dinsdag 22 mei 2012 De verbindende schakel in fotografie
Ruhrgebiet
Vorige Volgende
27 februari 2009 »
door Ohad Ben Shimon and Sander Uitdehaag

Ohad Ben Shimon and Sander Uitdehaag are still travelling through the Ruhrgebiet. More about ‘the ironic self-awareness of the artist’.

I’m back at the house on the Auf der Donau corner where you and I stayed during our first few trips to the Ruhrgebiet. It feels bare and empty. The trees and bushes carry no leaves. They are stripped of life. There is a little snow. It’s cold this winter.
This is where our trip started. I cooked chicken peas here and you baked eggs. We watched the recession take shape on CNN and looked at the map of the Ruhrgebiet. When we left at the end of our second trip I decided to put the technical camera on the corner of this street. We climbed on two different electricity structures and asked passersby to release the shutter. I put on my Americana blouse, the one with roses; you had on a purple shirt and were wearing the blue sunglasses of my dad. We took a simultaneous drag of our cigarettes when the picture was taken.

I think about the Auf der Donau-place a lot. The past months I’ve felt like returning to this place. Now that I’m back, I don’t feel much. It was new, but now it’s old. I’m an outsider to the place I once embraced –or that once embraced me.
There is a plastic green stem of a rose on the electricity structure that I stood on when we took that picture. The rosebud is gone. I put the stem of the flower in my camera bag and take a picture from the same point of view as four months ago.
Six people pass. Four men, two women, all in their thirties, all walking alone. One woman is walking a dog. Two men are smoking a cigarette. Five of them bow their head when passing by. The dog sniffs my feet. One man almost trips over.



What does a travel mean? What does a trip communicate? It is its own medium. It transfers something from one place to another. What is being transported? Travelers. Tourists. And so forth. From where to where? From here to there and back again. This is travel. This is tourism. That’s all.
But what is the essence inherent in trip? What does tripping mean? Isn’t it funny that the same word that is used for travel is also used to describe someone who trips over something, who stumbles, who falls, who fails? Isn’t failure the inherent essence of travel? Of a trip? How many times did we go on a trip and how many times were we disappointed to some extent? Didn’t we know from the beginning that our trip would be disappointing, that we wouldn’t find what we were looking for or that the place we tripped to didn’t meet our expectations? Isn’t trip a systematic failure? A pre-planned fall, a deliberate stumble? Why is planning so inherent in tripping? Why do travelers buy maps, make plans, fill up the car with a full tank, reserve seats before hand on planes, buses, trains, hotels?
Maybe it’s because the failure of a trip, a travel, a plan, is its essence, its destination. Its artistic manifest. How is trip connected to tragedy? To comedy? Why is the artist so fond of taking pictures on his travel? Isn’t it because he thinks it’s so funny? Or because it’s so dramatic?

What makes the artist on travel, the artist? Isn’t it because he is able to be the one that travels, that trips, that stumbles, and at the same time the one that watches his trip, his stumble, his failure? He can split himself in two. He can become non-original, and aware of his own in-authenticity. It is the ironic self-awareness of the artist that he must conceal or live within his own shadow.

 
Plaatsen/Stemmen op:  

Reacties (24)

1. Rob op Zaterdag 28 februari 2009 20.28
It is a pity to see that the conceptual theoretical framework of the KABK is so thin. When you are in your exam year, asking these premature questions without reference to works and/or theories that have been formulated before you arrived at the subject is a shame. This also makes the 'non-esthetics' claim sound remorseful, because 'where do we find meaning then?'. Start reading, start looking at art-history, there is nothing original, fascinating about these questions what so ever, not only has it been done before, but much better, more concrete with more whit and intelligence. Read Derida, Benjamin and Barthes study the works by 1970's and 80's landscape photographers (who very much referred to travelling and such), and then formulate your own questions. It is nothing more than a hollow scream in the dark that reeks to the same artistic appeal as your next fine-art postcard. Probably cum-laude at the KABK whilst being nothing more than immature non-interesting questions.

2. line op Zaterdag 28 februari 2009 22.50
Derrida is with 2 'r's' instead of 1.

3. me op Zaterdag 28 februari 2009 22.53
i just popped out of nowhere thinking that many of us simply do not give a bloody shit on conceptualism, not to mention framed works. oh! or was that framework? i hope i am not becoming prematurely ridiculous. or is that maybe just a sample of raw balkan shit as our dear Kristeva was so poetically describing her ineffable roots. did she really suffer after all?? giving credit to this project is giving credit to life. the only non aesthetic assumption hauls its stamina probably in the robotic people from LEGO land who are fated from the outset and never got the chance to bump their heads at least once. premature questions appoints to art-history insomuch as fashionable Ranciére pointed out just yeasterday to Platonic and Aristotelic mimesis, poesis and all that. Was he really that immature? shame shame shame

4. me op Zaterdag 28 februari 2009 22.54
if one read Barthes would, by now, know very well and unequivocal that semiotics is just another esoteric science. ba ba ba! and that meaning is made and not found and wrestling is actually really funny because it involves a lot of stumbling and tripping and head bumping me

5. me op Zaterdag 28 februari 2009 22.56
if one read Barthes would, by now, know very well and unequivocal that semiotics is just another esoteric science. ba ba ba! and that meaning is made and not found and wrestling is actually really funny because it involves a lot of stumbling and tripping and head bumping me

6. conceptual theoretical artist op Zaterdag 28 februari 2009 23.14
what is 'concept' by the way? and 'theory'?

7. derrida is dead op Zaterdag 28 februari 2009 23.43
For Derrida, all concepts are inextricably bound up with metaphor. Any concept that understands an aspect of some thing about or in the world is thus necessarily logically invalid, ungrounded--and in that sense "false"--since it relies to some extent on an 'as if' way, a metaphorical way, of understanding that thing. In other words, the very nature of logical concepts dooms them to mark out (unwittingly, so to speak) some aspect of the object they supposedly understand which escapes subsumption to that concept, escapes its understanding.

8. derrida is dead op Zaterdag 28 februari 2009 23.45
For Derrida, all concepts are inextricably bound up with metaphor. Any concept that understands an aspect of some thing about or in the world is thus necessarily logically invalid, ungrounded--and in that sense "false"--since it relies to some extent on an 'as if' way, a metaphorical way, of understanding that thing. In other words, the very nature of logical concepts dooms them to mark out (unwittingly, so to speak) some aspect of the object they supposedly understand which escapes subsumption to that concept, escapes its understanding.

9. ohad op Zondag 01 maart 2009 0.52
Dear Rob, Thank you for your re-action. I find the need to answer some of your remarks. 1. Sander and I believe that the conceptual theoretical framework of the kabk is perfectly fine. If you were to join one of the classes or meetings there recently you would be surprised to meet an intelligent, reflective and critical learning environment. So I completely disagree with what I believe to be an un-based haphazard assumption. 2. I, personally and I know that Sander as well, have read the authors you mentioned (and much more). We have also looked at art history and the photographers you mentioned from the 70's and 80's. If you wish to read and see a lecture I gave specifically about Jacques Derrida you can follow this link: http://www.ohadbenshimon.com/whentwopeoplecometogether.html to be continued...

10. ohad op Zondag 01 maart 2009 0.54
part 2 3. In my opinion the theoretical discourse within photography is phalo-centric. Furthermore I see referencing and citation within texts as most of the time empty pointers/ signifiers that more than create meaning create the image of meaning and constitute the biased construction of knowledge and it's archiving. My belief is that this form of theoretical stance/ jargon/ gesture resembles a medium (someone who talks to spirits) who attempts to bring into the room/ argument, the spirit of the dead referent/ reference to validate/ justify ones theoretical, formal or artistic argumentation. Therefore I usually decide to restrain myself from doing so. to be continued..

11. ohad op Zondag 01 maart 2009 0.59
part 3 4. If you were to be patient and observe our attempt in a broader time perspective and not judge it according to one column, you would notice the difference our project has with the photographers you mentioned. For example, the location in which our project is taking place in, is of historical significance even though we do not believe we should refer to it explicitly. I believe the conceptual artists and photographers from the 70's didnt have this intention in mind. For them it was usually purely about 'travel' or 'concept'or 'time'. Furthermore our project encompases a sculptural approach to time and photography which the photographers from the 70's did not 'put in the picture'. We are working in a post-war area. we cannot escape this reference and we do not intend to. we simply do it 'our way' in respect to the legacy of history and photography history within this specific region. to be continued..

12. ohad op Zondag 01 maart 2009 1.03
last part 5. I understand your remark about immaturity. Sander and I believe that attempting to sound mature is not our goal. we embrace 'innocent', 'immature' reasoning and try-outs because we believe this to be the most effective way to learn about ones self and about the world. we see ourselves within this project as professionals with an ameteuristic-eye. This strategy enables us to discover things we wouldnt have, given we would embark on a completely 'mature' adventure.

13. Rob op Zondag 01 maart 2009 1.39
Dear Ohad, Thank you kindly for your reply, some questions have been answered. In reply on part 1, I share a different experience during recent teaching at the KABK. Though the students were highly reflective and intelligent, I was amazed by the lack of theoretical awareness and knowledge of art's discourse, this in comparison to Frankfurt and London. Also the KABK library let me down, hardly any books on photography theory. The students told me that they only used Newhall's History of Photography in the past at the KABK. to be continued....

14. Rob op Zondag 01 maart 2009 1.41
Dear Ohad, Thank you kindly for your reply, some questions have been answered. In reply on part 1, I share a different experience during recent teaching at the KABK. Though the students were highly reflective and intelligent, I was amazed by the lack of theoretical awareness and knowledge of art's discourse, this in comparison to Frankfurt and London. Also the KABK library let me down, hardly any books on photography theory. The students told me that they only used Newhall's History of Photography in the past at the KABK. to be continued....

15. Rob op Zondag 01 maart 2009 1.54
On part 2/3. I just read your lecture and I must say I might have to be to hasty in judging your theoretical background, which was based on my experience at the KABK. That the discourse is still phallocentric I tend to disagree, recently James Elkins in his 'Photography Theory' argued that over the past 20 years feminist studies on arts discourse have more or less changed this. I strongly disagree on the deconstructionist argument that references create empty signifiers. Instead I maintain that (when done correctly) they obtain transparency for discourse on the authenticity of the artist (Wall, Struth, Ruff, Burgin et. al.). It also alludes to the assumption that art is pluralistic and the image itself is not more than an empty signifier. to be continued ...

16. Rob op Zondag 01 maart 2009 2.11
On part 3/4. My lack of patience, point well taken. Nonetheless, though the 1970's and 80's artists were often concentrated on neoconceptualist subjects. Nonetheless, another side of the discourse was very much about time and place. Here I'm referring to artists such as Nicholas Nixon, Lewis Baltz, Stephen Shore and John Schott. They all touched the post-industrial places and interwinding the elements of time throughout the 70's and 80's experienced through their journey's. When you do present your work through a column like this I miss the references/transparency to artists such as these. They dont have to be explicit references for all I care, however, some point of reference to contextualize the debate would be nice. to be continued...

17. Rob op Zondag 01 maart 2009 2.28
On part 5. Your take off point is not an unfamiliar strategy in academic art. Many young artists seem to find a comfort in exploring their thoughts/being behind a veil of ignorance. There is only one pitfall to this strategy: how can somebody who is read (like you) educated, experienced to some extent, maintain that she or he is unbiased. Moreover, you can not be obliviousness whilst being mediated (as you say yourself "professionals with an amateuristic-eye") through yourself; a paradox is created. That you discover things that were hidden before, maybe even unmasking the masked, is interesting. Nonetheless, it is not the immature point of view, or the premature artists point of view that enables these discoveries, because that would suggest regression and not progress (and therefore discovery)....

18. Rob op Zondag 01 maart 2009 2.30
....Transparency (coming back to it), would show that the immature form of reasoning is far from necessary. In other words, instead of taking things away, the immature reasoning is an addition to who you and the world are instead; a false presumption. Which makes the understanding of the world not more clear, but over simplistic and denies the self. Thank you.

19. ohad op Zondag 01 maart 2009 12.49
Dear Rob, Thank you once again for your thoughtful reply. As for part 1, I am under the impression that your initial remark was slightly influenced by your own experience at the kabk. I find it disappointing to understand that your accusation of our 'lacking' theoretical background was simply a projection on your behalf of what you believe a kabk student to represent. Besides being kabk students I hope we are also individuals in the world. From my experience in The U.K and Germany, I agree, they tend to have more intact discourse. However, as we live in a globalized world, we are all free to pursue our interests and frames of discourse.

20. ohad op Zondag 01 maart 2009 13.00
more...This also implies to your disappointment from the kabk library. I find this to be a slightly dated remark. Most theoretical discourses exist today online. With one or two clicks of the button you know almost everything you want to know about this or that theory, discourse, or theoretician. If you want some links I can refer you to some. Nevertheless I believe the material on photography theory in the kabk library is quite up to date. Furthermore, it is one of the most inspiring architectural spaces I have ever sat down to read a book in. and to top this up, the staff there is perhaps the kindest I have ever met in a library.

21. ohad op Zondag 01 maart 2009 13.07
more..As for parts 2 and 3. The difficult ones…maybe that and this discussion is phalo-centric, maybe not, I guess we wont be able to settle this argument within this framework. I find your point about the transparency for discourse on the authenticity of the artist very interesting. However I find it slightly ironic that you chose to state this argument within this context and under the sole sign 'rob'. Who are you? What is your agenda? What is your goal, your motivation? How does your face look like? How do you stand? How do you talk? All this I do not know. I find the manner you chose to initiate this argument and the whole discussion slightly bureaucratic.

22. ohad op Zondag 01 maart 2009 13.11
Furthermore I find it funny that you mention the influence of feminist critique on photography but then refer me back again to a large group of male photographers that work with photography using a very masculine approach and attitude. As for points of reference within this column. We chose to not do that. In between the lines, if you are a careful reader, you will find our points of departure. Furthermore I have posted in the past several columns in photoq about some of my points of reference. You can look them up. As for the complete framework of our project. That is difficult to outline here. The space is simply limited. You should visit our past posts and perhaps come to the kabk from time to time and hopefully for the end exam and check up what we are up to and where and who we depart from.

23. ohad op Zondag 01 maart 2009 13.17
more..As for your last point regarding strategy. I have never claimed that I am unbiased and 'objective'. Nor have I ever worn a 'veil of ignorance'. If you met me face to face and talked with me a bit, and not just embarked on a virtual discussion/ projection, you would discover my way or order of things. Once again you are reducing us to a group of people - ' academic art', 'young artists', 'premature artists'. First you dress us up with the emperor's clothes and then you claim 'the emperor is naked'. Slightly tautological argument. Furthermore I embrace such notions as paradox and fragmentation. I see this as a form of transparency to come back to the term you introduced. It is simply a question of method. One can plan out things, 'conceptualize' them, argument them, write them down, and then hit his or her road. We chose to first hit the road and then think and write. I'm sorry if this disappoints you or is in conflict with other frameworks of discourse.

24. ohad op Zondag 01 maart 2009 13.23
and..As for the notions of progress and regression. Once again difficult notions. I am not so sure we are progressing somewhere. The discourses of theoreticians and artists you mentioned have led most of us (and I speak of my generation) to a highly commercialized and specialized photography/art- world/ culture/ society. In other words I'm not quite sure they did a good job. My belief is that the experience of creative processes and cultural production today is much more fragmented and as I claimed initially in-authentic. I believe the self to be denied and fragmented, at least in today's society. I try to reflect this in my work and in this column. Once again, thanks for your commentary.

Plaats een reactie

Maximaal 2000 tekens, 2000 tekens over.

 
Archief
© 2008 - 2012 PhotoQ | Contact | Colofon | Development by IDCA Technologies