http://lesvos09.antira.info/
Turkiye kiyilarindan Ege Denizindeki Yunan Adalarina ve Yunanistan'a gecmeye calisan multecilere karsi sertlesen, insan haklarina karsi kosullarin tartisilacagi ve adadaki gozalti merkezinde eylemlerin duzenlenecegi bir kamp (25 - 31 Agustos)
* multecilik durumu yaratan yeni emperyalizm politikalarina karsi
* sinir idaresi ve baski+kontrol pratiklerine karsi
* gocun suclastirilmasina karsi
* gozalti merkezleri ve gocmen/ multecilerin insan haklarinin ihlaline karsi
* gocmen emeginin somurulmesine karsi
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Kahire Misafir Programlari Sempozyumu Uzerine Dusunceler/ Afterthoughts on the Cairo Residency Symposium
http://www.boltart.net/uluslararasi-subeler-yerel-inisiyatifler-ya-da-henuz-hayal-edemedigimiz-alternatifler/
International Branches, Local Initiatives, Or A Structure We Cannot Imagine Yet
Cairo Residency Symposium was organized by Townhouse Gallery and Fonds BKVB at the end of March 2009 and supported by the main funding institutions in Europe. Its stated aim was “to discuss in depth the significance and possibilities of cultural exchange in residency centers between artists from Europe, the Middle East and Africa”. It unraveled in the form of keynote speeches, case studies and group discussions. The structure allowed for voices of funders, institutions and to some extent artists to be heard, regarding the existence of international residency network. The location of the meeting allowed for more horizontal dialogues to emerge and alternative views to be heard, which could have remained unarticulated in another climate.
Our host, William Wells welcomed his guests proudly to Townhouse Gallery, which proves to be a very successful institution with a strong impact on the development of contemporary art practice in Egypt and on choosing “the work to be picked up and shown in the international arena”. They also run multiple outreach programs tailored to local needs.
Lexter ter Braak from Fonds BKVB provided the first insights into the mind of “the funder”. He informed us about artists not wanting to go to “the best in the West anymore” but instead preferring “residencies in non-Western countries to discover and explore other cultures”. He structured his speech around the metaphor of mirror neurons, proven to exist in human beings by a neurologist recently. He explained that “they reflect the activities of others in the brain”, thus “we love to imitate and synchronize”. He linked this phenomenon to artist residencies, suggesting their existence allows for “seeing, feeling and understanding”. With this scientific explanation, he legitimized the existence of the whole artist residency system.
Bassam el Baroni, a writer, curator and co-founder of ACAF (Alexandria Contemporary Arts Forum) was the chosen voice of “the host”, moderating the flow of the symposium in the next two days. He made it clear from the outset that the interest in the region was a post 9/11 condition, which is not only reflected by increased funding for residency programs in the region but also by major regional shows curated in the West. He walked on a cotton thread keeping his critique insistent, while making his anxiety over his role felt. He set the tone of criticism by suggesting that the residency network and our desire to construct, maintain, support and participate in it is an impulse to carry on the failed cosmopolitan project. He also referred to Boris Buden’s text “Criticism without Crisis: Crisis without Criticism” , not only to suggest the crisis inherent in this system but also to point out the necessity to reflect on the conditions of production in the art world.
Chris Keulemans, a writer and a “host to be”, gave a beautiful speech about the complexities of hospitality. He suggested, “True hospitality will be given without expectation of return”. He evoked the colonial past so gracefully, “Europeans came as uninvited guests, not only overstayed but occupied the whole house, mistreated its inhabitants and got rich out of it all”. He asked if hospitality as a traditional value would disappear. Although traces of it were felt in the next few days, it seems like institutions need a more solid language to explain their efforts in words such as expectations, evaluations and benefits.
“Voice of the artist” was a rarity in the symposium represented by Mahoud Khaled, who delivered one of the case studies “Mobility and Stability: The Dynamics of Losing and Finding Locations in an Artist’s Career”. He referred to the residency system as “part of the necessary lifestyle of a contemporary artist”. He talked about his four residency experiences and reflected on how they met his specific needs at certain times in his career. “Good living and working conditions” was mentioned multiple times, making us realize these are unusual qualities, especially in the South. He referred to the state of being a guest but his was a notion very much defined by institutional expectations and the professional needs of the artist.
Alessio Antoniolli of Gasworks and Triangle Arts Trust talked about the “Post-Residency Period”, which was unlucky. They fund so many of the artist-run initiatives in the region for emerging artists that he could have offered a lot more in sharing his experience in that direction than restating some experiences with resident artists. He referred to the residency system as “rare, expansive and a lot of work” but emphasized its crucial role in helping artists evolve. This was taken up in the Q&A session by artist Lara Baladi, who criticized this language as “infantilizing”.
Case studies presented by four different institutions proved that it is impossible to speak about a single model and that the structure of the institutions should be articulated based on local context. In her presentation “Residencies Around Urban Matters”, Marilyn Bell from Doul’Art in Cameroon explained their strategy of working, in which an artist is invited for a short stay of approximately one week and is invited back again whenever they come up with a project proposal to be realized. Goddy Leye, who is an artist also working in Douala, started the initiative “Art Bakery” not to get depressed and out of his own needs. He saw the lack of education and infrastructure, which led him to develop the portfolio program geared towards producing and presenting artwork. Meskerem Assegued presented her utopian vision for Zoma Contemporary Art Center in the ancient village of Harla, Ethiopia. Resident architects and builders, who will use local construction methods, will construct the center. They are working in close contact with villagers and tailoring the program to their needs.
The only case study outside the African continent was “Platform Garanti Contemporary Art Center” from Istanbul, Turkey. The center was started by Vasif Kortun soon after 9/11, when people were already looking at the city. He defined Istanbul as “ a flux city, which does not remember having been the capital of an Empire but feels it”. The center was even more specifically contextualized on Istiklal Street, which has been historically politicized and still is the site of most public demonstrations. From the start, he aimed at creating an “A League” institution and worked towards this vision as his negotiating power with funders increased. He emphasized the necessity of choosing the resident artist from a shortlist that is prepared by the partner institution most likely in Europe. He insisted on a local decision-making mechanism that can create the alchemy between the right artists and the city. Developing regional residency programs for artists from the Balkans and the Middle East has been a priority for Platform and Kortun emphasized the role they played in strengthening the networks and developments in the region. Platform set a unique example in tailoring the institution to the local needs, while determining how the local art scene will become part of the international art world.
The next speaker was Mouktar Kocache from Ford Foundation with his speech “Evaluation as a Funder and Host”. He shared the experience of working hard to include artist groups and foundations supporting art, in a conference of community based foundations working on social justice. They were the least prepared and most demanding among the participants. He called for the necessity of developing the knowledge and tools in the sector that will allow them to “remain at the table”. Chus Martinez raised an important point in the Q&A session about the power of funding institutions in defining the content of production.
Two ideas were central to the discussions; mobility and migration. Todd Lester from freedimensional, which is an international network that advances social justice by hosting activists in art spaces, introduced a perspective that is neglected by most of the people working in the field. He insisted on elongating the mobility discourse to other vocations. Although artistic mobility is central to the residency system, the concept of mobility was not dissected to reveal its relationship to many other contemporary debates about power and post-fordist working conditions. Thus, it is necessary to approach artistic mobility with some caution, questioning its connections with an expanding market and other flows such as capital, oil, information, labor, refugees and tourists. Still, I would like to end with a positive evocation of mobility as “a freedom from constraint, from the methods of confinement and conformity that nation-states, academies and other orthodoxies practice.”
Migration seems to be the main current that makes the whole system move. Let’s recognize the contradiction from the outset: Why is there a language of diversity and tolerance in the cultural field, while the harsh political language of Europe’s closed-door policy emerges when we start speaking about borders and security issues? As Jakob Myschetzky from Inklusion stated, many Europeans are retiring and newcomers are needed as a workforce. It is necessary to include the new people by using creative means. And of course, newcomers are not only arriving because they are needed. There is an accelerating increase in migration to Europe motivated by economic, political and professional realities “at home”. Most of the funding from Europe for arts and culture is focused on finding ways to deal with, mediate the increasing diversity within Europe. One of the participants drew attention to the fact that many regional exhibitions shown in the West are closely linked to migration processes and issues of integration. And Bassam asked, “Are we peeping into the culture of the minority through the artist?”
From all the ideas that have been voiced, some tendencies and shifts became apparent: Instead of exporting giant institutions that are expensive to maintain, foundations are leaning towards supporting individual artists with their specific needs. Local initiatives are already articulating the necessary models that function well and influence the formation of the art scene in their contexts. Support for regional networks and exchange should increase for constructing a truly international art world. We shall see how the results of the meeting manifest themselves as cultural policy at a global level.
Iz Oztat
International Branches, Local Initiatives, Or A Structure We Cannot Imagine Yet
Cairo Residency Symposium was organized by Townhouse Gallery and Fonds BKVB at the end of March 2009 and supported by the main funding institutions in Europe. Its stated aim was “to discuss in depth the significance and possibilities of cultural exchange in residency centers between artists from Europe, the Middle East and Africa”. It unraveled in the form of keynote speeches, case studies and group discussions. The structure allowed for voices of funders, institutions and to some extent artists to be heard, regarding the existence of international residency network. The location of the meeting allowed for more horizontal dialogues to emerge and alternative views to be heard, which could have remained unarticulated in another climate.
Our host, William Wells welcomed his guests proudly to Townhouse Gallery, which proves to be a very successful institution with a strong impact on the development of contemporary art practice in Egypt and on choosing “the work to be picked up and shown in the international arena”. They also run multiple outreach programs tailored to local needs.
Lexter ter Braak from Fonds BKVB provided the first insights into the mind of “the funder”. He informed us about artists not wanting to go to “the best in the West anymore” but instead preferring “residencies in non-Western countries to discover and explore other cultures”. He structured his speech around the metaphor of mirror neurons, proven to exist in human beings by a neurologist recently. He explained that “they reflect the activities of others in the brain”, thus “we love to imitate and synchronize”. He linked this phenomenon to artist residencies, suggesting their existence allows for “seeing, feeling and understanding”. With this scientific explanation, he legitimized the existence of the whole artist residency system.
Bassam el Baroni, a writer, curator and co-founder of ACAF (Alexandria Contemporary Arts Forum) was the chosen voice of “the host”, moderating the flow of the symposium in the next two days. He made it clear from the outset that the interest in the region was a post 9/11 condition, which is not only reflected by increased funding for residency programs in the region but also by major regional shows curated in the West. He walked on a cotton thread keeping his critique insistent, while making his anxiety over his role felt. He set the tone of criticism by suggesting that the residency network and our desire to construct, maintain, support and participate in it is an impulse to carry on the failed cosmopolitan project. He also referred to Boris Buden’s text “Criticism without Crisis: Crisis without Criticism” , not only to suggest the crisis inherent in this system but also to point out the necessity to reflect on the conditions of production in the art world.
Chris Keulemans, a writer and a “host to be”, gave a beautiful speech about the complexities of hospitality. He suggested, “True hospitality will be given without expectation of return”. He evoked the colonial past so gracefully, “Europeans came as uninvited guests, not only overstayed but occupied the whole house, mistreated its inhabitants and got rich out of it all”. He asked if hospitality as a traditional value would disappear. Although traces of it were felt in the next few days, it seems like institutions need a more solid language to explain their efforts in words such as expectations, evaluations and benefits.
“Voice of the artist” was a rarity in the symposium represented by Mahoud Khaled, who delivered one of the case studies “Mobility and Stability: The Dynamics of Losing and Finding Locations in an Artist’s Career”. He referred to the residency system as “part of the necessary lifestyle of a contemporary artist”. He talked about his four residency experiences and reflected on how they met his specific needs at certain times in his career. “Good living and working conditions” was mentioned multiple times, making us realize these are unusual qualities, especially in the South. He referred to the state of being a guest but his was a notion very much defined by institutional expectations and the professional needs of the artist.
Alessio Antoniolli of Gasworks and Triangle Arts Trust talked about the “Post-Residency Period”, which was unlucky. They fund so many of the artist-run initiatives in the region for emerging artists that he could have offered a lot more in sharing his experience in that direction than restating some experiences with resident artists. He referred to the residency system as “rare, expansive and a lot of work” but emphasized its crucial role in helping artists evolve. This was taken up in the Q&A session by artist Lara Baladi, who criticized this language as “infantilizing”.
Case studies presented by four different institutions proved that it is impossible to speak about a single model and that the structure of the institutions should be articulated based on local context. In her presentation “Residencies Around Urban Matters”, Marilyn Bell from Doul’Art in Cameroon explained their strategy of working, in which an artist is invited for a short stay of approximately one week and is invited back again whenever they come up with a project proposal to be realized. Goddy Leye, who is an artist also working in Douala, started the initiative “Art Bakery” not to get depressed and out of his own needs. He saw the lack of education and infrastructure, which led him to develop the portfolio program geared towards producing and presenting artwork. Meskerem Assegued presented her utopian vision for Zoma Contemporary Art Center in the ancient village of Harla, Ethiopia. Resident architects and builders, who will use local construction methods, will construct the center. They are working in close contact with villagers and tailoring the program to their needs.
The only case study outside the African continent was “Platform Garanti Contemporary Art Center” from Istanbul, Turkey. The center was started by Vasif Kortun soon after 9/11, when people were already looking at the city. He defined Istanbul as “ a flux city, which does not remember having been the capital of an Empire but feels it”. The center was even more specifically contextualized on Istiklal Street, which has been historically politicized and still is the site of most public demonstrations. From the start, he aimed at creating an “A League” institution and worked towards this vision as his negotiating power with funders increased. He emphasized the necessity of choosing the resident artist from a shortlist that is prepared by the partner institution most likely in Europe. He insisted on a local decision-making mechanism that can create the alchemy between the right artists and the city. Developing regional residency programs for artists from the Balkans and the Middle East has been a priority for Platform and Kortun emphasized the role they played in strengthening the networks and developments in the region. Platform set a unique example in tailoring the institution to the local needs, while determining how the local art scene will become part of the international art world.
The next speaker was Mouktar Kocache from Ford Foundation with his speech “Evaluation as a Funder and Host”. He shared the experience of working hard to include artist groups and foundations supporting art, in a conference of community based foundations working on social justice. They were the least prepared and most demanding among the participants. He called for the necessity of developing the knowledge and tools in the sector that will allow them to “remain at the table”. Chus Martinez raised an important point in the Q&A session about the power of funding institutions in defining the content of production.
Two ideas were central to the discussions; mobility and migration. Todd Lester from freedimensional, which is an international network that advances social justice by hosting activists in art spaces, introduced a perspective that is neglected by most of the people working in the field. He insisted on elongating the mobility discourse to other vocations. Although artistic mobility is central to the residency system, the concept of mobility was not dissected to reveal its relationship to many other contemporary debates about power and post-fordist working conditions. Thus, it is necessary to approach artistic mobility with some caution, questioning its connections with an expanding market and other flows such as capital, oil, information, labor, refugees and tourists. Still, I would like to end with a positive evocation of mobility as “a freedom from constraint, from the methods of confinement and conformity that nation-states, academies and other orthodoxies practice.”
Migration seems to be the main current that makes the whole system move. Let’s recognize the contradiction from the outset: Why is there a language of diversity and tolerance in the cultural field, while the harsh political language of Europe’s closed-door policy emerges when we start speaking about borders and security issues? As Jakob Myschetzky from Inklusion stated, many Europeans are retiring and newcomers are needed as a workforce. It is necessary to include the new people by using creative means. And of course, newcomers are not only arriving because they are needed. There is an accelerating increase in migration to Europe motivated by economic, political and professional realities “at home”. Most of the funding from Europe for arts and culture is focused on finding ways to deal with, mediate the increasing diversity within Europe. One of the participants drew attention to the fact that many regional exhibitions shown in the West are closely linked to migration processes and issues of integration. And Bassam asked, “Are we peeping into the culture of the minority through the artist?”
From all the ideas that have been voiced, some tendencies and shifts became apparent: Instead of exporting giant institutions that are expensive to maintain, foundations are leaning towards supporting individual artists with their specific needs. Local initiatives are already articulating the necessary models that function well and influence the formation of the art scene in their contexts. Support for regional networks and exchange should increase for constructing a truly international art world. We shall see how the results of the meeting manifest themselves as cultural policy at a global level.
Iz Oztat
Monday, November 24, 2008
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Cura Bodrum, Beyond a residency of sorts by Javier Toscano
The double sense of cura refers to care for something as concern, absorption in the world, but also care in the sense of devotion.
Martin Heidegger
All quiet on the art front. This could be the heading on any newspaper’s section on art & culture at a global scale. And it wouldn’t be that far from reality. Art in our days has lost much of its capacity to question and shock the cultural world mostly due the dullness, conformation, apathy and readiness to comply with the de facto powers (money rattles) from most of the agents involved in its actual operation. These days, the only news that hit the headlines strong is the latest sales record from Damien Hirst at Sotheby’s. (Hurrah, we’re thrilled…)
Along this gloomy series of events, we have been witnesses to a new behavior by many emerging artists, which has surged at an unbelievable rate. I’m speaking here of the artist-in-residence, the new cultural tourist which any of us might find some time or another attending some of the peculiarly exciting artistic in any of our cities. They tend to be friendly, very outgoing, frank and interesting. I myself have met a lot of really fascinating persons this way, and still am friends to some. But what this massive behavior is telling us is that there is not much of a specificity to a residence anymore, that any artistic institution that respects itself has built up a resident program in order to keep up with the trend, and that, as biennales some five years ago, residencies already lost much of their charm to an institutionalized way of making public relations and even a series of diplomatic moves.
Let’s think of it this way. If artists were really critical with their practices, if they would really hit the aching spot with their interventions, bureaucrats would not have them traveling around giving away their unsolicited opinions and developing their pieces, would they? So one of two things must have happened: either bureaucrats and politicians are doing their job unbelievably well, so that there is nothing else to comment on, or art practices have become trendy, fashionable, smooth and easy-going. From the current state of events in the world, I would say the second is true. So we have a first upshot: artists that are really critical, the ones that get involved in social or communitarian issues (if there are still some out there), tend to stay home, kind of grounded, while their confident and charming counterparts tour the world showing little tiny pieces of self-made aesthetic trifles.
Am I being too harsh? Probably, but let’s remember this is a generalization, and in that sense flawed, as any useful generalization, but that it tries to bring out the symptom so that anyone can analyze it according to his or her own needs and understanding.
Anyway, what strikes me beyond this analytical exercise, is that there are indeed, seldom but sometimes, groups of agents that really try to do things in a different way, people that seek to affect their surroundings, individuals that still believe in the creative power of art, in its facility to produce symbolic meaning, and risk it all in order to try to make a change. However enthusiastic, these persons are not heroes and never naïve, they are the utmost realists: they want to take a specific knowledge to its radical achievement: they ask for the impossible because they understand that it is the only manner in which art can justify itself. These are the persons that one seldom sees at residencies because they commit, and an institutional residency is basically a place where an artist stays for some time and then leaves. No commitment necessary.
Such engaged agents are never easy to find. But now, there was a very interesting experiment taking place in southern Turkey this year; an exercise so rich that it pays off to comment on it profusely. A couple of Turkish artists (Iz Oztat and Emincan Alemdaroglu) didn’t just go out to the community in the Bodrum peninsula and tried to start up a new cultural venture. They actually built up a sort of informal residency in which they invited colleagues from around the world in order to start thinking and acting collectively. They looked out for the funds themselves, and risked all their assets into this “creative think tank”, which I prefer to call in order to differentiate it from the colonized description of a simple, institutionalized residency. This creative think tank, a place for cure, be it individually or communally, was set up in the midst of a family house, and if someone is acquainted with Middle-eastern hospitality traits, that means really a lot, it involves the participation of a family circle that plays the role of a host, which opens itself to the guests, profusely and generously. So this creative think tank hosted within a family house behaved really in an odd but enriching way, it really aimed at the healing and restructuring of a decaying practice. Discussions took place, involvement with the community was looked after, creative research was fostered, works were shown and profoundly commented, and direct social action through the production of new art pieces was taken.
The usual questions made by an eyebrow-raiser would be: Did it worked? Was it worth it? Only, for a moment, instead of building up rhetorical answers, we should pause and ask for something else, something deeper and in a different direction, something that really stands in for the glimpse of hope that the experience produced. So, the really engaging questions should be: what does this kind of practice opens up for the art world as a whole? What does it tell about the possible practices of the years to come? What does it bring about by itself? How does it become sustainable? There is no easy and frank answer to this last question, for it is not quite easy to foresee a complex experience turned into a repeatable chore. But we can try to sketch a draft for the rest.
The scheme to bring in a group of people to think and act with a common objective and a creative stance may not by itself solve any of the problems on the community where they decide to set. The idea of producing socially engaging art practices alone may not be enough to produce a new, active subjectivity. The proposal to come closer to the people, to turn them into partners of deeds, may not end up in a more coherent set of cultural performances. And this is because there has never been in art (or for this sake, in any other human activity) a single solution to a series of deep problems. But what took place in Turkey was a huge, intense compilation of all of these. In different degrees, the creative think tank sorted out ways to imagine possibilities, to foster communication practices (and as activist Paulo Freire once suggested: a revolution in communication might be the only revolution needed), and then acted accordingly, all within a restrained budget but with a specific agenda in mind: the actual affectation of the community. The latest challenge might be now to keep it going, so it can display a glimpse of hope for the future. For this is what the creative think tank immediately produces: hopes and dreams that stem from the community itself, and shape it back showing it what it can achieve by itself, and even further with the support of these operators. In one word, socially engaged art practices inspire an understanding of one’s own surroundings and they reassure communities in their own way of world-making, as very few other activities can do. Inasmuch as art practices deal with the creation of symbols, people profit from experiencing their own hopes and dreams turned into symbolic value. But this does not imply any activism of any sort. It comes by through negotiations, through conflict and dialogue, through active engagement. And this is what the people in Turkey could bring in, at least for a start.
In an art world much in need for new political subjectivities and active forms of production of the self, we recquire to approach the lay people who haven’t abandoned their faith in cultural and artistic practices and learn with them how to reciprocaly free ourselves from frivolities, from fraudulent operations that impose class values or cynical attitudes, away from spectacularity and market-like modes of display, and get instead to exercise creativity through critical thinking.
Right now, in the midst of a generalized global economic collapse, we need to rebuild and regain the central function that art used to have within a given society, its spiritual strenght and devotion for the care of one’s own entourage. For it has been this resignification of everyday experiences, turned into gulps of fresh air, which tend to conform ideals and utopias that makes one want to live, to love, to be, and sometimes even to die for. If this energy is still to be found there, it is because it has always been part of a collectivity. How to approach it, nurture oneself from it, perform with it and ultimately build and share one’s own experience through it might be the task for the coming years. At least nowadays, while the financial turmoil keeps fancy collectors away from disruptions in all of these practices, we might find some time to nurture more engaged endeavours that usually need some time to mature. So this year was a great season to start following one promising case, a preview of what the future can bring if a little of hope still remains.
Martin Heidegger
All quiet on the art front. This could be the heading on any newspaper’s section on art & culture at a global scale. And it wouldn’t be that far from reality. Art in our days has lost much of its capacity to question and shock the cultural world mostly due the dullness, conformation, apathy and readiness to comply with the de facto powers (money rattles) from most of the agents involved in its actual operation. These days, the only news that hit the headlines strong is the latest sales record from Damien Hirst at Sotheby’s. (Hurrah, we’re thrilled…)
Along this gloomy series of events, we have been witnesses to a new behavior by many emerging artists, which has surged at an unbelievable rate. I’m speaking here of the artist-in-residence, the new cultural tourist which any of us might find some time or another attending some of the peculiarly exciting artistic in any of our cities. They tend to be friendly, very outgoing, frank and interesting. I myself have met a lot of really fascinating persons this way, and still am friends to some. But what this massive behavior is telling us is that there is not much of a specificity to a residence anymore, that any artistic institution that respects itself has built up a resident program in order to keep up with the trend, and that, as biennales some five years ago, residencies already lost much of their charm to an institutionalized way of making public relations and even a series of diplomatic moves.
Let’s think of it this way. If artists were really critical with their practices, if they would really hit the aching spot with their interventions, bureaucrats would not have them traveling around giving away their unsolicited opinions and developing their pieces, would they? So one of two things must have happened: either bureaucrats and politicians are doing their job unbelievably well, so that there is nothing else to comment on, or art practices have become trendy, fashionable, smooth and easy-going. From the current state of events in the world, I would say the second is true. So we have a first upshot: artists that are really critical, the ones that get involved in social or communitarian issues (if there are still some out there), tend to stay home, kind of grounded, while their confident and charming counterparts tour the world showing little tiny pieces of self-made aesthetic trifles.
Am I being too harsh? Probably, but let’s remember this is a generalization, and in that sense flawed, as any useful generalization, but that it tries to bring out the symptom so that anyone can analyze it according to his or her own needs and understanding.
Anyway, what strikes me beyond this analytical exercise, is that there are indeed, seldom but sometimes, groups of agents that really try to do things in a different way, people that seek to affect their surroundings, individuals that still believe in the creative power of art, in its facility to produce symbolic meaning, and risk it all in order to try to make a change. However enthusiastic, these persons are not heroes and never naïve, they are the utmost realists: they want to take a specific knowledge to its radical achievement: they ask for the impossible because they understand that it is the only manner in which art can justify itself. These are the persons that one seldom sees at residencies because they commit, and an institutional residency is basically a place where an artist stays for some time and then leaves. No commitment necessary.
Such engaged agents are never easy to find. But now, there was a very interesting experiment taking place in southern Turkey this year; an exercise so rich that it pays off to comment on it profusely. A couple of Turkish artists (Iz Oztat and Emincan Alemdaroglu) didn’t just go out to the community in the Bodrum peninsula and tried to start up a new cultural venture. They actually built up a sort of informal residency in which they invited colleagues from around the world in order to start thinking and acting collectively. They looked out for the funds themselves, and risked all their assets into this “creative think tank”, which I prefer to call in order to differentiate it from the colonized description of a simple, institutionalized residency. This creative think tank, a place for cure, be it individually or communally, was set up in the midst of a family house, and if someone is acquainted with Middle-eastern hospitality traits, that means really a lot, it involves the participation of a family circle that plays the role of a host, which opens itself to the guests, profusely and generously. So this creative think tank hosted within a family house behaved really in an odd but enriching way, it really aimed at the healing and restructuring of a decaying practice. Discussions took place, involvement with the community was looked after, creative research was fostered, works were shown and profoundly commented, and direct social action through the production of new art pieces was taken.
The usual questions made by an eyebrow-raiser would be: Did it worked? Was it worth it? Only, for a moment, instead of building up rhetorical answers, we should pause and ask for something else, something deeper and in a different direction, something that really stands in for the glimpse of hope that the experience produced. So, the really engaging questions should be: what does this kind of practice opens up for the art world as a whole? What does it tell about the possible practices of the years to come? What does it bring about by itself? How does it become sustainable? There is no easy and frank answer to this last question, for it is not quite easy to foresee a complex experience turned into a repeatable chore. But we can try to sketch a draft for the rest.
The scheme to bring in a group of people to think and act with a common objective and a creative stance may not by itself solve any of the problems on the community where they decide to set. The idea of producing socially engaging art practices alone may not be enough to produce a new, active subjectivity. The proposal to come closer to the people, to turn them into partners of deeds, may not end up in a more coherent set of cultural performances. And this is because there has never been in art (or for this sake, in any other human activity) a single solution to a series of deep problems. But what took place in Turkey was a huge, intense compilation of all of these. In different degrees, the creative think tank sorted out ways to imagine possibilities, to foster communication practices (and as activist Paulo Freire once suggested: a revolution in communication might be the only revolution needed), and then acted accordingly, all within a restrained budget but with a specific agenda in mind: the actual affectation of the community. The latest challenge might be now to keep it going, so it can display a glimpse of hope for the future. For this is what the creative think tank immediately produces: hopes and dreams that stem from the community itself, and shape it back showing it what it can achieve by itself, and even further with the support of these operators. In one word, socially engaged art practices inspire an understanding of one’s own surroundings and they reassure communities in their own way of world-making, as very few other activities can do. Inasmuch as art practices deal with the creation of symbols, people profit from experiencing their own hopes and dreams turned into symbolic value. But this does not imply any activism of any sort. It comes by through negotiations, through conflict and dialogue, through active engagement. And this is what the people in Turkey could bring in, at least for a start.
In an art world much in need for new political subjectivities and active forms of production of the self, we recquire to approach the lay people who haven’t abandoned their faith in cultural and artistic practices and learn with them how to reciprocaly free ourselves from frivolities, from fraudulent operations that impose class values or cynical attitudes, away from spectacularity and market-like modes of display, and get instead to exercise creativity through critical thinking.
Right now, in the midst of a generalized global economic collapse, we need to rebuild and regain the central function that art used to have within a given society, its spiritual strenght and devotion for the care of one’s own entourage. For it has been this resignification of everyday experiences, turned into gulps of fresh air, which tend to conform ideals and utopias that makes one want to live, to love, to be, and sometimes even to die for. If this energy is still to be found there, it is because it has always been part of a collectivity. How to approach it, nurture oneself from it, perform with it and ultimately build and share one’s own experience through it might be the task for the coming years. At least nowadays, while the financial turmoil keeps fancy collectors away from disruptions in all of these practices, we might find some time to nurture more engaged endeavours that usually need some time to mature. So this year was a great season to start following one promising case, a preview of what the future can bring if a little of hope still remains.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Friday, September 12, 2008
Sunday, August 31, 2008
"Zwetschkenfleck"
Measure: a yoghurt cup
1 cup yoghurt
1 cup sugar
2 cups flour
3/4 cup sun flower oil
4 eggs
1 package vanilla sugar
1 package backing powder
1kg plums (or apricots or nectarines)
1) seperate the yolk from the albumen
2) whisk stiff the albumen
3) mix yolk + yoghurt + sugar + vanilla sugar
4) add slowly the oil
5) add the flower and the baking powder
6) slowly add the whisk stiff
7) put the dough into a pan and place the plums on top
Bake it with 180degrees at least 25 min.
BON APPETITE!
1 cup yoghurt
1 cup sugar
2 cups flour
3/4 cup sun flower oil
4 eggs
1 package vanilla sugar
1 package backing powder
1kg plums (or apricots or nectarines)
1) seperate the yolk from the albumen
2) whisk stiff the albumen
3) mix yolk + yoghurt + sugar + vanilla sugar
4) add slowly the oil
5) add the flower and the baking powder
6) slowly add the whisk stiff
7) put the dough into a pan and place the plums on top
Bake it with 180degrees at least 25 min.
BON APPETITE!
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Privatization of Natural Water Resources/ Mari Spirito
Mari Spirito is working with organizations taking action against the privatization of natural water resoruces. Here are some links from her related to the issue:
http://www.suplatformu.net/
http://www.flowthefilm.com
www.article31.org
www.blueplanetproject.net
http://www.suplatformu.net/
http://www.flowthefilm.com
www.article31.org
www.blueplanetproject.net
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
History of Golkoy/ Turkbuku
These two websites give a brief history of the villages:
http://www.golturkbuku.com/english/tarihce/tarihce1.htm
http://www.turkuaz-guide.net/golkoy.htm
http://www.golturkbuku.com/english/tarihce/tarihce1.htm
http://www.turkuaz-guide.net/golkoy.htm
Monday, August 11, 2008
Bodrum Town and Village Populations
Bodrum Town and Village Populations
CENTER
Bodrum Center 26.297
TOWNS
Bitez 7.792
Göltürkbükü 7.288
Gümüşlük 7.480
Gündoğan 8.021
Konacık 5.074
Mumcular 1.175
Ortakent-Yahşi 6.634
Turgutreis 18.471
Yalı 3.516
Yalıkavak 14.454
TOTAL 79.635
TOWN TOTAL 105.932
VILLAGES
Akyarlar 8.479
Bahçeyakası 659
Çamlık 250
Çömlekçi 630
Dağbelen 385
Dereköy 1.214
Gökpınar 202
Gürece 498
Güvercinlik 2.158
İslamhaneleri 3.185
Kemer 409
Kumköy 336
Mazıky 1.094
Peksimet 2.904
Pınarbelen 917
Sazköy 945
Tepecik 242
Yakaköy 669
Yeniköy 559
VILLAGE TOTAL 25.735
GRAND TOTAL 131.667
Between june and august the population reaches approximately 1.000.000
Statistics taken from
Bodrum Yarimadasinin Cevresel ve Yapısal Gelecegi Sempozyumu, 2008.
CENTER
Bodrum Center 26.297
TOWNS
Bitez 7.792
Göltürkbükü 7.288
Gümüşlük 7.480
Gündoğan 8.021
Konacık 5.074
Mumcular 1.175
Ortakent-Yahşi 6.634
Turgutreis 18.471
Yalı 3.516
Yalıkavak 14.454
TOTAL 79.635
TOWN TOTAL 105.932
VILLAGES
Akyarlar 8.479
Bahçeyakası 659
Çamlık 250
Çömlekçi 630
Dağbelen 385
Dereköy 1.214
Gökpınar 202
Gürece 498
Güvercinlik 2.158
İslamhaneleri 3.185
Kemer 409
Kumköy 336
Mazıky 1.094
Peksimet 2.904
Pınarbelen 917
Sazköy 945
Tepecik 242
Yakaköy 669
Yeniköy 559
VILLAGE TOTAL 25.735
GRAND TOTAL 131.667
Between june and august the population reaches approximately 1.000.000
Statistics taken from
Bodrum Yarimadasinin Cevresel ve Yapısal Gelecegi Sempozyumu, 2008.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)