Catalog 8

S H U F F L E P R O J E C T #8

FRAME FRAME FRAME FRAME FRAME FRAME FRAME FRAME FRAME FRAME FRAME FRAME FRAME

THE OBSERVER AND THE OBSERVED, THROUGH A FRAME OF OBJECTIVITY SHUFFLE PROJECT?

CURRENT EDITION:

Shuffle project provides a ground for the development of ideas from various fields (Visual Arts, Performing Arts, Literature, Music, Photography, Film or Hybrid) during a week long project based in the Gallery c/o the OT301. Each participant is invited to run one day of the week’s workshop and take part in the sessions hosted by the others.

On Sunday there is an Open Show presenting the work of all the artists who took part in the project.

February 23 to March 1, 2015 Participants to the eighth edition of the Shuffle Project were Michael Scerbo, Alex Pope, Konstantin Guz, Eve Kalyva and 4bid’s Irina Baldini. Following the structure as set out by 4bid gallery, each day a different participant –hereafter called ‘shuffler’- presented a personal research and engaged the others in the subject by leading a workshop in which the theme of each one’s personal preference was presented and discussed.Workshops in this week were: Production of Knowledge, Face Dance, Framing and Undoing, GraffitiArt, and Collage.

THE DOCUMENTER? For the first time in the history of the project, an external individual was appointed to observe and document the workshops and to present The Catalog with information gathered during the week.

The documenter especially paid attention to group dynamics, imagery, similarities, differences, generalities, peculiarities,topics, subjects, quotes, words spoken, silence, what broke it.

The choice to deliberately remain silent and to not take part in any activity was taken so as to be as objective as possible in order to portray the inside as it was seen from the outside.

What follows is thus the result of this observation.

DAY 1 PRODUCTION

OF

KNOWLEDGE

BY IRINA BALDINI

THEY SAT GIGGLES SCRIBBLES GLARES PAGES TURNED LAUGHTER FACES LEANING ON HANDS ELBOWS ON THE TABLE THEY READ LEGS CROSSED LEGS STRAIGHT NOSES SCRATCHED HEADS NODDED BACKS RUBBED BACKS STRAIGHT FEET SWUNG BACKS BENT MARKING WHAT CAUGHT THEIR EYE CAUGHT

BY MINE

PRODUCTION

OF

KNOWLEDGE

The aim of this workshop was to reach a recontextualization of knowledge by discussion, to ultimately lead to the creation of a new, immaterial knowledge. As the first workshop of the week, it was also a moment for the shufflers to get closer to each other through exchanging opinions, visions and thoughts.

A selection of texts, all by the hand of Mårten Spångberg, was presented as a base for the following discussion. they read in silence.

The emphasis of the discussion was on the double meaning of words and sentences, the two faces, the doubt of the artist, about being inside the system but pushing for change, and about using the system without forgetting you are part of it. Is art communication? (Why) does the artist need an audience? If you are already inside, how can you push for change?

1st PHASE: “SILENCE” -

cough giggle scrape water in glass glares focus laugh mumblenote -

2nd PHASE: “PRODUCING SOUNDS” “We live in the time of service.”

“Pure art is made just for oneselfOr is that merely symbolic production?”

“Dance is a kind of well-behaving bulimic.”

“It’s not about what you make, but how you sell it”.

DAY 2 FACE

DANCE

BY MICHAEL SCERBO

“It’s ridiculous that it’s ridiculous.”

Soon they saw who was really in front of them

YAWN SHAVE ANGER RELIEF WINDY SURPRISE DISGUST DISBELIEF CLEAN EAR

FACE

DANCE

fascinated by finger dance, Michael wondered which other part of the body could be isolated and individually moved.

He decided to work with the face and make it dance.

The group worked in pairs, warming up twisting

moving faces, subtle emotions creating visible expressions seeing each other’s other side. four faces

distinct

uneasy

aware Yet the uncomfortable soon turned into laughter and eventually even comfort. they were brought together, in a way words never could have done.

DAY 3 FRAMING

AND

UNDOING

BY EVE KALYVA

language behavior system of mediation more than that object vs frame vs expectation

visibility proposition like time flow sense rest

FRAMING

AND

UNDOING

Since our understanding is always shaped by certain frameworks, one of the starting points here was “How do you understand the world around you?”. As a base for the discussion, Eve presented visual material and excerpts from texts about language and its use, over artistic practice to the body, the self. What can be done to not be conventional? What is the relation between an object as a critical work and its frame? Is it impossible to prove a negation? Is everything always a reference to something else?

PART 1: “The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.”

-Ludwig Wittgenstein

PART 2: “To see something as art requires something the eye cannot decry an atmosphere of artistic theory, a knowledge of the historiy of art and art world.”

-Arthur Danto

PART 3: “Who speaks when convention speaks? (...) In some sense, it is an inherited set of voices, an echo of others who speak as the I.” -Judith Butler

“It’s a terrible time to be an artist.”

DAY 4 CATALOG

PRESENTATION

PRESENTATION OF PREVIOUS SHUFFLE CATALOGS

DAY 5 GRAFFITI by

Alex

ART Pope

GRAFFITI

ART

Alex gave an insight in the history of graffiti, “From the subway to the museum”. Albeit a personal one, since “there is no one history of graffiti. It depends on what borough you lived in, what year you were born,...” The constant battle between whether graffiti is art or vandalism worked as the main driving question of the workshop.

The topic seemed to easily intertwine in matters discussed in previous days.When did graffiti become recognised or perceived as art? intrinsically linked with the medium is its unwillingness to “fit in”, because of which graffiti remains mainly subcultural and therefore oftentimes also misunderstood. Yet graffiti artists do succeed in bypassing the so-called gatekeepers. By going directly to the public, and in that way challenging the existing frames, they have become gatemakers.

“Oh my god, they made a business out of that.”

“Who are the makers of the maker?”

“When beauty was introduced, the crime became art.” ((crime) + (beauty)) x recognition = art?

DAY 6 COLLAGE by

Konstantin

Guz

COLLAGE

Konstantin is intrigued by the everyday and researches how to make something unusual out of the usual. He let the participants engage in a two- on- two- collage tournament and in a ‘collective abstractionism’. Both shufflers and visitors participated in the latter. objects found on the streets lay scattered around on the floor of the gallery, until they were given a new life in instinctively built, transient works that were to be destroyed by the makers after completion.

Through questions such as “How often do you follow your intuition”, ”Is intuition the only truth” and “What do intuition and coincidence have in common”, participants were encouraged to consciously dwell on their actions, carried out intuitively.

DAY 7 OPEN The shufflers are gathered around the round table, discussing the topics of the past week.

Upon entering the space, visitors are invited to explore the room and the objects scattered around in it. After choosing one of them, they join the table. By matching the chosen object with one of the subjects, written on small papers lying on the table, the conversation switches.

Gradually the table was filled with words written and spoken.

SHOW

With candles lit spotlight on papers objects brought from shadow to light an open circle words shared nods

a bang when the frame drops

FEEDBACK ON THE OPEN SHOW

BY EVE KALYVA I particularly liked the fluidity of progression and the development of the performance in time. Even though we did need some time to warm up, I think it turned out to be an engaging experience for both us and the public. Perhaps next time we will get more easily in the role, or assume and maintain more clear-cut personas (that can shift and change throughout the course of the performance). My biggest concern was how to communicate our intentions to the public – the different ideas that had come up through the workshops, reflection, exploration and dialogue – but I think this was achieved in two ways. First, by st aging the setting with clear and simple rules that one could follow; and second, by allowing ludic and performative activities to develop naturally, improvising new means of communication along the way. I am not sure if the ‘idea’ of the performance got across as something clear or singular; but I believe that if we ask the public what they got out of it they will certainly find something. I also like how the gallery was set up – a round table in the middle under the spotlight with a minimal outlook to begin with (especially the little pieces of blank paper!), random objects lying around and a 3-d collective collage on the one wall. If we do this again, I would be interested in adding more performative elements to the discussion, side games or impromptu instructions; and work towards developing non-verbal means of communication. Confronting the audience and making them do something (perhaps a 2-minute single-word debate or an object/gesture battle) is also something to consider in order to allow participants to go through the process and embody the experience. They might feel intimidated but they will also be prompted to overcome their inhibitions and claim their own voice – I think this is the core of the creative act in itself.

UNDO UNDO UNDO UNDO UNDO UNDO UNDO UNDO UNDO UNDO UNDO UNDO

A project by 4bid gallery

www.4bidgallery.com info@4bidgallery.com Overtoom 301 1054HW Amsterdam Documentation by Sanne Verbruggen www.sanskiphoto.tumblr.com