What Else! is a critique on contemporary art. This project is part of an indefinite residency at The Yes Foundation in 's-Hertogenbosch. Didn't we just kill god?
A Bunch of Political or Artistic Things
'A Bunch of Political or Artistic Things', PowerPoint video (1"30)
I don't like art that is made out of a lot of the same small things. Like a floor out of coffee pads or even a drawing out of small dots. I think it's pure fetishism. What's wrong about fetishism is that it's sexist and therefore it's shallow. A part of me wants to make a work that is highly aesthetic with a perfect composition of shape and colour. But I'm afraid this is just as fetishist. Also I think it's fascist to make such a work. I know that aesthetics have a political quality. But still I'm afraid that this believe in progress is just fascist and irrelevant. What's wrong with fascism is not so much that it's dangerous but much more that it undermines freedom. It objectifies. If art wants to make things open and mature it can't objectify. Is art about making things open and mature? Maybe so. So if I wanted to make a more relevant work, would that also mean it should have any political value? If it has a political starting point or is even fixed somehow, it would also objectify. Because it would suggest a difference between it's own position and the rest of the world's. So that would suggest some kind of hierarchy. Especially if it would try to change anything or even try to say something. So therefor this would be even more fascist. The only political value an art work should have is an aesthetic one. Just for being art. But be careful not to say anything. I don't like Christians because they judge and impose their morals. I think artists should never be like Christians. Also I don't like too emotional art because that makes the artist centre of attention and if a person should know one thing, it is that they are not important and not the centre of anything. But me saying that is also like being a Christian. Especially writing it down. Who am I to judge? Maybe these people really are super important. Also I don't like about Christians that they are hypocrites. That means they impose their morals on everyone but themselves. Like meat eating vegetarians. The whole base on Christianity is hypocrite. For instance wearing your best clothes to church is hypocrite. And that's just a small example. What about trying to come closer to God than others? Of course I know being born in this part of the world in this time also makes me a Christian. For example because I think it's 2013. And for the capitals I use. So maybe it's just as hypocrite to take an artwork out of a working space and into a museum. Also my scepticism inhibits my freedom. I judge. I really like compositions that are perfect. I think that has something to do with sex. Which I hate about it. It's not rational. It's stupid. And shallow. I know aesthetics aren't shallow. But perfect compositions are. I do like things that are irrational like throwing bananas or dancing silly. I also really like sculptures that contain banana throwing attributes and dancing silly shapes and colours. Especially if they are complex at the same time. I really love complex art theory and philosophy. But I'm afraid it's nothing more than entertainment for the mind. Like five star cryptograms. What's wrong about entertainment is that it's often a mass thing. I don't like mass taste and mass culture. It objectifies. It's fascist. I do like enjoyment. Words are also fascist. They objectify things. And they invade the blank sheet. Modernism is mass taste. Especially expressionism. Or is it? I really don't like bands either. Bands and pop music are such a cliché I can almost puke out of boredom. I can't believe people can still be enjoyed or inspired by bands. Just like hanging things on walls. How can you still do that without being totally cynical? I also don't like cynicism. I like about 50% of all things. I think that makes me a realist. I do think I am sceptical. But how can you trust a thing if you know that everything is uncertain? Things that I do not distrust: the perfect balanced combination of grapefruit and beetroot. And love. I'm also a romantic. But that has nothing to do with art. So if I wanted to make a work that was somehow entertaining or spectacular it would be irrelevant. It would be what culture demands, and art should undermine culture and strive for new things. So therefore it would be wrong to make something spectacular. But a very beautiful or a very ugly piece is also spectacular. Or dancing silly. So therefore I should make something more invisible. Maybe something boring, but that's also been done. Is making new things important? I think so. I don't know why. Probably because I'm still a Christian. If time is really more circular than linear we have to stop making new things and start all over again. Be more repetitive. I also don't want to use beautiful materials because that's just fetishism. And I believe buying expensive materials is immoral and it undermines my artistic freedom. Art should be immoral. I like morals. I have a lot of rules. I never go near people that are depressed. I think people that are depressed are lazy for not fixing themselves. I also don't like homeless people. I think they should at least pay for the sidewalk if they want to lie on it. It's not their sidewalk. I really like expensive and ugly community art. Like a huge golden golden retriever in someone's front yard unasked. Or something like that. But then more complex of course. It has to be complex. Four stars at least. Plants are an easy solution that really seems to work. For now. I don't like my work to be too much about me. I also don't like the word 'I'. Or writing it with a capital. In fact I don't like to use capitals at all. But in this case the universal rules are more important than my own. All these sentences start with the word 'I'. I hate that. I like sentences that start with the word 'Tevergeefs'. Because it makes you know that everything else will be totally useless. I don't like the use of the human figure in art at all. I also think the medium should result out of the work and not the other way around. Therefore I think it's lame to be a performer. Or a painter. Or a band. It's fascist to call yourself something like that. Designers also like to make things out of a lot of small things. Like a lamp out of spoons or a chair out of spoons. Boring. Lamps and chairs are boring. And so are spoons. I'm sure there are enough pretty chairs and lamps in the world to go around by now. Let's do something else. The political promise of a good art work is the possibility to undermine any kind of hierarchy. The possibility of endless reconsideration. Therefore it cannot know any moral. And therefore it should always undermine the codes of the arts. As well as the rules of the artist. The artist should always try to nullify art, for art cannot be conservative. If art becomes conservative it vanishes. Artists should try to vanish art into life. You have to kick it, break it, make it boring, make it invisible, make it ordinary.
What Else! – www.theyesfoundation.nl
'Don't Be So Dramatically Skeptical', Digital Image (1405 x 1057) PowerPoint Screen Shot
'Sense', Digital Image (1772 x 2658)
'The Wanderer in Line for a Coffee', PowerPoint video (10"08)
'Juggling (4 The People)', PowerPoint Video (5"29)
The Wanderer in Line for Coffee
The Wanderer in Line for Coffee
This video essay is part of the research project What Else! on metaphysical homelessness ("rooflessness" literally in Dutch). This project is part of an infinite residency at The Yes Foundation in 's-Hertogenbosch.
What Else! – www.theyesfoundation.nl
(HD) PowerPoint Screen Capture Animation Video—5'28"