Other writings






Luz/Oscuridad y Verdad

Juan Toro


En el arte para abrir boquetes a la realidad de algún modo siempre es necesario un nominalismo. Tomemos el caso del gran proyecto occidental de la ilustración. Es la libertad de expresión y el laicismo, la razón cientí­fica y el imperio de la verdad. Cada uno esta emblemáticamente asociado con lo claro. Incluso en el lenguaje se dice ‘aclarar’ una idea, asociado con la ‘ideelhere’ de Platón. La palabra Iluminar, los iluminados, están en la trampa del lenguaje.


Hace unos meses como acto no solamente simbólico, apagaron la luz eléctrica de la Catedral de Colonia. Ese mismo día en que supuestamente los “islamistas y los nazis se demostraban por que volvieran a quemar judíos en las cámaras de gas”. En realidad es la islamofobia y por que se teme a la polí­tica de la globalización. Está ahí­ la idea de castigar, y el mensaje es claro: “si el islam llega aquí­, entonces apagaremos las luces de las iglesia”. “Si el Islam llega a ser mayorí­a, entonces será oscuro para los cristianos como nunca lo fue siquiera para ISIS”. Y “si los feligreses de aquí­ a 20 años se acaban, la luz de la iglesia se apagarán”. Es la profecía del apocalipsis, evocando el horizonte de la extinción. Cristo es la luz del mundo y ciertas personas están excluídos ahora de esa luz. Parece que el escenario en Alemania, así como en Paris, es el Catastrofismo, porque no hay ya tantos feligreses los domingos. Como dicen, el ultimo apaga la luz.


En la teoría del “diseño inteligente“ asimilado por la ciencia ortodoxa cuenta que Galileo veía con los ojos a Jupiter más pequeño que Venus, y con el telescopio lo veía más grande. Él se preguntaba si es que los ojos le engañaban o si es el universo. Entonces inventa el método de la deducción. Esto es construir por la razón “experiencias mentales”. Una vez construida la experiencia, la razón matemática busca la demostración. Así es como en la neurociencia se discriminan dos tipos de neuronas del dolor, las neuronas tipo On y las tipo Off. Esto es como la lógica binaria de 1/0. El “conmutador cerebral” que se activa de forma refleja. Es luz On y luz Off, los cuales son dos sistemas que funcionan “infinitamente independentemente” cada uno por su lado. Cuando dormimos activamos el modo Off como un Switch. Las neuronas enrutan de aqui para allá, aprenden, pero no piensan, dependiendo de la luz vamos a tener una sensación diferente del tamaño de las cosas. La información está en los servidores o en los computadores de los usuarios.

En realidad la señal electroquímica que cazamos cuando detrás hay luz es diferente a la señal que cazamos cuando en el fondo hay oscuridad. Dependiendo de la señal que va o que viene, captamos las cosas diferente. La intensidad es la misma, pero la sensación que vamos a tener es diferente. Es la relación de los colores fríos y calientes, si vemos un campo de flores amarillas tiene la sensación que se acercan y si son flores azules, tendremos la sensación que se aleja. Por otro lado, habría otro tipo de neuronas de tipo “neutro” de las que no se saben como funcionan. La idea de la luz se está interpretando en la tecnociencia de maneras diferentes cada día con cada experimento y siendo utilizado como política de imagen en las agendas de conservación climática. Pero también es una transformación ideológica para futuros geosociales. Desde los fotones y la nanotecnología hasta la femtotecnología, la física entrelazada con política, economía, ecología psicología y religión, se va constituyendo en el fundamentalismo de la tecnocracia. Estamos ante una especie de Reduccionismo psicológico y apocalíptico que intenta explicar todo el universo y la “mente”. De esta manera enfrentado a un gnosticismo. Originado por las grandes organizaciones totalizadoras, donde el ser humano es solamente una interfase como cualquier otra, que debe tener instalado los software de las leyes de la física. Más que la utopía de la libertad esté siendo administrada, “la gestión del planeta” es la idea del fin de la civilización, más aún es la idea de civilización que se hunde con ella misma.



En la cosmología, la idea de la materia oscura (Off) y el reflejo de la luz en la oscuridad  impone su monismo. El redireccionamiento de un nuevo mundo, de un pasado que sobrevaloraba la idea de luz como más importante, para activar el hecho de que la luz no es posible sin oscuridad. La "farmacia" de Malevich está ya organizada, la representación de la destrucción total en el cuadrado negro sobre negro. Un ejemplo es el remolino de Kapoor en el palacio de Versalles, donde el agujero negro, oponiéndose a la racionalidad ilustrada, gira incesante hacia un adentro “incognoscible”. Es el inconsciente de la oscuridad gestionada. Es el dibujo que pospone interminablemente un evento de cambio que no se puede abarcar, por que es transformación, colapso total. Pero es la “singularidad monádica” que reclama una ley natural encuentra del derecho positivo. En un mundo interesado en “la regulación de los estados de ánimo y la respuesta a la catástrofe a través del uso de la luz o su ausencia”, la luz no es ya deseable, de esa salsa negra que busca absorber al espectador-artísta, mientras éste luchará para no dejarse tragar. Uno se pregunta qué viene después de Off, el apocalipsis y el post-apocalipsis conviven sin afectarse, en octubre vuelve a brillar el sol - On- y el negro se vuelve divertido.








Light/Darkness and Truth

Juan Toro

In art to open gaps to reality somehow nominalism is always necessary. Take the case of the great Western project Illustration. Is freedom of expression and secularism, scientific reason and the rule of truth. Each is emblematically associated with the course. Even the language we say "clarify" an idea associated with "ideelehre" Plato. The word Illuminate, the iluminatti, is in this trap of language. 

A few months ago not only symbolic act, turned off the electric light of the Cologne Cathedral. That same day he allegedly "Islamists and the Nazis Protesters demonstrate in favor of return to burn Jews in the gas chambers." It's actually Islamophobia and fears to the globalization policy. It is there the idea of punishment, and the message is clear: "if Islam gets here, then turn out the lights of the churches." "If Islam becomes majority, then it will be dark for Christians as it never was even to ISIS". And "if the parishioners in 20 years are over, the light will go out of the church." It is the prophecy of the Apocalypse, evoking the horizon of extinction. Christ is the light of the world and some people are excluded now that light. It seems that the scene in Germany as well as in Paris, is Cathastrophism, that there are no longer many parishioners on Sundays. As they say, the last off the light.


In the theory of "intelligent design" assimilated by orthodox science that Galileo with his eyes saw smaller Jupiter as Venus, but saw it largest through the telescope.

He wondered if his eyes were deceiving him or if the universe. Then invented the method of deduction. This is build by reason "mental experiences". Once built the experience, mathematical reason seeks the show.

Here's how neuroscience two types of pain neurons are discriminated, neurons On and Off type. This is like the binary logic of 1/0. The "brain switch" that activates reflexively.

It is light Off and light On, which are two systems operating "infinitely independent" everyone for himself. When we sleep we activate the "Off" mode as a Switche. Neurons routed from here to there, they learn, but do not think, depending on the light will have a different feeling about the size of things. The information is on servers or computers of users.

Actually we hunt a electrochemical signal of the objects when light is behind, it is very different from the signal that we hunt of the objects when there deep darkness. Depending on the signal going or coming, we perceive things differently. The intensity is the same, but the feeling will be different. It is the ratio of cold and warm colors,

if we see a field of yellow flowers have the feeling that if they are close, and when are blue flowers, have the feeling that moves away. On the other hand, there would be another type of neurons "neutral" type that does not know how they work. The idea of light is being interpreted in different ways technoscience every day with each experiment and being used as a political image in climate conservation agendas. But it is also an ideological transformation to geo-social future. Since photons and nanotechnology to femtotechnology, the Physik is intertwined with politics, economics, ecology, psychology and religion, it is being constituted in the fundamentalism of technocracy. We are facing a kind of apocalyptic psychological reductionism that tries to explain the entire universe and the "mind". Thus confronted with an Gnosticism. This is caused by large organizations totalizing, where the human being is only an interface like any other software that the laws of physics must be installed. More than the utopia of freedom is being administered, "the management of the planetary" is the idea of the end of civilization, even more, is the idea of civilization that sinking with herself.



In cosmology the idea of dark matter (Off) and the reflection of light in the darkness, his monism prevails. Redirection of a new world, of a past that overstated the idea of light as most important, to turn that light is not possible without darkness.

The "pharmacy" of Malevich is already organizing themselves, representation of mass destruction in the black square on black. One example is the swirl of Kapoor in the palace of Versailles, where the black hole, opposing the Enlightenment rationality, that relentless touring to a "unknowable" inside. It is the unconscious of managed dark. It is the drawing endlessly postponed event of change that can not be covered, that is transformation, total collapse. But is the "monadic singularity" that demands a natural law against the positive law. In a world looking for "the regulation of mood and disaster response through the use of light or its absence", the light is no longer desirable, black sauce that you are looking absorb the viewer-artist, while this fight to avoid being

swallowed. One wonders what comes after Off, the apocalypse and the post-apocalypse live unaffected, in October the sun shines again - On- and black becomes fun.






Torbellino/Tejido *

Alejandro Orozco

Torbellino
El caos visto de frente es plano. Para observar su intensidad hay que dividirlo en secciones, esto es principalmente porque no existen caos pequeños ni grandes, el caos es caos. Lo que sí se puede hacer es buscar otro punto de vista, un corte diagonal o bien, elegir una sección. Cuando esto sucede, extrañamente el caos adquiere forma de torbellino. La sobreposición de espirales y su ritmo acelerado le hace parecer como si bailara una danza loca.


El torbellino arrasa, eso ya se sabe. A su paso levanta por los aires lo que encuentra: polvo, plantas, bardas e incluso vacas. Los lleva al interior por unos momentos, luego de una zarandeada los libera. La planta y la vaca caen al suelo muy mareados, despistados. Una ventana aquí, una puerta allá, el torbellino deja un rastro difícil de ignorar. Se trata de un desastre pasajero, claro, tampoco hay desastres permanentes, o como en la enfermedad, no habría nadie que lo resista.





El torbellino no es una representación del caos, es un fragmento de él, es una expresión de él. Más bien eso, un gesto sobre el desorden. Pero aún en él hay unidad. El torbellino es uno y muchas cosas a la vez, es un triunfo de las presiones, de la temperatura, del viento atrapado, de la velocidad. Es una muestra de fugacidad. En su contemplación parece incluso llevar la tierra al cielo, o al revés, abrir un hueco entre las nubes para descender vertiginosamente, como en extremo tobogán. Llega al suelo.

Cuando se intensifica aparece el tornado, hay destrucción. Ahí se recuerda y se entiende su vocación por el caos, su belleza se altera pero el respeto y el temor aumenta. El torbellino en cambio, delgado y fijo, absorbe y deja ir. Es sensación pura de lo inestable que sin embargo permanece, se va y regresa, se desvanece y re-aparece.



Tejido

Biol. Conjunto organizado de células, con un comportamiento coordinado. Entrelazar hilos, cordones o materiales para formar la unidad, crear un producto. En ambos casos el tejido puede formarse, desprenderse y regenerarse

.

El génesis del tejido demuestra dos aspectos fundamentales, por un lado el reconocimiento de la unidad independiente, por otra la capacidad de asociación. Las células parecen mantener un sentido práctico, o al menos tienden a algo. Célula-cerebro y célula- hígado son claramente diferenciables de otras tantas cuya función, digamos, cuyos hábitos les definen. Estos comportamientos vienen programados, así viven y así desaparecen. Por ejemplo, la célula de una costilla vive unos quince años, luego se va, y cada vez menos regresa. Por el contrario la célula de la vista, permanece toda la vida. Tal vez eso explica la mecánica del recuerdo.



Lo que se olvida entonces es de alguna manera cíclico, a veces selectivo, en cambio lo que se deteriora es progresivo. La célula en soledad no observa otra cosa que su propio calendario, literalmente vive encerrada en sí. Ci-to-plas-ma. Pero esa no es la razón por la que se asocia. El significado de su función muta, cambia cuando se vuelve tejido. El mismo quehacer ahora quiere decir otra cosa, el mismo día con día se desplaza hacia la tarde o la noche. En el tejido, la célula resiste, la célula construye y se mantiene. La idea de unidad no proviene sólo de la forma o de la textura, piel suave o áspera, no viene incluso de la mejora colectiva, el tejido demuestra, como ya se dice, que la unidad becomes fuerza. En realidad no es nada de eso. Romanticismo de laboratorio. Lo que cambia es el significado, la célula en el fondo sigue igual, es la misma, lo que se transforma es la relación , la membrana en contacto, la cercanía que hace olvidar la función unitaria para entregarse a la tarea colectiva. Entonces sí, el goce celular se mueve hacia el tacto, ahí finalmente ocurre el encuentro.


Sin embargo el tejido también se desgarra. Las abuelas enseñaban a tejer, a hilar, a entrelazar líneas que se convertían en superficies o en praderas. La lógica celular demostraba aquí los beneficios de anudar, las normas del ritmo y de la repetición. Enlazo con voluntad, con afecto, por ejemplo en la bufanda para el invierno, así más o menos transformo la función y el destino. Deshilo y me equivoco, recomienzo. Rompo y reparo. Vuelvo a unir, a veces con un hilo distinto, rojo, fuera de tono. Esa es la voluntad que las células no aprendieron, ellas se regeneran todo el tiempo, pero sobre el mismo plano y sobre la suposición del mismo invierno. Éste ni dura tanto, ni es tan perverso.


              

Dialéctica del tejido regenerado o bien, resolución práctica.

A la regeneración precede el desgarre. A la creación el caos. En medio del torbellino y en su substancia hay vacío, pero este vacío es espacio. Vacío y espacio. Al lugar de fuga antecede el encierro. Y así en adelante. Dialécticas más o menos claras, más o menos inútiles. Lo que es clave es que de ambas viene la producción de un tercero. Hegel. El tercero es eso, producción pura, hacer que genera, modo de surgir. El torbellino no desaparece sin tener en la mente su próxima aparición. La célula no olvida siendo tejido que andaba sola. Multiplasma-Multipass. El deseo no es la falta, no se elimina con la satisfacción. El vacío no se llena. Lo que se rompe es el ciclo, lo que se adquiere es un nuevo ritmo, un cierto compás. Un pequeño baile, una danza. Resolución práctica: Lo que cambia es lo que ambos producen. Aquello en lo que se convierten.


*

Originally written for the fanzine Red Column in the context of the exhibition Pure Game





POWER AND OPPOSITION: NOTES ON THE RELATION BETWEEN TIME AND RESISTANCE *

Jimena Mendizábal

‘We lack creation. We lack resistance to the present’
Gilles Deleuze & Felix Guattari


It seems that this days the list of things we need to resist keeps getting longer: unending wars, antibiotic-resistant diseases, artificial intelligence, automatisation of work, lack of affordable housing, skyrocketing debt, international terrorism, return of ultra-nationalism, etc. The list could keep going and going, blurring the horizon of resistance into an uncertain territory. So what is it exactly that we should be resisting and why? This is a complex question with many possible answers. For this article I posit that the main forces that need to be resisted are the same that are structuring the flows of money, people, goods, services, information around the world: the coalition between states and capitalistic systems of production, what I will call here the capitalistic State or the State.

Drawing strongly from the ideas of Deleuze, Guattari, Foucault and Harvey, among others, my aim is to sketch the current state and meaning of resistance and to propose time/temporality as a fertile territory for struggle. A territory where private citizens, civilian organisations and NGOs can take the fight against Capitalism and to push back the overtake of the structures and organs of democratic States by economic systems of production.


DEFINING RESISTANCE

As Howard Caygill points out in his essay Also Sprach Zapata, the contemporary philosophical analysis about the concept of resistance has been inconclusive. Many have mentioned it or pointed out its potential but a complete study of the concept hasn’t been developed yet. Such is the case of Michel Foucault, who during a 1984 interview elaborated over a citation from History of sexuality: ‘There where there is power, there is resistance’. He posited that resistance comes from within the dynamic of every power relation and it is never external to IT, as he argues ‘You see, if there was no resistance, there would be no power relations. Because it would simply be a matter of obedience’ (Foucault 1997a, 167). In his comment Foucault even considers that resistance is “the key word” in any power relation, since it is what allows for a change in such relations, in short what make us free subjects even within a power relation.

Caygill takes the foucauldian analysis as a starting point for his study on resistance, drawing upon the last papers and interviews of Foucault in which he abandoned the understanding of power in juridical terms to move towards a military description of power and social relations (Foucault 1997b, 59-65). In this shift towards military strategy, Caygill identifies the direct inspiration of Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz, whose book On War is key for Caygill’s definition of resistance. The inclusion of Clausewitz in an analysis on resistance is quite unexpected, usually he is credited as a theorist of war whose writings caused much of the sufferings of World War I and Vietnam. Today many academics have tried to rescue Clausewitz legate by clarifying a lot of the misunderstandings that the incomplete readings of On War have provoked. In this case Caygill considers Clausewitz not as a theorist of war as is usually conceived, but above all as a theorist of resistance.


A MATTER OF TIME: PEOPLE’S RESISTANCE

‘No longer are social confrontations merely of an economic order,
they also take place among the different ways in which groups and
individuals choose to live’
Felix Guattari


For Caygill the way in which Clausewitz defined war made him ‘far more than a theorist of war between nation-states [...] [he] was the thinker of the people’s war of resistance: Volkskrieg’ (Caygill 2012, 22). The Prussian general considered that the concept of war was deeply related to the capacity to resist, proposing the end of war as to ‘render the enemy incapable of further resistance’ (Idem). Considering this along with Clausewitz most famous quote ‘war is the mere continuation of politics by other means’, Caygill concludes that the politics of resistance consist of ‘maintaining the capacity to resist while avoiding any imprudent escalation of violence that might compromise it’ (Ibid, 23). Is here that the relation between resistance and time that I would like to take further starts to develop.

For Caygill the key concept of resistance is maintaining the capacity to resist, this is, to retain the capacity to change power relations and therefore the capacity to remain free under any circumstance. The dynamics of such endeavour are quite complicated when it comes to the power relation between the State and the people, since, as Caygill points out, this relation is extremely asymmetrical: ‘the state is prepared with very little provocation to initiate the logic of escalation’ (Idem). So the role of a resistant society is to refuse to enter into this logic of escalation that looks to increase the levels of violence and repression in the shortest time possible in order to seize the people’s capacity to resist the State power. To resist then is necessary to refuse to follow the temporality marked by the State, which is prone to excess, and adopt a different temporality in order to ‘threaten the state’s own capacity to resist by temporal distension’ (Idem).

So to be able to understand resistance it is necessary first to understand what time means for a society that is trying to resist a capitalistic State. If to resist means to refuse to act inside the temporality of the State, then this implies thinking of time not as a unity but as a multiplicity, as Harvey proposes ‘[It is necessary to] recognise the multiplicity of the objective qualities which space and time can express, and the role of human practices in their construction’ (Harvey 1989, 203). Time and space are constructions that relate closely to material practices and the processes of social life, to the point where ‘neither time nor space can be assigned objective meanings independently of material processes’ (Ibid, 204). So in order to define resistance it is necessary to understand time as a multiplicity where different social groups can act within different temporalities. Therefore, among other spatial-temporal constructions, there is a time of the capitalistic State and there is a time of resistance that implies an indefinite distension or expansion of the time of the capitalistic State.


COMPRESSED TIME: THE TEMPORALITY OF THE CAPITALISTIC STATE AND THE TEMPORALITY OF RESISTANCE

‘Spatial and temporal practices are never neutral in social affairs.
They always express some kind of class or other social content,
and are more often than not the focus of intense social struggle.’
David Harvey


According to Harvey ‘command over spaces and times is a crucial element in any search for profit’. The transition from the rigidities of Fordism to the fluidity of flexible accumulation changed the perception of time, bringing forward a “compression of time and space”. Harvey chooses the term ‘compression’ as descriptive for a proper capitalistic time and space because of its effects in speeding up the pace of life while spatial barriers are overcomed so fast that they seem to ‘collapse inwards upon us’ (Harvey 1989, 240). In capitalistic production the necessity for short-term gains takes over long-time planning, thus time needs to be ‘constantly pushing forward’, speeding up social processes and reducing the time for ‘meaningful decision making’, as Harvey writes ‘[The schizophrenic dimension to postmodernity] with the accelerations in turnover times in production, exchange, and consumption that produce, as it were, the loss of a sense of the future except and insofar as the future can be discounted into the present [...] Past experience gets compressed into some overwhelming present.’ (Ibid, 291).

Therefore the time created by the capitalistic mode of production is constantly rushing forward, it is ‘time in advance of itself’ (Ibid, 223), since its prime objective is to speed up turn over time and overcome spatial barriers by compressing past and future into a constant present. This is the time the capitalistic State needs to work with in order to allow the free movement of capital: a ’compressed historical time’ in which the past and the future are compressed in a shortened present that is the only time that really counts for the purposes of capital.

According to Harvey it is through assigning social meanings to space and time, that we learn who and what we are in society (Ibid, 214). Capitalism needs an absolute and homogenous concept of time that acts as a container for every thought and action (Ibid, 252), therefore it is necessary to present and maintain compressed historical time as the only possible ground for social actions and interactions. In this way, capitalistic time becomes the general time of equivalence that overcodes all activities of production, as Guattari argues ‘All these internalised ways of measuring the equivalence of time are not just a subjective fact, but also basic element for the formation of collective labour power, and for the formation of the collective force for social control’ (Guattari 2007, 59)


THE DISTENSION OF TIME

‘The nomad knows how to wait, he has infinite patience’
Deleuze and Guattari


I argue that resistance is the experimentation with actions that might allow the disruption of the compressed time of capitalistic State in order to preserve the capacity to resist. To resist means to act in a way capable of distending the moment of tension, instead of engaging into the logic of escalation of the State that needs to end conflicts within a shortened period of action. Therefore while Negri and Hardt (2001, 212) propose desertion or nomadism (as the individual’s subtraction of the places of power) as an effective way to resist the new world order, I propose desertion but not of a certain space but of a certain time dominated by the capitalistic State.

I recognise that the concept of ‘waiting’ implied in the ‘distension of time’ seems to put the  resistant subject into a merely passive role. But as Deleuze and Guattari argue one must distinguish between speed and movement: ‘a movement might be very fast, but that does not give it speed; a speed may be very slow, or even immobile, yet it is still speed’ (Deleuze & Guattari 1987, 381), speed is more related to the capacity to spring at any point inside a smooth space than it is to movement. The ‘nomad’ is the one who is outside the restricted time and space of the State, the one who recognises the true nature of speed and its relation to ‘holding’ a space or in this case a time. This notion of waiting also seems to be at the hearth of Clausewitz’ position about resistance, since it is in fact the capacity to wait, to work with a different temporality, what he considered as the essence of any active defence. For Clausewitz distending the moment is actually an active strategic action, as Bassford (2008) explains:

‘However strongly an offensive may start out, it inevitably weakens as it advances from its original base. [...] Meanwhile, the defender falls back upon the sources of his strength. Every offensive, however victorious, has a “culminating point”. If the defender has enough time and space in which to recover, the aggressor inevitably reaches a point at which he must himself take up the defence. If he pushes too far, the equilibrium will shift against him.’

The actions that are subscribed only to the present weaken as they advance on time. In the other hand actions that participate of a different temporality might be able to avoid the deterioration imposed by a chronological advance. Resistant actions must extend in multiple directions beyond the instant of action, calling for a struggle that cannot be resolved in a short term period and forcing the State to expand its time horizons and the time of the decision making process. In order to distend the moment resistant groups must be ready to take the necessary conditions from the current state of affairs and dare to experiment with them.

To resist then is to experiment with actions that can expand the present into multiple temporalities: new readings of history that allow for different narratives and points of view, new conceptions of modernity that recognise the plurality of the modern project and its specificities in each country, novel ways of thinking and of organising thought, alternative models for education, labour and communication that look into the needs of individuals instead of economic benefit, ways of production that look beyond short term gains, curatorial projects that take a wider view of the possibilities of art production, artistic creations that work with history and historical materials, etc. Resistance might not defeat the State completely but that was never the goal, resistance triumphs if it has managed to preserve resistance itself. So as long as resistant groups do not quit they cannot be defeated, their only existence is already a victory since it points to the fact that society’s capacity to resist is still there. Resistant groups win if they resist, the capitalistic State is defeated if the people’s capacity for resistance is still there.



*

Originally written for the fanzine Red Column in the context of the exhibition Pure Game






Draft of a possible Manifesto
Carolina Alba, Mirjam Kroker, Jimena Mendizabal, Alejandro Orozco & Juan Toro.

This document was written concurrently by all collaborators. Taking a digital page as a blank canvas to express different ideas, concepts and vissions about collective work, all contributors were free to add, edit or erase parts of the document. The result is a collective conversation and a declaration of goals.


This is gonna be hard, but interesting

Manifesto: A public declaration of your aims.

we (:)) do not know how valid or convenient is still today a Manifesto…. It takes you back to the first half of the XX century (exactly) and there were bit expectations of the renewal of life...do we have them too? Do we want to change things out there? Or should we be more humble? The last I read about a collective trying to get organized to do a change in the public realm through activism, theory, politics and art (working on the on/off line dynamic, attending local problems from global perspectives), they just found out they were still too young….and dreamy. Maybe it is not about changing the world but changing yourself (exactly: modes of doing becomes modes of existence) and the world around you. Actually today is necessary to think in the sense of micro-modifications, alternate forms of community. We are not naifs, in the sense above, and the term Manifesto (of course very avant-garde) it is used differently today.

Writing a Manifesto (nowadays) is valid. Because expresses modes of doing: coherence between artistic production, distribution and (I love how this “and” opens to other possibilities of the chain of production)

Working within a collective is to  sacrifice,you sideness for some unimaginable, is to forget about yourself as just ‘being’ and think in terms of ‘being-with’ (the only way of being according to Jan Luc Nancy)

It is in this case the conviction of a radical idea that it is art as a commitment to life is something we have to……….in a collective way

So, how is our “being-together”? Or what do we expect from it? There are many ways of ‘being-together’, we can collaborate (co-labour) or we can cooperate (co-operate).(:)) In co-labour all activities are aimed towards a single aim or purpose, there is common goal. In co-operation there is no common goal, just a shared enterprise; people work together but toward their own goals. One is a collectivity, the other a network. Do we want a network or a collectivity? Probably both. Networking and collaboration are not necessarily opposed terms. Collaboration is (should be) what we do. That has certain extension (those who actively and horizontally co-work with us), this also may create networks which might also be of different levels of participation. One example is that today there are networks that helps only with dissemination (?), this is what occurs with social networking, for instance.  

A Manifesto (in itself) is an expression of collectivity. (Especially this one where we are literally co-labouring)

We  don’t care about networks and co-works and entrepreneurs and colap or better collaps (jajaja). There is something else behind … a commitment to what? For what?

A manifesto is a collective birth of a pregnant idea (love it!) with strong contractions. It is not a want it, it is a must. The condition is the same.  Something is coming, which you don’t know, you can’t even control but you have a [...] This “something coming”, is what defines what a Manifesto is: coming to an idea which extends a possible future. In that way art is understood as a commitment to life - a  commitment to the life of others. You don’t care the pain and the effort because that is the doing to get it out. Actually it is ?

There is nothing new but the collective work is the persuasion to find slightly different facts and things/experiences/concepts? something out together? Cause if it is not labour, in a productive way… is it in a personal way?  Maybe it can be counted in the realm of biopolitical labour (labour that reproduces forms of life characterized by its potentiality and not by what can be quantified)? Which forms of life/doing are we reproducing or questioning in particular? On-Off line communication that leads to on-off line communities that can be independent from (capital) value.

While we understand that the information is not knowledge, computer see the "complexity" informatica and data exchange as steps for dimensionless, nonlinear and asymmetrical conversations.

To consider a new concept of information as a device to switch On and Off in art and in the technosphere, where science and art transform and create new realities. We welcome the conversation at many levels On-line and various forms of current interaction as well as the Off-line conversation, but also in the post-internet and "practice hospitality" that go beyond computer systems and paradigms of the logarithms of human behavior.

The only way to understand singular and collective life in the digital era is by identifying new connections and new ways of acquiring and organizing information (Camnitzer)

Actually we are the uncritical mass we have no proper name, no proper idea no proper goal

Reddit Community!

we are the super suspicious suspects [!!!]- the ones you better don’t trust, we sometimes talk without thinking, eat without appetite and sleep without dreaming we are the jokers who try to say the truth about the lies.

(We are the super suspicious subjects in labour)  

Sounds nice, but… are we? I liked the idea of not wanting to just reproduce our lives, but how to become jokers? The joker is the wild card/cat, the one that can be any other card. We are the uncountable- the number is the variant and always replaced. That is against the system of the super machine but machines (are) unintelligent by nature (by programming). So the machine has to confront its imperfect conditions. Hence, the idea of “Nature" puts it in question. Since the concept of "nature" is imposed for centuries by religion or fundamentalism, we propose instead a “liquidity” artistic research practice in a constant feedback and reconfiguration. Finally we arrived here… the imperfect world. There is no perfect system/world, so probably we should not be also wanting it, but accepting it. Working from and with it. But the manifesto is something else, it is not the super machine. It’s rather the antivirus system of the supermachine itself. It tries to defend the destructive nature of the machine. Discovering through the failures and chaos a (...) system,- the supermachine doesn’t need a convenient system, the inconvenient is the convenient system itself. That is it why it is always reproduced in circles and loops without an ending-.  How does an antivirus then work like? Disturbance is its best diet. The antivirus scans the complete system and attacs it (sometimes permanently) to help recovering it. Sometimes the antivirus mimics the real system, to distract, and/or to empowers itself.

No action is its addiction but sometimes it is disobedient.

TIME OUT
coffee break (10 mins)
ok- ok ok
thanks

Can we skype now? Or?
to micro-modify what
artistic collaboration might mean?

Spanish

TIEMPO LIBRE
TIME OUT
coffee break (10 mins)
ok- ok ok
thanks




︎ onoffcollaboration@gmail.com