The Escape Route's Design: Assessment of the Impact of Current Aesthetics on History and a...

8/7/2019 The Escape Route's Design: Assessment of the Impact of Current Aesthetics on History and a Comparative Reading…

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-escape-routes-design-assessment-of-the-impact-of-current-aesthetics 1/15

Mariana Silva and Pedro NevesMarques

The Escape

RouteÕs Design:Assessment ofthe Impact ofCurrentAesthetics on

History and aComparativeReading Basedon an ExampleClose to the Cityof Berlin

EnunciationThe following speculative exercise aims atsurveying the impact of current Aesthetic Theory,of a certain Contemporary Aesthetics inparticular which proposes as fundamental thedenomination of what is Art, in its application toHistory; to, that is, the re-evaluation of pastevents, eventually to the re-evaluation ofincidents whose occurrence is considered solely

possible in the Past and from whence a politicaland social significance could emerge. Thepresent exercise is to be understood ascomparative, and the nature of the survey isdefined by its exemplificative or exemplarycharacter in the displacement of the object ofaesthetical reasoning from a specific object (Art)to a specific occurrence (History). To this end, weground ourselves in a modern conception of theIndividual and in the aesthetic judgment inherentto it, as well as in the admitted possibility of acontinuous re-evaluation and social

redistribution of its interpretation. Themethodology here proposed for an aesthetic re-reading of historical events is thus renderedbeyond the factual evaluation of History; it isindependent from it without howeverdisrespecting its existence per se; it does notapproach the causes and effects involved in theunfolding of a given event, or attempt theexplanation or consolidation of points of view onthe political and social relations potentiallyassociated with it. Nevertheless it equallypresupposes the interpretation of those samehistorical events in order to formulate adifferentiated possibility of reading andunderstanding the event in itself; it is, and mustbe, conscious of the social surroundings of theevent under consideration, even if it does notpropose to approach them directly.Consequently, this supposed possibility does notaim at rethinking a historical interpretation of aparticular event, but to revolve the event in itssubjective possibilities of value.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊThrough its inextricable association withthe Individual, aesthetic judgment necessarilyand intrinsically confers its freedom to judge any

occurrence as Art. Or, as we prefer, to judge anyoccurrence as object of referential or substantivevalue, capable of a communicative bond andexemplarity. This referential or substantive valuewould then be repositioned equally,simultaneously, and inevitably in the sphere ofthe individual and of communicative andcommunitarian socialization. Towards anoperative end, and within the historical lineageof philosophical thought concerning thesubjectivity of value, the displacement of theaesthetic judgment for its free application is

here stated, reaffirming the preposition that thisjudgment, defined by its occurrence in a

e-flux journal #6 Ñ may 2009 Ê Mariana Silva and Pedro Neves Marques

The Escape Route

Õs Design: Assessment of the Impact of Current Aesthetics on History and a Com

parative Reading Based on an Example C

lose to the City of Berlin

01/15

08.25.10 / 20:07:55 UTC


http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-escape-routes-design-assessment-of-the-impact-of-current-aesthetics 2/1508.25.10 / 20:07:55 UTC


http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-escape-routes-design-assessment-of-the-impact-of-current-aesthetics 3/1508.25.10 / 20:07:55 UTC



predominantly subjective and individual regime,proposes an intrinsically social, albeitspecialized, universal validity.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊIn light of this, the Kantian supposition thatany social other might also recognize and shareany event as such (Art/value), the redirection ofthe object of aesthetic judgment isfundamentally legitimized by not presupposingthe artistic object as an a priori element.

Furthermore, the entailment of the freeattribution of value to the subjective individual isalso associated with the modernist avant-gardemovements, in particular, Surrealism, Dadaism,and Russian Constructivism. In the sequence ofproposed ruptures, these movementsprogressively pointed, deliberately or not, to anenlargement of the significance of Art by itsreassessment of value; that is, thedisengagement of value from religious or royalrepresentations of power. This disengagementwould establish a regime of exchange that is, if

not democratic or communist, fundamentallyegalitarian with respect to creation, production,and reception of signification. From thishorizontal notion of the functioning of Art, or of areferential value capable of bonding, comes theconclusion that any reading is ultimately done inthe position of the spectator. This portrays the

spectator as a subject of power, thereforecapable of voluntary aesthetic emancipation andeffective action in the world through thisparticular capacity of judgment and re-evaluation, but not necessarily of reordering theobjects and/or phenomena involved in theunfolding of the historical process. From ourperspective, then, this could be understood as anattempt to respond to the increasing

crystallization of History and its constitutiveelements, of which the results are the loss of thenecessarily intrinsic potentiality of the Individualin its constructive relation to the present andfuture, the loss, that is, of a critical grounding forcollective identity.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊTo illustrate the displacement that is soughthere, with the assessment of its operativepossibilities as our goal, an example of a workconsidered as Art will be taken and juxtaposedwith a particular group of actions relevant to thecity of Berlin and considered of historical

significance. As such, the suggestion of ahypothetical triangle, the vertices of whose baseare the two cases A (Art) and E (Event), dulycrowned by the Individual, might be of use forthis purpose. The displacement of the Aestheticmethod (the side of the triangle defined by thevertices Individual←→Art) towards the

04/15

08.25.10 / 20:07:55 UTC



Historiographic method (the side of the triangledefined by the vertices Individual←→Event)

originates in the transference of the lineIndividual←→Art to its application to and co-

existence with the line Individual←→Event. This

will inevitably result in the dissolution of thetriangular form. Placing particular examples Ð asigned work and registered events in the journalsof History, respectively Ð on points A (Art) and E

(Event) is meant to, although not exclusively,facilitate the understanding of this scheme, andhence the visualization of the picture sketchedbelow.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊTherefore, this reading is merely apossibility amongst others available to theIndividual-Reader, who may freely pursue thissurvey on his/her own, as it necessarily includesand implies him/her. The Individual is intrinsic tothe aforementioned apparatus; solely throughthe activation of the IndividualÕs intervenientpotential is the aforementioned transferability

permitted. The possibilities for conjunctionbetween one and the other vertices areinnumerable: theoretically, as many as there are,or can be, and as many as could have been, orwere. Therefore, we do not propose a beginningand an end to this joint initiative, or indeed thedirection or accumulation of knowledge aimed ata productive extraction of conclusions. Theexercise aims above all at repositioningproposals, at a productive re-evaluation, which isthe main exercise in the egalitarian negotiationof value, eminently redundant and ultimatelyreinforcing the legitimacy of the act, theproposition which supports it, radical in itselfand desperately civic.

Demonstration of a Utopian Proposition:The Palace of Projects, by Ilya and EmiliaKabakov

For a valuable re-reading of the chosen historicalevents, originally occurring in the city of Berlinand to be elucidated below, we here consider theproposal of Ilya and Emilia Kabakov, particularlythe proposals that constitute the totality of The

Palace of Projects, a permanent installationexhibited in the city of Essen1. In this Palace thevisitor is given on average seventy sets ofinstructions, framed by the tri-partite objectiveof the authors: 1) Projects concerning theimprovement of the life of other people; 2)Projects stimulating creativity, helping thecreation, the emergence of the projectsthemselves; 3) Projects aimed at perfectingoneself as an individual.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊFollowing the logic of previous works, theseseventy projects, some of them previously

presented in other contexts, are enclosed in atwo-story architectonic structure which

resembles TatlinÕs Monument to the ThirdInternational, although distinctly different inspectacularity and movement. Nevertheless, asin the Monument to the Third International, ThePalace of Projects also takes from thearchitectonic context its openly monumentalfunction of guidance and symbolic aggregationthrough the eyes and/or movement of thespectator. The direction, although spiral, is in

both pieces fundamental and explicitly vertical.This direction links both monuments to atangible functionalism, that is, an adjustment ofthe symbolic form to an objective bureaucraticfunction, product of the negation of the purelypropagandistic character of the monument. Inthe Monument to the Third International this isaccomplished through the deliberate tri-partitioning of the rotating spiral structure in acubic base intended for discourse presented inthe form of conferences, readings, congresses,and so forth; an intermediate conical structure

intended for administrative functions; acylindrical peak for the propaganda center. InThe Palace of Projects it is addressed byadopting the ascendant spiral form for the tri-partition of projects and accommodating theseon two stories (projects concerned with theimprovement of the life of other people andprojects stimulating creativity, helping thecreation, the emergence of the projectsthemselves on the ground floor; projects aimed atperfecting oneself as an individual on the upperfloor), as well as by carefully guiding thespectator along its interior, roughly mimicking amuseological display for the presentation andreception of work, even if in the form of a project.

ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊThe project proposed below is precisely thiskind of ÒPalace of Projects,Ó projects which forthe most part may be nave and unrealizable, butin their concepts and intentions they havedefinitely earned the right to wind up in such aÒPalace.Ó An enormous quantity of similarÒpalacesÓ-monuments exist in our world:ÒPalaces of Transportation,Ó ÒPalaces of oldTechnologyÓ where lathes and electric machines

are exhibited, ÒPalaces of Ship Building,Ó withamazing boats Ð everywhere there are thingsthat had received their material form and wereformerly realized and functioning in their owntime. But it is no less important, and perhapsmore so, to create a unique museum of dreams, amuseum of hypothesis and projects, even ifunrealizable. In many of them, the visitor to sucha ÒPalaceÓ will encounter stimulus of his owntasks, will awaken his imagination, and the mainthing, will provide the impulse for his owncreative activity in a Òpositive direction.Ó2

ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊConsistent with the museological nature ofthe display, each of the exhibited projects


The Escape Route




05/15

08.25.10 / 20:07:55 UTC



Image from Rainer Hildebrandt, It Happened at the Wall, (Berlin: ÒHaus am Checkpoint CharlieÓ Publications, 2006).


08.25.10 / 20:07:55 UTC



presents a modular structure in the form of amodel, an illustration, and a writtenannouncement which the Kabakovs open up tothe possibility of execution by using the conciselanguage of an instruction manual. Therelationship is significantly reciprocal: betweenthe modular structure of each project and theform of the Palace. These instructions for theeffective realization of the projects, which in

each case schematize its execution in 4Ð6points, presuppose general access to theproposals, even if while doing so the exposure ofthe possibility of their realization might renderthem ridiculous. Furthermore, by juxtaposing: 1)Projects concerning the improvement of the life of other people and 3) Projects aimed at perfectingoneself as an Individual in the same installation,under the roof of the same Palace, under theform of a manual, without prioritizing theviability of each one, that is, by juxtaposingprojects of easy execution directed at the

Individual with projects for which the addresseemust necessarily be collective or social, theKabakovs opt to submit the first to the logicalfield of the second and consequently to a field ofcommunitarian action, perhaps articulated, butnot necessarily guaranteed or possible, in thedirection of a positive future. This logical andbureaucratic conflict, of the institutionalorganization of the Palace in the form of a multi-floored exhibition intended as a homogenizationof the Individual and the collective, is furtherexpressed by the fact that a number ofproposals, precisely the quasi-totality of theproposals intended for a preferably activeaddressee, evoke actions in the realm of thefantastic and/or metaphysical, viable solelythanks to a global entity or unviable without itsoverall support.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊThus the KabakovsÕ work constitutes itselfprecisely in the space between the realizableand the unrealizable, or, more specifically, in theformulation of the realizable solely as possibilityopposed to its effective realization in the world,that is, the permanence of truly viable proposalsas incomplete. Accordingly, one could advance

the notion that the device that makes theinstruction manual touching is the displacementof the realizable examples towards theunrealizable; by means of a manual, thepermanence of the realizable projects in theform of a model, thus being transferred to thesame metaphysical field of the other projects.This makes 3) Projects aimed at perfectingoneself as an individual proposals for a social,general, resolution; it clarifies that its proposal,although addressed to the Individual, aims at apotentially public significance. It is the non-

consideration of the possibility of proposalswhich permit the evocation of an ideal, of an

aspiration to which can be attributed theadjective utopian, just as it is with regard to thisprecise characteristic of possibility orimpossibility of a proposal, even if the conditionsfor the occurrence of the first option are alreadystructured, that the idea of utopia is established.

ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊNevertheless, this idea of utopia does nothere concern so much the concept of utopia in

the strict sense of a thing to come, that is, of anoverall state of things to which one aspires for avector direction leading to its hypothetical end,but the idea of a concrete utopia, susceptible ofrealization now and onto another now (a Present-Present relation), as opposed to an effectuationin the present directed toward a posterior pointin time (a Present-Future relation Ð theinstitutionalized definition of utopia). Thedifference is, precisely, temporal. The firsthypothesis of utopia concerns a present act3, buta present act directed at another, to come,

seeking through the present a futureaccomplishment; a linear relation, vector aleading to vector b, therefore a narrow and/ordogmatic utopia―this constraint, caused by its

subsequent direction, is here bipolar; the futureconstrains the present, by the precise will toinstall it(self), and the present auto-constrainsitself in regard to that same precise vision of thefuture. The second hypothesis of utopia equallyconcerns a present act, although an act that isnot so much intended as another, to come, aswith interplay, often disarticulated and/oraccidental, of the action with itself and itssurroundings. It is, therefore, the possibility ofeffective realization, in the present into thepresent; a noncommitment to the formulation offuture hypotheses, thus transferring thiseffective realization to a concrete variation of thereal and contact with the Other. As if necessity orpossibly chance, necessity driven by chance orchance driven by necessity, impelled the firsthypothesis onto the second, as with the man whoflew into space from his apartment, who ÒdidnÕtwant to wait until the whole of the rest of societywas ready for utopia; he wanted to head up for

utopia there and then Ð flying out into cosmicspace where he would no longer be tied to aparticular place, a particular topos, a Ônon-place,Õ weightless, floating free in the cosmicinfinitude.Ó4 By doing so, the man who flew intospace from his apartment took into his ownhands the effectuation of a concrete utopia; bylaunching there and then and not further aheadhe brought the Other to himself.

Point of Inflection

The above-mentioned enlargement of utopia isthus beyond (or before) an enlargement of reality


The Escape Route




07/15

08.25.10 / 20:07:55 UTC



Ilya & Emilia Kabakov, ÒThe Palace of Projects,Ó Madrid: Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofia, Londres: Artangel, 1998.

08/15

08.25.10 / 20:07:55 UTC




09/15

08.25.10 / 20:07:55 UTC



Image from Rainer Hildebrandt,It Happened at the Wall, (Berlin:

ÒHaus am Checkpoint CharlieÓPublications, 2006).

Image from Rainer Hildebrandt,It Happened at the Wall, (Berlin:ÒHaus am Checkpoint CharlieÓPublications, 2006).

08.25.10 / 20:07:55 UTC



via the field of future possibilities, of aspirationsto viability, but rather concerns the effectiveenlargement of reality via the field of presentpossibilities (Present-Present relation). TheKabakovsÕ proposals, voluntarily directed at thesphere of possibility or exemplary enunciation,are thus simultaneously deviated from animminence and an eminence; they carry the stateto come to a now, they update it, and by doing so

annul the above-mentioned bipolar direction, or,in other words, they deport utopia from itsinstitutionalized position. Therefore, thispossibility of utopia nevertheless remains, in theKabakovsÕ Palace, entangled in its ownenunciation, in the supposition of a hypothesisawaiting activation, or, in the perspective of theauthors, solely valid, because the realizable isenmeshed with the unrealizable, as supposition.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊThe foundation derives, precisely, from theKabakovsÕ attribution of an authorship to each ofthe exhibited projects: the potential execution of

any project by a possible real and credible authorsustains the method by which the elaboratedproposals are stated, or, in other words, how theproposals are individualized and,simultaneously, universalized in theirperformative potentiality. The inferredcompletion of each project within The Palace of Projects, achieved by presenting each one underthe form of a manual or through the attribution ofan authorship, credible or incredible, to each,legitimizes the social nature of the exhibitedproposals. Therefore it is implied that onlythrough a given authorship and its consequentexecution by the implicit singularity of the authorcould an intuitive genuine making of these sameprojects be promoted Ð the transference of theproposal to practice or the effectuation of theproposal in the world. It follows that solelythrough this authorial, attributive tactic couldone expose the intrinsic utopian intention of theprojects or presumably unlock the latentpotential they contain. However, even ifindividualized by a possibly real authorship,these projects are not capable of extrapolatingthe field of supposition or narrative

demonstration, remaining nevertheless, andsolely, in the field of a hypothetical utopianaction.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊThe KabakovsÕ refusal is obvious Ðentangled in the preposition of an aspiration.Although clearly representative of a potentialutopian effectuation, this effectuation is keptnevertheless helplessly directed. As in TatlinÕsMonument to the Third International, The Palaceof Projects remains inexorably illustrative,model-like, and thus ultimately symbolic. Thepotential and supposed practicality or functional

utility of both monuments is then transferred toan exhibition, solely inspiring or demonstrative of

intentions. The model becomes the monument; itembodies its possibilities of edification, thesymbolic empowerment inherent in it. It isprojection, but a projection, through the refusalof edification, charged by posterity yet to come.The Palace of Projects represents the varied Ð asvaried as the number of projects containedtherein Ð possibilities of present effectiveutopia; but due precisely to this same character

of representation it does not effectively becomeso. The represented does not gain autonomyfrom what it represents; hence the presentedutopia is not permitted and has not thepossibilities it suggests. The collection ofprojects demonstrates a possibility, or a varietyof possibilities, to be effected, but it is not initself this effectuation. This non-realization owesas much to a narrow utopia as to a potentialutopian effectuation, or, in other words, as muchÐ by the demonstrated possibility of utopia in thepresent Ð to an effective present utopia, as Ð by

this same (exclusively) demonstrative characterÐ to a narrow utopia, directed by and to a state ofthings to come.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊAccordingly, and in view of the state ofdemocratic negotiability of value mentionedabove, one is confronted with a situation inwhich history seems to reply retroactively to theproposals elaborated by the KabakovsÕ authors,precisely by the particularity of the attempts atcrossing the Berlin Wall in its verticality. Thecases of escape from the Soviet regime,perpetuated by numerous people during adeterminate period in time, by transgressing theboundary of the Berlin Wall, is equivalent to anequal or corresponding innumerability ofprojects, whose conception and realization, ofindividual or collective design, could thenconstitute an answer or a historicalcounterproposal to the KabakovsÕ projects. Thisresponse, as counterproposal, is given by itsexemplary character in opposition to thepreviously cited demonstrative enunciation ofthe artist. Put differently, the character of theaforementioned events imposes precisely andnecessarily the will or act of taking the design in

hand, no longer understood as a project or modelbut as the physical actuality of an act in itssimplicity of idea. With a multiplicity of commonobjects used for and during its concretization, itdoes not cease to propose its execution to eachinhabitant, individually and without exception.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊThus the juxtaposition of the attempts atcrossing the Berlin Wall and the KabakovsÕproposals Ð allowed by freedom Ð offered withinthe rhetoric outlined here: the free displacementof both elements, in short, and schematically, ofthe triangular vertex E juxtaposed to the

triangular vertex A by the displacement made bythe Individual in vertex I, for the purpose of


The Escape Route




11/15

08.25.10 / 20:07:55 UTC



reconnaissance, review, and reshaping of thehistoric condition of a particular event, namely A:The Palace of Projects, and E: consecutiveattempts at crossing the Berlin Wall. Themethodology in both cases is relativelyreciprocal, the KabakovsÕ projects + attempts atcrossing the Berlin Wall, enabling as such thedisplacement.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊInherent in, if not constitutive of, the

attempts at crossing the Berlin Wall, is thenecessary appearance of casualness (the use ofdisguises, hiding places in cars and baggage,electric cable spools) and/or the concealment ofthe executed action (construction of tunnels),these attempts being furthermore surrounded bya variety of plausible situations (credible to andunsuspected by the frontier control), or, at least,by a degree of invisibility. This plural act, invisiblyperformed either through the casualness ofunsuspected appearance or in a covert manner,is the escape routeÕs design. Both points, A and

E, thus enunciate a transformation of an overallstate of things, simultaneously dis- and re-functionalizing common and/or establishedmaterials and actions, aiming at theenlargement, beyond the delineated, of thespace of action. Equally binding A and E is alatent performativity, already demonstrated inthe case of the projects within the Palace, andfurther necessitated by specification of thejuxtaposed events. The attempts at crossing theBerlin Wall, understood as actions independentof each of its actorÕs intentions and of the weightof personal motivations, inevitably ended,although without public knowledge, in thesubmission to an audience, not in the sense ofthe spectator implied in its physical presence, asunderstood by the perfomative arts, but to thosethrough whom the diffusion of its report couldconfront themselves with their own possibility ofand for action: a deferred audience, posterior tothe given action, which could consequently readeach crossing as demonstrative and construe Ðor not Ð for itself, individually, within the freedomof its will, the exemplary character of eachcrossing.

ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊThe performative character of these eventswould then simultaneously translate into a non-commensurable action, a production ofmeanings and free spaces, conditions and actsof self-identification, precisely through thisabsence of an intentional audience, the absenceof a predefined performative structure; thereforeof a demonstration understood as conscious andintentional, as is frequently the case in theproduction of artistic value, quantifiable andquantified by law. This exemplary character isthen paradoxically extracted from its own

characteristics of un-example, namely itsunformed and undetermined characteristics,

foreign to any commensurable regulation in theeffective making of the action. The plurality ofthe proposal, or the activation of the proposals inthe world, to the subject who thus understandsit, cannot and could not have shape or structuralprinciples because it is/was independent of anyproposal of social organization found to the Eastor West of the Berlin Wall, and as such, althougheminently social in its understanding, cannot

and could not be understood then as a solutionaimed at the Other to come.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊThe spontaneity of the action asperformativity is fundamental, and solelyconstituted and unleashed by the personal will ofthe Individual and by his position in the contextthat, at a particular moment, surrounds him. Theeffective act of crossing the Berlin Walldistances itself thus from the Palace of Projects,given that only when the monument, itself asymbol of aspiring potentiality, is effectuatedthrough the attempts at crossing the Berlin Wall,

is it accomplished in Life. Nevertheless, thisrecognition of the symbolic diluted in life, that is,unrecognizable as such while it occurred, wouldimplicate the negation of the proper identity ofmonument, its understanding as such, given thatthe permanence of its status would necessarilymake its de-signified establishment in the worldimpossible. Solely by denying the monument itsproper self-referential status as monumentcould it perhaps, differentiated by this precisenegation, permit its own dissolution in the life-world, precisely because the event Ð as shown bythe displacement and juxtaposition of A (Palaceof Projects) and E (attempts at crossing theBerlin Wall) Ð disengages itself through its actionfrom symbolic reference or property.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊIn this sense, the placement of thetriangular vertex A on the triangular vertex E Ðenabled by I, that is, the re-articulated andrepositioned dimensions of the aforementionedevents, assisted by the proposals andelaborations signed by the Kabakovs Ð proposesthat the possibility of utopia, merely enunciatedby the authors as project, has already and ineffect taken place. That the meaning found in the

PalaceÕs proposals would have been extrapolatedin their unfinished condition and consequentlydemonstrated a real existence of these individualgestures of social significance, in that thereferred projects would have already, truly, at agiven moment, and even if in another time and byother means, been effectuated. We findourselves thus and again confronted with thesecond, aforementioned, case of utopiaconstituted by the disarticulated or accidentalenchainment of the action with itself and with itssurroundings. It is here understood that the

attempts at crossing the Berlin Wall have takenthe place of the proposals elaborated by Ilya and


The Escape Route




12/15

08.25.10 / 20:07:55 UTC



Emilia Kabakov in the world, even if without theirknowledge or intrinsic necessity, givenfurthermore by their temporal antecedence tothe regarded proposals. This would allow then arenewed perspective on the Berlin events. Theseevents would henceforth be charged with autopian affectivity: allocated, present, androoted in a now. In this perspective, Utopia wouldno longer be in question, but by its differentiated

concretization here and now we would findourselves automatically updated to a post-utopian situation Ð the obvious proof of theviability of utopian revolution obtained not by itsaccomplishment in the present but through therereading of the past through the prism of freeattribution of value, kaleidoscopic in form. Onecould therefore advance that Revolution Ð albeitan unnoticed revolution, in invisibility Ð has,vividly utopian in occurrence, already taken placein the past. This post-utopia withdraws itselfconsequently, and diametrically, from the

commonplace notion of post-utopia thatdiscredits or abandons the possibility of utopianrealization in the present, or, for that matter, inthe future. It is therefore the precise literalmeaning of a post-utopia; of living in itsposterity. This would be another or differentiatednotion of a post-utopian condition, literal withregard to the use of the term post and no longerassociated with a narrow utopia, established asthe crystallization of a condition at the end ofHistory, given that it emerges from a permanentor capacitated-to-repeated-recurrence utopia.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊThe understanding of a past utopia by theIndividual therefore derives from the free usageof the method of theoretical discourse towardsthe reconfiguration of the concept of utopia. Buta utopia with the past as its center wouldnecessarily imply an etymological and socialreview of the term; a review of different anddistant characteristics from that of the strictlyformatted utopia, given the fact that it originatesfrom a notion which proposes and/or concludesits effectiveness, and by this conceivesspontaneity or chance as predominant elementsfor this same effectuation. By incorporating

spontaneity, randomness, and/or chance into theterm, the idea of revolution, alreadyaccomplished or in process, would dissolve itselfin the possibility of the unconsciousness of theevent while lived by its actors. In other words,from here would derive the equation, of invertedproportionality, in which the utopianeffectiveness of an event could correspond tothe invisibility of the revolution.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊOne last paradox should be addressed. Onlythrough this temporal inversion of meaning andhistorical position would the effectuation of the

KabakovsÕ proposals Ð understood up to thispoint as solely proposal Ð be possible, displacing

them from their potential position to anactivation that would thus cease to bedemonstrative. More importantly, this activationwould imply a double meaning: the activation ofthe example (model) which, through itsactivation, restructures the understanding of theevent. This is, that the effectuation of theKabakovsÕ proposals is possible only through thegiven past event (attempts at crossing the Berlin

Wall), while the position and form of the givenpast event is inevitably submitted to a necessaryrestructuring. But with this assumption of therealization of the KabakovsÕ utopia, its ownproposal would be sacrificed. By this we meanthat for the actualization of society to a post-utopian condition through the rereading of theKabakovsÕ work, one would have to afterwardsand consequently dismiss the workÕs poeticvalue, grounded in the incompleteness of itsproposals. Its body of work would have already,historically, been accomplished, hence the

Kabakovs would discover, and even demonstrate,the act after its effective occurrence, knowingnevertheless that solely by the initialincompleteness of the projects would thereading of the attempts at crossing the BerlinWall in their intrinsic utopian value be madetangible. Thus reading the Kabakovs would sendthe value of their proposal back to a point oforigin, the point of departure of aestheticjudgment, through the social and critical re-qualification of the events of the Berlin Wall.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊThe Kabakovs are here, therefore, theindispensable element for the formulation of thishistorical answer; they enable the assumptionthat becomes the origin of judgment, even ifthrough the process their suggestion of utopia isdisplaced by an effective concretization found inthe attempts at crossing the Berlin Wall thatquestion the authorsÕ poetics. The methodpresented here consequently implies that theartistsÕ piece, understood as Art, is turnedinstrument to provoke a new historic reading andunderstanding of a common past. The Kabakovsthen become the critical point that enablesinflection, whilst knowing that this same

capacity of and for inflection is in the criticalityof the beholder, vertex I. The fruition of the piecewould then be beyond the reign of the sensibleassociated with aesthetic experience; andhenceforth, entangled in its inherent liberty ofthe sign, close to an eminently political function.The attribution of value to a work named Art, inthe state of democratic and free attribution ofvalue opened to the Individual, would deviatefrom the exclusive function of nomenclature, theattribution of meaning and property to the wordArt, to a critical significance, transgressing

disciplinary and thus also geographic, historic,and temporal boundaries. In other words, the


The Escape Route




13/15

08.25.10 / 20:07:56 UTC



transgressive potency of the aesthetic judgmentwould cease to be limited to the possibility of theattribution of the word Art to a particularphenomenon, displaced hereafter from the freepossibility of attribution of value to a criticalcapacity of the attributive act aimed at the self-recognition and reflection of the Individual inHistory and to the consequent restructuring thatthis change of nomenclature in History could

effect.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊTo end, the assessment of the methodshould open up to inquiry what would result fromthe reiteration and repetition of attribution ofvalue; in other words, from the continuousaffirmation of the possibility of exchange valuebeyond the gathering of consensus ormultiplicity. Which consciousness and positionwould convey the inference in the relation of thesocial whole with itself, hence of everyone withevery other and of each as a potent agent in thehistorical and in the natural world. What would

the act in itself allow the Individual beyond thealready valuable affirmation of its constitutiveright and of its active role in the social sphere, inits redundancy, in its repetition and insistence, inits dissolution or translation raised to theextension of a present society.ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊ×This text is a revised version of ÒThe Escape Route's Design,Óa bilingual Portuguese/English artist book, edited anddesigned by Mariana Silva and Pedro Neves Marques, andfirst presented in Berlin at Sparwasser HQ, June 12Ð14, 2008.The book launch featured a model which acted as aschematic sculpture loosely appropriating concepts from thebook. The event was conceived as less an exhibition than athree-day presentation meant to end when the last booklet

was given away.

Mariana Silva is an artist currently living and workingin Lisbon. Since 2007 she has participated in severalgroup exhibitions including ÒEur‡siaÓ (Casa MuseuAnast‡cio Gon•alves, Lisbon, 2007) and ÒAntes que aprodu•‹o cesse / Before production ceasesÓ (Espa•oAvenida, Lisbon, 2007). In 2006, under thecoordination of Vanda Gorj‹o, Mariana Silva co-edited,with Raquel Feliciano and Rita Roberto, the secondissue of MArte, an art theory magazine of the Facultyof Fine Arts, University of Lisbon, dedicated toÒLegitimization in Art.Ó Mariana Silva was one of the

winners of BES Revela•‹o prize (Serralves Museum,2008). She is currently co-programming ÒStates-General,Ó a four-month cycle of shows and eventsbased at Arte Contempo and several other places inLisbon. Ê

Pedro Neves Marques is an artist currently living andworking in Lisbon. He has participated in severalexhibitions since 2007, including the solo showsÒAbridged ImageticsÓ at Galeria Pedro Cera (Lisbon,2008), and ÒThe Wandering ChiefÓ at Espa•o Avenida(Lisbon, 2009), as well as in collective shows such asÒA river ainÕt too much to loveÓ at Spike Island (Bristol,UK, 2008) and the ÒBES Revelation 2007Ó art prizeshow at Serralves Villa Ð Museum of Contemporary Art(Oporto, Portugal). He has co-produced severalprojects in Lisbon, such as the shows ÒAntes que aprodu•‹o cesseÓ (Espa•o Avenida) and ÒEurasiaÓ(House Museum Anast‡cio Gon•alves). He is currentlyco-programming ÒStates-General,Ó a four-month cycleof shows and events based at Arte Contempo andseveral other places in Lisbon.


The Escape Route




14/15

08.25.10 / 20:07:56 UTC



ÊÊÊÊÊÊ1Ilya and Emilia Kabakov, ThePalace of Projects, MuseoNacional Centro de Arte ReinaSofia, Madrid, December 13,1998ÐApril 15, 1999.

ÊÊÊÊÊÊ2Neither to act nor to make doproper justice to the Portugueseterm fazer . Fazer would literallytranslate both the verb to do andthe verb to make, necessarilyimplying in either case the

temporal, and effective, notionof action. But such a translationmust be cautiously made; fazer unconjugated, in the infinitive, isentrenched in abstraction,enlarged by the definedundefinition. It does not imply somuch the action Ð construction,let us say Ð but the will to actelevated to the condition of aninfinitive: a potent, and latent,universal self-definingabstraction. We have thus optedhere for the careful and relatedusage of the words act andmaking as a proper translation ofthe term.

ÊÊÊÊÊÊ3

Boris Groys, Ilya Kabakov: TheMan Who Flew into Space fromhis Apartment (London: AfterallBooks, 2006).


The Escape Route




15/15

The Escape Route's Design: Assessment of the Impact of Current Aesthetics on History and a...

Documents

Transcript of The Escape Route's Design: Assessment of the Impact of Current Aesthetics on History and a...