Otis did create the safety catch that would prevent a vertically
mobile enclosure from plummeting from great heights to great depths
at very high speeds, injuring its passengers. This invention was
demonstrated at the 1853 World’s Fair in New York, almost five
thousand years after the elevator first came into usage.
Otis did not invent the elevator, although he is regularly credited
with it. But it was his incremental improvement to an existing
technology that launched what we now know as the elevator industry,
the great facilitator of skyscraping cities, of vertical living,
working, and buying.
exemplifies what I call the designer’s dilemma – the tension that
exists in the space between inventing and improving. If the
designer’s role is to drive innovation on a large scale, how can we
resolve ourselves to the incremental improvements that are
necessitated by today's increasingly complex culture?
this question is more relevant than ever: there is no single
innovation that can counteract the innumerable injuries we have done
to the global ecosystem. But if the key to tackling our environmental
challenges lies within this world of iterative change and cumulative
improvement – and I believe that it does – then what does this
mean for design as a whole?
Pressures for Radical Change
oversaturated consumer market and increasingly sophisticated end-user
have made it difficult to differentiate products and services in
today’s economy. Design has become the de facto solution for
pursuing, and owning, the habits and routines of consumers. So
strident is the competition for shelf-space and mindshare that
incremental improvement is often thought akin to colossal failure.
While designers excel at making the small changes that shape everyday
experiences, in this competitive climate we are compelled to pursue
the next big thing with great ferocity. We seek change in the
Orwellian sense – paradigm-shifts, phoenix products, dot-something
web landmarks. And success has a short memory; we are measured only
by our most recent achievement: the last to-market, the newest
award-winner, the latest recognition by the digerati.
is a challenge, then, that in this time of fierce competition and
creative pressure, we are pummeled by the tsunami of the green
movement. It is virtually impossible to avoid the daily discussions
of climate change, G8 debates, and company manifestos. This is the
single most significant movement of our generation – a veritable
perfect storm of social awareness, corporate interest, and
technological advancement. All things “green” have entered the
cultural vernacular, and our contemporary currency is a fluency with
these issues. Just as the market pressures us to create more
individual design contributions, it has become obvious that the key
to meaningfully addressing environmental issues is through additive
change – continual improvement, rather than discrete invention.
There is no magic bullet, no single a-ha moment, no “iPod” of the
in this time of transformation, when new thinking is so critical, why
are designers at a standstill? Why has design not been at the
forefront of this movement with new solutions and roadmaps for
change? In many ways, the green movement is threatened by the
prevailing mentality in design today – one that equates
sustainability with stasis, and collaboration with mimicry.
course, there are the requisite resin-seeped art pieces, recycled
coated paper packaging explorations, and sunflower-seed kitchen
cabinets. But at this cultural inflection point, we need to do more
than create niche products and art pieces. We need to do more than
play corporate catch-up or throw our hats into the ever-enlarged PR
ring of greenery. We need to stimulate mass change.
the same way that we approach design challenges – not by purporting
to have all of the answers, but instead by assuredly asking the right
questions – we must recognize that we don’t have the solution yet
because our formula has been wrong. Our addiction to sweeping change
has hobbled us from seeing the most obvious opportunities for
improvement. In order to create a radical position around
sustainability, we need to change our concept of design. Our first
green products must be ourselves.
the most revolutionary characteristic of the environmental movement
is its sheer scope. Activist Paul Hawken describes it as the largest
and fastest growing movement in the world, comprising more than 2
million organizations worldwide. This vast reach provides a great
opportunity for facilitating change - but it also poses a unique set
of challenges regarding the management and self-identity of such a
broad, loosely connected network.
are just one of many groups clamoring to contribute within this
space. NGOs, commercial businesses, technologists, academics, and
governments are all forging ahead with their individual visions,
sharing the public's attention. Together, the many voices of this
movement form a harmony, deeper and more complex than any solo the
designer alone can offer.
this is a new and uncomfortable space for many designers to occupy,
indoctrinated as we are with the importance of differentiation and
exclusivity. To date, we have succeeded in our difference, not our
similarities. We are accustomed, in many ways, to known boundaries.
This is not to say that designers are not continuously pushing those
boundaries and rewriting our own histories and futures, but rather
that our design thinking tools and methods (narrative, motion, form,
virtuality) have remained relatively constant. Even as our industry
has evolved to integrate robust strategic and analytical
perspectives, our jurisdiction has remained clear. Even as we engage
in transformational thinking, build new business and brand models,
and tackle human-interaction challenges in emerging economies, we are
still designers. The horizon line moves with us.
clients expect our ability to translate research and ideation into
concrete products and services. And they know we'll be able to
differentiate them - at least for a while - from their competitors.
But now we are not dealing with competitors, we are elbow-to-elbow
with people who share our ethic, and to engage in the traditional
competitive stance would be counterproductive. In a world where
everything is connected and we all share common goals, how do we
satisfy our deep instinct to create a unique position for ourselves?
need a new strategy.
in deep waters, become a diver
we redefine the role of design in this new world order, we must look
to each other for ideas and inspiration. Individually greening our
companies is not sufficient. By pooling our knowledge, we can create
a network in which every client is compelled to engage in a
discussion of sustainability - no matter which firm it selects as a
design partner. Together, we can advocate for the improvements -
large and small - that will produce lasting change.
creating independent "green design" practices that exist
adjacent to traditional industrial design, engineering, and digital
media design offerings, we only marginalize the issue. To effect real
change, we need to apply a green lens to all of our activities, not
just some of them. Environmental intelligence needs to be fully
assimilated within the entire design process, across the entire
course, in order to engage in an informed conversation with our
clients, we also need to commit to educating ourselves and our teams
about eco-friendly behaviors and environmental strategies. This
undertaking is significant, for as we ask more in-depth questions,
the answers become more difficult to locate.
has initiated a Kyoto Treaty of design - a call to arms for the
creative community around environmental stewardship. Our initial
thoughts and conversations have led to these basic tenets, but these
are just a start. We ask each member of the the design community to
commit to these principles and join with us in building upon them:
Helping craft a larger social equity protocol for the design
Publicly ratifying that agreement, and committing to its compliance
Contributing to the communal knowledge base for sustainable design
Advancing the intellectual understanding of environmental issues from
a design perspective
Offering green analysis to clients, or partnering with others to
conduct this analysis
Providing material alternatives for sustainable product development
Investigating manufacturing processes and rewarding green innovation
Minimizing environmental impact from prototyping or model-making
Publicly reporting the carbon footprint of our firms
Becoming educated about the environmental impact of our work
we know is inverted. Everything we rested our beliefs on is cast in a
new light. Change happens fast, and we need to act quickly. We are
revisiting our practices, our methods, and our philosophies. We are
talking to each other. We are leaving our egos behind.
you are ready for change, join us.
by Valerie Casey
is a global design and strategy firm; the author was creative
director of design research and design strategy at frog.
article was the first written piece about The Designers Accord (which
at the time was named the "Kyoto Treaty" of Design). It was
featured in the frog Design Mind newsletter, summer 2007.
Panos Tsagaris, Untitled, 2015, leaf, acrylic and silkscreen on canvas , 32.5"x21" (82x53cm)
of the Birds: Occult and Art considers over 60 modern and
contemporary artists who have each expressed their own engagement
with magical practice. Beginning with Aleister Crowley's tarot
paintings and Austin Osman Spare's automatic drawings of the 1920s,
the exhibition traces nearly a century of occult art, including
Leonora Carrington and Kurt Seligmann's surrealist explorations,
Kenneth Anger and Ira Cohen's ritualistic experiments in film and
photography, and the mystical probings of contemporary visionaries
such as Francesco Clemente, Kiki Smith, Paul Laffoley, BREYER
P-ORRIDGE, and Carol Bove.
concerns and influences of each of these artists are as eclectic as
the styles in which they work. While several of the pieces deal with
"high" or ceremonial magic, others draw from so-called "low
magic" practices and have deeply chthonic roots. The approaches
in technique are varying as well, with some doing years of research
and preparation for the act of creation, and others working entirely
intuitively. Regardless of method, Language of the Birds suggests
that all are part of the same lineage: one that pulls on threads from
the esoteric web of alchemy, Hermeticism, Spiritualism, Theosophy,
divination and witchcraft. The exhibition takes its name from the
historical and cross-cultural notion that there is a magic language
via which only the initiated can communicate. Often referred to as
the "language of the birds," it is a system rumored to
operate in symbols, and to be a vehicle for revealing hidden truths
and igniting metamorphic sparks.
artists in Language of the Birds can be considered magicians, then,
when seen through this mythopoeic lens. A visual vocabulary is
offered up by them, so that we all might be initiated into their
imaginal mystery cults and dialog with the ineffable. They speak to
us in secret tongues, cast spells, and employ pictures for the
purpose of activating profound change in both themselves and in us.
By going within, then drawing streams of imagery forth through their
creations, each of these artists seeks to render the invisible
visible, to materialize the immaterial, and to tell us that we, too,
can enter numinous realms.
by Pam Grossman
Anger * Anohni (FKA Antony Hegarty) * Laura Battle * Jordan Belson *
Alison Blickle * Carol Bove * Jesse Bransford * BREYER P-ORRIDGE *
John Brill * Robert Buratti * Elijah Burgher * Cameron * Leonora
Carrington * Francesco Clemente * Ira Cohen * Brian Cotnoir *
Aleister Crowley * Enrico Donati * El Gato Chimney * Leonor Fini *
JFC Fuller * Helen Rebekah Garber * Rik Garrett * Delia Gonzalez *
Jonah Groeneboer * Juanita Guccione * Brion Gysin * Frank Haines *
Barry William Hale * Valerie Hammond * Ken Henson * Bernard Hoffman *
Nino Japaridze * Gerome Kamrowski * Leo Kenney * Paul Laffoley *
Adela Leibowitz * Darcilio Lima * Angus MacLise * Ann McCoy * Rithika
Merchant * William Mortensen * Rosaleen Norton * Micki Pellerano *
Ryan M Pfeiffer & Rebecca Walz * Max Razdow * Ron Regé, Jr. *
Kurt Seligmann * Harry Smith * Kiki Smith * Xul Solar * Austin Osman
Spare * Charles Stein * Shannon Taggart * Gordon Terry * Scott
Treleaven * Panos Tsagaris * Charmion von Wiegand * Robert Wang *
Peter Lamborn Wilson
12 - February 13
Kostis Velonis Kωστης Βελωνης
The text that follows was written by the Brazilian anthropologist Eduardo Viveiros de Castro (Rio de Janeiro, 1951) in response to a questionnaire regarding the problem of species prepared and sent to him by Álvaro Fernández-Bravo, for e-misférica 10.1. The recent work of Viveiros de Castro is not too well known by American [English] readers. His most important English-language book came out twenty years ago, From the Enemy’s Point of View: Humanity and Divinity in an Amazonian Society (The University of Chicago Press, 1992). He recently published The Inconstancy of the Indian Soul: The Encounter of Catholics and Cannibals in 16-century Brazil (Prickly Paradigm Press, 2011), which is a translation of his previously published work. Among his most important recent works are A inconstância da alma selvagem e outros ensaios de antropologia (São Paulo: Cosac & Naify, 2000), Métaphysiques cannibals. Lignes d’anthropologies post-structurale (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2009), and the Spanish version of the same book, Metafísicas caníbales. Líneas de antropología postestructural (Buenos Aires: Katz, 2010). He has taught at the University of Chicago, Cambridge University, University of Manchester, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, Paris, Universidade de São Paulo, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brazil and is currently professor of Anthropology at the National Museum, Federal University of Río de Janeiro as well as researcher at CNRS, France.
The focus of the questions addressed to the author was organized around the topic of Multinaturalist Perspectivism, a concept developed in his work that emphasizes the point of view of Amazonian Indigenous peoples. Viveiros de Castro’s argument is to move out from the Amerindian world as an object of observation/study into an effort to look to the world (including its non-human components) from an Indigenous point of view. Not the return of the native, but the turn of the native, as he has stated. Amerindian perspectivism is a theory and vision of the world with a strong connection to “multinaturalism”, a category opposed to multiculturalism that assumes the coexistence of different “natures” as in Amazonian cosmology. These “natures” include non-human animal perception along with a human one, all of them sharing a common perspective or affinity. As the author put it, what matters is no longer to classify the species in which nature is divided, but to know how the species themselves take over this task (2010: 69), producing images of nature according to their perspective. In his books and articles, in active dialogue with Deleuzian philosophical positions, Viveiros de Castro refers in many opportunities to “species”, particularly in relation to the human-animal pair. Animals and humans share a common point of view, according to which different and moving “natures” are conceived.
The questions addressed to Eduardo Viveiros de Castro asked him to develop some of his concepts, particularly the relationship between Multinaturalist Perspectivism and species. Is the category of “species” still useful to understand the world? What is its value to produce knowledge? Is it possible to avoid the epistemic violence that has characterized taxonomies and racialist hierarchies in the History of Science in the West and continue thinking with “species”? Shall we preserve “species” as a conceptual tool or should it be abandoned at all? Is it possible to capture “species” and assign them an emancipatory function?
Hellenic American Union and Hellenic American College (HAEC) in
cooperation with Hellenic American University (Manchester, NH, USA)
present a visual arts exhibition curated by Hara Piperidou.
regards to the art, the semantic, political and aesthetic load that
the prefix "co" bears, is located predominantly within the
project itself. Structured in a dialectical moment, it is the element
that manages to give birth to new contours and meanings. The "birth
of coexistence" implies that artistic creation does not simply
produce an object: it created identities, relationships and
reflections, strings that derive from a chore to connect the objects
that surround it with new forms of attraction or repulsion,
reconciliation or violence.
View of The Last Futurist Exhibition of Painting 0.10 (Zero-Ten). Petrograd, 1915
Malevich Society would like to invite you to attend “100 Years of
Suprematism,” a conference organized in celebration of the
centenary of Kazimir Malevich’s invention of Suprematism and the
first public display of his Suprematist paintings in December 1915.
The two-day conference, organized in association with the Harriman
Institute, the Lazar Khidekel Society, and SHERA, will be held on
Friday and Saturday, December 11–12, at the Davis Auditorium,
Schapiro Center, Columbia University. The conference promises to be
an historic event, featuring presentations by an international and
renowned group of scholars. Among them are leading researchers in the
field from the United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom. The
event will also include a presentation of Kazimir
Malevich: Letters and Documents, Memoirs and Criticism
(London: Tate, 2015).
the Malevich Society
Malevich Society is a private American not-for-profit organization,
established by members of the family of the Russian artist Kazimir
Malevich, and dedicated to advancing knowledge about Kazimir Malevich
and his work. In the belief that Malevich was a pioneer of modern art
and should be better recognized for his key contributions to the
history of Modernism, the Malevich Society awards grants to encourage
research, writing, and other activities relating to the history and
memory of Kazimir Malevich. The Society welcomes applications from
scholars of any nationality. Proposed projects should increase the
understanding of Malevich and his work, or augment historical,
biographical, or artistic information about Malevich and/or his
artistic legacy. The Society also supports translations and the
publication of relevant texts.
October 11, 2014, according to Islamic State-affiliated Twitter
accounts a woman going by the name Ahlam al-Nasr was married in the
courthouse of Raqqa, Syria, to Abu Usama al-Gharib, a Vienna-born
jihadi close to the movement’s leadership. ISIS social media rarely
make marriage announcements, but al-Nasr and al-Gharib are a jihadi
power couple. Al-Gharib is a veteran propagandist, initially for Al
Qaeda and now for ISIS.
bride is a burgeoning literary celebrity, better known as “the
Poetess of the Islamic State.” Her first book of verse, “The
Blaze of Truth,” was published online last summer and quickly
circulated among militant networks. Sung recitations of her work,
performed a cappella, in accordance with ISIS’s prohibition on
instrumental music, are easy to find on YouTube. “The Blaze of
Truth” consists of a hundred and seven poems in Arabic—elegies to
mujahideen, laments for prisoners, victory odes, and short poems that
were originally tweets. Almost all the poems are written in
monorhyme—one rhyme for what is sometimes many dozens of lines of
verse—and classical Arabic metres.
are accustomed to equating literature and architecture—a stanza,
the basic unit of poetry, is, after all, a “room” in Italian. But
in the case of the edifices built to hold books, this relationship is
more intimate, not just linguistic or metaphoric but concrete (often
marble). If a stanza is a room for words on the page, a library is a
series of rooms for words—and the books that hold them—on the
ground. And ground is often disputed, desecrated, possessed and
dispossessed. It is always political: just as it is the site for the
building and projecting of knowledge, it is often the site of its
destruction as well. Consider three examples:
Fridericianum in Kassel, Germany, opened in 1779 as a library and
public museum, one of Europe’s earliest. Along with the art
collections of the Hessian landgraves, it held more than 100,000
books. The Fridericianum’s construction was funded by Friedrich II,
Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel, who made his fortune by selling local
mercenaries to Great Britain to fight in the American Revolution.
After briefly becoming a parliamentary building under
Napoléon’s brother Jérôme, then King of Westphalia and
Kassel, the Fridericianum was returned to its original function;
Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm would work at the library there. The museum’s
collections were relocated to Berlin under Prussian rule, and by the
early twentieth century the building became a state library only.
Thus marks some of the nascent stages of Fridericianum’s building
of knowledge, but burning would come.
May 19, 1933, approximately 2,000 books were burned on
Friedrichsplatz, reportedly attended to by enormous crowds. The
bonfire was held in conjunction with book burnings in university
towns across the country, a nation-wide “Action Against the
Un-German Spirit,” as it was termed, that aimed to rid Germany of
“Jewish intellectualism.” Nearly a decade later, in 1941, the
Fridericianum—still a library at the time—caught fire during the
Allied bombing raids that flattened Kassel. In images taken after the
bombing, we notice not just the thousands of burned volumes leafing
out palely from the dark rubble, but the now naked Neoclassical
armature of the building’s columns; indeed, the eighteenth-century
structure was designed in the “spirit of the Enlightenment” by
Huguenot architect Simon Louis du Ry.
main architectural embodiment of that spirit, and of the classical
ideal more generally, was, of course, the Parthenon in Greece. Built
during the rule of Pericles in Athens between 447 and 432 BC, the
temple was dedicated to Athena, the goddess of wisdom, civilization,
justice, and war, among other attributes. And the Parthenon would
become the architectural model that has most often inspired the shape
of Western public institutions’ edifices of knowledge, among them
libraries, museums, universities, government buildings, courts, and
banks. Though built to shelter a monumental gold-and-ivory statue of
Athena, the Parthenon would also house the city’s treasury. Indeed,
the temple was funded by taxes derived from both the Athens treasury
and tribute from cities across the Aegean after the Athenian
victories in the Persian Wars (Plutarch famously offers a story about
Pericles wasting allies’ money on “sacred buildings”).
Transformed into a mosque during the Ottoman Empire, and partially
destroyed and rebuilt many times in the interim, the deconsecrated
Parthenon of the modern period became an emblem of Western cultural
hegemony, not exclusively democratic.
by Pierre Bal-Blanc, Marina Fokidis,
Quinn Latimer, Yorgos Makris, Marta Minujín
must start speaking about workers again, with programmes and projects
that concern them directly, existentially.
Tronti, ‘Politics at Work’, 2008
her book The Human Condition, Hannah Arendt distinguishes labour from
work. While work is the production of things that may be more
enduring than the life of its producer (like a pot or a poem), labour
is the sheer unending business of life reproduction: cooking,
cleaning, giving birth, raising kids, taking care of the household.
According to Arendt, labour is merely a performative activity
confined within the space of the house that does not leave anything
material behind. With the rise of industrialisation and the
increasing division of labour, the distinction between labour and
work does not exist anymore and the subjectivity of animal laborans
becomes the fundamental datum of modern society. Within modernity
labour no longer addresses a specific sphere of the human condition
but the totality of life, since under capitalism it is life as bios
that is put to work and made productive. As Karl Marx wrote in a
crucial passage of Das Kapital ‘labour power is the aggregate of
those mental and physical capabilities existing in the physical form,
the living personality, of a human being’. This means that what is
at stake in the concept of labour is not the production of things,
but the production of the most crucial commodity within a
capitalistic economy: subjectivity. Production of subjectivity
becomes the fundamental goal of a capitalistic economy.
this sense it is impossible to define the modern city and its
architecture without understanding it through the lens of labour. And
yet until today, with very few notable exceptions, very little has
been written on the relationship between labour and architecture.
While issues such as public space, politics, capitalism,
neoliberalism and the commodification of the built environment are
widely discussed, labour has rarely been confronted by the culture of
architecture. The reason for this lack of discussion may be the
ubiquity of labour itself as both spatial and social condition of our
life. The symposium gathers for the first time a group of researchers
who will attempt to read the relationship between labour and
architecture in different contexts, from the intimacy of domestic
space to the abstraction of post-industrial forms of production, to
the role of the architect as producer. Rather than offering a
comprehensive historical mapping, the symposium will offer critical
insights towards a new understanding of architecture through the
concept of labour.
Symposium organised by Pier Vittorio Aureli and the PhD programme
Vittorio Aureli, Fabrizio Ballabio, Peggy Deamer, Fabrizio Gallanti,
Maria S. Giudici, Peer Ilner, Francesco Marullo, Andreas Rumpfhuber
Architectural Association School of Architecture
This design for a monument to popular sovereignty was produced by the French artist and designer Jean Jacques Lequeu (1757–1826) at the time of the French Revolution. After gaining a solid education as an architect and making a promising start to his career, Lequeu failed to channel his architectural and philosophical ideas into concrete projects that would ensure him fame. Lequeu was a man of his times in his faith in science and his religious eclecticism, but he was also a troubled visionary, known to be unorthodox and eccentric. He designed several projects that were inspired by the new revolutionary era, none of which he managed to complete. Lequeu’s semicircular design is dated, in the title above the design, June 24, 1793, and, in the lower right-hand corner, Messidor 9, Second Year of the Republic. In its efforts to eliminate traditional influences from French life, the French Revolution instituted a new calendar that featured a set of renamed months, divided into three ten-day weeks. “Messidor 9” refers to the ninth day of the month of Messidor, the first month of the summer, named after the Latin word messis, meaning harvest. Years were numbered starting with the proclamation of the French Republic in September 1792. Napoleon abolished this system and restored the Gregorian calendar with effect from January 1, 1806.
Kostis Velonis Kωστης Βελωνης
exposición busca evidenciar cómo las más representativas
tendencias pictóricas ligadas al informalismo internacional
arribaron a la escena artística mexicana y de qué manera este
estilo de la abstracción tuvo resonancias, tanto en el trabajo de
artistas mexicanos, como en el desarrollo de las colecciones de arte
y de sus prácticas artísticas y expositivas. La muestra presentará
a través de obras, publicaciones y documentos una sucesión de
eventos y expresiones en las cuales se ponen de manifiesto
interesantes puntos de contacto entre grandes creadores y teóricos
ligados al informalismo y artistas e intelectuales mexicanos, quienes
de manera sincrónica realizaron obras dentro de esta tendencia
exposición incluirá un conjunto muy puntual de piezas seleccionadas
que dialogarán entre ellas y con diversos documentos y materiales
referenciales. La muestra está organizada a partir de tres
núcleos curatoriales muy precisos. El primero presenta las
corrientes españolas del informalismo, ya que fueron los artistas de
este país y ligados a esta tendencia quienes tuvieron mayor
presencia en México. El segundo núcleo expondrá ejemplos de otros
informalismos europeos y americanos en la escena artística local y,
finalmente, el tercer núcleo pondrá de manifiesto los reflejos de
esta práctica pictórica en el arte mexicano del siglo XX.º
In Hjorvardur Harvard Arnason’s sweeping survey History of Modern Art, first published in 1968, a brief entry on psychedelic art completes his six-hundred-page tome. It seems a fitting way to conclude the book’s march through modernism, focusing as it does on the au courant style of the moment. As Arnason explains, “The recent appearance of psychedelic art may be accounted for in several ways: the easy availability and enormously increased use of psychedelic drugs; the mixture and confusion of appeals to several senses simultaneously in the so-called mixed media performances; the ethos of the hippies and flower-children; and the prevalent atmosphere of rebellion against ‘the establishment,’ whether in society in general or in art specifically.” 1 Arnason does not elaborate on these causalities, which, nevertheless, are instructive in their range of positions. The use of mind-altering and consciousness-expanding drugs such as LSD, mescaline, and psilocybin on the part of artists would seem to be an expected foundational definition of a psychedelic art. This “art under the influence” approach applied not only to some artists whose work was produced during drug-induced sessions but also for the many more who drew upon such episodes and experiences more symbolically or referentially, giving psychedelic art currency as both a form of process and representational art. Interestingly, Arnason does not parse the difference between the artist and the audience undergoing an altered state of consciousness, rendering psychedelic art also possible in the mind’s-eye of the beholder.
"The Barricade and the Dance Floor: Aesthetic Radicalism and the Counterculture" is republished from Hippie Modernism: The Struggle for Utopia (Walker Art Center, 2015; Andrew Blauvelt, ed.). The exhibition is on view October 24, 2015 through February 28, 2015, before traveling to the Cranbrook Art Museum and University of California, Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive.
Kostis Velonis Kωστης Βελωνης
I was familiar with the sense of soaring from the music of Lars-Erik Larsson: he must have seen the same water surfaces as I, been filled by the same light along the same curving coastline, and felt the slowly rising movement of the summer in an outer world which already was an inner one: it was as if one stood and looked northwest where the northern Sound has imperceptibly become the Kattegat on a day when all the sea is placid and the sky light-blue and a hazy fog seals the horizon – the blank shining ground-swell with a single floating tuft of seaweed or a bit of plank which heaves, heaves slowly mirroring itself, while the sea’s cool and intensely shining mist rises up in microscopic crystals of salt – soaring in the air where the Sound opens out on an unfathomable beyond and a single three-toed gull which, battered from some afterworld of flight, comes in view as flying’s sole survivor gliding inland towards the lighthouse at Kullaberg – Winddriventhing at rest in the bluest of hazes or perhaps an optical illusion in the prisms of the lighthouse open toward monotony of air – all alone on a summer’s day, which sees the loss of the horizon, takes a giddy gyroscopic turn and topples over in memory without a sense of anything but height and depth as if shutting its eyes to the infinite with wings spread wide, rising and sinking and soaring seems to free itself at last from the immense and sparkling blue.
Jesper Svenbro, from Three-Toed Gull: Selected Poems. Translated by John Matthias and Lars-Hakan Svensson. Evanston: Hydra Books/Northwestern University Press, 2003
Kostis Velonis Kωστης Βελωνης
ποίημα είναι λοιπόν μία λέξη για παραπάνω
από έναν, ένας λόγος που το τώρα του
συγκρατεί παραπάνω από έναν μέσα του,
μία ομιλία που συλλέγει παραπάνω από
έναν στο εσωτερικό της", γράφει ο
Jacques Derrida για την ποίηση με αφορμή τον
Paul Celan στις διαλέξεις του 2002 με θέμα "Το
κτήνος (σε θηλυκό γένος) και ο κυρίαρχος".
έργο ΑΙΓΑΙ-Ω εκπηγάζει από μία έρευνα
που η Φοίβη Γιαννίση και η Ίρις Λυκουριώτη
έχουν εκινήσει εδώ και τρία χρόνια με
θέμα την κτηνοτροφία αιγών στον ελληνικό
χώρο, ηπειρωτικό και νησιωτικό, στο
πλαίσιο της νέας μετα-ανθρωπιστικής
συνθήκης. Η λέξη ΑΙΓΑΙ-Ω φωτίζει την
υπόμνηση του ευρύτερου αιγαιακού χώρου
ως γεωγραφία αλλά και ως γη των αιγών.
Το τελικό Ω, δανεισμένο από αρχαίες
αναπαραστάσεις του θηλυκού αιδοίου
επάνω σε λατρευτικά εδώλια, υπαινίσσεται
κάποια θηλυκή οπτική. Το ΑΙΓΑΙ-Ω τοποθετεί
στο κέντρο το ζώο και τον κύκλο ζωής του
καθώς και τις πρακτικές της σύγχρονης
κτηνοτροφικής ζωής και απλώνεται
μεταφορικά σε θέματα εξουσίας (χωρικής,
κοινωνικής και φυλετικής) και ιστορίας.
Performance της 22ας Οκτωβρίου, "τραγουδι
1” συμμετέχουν οι: