Oleg Kulik, Nikolai: Piggly Wiggly mskes presents

Exposition by Oleg Kulik (the name is proposed by V. Fishkin).

 

The only thing a person can not afford is inaction. He is forced to produce everything he needs. Do politics, make money, make children, create art. Fortunately or not, this endless production can serve as a source of endless pleasure and an endless source of energy. Life, it seems, is a series of production processes, with fatigue and mandatory rest, with problems of depreciation and amortization.

There is a choice -what to produce.But it is difficult, because one can produce something that was not intended to be produced: the person making money, in fact, turns out to be creating art. And vice versa - very often. Moreover, the most intensive production process can do nothing. So is in the "Passion" film by Godard where the heroes do the movie day and night and in parallel make love, all this selflessly and without result. There was no result for the known reason - the light was not the same. Not the light. But there was another reason - only the process is important here, it is the only result. “That”, exactly that needed light just doesn’t exist

Production removes intimacy from any process. Or sacredness. It does not matter what kind of process it is - sewing boots or making children. Production is neutral, although it can once again be endowed with intimacy or sacredness through the experience of the process by its participants or witnesses. The action “The Piglet makes gifts” is conceived as the most common thing, daily and familiar. True, certainly backstage.

Still, there are taboo topics (although this is so strange - after all), and the theme of the killed chicken, the theme of the pig -  among them. There are no potencies of something heroic or didactic in this topic. It lacks food for great passions, and a small vegetarian idea of love for everything alive is easily covered by the pragmatic idea of necessity. About a pretty little lamb and then about the delicious mutton somehow it's not customary to say. Because - why? Childish spontaneity is unforgivable when you are long bearded. All this is somehow inappropriate. One whole is the Central Market, the other is the Gallery. In a word, why?

The author of the project Oleg Kulik has his own “active cause”. He believes that a reference to the human body or animal body as a material would nowhere be as natural as we have it. So no, calm musical Vienna - and “agressive Vienna citizens”. And we are barely touched body art. However, no matter where, the material is mastered by art, so with the causa materialis, as it used to be called from Aristotle to Heidegger, everything is in order.

The problem is different.

Nowhere, Kulik says, the issue of rights and borders does not look as rhetorical as here. Bloody baptism of the Rus (who gave the right!), the reforms of Ivan the Terrible, Peter the Great (who gave the right?), "People's happiness" with Lenin and Stalin (who gave the right!). Everything around us is so poisoned by violence and lack of freedom that the usual "expansion of the boundaries of art" by Western standards could look simply monstrous.

And here is only a specially pig-fed for the market, checked by veterinarians, is an excellent pig. Well, what does the "blood clearance on conscience" mean? What does the "chronicle of the announced murder" mean? Perhaps, the group "Nicholay" should be classified as a group of hired assassins as well? Come on, it's really embarrassing, gentlemen.

It's not about Christian babies. It is, in general, the process of pork productioт, about the penultimate stage of it – and you have to complete the process yourself. It's normal.

Although we will not dissemble. There is its share of shocking in this action. What is the blatant blasphemy of the name, not hidden under the same "acting reason": the main thing is to call it properly in the Russian situation. Under one good name, we may say “construction of bright future”, we can destroy half of the mankind. However, we are not at a riot - we are at the gallery. And again the same question arises - why? Why at the gallery, then?

There is familiar temptation – briefly and abruptly unsubscribe by Heidegger: “The driving cause (causa efficient) (it is the cause, forcing the producer to act, “master” –. L. B.) decisively determines all causality. The point is that the main cause of "causa finalis" in general is no longer attributed to causality”.

But there are other thoughts as well.

The latest report on the loss of art (October 1991) speaks through the mouth of Bonito Oliva about the death of a work of art, a separate independent work of art. On the death of Gioconda, who continues to smile at us from the Louvre day and night with absolute mystery and absolutely ineffectual.

“Today there is no distance between the production of the artist's works and their consumption, "the critic writes. Today, art is the study of the time interval between a short exposure, an exhibition and subsequent information about it. The artist's goal is to prolong, intensify the information process, constantly being exposed to inflation. The artist's goal is a direct translation of what is happening to him. This broadcast is not an invention of television, Socrates used this method with his questions and answers, seeking not the truth, but the opportunity to define philosophy. The art of today is the search for an opportunity to define art, the tautological assertion of one's existence. Only direct translation can approve a contemporary artist as part of our present tense (present tense).

The artist today (and not so much in our general present tense as in his own present continuous) develops and preserves forms free of burdening content that only reduces the speed of circulation of these forms as purely signifying”, - Bonito Oliva assumes. Speaking in other words, art today - it is the process of its production, the production process, practically inseparable from the process of consumption. Today's art is our adventure at the exhibition, the memory and the story about it, these are the questions that come to your mind, and those answers that you can get.

“Paradoxical situation, but I will speak specifically”, - as the convicted Skvortsov told the artist Ivan Chuikov at an exhibition in Butyrskaya prison.

I will be concrete. When i watch “Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma” Pasolini, I understand, that it is about the productionary process. Do politics, create the system – it is a fascinating process, though disgusting. (Making a move is also a fascinating process, and that is crucial). The analysis of technology does not imply any emotions like "is it painful for this gear!”.

Everything in life is ultimately a production process, and everything can be considered so. Although it can be treated differently.

According to the script of the ritual action of the priest, poet, grammar and criticism, one should begin with "dismemberment, separation of the original unity (be it a victim or a text)” (Е. Barabanov “Place of Art”). With this, the chopping of the pig begins.

“Death of the Piglet” (aka. “Death of the Author”, “Death of the Masterpiece”) and the cutting of his beef, conceived as logical, and, most importantly, the skillful completion of his participation in the production process, can be the beginning of another process – the process of a direct and exciting broadcast on April 11.

I doubt that the issue of the teardrop of the Universal Child will be sharply raised, although I do not presume to guess all possible questions and all the answers to them.

Let's wait a little – the taste and smell of the emerging context will be determined directly during the live broadcast and immediately after, without separating production from consumption.

 

 

Lyudmila Bredikhina

“Arguing about tastes and smells…”

(from “Diary of the Festival”)