NB: when listening to SoundCloud links, deactivate Autoplay Station by clicking on Next up function bottom right of the page opened through the link .
|
quotes
"He who has a why to live for can bare with almost any how" (Nietzsche, F.)
narratives
STAY (SoundCloud link) 3'21'' -opens a new window-
quotes
"The voice is without a doubt a technology of the self. With our voice, we can 'speak for ourselves'. It is able to travel, transform and penetrate way beyond where the body can go" (Hoegen, P.)
dialogues
Self-Interview 8'47''
"He who has a why to live for can bare with almost any how" (Nietzsche, F.)
narratives
STAY (SoundCloud link) 3'21'' -opens a new window-
quotes
"The voice is without a doubt a technology of the self. With our voice, we can 'speak for ourselves'. It is able to travel, transform and penetrate way beyond where the body can go" (Hoegen, P.)
dialogues
Self-Interview 8'47''
quotes
“The experiential body can become a locus of resistance because it is the possibility of an unpredictable event.” (Oksala, J.)
contemplations
If form would imply perimeter, it would preclude something from entering its realm. Formlessness would therefore be a welcoming model, as it would not predefine limits by which something is bound to be cast out. Categorically abject. THUS Formlessness is freedom . Form is rule. BUT is one ever better than the other? OR does the form of 'better' have a morphing nature itself? AND if formlessness could only be identified in its resistance to form, would form (in its ever-morphing nature) then be necessary in order for freedom to be felt? Is freedom a sensation, given by resistance to a norm? Anarchy. It would imply absence of a governing body. Still it would be related to form, as it would radically demolish precedent forms in abjection. SO Do I need a governing body to even feel freedom? IF the governing body of me would be ME, AND the essence of the form of me would be ME-ness, then I would be governing form. AND since I feel an attraction to contradictions, I am drawn to challenging this. BUT by challenging ME-ness through the practice of confusion and contradiction, do I confirm what is essential of ME? Thereby remaining in charge AND deceiving the point. If I would be the author and authority of ME-ness, the powerful minority who decides what is abject: could I even think of abjecting form? Would I hence question Me-ness and therefore my existence altogether (doubting that form exists in my challenging of what constitutes the frame of ME). Would I cease existing when I practice negation of form, as there would be nothing stable of me left? If I would practice destroying the product of me, would I annihilate ME? YET I would still exist in my matter-of-factness by which my flesh and bone persist. AND after all, am I the author of me? I could fool myself I am by destabilising the way things seem to be organised, attempting at avoiding producing subjectivity. Avoiding producing finiteness. BUT it would just trick me into thinking I am in charge. AND I am therefore in a catch twenty-two, running for the impossible. Exactly. Perpetually going. Perpetually still. Wishing to disappear into matter-less wether dynamic or motionless. Is matter-less also form-less? I shall cease existing to find out. BUT That would be an arrival. I am interested in the being doing the disappearing. Escaping form as the impossible task in itself is the work. Perpetually escaping. Perpetually staying. Go (?) on living; Stay (?) alive; Live (?)
“The experiential body can become a locus of resistance because it is the possibility of an unpredictable event.” (Oksala, J.)
contemplations
If form would imply perimeter, it would preclude something from entering its realm. Formlessness would therefore be a welcoming model, as it would not predefine limits by which something is bound to be cast out. Categorically abject. THUS Formlessness is freedom . Form is rule. BUT is one ever better than the other? OR does the form of 'better' have a morphing nature itself? AND if formlessness could only be identified in its resistance to form, would form (in its ever-morphing nature) then be necessary in order for freedom to be felt? Is freedom a sensation, given by resistance to a norm? Anarchy. It would imply absence of a governing body. Still it would be related to form, as it would radically demolish precedent forms in abjection. SO Do I need a governing body to even feel freedom? IF the governing body of me would be ME, AND the essence of the form of me would be ME-ness, then I would be governing form. AND since I feel an attraction to contradictions, I am drawn to challenging this. BUT by challenging ME-ness through the practice of confusion and contradiction, do I confirm what is essential of ME? Thereby remaining in charge AND deceiving the point. If I would be the author and authority of ME-ness, the powerful minority who decides what is abject: could I even think of abjecting form? Would I hence question Me-ness and therefore my existence altogether (doubting that form exists in my challenging of what constitutes the frame of ME). Would I cease existing when I practice negation of form, as there would be nothing stable of me left? If I would practice destroying the product of me, would I annihilate ME? YET I would still exist in my matter-of-factness by which my flesh and bone persist. AND after all, am I the author of me? I could fool myself I am by destabilising the way things seem to be organised, attempting at avoiding producing subjectivity. Avoiding producing finiteness. BUT it would just trick me into thinking I am in charge. AND I am therefore in a catch twenty-two, running for the impossible. Exactly. Perpetually going. Perpetually still. Wishing to disappear into matter-less wether dynamic or motionless. Is matter-less also form-less? I shall cease existing to find out. BUT That would be an arrival. I am interested in the being doing the disappearing. Escaping form as the impossible task in itself is the work. Perpetually escaping. Perpetually staying. Go (?) on living; Stay (?) alive; Live (?)
images as score
quotes
"metamorphosis – the freedom within the body, the dis-enclosure of its potentiality – is, paradoxically at first glance, a powerful resistance against the imposed by the actual polit-economical regimes performing efficiency of flexible, fluid (life) forms: life forms becoming producible commodities." (Manchev, B.)
contemplations
ANARCHIC body? The Arachnic body? Metamorphosis or contradiction? Or contradiction in order to morph? Arachne's myth is a cycle. The bio-technique is activated through the cyclicity of producing, receiving, interpreting, regurgitating. No mediation other than technology to regurgitate the self in other form to be re-eaten and spat in yet other form. A loop is formed, feeding and spitting itself. DISORGANISATION through metamorphosis. Is this the freedom within the body? Does an anarchic body lack in an apparent governing body? Order through disorder?
Does an anarchist body base its convictions on superstitions?
ORGANIC (normative) and INORGANIC (challenging the norm)
Every time I say BUT, I create a metamorphosis. Or a misunderstanding? Perpetually identifying and actively undoing recognisable forms. Or a disunderstanding? Setting categories for instability to be possible. For stability to be impossible? Setting a code for confusion to be safe. Not comfortable. Or finding the ethics that allow me to be you, blurring perimeter by looking at the body at an atomic level. Creating a form beyond a recognisable size, so I don't have to run away.
points of reference
(MANIFESTO by Ferretti, G., L.)
"dare the impossible, dare to lose, great is the impossible, dare the confusion, the sky above and below, we can only get lost, WE CAN ONLY GET LOST" -original lyrics: "osare l'impossibile osare osare perdere grande è l'impossibile osare la confusione il cielo sopra e sotto ci si può solo perdere CI SI PUO SOLO PERDERE"-.
"metamorphosis – the freedom within the body, the dis-enclosure of its potentiality – is, paradoxically at first glance, a powerful resistance against the imposed by the actual polit-economical regimes performing efficiency of flexible, fluid (life) forms: life forms becoming producible commodities." (Manchev, B.)
contemplations
ANARCHIC body? The Arachnic body? Metamorphosis or contradiction? Or contradiction in order to morph? Arachne's myth is a cycle. The bio-technique is activated through the cyclicity of producing, receiving, interpreting, regurgitating. No mediation other than technology to regurgitate the self in other form to be re-eaten and spat in yet other form. A loop is formed, feeding and spitting itself. DISORGANISATION through metamorphosis. Is this the freedom within the body? Does an anarchic body lack in an apparent governing body? Order through disorder?
Does an anarchist body base its convictions on superstitions?
ORGANIC (normative) and INORGANIC (challenging the norm)
Every time I say BUT, I create a metamorphosis. Or a misunderstanding? Perpetually identifying and actively undoing recognisable forms. Or a disunderstanding? Setting categories for instability to be possible. For stability to be impossible? Setting a code for confusion to be safe. Not comfortable. Or finding the ethics that allow me to be you, blurring perimeter by looking at the body at an atomic level. Creating a form beyond a recognisable size, so I don't have to run away.
points of reference
(MANIFESTO by Ferretti, G., L.)
"dare the impossible, dare to lose, great is the impossible, dare the confusion, the sky above and below, we can only get lost, WE CAN ONLY GET LOST" -original lyrics: "osare l'impossibile osare osare perdere grande è l'impossibile osare la confusione il cielo sopra e sotto ci si può solo perdere CI SI PUO SOLO PERDERE"-.
points of reference
(Arendt, H. by Krimstein, K.)
(Arendt, H. by Krimstein, K.)
records
1. the seed
During my latest live-performance I explored the presence of movement, speech, sound and image in a durational work of two hours. I was interested in taking myself outside of my own comfort zone and I decided to do so by exposing something I have always considered very intimate: the process of creating an image by drawing. It was the very first time I dared to make this public, and by doing so to make the paralysing feeling of being witnessed during something so personal, feed the performance as it evolved.
I took this as an example as it was a first attempt at converging one of the currently focal aspects of my research, vulnerability, with the idea of feedback through mediums.
This led me to think further in depth about in-between spaces, voids and metamorphing. It generated a loop informing and being informed by my states of mind, in which confusions, instability and contradictions became crucial to the event.
2. how it grew
After this live experience, my second attempt to incorporate the idea of loop was a video, a more direct application of transliteration, metamorphing and feedback. I used skin sensors, softwares, sound design and editing programs, to find that my agency was still strong despite the diversion of the movement practice towards other mediums.
I started to think about what constitutes the bare essentials of my work and practice, and what parameters I could alter, through which I could reveal other, possibly concealed aspects of the work. I decided to keep on translating through mediums and through these means re-defining the work.
KELDER (video link) 5'' -opens a new window-
By watching the video in retrospective I sense the tension between staying and leaving that was embodied in the performance preceding this work, giving roots to my search for glitches or disruptions in linearity of thought and feeling, confusion to access an emotionally rich state which I have identified as a void.
1. the seed
During my latest live-performance I explored the presence of movement, speech, sound and image in a durational work of two hours. I was interested in taking myself outside of my own comfort zone and I decided to do so by exposing something I have always considered very intimate: the process of creating an image by drawing. It was the very first time I dared to make this public, and by doing so to make the paralysing feeling of being witnessed during something so personal, feed the performance as it evolved.
I took this as an example as it was a first attempt at converging one of the currently focal aspects of my research, vulnerability, with the idea of feedback through mediums.
This led me to think further in depth about in-between spaces, voids and metamorphing. It generated a loop informing and being informed by my states of mind, in which confusions, instability and contradictions became crucial to the event.
2. how it grew
After this live experience, my second attempt to incorporate the idea of loop was a video, a more direct application of transliteration, metamorphing and feedback. I used skin sensors, softwares, sound design and editing programs, to find that my agency was still strong despite the diversion of the movement practice towards other mediums.
I started to think about what constitutes the bare essentials of my work and practice, and what parameters I could alter, through which I could reveal other, possibly concealed aspects of the work. I decided to keep on translating through mediums and through these means re-defining the work.
KELDER (video link) 5'' -opens a new window-
By watching the video in retrospective I sense the tension between staying and leaving that was embodied in the performance preceding this work, giving roots to my search for glitches or disruptions in linearity of thought and feeling, confusion to access an emotionally rich state which I have identified as a void.
quotes
“Transgression is not only objectively necessary to [this] freedom, for it can happen that unless we see transgression is taking place we no longer have the feeling of freedom” (Bataille, G)
“Transgression is not only objectively necessary to [this] freedom, for it can happen that unless we see transgression is taking place we no longer have the feeling of freedom” (Bataille, G)
points of reference
(Arendt, H. by Krimstein, K.)
(Arendt, H. by Krimstein, K.)
reports
Elisa's report (SoundCloud Link) 4'32''
Elisa's report (SoundCloud Link) 4'32''
contemplations
Am I, perhaps, moving through the sense of thinking?
Questioning a hierarchical organisation of the system of the body.
Challenging it to acquire chameleonic qualities, to test illusions and to face risks.
Facing does not necessarily mean taking.
Taking responsibility to face them.
Face material, physical and immaterial, imaginary dangers. To move. To die. To move on . To live.
Am I, perhaps, moving through the sense of thinking?
Questioning a hierarchical organisation of the system of the body.
Challenging it to acquire chameleonic qualities, to test illusions and to face risks.
Facing does not necessarily mean taking.
Taking responsibility to face them.
Face material, physical and immaterial, imaginary dangers. To move. To die. To move on . To live.