a river of art projects
A letter from Jean-Marie
Jean-Marie sent me this email the other day, which I hope will lead to some discussion here on (and about?) the site:
Rajni, how are you?
Let me start by saying that, although I am not capable of making art
and, at the same time, making sense of it, it is a constant endeavor,
always frustrating, always frustrated. Which leads me to a typical
contradiction of mine: as artists we must control our output, I keep
preaching!
Yet, remembering what I said many times during the Charleston
conversations, it is clear that I did not have as much a sense of
"creating" within the Future is on the Table as of "facilitating",
through the manufacture of the objects individual artists would use
for their work.
So, under the circumstances, not being exactly a practicing artist, I
was not facing the usual questions an artist faces in his work. Two
months later, though, as I start reading and thinking, again, around
the Future, a reality unfolds before my eyes: the necessity to
articulate socially and politically my "non-artist" participation to
the project! Simple, no?
Well, it is very clear to me now that, although I was not creating
art, I was creating relationships, connections, social links. For a
VISUAL artist, indeed, it is is difficult to keep this munbo jumbo
together. Somehow, I have to hurry and make sense of this function
and, even further, I must articulate the social and the artistic in a
much clearer way.
The oddest thing is that one of my strongest claims to clarity goes
as follows: there is no aesthetics without ethics! Since, in my mind,
the roots of ethics are outside the arts, since they are in our
social condition as humans, can it be said that I claim, I claim time
and again ... not knowing the implications? That would not be
unusual. But it is not admissible!
It seems to me that I am approaching what Derrida would call an
apory! One of my favorite states of mind, where our existence is
reduced to un-conciliable, tyranical contradictions. And, please
appreciate the use of the word "contradiction". It is a word I try to
avoid for all its dialectical implications, reductive, binary,
destructive. So I use it for lack of a long metaphore, a paragraph or
even a bad essay ... So, let me try again: the aporic state is one
where one realizes that, in order to go on despite the constant clash
of our thoughts, incomprehensions, incoherences, ignorance(s), one
must not hope for the best or pray for better days, or drink, or
whatever ... one must mettre un pied devant l'autre, in other words:
walk on, whatever the destination and the obstacles.
Let me tell you, now, that, presently, today, at this time, I do not
see any absurdity in this vision. Sometimes, of course, I do. Not
this time. And do you know why? Well, precisely because, in the
exercise of performing my tasks for the Future is on the Table, I
met people who helped me open my mind to a reality new to me. Namely
that people can genuinelly be very close to each other, behave like
brothers and sisters although they had hardly ever met before. So, la
boucle est bouclée. The whole experience was NOT an antagonistic one,
an ego-ridden artistic performance but really community enhancing, in
the strict sense.
To grasp the full meaning of the communal experience of the Future
is on the Table, I have to integrate it in the larger socio-political
realm which underpins my sense of ethics. In one short sentence(!),
it is based on the belief that there would not even be a sense of
self if there was not, primarily, (meaning "ante"), a sense of
others. And let the whole truth be told, I am helped a great deal by
the reading of "La Contre-Démocratie" par Pierre Rosanvallon,
professor at the Collège de France, historian of the democratic
institutions. This man has a special talent for integrating the
contemporary systems of social networking into the political
landscape without taking away from them any of their individual
originality, meaning without falling for the normative temptation of
simplifying or categorizing or modelizing ... Indidualisation without
individualism. In any case, Rosanvallon successfully portrays the
contemporary socio-political landscape as one full of "private" un-
authoritarian tendencies, unwilling to impose their views, but
screaming for togetherness through a sense of ... community.
Community in which, by the way, the arts behave both as a stimulus
and a coagulant. Can there be, then, a better medecine for the future
(no capital F here)?
All this is still too complex for me to make art of!
And that is why, Rajni, I have not been free to participate in the
NING dialogue!
BUT, but, I am interested in having the above posted, one way or an
other, to open a discussion on art and community, within a more socio-
political realm. And to dig deeper into the role of the arts in the
building of goodwill. (This particular aspect was prompted by the
reading of Chalamof, in "Vichera". The guy spent 25 years of his life
a prisonner of the Goulag system. And he writes: "l'homme vit quand
il peut aider les autres. Au fond, c'est la même formule séculaire
du don de soi dans l'art." I remember we talked about that in London.
It still haunts me and has helped me through 900 pages of his other
book, "Récits de la Kolima" ... 500 to go!)
As you can see, although none of the thoughts exposed above are
really new to me, what is new is the sense of urgency to put them
together in a managable paradigm; stripped of what usually makes a
paradigm universal, normative, slightly blind! Yet communicable,
sharable(!), borrowable and so on ...
Thank you for your patience. And also, again, for your hospitality.
See you two soon. JM
Rajni, how are you?
Let me start by saying that, although I am not capable of making art
and, at the same time, making sense of it, it is a constant endeavor,
always frustrating, always frustrated. Which leads me to a typical
contradiction of mine: as artists we must control our output, I keep
preaching!
Yet, remembering what I said many times during the Charleston
conversations, it is clear that I did not have as much a sense of
"creating" within the Future is on the Table as of "facilitating",
through the manufacture of the objects individual artists would use
for their work.
So, under the circumstances, not being exactly a practicing artist, I
was not facing the usual questions an artist faces in his work. Two
months later, though, as I start reading and thinking, again, around
the Future, a reality unfolds before my eyes: the necessity to
articulate socially and politically my "non-artist" participation to
the project! Simple, no?
Well, it is very clear to me now that, although I was not creating
art, I was creating relationships, connections, social links. For a
VISUAL artist, indeed, it is is difficult to keep this munbo jumbo
together. Somehow, I have to hurry and make sense of this function
and, even further, I must articulate the social and the artistic in a
much clearer way.
The oddest thing is that one of my strongest claims to clarity goes
as follows: there is no aesthetics without ethics! Since, in my mind,
the roots of ethics are outside the arts, since they are in our
social condition as humans, can it be said that I claim, I claim time
and again ... not knowing the implications? That would not be
unusual. But it is not admissible!
It seems to me that I am approaching what Derrida would call an
apory! One of my favorite states of mind, where our existence is
reduced to un-conciliable, tyranical contradictions. And, please
appreciate the use of the word "contradiction". It is a word I try to
avoid for all its dialectical implications, reductive, binary,
destructive. So I use it for lack of a long metaphore, a paragraph or
even a bad essay ... So, let me try again: the aporic state is one
where one realizes that, in order to go on despite the constant clash
of our thoughts, incomprehensions, incoherences, ignorance(s), one
must not hope for the best or pray for better days, or drink, or
whatever ... one must mettre un pied devant l'autre, in other words:
walk on, whatever the destination and the obstacles.
Let me tell you, now, that, presently, today, at this time, I do not
see any absurdity in this vision. Sometimes, of course, I do. Not
this time. And do you know why? Well, precisely because, in the
exercise of performing my tasks for the Future is on the Table, I
met people who helped me open my mind to a reality new to me. Namely
that people can genuinelly be very close to each other, behave like
brothers and sisters although they had hardly ever met before. So, la
boucle est bouclée. The whole experience was NOT an antagonistic one,
an ego-ridden artistic performance but really community enhancing, in
the strict sense.
To grasp the full meaning of the communal experience of the Future
is on the Table, I have to integrate it in the larger socio-political
realm which underpins my sense of ethics. In one short sentence(!),
it is based on the belief that there would not even be a sense of
self if there was not, primarily, (meaning "ante"), a sense of
others. And let the whole truth be told, I am helped a great deal by
the reading of "La Contre-Démocratie" par Pierre Rosanvallon,
professor at the Collège de France, historian of the democratic
institutions. This man has a special talent for integrating the
contemporary systems of social networking into the political
landscape without taking away from them any of their individual
originality, meaning without falling for the normative temptation of
simplifying or categorizing or modelizing ... Indidualisation without
individualism. In any case, Rosanvallon successfully portrays the
contemporary socio-political landscape as one full of "private" un-
authoritarian tendencies, unwilling to impose their views, but
screaming for togetherness through a sense of ... community.
Community in which, by the way, the arts behave both as a stimulus
and a coagulant. Can there be, then, a better medecine for the future
(no capital F here)?
All this is still too complex for me to make art of!
And that is why, Rajni, I have not been free to participate in the
NING dialogue!
BUT, but, I am interested in having the above posted, one way or an
other, to open a discussion on art and community, within a more socio-
political realm. And to dig deeper into the role of the arts in the
building of goodwill. (This particular aspect was prompted by the
reading of Chalamof, in "Vichera". The guy spent 25 years of his life
a prisonner of the Goulag system. And he writes: "l'homme vit quand
il peut aider les autres. Au fond, c'est la même formule séculaire
du don de soi dans l'art." I remember we talked about that in London.
It still haunts me and has helped me through 900 pages of his other
book, "Récits de la Kolima" ... 500 to go!)
As you can see, although none of the thoughts exposed above are
really new to me, what is new is the sense of urgency to put them
together in a managable paradigm; stripped of what usually makes a
paradigm universal, normative, slightly blind! Yet communicable,
sharable(!), borrowable and so on ...
Thank you for your patience. And also, again, for your hospitality.
See you two soon. JM
Comment
-
Comment by Gwylene Gallimard & Jean-Marie Mauclet on January 10, 2009 at 11:52am -
"l'homme vit quand il peut aider les autres. Au fond, c'est la même formule séculaire
du don de soi dans l'art."
I just want to attempt to translate that. This guy in the Goulag comes to that conclusion that people who survived it are the ones who were dedicated to help the others.
I think that all types of collaboration in Art or partnership are one way to affect social change, at least in America. It means to color individualism and competitiveness with roles in our fields, our communities, this society we are part of. And that has nothing to do with charity. Thanks for the opportunity. Gwylene
About
Events
© 2009 Created by The Future Is On The Table on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
You need to be a member of The Future Is On The Table to add comments!
Join this Ning Network