illegal_cinema #5 – L’ECOLE DE PICKPOCKETS (Sven Augustijnen, 2000)

illegal_cinema #5 – L’ECOLE DE PICKPOCKETS (Sven Augustijnen, 2000)

Dans le cadre du projet illegal_cinema, TkH et Les Laboratoires d’Aubervilliers vous invitent à la projection et au débat:

L’école de pickpockets
(2000, Belgium, 52 min.)
+
Johan
(2001, Belgium, 24 min.)

Auteur: Sven Augustijnen

La séance sera présentée par Bojana Cvejić (musicologue, philosophe et dramaturge).

Lundi 21 Juin à 19:30, Les Laboratoires d’Aubervilliers

“L’école de pickpockets” est un film qui situe sa forme entre le documentaire et la fiction, dans lequel deux voleurs professionnels sont amenés à réaliser une master-class sur l’art du “pickpocketisme” face à la caméra.

“Johan” est un documentaire, tourné pendant la rencontre entre un patient aphasique et un thérapeute de la parole.

Le réalisateur, Sven Augustijnen, est un vidéaste, habitant et travaillant à Bruxelles.

Dans ses vidéos, Augustijnen a développé une manière particulière de montrer la parole. Vous pourriez être tenté d’appeler ses films des documentaires, parce qu’ils présentent la manière dont un sujet ou un groupe de personnes parlent de leur travail et de leurs obsessions, ou plutôt dont ils font leur travail et expriment leurs idées fixes dans leur vie quotidienne. Cependant, le terme de “documentaire” est trompeur dans ce cas puisqu’il ne s’agit pas tant pour Augustijnen de documenter la façon dont ces personnes parlent mais de libérer leur discours à travers son propre travail. Quand la caméra est déclenchée, c’est comme si une valve s’ouvrait et que les mots s’en écoulaient. Ce flot de paroles est tellement séduisant qu’il absorbe rapidement toute l‘attention. En écoutant ce qui se dit, le spectateur se retrouve plongé dans le flux sonore incessant des mots qui tournent sur eux-mêmes. Pourtant, comme dans tout état d’absorption, la perception des détails formels et des événements périphériques est accrue. On commence à observer les particularités de la sonorité des mots et du langage corporel de l’orateur. Dans ces conditions, on ne peut manquer de remarquer toutes les petites choses qui surgissent derrière son dos…

…Le réalisme extrême des travaux d’Augustijnen repose ainsi dans l’acuité avec laquelle il révèle le surréalisme inhérent aux nombreuses manières dont les gens parlent pour obtenir quelque chose, dont leur parole détourne l’attention de leurs actions ou annonce ce qu’ils pourraient ou aimeraient faire par le fait de ne pas en parler du tout et sans jamais cesser de parler pour autant. Son approche est d’un réalisme extrême en ce qu’elle déconnecte son analyse des modes de travail des questions de croyance. On juge d’ordinaire la valeur de vérité d’une itération sur la base de notre foi (ou absence de foi) en l’orateur. C’est pourquoi la recherche d’orateurs crédibles et l’élaboration de modes de présentation qui persuadent le spectateur de la véracité de leurs affirmations a toujours été une préoccupation majeure du genre documentaire. De même, la presse comme les individus aiment à juger les politiciens sur la crédibilité ou l’absence de crédibilité de leur discours, et donc de leur personne. Dans ses travaux, Augustijnen court-circuite et dépasse cette façon de penser : en montrant des orateurs desquels il serait absurde de se demander si ils font ce qu’ils disent, puisque parler est leur activité principale. Ainsi suffit-il d’apprendre à voir ce qui s’expose dans et par leur discours pour saisir le lien secret entre leurs paroles et leur profession.

Le Surréalisme pratique du pouvoir (by Jan Verwoert, in A Prior #4, 2007)

Les séances d’illegal_cinema se déroulent tous les lundis à 19h30 aux Laboratoires d’Aubervilliers.

Details »

RE-HALLUCINATING CONTEXTS #4: report from the session

RE-HALLUCINATING CONTEXTS #4:

report from the session by Bojana Cvejic

Our fourth session began with Grégory and Alice informing us about a two-day event at Tate Modern where “independent artists” were invited to support their own representation in this space as “independent artists”, quite a cynical move of Tate Modern to co-opt even that which not only doesn’t belong to them but that explicitly counters their logic.

My introduction opened with a question: is it a map that we are making?

Preparing for this session, I researched the principles of cartography and artistic procedures of map-making. This was to distinguish and sharpen the direction and purpose of making a map of “relatively autonomous” scenes of Paris and Belgrade – a map we would publish and thereby suggest to be used by others. The decision to publish it begs the question: could our map guide a navigation that would really re-hallucinate the scenes? Especially as we planned the trip of exchange Belgrade-Paris. Could Parisians start with this map and Belgradians use this map instead of Pariscope?

Details »

What are we talking about when we say “independent scene”?

RE-HALLUCINATING CONTEXTS #3:

report from the session by Bojana Cvejic

What are we talking about when we say “independent scene”?

The attribute “independent” is inappropriate for two reasons:

1)      independence suggests a fantasy about being “outside” institutions, isolation and self-sufficiency, as in autarchy (economic independence)

2)      the latter is related to the historical usage “independent artist” – the artist who produces her work through her own company, as opposed to the artist who is employed by a state institution. It’s associated today with the much contested status of the self-employed “free entrepreneur”, hence, has a liberal capitalist sense

Instead, I propose to replace “independence” with “relative autonomy”, and thus claim that in every context of the global world there are semi-autonomous artists, possibly also forming a relatively autonomous scene: relatively autonomous or semi-autonomous individual artists, groups and collectives, projects, initiatives, organizations, movements, spaces etc.

“Autonomy” is neither a problem-free term: like “independence”, it also begs for careful deliberation.

The idea and popular notion of “autonomy” dates back to the establishing of the aesthetic regime of art, to use Rancière’s scheme of division of mega-cultural and art epochs. Autonomy is the historical condition (ca. 1800) of separating art from the function of social service and establishing its function of not having a function (Adorno, Sociology of Music), purported in Kantian aesthetic judgment as disinterested pleasure. This notion of autonomy, which casts art in the extremes, either dedicated to self-perfection for its own sake and thus free from engagement with social reality, or accused for precisely the same reason of not engaging with realities outside of its medium.

Details »

Public Editing Session #1: NOTES

PUBLIC EDITING SESSION #1:

for joined issue of TkH Journal and le Journal de Laboratoires: Materialist approaches to immaterial labour /(in) performance – Re-materializing immaterial labor

Notes

Format – of Public Editing

TkH’s project How to Do Things by Theory defines critical theory (of performing arts) as a social practice, and views Public Editing as one of the formats of performing theory – by doing editing of a journal as a public process. PE sessions aim not only at public theoretical discussions of the issue, but also at commissioning, producing, and live proof-reading concrete contributions to the journal.

Main topic: Why immaterial labor in relation to performing arts today?

- from social field to performing arts and back -

The aim of the PE session#1 was on one side to apply theoretical, philosophical, political concepts to the performance practice, but also to investigate how we can challenge wider social-political concepts by performance practices and experiences.

What is immaterial labor in performing arts?

Immaterial (labour) is not addressing the ‘inherent’, ontological immateriality of performance itself, but the materialist (economic-political) approach to process orientation in performance, shift from the commodity of performance to the commodification of all the processes that enable the event and the product of performance.

Immaterial work in performance field implies cheap political-economic deal: what is all that a young performing artist need? ‘A room of one’s own (Virginia Woolf) and a bit of cash’ model results in proliferation of solos, ‘research aesthetics’ etc.

There are many activities, not oriented to production of a piece, but the artistic production depends on them: knowledge production, collaboration, conferences, networking. Organising these kind of activities is cheap, and so they easily become products substituting high performance production budgets.

Details »

PUBLIC EDITING #2 reference text_3: THE WORK OF ART IN THE AGE OF DIGITAL REPRODUCTION

PUBLIC EDITING #2 reference text_3:

THE WORK OF ART IN THE AGE OF DIGITAL REPRODUCTION

Robert Luxemburg

text published on 04/04/2004 on http://makeworlds.net/node/113

»Our fine arts were developed, their types and uses were established, in times very different from the present, by men whose power of action upon things was insignificant in comparison with ours. But the amazing growth of our techniques, the adaptability and precision they have attained, the ideas and habits they are creating, make it a certainty that profound changes are impending in the ancient craft of the Beautiful. In all the arts there is a physical component which can no longer be considered or treated as it used to be, which cannot remain unaffected by our modern knowledge and power. For the last twenty years neither matter nor space nor time has been what it was from time immemorial. We must expect great innovations to transform the entire technique of the arts, thereby affecting artistic invention itself and perhaps even bringing about an amazing change in our very notion of art.« (Steve Jobs, Keynote, MacWorld San Francisco 2004)

Preface

When Marx undertook his critique of the capitalistic mode of production, this mode was in its infancy. Marx directed his efforts in such a way as to give them prognostic value. He went back to the basic conditions underlying capitalistic production and through his presentation showed what could be expected of capitalism in the future. The result was that one could expect it not only to exploit the proletariat with increasing intensity, but ultimately to create conditions which would make it possible to abolish capitalism itself. The transformation of the superstructure, which takes place far more slowly than that of the substructure, has taken more than one and a half centuries to manifest in all areas of culture the change in the conditions of production. Only today can it be indicated what form this has taken. Certain prognostic requirements should be met by these statements. However, theses about the art of the new proletariat after its assumption of power or about the art of a classless society would have less bearing on these demands than theses about the developmental tendencies of art under present conditions of production. Their dialectic is no less noticeable in the superstructure than in the economy. It would therefore be wrong to underestimate the value of such theses as a weapon. They brush aside a number of outmoded concepts, such as creativity and genius, shareholder value and copyright — concepts whose uncontrolled (and at present almost uncontrollable) application would lead to a processing of data in the Fascist sense. The concepts which are introduced into the theory of art in what follows differ from the more familiar terms in that they are completely useless for the purposes of Fascism. They are, on the other hand, useful for the formulation of revolutionary demands in the politics of art.

Details »

PUBLIC EDITING #2 reference text_2: COLLABORATION

PUBLIC EDITING #2 reference text_2:

COLLABORATION

Florian Schneider

text published on 02/17/2007 on http://summit.kein.org/node/190

If one principle could be seen to inform the opaque surface of what in the 1990s was called a “new economy” — the shifts and changes, the dynamics and blockades, the emergencies and habit formations taking place within the realm of immaterial production — it would certainly be: “Work together”.

Facing the challenges of digital technologies, global communications, and networking environments, as well as the inherant ignorance of traditional systems towards these, ‘working together’ has emerged as an unsystematic mode of collective learning processes.

Slowly and almost unnoticeably, a new word came into vogue. At first sight it might seem the least significant common denominator for describing new modes of working together, yet “collaboration” has become one of the leading terms of an emergent contemporary political sensibility.

Details »