21 Σεπ 2009
1000+1 Prax(e)is
Είναι γεγονός ότι, στο τέλος της δεκαετίας που διανύουμε, η σύγχρονη τέχνη και κατ' επέκταση το εικαστικό έργο, βρίσκεται σε μια εποχή δημιουργικής και θεωρητικής κρίσης, τόσο στα κέντρα λήψης αποφάσεων όσο και στην περιφέρεια.
Ο νεο-φιλελευθερισμός έχοντας διεισδύσει σε όλους τους τρόπους παραγωγής, του όποιου προϊόντος, διαβρώνει τόσο τον κοινωνικό όσο και τον εικαστικό λόγο.
Η μαζική επικοινωνία και παραγωγή τείνουν να εξαφανίσουν τη γλώσσα που διαμορφώνει είτε τη σκέψη, την ιδέα, το λόγο, είτε το εικαστικό αποτέλεσμα προς όφελος μιας παραγωγής που έχει ως μοναδικό στόχο την προώθηση του προϊόντος, δηλαδή την πώληση και την αγορά.
Οι κοινωνικές και πολιτιστικές συνθήκες διαμορφώνουν έναν πλουραλισμό ο οποίος αναπτύσσει μεθοδικά και οργανωμένα ένα είδος σύγχυσης που ευνοεί, σχεδόν επευφημεί την απουσία της κριτικής σκέψης.
Η γλώσσα των μέσων μαζικής ενημέρωσης και η σχέση της με το υποκείμενο-αντικείμενο έχει πλέον καταστεί modus vivedi, με τέτοιον τρόπο ώστε ακόμα και η παραγωγή του έργου τέχνης να καθίσταται διαδικαστική, να κατευθύνεται προς μια νέα αισθητική εμπειρία, με τρόπο που όλα να είναι κριτική και τίποτα να μην είναι. “Η κατάκτηση της αγοράς πραγματοποιείται με την απόκτηση του ελέγχου και όχι πλέον με τη σταθεροποίηση των ανταλλακτικών αξιών”1. Αποτέλεσμα: οι παροχές και οι υπηρεσίες να έχουν γίνει το κέντρο, η “ψυχή”, το star system, ενώ παράλληλα το marketing να έχει καταστεί το απόλυτο μέσο του κοινωνικού ελέγχου, διαμορφώνοντας με αυτόν τον τρόπο μια νέα τάξη συμπεριφορών.
Στο πλαίσιο αυτό η μορφή γλώσσας που διαμορφώνεται οργανώνει υλικές πραγματικότητες ή παρέχει στόχους, δηλαδή, αναπτύσσεται ένας μηχανισμός ελέγχου που συναντάται τόσο στην εκπαίδευση όσο και στις επιχειρήσεις, εις βάρος πλέον των Ανθρωπιστικών Επιστημών.
Ο “δυναμισμός” έχει γίνει αναπόσπαστο τμήμα μιας κοινωνίας η οποία παράγει την κουλτούρα της ταχύτητας και της ομοιομορφίας.
Το “ποιείν” και το “πράττειν”, -δηλαδή η καθολική συμμετοχή στην πολιτική πράξη, όπως όρισε ο Αριστοτέλης την έννοια της ευτυχίας-, έχει ερμηνευθεί ως δράση, η πράξη δεν εμπεριέχει την αντί -πράξη.
Είναι όλα τα ανωτέρω που διαμόρφωσαν, ως θεματική επιλογή, τις 1000+1 Πράξ(ε)ις, ως σχήμα υπερβολής αλλά και κυριολεξίας.
Ως επιθυμία ανίχνευσης, εκτός της καλλιτεχνικής πράξης, όλων αυτών των δυνητικών ή κυριολεκτικών πράξεων που διαμορφώνουν το κοινωνικό-πολιτικό σύστημα ελέγχου.
Ως επιθυμία αλλά και έρευνα των πράξεων αυτών που η εικαστική γλώσσα ερμηνεύει, παρερμηνεύει, παραβλέπει, ή μετουσιώνει σε έργο.
Ως διερώτηση για το ρόλο του καλλιτέχνη μέσα σ' ένα σύστημα που διαμορφώνεται γι' αυτόν και χωρίς αυτόν.
Ως παρατήρηση για τον τρόπο με τον οποίο οι επιλεγμένοι καλλιτέχνες αντιδρούν στην κατασκευασμένη πραγματικότητα, με το εικαστικό τους έργο και το μέσο έκφρασης που χρησιμοποιούν, και αν αυτό αποτελεί μέσο διαμαρτυρίας, συμβιβασμού ή αντίδρασης;
L' Autre Face de l'art 2
Η εποχή της κοινωνικής κριτικής τέχνης, της αμφισβήτησης, της επανάστασης και της διαμαρτυρίας, που χαρακτήρισε τη δεκαετία του' 60, μοιάζει να επανέρχεται μέσα από διαφορετικές διαδικασίες και χαρακτηριστικά.
Η νεότερη γενιά καλλιτεχνών, αυτή που δεν την απασχολεί μόνο τα γλωσσικά και πλαστικά θέματα του καλλιτεχνικού αντικειμένου, αλλά ούτε ασφαλώς και η αντίδραση στους θεσμούς και η άνοδος της μεσαίας τάξης, που είχε χαρακτηρίσει τη δεκαετία του 60, μοιάζει να προσανατολίζεται, δειλά και με κάποιους, ίσως, ενδοιασμούς αφού διαπιστώνει ότι δεν αποτελεί μέρος του συστήματος, προς μια κατεύθυνση κατάδειξης του τρόπου ζωής, του κοινωνικού -πολιτικού ευρύτερου ιστού.
Δεν θα επικαλεστούμε, βέβαια, ότι το προσωπικό είναι πολιτικό και αντίθετα, τη φράση δηλαδή που σημάδεψε για δεκαετίες το φεμινιστικό κίνημα, αλλά θα υποστηρίξουμε ότι, η απομάκρυνση από μια μετά-γλώσσα, που έγινε ιδιαίτερα αισθητή με την εμφάνιση αυτού που πλέον ονομάζουμε “Διεθνή Σκηνή της τέχνης”, -απόρροια της παγκοσμιοποίησης- έστρεψε σημαντικό αριθμό καλλιτεχνών προς μια αισθητική που επηρεάζεται από την αποτυχία, τη νωχέλεια, τη διάκριση μεταξύ “καλού” και “κακού” γούστου, την παρουσία ανώνυμων ή ελάχιστα ταυτοποιημένων αντικειμένων, την έμμεση παράσταση του σώματος, τις ερμαφρόδιτες ανδρόγυνες φιγούρες, τα ανώνυμα αστικά τοπία.
Αυτό βέβαια έχει ερμηνευθεί από τον Terry Eagleton3 ως αποτέλεσμα της κρίσης της πολιτισμικής θεωρίας και των πολιτιστικών σπουδών, αφού όπως επισημαίνει τέθηκε εκτός πεδίου ότι άπτεται του ηθικού, πολιτικού, φιλοσοφικού στοχασμού προς όφελος των εφήμερων και ανούσιων εκφάνσεων της ποπ κουλτούρας.
Μια παρόμοια ερμηνεία και προσέγγιση που αφορά στην ουσία το διατυπωμένο θεωρητικό λόγο πιστεύουμε ότι θίγει πρωτίστως ένα είδος εκλαΐκευσης των εθίμων και της κουλτούρας που προωθείται από τα κέντρα εξουσίας.
Έργα καλλιτεχνών όπως των Irene Anton, Michael H. Rohde, Τάσου Παυλόπουλου, Ανδρέα Μητρόπουλου, Καίσαρα Βρεττού-Ραμίρεζ, Olivier Roller, Jean-Pierre Attal, Γιώργου Κομνηνάκη, Αλέξανδρου Τσαμούρη δεν διστάζουν να ασκήσουν κριτική σε κοινωνικά, πολιτικά, καθημερινά θέματα, να παραστήσουν ή να αναπαραστήσουν ένα σύστημα ιδεών, ο καθένας με διαφορετικά μέσα έκφρασης, το οποίο περικλείει ένα σύνολο πράξεων και αντί-πράξεων, πέρα από κάθε θεωρητικό λόγο.
Να καυτηριάσουν είτε τον τρόπο με τον οποίο τα μέσα μαζικής ενημέρωσης, ως γνήσιοι “πνευματικοί αποικιοκράτες”, χειραγωγούν, είτε τις αντιλήψεις και ερμηνείες που αναπτύσσονται από το κοινωνικό σύνολο.
Η Irene Anton σε υλικά πολυτελείας, όπως αυτό του μεταξιού, σχεδιάζει ένα σύστημα “αξιών” επιβολής του καπιταλιστικού συστήματος, τονίζοντας ιδιαίτερα την αντιπαράθεση του εύθραυστου με του “άκαμπτου”. Από την αποικιοκρατία μέχρι και την παγκοσμιοποίηση, την επιβολή και εκμετάλλευση της Δύσης προς τον υπό ανάπτυξη, λεγόμενο κόσμο.
Το βίντεο του Michael H. Rohde θίγει τις σχέσεις της πρώην Ανατολικής Γερμανίας πριν και μετά την Πτώση του Τείχους, καυτηριάζει τη συντηρητική πολιτική της Μέρκελ σε σχέση με αυτήν του Χόνεκερ.
Ο Τάσος Παυλόπουλος με τα σχέδια του, πάντοτε προφητικός αλλά και καυστικός ασκεί κριτική στην νέο-ελληνική κοινωνία, στα ταμπού της αλλά και στις δεισιδαιμονίες της, στην ίδια την τέχνη, στους κριτικούς τέχνης, στην πολυπραγματοσύνη του Έλληνα.
Ενώ το βίντεο του Ανδρέα Μητρόπουλου μας θυμίζει τη σχέση αλληλεξάρτησης του εξουσιαστή με τον εξουσιαζόμενο, αλλά και την κοινωνία του ελέγχου.
Η εγκατάσταση του Καίσαρα Βρεττού- Ραμίρεζ λειτουργεί ως αντί-πραξη στον τηλεοπτικό καταναλωτικό καταιγισμό, στην εκποίηση κάθε προσωπικής μοναδικής στιγμής, στην παθητική επαναύπαση του καθενός από εμάς.
Στην ίδια κατεύθυνση κινείται και ο Olivier Roller με τις φωτογραφίες επιφανών ανδρών από το χώρο της διαφήμισης και της πολιτικής. Φωτογραφικά πορτραίτα, τα οποία αναπτύσσουν ένα διάλογο με το ίδιο αρχικά φωτογραφιζόμενο υποκείμενο, μας θυμίζουν τις μοναρχικές ρωμαϊκές προτομές και γλυπτά υπογραμμίζοντας την απουσία του μοντέρνου ανθρωπισμού και ίσως την προφητεία του Νίτσε για την “Εξαφάνιση του Ανθρώπου”.
Ενώ ο Jean-Pierre Attal με αστικές φωτογραφίες από το πολεοδομικό περιβάλλον του Παρισιού μας φέρνει αντιμέτωπους με την παθογένεια των ομοιόμορφων κατοικιών και των γκέτο. Οι άρτιοι αρχιτεκτονικοί όγκοι, ως ασφυκτικές μεζονέτες εσώκλειστων, η επιλεγμένη απουσία της ανθρώπινης παρουσίας δεν μαρτυρούν παρά την πληθωρικότητα της μοναξιάς.
Ενώ η φωτογραφική χρωματική του παλέτα συμμετέχει στο αποτέλεσμα ενός αυθεντικού οπτικού “γεγονότος”.
Με παραδοσιακό μέσο, όπως αυτό της ζωγραφικής, ο Γιώργος Κομνηνάκης, μέσα από τη χρήση διαφορετικών ειδών πινελιάς, επιλέγει να αναπαραστήσει την πλήρη διάβρωση του ιστορικού-πολιτικού συστήματος, να καυτηριάσει την πτώση των προτύπων. Το παρελθόν και το παρόν ρεαλιστικά ανθρωποκεντρικά, ιστορικά αλλά και μνημειώδη λειτουργούν ως αφορμή για κατάδειξη της πτώσης των ανταλλακτικών αξιών.
Ο Αλέξανδρος Τσαμούρης ασκεί κριτική στο τρίπτυχο πατρίς, θρησκεία, οικογένεια.
Ιδρύει το δικό του κράτος εν κράτη. Καλεί σε κατάληψη των στρατοπέδων εντός του πολεοδομικού σχεδίου Θεσσαλονίκης με σκοπό την πολιτιστική και κοινωνική ανάπλαση της πόλης. Τα μετωπικά του σχέδια, απαλλαγμένα από όγκους και φωτοσκιάσεις λειτουργούν ως ένα είδος άμεσου διαλόγου με το θεατή. Ενώ ως ακτιβιστής, η παρέμβαση του έργου του στα στρατόπεδα, λειτουργεί στη συλλογική συνείδηση σαν ένα είδος αφύπνισης αλλά και διαμαρτυρίας.
Έμμεσα, και με έργα που αναφέρονται περισσότερο σε προσωπικές ερμηνείες, κοινωνικού περιεχομένου, είναι τα έργα των Παυλίνα Βερούκη, Αγγελική Βαλβή, Χρυσή Τσίωτα, Patrick Meyer, Μαρία Γλύκα, Χάρη Πάλλα, Ράνια Μπέλλου, Ασπασία Κρυσταλλά, Sencer Vardarman, Φωτεινή Καλλέ- Βικτώρια Καρβούνη.
Το έργο τους έχει κοινό χαρακτηριστικό, ανεξάρτητα από το μέσο, ότι επαναφέρει την αναπαράσταση, το ίχνος του εγκλωβισμένου κοινωνικά σώματος.
Ο τρόπος βέβαια που επιλέγουν να εργαστούν οι καλλιτέχνες παραπέμπει περισσότερο στο νέον τρόπο θέασης, δηλαδή στην αντίληψη μιας εικόνας του κόσμου, που τον αναγνωρίζουμε, τον καταλαβαίνουμε σε σχέση μ' αυτόν που προηγήθηκε, μ' αυτόν που ακολουθεί και με το σφαιρικό του περιβάλλον.
Δηλαδή, στον αντίποδα του Ουμανισμού που μας έμαθε να σκεφτόμαστε τον κόσμο χωρίζοντάς τον και διαχωρίζοντάς τον σε στοιχεία.
Η Παυλίνα Βερούκη επιλέγει, μέσα από εφήμερα υλικά όπως είναι η κιμωλία, να βάλει όρια στην ημερήσια κίνηση του ήλιου, να καταγράψει την πολυσύχναστη αγορά της Δαμασκού, όχι μέσα από τα ήθη και έθιμα της, αλλά μέσα από την έκκεντρη και μη, κίνηση των περαστικών και των αυτοκινήτων, σε σχέση με τον ήλιο. Η θέση της όπως δηλώνει ήταν: “να μη πάρει κριτική, πολιτική θέση όπως κάθε δυτικός, στο τρόπο ζωής και έκφρασης του άλλου”.
Η Αγγελική Βαλβή, σχεδόν χειρονομιακά, “απλώνει” στο χώρο τα αυτοκόλλητα σχέδια της, συνθέτει, οργανώνει του ημερολογιακού τύπου σημειώσεις της.
Καμία πράξη δεν είναι ολοκληρωμένη, αναιρεί και αναιρείται. Προκαλεί, μέσα από πανομοιότυπες φιγούρες, την ρομποτική αυτή επανάληψη ενός σώματος υπό αμφισβήτηση.
Ενώ αντίθετα το έργο της Χρυσής Τσιώτα υποθάλπει μηχανισμούς του ερμαφρόδιτου προτύπου, τραυματισμένο από το αστικό και κοινωνικό τοπίο, εμπνέεται από ιστορικά γεγονότα μετανάστευσης και διωγμών. Σύνηθες κεντρικό θέμα στα έργα της ένα είδος “μυθολογοποίησης” του επαναληπτικού απρόσωπου αρσενικού/θηλυκού.
Ο Patrick Meyer παρεμβαίνει, με τα ετερωνύμια του, στον κοινωνικό δημόσιο χώρο (Dimossios Ergassia).
Συνένοχος με τον καθημερινό άνθρωπο διεγείρει τη σκέψη του, τη “φωτογραφίζει”. Το αίμα γίνεται μελάνι, σημαδεμένο σώμα και λέξεις. Ένα είδος ποιητικής σκηνογραφίας των λέξεων συνώνυμη με μια επιθυμία κατάκτησης μιας πνευματικής ταυτότητας.
Ενώ η παρέμβαση της Μαρίας Γλύκα στο φυσικό χώρο και η μετάπλασή του από τα διπλωμένα, ανακατασκευασμένα χαρτόνια, αποκαλύπτουν μικρές μη αφηγηματικές ιστορίες που επιζητούν την πράξη της ερμηνείας τόσο στο χώρο όσο και στο φαντασιακό.
Οι προκαλούμενες αβεβαιότητες και διαφοροποιήσεις που προκαλούνται, αποτελούν ένα από τα δυναμικά σημεία της υπό αέναης εξέλιξης του φυσικού χώρου και κατ' επέκταση του οργανικού στοιχείου.
Ο Χάρης Πάλλας στην εγκατάσταση του, πραγματεύεται την αίσθηση της ασφυξίας αλλά και της διαφάνειας που προσδίδουν τα υλικά στο ανθρώπινο σώμα. Την ασφυξία της μοναχικότητας αλλά και την ψυχολογική κακοποίηση που μπορεί να προέλθει απ' αυτήν.
Την κακοποίηση που προκύπτει αφενός από την κοινωνική μάζα αλλά και από την ίδια την αναζήτηση της κοινωνικής διεκδίκησης για ταυτότητα, δηλαδή, μια μορφή πολιτιστικής ταυτότητας.
Ενώ η Ράνια Μπέλλου πραγματεύεται σφαιρικά τη σχέση του χώρου με το σώμα. Το μεν δεν μπορεί να υφίσταται χωρίς το δε και γι' αυτόν το λόγο θεωρεί απαραίτητη συνιστώσα του έργου της τη διάδραση που δημιουργείται από το θεατή. Τα ίχνη, τα απομεινάρια ενός τεχνητού χώρου που είναι όμως η προέκταση, η προβολή του φυσικού.
Η Ασπασία Κρυσταλλά, με παραδοσιακό μέσο που είναι αυτό του μελανιού σε χαρτί, οργανώνει την κοινωνία των αρπακτικών μετά το “όργιο”. Αναρωτιέται, συμβολικά, τι ακολουθεί μετά τις “απελευθερώσεις”; Οι διαφορετικοί τόνοι στο σχέδιο της οργανώνουν, εύστοχα, τη μικρογραφία ενός εξουσιαστικού κόσμου.
Ενώ το έργο του Sencer Vardarman λειτουργεί ως ένας κοινωνικός-πολιτιστικός ιστός γύρω από τον οποίο διαμορφώθηκαν και διαμορφώνονται όλα τα οικονομικά συμφέροντα, το γενεαλογικό δέντρο του χρήματος μας υπογραμμίζει την επιστημονική πλευρά ενός συμβόλου που «διακινεί» την ασφάλεια και τη συνέχεια της εξέλιξης του ανθρώπινου είδους.
Τα όρια του προσωπικού, του ιδιωτικού με το δημόσιο εξετάζουν οι Φωτεινή Καλλέ- Βικτώρια Καρβούνη με τη βίντεο-προβολή τους. Ηδονοβλεψίες ή παρατηρητές, χρήστες δικτυακών τόπων ή κατάχρηση, παραβίαση; Αντιγραφή-επικόλληση; Οι δύο καλλιτέχνες διεισδύουν στις παροχές της ψηφιακής εποχής και αναρωτιούνται εάν η εποχή μας αποτελεί τμήμα ή μεταμόρφωση της “Κοινωνίας του Θεάματος”, όπως την όρισε ο Guy Debord4.
“Τέχνη Σε Αβέβαιους Καιρούς”, σε καιρούς που η ιστορικότητα, το περιεχόμενο, η εργασία αποτελούν ουτοπία. Καλλιτέχνες σε Αβέβαιους Καιρούς.
Με ποιόν τρόπο άραγε μπορούν να αντισταθούν στην αβέβαιη και αυθαίρετη εξουσία, να υπερασπισθούν την ελευθερία του ατόμου, τη δημοκρατία, να φανταστούν ένα μέλλον όπου δεν αναπαράγονται οι απάνθρωπες παραβιάσεις;
Πως οφείλει να αντιδράσει ο καλλιτέχνης σε μια εποχή όπου η πολιτική εξασθενεί; Να αντισταθεί ή να συμπλεύσει;
Να εκχυδαΐσει, να εκμηδενίσει την απουσία του “άλλου”, απέναντι του; να ανατρέξει σε μια αισθητική της αδιαφοροποίησης; (indifferenciation)
Περισσότερο από ποτέ οι καλλιτέχνες χρησιμοποιούν τις οπτικές μεταφορές, τα μετωνύμια, τις μετατοπίσεις, τις συνθέσεις και συνδυασμούς, επιχειρούν να κάνουν αισθητή την ύπαρξη τους, την παρουσία τους στον κόσμο, με τον ένα και μοναδικό τρόπο που έχουν.
Αυτόν της καλλιτεχνικής πράξης στο κοινωνικό σύνολο
1000+1 Prax(e)is
We are now nearing the end of this decade and it is a fact that modern art – and by extension art – currently finds itself in a creative and theoretical crisis, both at the decision-making centres and in the regions.
Neoliberalism has penetrated all methods of production of all products and is eating away at social and artistic discourse.
Mass communication and production are moving towards eliminating the language that gives shape either to thoughts, ideas and language or to the artistic result, favouring instead a production that exclusively aims to promote a product, in other words to sell and buy.
Social and cultural conditions form a certain pluralism that systematically and methodically develops a kind of confusion that favours and applauds the absence of critical thinking.
The language of the media and its relationship with the subject-object have become a modus vivendi, to the point that even the production of a work of art is rendered procedural, moving in the direction of a new aesthetic experience, in a way that everything is criticism and nothing is not. “The conquest of the market is made by grabbing control and no longer by fixing the exchange rate”1. As a result, supplies and services have become the centre“soul”, the star system, while at the same time marketing has become the absolute means of social control, thus creating a new class of behaviours.
In this framework, the form of the language that is created organises material realities or sets goals, in other words, it gives rise to a control mechanism that is encountered both in education and in business, now at the expense of the Humanities.
“Dynamism” has become an integral part of a society that is responsible for producing a culture of speed and uniformity.
The concepts of “poiein” (to make) and “prattein” (to act) – namely the universal participation in the political act, as Aristotle has defined the concept of happiness – have been interpreted as action, while the act in itself does not include the counter-act.
All of the above have led to our choice of theme, namely the 1000+1 Acts, both as a hyperbole and literal concept.
As a desire to discover – outside the artistic act – all those potential or literal acts that shape the socio-political system of control.
As a desire but also a researcher of those acts that artistic language interprets, misinterprets, overlooks or transforms into an artwork.
As a query about the role of the artist in a system that is created for him and without him.
As an observation on the way in which the selected artists react – through their artworks and the means of expression they use – to this constructed reality and a question as to whether this is a means of protest, compromise or reaction?
L' Autre Face de l'art2
The period of social critical art, challenge, revolution and protest, as the 60s were defined, seems to be returning through various processes and characteristics.
The younger generation of artists, which is not only concerned with the linguistic and formative aspects of the artistic object, nor of course with any reaction to institutions and the rise of the bourgeoisie, which defined the period of the 60s, appears to be oriented – warily and perhaps with some scruples as they discover that they do not form part of the system – towards a desire to reveal the way of life, the broader socio-political fabric.
We will not of course claim that the personal is political and vice versa, which is the phrase that had marked the feminist movement for many decades, but we will argue that the retreat from a meta-language, which was strongly felt upon the appearance of what we now call the “International Art Scene” – a product of globalisation –, has driven a significant number of artists to a form of aesthetics that is affected by failure, nonchalance, the distinction between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ taste, the presence of unknown or barely identifiable objects, the indirect depiction of the body, hermaphrodite/androgynous figures, unknown urban scenes.
This has been interpreted by Terry Eagleton3 as the result of the crisis of cultural theory and cultural sciences, since according to him, whatever touches upon moral, political or philosophical thinking is rejected in favour of ephemeral and insipid expressions of pop culture.
It is our belief that a similar interpretation and approach, which basically concerns formulated theoretical discourse, primarily touches upon a form of popularisation of the customs and culture being promoted by the centres of power.
Works by artists like Irene Anton, Michael H. Rohde, Tassos Pavlopoulos, Andreas Mitropoulos, Caesar Vrettos-Ramirez, Olivier Roller, Jean-Pierre Attal, George Komninakis and Alexandros Tsamouris do not hesitate to criticise social, political and everyday issues, or to present or represent a system of ideas – each using different means of expression – that includes a set of acts and counter-acts beyond any form of theoretical discourse.
They do not hesitate to castigate the way in which the mass media – as genuine ‘spiritual colonisers’ – manipulate people, or the perceptions and interpretations that society develops.
Irene Anton uses luxury materials such as silk to design a system of “values” that imposes capitalism, laying particular emphasis on the clash between the fragile and the “inflexible”. From colonialism to globalisation, and the West’s imposition on and exploitation of the so-called developing world.
Michael H. Rohde’s video touches upon the relations of former East Germany before and after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and criticises the conservative politics of Merkel compared to that of Honecker.
Tassos Pavlopoulos, always prophetic and sarcastic, uses his drawings to criticise modern Greek society, its taboos and its superstitions, art itself, art critics and the inquisitiveness of Greeks.
On the other hand, Andreas Mitropoulo's video reminds us of the relationship of interdependence between the ruler and the ruled, as well as of the society of control.
Caesar Vrettos -Ramirez’ installation functions as a counter-act against the flood of consumerism on television, the sell-out of every unique personal moment and the passive contentedness of each of us.
Olivier Roller moves in the same direction with his photographs of notable men in the field of advertising and politics. Photographic portraits that enter into a dialogue with the initially photographed subject are reminiscent of monarchic Roman busts and sculptures, underlining the absence of modern humanism and perhaps Nietzsche's prophecy on the ‘Demise of Man’.
On the other hand, Jean-Pierre Attal’s urban photographs of the built-up environment of Paris bring us face-to-face with the pathogenesis of the uniform residences and ghettos. The perfect architectural structures – as the suffocating maisonettes of inmates – and the chosen lack of human presence cannot but reveal the overabundance of loneliness, while his photographic colour 'palette” contributes to the result of an authentic visual “event”.
By using a traditional medium, like that of painting, and by applying different types of brush strokes, George Komninakis chooses to depict the total corrosion of the historical-political system and criticise the decline of norms. The past and present realistically, humanistically, historically and monumentally provide an opportunity to reveal the fall of exchange values.
Alexandros Tsamouris criticises the threefold concept of fatherland, religion and family. He founds his own state within a state. He invites us to occupy the army camps in the town plan of Thessaloniki in order to recreate the city’s cultural and social aspects. His frontal drawings are free of any structures and shading, and function as a form of direct dialogue with the viewer. As an activist, his work’s intervention in army camps is seen by the collective conscience as a form of awakening and protest.
The work of Pavlina Verouki, Angela Valvi, Chryse Tsiota, Patrick Meyer, Maria Glyka, Haris Pallas, Rania Bellou, Aspasia Krystalla, Sencer Vardarman and Foteini Kalle-Victoria Karvouni can be described as being more indirect, including works that refer more to personal interpretations with a social content.
Their work, regardless of the medium, has a common feature: it brings back the depiction, the outline of the socially trapped body.
Of course, the manner in which the artists choose to work refers more to the new way of seeing things, that is, to the perception of an image of the world; we can identify and understand this new way of seeing things in relation to the previous one, to that which is to follow and to its general environment.
That is, the very opposite of the Humanism that has taught us to think of the world by dividing it and splitting it into elements.
By using temporary materials such as chalk, Pavlina Verouki chooses to set limits to the daily movement of the sun and record the busy market of Damascus, not through its mores, but through the eccentric or concentric movement of passers-by and cars in relation to the sun. As she has stated, her stance was “not to take a critical, political stance like all westerners on the way of life and expression of others”.
Angela Valvi, in an almost gesticulatory manner, “spreads” her adhesive drawings in space, and composes and organises her diary-like notes.
No act is complete; it can negate and be negated. It causes, through its identical figures, this robotic repetition of a body under dispute.
On the contrary, Chryse Tsiota’s work engenders mechanisms of the hermaphrodite model, injured by the urban and social setting, and is inspired by historical events of migration and persecution. A common central theme of her work is a type of “mythification” of the repetitive, impersonal male/female.
With his heteronyms, Patrick Meyer intervenes in the social public space (Dimossios Ergassia).
Being an accomplice of the everyday individual, he stimulates his thoughts and ‘photographs’ them. Blood turns to ink, a branded body and words. A kind of poetic staging of words equal to the desire to obtain a spiritual identity.
On the other hand, Maria Glyka’s intervention in natural space and its transformation through folded, reconstructed cardboard, reveal small, non-narrative stories that seek the act of interpretation both in space and in the imagination.
The uncertainties and differentiations that arise constitute one of the strong points of the perpetually developing natural space, and by extension of the organic element.
In his installation, Haris Pallas deals with the feeling of suffocation and transparency that materials attach to the human body; the suffocation of loneliness, but also the psychological abuse that can come of it; the abuse that arises from the social mass, as well as from the search for the social assertion of identity, namely a form of cultural identity.
Rania Bellou, on the other hand, comprehensively deals with the relationship between space and the body. The one cannot exist without the other, and she therefore considers the interaction initiated by the viewer to be a necessary component of her work; the traces, remains of an artificial space, which is however a continuation, projection of the natural.
Aspasia Krystalla uses the traditional means of ink on paper to organise the society of vultures after the ‘orgy’. She wonders, symbolically, what follows the ‘liberations’. The different tones of her design aptly form the miniature of a controlling world.
The work of Sencer Vardarman functions as a social-cultural fabric around which all financial interests have been and are still being formed; the genealogical tree of money highlights the scientific aspect of a symbol that “traffics” the security and continuation of humankind’s evolution.
Through their video-projection Fotini Kalle and Victoria Karvouni explore the boundaries between the personal, the private and the public. Voyeurs or observers, website use or abuse, violation? Copy-pasting? The two artists delve into what the digital age has to offer and wonder if our era is a part or transformation of the ‘Society of the Spectacle’, as defined by Guy Debord4.
“Art in Uncertain Times”; in times when historicity, content and work constitute a utopia.
Artists in Uncertain Times.
What can they do to resist this uncertain and arbitrary power; to defend the freedom of the individual and democracy; to imagine a future in which inhuman violations are not reproduced?
How must an artist react in a time when politics is weakening? Must he react or go along?
Must he vulgarise, annihilate the absence of the ‘other’ before him? Must he go back to the aesthetics of indifferenciation?
Now more than ever artists use visual metaphors, metonyms, displacements, compositions and combinations; they attempt to make their existence and presence in the world felt in the one and only way that they can:
Through the artistic act in the social whole.
1. Gilles Deleuzes, Pourparlers (1972-1990), Minuit, Paris 1990.
2. Pierre Restany, L'autre Face de l'art, Gallilée, Paris 1979.
3. Therry Eagleton, Μετά τη Θεωρία, Μεταίχμιο, Αθήνα, 2003.
4. Guy Debord, la Sosieté du Spectacle, Gallimard, Paris, 1992.
Dorothea Konteletzidou
10 Σεπ 2009
Cy Twombly The Deconstruction of painting through Gesture
About his work, which haw been acclaimed since 1979, Cy Twombly offers little information, admitting that he intentionally ascribes a mysterious power to certain words and images.
Influenced by American Abstact Expressionism and Old Word past, the artist came by way of initial process of exploration and investigation to adopt a plastic sensibility that conveys the essence, which is the gesture. Of course, in no way does his abstract tendency parallel that of American abstraction, despite the fact that in 1950, having already met Robert Rauschenberg, he realized that the painting surface interested him as a surface on which no physical visual experience takes place except a working progress of execution.
Twombly is an adherent to gestural painting and is opposed to every notion of representation.
His 1953 reference to automatic writing seems to have liberated him from every cultural consideration.
His pictorial “image” corresponds to an inner spirit that has led him to those sacred childhood years when the child, drawing and scribbling, shifts his thoughts away from any speech and image.
The gestural trace becomes the representation of the artist's thinking, the absence of signifier is replaced by the presence of being. The non-signifying thought is for the artist the first stage before the crystallization, before and culture convention.
At the time, young Twombly was moving in search of the essence, the invisible, which would lead him to what Jean-Jacques Rousseau calls “perfect Harmony with the nature”. Motherwell's theoretical exlporation (for him art had to spark contemplation of fundamentally concerns life, the “essence”)led Twombly to continue his investigations into creative activity at the expense of the illusion.
His image records his gestural movements, setting up a personal relationship between the image and the product. The result is that the “scribblings” of this period function as starting points to artistic creation. Twombly has mentioned his specific concerns for the pleasure in what takes place, thereby literally impelling the instinctual dynamism of his gestural movement to reveal a forgotten memory.
With his reference to automatic and gestural writing, with the vibracy of his gesture, with his intense scribblings, Twombly goes beyond Pollock's chicken scratches and drippings. Pollock, in his denial of al personal history, all experience and know-ledge, creaded a tabula rasa in his desire to approach the collective subconscious.
In contrast, Twombly does not categorically deny the connection between consciousness and the mechanisms of subconscious. For him the touch of the hand-via the itinerary of thinking and surface, the base of thinking- is fundamental, since it brings creative thinking into direct contact with human life.
He neither seeks to express nor to represent a reaction or an emotion; he simply uses the picture surface as the base for all the movements of his mental life and thinking, so the gestural writing becomes the means of expression that allows him to leave his traces.
Twombly's 1975 installation in Rome confronted the organic union of past and present that is history. With a cultural tradition, “be it about an idea of God, be it about an idea of man” the Old World,linked to the consciousness of historical time, “emphasizes” for the artist the violence of time through historical monuments that are nothing but “ a degenerate and distorted past”.
Compared with poetry of the monument and ruins, the reference created by their decay turns them into “objects". Offered up to his gaze, they are testaments to the absence of the sacred. Works of man, they demonstrate the dissolution of form, and abandoned, secluded, reintegrated into nature, they end up being constant reference for Cy Twombly.
Roma (1957) does not portray the city, but takes on an end in itself as writing. “Words have the power to make thinks disappear, to make them appear as disappeared, appearance which is that of a disappearance, presence that returns to absence...”. In other words, one could regard the image perceived and represented by Twombly, vested with time and experience, as not the same as the one the ancients perceived.
The artist apprehended what knowledge dictated to him- which is nothing more than a piecemeal knowledge of the reality presented- so that the ruins, the inscriptions of the funerary steles, worn by time, leaving few traces of their former meanings, appear in his work without any near past. At last visual language comprises the painting's main image, so that even the dim shadow of the past appears via the glow of the pictorial image.
As substantial change appeared in his work with use of alphabet script, since up until then his writing was intended to describe personal experience.
By using words as monads reflecting the nature of words, Twombly clarifies language proper as the work, allowing the person, the artist, to appear in a second reading.
The period of the seventies has been characterized by Roland Barhtes as the manifestation of “ a remembrance, an irony, a posture”; by Roberta Smith as a determinatin to render life through Greco-Roman mythology. Neither of them, however, elaborated on the direct relationship between the artist and the myth.
According to Levi-Strauss, “myth is always the discourse on the origin, the story of the foundation” where legitimacy and arbitrariness, reality and images blend without any particular distinction to define modern man just as easily as they do the man of antiquity and his gods. But in the telling, it dissembles and in this way is unable to reconstruct a “representation that is already distance, loss”.
Twombly's consequent return to myths, to the genesis of the world, produced a loss of the notion of the primordial myth. Narcissus, Venus, Dionysus, Leda are subjects in which the artist, though a process other than that of imitation, effects a dual reading: one of painting, one of the text.
In Mythologie, Roland Barthes notes that each “object” is open to society's appropriation and can pass from a real historical state into an oral state, and thus come back to “life”. The obhect in this case, the myth of Narcissus, appropriated from the artist's imagination, returns via a personal way of seeing. Distance from all iconography, the artist sets the viewer free to alter the original myth, since his writing defines but an idea.
“Writing is added to speech, affixed like an image or a representation, “writes Derrida, so that, presented as a mirror of speech, it compromises the representation of immediate thought. The result lies in the determination of (indefinite) speech as myth, defining it by plastic means or writing. With the creative act, Twombly detached the myth from the “sacred space where it is preserved”, there be creating in a visual space his own other “myth”, that of the work.
The “myths”, such as Dionysus (1975), Venus (1975), Pan (1975), Orpheus (1975), detached from their identities, are surrendered to a personal appropriation of their meaning that differs from that of classical painting, whose aim is the representation of the “real”.
Classical painting structures its language by the following concepts: the signifier (which encompasses figures, object, forms, lines, colors, perspectives, etc.), the referent (meaning that real to which a similar organization refers) and the signifiant (the symbolic speech that unites the signifier to the referent). These are concepts in which there is a subject of writing and reading that decodifies the picture's code, referencing a story (religious, secular, etc.). This painting has a constant relationship to the sign, for the pictorial sign is permanently in reference to the real (sign), and in this manner guides thinking with the assistance of the pictorial signifier towards something else, which is the narrative. But knowing that “the most faithfully represented thing is no longer present”, we find ourselves faced with not only a probable change of narrative, but also with an absence of the thing that the painter initially wanted to represent.
Finally, by attempting with visual materials to ignore this absence, classical painting ended up referring with the aid of the signifiant to a sign other than the primary one. Its language since then has referenced a religious or other type of thinking in which speech, as in language, is Being.
Thus we observe that this visual language references the great absence that takes the form of God. The thing that classical painting presents, says Marc Devade, is that which is absent.
In other words, the classical picture doesn't only exist in the space of its essential representation (pictoral object-real object), but through its visual code it evokes a significative process that impels an interpretation, a “ becoming” text. Just as religion is the interpretation of the Divine Word, likewise visual writing in classical painting refers to a symbolic word; it guides us to what existed in the beginning, to the Divine Word.
Thus Cy Twombly writes names, sometimes rapidly, sometimes nonchalantly, illegibly or not, in an attempt to bring into the space of painting those who are essentially absent. With no reference whatsoever to the real, the artist demonstrates that writing, his writing, helps him to that non-real, other world of Gods. This time it is not through a pictorial sign that the painter wants to narrate, as occurs in classical, but through the letters that directly reference speech.
In contrast to what occurs in classical painting, Twombly has no need of the referent, of a real, because on the one hand, the essential referent as sole reality is the word itself, and on the other, his writing in the form of line that transforms into linear phonetic notation-uniting vocal sounds-refer-ences that which preexisted: the Gods.
So if his writing is clumsy, nonchalant, and/or even calligraphic, it does not hinder what he himself wishes to present within the pictorial space: speech, sound, the beginning.
'Each line is inhabited by its own history, it does not explain, it is the event of its own materialization”, Twombly remarks. And is detaching the line from the word he frees it from the sign, from the language, in an effort to also utilize and create the pictorial space.
His writing, whether lectical or not, “in ceasing to be the prose of the world”, become free. By producing the visual autonomy of the signs, the artist structures the space in the work around what truly compromises it: words, letters.
As opposed to the Futurist, for who writing had to be readable since it formed the basic element of equilibrium between the visual signs and the ideograms in the work, Twombly appropriating writing, infiltrates the space of graffiti art, where words comprise the plastic syntheses of production of the work. The point of reference in his creative act is not the loberation of words so as approach the immediate language of reality, but the appraisal of the plastic writing behind the names, behind the words.
“Of writing, Twombly keeps the gesture, not the product” In the end, it is the artist'a gesture does not divulge the act of painting (translator's note: in Greek to paint is a synthesis of to live and to write), since gesture is a pause, an interruption, and not the projection of the self, as we presume.
On this very point also lies the reason for its existence; the significance of the instantaneous painting act registers the moment in time when it acts, not earlier, not later.
Before the “arrival” of the final moment, the gesture is the sole manifestation of the artist's being, noting however, in its passing the stoppage of time of the past- in other words, death. As aresult, the writing esposed to the eyes does not contain life, nor does it manifest the trace of the painting act. What is left of this gestural act is the work itself. By means of plastic syntheses, it constitutes the sole presence.
Cy Twombly's art has no wish to be either dedication, nor translation of an idea or sentiment:
He creates without appropriating
He acts without expecting anything
His work accomplished,
he does not cling to it,
And since he does not cling to it,
His work will las. (Tao To King)
in ARTI, no 23, 1995
Influenced by American Abstact Expressionism and Old Word past, the artist came by way of initial process of exploration and investigation to adopt a plastic sensibility that conveys the essence, which is the gesture. Of course, in no way does his abstract tendency parallel that of American abstraction, despite the fact that in 1950, having already met Robert Rauschenberg, he realized that the painting surface interested him as a surface on which no physical visual experience takes place except a working progress of execution.
Twombly is an adherent to gestural painting and is opposed to every notion of representation.
His 1953 reference to automatic writing seems to have liberated him from every cultural consideration.
His pictorial “image” corresponds to an inner spirit that has led him to those sacred childhood years when the child, drawing and scribbling, shifts his thoughts away from any speech and image.
The gestural trace becomes the representation of the artist's thinking, the absence of signifier is replaced by the presence of being. The non-signifying thought is for the artist the first stage before the crystallization, before and culture convention.
At the time, young Twombly was moving in search of the essence, the invisible, which would lead him to what Jean-Jacques Rousseau calls “perfect Harmony with the nature”. Motherwell's theoretical exlporation (for him art had to spark contemplation of fundamentally concerns life, the “essence”)led Twombly to continue his investigations into creative activity at the expense of the illusion.
His image records his gestural movements, setting up a personal relationship between the image and the product. The result is that the “scribblings” of this period function as starting points to artistic creation. Twombly has mentioned his specific concerns for the pleasure in what takes place, thereby literally impelling the instinctual dynamism of his gestural movement to reveal a forgotten memory.
With his reference to automatic and gestural writing, with the vibracy of his gesture, with his intense scribblings, Twombly goes beyond Pollock's chicken scratches and drippings. Pollock, in his denial of al personal history, all experience and know-ledge, creaded a tabula rasa in his desire to approach the collective subconscious.
In contrast, Twombly does not categorically deny the connection between consciousness and the mechanisms of subconscious. For him the touch of the hand-via the itinerary of thinking and surface, the base of thinking- is fundamental, since it brings creative thinking into direct contact with human life.
He neither seeks to express nor to represent a reaction or an emotion; he simply uses the picture surface as the base for all the movements of his mental life and thinking, so the gestural writing becomes the means of expression that allows him to leave his traces.
Twombly's 1975 installation in Rome confronted the organic union of past and present that is history. With a cultural tradition, “be it about an idea of God, be it about an idea of man” the Old World,linked to the consciousness of historical time, “emphasizes” for the artist the violence of time through historical monuments that are nothing but “ a degenerate and distorted past”.
Compared with poetry of the monument and ruins, the reference created by their decay turns them into “objects". Offered up to his gaze, they are testaments to the absence of the sacred. Works of man, they demonstrate the dissolution of form, and abandoned, secluded, reintegrated into nature, they end up being constant reference for Cy Twombly.
Roma (1957) does not portray the city, but takes on an end in itself as writing. “Words have the power to make thinks disappear, to make them appear as disappeared, appearance which is that of a disappearance, presence that returns to absence...”. In other words, one could regard the image perceived and represented by Twombly, vested with time and experience, as not the same as the one the ancients perceived.
The artist apprehended what knowledge dictated to him- which is nothing more than a piecemeal knowledge of the reality presented- so that the ruins, the inscriptions of the funerary steles, worn by time, leaving few traces of their former meanings, appear in his work without any near past. At last visual language comprises the painting's main image, so that even the dim shadow of the past appears via the glow of the pictorial image.
As substantial change appeared in his work with use of alphabet script, since up until then his writing was intended to describe personal experience.
By using words as monads reflecting the nature of words, Twombly clarifies language proper as the work, allowing the person, the artist, to appear in a second reading.
The period of the seventies has been characterized by Roland Barhtes as the manifestation of “ a remembrance, an irony, a posture”; by Roberta Smith as a determinatin to render life through Greco-Roman mythology. Neither of them, however, elaborated on the direct relationship between the artist and the myth.
According to Levi-Strauss, “myth is always the discourse on the origin, the story of the foundation” where legitimacy and arbitrariness, reality and images blend without any particular distinction to define modern man just as easily as they do the man of antiquity and his gods. But in the telling, it dissembles and in this way is unable to reconstruct a “representation that is already distance, loss”.
Twombly's consequent return to myths, to the genesis of the world, produced a loss of the notion of the primordial myth. Narcissus, Venus, Dionysus, Leda are subjects in which the artist, though a process other than that of imitation, effects a dual reading: one of painting, one of the text.
In Mythologie, Roland Barthes notes that each “object” is open to society's appropriation and can pass from a real historical state into an oral state, and thus come back to “life”. The obhect in this case, the myth of Narcissus, appropriated from the artist's imagination, returns via a personal way of seeing. Distance from all iconography, the artist sets the viewer free to alter the original myth, since his writing defines but an idea.
“Writing is added to speech, affixed like an image or a representation, “writes Derrida, so that, presented as a mirror of speech, it compromises the representation of immediate thought. The result lies in the determination of (indefinite) speech as myth, defining it by plastic means or writing. With the creative act, Twombly detached the myth from the “sacred space where it is preserved”, there be creating in a visual space his own other “myth”, that of the work.
The “myths”, such as Dionysus (1975), Venus (1975), Pan (1975), Orpheus (1975), detached from their identities, are surrendered to a personal appropriation of their meaning that differs from that of classical painting, whose aim is the representation of the “real”.
Classical painting structures its language by the following concepts: the signifier (which encompasses figures, object, forms, lines, colors, perspectives, etc.), the referent (meaning that real to which a similar organization refers) and the signifiant (the symbolic speech that unites the signifier to the referent). These are concepts in which there is a subject of writing and reading that decodifies the picture's code, referencing a story (religious, secular, etc.). This painting has a constant relationship to the sign, for the pictorial sign is permanently in reference to the real (sign), and in this manner guides thinking with the assistance of the pictorial signifier towards something else, which is the narrative. But knowing that “the most faithfully represented thing is no longer present”, we find ourselves faced with not only a probable change of narrative, but also with an absence of the thing that the painter initially wanted to represent.
Finally, by attempting with visual materials to ignore this absence, classical painting ended up referring with the aid of the signifiant to a sign other than the primary one. Its language since then has referenced a religious or other type of thinking in which speech, as in language, is Being.
Thus we observe that this visual language references the great absence that takes the form of God. The thing that classical painting presents, says Marc Devade, is that which is absent.
In other words, the classical picture doesn't only exist in the space of its essential representation (pictoral object-real object), but through its visual code it evokes a significative process that impels an interpretation, a “ becoming” text. Just as religion is the interpretation of the Divine Word, likewise visual writing in classical painting refers to a symbolic word; it guides us to what existed in the beginning, to the Divine Word.
Thus Cy Twombly writes names, sometimes rapidly, sometimes nonchalantly, illegibly or not, in an attempt to bring into the space of painting those who are essentially absent. With no reference whatsoever to the real, the artist demonstrates that writing, his writing, helps him to that non-real, other world of Gods. This time it is not through a pictorial sign that the painter wants to narrate, as occurs in classical, but through the letters that directly reference speech.
In contrast to what occurs in classical painting, Twombly has no need of the referent, of a real, because on the one hand, the essential referent as sole reality is the word itself, and on the other, his writing in the form of line that transforms into linear phonetic notation-uniting vocal sounds-refer-ences that which preexisted: the Gods.
So if his writing is clumsy, nonchalant, and/or even calligraphic, it does not hinder what he himself wishes to present within the pictorial space: speech, sound, the beginning.
'Each line is inhabited by its own history, it does not explain, it is the event of its own materialization”, Twombly remarks. And is detaching the line from the word he frees it from the sign, from the language, in an effort to also utilize and create the pictorial space.
His writing, whether lectical or not, “in ceasing to be the prose of the world”, become free. By producing the visual autonomy of the signs, the artist structures the space in the work around what truly compromises it: words, letters.
As opposed to the Futurist, for who writing had to be readable since it formed the basic element of equilibrium between the visual signs and the ideograms in the work, Twombly appropriating writing, infiltrates the space of graffiti art, where words comprise the plastic syntheses of production of the work. The point of reference in his creative act is not the loberation of words so as approach the immediate language of reality, but the appraisal of the plastic writing behind the names, behind the words.
“Of writing, Twombly keeps the gesture, not the product” In the end, it is the artist'a gesture does not divulge the act of painting (translator's note: in Greek to paint is a synthesis of to live and to write), since gesture is a pause, an interruption, and not the projection of the self, as we presume.
On this very point also lies the reason for its existence; the significance of the instantaneous painting act registers the moment in time when it acts, not earlier, not later.
Before the “arrival” of the final moment, the gesture is the sole manifestation of the artist's being, noting however, in its passing the stoppage of time of the past- in other words, death. As aresult, the writing esposed to the eyes does not contain life, nor does it manifest the trace of the painting act. What is left of this gestural act is the work itself. By means of plastic syntheses, it constitutes the sole presence.
Cy Twombly's art has no wish to be either dedication, nor translation of an idea or sentiment:
He creates without appropriating
He acts without expecting anything
His work accomplished,
he does not cling to it,
And since he does not cling to it,
His work will las. (Tao To King)
in ARTI, no 23, 1995
Εγγραφή σε:
Αναρτήσεις (Atom)