek bila negde izme|u umeti~kog i svakodnevnog ìvota,
ali je bila blià svakodnevnim aktivnostima. Aktivisti~ka praksa u na{em radu mo-
è biti definisana kao bavljenje svakodnevnim situacijama kroz razli~ite pozicije i, u
ovom slu~aju, re~ saradnja je bitnija od re~i u~e{}e. Kako sara|ivati, kako delovati u
okviru kolektiva...
ODA PROJESI:Prakse vezane za kom{iluk uglavnom rade ZA kom{iluk. One su vi-
dljiva lica dru{tva i direktno su vezana za zajednicu. Iako ove prakse mogu biti kri-
ti~ki orijentisane, one uglavnom funkcioni{u unutar datog sistema, bliske su sa-
me sebi i to je njihova su{tina. Mi ne postavljamo na{e aktivnosti u kontekst tih
praksi, ali delimo sa njima sli~ne taktike i brige. Mo`da je tu tako|e re~ o pripada-
nosti i identitetu, ali mi poku{avamo da uspostavimo distancu u odnosu na to. Te
prakse vas lako mogu na~initi portparolom zajednice i proizvesti odnose mo}i. U
slu~aju Ode Projesi obra~unavamo se sa bilo kakvom vrstom autoriteta kroz poku-
{aj da uspostavimo novu pozornicu za druga~ije uloge i delovanja. Oda Projesi je
na primer pokrenula radio projekat u svom kom{iluku kao poslednji projekat u
tom prostoru, ali pritom nismo imale nameru da budemo poput lokalnog com-
munity radija koji bi predstavljao glas kom{iluka i napravio jo{ jedan mogu}i
prostor za refleksiju. Mi smo na radiju upotrebile oru|e alijenacije, kako bismo ga
u~inile funkcionalnim ZA zajednicu. Oslonile smo se na jezik ljudi iz kom{iluka i
stvari koje su oni ve} navikli da rade. Glavni radio proces se, kao i u slu~aju hrane,
razvio prema jedinstvenom receptu, receptu koji je odgovarao tom vremenskom
trenutku i situaciji.
Intervju sa OJc rcjesi _ NOVI @ANR JAVNE UMETNOSTI MOJA SOBA, VA[A KULTURNA POLITIKA _ 21
PRELOM: cstc je cvc izJcnje pcsvecenc ru|-
turncm rcpitc|u, nc rrcju rczcvcrc bi me in-
terescvc|i vcsi rcmentcri nc mcuce primeJbe
rcje Jc|cze iz cbc prcvcc, iz umetncsti i iz crti-
vizmc, Je su trcnsresivne prcrse rcc stc je vc-
sc csuJivcne zc neJcstctcr ejertc i jcsnih Jru-
stvenih rezu|tctc s jeJne strcne i cutscurcin rc-
Jc nc crc|inu, c|i prirup|jcnje visrc vreJncsti
zc sebe s Jrue strcne
lODA PROJESI je umetni~ki kolektiv iz Istam-
bula iniciran od strane tri umetnice: Ezge A~i-
kol, Gines Savas i Se~il Jersel.
Oda Projesi zna~i sobni projekat i bavi se razli-
~itim upotrebama sobe tragaju}i za na~inima
povezivanja svakodnevnog ìvota i umetni~-
kih praksi. Grupa ima za cilj uspostavljanje no-
vih veza izme|u umetnika, ne-umetnika,
umetni~kih grupa, institucija i zajednica ljudi
koji ìve u kom{iluku.
www.odaprojesi.com
Mislim da je va`no imati uvid u okolinu u kojoj je projekat formiran i pokrenut,
da bi pozadina projekta bila jasnija i da bi se shatila pozicija koju je Oda Projesi po-
ku{ala da zauzme u regionu. Galata je kraj koji je vrlo blizu gradskom kulturnom i
zabavnom centru Bejoglu (Beyoglu), gde se odvijaju sve vrste doga|aja i gde hrle lju-
di iz razli~itih dru{tvenih i ekonomskih sfera. Bejoglu je uvek bio istorijski zna~ajan
zbog svoje multinacionalne strukture i bio je prvi na udaru kada je pokret vesterni-
zacije uzeo maha. Naseljen je brojnim manjinama, imao je zna~ajnu ulogu u proto-
ku robe i predstavljao je centar za brojne strance. Jedan kraj duga~ke I{tiklal ulice do-
seè do Galate koja je nekada bila lu~ki kraj. Okruènje Ode Projesi je nekada bio je-
vrejski kraj, a kada su se vlasnici preselili, stare tro{ne zgrade su postale veoma jefti-
ne i postale su dom za prvu generaciju imigranata koji su do{li u Istambul krajem
70-ih i 80-ih sa istoka i severa Turske. Populacija imigranata je rasla kroz neformal-
ne odnose sa selom; prvi do{ljaci su zvali svoje i sve je izgledalo kao da se naseljava
jedna velika porodica. Me|utim, ceo kom{iluk je ve} 10 godina u procesu moderniza-
cije i nastavlja da bude oblikovan cirkulacijom ljudi kao {to su novinari, umetnici, i
tako dalje. Me|utim, on i dalje predstavlja ne{to poput prvog koraka za imigrante,
koji nemaju dovoljno novca da poprave te veoma stare zgrade, niti èle da tro{e vre-
me i novac za to. Ono {to oni èle su potpuno nove ku}e gra|ene u starim i novim
predgra|ima u koja }e se preseliti ~im zarade novac. Oni koji ostaju uglavnom su ve-
oma siroma{ni i nemaju novca da napuste mesto u kome nemaju siguran ìvot.
U ovakvoj situaciji lako moè{ postati projekat koji se bavi ovim problemima
na na~in koji bi bio ZA neke ljude. Za Odu Projesi smo iskoristile na{e prisustvo u da-
toj situaciji i poku{ale smo da kreiramo neke opcije, bez nekakvog cilja ili manifesta.
ODA PROJESI:Oda Projesi ne teì definisanim ili prethodno osmi{ljenim odrìvim
efektima i ne brine o tome. Pojedinac ne treba da sluì nikakav veliki sistem koji è-
li da dosegne rezultate i da profitira iz toga: to moè biti umetni~ka ili aktivisti~ka
perspektiva, nije ni bitno. Kada mi posmatramo projekat, bitno je ono {to vidimo
Looking for a Clay Language.
Libija Peres de Silez de Kastro (Libia Perez de Siles de Castro) i Olafur Arni Olaf-
son (Olafur Arni Olafsson) radili su mesec dana zajedno sa Odom Projesi i kom{ija-
ma. Radni proces je prikazan posetiocima kroz video projekciju u samom prostoru.
Sredi{te rada bio je jezik. Po{to ne postoji zajedni~ki, dati jezik, koji su mogli deliti
me|u sobom i sa okolinom, izmislili su kodiran jezik koji su izvedeli iz komunikaci-
je sa kom{ijama. Po{to se jezik sastojao od eklekti~nih re~i i u svakom trenutku bio
spreman da bude izliven iz kalupa, nazvali su ga plasti~ni jezik. Inpirisani dinami-
kom kom{iluka, napravili su instalaciju u sobi koju su nazvali okolina. Zidovi so-
be su bili prekriveni blatom, razli~iti za~ini su razbacani po uglovima, glavni ulaz i
svetlo u sobi su promenjeni i, tokom dve nedelje, sve do zatvaranja izlo`be, pro-
stor je bio u permanentnom procesu transformacije. De~je slike su bile ugravirane u
blato i, po{to su zbog prirode materijala slike postale nejasne, deca su dolazila i ka-
~ila nove svaki dan. Soba je postala struktura u pokretu koja se procesualno menja-
la i transformisala.
Za ~ajanke organizovane povodom ceremonije otvaranja i zatvaranja izlo`be,
napravili su kola~e u obliku slova koje su zajedno sa gostima pojeli i tako uni{tili je-
zik pojev{i ga.
Intevju vodila: Jelena Vesi}
Prevod sa engleskog: Jelena Vesi}
Nadine Reschke Kindlimann, So Far So Good So Weit So Gut, 2004
PRELOM:rcjerti nc rcjimc si rcJic Flux
1
i|i Sli-
ke tranzicije
2
cJncse se premc pcjmcvimc ru|-
turne e|ite, umetnicrc centrc, cutcrstvc
i|i prcjesicnc|izmc rcje cbicnc vezujemc zc
burzccsre, c|i i mcJernisticre rcncepcije ru|tu-
re lcrc bi cpiscc svcje pcvcJe zc pcrretcnje
cvcrvih prcjerctc i rcje pcjcve u |crc|ncm ru|-
turncm pejzczu bi cbuhvctcc njihcv rcJijus?
NEBOJ[A MILIKI]:Paaa... Povodi su bili prili~no inènjerski, rekao bih... Projekat
|ux je trebalo (a treba i nadalje, po{to se odvija i ove godine) da omogu}i ujedna~e-
nu distribuciju umetni~kih radova, doga|aja i inicijativa. Glavni sadràj |uxc tokom
prethodne dve godine bile su izlo`be radova savremene umetnosti u javnom prosto-
ru predgra|a. Jednostavno, odemo na poziciju, na primer poslednju stanicu autobu-
sa 309 u Kalu|erici, izaberemo najsvetliji zid za video projekciju, ostavimo TV apara-
te u kioscima na autobuskim stanicama i sli~no, tako da ljudi koji ~ekaju autobus mo-
gu da prekrate vreme gledaju}i video rad iz teku}e video produkcije... Pre toga pode-
limo flajere, izlepimo plakate, napravimo malu kampanju... U projektu su svakako
postojali pokroviteljski i prosvetiteljski momenti, na {ta mi je skrenuta pa`nja na raz-
govorima o umetni~kom delu
3
, ali mislim da ta kritika prestaje da vaì od trenutka
kada po~injemo da vodimo diskusije sa ljudima koji bi dolazili na projekcije ili bi se tu
slu~ajno zaticali. Te diskusije su usmerile dalji razvoj projekta, pruàju}i spontanu i
otre`njuju}u evaluaciju umetni~ke produkcije, ina~e odsutnu u krugovima kritike i
teorije. Ako nema{ na ~emu da gradi{ diskusiju o umetnosti u gradu idi u predgra-
|e, dislociraj se, pa malo pogledaj sa strane na galerijski svet i njegova dostignu}a!
Da se vratimo na 5|ire trcnzicije Na{ vrlo vaàn donator, [vedski helsin{ki
odbor za ljudska prava, angaòvao je Kulturni centar Rex da pomogne novoosnova-
nim Resurs centrima u pet gradova Srbije da profili{u opseg svojih aktivnosti i po-
dignu operativni i programski sistem. Resurs centri su osnovani uz Odbore za ljud-
ska prava, koji su ve} vi{e godina postojali u tim gradovima... Dakle, trebalo je krei-
rati nove oblasti delovanja NGO sektora, dati tehni~ku podr{ku srodnim inicijativa-
ma u lokalu i nadalje afirmisati politiku ljudskih prava... Rex predlaè projekat-u~i-
lo, koji se odvijao kroz konkurs za umetni~ke i dokumentarne radove na temu Sli-
ke tranzicije, kreativne radionice gde su umetnici-moderatori obezbe|ivali konsul-
tativnu i produkcijsku podr{ku u~esnicima, i produkcije radova i izlo`bi. Uradili smo
pet lokalnih, ili, bolje re~eno, mesnih, i dve zavr{ne grupne izlo`be. Prva je odràna
u Rexu, a druga u Salonu Muzeja savremene umetnosti u Beogradu. Na izlo`bama
se predstavila grupa zanimljivih autora, {to profesionalnih umetnika, {to amatera,
i mislim da je tu bilo odli~nih radova, mo`da nesavr{enih u produkcijskom smislu
ali jakih u pogledu koncepta i inovativnih u pogledu kreativnih re{enja. Dakle, pro-
jekat je organizovao resurs grupnog stvarala{tva iz kog je svako mogao da crpi ono
{to mu je bilo potrebno: razmenu ideja, profilisanje kriti~kog mi{ljenja, usvajanje
novih produkcijskih i izlaga~kih standarda, sve ono {to je ina~e dostupno samo
uskom krugu prakti~ara u Beogradu i Novom Sadu...
Jedan od povoda za ove projekte je bio iritiraju}i repertoar makrocefalusa
centralisti~ke kulturne politike, tj. predimenzioniranog, a jalovog umetni~kog siste-
ma Beograda. Umetni~ka produkcija u Beogradu bazira se na okrenutosti mo`da i
dobrim uzorima me|unarodne umetni~ke scene, ali i na nesposobnosti uspostavlja-
nja kreativnih relacija prema sopstvenom dru{tvenom kontekstu i ignorisanju po-
stoje}ih komunikacijskih standarda, tj. ignorisanju publike... Me|utim, moj osnovni
pokreta~ki motiv je bilo ne{to drugo to je bila èlja za otkrivanjem novog, prigu-
{enog ili uspavanog ljudskog potencijala, potencijala koji se ne moè ni ostvariti a
kamoli probiti kroz kriterijume i procedure kulturnom produkcijom prezasi}enog
establi{menta. To je trebalo da se desi kroz rad na va`nim temama, koje se ti~u svih
nas i uklju~uju nas kao ravnopravne akcionare, npr. u formulisanju javnog inte-
resa... Usled sveprisutnog tranzicionog ideolo{kog presinga, otkrivanje tako pretpo-
stavljenih potencijala ide malo po malo kao {to se sprema klin ~orba... Ali i tako
postepene promene su{tinski menjaju postoje}e mikro-kosmose... Ako ti kaù: ajde
da napravimo projekat koji }e pro{iriti i afirmisati dosada{nje delatnosti Odbora za
ljudska prava ti napravi{ kreativne radionice i izlo`bu koja }e u prvom redu upo-
sliti umetnike i kreativce, ali }e, kako god da okrene{, uposliti i sve kapacitete pome-
nutih Odbora i Resurs Centara i u novostvorenom settinu, upravo problematizova-
ti teku}u politiku nevladinog sektora... Dakle, natera{ ljude da misle i da stvaraju,
odbacuju}i postoje}e hijerarhije i kriterijume... {to se manje-vi{e i desilo...
Intervju sa Neboj{om Miliki}em _ POLITIKE DECENTRALIZACIJE, SLIKE TRANZICIJE, KLIN, ÔRBA... _ 23
PRESTONICA KULTURE:
POLITIKE DECENTRALIZACIJE,
SLIKE TRANZICIJE, KLIN, ÔRBA...
1 Projekat Flux je koncipiran kao prezentacija i produkcija umetno-
sti van infrastrukturnih i logisti~kih resursa postoje}eg umetni~kog
sistema. Jedan od ciljeva ovog projekta je uspostavljanje i artikula-
cija novog kriti~kog polja oko recentne umetni~ke produkcije. Flux
je u organizacjij i produkciji Kulturnog centra Rex, do sada realizo-
van u {est beogradskih predgra|a. (www.rex.b92.net/flux02)
2 Projekat Slike tranzicije realizovao je Kulturni centar Rex u sarad-
nji sa Resurs Centrima Ni{a, Sandàka, Negotina, Leskovca, Bora i
klubom Urban In iz Novog Pazara, tokom 2002. godine.
Projekat se bavio iznalaènjem novih na~ina za decentralizaciju i
razmenu unutar sfere savremenih vizuelnih umetnosti. Vode}i se
strategijom access to all, projekat je kroz otvorene konkurse, radio-
nice i na kraju organizovane izlo`be, u svakom od gradova, otvorio
mogu}nost za za vi{estrana kriti~ka sagledavanja jednog dru{tvenog
i politi~kog okruènja u kome su se tad nalazili stanovici Srbije.
(www.rex.b92.net/sliketranzicije)
3 Razgovor o umetni~kom delu je inicijativa koju je pokrenula grupa
umetnika iz Beograda. Inicijativa je rezultirala volonterskim skupovi-
ma u Ku}i \ure Jak{i}a, gde se raspravljalo o raznim temama, pro-
jektima i poku{ajima iz oblasti kulturne politike i umetni~kog rada.
Grupa umetnika, a kasnije i grupa aktivnih u~esnika ovih razgovora,
delegirala je teme za diskusiju i kritiku. Specifi~nost ovih razgovora
sastojala se u odsustvu zvani~nih institucija diskusija kao {to su mo-
derator, govornici i publika, {to je ~esto rezultiralo direktnim i spon-
tanim oblicima kriti~nosti.
Intervju sa Neboj{om Miliki}em
PRELOM:ViJis, ncs bcs zcnimc tc ccrbc i|i pcr,
mczJc cJncs ccrbe i r|inc 1i pcminjes rcJirc|ni
iz|czcr nc u|icu, inicijctive izvcn Jcmetc siste-
mc, Jcr|e izvcn centrc BecrcJc u rcme se stc|-
nc nestc vrti nc errcnimc i Je mczJc pcstcji
nerc pub|irc, jcvncst i prcrsc crup|jcnjc 1ebe
interesuju mestc Je umetncst r|csnc ne Jcpire,
bcrem ne cnc stc zcvemc viscrc umetncst,
Je se mczJc i s|usc turbc jc|r, c|i nemc Mi|ice
1cmic 1i, ipcr, mis|is Jc tc nije Jcvc|jnc i nuJis
scvremenu umetncst rcc r|in u ccrbi Jisrursc
sccijc|isticrc rec|izmc, prcsvetite|jstvc, cJver-
tcjzinc, NGO pc|itire i institucicnc|ne rritire
(Mis|imc nc urrstcnje terminc inzenjerin,
rcmpcnjc, Jizcnje sistemc, nc pcrc|e|nc
nuJenje ru|turnih pcretc i neccije rcnterstc
rcji rreircju ru|turne institucije u BecrcJu) l tu
se, ncrcvnc, ispcstcv|jc pitcnje ejertc (ne rcc
bum-resenjc, vec rcc Jvcsmernc prccesc u rc-
me se Jescvcju prcmene nc cbc pc|c)
PRELOM: Dcbrc OJcvcric si bcrem nc jeJnu
trecinu pitcnjc, stc nije zcnemcr|jivc, c|i ipcr
metcjcre i Jc|je pcbeJuju Dc |i bi mccc Jc pc-
jcsnis svcje pczicije sprcm umetnicre scene u
BecrcJu 1vcjc pccetnc tvrJnjc bi|c je Jc scenc
pcstcji i tc u r|csicncm institucicnc|ncm smis|u
rcji pcJrczumevc neru vrstu rutine i scmcJc-
vc|jncsti, c tc nije tezc sc rcjcm bi se svi s|czi|i
Dc |i mczes Jc rcnrretizujes svcju rritiru, rcrc
rczes, centrc|isticre ru|turne pc|itire, preJi-
menzicnircnc, c jc|cvc umetnicrc sistemc,
cJsustvc rrectivnih re|ccijc premc scpstve-
ncm Jrustvencm rcnterstu, itJ?
Podvukao bih i va`nu razliku izme|u |uxc i 5|irc trcnzicije: pod jedan, |ux
ciljano proizvodi kulturne napetosti i otvara nove mogu}nosti za produkciju i pre-
zentaciju umetnosti. Kad kaèm nove, mislim nove za Beograd, {to se internacional-
ne scene ti~e, to je rupa na saksiji. Pod dva, 5|ire trcnzicije su rad na vi{e manje za-
datu temu, na zadatom terenu, i tu se pravi klin-~orba.
NEBOJ[A MILIKI]:He, he, he... Kao i u svakoj klin-~orbi, svi su radoznali da vide ka-
ko se to pravi i ne pitaju {ta treba, samo ulaù... Eto, vi ste sada uloìli va{u kriti~ku,
raskrinkavaju}u ambiciju... Ali, {ta ste otkrili? Da sam savremenu umetnost nudio kao
klin? Otkud vam to? Pa dobro znate da je to nemogu}e! Prvo, klin za ~orbu ne nudi{, ne-
go ga traì{ ili ga dobije{ ne pitaju}i... Drugo, da li iko u ku}i, {pajzu, alatu, memoriji, is-
kustvu, ima savremenu umetnost? Nema, naravno. Klin ~orbu moè{ praviti samo od
ne~ega ~ega ima u svakoj ku}i, kod svakog pojedinca, a nije od bog zna kakve upotreb-
ne vrednosti. Klin je u 5|ircmc trcnzicije bio slede}i: Svako ima pravo na slobodu izra-
àvanja, na sopstveno mi{ljenje, na razvoj sopstvene li~nosti. Dakle, klin je bila sama
politika ljudskih prava. A onda, kad se ljudi uklju~e po tom osnovu, ti im, mic po mic,
izvu~e{ na sto i klju~no ljudsko pravo, tj. klju~nu ljudsku obavezu: da sva ta prava zah-
tevaju dnevnu kreativnost, promi{ljanje, praktikovanje, i to najbolje kroz subverziju
postoje}ih interpretativnih modela i same ideologije tih prava. Ispituje{ i pokazuje{ da
li to svako moè ili ne moè, da li svako ima ili barem zna potrebne sastojke. Polje
umetnosti, radovi i sama izlo`ba su samo sto, pozornica, ili, ako ho}e{, voda u kojoj se
mogu kuvati sastojci... ako ih ima. Izlo`be i katalozi nisu krajnji ciljevi ovih projeka-
ta, ve} je cilj stavljanje klin-~orbe ili samog klina na stvarala~ki repertoar u~esnika, pu-
blike, zajednice, itd. Moram priznati da tu nije bilo nekog uspeha, tako da }u morati da
unapre|ujem koncept. [to se ti~e diskursa socrealizma, prosvetiteljstva, advertajzinga,
NGO politike i institucionalne kritike to je samo postoje}e ratno okruènje u kojem
vojnik dolazi u ku}u i i{te ne{to za jelo (kako i po~inje pri~a o klin-~orbi). Zna~i, 5|ire
trcnzicije su nastale zbog nesta{ice ideja i njom prouzrokovane gladi...
NEBOJ[A MILIKI]:Ja ovde malo praktikujem naknadnu pamet, jer su moji primar-
ni motivi za, npr. |ux, bili prili~no jednostavni: cenio sam i zaista voleo mnoge rado-
ve iz tada{nje produkcije, smatrao sam ih dru{tvenim bogatstvom i imao sam jedno-
stavnu tezu da ih je potrebno prikazivati na {to vi{e mesta i {to ~e{}e; da ih je potreb-
no u~initi permanetno dostupnim van galerijskog sistema, da bi do{lo do bolje razme-
ne umetni~kih ideja sa stanovni{tvom, koje, na kraju krajeva, ve}inom i finansira tu
produkciju. Zar nije rutina i samodovoljnost to {to ni galerije ni umetnici nisu traìli
na~ina da ambicioznije predstave svoje radove? Zar to ne dovodi do jedne autisti~ne i
duboko konzervativne produkcije okrenute samo Galerijski Predstavljivim Radovima?
Hajde da to pogledamo s ove strane: prvi i osnovni cilj |uxc je bila ravnomerna
distribucija informacija. U ovom slu~aju, onih informacija o savremenom svetu koje u
sebi sadrè radovi vizuelnih umetnika. Ja sam se, kao autor i kurator projekta, junJ-rc-
iser-po~etnik i budu}i silom-prilika-site-menadèr projekta, u znatnoj meri pokrenut
iskustvima sa kursa Politike izlaganja umetnosti (u [koli za istoriju i teoriju slike),
upitao: za{to se neki umetni~ki rad, koji je nastao tako {to je uslove produkcije finan-
siralo dru{tvo, manje ili vi{e svi gra|ani, izlaè isklju~ivo u galeriji koja je prakti~no do-
stupna samo stanovnicima i redovnim prolaznicima centra grada? Za{to se, recimo,
ne izlaè na plakatima, u {kolama, na televiziji, gde ga, ve}, mogu videti odnosno kon-
zumirati oni koji su ga finansirali? [to se mene ti~e, odgovor glasi: zato {to galerije ne
mogu da se oslobode svog inicijalnog statusa mesta za uìvanje onih koji su, znanjem
ili poloàjem, povla{}eni (kao {to znamo prvi muzeji nisu bili otvoreni za {iroku publi-
ku). Problem je {to tako, naro~ito u odsustvu trì{ta, vremenom nastaje incestuozna
sprega autora i retke stru~ne publike, a ta sprega nadalje diktira razvoj umetni~kih je-
zika i tematiku savremene umetni~ke prakse. Ako se osvr}em na rutinu i samodovolj-
nost, mislim upravo na tu vrstu rutine izlaga}emo u galeriji i samodovoljnosti do-
}i }e i razume}e prijatelji i kolege. smatram da je sve to u redu {to se slobode stvara-
la{tva ti~e, samo mi nije jasno koji je interes dru{tva da investira u takav sistem pro-
dukcije i prezentacije umetnosti? Za{to bi, na primer, zajednica svih stanovnika grada
Beograda ulagala u uìvanje povla{}ene elite, pa makar to bila i sasvim osiroma{ena
intelektualna elita? A opet, pita}e se neko, za{to bi se kod nas finansiralo ne{to drugo
od onoga {to se finansira i u svetu? I tu dolazimo do problema uspostavljanja relacija
sa ovda{njim dru{tvenim kontekstom, dakle za{to ja pominjem odsustvo kreativnih
relacija prema sopstvenom dru{tvenom kontekstu?
Pa mo`da ba{ zato {to je ova beogradska sredina tokom postojanja SFRJ imala
za svoj kontekst sasvim originalan dru{tveno-politi~ki sistem, koji je u velikoj meri
otvorio i drào otvorenom mogu}nost participacije masa u distribuciji dru{tvenog
bogatstva. Kao {to znamo iz o~ajni~kog stejtmenta/rada Ismeta Mujezinovi}a,
umetnici nisu mnogo brenisali tu situaciju, ve} su krenuli linijom manjeg otpora, di-
skutuju}i pitanje koji buròaski individualizam je bolji: onaj kvazi-moderni socijali-
sti~ko-estetisti~ki ili onaj kvazi-subverzivni, konceptualni. [to se mene ti~e, ako je
ikad postojao sistem i zemlja kojoj nije bila potrebna umetnost u galerijama, bila je
to SFRJ. Naravno, nije se moglo o~ekivati da ta ~injenica bude shva}ena i praktiko-
vana od vlasti i dru{tva, ali je mogla biti spoznata i eksploatisana od strane umetni-
ka. Toliko nezauzetih prostora za umetni~ku misao i kreativne intervencije, za sa-
moupravu u najbukvalnijem smislu te re~i, bilo je na raspolaganju... Ali, ono {to
smo imali, jedna je repetitivna praksa, okrenuta zaista referentnim uzorima, ali sa
pukim konzumersko-promoterskim ambicijama, kao ono kad neko donese nove
plo~e, pa je glavni... Nove, internacionalno va`ne poetike i medijska re{enja tipski
su uvo|ena u ovda{nju praksu (do|i kod mene da slu{amo plo~e), bez ikakve ade-
kvatne prerade ili dorade. îst {verc, rekao bih. SFRJ je valjda zasluìvala da se u njoj
izmisli nova umetni~ka praksa, ali nedostatak politi~kih ambicija i malogra|anske
aspiracije na{ih dragih pokondirenih rukovodilaca i na{ih naduvenih videla-àba-
da-se-konji-potkivaju-pa-i-oni stvaralaca, komotno su prokockale tu {ansu.
U 2001. godini nije bilo mnogo druga~ije, jer je pritisak opisane lokalne oscila-
torne stvarala~ke tradicije bio sveprisutan i jak i tokom devedesetih, samo malo pri-
gu{en i moderisan ratovima, a iskomplikovan famom fondacija, tranzicije, izvesnog
me|unarodnog interesovanja za ovda{nju scenu (baziranog uglavnom na pukoj eg-
zotici). Ali tada vi{e nije bilo ni~ega da se prokocka... Morali smo, hteli ne hteli, da
Glavno jelo: pile}a dìgerica sa barenim krompirom; Salata: barena paprika i paradajz; Dezert: gro`|e iz sopstvene proizvodnje; Pi}e: doma}a rakija
Cene: 1 kilogram krompira 10,00 dinara; 0,6 kilograma dìgerice 90,00 dinara; 0,5 kilograma krompira 7,00 dinara; 10 paprika 15 dinara; 1 vekna hleba 20,00 dinara; UKUPNO: 142 dinara (1 evro=60 dinara)
Main course: chicken liver with boiled tomatoes; Salad: boiled peppers and tomatoes; Dessert: homemade grapes; Drinks: homemade brandy
Prices: 1 kilo of tomatoes 10,00 dinars; 0,6 kilos of liver 90,00 dinars; 0,5 kilos of tomatoes 7,00 dinars; 10 peppers 15,00 dinars; 1 loaf of bread 20,00 dinars; TOTAL: 142 dinars (1 euro=60 dinars)
Neboj{a Krsti} i Neboj{a Miliki}, Obrok/Meal, 2002
PRELOM:Dc |i bi cnJc mccc Jc ncm rczes rc-
rvc je tvcje isrustvc sc nccincm junrcicniscnjc
scvremene umetncsti izvcn umetnicrc-c|erij-
src sistemc metrcpc|e? Nc rcji nccin scvreme-
nc umetncst uspcstcv|jc rcnctcrt sc |crc|ncm
mirrc sreJincm i rcji su rrcjnji ucinci scmc
JccJcjc prezentcvcnjc scvremene umetncsti
u prerijernim pcJrucjimc?
Dc |i se zncccj crcije izmestcnjc scvremene
umetncsti izvcn institucicnc|nc sistemc i nje-
ni Jcmeti iscrp|juju scmc u nercrvcm pcruscju
ready-made ersperimentc repczicicnircnjc/Je-
pczicicnisrcnjc/izmestcnjc scvremene umetnc-
sti u cJncsu nc, rcrc scm rczes, zcsticene Jis-
rurzivne zcne c|erije i muzejc i stcv|jcnjc u
Jrucciji mirrc-sccic-ru|turni rcnterst? l|i su,
ncprctiv, vczniji rcnrretni ejerti rcje JccJcj
prezentccije scvremene umetncsti prcizvcJi nc
nivcu scmih Jrustvenih cJncsc u |crc|nim zc-
jeJniccmc, u svcrcJnevncm zivctncm crruze-
nju pcjeJinccc u Jctcj mirrc-ru|turncj sreJini?
OvJe prvenstvenc imcmc u viJu prcjerct Flux
lc|irc su ucpste ejerti cvcrvih crcijc Jubcri i
pcstcjcni u vremenu, u rcjcj meri cni zcistc uti-
cu nc prcmene u mirrc-sccijc|nim cJncsimc nc
nivcu scme |crc|ne zcjeJnice rcjcj se cbrcccju?
po~nemo da mislimo, diskutujemo, traìmo na~ine za generisanje savremene umet-
nosti. A tu nema prostora za povlastice. Fluxom se povlastice ukidaju, a Slikama
tranzicije poku{ava se lociranje nepovla{}enih a kreativnih, te logisti~ka podr{ka
upravo njima. Flux nam daje odgovor na pitanje {ta je umetni~ki rad van za{ti}ene
diskurzivne zone galerije ili muzeja, a 5|ire trcnzicije {ta nije i ne moè biti obuhva-
}eno postoje}im institucionalnim procedurama, a vredno je produkcijske podr{ke.
Uostalom, {ta bi drugo jedan alternativni Kulturni centar i mogao da radi?
NEBOJ[A MILIKI]:Iskustvo je slede}e: savremena galerijska umetnost vrlo te{ko
funkcioni{e van sistema u kome je nastala. Uporedio bih to sa hendikepom koji bi
ìvotinja ro|ena i odrasla u zoolo{kom vrtu imala u slu~aju povratka u svoje prirod-
no stani{te. Glavni efekat projekta |ux desio se na samoj sceni i u medijima, gde je
bio puka atrakcija posledica eksperimentalnog, dislociraju}eg modusa samog
projekta. [to se ti~e mikro-sfere dru{tvenih i kulturnih odnosa, |ux na licu mesta
(bilo je tu preko 40 video projekcija u {est predgra|a) nije dao neke impresivne re-
zultate. Imali smo, dodu{e, projekcije i za vi{e od sto vrlo zadovoljnih gledalaca, ali
bilo ih je i bez publike (kada sam sa pravom bio kritikovan, mada se pitam ima li ika-
kve publike na takvim projekcijama u galerijama). Ve}ina prikazanih radova zahte-
vala je vrlo prilagodljiv vodi~ za {iroku publiku, kao neki interfejs za procesiranje i
konzumiranje savremene umetnosti van etabliranih izlaga~kih sistema. Bilo mi je
zadovoljstvo da na licu mesta proizvodim taj interfejs kroz razgovore, ali ishod su-
~eljavanja nije bio slavan po stvarala~ke potencijale scene, ~ak i kada bi na nivou
razumevanja zna~enja ili koncepta radova vodi~ bio uspe{an. Kao {to sam ve} re-
kao, problemi su brojni. Ve}ina umetnika koristi vrlo hermeti~an jezik, autoreferen-
tan sistem koncepata, sadràja, poruka. Ono {to dobijamo jeste visokospecijalizova-
ni, ograni~en i uveliko atrofiraju}i sistem komunikacije.
Trebalo je generisati nove kriterijume produkcije, a to se moglo samo u nekim
novim uslovima. Zbog svega toga smo tre}e godine u~inili poku{aj da potpuno dis-
lociramo logistiku i infrastrukturu projekta iz Rexa, u sama predgra|a. To je dalo ne-
ke traljave, ali i neke ohrabruju}e rezultate, pa smo nastavili unapre|enom varijan-
tom te strategije i ove godine. Sistem je slede}i: umetnik odlazi u naselje, upoznaje
se sa datim settingom, misli, dovija se, predlaè, uklju~uje ljude... Na kraju produku-
je rad, sa grupom saradnika, a mo`da i sam.
[to se efekata na nivou zajednica ti~e, moèmo lako biti samokriti~ni, ali da vi-
dimo prvo koji su kriterijumi u upotrebi, i u kom vremenskom razdoblju. Evo jed-
nog primera za razmi{ljanje: kada je u drugoj godini realizacije projekta do{lo do
osipanja interesovanja publike, {to zbog restitucije konzervativnih javnih diskursa,
{to zbog ~injenice da vi{e nismo, kao prve godine, mogli ra~unati na efekat iznena-
|enja, odlu~io sam, upravo na razgovoru sa lokalnim saradnicima, da se povodom
akcije |uxc 02 u Kalu|erici izvede akcija koja se obra}a nekom lokalnom problemu.
Prilikom interne evaluacije projekta (posle dve godine zajedni~kog predstavljanja i
diskutovanja vi{e od trideset radova sa ovda{nje i regionalne scene), postavio sam
pitanje u~esnicima diskusija {ta je za njih dobra umetnost, vredna pam}enja i pre-
pri~avanja i {ta bi izdvojili iz prikazane umetni~ke produkcije? Po{to, takore}i, ni-
sam dobio odgovor na ovo pitanje, okrenuo sam pozicije i pitao da li je umetnost
ako neko u~ini ne{to kreativno povodom problema koji naselje ima, a ljudi ne ume-
ju njime da se bave? Svi su se odmah sloìli da to jeste umetnost. (Samo zamislite
{ta bi se desilo kada bi to pitanje postavili profesorima neke ovda{nje umetni~ke
akademije.) Kalu|erica je tzv. divlje naselje, bez planirane infrastrukture, te je pro-
blem kanalizacije ne{to {to se samo name}e. S druge strane, malo {ta bi bilo soci-
jalniji i relacioniji domen nego {to je to kanalizacija. Ne samo {to su tim siste-
mom svi manje vi{e direktno povezani, nego se problemsko jedinstvo odvija i
kroz vazduh, kao kroz neki esencijalni medij kad se nekome izlije, svima smrdi
itd... I {ta smo uradili? Iskoristili smo flajere/kataloge kojim smo ina~e svuda ogla-
{avali projekat. Na pole|ini 1500 flajera za akciju |ux 02 u Kalu|erici napisali smo
sasvim banalnu i vrlo propagandisti~ku izjavu o tome kako bi (navodno) problem
kanalizacije mogao da se re{i, a onda smo svaki taj flajer isekli na tri komada i do-
bili 4500 letaka. [tos je bio u tome {to se na svakom letku nalazio samo po deo iz-
jave, odnosno tzv. re{enja, a onaj ko bi poèleo da sazna ceo tekst morao bi da po-
traì i druge delove... Ali gde? Pa kod kom{ija, sa kojima i deli problem kanalizacije
(vidi wwwrexbznet/j|uxoz/rc|uJjericco:) Sada biste mogli da me pitate: pa jel
imalo to nekog efekta, jesu li sredili kanalizaciju? Naravno da nisu, to mnogo ko{ta,
PRELOM:5tc se tice prcjertc Slike tranzicije, zc-
nimc ncs Jc |i izvesni Jrustveni Jincmizcm rc-
ji se uspcstcv|jc pri|ircm rec|izcvcnjc prcjertc
uspevc Jc cJrzi intenzitet i Jc prcncJe v|cstiti
modus operandi u |crc|ncj sreJini i ncrcn zcvr-
setrc prcjertc? 1ime bismc eventuc|nc mc|i
Jc izmerimc stvcrcn pctencijc| i ucincr pc|i-
tirc Jecentrc|izccije Jcmincntnc ruturnc
mcJe|c nc nivcu svcrcJnevnc zivctc Ncmerc
Jecentrc|izccije Jcmincntnc ru|turnc mcJe-
|c je cci|eJnc u prcjertimc cve vrste, c|i rcji su
rec|ni Jcmeti u prcrsi? Druim recimc, rc|irc je
uistinu ucinrcvit crtivisticri pctencijc| Jisemi-
nctivnih umetnicrih prcrsi u prccesu Jecentrc-
|izcvcnjc Jcminctnc ru|turnc mcJe|c umet-
nicre prcJurcije u |crc|ncj sreJini Jcncs i cvJe?
ali nakon podele 4500 letaka na tu temu, nema politike koja u Kalu|erici moè da
ima ambicije, a da ne doti~e i taj problem. Glavno je to da je barijera, tabu, zbog ko-
ga ljudi navodno ne umeju da se bave tim problemom niti se o datoj temi moè po-
vesti neka standardna javna kampanja probijena. To je bio samo po~etak, pokret
u èljenom smeru, slede}e godine smo napravili kalendar sa najlep{im ku}ama Ka-
lu|erice, sada planiramo izradu karte postoje}e kanalizacione mreè, itd. Bolje bi bi-
lo da ovde prekinem po{to se ose}am kao da pi{em projekat...
Mogli bismo mo`da da postavimo i malo ovakvih pitanja: Na koji na~in savre-
mena galerijska umetnost uspostavlja konatakt sa makro sredinom i koji su krajnji
u~inci samog doga|aja prezentovanja savremene umetnosti u centralnim podru~ji-
ma, tj. onim koja nisu periferna? Koje konkretne efekte i doga|aje prezentacije sa-
vremene umetnosti u galerijama proizvodi na nivou samih dru{tvenih odnosa u lo-
kalnim zajednicama, u svakodnevnom ìvotnom okruènju pojedinaca u datoj mi-
kro i makro kulturnoj sredini? Koliko su uop{te efekti tih na~ina prezentacije dubo-
ki i postojani u vremenu, u kojoj meri oni zaista uti~u na promene u mikro i makro
socijalnim odnosima na nivou same zajednice kojoj se obra}aju?
NEBOJ[A MILIKI]:Au, kakvo je pitanje, vas bi trebalo postaviti za policajce kul-
turne politike!
[to se nastavka umetni~ke produkcije ovom metodologijom ti~e, prema mom
uvidu nema mnogo dinamizma, intenziteta, niti izraène èlje za samostalno{}u.
Klin ~orba ba{ i ne moè da se stavi na jelovnik... Mogu sada da razvijam pri~u o efek-
tima 5|irc trcnzicije koje bih lako ukalkulisao u te odrednice, kao {to su upJcte poli-
tike i tehnologije izlaganja (gde, na primer, ako galerija nema opremu, u~esnici sami
donesu tri-~etiri TV-a i VHS-a od svojih ku}a; uostalom pogledajte na
wwwrexbznet/s|iretrcnzicije kako su izgledale izlo`be), i kao {to su prilike da pot-
puno nepoznati kreativci dobiju nagrade upravo od etabliranih umetnika i kulturnih
prakti~ara, koje smo obavezno uklju~ivali u ìrije. Me|utim, nema svrhe da razgla-
bam o tome ukoliko nema nastavka tih aktivnosti, a nema ih. Ono ~ega ima i tamo i
ovde to su nova znanja u oblasti generisanja umetnosti, nove inènjerske meto-
de i re{enja. Uz pomo} tih novih znanja i metoda traìmo nove razloge kreacije i {i-
roke participacije u produkciji i prezentaciji umetnosti, van banalnog domena gale-
rijskih ili, bolje re~eno, dekorativnih umetnosti, protiv kojih u su{tini nemam ni{ta,
ali ih smatram pukom dekoracijom dru{tva (koje bismo mogli okarakterisati kao
dru{tvo tranzicionog spektakla), dru{tva koje ne ume i ne moè da artikuli{e i reflek-
tuje svoje probleme. Aktivisti~ki potencijal vezan za ovakve projekte je o~igledno ve-
lik, i u tom smislu moram da naglasim da je veliki broj radova savremene umetno-
sti, kao i teorijskih tekstova, vrlo inspirativan i sasvim neophodan za uspe{an razvoj
tih potencijala. Samo ih treba primeniti.
A decentralizacija nikako ne sme da ima smer Beograd-provincija ili centar-
predgra|e, ve} institucija umetnosti kao nekakva op{tepriznata dru{tvena datost
atomski inkluzivna produkcija koja generi{e i propisuje novu datost.
Razgovor vodili: Jelena Vesi} i Milan Rakita
Mladen Stilinovi}, Posao je zavr{en/The Work is Finished, 1977
FINAL EXHIBITION evolves within a context marked by a split in the
reception of activities of the independent cultural sector in the local con-
text where it is considered to be alternative and marginalized as such
and in the so-called international context, in which this scene is increas-
ingly present, but most often marginalized by the system of geo-political
instrumentalization, as well as by the level of expectations based on the
phantasm of vitality, dynamism and authentic life that could challenge
empty Western consumerism and its decadent art world. In the situation of
the ever-increasing internalization of the art market, which is certainly not
a simple, straightforward form of dialogue or multiculturalism but rather a
set of relations revolving around power, marketing and packaging, geopol-
itics and career strategies, FINAL EXHIBITION is focused especially on
the two phenomena currently circulating on the international cultural cap-
ital market and thus also on the local level, although without institutional
support and real influence, that is, on the conceptual art practice from the
70s, and on the contemporary collaborative practices of independent cul-
tural initiatives and organizations.
FINAL EXHIBITION does not mark the end or finale of the collaborative
processes that started under the name of Zagreb Cultural Kapital of
Europe 3000 in 2003. Rather, it is an attempt at redefining institutions
and their role of presenting production and reproducing presentability, and
about a series of modulations that challenge the notion of art over-deter-
mined by a regime of public visibility. FINAL EXHIBITION is a collabora-
tive project in which the traditional role of the curator as the authority who
selects and commissions art works is transformed into a collective process
of learning, analyzing, discussing, documenting, etc. FINAL EXHIBITION
takes place in Gallery Nova from December 22, 2005 to March, 14, 2006
and it consists of exhibitions, performances, publications, lectures, presen-
tations, a symposium, workshops, etc. that are conceptualized and organ-
ized by partner organizations of CK3000 and similar initiatives in the region
(Proba, Sarajevo; Kuda.org, Novi Sad; PRELOM, Belgrade).
Within this grand project of bringing the Balkans closer to the standards of
the Western liberal-capitalistic order, it is culture that plays a crucial role
and regional collaborations are the favoured model. In such a situation the
question of cultural capital produced in these transactions becomes
urgent. This then is the subject of this issue of the Gallery Nova newslet-
ter, edited by Belgrade-based magazine PRELOM as part of the FINAL
EXHIBITION.
Zagreb, December 2005
l WHAT, HOW, FOR WHOM / WHW is an independent curatorial collec-
tive that organizes different production, exhibition and publishing projects
and also runs Gallery Nova in Zagreb.
FINAL EXHIBITION is a project within the Zagreb Cultural Kapital of
Europe 3000 (CK3000) platform, a long-term intensive collaborative plat-
form of independent cultural organizations, whose members currently
include BLOK (Local Base for Culture Refreshment), Center for Drama Art
(CDU), Community Art, Kontejner (bureau of contemporary art praxis),
Multimedia Institute (mi2), Platforma 9,81, Shadow Casters, and WHW.
What connects the different phenomena of progressive, collaborative,
socially engaged non-institutional cultural practices is opposition to domi-
nant models of representation, and attempts at the preservation and cre-
ation of a public space which is diminishing and being threatened by pri-
vatisation, capital, the ideology of national culture, and pragmatic demands
posed on the way to European integration. These initiatives insist on the
social and communicational role of art and systematically work on defining
a long-term cultural policy for the development of independent cultural pro-
duction in terms of its infrastructure but also in terms of an institutional
framework within which the independent sector operates, and which would
enable not only its development and sustainability, but also a transforma-
tion of the entire system of culture.
FINAL EXHIBITION is not a representation of collaborative projects or an
organizational model or even the goals of CK3000. In the current period of
normalization, which acts in the field of the symbolic and production of
meaning producing consensus and consent, FINAL EXHIBITION tries to
map a certain cultural terrain on which conflicting positions of institutional
and non-institutional cultural sectors and a broader understanding of cul-
ture and art are being re-configured.
The dominant understanding of culture is based on identity, particularly on
national identity, while the cultural model has institutions, markets and con-
cepts based on the Western world, but many elements of the modernist
paradigm that have long been removed from the Western world still essen-
tially form the system of art institutions, as well as the very institution of art.
The independent cultural scene emerges in opposition and always indirect-
ly as a concrete critique of the activities and inactivity of existent institu-
tions. This frustrating situation caused the independent cultural sector to
catalyze and crystallize its goals, to develop intensive international con-
tacts, new contents and organizational models. But this form of parallel
functioning is problematic as a contribution to normalization in terms of the
danger of the independent cultural scene functioning merely as a correc-
tive and kind of testing ground for models necessary for adapting to the
standards of the European Union, which uses art and culture as a means
of mediation between the developed liberal-capitalist West and the post-
communist societies which still need to be integrated in the liberal-demo-
cratic world of the free market and human rights. Still, validation from the
West is often the only channel open for securing and increasing cultural
capital at the local level.
As a remainder, those were the years of mass exclusion of
Albanians from the modern public sphere and of ghettoization in
parallel institutions. Buden is even very clear, when he explains that
this exclusion was directly planned and introduced into practice by
Serbian police policy (which are of etymologically same meaning).
Thus, Kosovo Albanian, as a man, descended into the darkest
depth of the Concrete (page 10), and in this depth he lost his
humanity (which begins with words and language) and started
expressing himself in rituals (prelinguistic state).
Furthermore, the most important signifier in this ritual is
blood and death, which is associated with the image of two
Albanian demonstrators, two actual persons with first and last
names, Fatmir Kaleshi and Xhevat Hoxha. This place of death,
marked by the puddle of blood, their citizens surrounded with
candles and in that circle they erected some sort of an altar, assem-
bled from vases, candles, various objects thrown onto that were
used by the deceased in their lifetime, their photographs, etc.
So, this is the image (Buden psychoanalytically-cinemato-
graphically calls it Dream Screen; without any irony we can read
this as a hidden slip), which he comprehends ritualistically and
artistically and that is the only historical fact he uses in the entire
article.
Without delving into the discussion of this practice of
necrosymbolism (which is a universal practice of symbolic alter-
ation of political death across the world), we will continue with the
explication of the image (man) of an Albanian in Budens system.
This Albanian is no longer human, he can not speak, he is
excluded from all public spheres and the only thing left for him is
the practice called rituc|. It is an African, it is the Other, a multi-
tude, homo sacer (bare man), a primitive It is Unconscious.
It is a Silent Albanian.
Even a slogan Kosovo Republic no longer belongs to the dis-
cursive plan of desires for ending of injustice, instead it is a ritual
staging of collective identity. Moreover, it is claimed that this
content speaks in the ghetto of prelingustic, sensual immediate
symbol, it finds its expression on the deeper, unconscious level of
meaning in the form of its bodily substrate (page 12).
This bodily substrate of an Albanian is, according to Buden,
visible even on the level of totally instrumental and rational prac-
tice, such as a strike.
The strike, which Albanian miners started in 1989 in the ninth
horizon of Stari Trg mine (the most spectacular workers strike of the
post-war Yugoslavia) is also, according to Buden, pre-discursive and
immediately sensual. Let us continue: what an Albanian declared a
year ago by going down into the depth of mining underground, he
is symbolically repeating now by descending to the ninth horizon
of the unconscious, the place where desire speaks in the language of
the body, where life merges with its own simulation, where fanta-
sy becomes illusion and symbol turns into symptom (p.15).
This anatomization and corporality of political
discourse is actually one of the oldest and most popu-
lar methods of colonizers representation. By main-
taining this psychoanalytic symptomatology, Buden
even reaches a conclusion that, as result of these
repressions, an Albanian experiences complete
expression (again bodily) of his total, superior body.
ONE OF THE FORMS OF NEW COLONIZATION is taking place, aided
by the techniques of representation. It is a new form of cultural
and class control, which can be perceived in all areas of contem-
porary knowledge, from anthropology to video art.
As it is already known, representation is a way of presenting
other (the one who is absent) in your own system.
Words contained in this definition such as presentation,
other, absence and system are sufficient for the understanding
of political connotation of representation.
I would like to analyse in this essay the representation of
Albanians from Kosovo and their interpellation in the great ideol-
ogy of exclusion.
l l l
Sometime in the beginning of 1990 in Blue Box cafe in Vienna,
Boris Buden was watching some photos from a projector, accom-
panied by rock music and much to his own surprise, he noticed
briefly a writing on the wall Krv i smrt (Blood and Death) in
Croatian-Serbian language.
This unutterable word, with no vowels in it, is not an associ-
ation of any kind for the Austrians, however this word takes
Buden to his South and he sadly remembers his Yugoslavia.
Moreover, this association leads him to Kosovo where at the
exact moment Kosovo Albanians are going through very difficult
situations to the town \akovica and at that time insignificant,
Mhalla e Grs, where genres of life and death, inadvertently
created high art and ritual got mixed up.
Namely, we are referring to the long article that Buden wrote
in 1990, entitled Inconscientia Iugoslavica (Yugoslavian Uncon-
scious)
1
. In this article, he analysed problems in Kosovo, as one of the
more important factors of the Yugoslav problem. This article is cer-
tainly not the only one analysing the breakdown of Yugoslavia,
from a standpoint of Kosovo syndrome; what is more, it is not our
topic in this essay. It is more important to emphasize and state pre-
cisely how Buden represents Albanians during the demonstrations
in the beginning of 1990, or the way he aestheticizes them.
Boris Buden is a symbol of Yugoslav solidarity and nostalgia
of lost democracy. Not only as an analyst, but as a journalist, he
has always stood up against narrow-minded nationalism and
mafioso-provincialism. He has been one of the rare intellectuals,
who clearly and loudly criticized Tudjmans fascist government
during the war. Buden is a progressive anti-nationalist and left
orientated critic. That is the reason why it is interesting to analyse
how he represents Albanians in his essay.
At the very beginning of the text, Buden conceives these dif-
ficulties in Kosovo, quoting a journalist from 5tcrt magazine from
Zagreb, as high artistic performances and ritual actions. It is not of
much significance to him which national-class, economic-politi-
cal and historical factors are at work here, but only those factors,
which are symptoms of these demonstrations.
For Buden, these demonstrations are a rituc|, taking place in
prelinguistic state of consciousness.
Naturally, it is clear to everyone that Budens real intention
in this article is to analyse the conditions of exclusion of
Albanians from the pub|ic sphere and pub|ic Jisccurse in Kosovo.
Sezgin Boynik _ BORIS BUDENS SILENT ALBANIANS _ 31
BORIS BUDENSSILENT ALBANIANS
POLITICS AS NONDISCURSIVITY Sezgin Boynik
1 Citations given in this
essay are from: Boris
Buden, Kaptol Railway
Station: political essays
(Kaptolski kolodvor:
politi~ki eseji), CSUb,
Belgrade, 2002, pages
7-25
As Buden notices, Serbianship drops like a shadow, while at
its place Albanianship is rising gloriously as a substitute in all its
bare, vibrant nature, in the identical situation of the ritual-myth-
ical staging of collective identity(p.19)
Albanian, who is silent in a psychoanalytic discourse, now is
also in its bare, vibrant nature reduced to the level of pre-human
and pre-civilized state. Now, he is a powerful animal.
This anatomic machoism, along with prediscoursive politics of
ritual, is a ccmmcn of almost all elite and mcinstrecmdiscourses.
It is interesting that Buden, who would like to analyse the
reasons of exclusion of Albanians from modern public space of
ex-Yugoslavia, falls into the same semantic representation of an
excluder (this illustrates that the exclusion of Kosovo was not just
a problem of Serbia, but of whole Yugoslavia as well), which is
evident in two motifs: man who can not speak and bare man in
its nature, where the Otherness is formulated in pre-humanity,
almost in animality.
The problem with Buden and large number of other pop-left-
ist theoreticians is that the potential for accepting of generally
accepted representation always lies in their universal theories.
The reasons for this are various starting from insufficient infor-
mation to ideological c pricri neo-liberalism, which accepts
Western culture as an absolute and the only cognitive culture and
rejects all other political acts as pre-civilized and preverbal.
Actually, the culturalization of politics, which Buden criticized on
several occasions, is not even noticeable in this case, as entirely
different categories are in power and since this is a system, which
has not reached its culturalization yet (words and cognitive dis-
course are still missing), thus everything is ritualized.
Economic-political state of Kosovo in comparison to other
former Yugoslav republics is not of any relevance for Buden.
Again here we are going to make a digression, as we have to point
out that Buden is not the only critic falling into this anomaly of
representation, but only serves as an example of cultural expert
and humanist with problems of representation.
On the other hand, another Croat, Branka Maga{, is a rare
example of writer, who, even though she analysed the break-
down of Yugoslavia, with Kosovo as a symptom, did not fall into
these problems of (un)cultural representation.
Branka Maga{s article, written in 1989 for New |ejt keview,
entitled Yugoslavia: The Spectre of Balkanization, is an analysis
from the aspect of class problem, from beginning to end.
The difference is visible right at the start, because in this case
the problem is not formulated as unconscious, but as spectral.
Starting from Marx to present moment, as we all know, spectre is
a political other, not exotic otherness.
Maga{ notices that Albanian miners created the biggest
workers movement of post-war, revolutionary Yugoslavia in
1989. What Buden commented on as psychoanalytic practice, is
presented here in view of class movement of workers.
Throughout her entire report, Maga{ presents with intensity
how Kosovo always suffered from weak economy and how min-
ers were primarily interested in their poor salaries and bad work-
ing and living conditions, more than in ritual performances,
which held so much attraction for the reporters of 5tcrt magazine
and Buden. Maga{ goes as far as to quote an old miner, who
looked upon the demonstrations as feast without meat and real
politics.
Besides, she sees these demonstrations as totally disciplined,
with completely cognitive democratic and new political demands
(we should bare in mind that this is the time of turmoil in whole
of Yugoslavia).
Also, Maga{ notices that out of thirty Yugoslav journalists in
Kosovo, only three spoke Albanian. In the end it is logical that the
whole story was based on non-cognitive and exotic scenario.
Nevertheless, this is not a story of Budens Kosovo vs. Maga{s
Kosovo, but the story about two politics of representation.
First is Budens, which by trying to preserve local otherness
in its totality and structure, wanders into absolute corporality. It
is powerful, uncultured, exotic, incomprehensible, therefore
impossible Other.
We dealt more with the former semantics of representation
in this article, whereas the latter, developed by Branka Maga{
according to terminology, Marxist is truly against any kind of
representation. When she is analysing the reasons for exclusion,
they relate solely to economic-political factors, while the repre-
sentation is only a product or symptom of these factors. It is a
method, which analyses, even otherness and localness from the
position of universality of politics and compares culture, nation
and discourse from the standpoint of class differences.
Naturally a whole complex of relationships between cultural
by-products and economic policy was not developed in Branka
Maga{s article, which is a sort of new-leftist report for an inter-
national left magazine (N|k).
Yet, the position that Maga{ defends is universal, method-
ological and critical, which is called Marxism and is different from
sensual sentimentality of Budens exotic essay writing.
Situation is going to get even more complicated, yet more
interesting, if we analyse the concept of nation by employing a
Marxist method, especially when it involves Kosovo and whole of
the Balkans, where all problems have been reduced to nation or
nationality. On the other hand, nation is connected with so many
associations, so it is almost impossible to reduce to only one fac-
tor, in this case economic-political.
In its history, Marxism had many mistakes regarding nation:
starting from Engels, who believed that Slavs are not capable of
socialism (history proved the opposite) to Marxs catastrophic
understanding of Asian way of manufacture, etc. Yet, Eric
Hobsbawms theory, which differs from Andersons culturaliza-
tion of national issue, explained the matter by developing the
term of nation, as an invented tradition, to the understanding of
class difference between ethnical entities. To put it more simply,
if colonialism is a matter of economy, than colonizer and colo-
nized are two different economic classes.
Hobsbawm managed to explain the renaissance of national-
ity in 19
th
century by comparing this entire development to mod-
ernized economies of bourgeoisie. For example, new nations of
19
th
century were not just a product of Romantic thought, but an
uprising against the minority of capitalist, colonizing oppressors,
while all of it was popularized in national idealism and we
together against ... clichs.
According to this theory, national dialectic between
Albanians and Serbs in Kosovo is not induced by archaic motifs of
unconsciousness, instead it is contemporary and historically
understandable complex of structure of money, labour, produc-
tivity, standard, etc.
Due to all this reasons theatralizing, sensualizing, ritualizing
of Albanianship by psychoanalysis is nothing more than hiding
of above mentioned dialectic in the name of neoconservative pol-
itics of representation.
Mister Buden, obviously, fell into this trap.l
Vladimir Markovi} _ DISSIDENT ETHICS AND THE SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM_ 33
mcn thcse sccrce cu|turc| vc|ues crecteJ in the seccnJ hc|j cj the
twentieth century, which wi||, lm cj the be|iej, withstcnJ the test cj
time, is the Zcreb phi|cscphicc| jcurnc| Praxis cnJ the lcrcu|c
5ummer 5chcc|
THE WORDS THAT STAND AT THE BEGINNING of this critical
review were written by Serbian sociologist Boìdar Jak{i} in his
professional-emotional reminiscences on the existence and effect
of a journal from the field of philosophy and of the summer philo-
sophical-sociological seminar that took place on a picturesque
Dalmatian island.
1
Perhaps it is redundant to mention that with-
in the framework of philosophical-humanist thought in Yugosla-
via starting with the mid 1960s, rcxis, with its seminar on
Kor~ula, was the personification of dissident activity and intellec-
tual criticism towards Titos regime and socialism. It was precise-
ly in the questioning of the potentials of Humanist-Marxist criti-
cisms of socialism that a great attraction for the rcxis-school on
the part of a left-oriented academic public in the West could be
found. If truth be told, it was not only leftists who showed enthu-
siasm toward the sharpness of this criticism, but a more detailed
look into this question belongs to the domain of considering bour-
geois taste of Cold War weapon selection.
To see how Marxist-humanism of Praxis positioned itself in a
given historical situation is best illustrated by the subsequent res-
olute formulation of one of the key actors of this orientation,
Croatian philosopher Milan Kangrga. According to him, thanks to
the efforts made by anti-dogmatic philosophers from Zagreb and
Belgrade, with the founding of the rcxis-school Marxism for the
first time in Europe and the world was treated in a Marxs sense.
[] It should be said that that what we were doing was the only
true renaissance of Marx in the world. [] The works from the
West were below the level of that what we had done. And that
needs to be said.
2
In order to complete the image of sharpness of this struggle
for the legacy of authentic Marxism, we continue with profes-
sor Kangrgas presentation: I will show this through an incident
that happened to us in 1965 when we were already working on
the international issue of rcxis. We received a 50-page text by
Louis Althusser. Rudi Supek and I were to give a review of that
text. Rudi wrote that the text was at the position of Stalinist posi-
tivism. And I wrote a scathing critique evaluating the work as
being substandard, that it was Stalinist. We did not publish that
text, but Althusser published it in the Communist paper |c ensee
and became the star of Marxism in the West on the basis of that
article.
3
Serbian sociologist Zagorka Golubovi} adds to this anec-
dote in the same tone: At that time I was teaching in Sweden as
I, along with my colleagues, had been expelled here from the uni-
versity. This was many years after the termination of rcxis, but
at that time Althusser was very popular so much so that they
asked me if I was Althusserian. I would reply that for me his stand-
point was positivistic Marxism, that it was Stalinism for me.
4
The figure of Stalinism, as an empty signifier in the discourse
of the Yugoslavian state ideological and repressive apparatus from
1948, was used here so that theoretical anti-humanism could be
kept at a safe distance from the coast of Kor~ula. Far from the cold-
ness of a real or imaginary Gulag, this island had to maintain at all
costs its status as a shelter of humanistic dissidents. A dissident
island of freedom in a sea of totalitarianism is the dominant self-
representation of the rcxis-school. According to Boìdar Jak{i},
dissidents of our time are a manifestation of authoritarian and
totalitarian regimes, particularly of that other Europe. They were
constituted by individuals and groups who did not adhere to the
idea of an imprisoned mind.
5
What gave further rise to the myth
of the Kor~ula summer school was the presence at the seminar of
distinguished names from the fields of philosophy and the
humanities such as: Ernst Bloch, Erich Fromm, Herbert Marcuse,
Lucien Goldmann, Eugen Fink, Leszek Kolakowski, gnes Heller,
Karel Kosik, Jrgen Habermas and others. The mythologization
continues, as can be seen,
6
even after the inglorious desertion of
the theoretical lcmpjp|ctz on the part of Yugoslavian dissidents of
rcxicn provenance, whose representatives parted ways on the
issue of continuation of activities following the cancelling of the
journal, some of them accepting the role of ideologues of Serbian
nationalism (with an expressly non-humanistic demeanour dur-
ing the Yugoslavian wars of 1991), and a great majority complete-
ly discarded their Marxist orientation.
As it does not seem significantly useful for us to analyse the
ethnocentric contents that rcxis collaborators such as Serbian
philosophers Mihailo Markovi} and Ljubomir Tadi} used to fill the
frameworks of their chauvinistic-humanistic activities from the
second half of the 1980s, here we will examine one aspect of the
left-oriented, cosmopolite-libertarian legacy of the rcxis-school.
With the start of the Yugoslav war, a small academic group
(among whom were active Praxis members Miladin @ivoti},
DISSIDENT ETHICS AND
THE SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM
Vladimir Markovi}
1 Boìdar Jak{i}, Praxis i Kor~ulanska ljetna {kola. Kritike, osporavanja, napadi [Praxis and the Kor~ula
summer school. Critiques, challenges, attacks], in: Neboj{a Popov (ed.): Sloboda i nasilje: Razgovor o
~asopisu Praxis i Kor~ulanskoj letnjoj {koli [Freedom and violence: Discussion on the Praxis journal and
the Kor~ula Summer School], Res publica, Belgrade, 2003, pp. 170-171
2 See: Neboj{a Popov (ed.): Sloboda i nasilje: Razgovor o ~asopisu Praxis i Kor~ulanskoj letnjoj {koli
[Freedom and violence: Discussion on the Praxis journal and the Kor~ula Summer School], Res publica,
Belgrade, 2003, p. 29
3 Ibid.
4 Ibid, p. 30
5 Boìdar Jak{i}, Balkanski paradoksi [Balkan Paradoxes], Beogradski krug, Belgrade, 2000, p. 186.
This para-definition was created, as can be seen, from the ritual reference to terms (titles) from the pub-
licist writing of Polish-American writer and paradigmatic East European dissident Czeslaw Milosz.
6 Re~nik YU mitologije [Lexicon of YU Mythology], a perfect mirror of every kind of mytholigizations of the
SFRY epoch, gives us the following text under the term PRAXIS which Ranko Vuk~evi} placed on the
www.leksikon-yu-mitologije.net web site: A philosophical journal concerned with relevant problems of the
contemporary world. It was published for a full ten years (from 1964 to 1974) and gathered the most
prominent theorists in the areas of philosophy and sociology of the time from the SFRY region, but also
from many parts of Western and Eastern Europe. Founders: Branko Bo{njak, Danko Grli}, Milan Kangrga,
Rudi Supek, Gajo Petrovi}, Predrag Vranicki, Danilo Pejovi} and Ivan Kuva~i}. Texts in the journal culti-
vated a sharp critical standpoint toward Yugoslav Stalinist theory and praxis. It was because of this that
the journal experienced heated public criticism and ban from the then regime, and its editors and authors
were labelled professional anti-communists and enemies of self-management socialism. The journal
PRAXIS was also linked to the Kor~ula summer school; international meetings of philosophers and soci-
ologists from the entire world. A unique place where the greatest theorists from the East and West gath-
ered and discussed the contemporary world and its problems. Texts and papers that emerged during the
two-week duration of the school were published in the PRAXIS journal. The school and the journal
enjoyed immense popularity during the ten-year existence, up until their ban in 1974. Many theorists
linked with this theoretical school were persecuted during the eighties.
Zagorka Golubovi}, Boìdar Jak{i},
Neboj{a Popov) stood apart from the
euphoric mass of Serbian critical
intellectuals who flew into national-
ism. They believed that the status of
an intellectual obligates one to pub-
lic condemnation of the politics of
chauvinism, war and crime.
Presenting themselves as a consis-
tent moral alternative to the domi-
nant discourse in Serbia, this group
appeared under the name the Other Serbia. That Other Serbia
had as its goal to promote liberal and anti-nationalistic values of
an intellectually responsible civil and European Serbia.
This renewed attempt of taking over a dissident position
remained largely unnoticed among the masses and, in essence,
depoliticised. Depoliticisation is the consequence of the moraliz-
ing relation of these intellectuals toward the appearance of
nationalism and war in a given historical moment. It is a conse-
quence of the absence of understanding that the civil society and
a liberal state cannot have another legitimising framework
except a nationalist one, and that the ancient question of state
sovereignty is resolved through war conflicts at the same time
creating a new class structure in the processes of post-socialist
transition.
That which, however, was left for the intellectual carriers
and heirs of rcxis as real ground for theoretical-political dis-
course and in the current historical combination was their cus-
tomary criticism of socialism, from a safe historical distance.
Thus, for example, Croatian sociologist and at one time a promi-
nent rcxis member, Ivan Kuva~i}, bemoans the weakening intel-
lectual influence which, he feels, is to a great extent conditioned
by the very blunders they made during the twentieth century
and of which the greatest is their support of the communist
utopia which was discredited in practice.
7
Meanwhile, Zagorka
Golubovi} in her text entitled Sociological-anthropological
analysis of the legacy of real socialism and post-socialist soci-
eties puts forth the claim which she finds valid for the situation
at the end of the 1990s: From the previous analysis it can be con-
cluded that the seeds of totalitarian communism continue to
grow in former Yugoslav republics.
8
Such an opinion doubts
their earlier dedication to the only real Marxism and the eman-
cipatory, leftist humanist ideas, and shows how non-criticalness
towards capitalism grows with a dissident critique of socialism.
The kind of breadths the evolution of these kinds of stand-
points during the past few years show, in the period of incredible
acceleration of economic restructuring processes, privatisation,
the closing down of a huge number of factories, mass layoffs of
workers, participation of politicians in wide-ranging financial
affairs and criminal amassments of enormous personal wealth, is
once again explained to us by professor Golubovi} in the unmis-
takable emphasis on her own dissident history balance: We will
have to change our habits, our attitude to life. And of course we
will have to change our attitude toward work. A large majority of
people have broken out of the habit of work. Workers who were
left without jobs and who were on forced vacations have turned
to flea markets and are no longer interested in returning to facto-
ries. [] I feel that we will have to struggle for some time to learn
how to work. [] People need to show initiative, readiness to col-
laborate, to be self-sacrificial and responsible in their work that
they begin in order to succeed, in order to apply for loans and
develop their own private business.
9
Let us conclude this review in such a way so as to state that,
just like the carrier of the Protestant movement in the XVI and
XVII c., for Max Weber paradigmatic ascetic Protestantism which
was developing in the fold of the Calvinist Church, did not direct-
ly and consciously aspire to the expanding of the capitalist spirit
(but where the convulsive search for signs of Gods mercy gradu-
ally turned into a virtue of professional engagement), so neither
did Marxist humanism of the dissident rcxis-school directly pro-
duce an ideologically entwined matter for the transition process-
es of capitalist restoration along with the rise of nationalism and
the disintegration of Yugoslavia, accompanied by war destruc-
tion. The legacy of rcxis, considering that it withstood the test of
time, remains to figure as significant ideological capital of the
social system which is stabilizing itself today, enriching the spec-
tre of various forms of criticism against the revolutionary termi-
nation of capitalism.l
7 Ivan Kuva~i}, Kako se raspao bolj{evizam. De-
set eseja o problemima prijelaznog razdoblja
[How Bolshevism Fell Apart. Ten Essays on the
Problems of the Transitory Period], Naprijed,
Zagreb, 1997, p. 117
8 See: Zagorka Golubovi}, Stranputice demo-
kratizacije u postsocijalizmu [The Byways of
Democratization in Postsocialism], Beogradski
krug, Belgrade, 1999, p. 23
9 Zagorka Golubovi}, Bilans disidentkinje
[Dissident History Balance], Bulevar, no. 67,
Novi Sad, 18 January 2002, pp. 6-9
Mladen Stilinovi}, Zapjevaj!/Sing!,
Razmi{ljanje o novcu/Reflections on Money, 1980
PRELOM:1he Eurcpecn city/ccpitc| cj cu|ture
instituticn is JesincteJ cn cn intercvernmen-
tc| bcsis cnJ junJeJ by the Eurcpecn
ccmmissicn, ncw thrcuh the Culture 2000
prcrcmme Ycu were inviteJ tc curcte crt
events in Cork European Capital of Culture
2005 Hcw Jc ycu see junJer-junJeJ re|cticns
when specrin cbcut such cjjicic| crt events
thct cre netwcrrin sc mcny interests?
PRELOM: beccuse ycur Jecisicn wcs nct cin
in the Jirecticn cj exhibiticn-mcrin but tc
rncw|eJe prcJucticn cr resecrch cj specu|ctive
pcssibi|ities cj cu|ture Ycu JeciJeJ tc mcre
ccucus [c scrt cj pcr|icment] instecJ cj cn exhi-
biticn cnJ jcr ycu it wcs the wcy tc briJe the
prcb|ems cj tempcrc|ity cnJ |cw ejjectiveness cj
c rcnJ interncticnc| shcw intc the |ccc| ccn-
text ccn ycu scy mcre cbcut thct, cnJ hcw it
Jeve|cpeJ tcwcrJs the enJ cj the prcject?
ANNIE FLETCHER:Well, of course, its always extremely complex and problematic
to think about how you deal with these expectations. We were quite frank with the
funders about how we wanted to critique the notion of the European Capital of
Culture per se and to try and propose a different model, one which would leave a
legacy in the city rather than do something spectacular as an event and then leave.
What is rather amazing about the City of Culture is actually that the European
Commission gives a relatively tiny amount of the budget towards the event despite
the title. From the start we sought to question through our project the expectations
of prestige and spectacle which a title like Capital of Culture brings and also its
very temporal nature. We wanted to face these kinds of issues head-on. But looking
back, I wonder whether no matter how much we tried to curate antithetically in
this context, what we did was often read and framed locally as part of the Capital
of Culture prestige machine, which became quite frustrating.
ANNIE FLETCHER:Well, we were just sure we didnt want to make an event that
came and disappeared and had little relevance or impact locally. We were interested
in investigating this idea about what other way could you think about a city and its
cultural intelligence, and how that might connect with different experiences on a
broader level, whether the questions that were relevant and urgent for Cork in some
way could be reflected against larger global questions and given the nature of
globalization could they perhaps on some level even be the same? The idea of the
Caucus, which in fact is a Native American term, connotes the idea of a meeting to
make decisions about the future. This early democratic model had been used tradi-
tionally in the Native American community and is now used in American party pol-
itics as a way of developing future policy. It seemed like an interesting propositional
model because we wanted to think about the artist as an important and vital politi-
cal entity in society, and to test out whether the space of artistic practice and artistic
thinking might indeed provide an imaginative and propositional space for society.
For almost about nine months before the intense three-week summer period
Art/Not Art led what they somewhat ironically called the Grassroots Phase.
Through a series of discussions, reading groups, film screenings and simply show-
ing and making work a community of artists, poets and others interested in the
ideas which the Caucus proposed emerged and developed together in Cork with a
view to contributing to the summer period as well. We also invited various artists
who would develop projects on a long-term basis to come during this period like
Eoghan McTigue, Catherine David, Maria Eichhorn and Surasi Kusolwong so when
they came back during the summer period the relationship was more sustained,
and actually now Bik van der Pol, Maria Eichhorn and Phil Collins, Art/Not Art, Static
and Villa K are continuing to develop long-term projects in Cork. For me, the princi-
ple of producing work was also extremely important because the project, though
discussion-based on many levels, in no way sought to displace practice but rather
to think through artist work alongside discussion.
In the summer we had the most intense phase where we invited all those who
had been active in Cork and about thirty artists and thinkers from all over the world
(it was really important for us that we didnt frame the event only in terms of Cork
and Europe) together to show works and to discuss the topics of art, democracy and
possibility; I suppose one could say the curating we did was to try and invite people
for whom these issues were important in their practice to some extent. One pivotal
activity was a reading group led by Shep Steiner around Giorgio Agambens The
Coming Community that really turned out to be incredible. It took place every two
days during the three weeks, so it was a really sustained intense activity. There
were many other projects too; Surasi Kusolwong held a three-day market in the
centre of the city in Peace Park; Bik van der Pol developed a video-based research
36 _ PRELOM_ _ Topic: CULTURE CAPITAL/CAPITAL OF CULTURE _
CAPITAL OF CULTURE:
CAN WE HAVE A POSITIONWITHOUT LOCATION?
Interview with Annie Flatcher
Invisible Pilots, White Benches Project , Cork Caucus, 2005
PRELOM: 5c in c wcy c|| the prcjects were
prccess-bcseJ cnJ crienteJ tcwcrJs |ccc| ccn-
text 1he rcJic pcne| thct ycu crcnizeJ jcr the
Radiodays prcject c|sc Jec|t with questicns cj
|ccc|ity, cnJ ycu then useJ c sentence by lrit
kccjj cs the intrc-stctement, which wcs. Ycu
ccnnct hcve c pcsiticn withcut |cccticn ccn
ycu scy scmethin cbcut the thecreticc| cnJ
prccticc| cspects cj such curctcric| interests?
PRELOM:1he ccrr prcject wcs c|sc jccuseJ cn
ccmmuniccticn cnJ Jemccrctic prccesses, cnJ
ycu tccr cs the stcrtin pcint cseph Beuyss biJ
tc estcb|ish the ree lnterncticnc| University in
lre|cnJ in the ,os with the cbjective tc exp|cre
the ccntributicn cu|turc| cnJ inte||ectuc| |ije
ccn mcre tc scciety ccn ycu te|| us mcre cbcut
Beuyss iJecs cnJ the wcy ycu reu|cteJ the
ccmmuniccticn cnJ Jecisicn-mcrin structure
in ccrr?
about about the Ford Factory which was one of the first global industries to be
based in Cork, and examined how micro industries developed around it. Can Altay
made a video piece about urban animals in the city. Eoghan McTigue made a series
of postcards photographing the aftermath of when Helsinki was the Capital of
Culture and how afterwards many galleries seemed to close down. Everyone who
came did an introduction and then developed a workshop, a performance or lecture
or made work at some point. Every day for three weeks we had about six meetings
a day it was an extremely intense time ... we also arranged certain lectures and
seminars to punctuate the period with Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Chantal
Mouffe. Sarat Maharaj also came and worked with a smaller workshop group in
West Cork for a three-day period and Catherine David developed a seminar around
the idea of aesthetics and politics together with Smain Laacher and Lucas Ensele.
ANNIE FLETCHER:I guess I am just very bored by the idea that a lot of art institu-
tions exist as autonomous international zones. I think curators are, to a large extent,
mediators and so should be sensitive on every level to who participates in what
they develop. I have always been interested in the idea of what sustains an artistic
discourse in a particular situation be it in Ankara or Belfast. I think the solidarity of
a community sustains artists and thinkers on many levels and is an important,
often fragile thing that should be facilitated and protected if possible. I think that
can be part of the curatorial practice. Thats why Sarah Pierce and myself developed
The Paraeducation Department at Witte de With and TENT in Rotterdam in 2004.
We were invited to participate as an artist and curator in an exhibition called
Tracer, and we started to research and talk to artists locally about what it was to be
an artist in Rotterdam and it became clear that what people missed was a public
space. Basically, we took over the only shared space, which the two institutions
have and advertised it as open to the public, we had a booking system and a large
curtain, which could be closed over if the room was occupied. We simply made the
space comfortable using furniture already in the basement of the building, and we
also developed a reading group, as one model of how the room might be used.
Many artists used the space to read or to talk or to have meetings. We wanted
to think that these art institutions might offer a space which would privilege a
slower less visible relationship with artistic discourses as alongside the activity of
exhibition-making. We wanted to provide a more intimate space in which to figure
things out, grapple with problems and to make mistakes this is how we learn
and this process should be ongoing without the pressure of always being super vis-
ible. This was always also a reaction to the local political criticisms to Catherine
Davids programme at that time in Witte de With, which was criticised as not being
spectacular enough.
Putting art in dialogue with other art via an exhibition or some kind of display
has to be a good thing as often and as much as possible I think, so I am always inter-
ested in why and how that happens. Irit Rogoffs quote makes sense to me because
it situates ones thinking position and is embedded in life, in societal conditions and
sensitive to circumstance. I think she means location in a broader sense not just as
a geographic situation but rather as a contingent performative one.
ANNIE FLETCHER:That was indeed the second really important point of departure
for us to look again at Joseph Beuys and the Free International University. Beuys
had the idea at one point in the early seventies to locate the FIU in Ireland and had
actually made with Caroline Tisdall a funding application to what was the
European Economic Community (EEC) in 1975. Beuys had been quite a presence in
Ireland while researching this, connecting with the peace movement in Northern
Ireland and went on to partake in his 100-day Documenta project later. Beuys had a
highly romantic view of Ireland as a space unsullied by Modernism and in some
ways still connected to its primitive mystical and pagan roots. But he also saw the
open wound that was the ongoing Troubles in Northern Ireland somehow as a kind
of representative of contemporary conflict per se and all the more in need of art.
But what becomes most immediately obvious when you read his reasons for
going to Ireland in the first place and juxtapose them with the situation now (as our
co-curators Art/Not Art did as an early part of the project) is that of course contem-
porary Ireland has changed radically, it is more industrialized and has been boom-
ing economically since then, and the peace process still holds and is now held up as
Interview with Annie Flatcher _ CAN WE HAVE A POSITION WITHOUT LOCATION? _ 37
PRELOM: nJ hcw Jc ycu see juture Jeve|cp-
ment cj the |cn-term crtist prcjects in thct ccn-
text?
l ANNIE FLETCHER is an independent critic
and curator who lives and works in Amster-
dam. She is currently head of the Curatorial
Training Programme at De Appel in Amster-
dam. She is currently co-curating with Frederi-
que Bergholtz and Tanja Elstgeest If I Cant
Dance I Dont Want To Be Part Of Your
Revolution at various locations in the Nether-
lands (www.ificantdance.org), 2005-2007.
Recent collabrations include Cork Caucus with
Charles Esche, Tara Byrne & Sean Kelly (NSF)
and Art/Not Art in Cork, Ireland 2005
(www.corkcaucus.org), The Paraeducation
Department with Sarah Pierce as part of
Tracer at TENT./ Witte de Rotterdam, 2004.
She co-curated the project Now What?
Dreaming a better world in six parts, October
2003 with Maria Hlavajova based at BAK, basis
voor actuele kunst in Utrecht, 2003. Other proj-
ects include How Things Turn Out Irish
Museum of Modern art 2002, Simulation Caf
with Apolonija [u{ter{i} as part of the
Visualise programme in Carlow, Ireland and a
solo exhibition Herald or Press of Gerard Byrne
at the Douglas Hyde Gallery Dublin in 2002.
The International Language in Belfast 2001
and Adam and Eve, sex, tolerance and other
dependencies at Stichting De Appel,
Amsterdam 2002. Published essays include
catalogue texts on Gerard Byrne, Paddy Jolley,
Susan Philipsz, Phil Collins, Otto Berchem, L.A.
Raeven and Apolonija [u{ter{i} and interviews
with Liam Gillick and Sarat Maharaj and
Nathan Coley.
the model of what the European Community can do for a previously underdevel-
oped country. Again for us this all provided a very important context from which to
critically consider what kind of situation we operate in now in the world and how
artists might contribute to that debate. Jan Verwoert wrote and gave a specific lec-
ture considering Beuyss legacy and his ideas of the political potential of art and its
connection to Ireland which was fantastic.
In terms of decision-making we just came back from Cork where we had a pub-
lic meeting to discuss what indeed could come out of Cork Caucus. Rather than it
being an event that was in some way complete, we wanted to ask people in Cork
what it had generated in terms of activity, ideas and possibility. It was a very vigor-
ous meeting not without its agonies and conflicts but it for sure felt like the Caucus
provided a kind of catalyst for on-going artistic activity. What the Capital of Culture
provided was money and focus and the NSF (National Sculpture Factory) would
probably never be able to mobilize on that scale again but what is clear is that it
generated enough thinking material and a model of practices for a more sustain-
able and varied level of relationship in Cork and beyond Cork to continue.
ANNIE FLETCHER:Well on two levels , one is that the practice and projects reflect
and comment on the situation of Cork in a variety of ways. Bik van der Pol are just
now publishing a newspaper supplement in a local Cork paper with essays from
invited thinkers and artists on their research in Cork and will have a show about the
Ford Boxes in the Triskel Arts Centre next year. Phil Collins will do a project called
Free Photolab which may be a project in three locations Cork, London and Belgrade
in 2006. The other central ideas was that the network and contacts made will be
sustained wider artistic practice elsewhere, already Art/Not Art are planning a book
about projects and ideas which had potential there at that moment, but which
never took off yet and might be revisited, like the workshop of held by Kunchi
Cultural studies centre and Agung Kurniawan from Indonesia. Also, positive new
elements on a very pragmatic level are the establishment of a new artists initiative
space called Villa K, and of course that the National Sculpture Factory under the
directorship of Tara Byrne mobilised itself in a totally ambitious way and have
made new links and connections internationally which I am sure will have a long
term effect. Who knows perhaps the best is yet to come!
Interview by Jelena Vesi}
Invisible Pilots, White Benches Project , Cork Caucus, 2005
QUESTION:5cme pecp|e see crective ccmmcns
cs c reccticn tc whct is hcppenin cn c |cre
scc|e with cu|turc| prcJucticn cnJ Jistributicn
thrcuh new technc|cies, with the rc|e cj prc-
Jucer cnJ cuJience, cnJ with the trcJiticnc| wcy
cj prctectin wcrr Whct, in ycur cpinicn, wcu|J
be scme mcin Jirecticns thct ccnstitute this, cs is
cjten cbserveJ, rinJ cj ccnj|icteJ envircnment?
QUESTION: |ct cj the thins thct ycu hcve
menticneJ cre pcrt cj ycur bccr cnJ ycur
resecrch where ycu mcre c c|ecr Jistincticn
between whct ycu cc|| ccmmcJity cu|ture
cnJ cu|ture withcut ccmmcJities |sc, ccm-
mcJity cu|ture bui|Js its strctey cn the ecc-
ncmic cnJ trcJe vc|ue cj the cu|turc| cbject cnJ
c|sc ccntrc|s mecns cj prcJucticn cnJ its Jistri-
buticn Whct wcu|J then be the mcin Jijjerence
between ccmmcJity cu|ture cnJ cu|ture with-
cut ccmmcJities?
Durin the jestivc| in |jub|jcnc which mcrreJ the |ccc|izcticn cj the crective
ccmmcns |icense in 5|cvenic, we hcJ cn cppcrtunity tc tc|r with e|ix 5tc|Jer,
kesecrcher in the jie|J cj ccntempcrcry cu|turc| prcJucticn cnJ netwcrrin prccesses
bcseJ cn the inj|uence cj new ccmmuniccticn technc|cies in scciety ct |cre 5ince,
we were witnessin crective ccmmcns |cunch, we tc|reJ with e|ix cbcut this system
cj |icensin, which cppecrs cs c new urency, cnJ he hcs ncticeJ thct crective
ccmmcns cctuc||y tries tc estcb|ish new bc|cnce between the jreeJcm cj pecp|e tc
use, ccpy cnJ shcre cu|turc| mcteric|, tc tcre cctive pcrt in scme prccesses cj cu|turc|
prcJucticn, cnJ the rihts cj cn cuthcr tc ccntrc| scme cspects cj the use cj its wcrrs
FELIX STALDER:The Creative Commons project reacts to two trends. One is that
on the Internet it is very easy for individuals to distribute material globally, their
own but also other peoples. The other is that established copyright industries
music labels, film studios and publishers are demanding, and obtaining even
more extensive legal restrictions particularly regarding using and sharing of mate-
rial. So, there is a contradiction: technically, you can access and distribute material
very easily, while legally, this becomes more and more difficult.
This tension between the technical and legal environment creates many prob-
lems. It is so easy to distribute material, which it is done by millions of people every-
day. Yet, much of it is illegal. Do we want to criminalize all of them? If not, we need
to create an environment in which these everyday practices can be conducted
openly and legally. Such an environment which makes accessing digital works easy
and cheap is not just good news for audiences, but also for creators, because it helps
them to find an audience for their works.
Creative Commons takes the fact that technically it is so easy to distribute
material as a good thing and creates tools that support this legally, without taking
away all the rights from the original author, which is what piracy does.
This is the distribution aspect of the Creative Commons project. However, this is
not all. CC is also concerned with the production side of the creative process. In a dig-
ital culture, techniques such as copy&paste, remixing, sampling or other kinds of
transformation are part of everyday practices. Thus, new culture is built by incorpo-
rating and adapting of existing material. This has always been the case; writers are
usually also avid readers, and painters tend to have a keen interest in other painters
works. The exchange of ideas is critical for the development of culture. In the digital
context, this is perhaps more obvious, and more easy, but unfortunately, new restric-
tive legal environment makes this more difficult. The Creative Commons licenses
make it easy to allow others to build on ones work, thus providing a resource of
material that can safely and easily be used as raw material for new works.
In the field of software, this new collaborative approach of cultural production
has become very important as open source software. In other fields of culture, say
music or writing, these processes are more experimental, but examples such as the
Wikipedia or emerging music styles based on remixing show that there is a lot of
potential. We are in the early days here.
FELIX STALDER: We are actually experiencing cultural transition, from culture
characterized by analogue technologies, in particular by print technology, but also by
technologies like painting or sculpting, to a culture that is characterized by digital
technologies. The analogue work, created using printing presses or canvases is very
different from digital work, for example a photo file, or mp3 music file. It is different
in a sense that digital objects are much more fluid; its very easy to make a remix of
a sound file, or to make an edit of an image file, in the way that it is very difficult to
do the same thing on a physical photograph, for example. Because there, when you
change it, you are changing the original. In the digital context, you are always mak-
ing copies. So, you copy it and you make something new through the process of copy-
ing it. This allows people to relate differently to the culture they produce.
Interview with Felix Stalder _ ARE NEW BALANCES POSSIBLE IN CONTEMPORARY CULTURAL PRODUCTION? _ 39
CULTURAL CAPITAL:
ARE NEW BALANCESPOSSIBLE IN
CONTEMPORARY CULTURAL PRODUCTION?
Interview with Felix Stalder by Branka ]ur~i}, kuda.org
QUESTION: 1his c|sc brins us tc questicn cj
the rc|e cj the trcJiticnc| ccpyriht |cw cn the
cne hcnJ, cnJ the rise cj mcny pcrc||e| |icens-
in systems cn the cther Hcw cctuc||y chcne-
cb|e cre strict ccpyriht |cws, ij they cre ct c||? ls
it pcssib|e thct the pressure cj pecp|e bein
criminc|izeJ beccuse cj their Jci|y cctivity cj
shcrin ji|es cver the lnternet wi|| cctuc||y
shcpe the |cw?
The analogue model is based on the idea that you produce culture out of raw
materials, lets say, paint that you apply to canvas. At the end of the process, you
have the finished painting. There is a clear difference between paint and the paint-
ing and there is the linear process from one to the other. Within digital culture,
what you take as your raw material is the work of other people. For example, you
are using a finished song and you remix it. Raw material and new cultural product
are on the same level theyre both music, produced by someone. There is no lin-
ear transition from the raw material to the fixed object. It is much more a process of
translation and transformation. It is much more like a chain structure, where one
links to the other, where the output of one becomes the input of the other.
When you use an analogue model of culture, you can then build an economy
on top of it that is based on the control of these objects by the artist (or the compa-
ny that bought the artists rights). This is how mass media work; all rights belong to
the owner of the work, the user has no rights (other than those he/she bought). If
you think of culture as an endless process of transformation, it becomes clear that
you cannot lock away the cultural products, but that you have to find a new balance
between the rights of the artists who created the work, and the rights of the public
(which also includes other artists), who wants to make use of the work.
In economic terms, one model is based on selling identical copies, the other is
based on unique performances. Musicians can do both, and in recent years, more
and more of their income comes from tours, rather than sales of records. Of course,
this is not true for everyone, but as a tendency its clearly noticeable.
FELIX STALDER:Changing the law is a political process. You have to get players in
relevant political bodies, say national parliaments or international organizations, to
conclude that they have to change the law. In practice, this is extremely difficult to
do, not the least because there are very strong organized interests that work on this
level. Industry associations, for example, are very experienced in doing that. The
problem is that they see their established business model selling identical copies
of something, say, a book threatened by the new technologies, which make copy-
ing trivial. They want to keep their analogue business model in the digital context.
So, they are trying to make restrictions on the legal level, and on the technical level,
so that you cannot make copies of the CDs that you bought, of the book that you
downloaded and similar things. Against this backdrop of organized interest, influ-
encing the law or the legal process in the direction of more openness and less
restrictions is very hard, but it can be done, as the defeat of software patents in the
European Parliament last June showed.
But in the meantime, we have to invite artists to think differently about what
they do and then help them by giving them legal tools, so that they can do it open-
ly. Existing copyright laws are heavily influenced by commercial interests, and they
are based on an old romantic idea of what artistic production is. Historically speak-
ing, this idea was formulated in the 18
th
and 19
th
centuries. Basically, the copyright
law that we have today is still in the 19
th
century mould. So, we have ideas of what
creative and artistic production is from the 19
th
century way of producing culture.
We now have digital culture, where these ideas no longer apply.
So, we have to develop ways of thinking about what it is to work as an artist in
the 21
st
century and then establish different practices based on that. I am convinced
that it will be easier for artists to develop new practices of doing art, or of musicians
doing music, how to share it with an audience and how to relate to an audience,
than it will be to change the law.
But in the end, both will have to come together. If what people do is too much
against legal environment, there would be a lot of friction and you can see that in
the case of file sharing, where millions of people are sharing files right now over the
Internet, which is against the law. What is happening now in the US and Europe is
that thousands of people are prosecuted and criminalized due to something that is
everyday practice. In the long run, that is a real bad situation.
In time, if the gap between what people do and what the law prescribes do
becomes too big, either law would break down or you would have to impose it through
a police state. Both options are neither attractive nor very likely. Because what you can
see increasingly is that there are a growing number of businesses or industries that are
no longer dependent on the old copyright model, but are actually trying to develop
new ways of doing business, within a more open environment. And that will help to
QUESTION:Beccuse cj everythin thct is hcp-
penin cn the ccntempcrcry cu|turc| scene,
there is c shijt hcppenin cs we|| - the pcsiticn,
re|cticnship, tit|e cj crtists, cu|turc| prcJucers is
chcnin cnJ the cc||cbcrcticn prccess
beccmes mcre cnJ mcre visib|e We ccn scy thct
this trenJ criinctes jrcm the Open 5curce
mcvement ccu|J ycu te|| us mcre cbcut the
princip|es thct cre respecteJ, nct cn|y in the
Open 5curce mcvement, but cbcut the princi-
p|es cn which this cc||cbcrcticn is bcseJ?
QUESTION: ln ycur resecrch, ycu c|sc mcre
scme rejerence tc crt cnJ cu|turc| mcvements
thrcuhcut histcry, which intrcJuceJ certcin
jreeJcms thct with tcJcys prcctices shcre c
rinJ cj the scme princip|es cj cc||cbcrcticn in
the prcJucticn ccu|J ycu te|| us mcre cbcut the
bcsis cj the pcrc||e|s thct ycu cre mcrin by
ccnnectin thcse mcvements?
strengthen the political coalitions that will change the law, before it gets to the break-
ing point. There is an example that has already been put into practice the campaign
against software patents in the European Union. There you had an interesting coali-
tion of Free Software programmers and cultural producers, but also small businesses,
who knew that the strengthening of copyright laws, in this case of software patent
laws, was not in their interest, because they do business in a different way. It is not just
a case of business against culture. What we can also see is the rift within business,
where certain businesses are better off with an old model and others are trying to find
a new one. I think that the political landscape is transforming around the issue, not
today and not tomorrow, but what you can already see, at least in the case of the
patent laws in the European Union, is that it is possible to change the law or prevent
the law from changing to worse in this case. A powerful coalition that was able to
influence that on the European level has emerged. There is indeed a chance that things
can change, because underneath the realities of digital cultures things have changed
so profoundly. It is very difficult to ignore this. It is possible, but not indefinitely.
FELIX STALDER:A lot of Open Source software or other cultural content is under
so-called copyleft licenses. Copyleft is a kind of opposite of copyright. This is based
on four basic freedoms, which guarantee that you can use the material for any pur-
pose you like; you can copy it, as often as you like, you can distribute those copies,
the third freedom is that you can change it and turn the material into something
that you like better or thats more useful to you, and the fourth freedom is that you
can distribute your change. This comes under one condition, that you must distrib-
ute your changes with the same four freedoms attached. The basic idea is that the
material that you get for free you give to others with the same freedoms. It doesnt
mean that it has to be without a price. You can make a business out of it, if you want
to, but you cannot make a business out of it by restricting others to enjoy the same
rights that you have. Thats kind of the basic idea behind it you build on it, on
something that someone else has done and you give others the right to build on
what you have done. Upon this, you can establish collaboration between people,
who dont know each other and who will know that you cannot take anything
away from them, because it is built on these principles.
FELIX STALDER:You can say that throughout the 20
th
century most avant-garde
movements in the West have tried to go beyond iconic art objects. They were less
and less about producing paintings or sculptures, but more and more about perform-
ances, processes, about trying to break down the barrier between the artist and the
audience. You can say that this started with the Dada movement in the time of the
First World War, and there were a series of movements during the 1950s and 1960s.
During the 1970s, for example, punk music tried to establish different concepts of
what it is like to be an artist, what it is like to be an audience. For a long time, these
Interview with Felix Stalder _ ARE NEW BALANCES POSSIBLE IN CONTEMPORARY CULTURAL PRODUCTION? _ 41
Christoph Bchel & Gianni Motti, Guantanamo Initiative, 2004
QUESTION: Whct is the sinijiccnce cj hcvin
crective ccmmcns |ccc|izcticn in the Bc|rcn
reicn, cn the territcry thct in the |cst zo yecrs
hcve been mcrreJ by brutc| pirccy cn the |eve| cj
prcJucticn, but much mcre cn the |eve| cj Jistri-
buticn cj the cu|turc| mcteric|? Dc ycu thinr thct
cu|turc| prcJucticn in thcse crecs miht c|sc be
JcmceJ, when cny rinJ cj cwnership ccncept is
ccnce||eJ? Whct sinijiccnce Jc these e|ements
hcve in the Jeve|cpment cj pub|ic cnJ cu|turc|
ccpitc| in c nec-|iberc| trcnsiticnc| ccntext?
l FELIX STALDER (*1968) is a lecturer in media
economy at the Academy of Art and Design,
Zurich [ 1 ] and a managing partner of Open-
flows [2], an international network enterprise
focusing on research and development of Open
Source technology and culture. He is also one of
the long-term moderators of nettime [3], inter-
national mailing list for critical theories and
practices of networked cultures. He has lived in
Toronto, Canada for a long time, completing
his Ph.D. and collaborating with the McLuhan
Program in Culture and Technology. He is cur-
rently based in Vienna, where he co-organized
several conferences and edited newspapers
with Netbase, the Institute for New Cultural
Technologies, t0o [4]. Has published and lec-
tured extensively on a wide-range of issues
relating loosely to the political economy of net-
worked technology [5]. His next book is Ma-
nuel Castells, Theory of the Network Society
Polity Press, 2006.
He lives together with Andrea Mayr, and Selma
Viola, all three proud to be flesh.
[ 1 ] http://www.snm-hgkz.net
[2] http://www.openflows.org
[3] http://www.nettime.org
[4] http://www.netbase.org
[5] http://felix.openflows.org
practices remained relatively marginal, because they were produced in such a way
that people couldnt understand them or in a medium, in which it was difficult to do
that. The practice of remixing images, collages has been done in art since the early
twenties. But, it is a little bit different to actually cut out material and to paste it
together physically. Its much easier to do that digitally. With digital technologies
these copy-and-paste processes have become an everyday practice carried out by
millions of people who are copying and pasting like its an ordinary thing. Those
ideas that were in the background of early avant-garde experiments became much
more widespread, because this practice became much more normal. Those questions
that used to excite the small band of avant-garde artists are now suddenly some-
thing that affects millions of people in their daily life. A lot of the questions that are
now being asked have been asked before by avant-garde artists, but now they are
asked in a much different context and there is a different political urgency to them.
FELIX STALDER:As the region is moving closer to the European Union, the copy-
right laws are being applied more strictly. This is already happening and will con-
tinue even more. The existing copyright law, even if it claims to protect artists and
other creative producers, really favours the established corporate players, not the
least because only they have the resources to bring people who infringe on a copy-
right to court. For most individuals, these rights are very, very hard to enforce, hence
they are of limited value. If you are coming from a poorer country with a less effi-
cient legal system, then your chances are even smaller. So, local producers do not
have all that terribly much to gain from getting more copyrights. In addition, the
traditional channels through which commercial culture is distributed are also heav-
ily controlled by these corporations and they make it very hard for artists that are
not under their contracts to get into these channels.
On the other hand, if you distribute our works online, it really doesnt matter
all that much where you are. All that matters is that the works you create can be
found by the people who might appreciate them. The Creative Commons licenses
help to do that, because they allow people to give your work to others who might
be interested in it. Thus, particularly for people who do not have access to the tradi-
tional culture industry and mass media, these licenses facilitate the use of the
Internet as an alternative means of building an audience. Of course, it still depends
on the quality of the work, but creating good works is what artists do best.
1his interview wcs rec|iseJ cn the ccccsicn cj the bccr presentcticn Open cu|tures
cnJ the Ncture cj Netwcrrs by e|ix 5tc|Jer, ct the crective ccmmcns jestivc| in
|jub|jcnc, Octcber z,-z, zoo 1he bccr is c jcint pub|ishin prcject cj New MeJic
center_ruJccr, Ncvi 5cJ cnJ prcbc, 5cc, 5crcjevc, cnJ the prccess cj pub|ishin,
presentin cnJ Jistributin the bccr is cn interc| pcrt cj the |mcstrec|: prcject
Christoph Bchel & Gianni Motti, Guantanamo Initiative, 2004
PRELOM:We ccu|J scy thct the exhibiticn itse|j
wcrrs cnJ is sprecJin |ire c virus, cnJ thct
theres c neeJ jcr cn instituticnc| jrcmewcrr
(bein the hcst) 1he l |cve Ycu exhibiticn
crcnizeJ by digitalcraft Jec|s with ccmputer
viruses ls there c neeJ jcr the instituticnc|
jrcme when it ccmes tc the questicn cj e|ectrcn-
ic spcce usce cnJ brccJer pcrticipcticn?
PRELOM:Digitalcraft wcs initic||y c secticn cj
the Museum cj pp|ieJ rts rcnrjurt, where
ycu were in the pcsiticn cj rcject Directcr
Whct wcs the mcin ccncept cj such cn initictive
in the cjjicic| structure cj the museum?
FRANZISKA NORI:In the case of Jiitc|crcjt, a curatorial team which has been
working since 2000 on exhibition projects devoted to the phenomena of digital cul-
ture, we explicitly choose the institutional frame as a platform for our projects.
Historically speaking, museums have always been places in which cultural rele-
vance has been decided and defined. Within society museums retain the role of
decision-maker in terms of what is worthy to be considered our collective cultural
heritage and therefore what is worthy of being preserved. During the 20
th
century,
museums have started to also address issues of contemporary art and culture.
Therefore, the museums role has shifted from being an institution of mere historic
documentation and preservation to being a platform for public discussion of cur-
rent social issues.
Marcel Duchamp was among the first avant-garde artists to explicitly raise the
issue about the importance of arts contextual definition. By extrapolating objects
of daily use (for example, his ready-mades, such as the Fountain a pissoir, or
the Porte-Bouteilles a bottle rack) from their functional context, re-contextual-
izing them in a museum setting, he, the artist, turned an ordinary object into a
unique piece of art. Beyond this, Duchamp explicitly chooses objects of industrial
production, therefore a serial production, undermining the idea itself of unique-
ness and of the artist-made masterpiece (what Walter Benjamin will analyze fur-
ther in his book The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction).
To go back to your query concerning the work of Jiitc|crcjt: yes, self-ironical-
ly speaking, in some ways the approach my team and I have chosen could be com-
pared to the way a virus functions an external entity (the Jiitc|crcjt team) infil-
trating the body of a host (in this case museums) with our ideas with the intention
of amplifying and distributing our contents more widely
Concerning your question addressing the ever-lasting polemic if born digital
contents need an institutional frame or even a real-sight placement: no, there is
no need at all, except it is a matter of scope, or, formulated otherwise: a matter of
who you want to reach and in which cultural context you would like to be per-
ceived. In fact, sadly enough, most of the digital art projects have never even been
acquainted by museum institutions, except through the work of single curators
who made the attempt to exhibit them sporadically, mainly in the museums
online sections.
I explicitly do not want to deepen the curatorial paradigm here about the legit-
imacy of exhibiting digital art and how to adequately exhibit it in real sites, as that
is an issue on its own. But I think I can affirm that actively pushing digital culture
and technology-based arts into museums is one of the tasks Jiitc|crcjt is pursuing,
mainly for the reason that we believe these sorts of projects, which reflect the cru-
cial issues of our current society, should be brought to the consciousness of a broad-
er audience and discussed on a socially larger scale than simply in the relatively
restricted digital art communities.
FRANZISKA NORI: In 1999, the former director of the Museum of Applied Arts
Frankfurt, James Bradburne, postulated a paradigm change to the institution of the
Museum, reacting to the evident crisis institutions go through if looking at gen-
eral attendance (number of visitors), their average age and the duration of their
stay. The management also foresaw a broader change in the implementation of a
new department, which was called Jiitc|crcjt. Over a time span of approximately
four years, Jiitc|crcjts mission consisted of defining aspects within digital culture
to integrate in the established museums work and finding adequate ways for its
mediation to a broader public.
Interview with Franziska Nori _ HOW TO INFILTRATE THE BODY OF THE HOST? _ 43
CULTURAL CAPITAL:
HOW TO INFILTRATE
THE BODY OF THE HOST?
Interview with Franziska Nori
PRELOM:5c, ij we scy thct the wcrr cj digital-
craft uses the meme |cic, hcw Jc ycu ccnceive
ycur prcjects in ccrre|cticn with BcurJieus iJec
cj cu|turc| reprcJucticn cnJ hcw Jc they re|cte
tc the ncticn cj cu|turc| ccpitc|, which is pcr-
ticu|cr|y ncticecb|e in museum prcctice?
The tasks we started defining for our project sprang from the traditional tasks
inherent to museums: researching, interpreting, collecting, preserving and exhibit-
ing. But the challenge consisted in re-defining these activities within the frame-
work of the contemporary information society and its changing demands.
Museums have the purpose of preserving and presenting historical objects, ful-
filling their function as part of the cultural memory, but in the information society
they find themselves facing an entirely new set of questions regarding the culture
of new media and the Internet. How can we collect contents that are ephemeral and
transitory, which by definition are in a constant process of modification, like, for
example, websites or net art projects? What criteria should we consider in order to
decide the relevance of an object in terms of cultural history? How should digital
objects be permanently stored in the face of the rapid innovation time of software
and hardware? How will we document social aspects like interaction and/or com-
munication streams? And finally, how best to present digital artefacts and media-
enhanced communication phenomena to the museum public?
We were confronted with the challenge of creating a digital collection without
any analogous comparison to an already existing museum project. In the year 2000
we started the process of trying different solutions, both in terms of technology as
well as in terms of approach, learning by making mistakes and modifying them.
Because we worked within the context of a museum of applied arts, the focus was
on digital applied arts, on objects of everyday life, so-called examples of digital
artistry, objects that combine form and function. Beyond that, we investigated phe-
nomena that applied to the production process itself, reflecting upon changes of
conditions and circumstances for it, as well as on phenomena in the fields of skills
and tools used for manufacturing digital craft.
A further challenge that we undertook was to run a real museum department
in which our main focus lay in the knowledge transfer to the audience. We created
a vast program of workshops and activities for kids and adults, a program which
was mainly driven by the concept of informal learning rather than on the tradition-
al didactic frontal teaching method, as is often found in museums. We also con-
ceived exhibitions dedicated to single phenomena of contemporary digital culture,
such as the already mentioned I Love You exhibition, the exhibition adon-
naM.mp3 which analyzed the peer-to-peer and file sharing phenomenon, or a proj-
ect called Digital Origami which presented the so-called demo scene (full docu-
mentation of all Jiitc|crcjt activities can be found under: www.digitalcraft.org).
The department had a growing community of users and the exhibitions con-
ceived were successful and started to tour around partner institutions internation-
ally. Throughout the duration of the project, the city administration had never
employed the Jiitc|crcjt team on a regular basis; instead the team was freelanc-
ing, which made it relatively easy for the new director who took over the museum
in late 2003 to discharge the team. As his interests lay in the traditional areas of
applied arts (ceramics, pottery, tapestry), we decided not to continue the new media
department removing it entirely from the institution.
FRANZISKA NORI:You address a very central issue which is also one of Jiitc|crcjts
main concerns: the essential role education plays in todays information society.
Actually, since the 1970s when Bourdieu first made his considerations about the con-
cept of cultural reproduction, the social reality has changed dramatically also due to
the possibilities given by the growing access to digital technologies and the Internet.
Entire industries have been deconstructed by the new parameters set by the
spread of connectivity the best example here might be the music industry, which
after the wide use of peer-to-peer networks, dramatically lost its base of commerce.
The economics of information, which arose from the new possibilities set by the
Net, generated a radical change of the traditional divide between producers and
consumers, of the production and distribution of goods and information.
Information has always been the key to social, political and economic influ-
ence and power and its significance has increased drastically in the current infor-
mation age.
The information monopoly, historically retained and channelled by the social
elites, has been shattered nowadays thanks to broader access to distributed knowl-
edge systems which open up opportunities for everyone skilled enough to ade-
quately use digital technologies and the Internet.
PRELOM:We||, l thinr here we ccu|J c bccr tc
the l |cve Ycu exhibiticn, which excmines c||
the |eve|s cj sccic| cnJ inJiviJuc| respcnsibi|ity
cnJ juncticns nct cn|y cs cn injcrmcticn
prcviJer, but c|sc cs c p|ctjcrm jcr estcb|ishin
pub|ic Jebctes lt cppecrs inevitcb|e tc |ccr ct
scme cj the exhibiticn sements in the ccntext
cj cctivism Usuc||y, hccrers by Jejcu|t cre chcr-
ccterizeJ cs rebe|s, even thcuh nct c|| cj them
cre cwcre cj the pc|iticc| ccnnctcticns Hcw Jc
ycu perceive these prcctices in the ccntext cj
cctivism cnJ hcw wcu|J ycu perceive them
recrJin its ejjects?
PRELOM:Whct cre the imp|iccticns cj digital-
craft cnJ its prcjects cn the pc|itics cj rethinrin
museums?
The importance of acquiring technological skills nowadays plays a key role.
With skills, I do not merely refer to the correct use of hard- and software but to a
deeper understanding of the multiple and complex correlations which constitute
our current online society and which turns passive users into aware and responsi-
ble citizens of the virtual realm. Diitc|crcjt sees its mission in publicly addressing
digital culture topics, providing a wide range of background information and
knowledge to its audience. By creating a web of cross-linked information we aim to
generate an extensive understanding about multifaceted realities by the audience.
Following the ideal of a humanistic education, Jiitc|crcjt ultimately aims to con-
tribute training to the audience to create its own opinion about controversial issues
and to stimulate a critical debate by providing all possible angles of view on a spe-
cific topic.
FRANZISKA NORI:Well, not all hackers are activists, and not all activists are hack-
ers. The hacker scene, overall, is quite heterogeneous and the motivations of single
individuals differ greatly among them. There has been a radical change within the
scene since its historic origins. In the 1980s and 90s the hacker scene was, interna-
tionally speaking, rather small and used a restricted number of insider news-
groups and platforms to communicate. One of the main suppositions to join these
mainly underground scenes was not only an extraordinary coding ability but also
the adherence to the hackers ethical code. Share your knowledge, or dont
release maleware into the wild were just some of the rules they shared. Later gen-
erations of so-called script kiddies, for example, had not much interest for these
self-inflicted canons and were driven rather by mere curiosity toward technical
boundaries or the will of performing their coding skills publicly. Not to mention
the latest expressions of criminal hacking which is related to spamming, carding
and data mining.
Speaking of activism today implies a broad field within itself, and hacking
activities might be one out of many possible aspects but not the only one. Activism,
in my opinion, primarily has to do with a founded knowledge of social and political
circumstances, with knowledge about correlations between facts and people and
than with direct participation in collective acts of protest taking place on the Net as
well as on real sites.
FRANZISKA NORI:The core consideration characterizing Jiitc|crcjts approach
sees exhibitions and museum collections in general as democratic (versus elitist)
acts of aesthetic and intellectual statement with a high degree of educational effect.
Collections and exhibitions contribute in creating the collective memory of a socie-
ty and at the same time carry the responsibility of generating a sense of historical
place and meaning, as Bruce Sterling expressed it.
Our consideration is based on the idea that exhibitions are strategic systems of
representation. Depending on their content (subject of the exhibition), their context
(the specificity of the given political environment, the historical context and the
institution or site at which the project is shown) and their authors (artists and con-
tributors of content), exhibitions create their own web of significance using a vari-
ety of stylistic elements. The assumption therefore lies in the fact that there is a
communication established between the curatorial team (who creates a coded sys-
tem) and the audience (who knows how to de-code, how to read the underlying
intentions).
The spatial relation in which the single elements of the exhibition are put to
each other and which reveal the curatorial assumptions play a key role. Therefore,
the aesthetics (site-specific and work-specific) along with the exhibition design and
architecture helps in creating a visual code as well as a meta-text between the
works which is essential in explicating the curatorial notions. Some elements, for
example, are the wall colouring (psychologically meaningful), the lighting (narra-
tive element that adds dramatic emphasis), or the creation of spatial situations
which bear specific connotations (e.g. white cube, black box, Wunderkammer Style
or Petersburger hanging, in a public site, in an institutional site, indoors, outdoors).
Furthermore, a broad didactic concept which involves various levels of complexity
in contents as well as different support media (guided tours, wall texts and
labelling, interactive terminals, catalogues) contributes to meet the single visitors
desire for a deeper understanding.
Interview with Franziska Nori _ HOW TO INFILTRATE THE BODY OF THE HOST? _ 45
l FRANZISKA NORI (1968) is head of research
of the digitalcraft.org organization, which pro-
duces exhibitions devoted to phenomena of
digital culture. From 2000 - 2003 she was cura-
tor of the department for new media art and
crafts at the Museum of Applied Arts (MAK) in
Frankfurt, for which she organized exhibitions
as well as a collection of digital objects (games
and websites). Franziska Nori and her team
produced exhibitions such as I Love You
exploring the worlds of hackers and viruses,
adonnaM.mp3 devoted to peer-to-peer net-
works and file-sharing in the Net, Digital Ori-
gami about the so-called demo scene. In 1998,
she was appointed by the European
Commission to deliver an appraisal of future
strategies for European museums working
with new media.
If we consider the exhibition to be a medium of communication that generates
a coded structure of meaning, one that the audience needs to decode according to
its personal cultural background, we could say that the task of a curator consists not
merely of selecting objects and putting them on display, but that in presenting
them he/she deliberately creates relationships of sense and meaning, thus formu-
lating a curatorial statement. The audiences ability of decoding these statements is
strongly related to its level of connoisseur-ship. It is therefore the curators assign-
ment to function not simply as a researcher but as a mediator and to provide the
viewer with tools that will help the latter to undertake this deciphering. This means
that he/she has to empower others to acquire relevant knowledge.
Within this line of argument it is also the curators task to openly formulate
his/her standpoint and underlying ideas therefore putting them up for public debate.
In the context of a rapidly changing communication and knowledge society, in
which technological, scientific and social changes are happening at breathtaking
speed, the role of artists and cultural operators can still be of crucial relevance to the
general orientation of collective visions. Questions such as where our society is
heading, who we still are and who we shall be, questions about our identity and
questions about conceivable future scenarios are still of social as well as individ-
ual interest. I would like to plead for the original utopian force of the arts (con-
sciously spoken of in the plural) in investigating existential matters, transcending
classifications by art historians and market-driven strategies.
Without considering here the many causes of museums loss of relevance in
respect to their social role, I think that we can recognise a gradual change of aware-
ness and a new attitude to self-legitimation in their work. Institutions are rising to
the challenge by experimenting with event-driven concepts, mass-audience mam-
moth exhibition projects and edutainment for all ages, to name but a few.
Museums historically have the purpose of preserving and presenting historical
objects, fulfilling their function as part of the cultural memory, but in the informa-
tion society they find themselves facing an entirely new set of questions regarding
the culture of new media and the Internet.
Although digital technology has had a strong impact on all sectors of contem-
porary society, both in the public and private domains, neither the general public
nor cultural institutions have yet developed a broad acceptance of current media
art production as an equally valid form of artistic expression.
One can speculate whether this is because technology is only ever seen as a
tool and not as a vehicle of cultural content, or whether those in the media art scene
stick too closely to their disciplines and work too hermetically. A further explana-
tion might be that the enormous flood of information to which we are subjected
has created such a high degree of apparent complexity that it is nearly impossible
for the average person to grasp all the factors and relationships determining the
political, economic, social and cultural reality today.
In the field of (media) art, curators can bridge the gaps that often separate dif-
ferent specialisms, bringing together a wide range of expert knowledge. They can
play the part of intermediaries and moderators, or function as translators or cata-
lysts between experts (such as artists and academics), the public and even museum
institutions; they can contribute in creating knowledge and meaning and they can
engage in ethical evaluations and debates. How? By making meaningful selections
of themes and artists, by establishing correlations and interdependencies between
discourses, and by creating experiences that are visual (aesthetic) as well as intel-
lectual in physical space.
It is a fundamental principal for Jiitc|crcjtcr that we see our task as that of
a mediator, functioning as a bridge between individual expert discourses and a par-
ticipative public. We have found this task to be quite challenging, since it has to be
performed anew each time, for every project, in accordance with the context and
the content concerned. There are different kinds of communication; different levels
of complexity have to be offered. Jiitc|crcjtcr regards its work to be a constant
process of experimentation with tasks of this sort so as to optimize the results. For
this reason, we are searching intensively for exchanges of views and cooperation
with colleagues, experts and institutions and are convinced that this event and
publication will contribute to the further exchange of thoughts.
Interview by Zorana Doji}
I Love You [rev.eng], Code Poetry, Watson Intstitute for
International Studies, Brown University, USA, 2004
PRELOM:Ycu cre wcrrin cs cn crt rcup unJer
the ncme Oda Projesi (Room Project) cnJ ycu
hcve renteJ cn cpcrtment in c neihbcurhccJ
in lstcnbu| cc||eJ Gc|ctc where ycu crcnize
Jijjerent cctivities with pecp|e |ivin in the crec
ccn ycu te|| us scmethin mcre cbcut these
cctivities?
ODA PROJESI:Oda Projesi is an artist collective based on creating common spaces
and playing with different space usages and building social relationships out of
these actions. Oda Projesi first performed its projects in a flat. But we cannot really
say that we organized different activities for the reason that organizing activities
means something else, than what we try and tried to do. The space in Galata was in
Istanbul in a neighbourhood on Sahkulu Street. Since 2000, the 45m
2
flat has been
used as a project space. But at the beginning, between 1997 and 2000, the flat was
used simply as an atelier, and the main intention was not to do a project. We were
all neighbours along with the other people in the neighbourhood. Basically this role
and act did not change, but we added or reduced our way of being present in the
area. The room in the middle was the first space where the projects started. zge
Aikkol did the opening project About a Useless Space, emptying the room and
exhibiting it with a text by Gecres erec
1
. Since then, the space started to be used
by Oda Projesi, the neighbours and the invited people (artists and people from dif-
ferent disciplines). Oda Projesis space opened on 22 January 2000 and closed on 16
March 2005 due to the gentrification process that is going on in the area. Oda Projesi
was in the neighbourhood since 1997.
Several live events/projects have been realized during this period of time in
which Oda Projesi was acting more like a host and a mediator, between possible
participants such as neighbours, artists, writers and people from different back-
grounds. But this space always functioned as a place where you can develop differ-
ent relationships stemming out of ideas of what can be done together within the
space. So our position from the very beginning varied from being a neighbour to
being an artist and we also tried to exchange roles during different projects. The last
project we made in the physical space, if we take that as an example, was a local
radio project which was joined by all the neighbours and people from different dis-
ciplines and it was in that period of time that we were ready to move from our
space, so it was a good experience and a transition from the physical space to air
space. With this radio project the neighbours made their own programs and it was
not dependent on strict schedules; it was a physical space that allowed you as well
to act without the presence of the body, gender, age and to speak through the radio
medium without being discriminated on the level of sound. It was an effort put on
to create a common language as well. The whole project in itself was also about
reflecting on hybrid languages, third language and third space.
In the end, we published a book called NeihbcurhccJ, rccm, neihbcur, uest
for the 9
th
Istanbul Biennale, treating it also as an Oda Projesi space. In this book we
thought about how a book space can be treated, as a physical space to be a meet-
ing/melting point for people who can get in touch through Oda Projesi, taking Oda
Projesi as their common relation or as a mediator to reach other people. We gath-
ered together 154 persons who had different kinds of relationships with Oda Projesi
either on the level of an idea or on the practical, action level. We started with a chain
of questions that we posed to the neighbours and we asked them to think of a new
question that will be forwarded to the next person and through these questions,
people had a symbolical dialogue between each other.
This is a book of narratives, a space inhabited by a multitude of singulars. A chain
of 154 singular narratives that are in no way unified but linked together sharing a
common space. Narratives link to each other and together articulate a hypertext, a
hyperspace. Like an orchestra with no conductor.
2
It is the practices of the narrators
that form the book as a space. As they write, they produce space. As you read, the
image of the space takes form in your mind and you become part of the production.
3
Interview with OJc rcjesi _ NEW GENRE OF PUBLIC ART MY ROOM, YOUR CULTURAL POLICY _ 47
CULTURE CAPITAL:
NEW GENREOF PUBLIC ART
MY ROOM,
YOUR CULTURAL POLICY
1 A space without a use.
I have several times tried to think of an apartment in which there
would be a useless room, absolutely and intentionally useless. It
wouldn't be a junkroom, it wouldn't be an extra bedroom, or a cor-
ridor, or a cubby-hole, or a corner. It would be a functionless space.
It would serve for nothing, relate to nothing.
For all my efforts, I found it impossible to follow this idea through to
the end. Language itself, seemingly, proved unsuited to describing
this nothing, this void, as if we could only speak of what is full, use-
ful and functional.
A space without a function. Not 'without any precise function' but
precisely without any function; not pluri-functional (everyone knows
how to do that), but a-functional. It wouldn't obviously be a space
intended solely to 'release' the others (lumber-room, cupboard,
hanging space, storage space, etc.) but a space, I repeat, that would
serve no purpose at all
Georges Perec, Species of Spaces and Other Pieces, Penguin
Books, 1997.
2 Hardt & Negri, 2004, p. 338.
3 Derya zkan, Oda Projesi produces new spaces, Ikidebir news-
paper, 9th Istanbul Biennale, 2005.
Interview with OJc rcjesi
PRELOM:Hcw Jc ycu see re|cticns between the
spcce cnJ the pub|ic? Whct is ycur view cn the
pcrticu|cr ncticn cj pub|icness thct is cttccheJ
tc ycur wcrr, tcrin p|cce in cn cpcrtment cs
usuc||y the mcst privcte p|cce?
PRELOM: l remember thct l recJ scmewhere
cbcut the ccmpcriscn cj ycur prcctice with c
c|cssic pub|ic scu|pture, where ycur wcrr wcs
metcphcricc||y JejineJ cs c sccic| scu|pture in
prccess 1he iJec cj c sccic| scu|pture is
hercic in c wcy, it pcints tc Jetermincticn, it
ccrries c certcinty cj intenticn whi|e ycur wcrr,
cn ccntrcry, hcs c certcin rinJ cj j|exibi|ity
ODA PROJESI: Maria Lind says in one of her articles on Oda Projesi that Oda
Projesis work is part of the varied contemporary art that operates interactively and
utilises public or semi-public space. She points out that we set up situations for
various types of exchanges in which intimacy and personal contact are stressed and
that our work has even been described as a reflection of what public art is and
what it can be and how it functions within contemporary art. Lind thinks that
Suzanne Lacys definition of the new genre public art might be applied to Oda
Projesis work: New genre public art calls for an integrative critical language
through which values, ethics and social responsibility can be discussed in terms of
art. In this case, for us to act in terms of art and to have the awareness of this act is
important.
The terms public and private differ in meaning according to societies and
even from one street to the next in Istanbul. As long as we did not really label our
work in terms of public or private, we found ourselves dealing with these terms
more closely in our projects. When you look and try to see Oda Projesi as a whole,
you start to have the sense of building some other kind of public, public under
construction through the projects. The boundaries between public and private are
very blurry in Istanbul and also in our projects. The usage of an apartment, termed
private, can be so public that it can help you to redefine your being or acts in pub-
lic. Space is organized by relations and usages, not by their given functions or defi-
nitions. It is very important to have a look at contemporary Istanbul in this sense,
to see how the meeting point of public and private forms new usages and relations.
How the usage of a street makes private life as public as possible or the other way
around.
Oda Projesi believes in micro organizations, acts and tactics. So within each
project the notion of public gets bigger and the classic definition is put aside. Oda
Projesi took the daily life dynamics of this neighbourhood as a starting point and
reflected upon different usages of the space whether on the city map or in the
room. Daily life is represented by the private field created publicly where space
and time are organized with personal conditions.
Let us look at a project that Erik Gngrich did in the neighbourhood, a picnic
project. Erik came up with the idea that Istanbul is a picnic city, and wanted to real-
ize this project. How can we make a picnic? What is needed? The project started
with shopping, then the entire courtyard was covered by colourful plastic carpets
used variously in urban spaces for different purposes. The event was announced in
advance in the neighbourhood and people were invited. The mothers were especial-
ly asked to bring some food. The courtyard covered with carpet, thanks to the archi-
tectural structure welcoming all transformations, suddenly became a space similar
to the interior of a house. Children took their shoes off and played until the begin-
ning of the feast. Since it was a picnic open to everybody, many outsiders participat-
ed as well. Mothers came in with the food they had cooked and took their place,
while the fathers preferred to participate in the event from the windows. The feast-
ing and the playing went on all day long.
ODA PROJESI:To define the work as a sculpture in process took time, the way
how the project developed organically in itself all through these 8 years, and we
started to move parallel with the project. This means that we did not predefine our
methods but sorted it out by experience and acting. Oda Projesi is related to the
environment the entire time, to the social and private life which is going on in it,
and to the relation between the people with the city... The project operates by using
these relational methods and moreover these are mostly neighbourhood rela-
tions. When the space existed, it was transformed into a meeting point in the
neighbourhood. And we were taking over the position of a mediator between the
artist and the local person. In this case, the art production does not form a space to
challenge itself, but becomes the tool for exploring existent traces and questions.
Oda Projesi acted and acts in the situation, not about or for the situation, and that
means we take the risk of being misunderstood or getting lost where we shouldnt,
but by taking of these risks, we create the tactics.
The so-called social sculpture takes the main determination and intention from
the neighbourhood, where Oda Projesi had a flat. The architectural plan of the space
PRELOM:Hcw Jc ycu see ycur pcsiticn in re|c-
ticn tc cctivist prcctises cnJ tc museum- c||ery
crt prcctices?
PRELOM:Hcw Jc ycu see ycur wcrr in the ccn-
text cj cther prcctices ccnnecteJ tc the neih-
bcurhccJ |ire hccJ prcb|ems, hip-hcp, ccmmu-
nity rcJic cnJ cthers?
and the place is very dominant; you have face-to-face apartments that are private
but all have a window facing a common courtyard, if you want to be invisible that
is not so easy but not impossible, as the dynamics that reorganize the acts in the
architectural neighbourhood, reshape the relations as well.
What does it mean to be a neighbour? What kind of a neighbour are you?
The work has a kind of flexibility, in the sense of redefining its already defined
roles or tactics. Oda Projesi is trying to update itself with Istanbul the whole time.
As Derya zkan says, Oda Projesi acts spatially and produces relationally. It is
important that space becomes space when you experience or practice it. Or as de
Certeau says, Space beccmes when you relate to it.
ODA PROJESI:Regarding our position, we see ourselves more close to activist prac-
tices, although we dont define ourselves in that discourse. But we also experienced
well-defined and restricted areas such as museum or gallery practices; these were
totally different in terms of the relation and in terms of level of practice. But the
common ground was to organize a different usage and role during the process. In
that sense, the practice we have in our own environment is also face-to-face with
big systems like schools, the family systems, politics..., kind of the same as when
you are face to face with a museum system in a museum. How do you deal with the
reality in front of you?
Maybe it is better again to look at a project. In the context of the exhibition
series Becoming a Place and Look Again organized by Proje4L, and the Istanbul
Museum of Contemporary Art, Oda Projesi was invited to take part in the exhibition.
The Oda Projesi team worked for 6 months in the Gltepe neighbourhood, the site of
the museum, which is a strategic point. Gltepe is one of the first ecercnJu sites
where the first generation of immigrants settled; while in front, it is 4. Levent, the
new financial centre of the city. The Oda Projesi team took the idea of settling
down to Gltepe as a basis and planned to use a place outside the museum, but in
this neighbourhood. Following a few visits to Gltepe, and inspired by its prior expe-
riences in the Room, the decision was made to rent an apartment in the place. The
choosing of this apartment among many others, meetings with estate agents and
programming of the houses arrangement, were all important parts of the project.
An apartment was rented, and then a relationship was gradually established
with the people living in the building. When the apartment was empty at the
beginning, the dwellers in the building began to arrange the house in their own
way. It was anticipated that the existing community of the building should orient
the formation of the project. The apartment was situated in an inspiring zone: right
across there was the museum, with a primary school at its side. The garden of the
school was a general meeting place just like the courtyard at Galata.
The presence of Oda Projesi in the museum was as such: On one of the walls at
the entrance was written 3 rooms and a living room (just like an immense real
estate announcement) together with the address of the place. The aim was to focus
on the apartment as a centre of attraction, hence rendering the museum as a pass-
ing point only. For the museums viewers, the work-space at the rear street became
an almost outside organ of the museum.
Proceeding in daily life and dealing with its own rules is much more fun and
dynamic rather than dealing with the museum or gallery needs. With its way of
performing projects, Oda Projesi always stood in the middle of the art world and
daily life and more close to daily activities. The activist practice from our side can be
defined as dealing with daily situations through different positions, in that case col-
laboration is important more, than participation. How you collaborate, how you act
within a collective...
ODA PROJESI:The practices connected to the neighbourhood are mostly acting for
the neighbourhood. They are visible faces of the community and directly attached to
the community. Although these practices can be critical, they mostly function within
that system and seem to be too close to themselves, which is the essence of these prac-
tices. We dont place our act in these practices, yet use some similar tactics and con-
cerns. Maybe it is also about belonging and the identity that we are trying to have a
distance to. These practices can easily make you the spokesperson of the community
and create a power relationship. In Oda Projesis case, we deal with any kind of power
in a way to put it aside and try to create another stage for different roles and acts. For
Interview with OJc rcjesi _ NEW GENRE OF PUBLIC ART MY ROOM, YOUR CULTURAL POLICY _ 49
101.7 Efem Radio project
Oda Projesi u saradnji sa Bookstr i Matthieu Pratom/Oda
Projesi in collaboration with Bookstr and Matthieu Prat,
19. februar - 16. mart 2005/February 19 - March 16, 2005
PRELOM: 5ince this is cn issue cbcut cu|turc|
lcpitc|, jcr the enJ cj this ccnverscticn lJ be
interesteJ in ycur ccmments cn the pcssib|e
ccmp|cints ccmin jrcm bcth the crt cnJ
cctivist perspective where trcnsressive prcc-
tices |ire ycurs cre juJeJ jcr the |ccr cj ejjects
cnJ c|ecr sccic| resu|ts cn cne hcnJ, cnJ jcr cut-
scurcin wcrr prcJucticn but ettin c surp|us
vc|ue jcr ycurse|ves cn the cther hcnJ
l ODA PROJESI is an artist collaborative
based in Istanbul initiated by three women
artists: zge Acikkol, Gnes Savas and Secil
Yersel.
Oda Projesi means Room Project and emp-
loys thinking of the different usages of the
room: finding a way to combine the daily life
and art practices. The group wants to bridge
relations between artists, non-artists, artist-
run-groups, institutions and the communities
in the neighborhood.
www.odaprojesi.com
example, Oda Projesi did a radio project in the neighbourhood as the last project in the
space, but we did not want it to be like community radio, like the voice of the neigh-
bourhood but just to create another possible space for reflective usages. We used
alienation tools on the radio, to make the radio for the community and with using
their own language, with the things that they are already used to doing. In the main
radio process, just as with food we can say that the food emerged from a unique
recipe, a recipe for that period of time and situation.
To better shape the background of the project, I think it is important to have a
look in the area, where the project was shaped and moved, to realise the placement
Oda Projesi tried to achieve in the region.
Galata is a neighbourhood, which is very close to the entertainment and cul-
tural centre of the city, Beyoglu, where all kinds of events take place and where peo-
ple from different social and economic backgrounds rush to. Beyoglu has always
had an importance in history with its multinational structure and it was the first
area where westernisation movements took place. The minorities lived here and it
had an important role in the commerce traffic since its been the centre for many
foreign people. The large street Istiklal reaches Galata at the end which was the old
harbour neighbourhood. Oda Projesis environment was the old Jewish neighbour-
hood and when the owners moved, the old caved-in buildings were very cheap and
became the home for first generation immigrants coming to Istanbul in the late 70s
and mid 80s from the east and north of Turkey. The immigrant population has
grown by informal relationships with the countryside, the first ones called for their
relatives and its like a big family has settled in. But its been in a gentrification
process for 10 years now and it continues to change and to be shaped by the circu-
lation of people like journalists, artists and so on. But this is like the first step for the
immigrants, because they dont have money to repair these very old buildings and
they dont prefer to spend money and time on it. They prefer brand new houses
being built in the old and new suburbs where they move to as soon as they earn
money. The ones who stay are mostly very poor, who dont have the chance to leave
this place where they dont feel safe to live in.
In a situation like this, you can easily make a project dealing with these issues
in a way that is for some people. For Oda Projesi, we used our presence in this sit-
uation and tried to create some options for the time being, without a certain goal or
manifesto!
ODA PROJESI:Oda Projesi does not aim or care to have a defined or preimagined,
sustainable effect. One should not serve any kind of large system that tries to get
outcomes to benefit from it for other ways; this can be either for the art perspective
or for the activist one, it doesnt matter. When we look at the project, Looking for a
Clay Language, what we see, this is important.
Libia Perez de Siles de Castro and Olafur Arni Olafsson worked one month
together with Oda Projesi and the neighbours. The working process was screened to
viewers by an installation in the space. The core of the work was language. Since
there was no common, given language they could share, they invented a coded lan-
guage arisen out of their communication with the people of the neighbourhood.
Since this language consisted of eclectic words, and was ready to be moulded every
moment, they named it the plastic language. Inspired by the dynamics of the
neighbourhood, they created an installation in the room that they called environ-
ment. The walls of the room were covered by mud, various spices were scattered
in the corners, the main entrance and the light of the room were changed, and
throughout two weeks, until the closing, the space was in a permanent process of
transformation. Pictures made by children were engraved in the mud, and as the
illustrations got blurred in time due to muds nature, the children came and fixed
them every day, thus the room became a structure in motion that gets changed and
transformed in the process.
At the tea parties they organized at the opening and closing ceremonies of the
exhibition, they made letter-formed cookies together with the children, wrote the
words of the plastic language with these cookies, and then ate them together with
the guests, hence destroying this language by eating it.
Interview by Jelena Vesi}
Mladen Stilinovi}, U vlastitom interesu/In Self-interest, 1980
PRELOM: rcjects cn which ycu wcrreJ cn -
Flux
1
cr Images of Transition
2
re|cte tc terms
such cs cu|turc| e|ite, crtistic centre, cut-
hcrship cr prcjessicnc|ism, which usuc||y
cre cssccicteJ with bcurecisie, cs we|| cs mcJ-
ernist ccncepts cj cu|ture Hcw wcu|J ycu
Jescribe ycur mctives jcr stcrtin up these prcj-
ects cnJ whct phencmenc in |ccc| cu|turc|
|cnJsccpe wcu|J be inc|uJeJ by their rcJius?
NEBOJ[A MILIKI]:Well... The motives were those of an engineer, I would say...
Project |ux was supposed to (and it should in the future, as it is continuing this
year) enable equal distribution of art works, events and initiatives. The main con-
tent of |ux in the past two years was the exhibitions of contemporary art works in
public space of the suburbs. Pretty simple, we would go to a location, for example,
final station of the bus 309 in Kalu|erica, we would pick the brightest wall for video
projection, leave TVs on the newsstands or similar objects on bus stops, so that the
people waiting for the bus could kill time by watching a video from the current
video production... Before this, we would pass out flyers, hang up posters, make a
small campaign There were certainly patron and enlightenment-like moments
within the project, which was brought to my attention in the Discussion on Art
Work
3
, however I think that this criticism stops being valid as of the moment we
start having discussions with people, who would come to these projections or
would be there by accident. Those discussions directed further development of the
project, providing spontaneous and sobering evaluation of artistic production, oth-
erwise absent in the criticism and theory circles. If you do not have anything upon
which to build a discussion about the art in the city go to the suburbs, dislocate
yourself, take an outsider look of the gallery world and its achievements!
We should go back to the lmces cj 1rcnsiticn. Our highly important donor,
Swedish Helsinki Board for Human Rights hired Cultural Centre Rex to assist the
newly founded Resource Centres in five Serbian towns to review the range of their
activities and build-up operational and program system. Resource centres were
founded within Boards for Human Rights, which already functioned in those
towns Therefore, there was a necessity to create new areas of work of NGO sec-
tor, provide technical support to similar initiatives in local communities and
affirm further the politics of human rights Rex suggested learning-project, which
took place in the form of competition for art and documentary works on the topic
Images of Transition, creative workshops, where artists-moderators ensured con-
sultative and production support to the participants and production of works and
finally exhibitions. We did five local, or more precisely, communal exhibitions and
two final shows. The first one was held in Rex, the other in the Salon of the
Museum of Contemporary Art in Belgrade. A group of interesting authors present-
ed themselves on the exhibitions, some were professional artists, some amateurs
and I believe there were some excellent pieces, perhaps not perfect in the sense of
production, yet very strong in the sense of the concept and innovative regarding
creative solutions. Thus the project organized the resource of group creative work,
out of which anyone could take what he felt was necessary: exchange of ideas,
profiling of critical opinion, acquiring of new production and exhibiting standards,
everything that is otherwise available to only close-knit circle of practitioners in
Belgrade and Novi Sad .
One of the reasons for these projects was an irritating repertoire of master-
mind of centralist cultural policy, that is, blown-out-of proportion, yet unproductive
art system of Belgrade. Art production in Belgrade is based on looking up to proba-
bly even good models of international art scene, as well as on inability of establish-
ing of creative relations with its own social context and ignoring of existing com-
munication standards that is, ignoring of an audience However, my basic driving
force was something else it was a desire for discovering of new, muffled or sleepy
human potential, a potential that can not be realized, let alone break through the
criteria and procedures of an establishment, already saturated with cultural pro-
duction. It was supposed to happen by working on important themes, concerning
Interview with Neboj{a Miliki} _ POLICIES OF DECENTRALIZATION, IMAGES OF TRANSITION, INGREDIENTS, STEW... _ 51
CAPITAL OF CULTURE:
POLICIES OF DECENTRALIZATION,
IMAGES OF TRANSITION,
INGREDIENTS, STEW...
Interview with Neboj{a Miliki}
1 Project Flux was conceptualized as presentation and production
of art, outside infrastructural and logistic resources of the existing
art system. One of the goals of this project is establishing and artic-
ulation of new critical field surrounding recent art production. Until
this moment, Flux that was organized and produced by Cultural
Centre Rex was realized in six Belgrade suburbs.
(www.rex.b92.net/flux02)
2 Project Images of Transition was realized by Cultural Centre Rex,
in cooperation with Resource Centres in Ni{, Sandàk, Negotin,
Leskovac, Bor and Urban In Club from Novi Pazar, during 2002. The
project tried to find new ways for decentralization and exchange,
within the sphere of contemporary visual art. Led by access to all
strategy, by means of open competition, workshops and an exhibi-
tion, which was organized in the end, this project opened up possi-
bilities for multilateral critical considerations of a social and political
environment in which citizens of Serbia were at the time.
(www.rex.b92.net/sliketranzicije)
3 Discussion on Art Work is an initiative, started by the group of
artists from Belgrade. This initiative resulted in voluntary meetings in
\ura Jak{i}s House, where different topics, projects and attempts
in the area of cultural policy and art work were discussed. Group of
artists, who became a group of active participants of these discus-
sions nominated topics for discussion and criticism. Particularity of
these discussions was the lack of official institutions such as mod-
erator, speakers and public, which frequently yielded direct and
spontaneous forms of criticism.
PRELOM:Ycu see, we cre interesteJ precise|y in
this stew cr perhcps the re|cticnship between
inreJients cnJ stew Ycu cre menticnin rcJi-
cc| ccmin cut tc streets, initictives cutsiJe the
rcne cj the system, thct is, cutsiJe centre cj
Be|rcJe, where scmethin is c|wcys p|cyin cn
the screens cnJ where pcssib|y there is cn cuJi-
ence, pub|ic cnJ prcctice cj ctherin Ycu cre
interesteJ in p|cces, nct reccheJ by crt, in the
sense cj the c|css, ct |ecst nct whct we cc|| hih
crt, where perhcps pecp|e |isten tc turbc-jc|r,
but there is nc Mi|icc 1cmic. Ycu, hcwever,
thinr thct it is nct encuh cnJ cjjer ccntempc-
rcry crt cs cn inreJient in the stew cj the Jis-
ccurse cj sccic|ist rec|ism, en|ihtenment,
cJvertisin, NGO pc|itics cnJ instituticnc| criti-
cism (We rejer tc intersecticn cj terms eni-
neerin, ccmpcin, system bui|Jin, tc pcrc|-
|e| cjjer cj cu|turc| pccrces cnJ necticn cj
ccntext, crecteJ by cu|turc| instituticns in
Be|rcJe) 1his is the instcnt where ncturc||y
questicn cj ejject is bein pcseJ (nct cs c bccm-
|ire sc|uticn, but cs twc-wcy prccess, where
chcnes cre tcrin p|cce cn bcth pc|es).
PRELOM:GccJ Ycu hcve cnswereJ ct |ecst cne
thirJ cj the questicn, which is nct scmethin tc
be cver|ccreJ, yet the metcphcrs sti|| ru|e ccu|J
ycu exp|cin ycur pcsiticn tcwcrJs crt scene in
Be|rcJe? Ycu initic| c|cim wcs thct there is c
scene, in the c|cssic, instituticnc| sense, which
mecns scme scrt cj rcutine cnJ ccmp|ccency
cnJ it is nct cn csserticn with which everycne
wcu|J cree ccu|J ycu mcre ycur criticism
mcre specijic cj cs ycu scy centrc|ist cu|turc|
pc|icy, b|cwn-cut-cj prcpcrticn, yet unprcJuc-
tive crt system |ccr cj crective re|cticns with its
cwn sccic| ccntext etc?
all of us and including us as equal stakeholders, for example in formulating of pub-
lic interest In midst of ever present transitional, ideological pressing, discovering
of such assumed potentials is moving a bit by bit similar to making of Mulligan
stew
4
Yet, these gradual changes essentially transform current micro-cosmos If
they tell you lets make a project that will expand and affirm current activities of
the Board for Human Rights you make creative workshops and exhibition that
will primarily engage artists and creative people, however, whichever way you
choose to look at it, it will employ all the capacities of before-mentioned Boards and
Resource Centres and in this newly founded setting current politics of non-govern-
ment sector would be actually put into focus Therefore, you make people think
and create, rejecting all existing hierarchies and criteria Which was what more or
less happened
I would underline an important difference between |ux and lmces cj
1rcnsiticn:
Firstly, |ux produces intentionally cultural tensions and opens up new possi-
bilities for production and presentation of art. When I say new, I mean new for
Belgrade, whereas regarding international scene, it has already been done.
Secondly, lmces cj 1rcnsiticn represent work upon more or less given topic
and this is where the stew is made.
NEBOJ[A MILIKI]:Ha, ha, ha As in every stew, everyone is curios to see how it
is made and they do not ask what is necessary, they are just putting stuff into it
Here, you have invested your critical, exposing ambition But, what did you discov-
er? That I offered contemporary art as a simple ingredient? Where do you come up
with that? You are well aware that it is impossible! First thing, you are not offering
an ingredient for a stew, you look for it, or get it without asking Secondly, does
anyone have contemporary art in their house, pantry, tool shed, memory or experi-
ence? No, of course not. Stew can be made only with things, available in every
house, at every individual, which is not a thing of any real value. An ingredient in
lmces cj 1rcnsiticn was the following: Everyone has the right to freedom of
expression, their own opinion, development of their personality. Therefore, an
ingredient was the politics of human rights itself. And then, when people get
involved on that basis, bit by bit you put on the table the key human right, that is,
key human obligation: that all these rights demand daily creativity, reflecting, prac-
ticing and the best way for it is through subversion of current interpretative mod-
els and the actual ideology of those rights. You ask around and show that everyone
can or can not do it, that everyone has or at least knows the right ingredients. The
field of art, works and exhibition itself are just a table, stage or if you want water in
which ingredients can be cooked If there is any. Exhibitions and catalogues are
not the final goals of these projects, but putting of a stew or just of an ingredient to
the creative repertoire of participants, public, community, etc. I have to admit that
there has been not much success in it, which is why I would have to work on the
concept. Regarding discourse of socialism, enlightenment, advertising, NGO politics
and institutional criticism it is just the present war-like environment, in which a
soldier comes into a house and begs for something to eat (how the story of the stew
begins). That means lmces cj 1rcnsiticn originated in lack of ideas and the hunger
caused by it
NEBOJ[A MILIKI]:What I am saying here is practicing what I learned later, as my
primary motives for |ux, were pretty simple: I appreciated and truly loved many
pieces from the production at that time, regarded them as social wealth and had a
simple claim that it is necessary to display them in as many places as possible and
as often: that they should be made permanently available outside of gallery system,
in order to have better exchange of artistic ideas with the population, which in the
end, mostly finances this production. Is it not routine and complacency that neither
galleries not artists did not look for the way to present their works more ambitious-
ly? Does that not lead to an autistic and deeply conservative production, turned
only towards Works that are Presentable in Galleries.
Let take a look on it from this side: first and basic goal of |ux was equal distri-
bution of information. In this case, the information on the contemporary world,
contained in the works of visual artists. I, as an author and curator of the project,
beginner fund-raiser and future site-manager, forced by the circumstances,
4 Mulligan stew is an Irish-type of stew, made out of whatever is at
hand at the moment.
inspired mostly by the experiences from the course Politics of Display (in the
School for History and Theory of Images), asked myself: why a certain art work,
which was realized in way that conditions of production were financed by the
society more or less all citizens, is displayed exclusively in a gallery, which is
practically available only to inhabitants and passers-by in the centre of the city?
Why is not displayed, for example, on billboards, in schools, on television, where
those who financed the work could indeed consume it? As far as I am concerned,
the answer is: because galleries can not liberate themselves of their initial status
of the places for enjoyment of those who are privileged, either in the sense of
knowledge or social position (as we all know first museums were not open for a
wide audience). Problem is that this way, especially in the absence of market,
incestuous conjunction of an author and rare professional audience is created over
time, whereas from that moment on, this conjunction dictates development of
artistic languages and themes of contemporary art practice. If I refer to routine and
complacency, I precisely think about this type of routine we-will-display-in-the-
gallery and complacency of the friends-and-colleagues-will-come-and-under-
stand type. I consider that all of that is fine, concerning the freedom of creativity,
the only thing not clear to me is what would be the interest of society to invest
into such system of production and presentation of art? Why would, for example,
community of all inhabitants of Belgrade invest into enjoyment of privileged elite,
even if it is completely impoverished, intellectual elite? Then again, one might
wonder, why would anything else, other than what is financed in the word, be
financed here? That is where we encounter a problem of establishing of relations
with the existing social context, the reason why I am mentioning the lack of cre-
ative relations with its own social context.
Perhaps this is exactly because this environment in Belgrade during the exis-
tence of SFRY had completely original social-political system, which opened up and
kept open a possibility of participation of masses in the distribution of social
wealth, to the great extent. As well all know from the desperate statement/work by
Ismet Mujezinovi}, the artists did not take much advantage from such situation, but
ventured on the path of least resistance, discussing the issue which bourgeoisie
individualism is better: the quasi-modern, socialist-aesthetic one or the quasi-sub-
versive, conceptual one. In my opinion, if there ever was a system and country that
did not need art in the galleries, it was SFRY. Naturally, it could not be expected that
the fact would be understood and put into practice by those in power and society,
however it could have been recognized and exploited by the artists. So much unoc-
cupied space for artistic thought and creative interventions, for self-management
in the most literal sense of the word, was at disposal Yet, what we had, was repet-
itive practice, turned towards truly referent models, although with mere con-
sumerist-promotional ambitions, similar to the situation when someone brings
new records from abroad, which makes him a big man in the group New, inter-
nationally relevant poetics and media solutions were regularly introduced into cur-
rent practice (come to my house, so we could listen to records), without any ade-
quate adaptation or processing. Pure smuggle, I would say. Country like SFRY prob-
ably deserved that a new artistic practice should be invented in it, nevertheless the
absence of political ambitions and provincial aspirations of our dear, conceited lead-
ers and our pompous if-one-sheep-leaps-over-the-dyke-all-the-rest-will-follow
artists, conveniently blew that chance.
It was not much different in 2001, as the pressure of the described local oscil-
latory creative tradition was omnipresent and strong during the 1990s, only slight-
ly muffled and moderated by wars and complicated by the notoriety of founda-
tions, transition, certain international interest for this scene (based mostly on mere
exotic). However, at that time there was nothing that could be lost We had to,
whether we wanted or not, to start thinking, discussing, looking for ways for gen-
erating of contemporary art. This was the place, where there was no space for priv-
ileges. |ux cancels all privileges, whereas lmces cj 1rcnsiticn tries to locate the
underprivileged, but creative, so the logistical support went to them. |ux gives us
the answer to the question what is an art work, outside protected, discursive zone
of the gallery or museum, while lmces cj 1rcnsiticn what is not and can not be
included by the existing institutional procedures, but is worth of production sup-
port. After all, what else could an alternative cultural centre do?
PRELOM: ccu|J ycu te|| us then, whct is ycur
experience with the wcy cj juncticnin cj ccn-
tempcrcry crt, cutsiJe cj crt-c||ery system cj
the ccpitc|? ln whct wcy ccntempcrcry crt
estcb|ishes ccntcct with the |ccc| micrc envircn-
ment cnJ whct cre the jinc| resu|ts cj the cctu-
c| event cj presentin cj ccntempcrcry crt in
the suburbs?
Dc the sinijiccnce cj Jis|ccctin cj ccn-
tempcrcry crt, cutsiJe instituticnc| system, cnJ
its sccpe wecr cut just in scme scrt cj cttempt cj
ready-made experiment cj repcsiticnin/Je-
pcsiticnin/Jis|ccctin cj ccntempcrcry crt, in
re|cticn tc, cs ycu sciJ ycurse|j cutsiJe prctect-
eJ, Jiscursive zcne cj the c||ery cr museum
cnJ puttin intc Jijjerent micrc-sccic-cu|turc|
ccntext? Or cre, cn the cppcsite, ccncrete ejjects
thct the experience cj presentin cj ccntempc-
rcry crt prcJuces cn the |eve| cj the cctuc| sccic|
re|cticns in |ccc| ccmmunities, in the everyJcy
|ivin surrcunJins cj the inJiviJuc|s in the
iven micrc-cu|turc| envircnment, mcre impcr-
tcnt? ln this ccse, we cre primcri|y becrin in
minJ Flux prcject jter c||, hcw much cre the
ejjects cj such ccticns Jeep cnJ stcb|e within
time, tc whct extent Jc they rec||y cjject the
chcnes in micrc-sccic| re|cticns cn the |eve| cj
the |ccc| ccmmunity, they cre cJJressin?
NEBOJ[A MILIKI]: The experience is the following: contemporary gallery art
functions with many difficulties, outside the system in which it was conceived. I
would compare it to the handicap an animal born and raised in the Zoo would
encounter in the case of the return to its natural environment. The main effect of
|ux project took place on the scene and in the media, where it was a mere attrac-
tion consequence of the experimental, dislocating modus of the project itself.
Regarding micro-sphere of cultural and social relations, |ux (there were more than
40 projections in 6 suburbs) did not yield such impressive results on the very loca-
tions. Although, we had projections for more than 100 very satisfied viewers, yet
there were those with no public (when I was rightly criticized, even though I won-
der whether there is any audience on such projections in galleries). Most of dis-
played works demanded very adaptable guide for wide audience, like an interface
for processing and consuming of contemporary art outside renowned exhibition
systems. It was my pleasure to produce this interface, on the spot, through conver-
sations, however the outcome of confronting was not flourishing, in the sense of
creative potentials of the scene, even when on the level of comprehension of mean-
ing or concepts of work, the guide would be successful. As I already said, the prob-
lems are numerous. Most of the artists use very hermetic language, auto-referent
system of concepts, contents, messages. What we get is highly specialized, limited
and considerably atrophied system of communication.
We should have generated new criteria of production, which was only possible
in new conditions. Due to all of that, during the third year we tried to completely
dislocate logistics and infrastructure of the project from Rex, to those suburbs. It
gave some clumsy results, but also some encouraging ones, so we continued with
the improved alternative of this strategy this year. The system functions like this:
an artist goes to the suburb, gets acquainted with the given setting, thinks, finds
solutions, suggests, includes people... In the end, he produces the work, perhaps
with the group of associates, perhaps alone.
In regard to effects on the level of the community, we can easily criticize our-
selves, but first let us see what criteria are at work and in which time period. Here
is an example to reflect on: when in the second year of realization of the project,
interest of the public begun to recede, partly for the reason of restitution of conser-
vative public discourses, in part due to the fact, that we, as in first year, could not
count on the effect of surprise, I decided, actually during a conversation with the
local associates, that on the occasion of action of Flux 02 in Kalu|erica, an action
addressing a local problem should be performed. During internal evaluation of the
project (two years after joint presentation and discussion of more than thirty works
from our and regional scene) I posed a question to the participants of the discussion
what they thought was good art, worth remembering and retelling and what
would they single out from the displayed artistic production? Since, literally, I did
not receive an answer, I switched positions and asked whether it was art, if some-
one made something creative, spurned on by the problem that this suburb encoun-
ters and people could not deal with? Everyone immediately agreed that it was art.
(Only imagine what would have happened, if this question was raised in front of
the professors of our Art Academy). Kalu|erica is so-called wild settlement, with-
out planned infrastructure, thus the problem of sewerage is something that is
imposed easily. On the other hand, there is little that could be more social and rela-
tional domain than sewerage. Not only that everyone is directly connected with
that system, but the problematic unity is present in the air, as an essential medi-
um once there is a leak in someones yard, everyone can smell it So, what did
we do? We used flyers/catalogues that were used to advertise the project every-
where. On the back of 1500 flyers for the action Flux 02 in Kalu|erica, we wrote
totally banal and very propagandistic statement on how (supposedly) sewerage
problem might be solved, then we cut each flyer into three and ended with 4500
leaflets. Catch was that there was only a part of the statement, that is, so-called
solution on each flyer and whoever wanted to find out the whole text would have
to search for other parts But where? At his neighbours, with whom, he shares sew-
erage problem (see wwwrexbznet/j|uxoz/rc|uJjericco:). You could ask me now:
did it have any effect, did they solve the problem of sewerage? Of course not, it costs
a lot, however after distribution of 4500 leaflets on that topic, there is not a politic,
which has some ambitions to succeed in Kalu|erica, that refuses to deal with this
problem. The main thing is that the barrier, a taboo, because of which people,
PRELOM: kecrJin the prcject Images of
Transition, we cre interesteJ whether certcin
sccic| Jyncmism, estcb|isheJ Jurin rec|izcticn
cj c prcject, mcnces tc mcintcin the intensity
cnJ jinJ its cwn modus operandi in the |ccc|
ccmmunity cjter the enJ cj the prcject? By me-
cns cj it, we ccu|J pcssib|y mecsure cut the rec|
pctentic| cnJ resu|t cj the pc|icies cj Jecentrc|-
izcticn cj Jcmincnt cu|turc| mcJe| cn the |eve|
cj everyJcy |ije 1he intenticn cj Jecentrc|izin
Jcmincnt cu|turc| mcJe is cbvicus in the prcj-
ects cj this rinJ, but whct cre the rec| resu|ts in
prcctice? ln cther wcrJs, hcw much is cctivist
pctentic| cj Jisseminctive crt prcctices in the
prccess cj Jecentrc|izin cj Jcmincnt mcJe| cj
crt prcJucticn in |ccc| envircnment here cnJ
tcJcy, cctuc||y ejjicient?
allegedly, can not deal with this problem or start up a standard public campaign
was penetrated. It was only a beginning, a move in the desired direction, next year
we made a calendar with the most beautiful houses in Kalu|erica, now we are plan-
ning the making of the map of current sewerage network and so on. It would be bet-
ter to stop here, as I feel like I am writing a project proposal
Probably, we could ask some questions, like these: What is the way that con-
temporary gallery art establishes contact with macro environment and what is the
final reach of the presenting of contemporary art in central areas, that is, those
which are not peripheral? What concrete effects and events are produced by presen-
tations of contemporary art in galleries on the level of those social relations in local
communities, in everyday living environment of an individual in the given micro
and macro cultural environment? Finally, how much the effects of those ways of
presentation are deep and stable in time, to what extent they truly influence the
changes in micro and macro social relations on the level of a community, they are
addressing?
NEBOJ[A MILIKI]:Whoa, what a question, you should be appointed as policemen
of cultural policy!
On the subject of continuation of art production with this methodology,
according to my insight there is not much dynamism, intensity, or expressed desire
for independence. Mulligan stew can not be offered on the menu I can go on
developing a story about the effects of lmces cj 1rcnsiticn, which could be easily
calculated within these guidelines, such as up-to-date politics and technologies of
displaying (where in case a gallery does not have the equipment, participants
themselves should bring three or four TVs and VCRs from their homes, after all take
a look at wwwrexbznet/s|iretrcnzicije what did the exhibitions looked like), as
well as opportunities for utterly unknown creative people to receive the prizes from
those renowned artists and cultural practitioners, who we made sure were includ-
ed in the juries. Nevertheless, there is no point in me rambling about that, if there
is no follow-up to these activities, and there are none. What is present here and
there is new knowledge in the area of generating of art, new engineering methods
and solutions. With the assistance of these new knowledge and methods, we are
searching for new reasons for creation and wide participation in the production and
presentation of art, outside banal domain of a gallery or to put it better decora-
tive arts, against which I have nothing in principle, however I consider them as
mere decorating of society (which could be characterized as society of transitional
spectacle), society that can not and is not able to articulate and reflect its problems.
Activist potential associated with these projects is obviously big and in that sense I
have to emphasize that large number of contemporary art works, as well as theo-
retical texts is very inspirational and totally necessary for the development of those
potentials. Only, they should be put into application.
Concerning decentralization, it can not go in the direction Belgrade the
province or centre suburb, but the institution of art as some sort of generally
acknowledged social givens atomic, inclusive production, generating and pre-
scribing new givens.
Interview conducted by Jelena Vesi} and Milan Rakita
Mladen Stilinovi}, 1976-1980
8
Mladen Stilinovi}, 1979

Nova

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nova

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PRELOM

You might also like