Superficial Aesthetics
Adrijana Gvozdenovic, Denis Maksimov. "Superficial Aesthetics", installation, the HAL, Antwerp (BE), 2015
One year before meeting each other in Belgium, Denis Maksimov and Adrijana Gvozdenovic both visited Estonian Pavilion at the 55th Venice Biennale Arte and took with them one copy of Denes Farkas white books, which themselves were the part of the larger installation. Maksimov chose the book with the title “Aesthetics” and Gvozdenovic picked up “Superficial”. Both had taken the books in order to use them for intervention of their own. Maksimov has used the book for creation of hand-written summary of re-approach of “aesthetics” in philosophy and theory, Gvozdenovic printed in the book dimensions of understanding of the contextualisation of “superficiality”. Installation “Superficial Aesthetics” acts as materialisation of seemingly impossible, but omnipresent connection between people: the magic moment when logic and intuition are becoming one.
2 books, 14 prints of the insides. The installation was presented at the group exhibition “Love Will Tear Us Apart” at the HAL, Antwerp, Belgium in February 2015.
Existential threats to fiction posed by future political changes
Lecture-performance of Adrijana Gvozdenovic and Denis Maksimov, the HAL, Antwerp, 2015
Fictional characters are facing an existential threat. It is posed by institutionalisation of internet and digital field in a desperate attempt of nation-states to stay relevant in the age, when flags, banners and anthems should become part of history and look at as rudiments just as slavery and medieval witch hunt. There is a strong backing from absolute majority of countries for establishing ‘territorial borders’ in the internet, a move that is challenging the very nature of internet as extraterritorial space, beyond Westphalian and nationalist frames.
3 principles of Internet and digital data storage guarantee preserving the internet as the space of opportunities and deconstruction of dictated by domination and power imposed reality. Failing in them will be what meteor hit was for dinosaurs.
1. Neutrality
simultaneous access & leveraging speed of the connection without preferences
We are coming to a moment when internet access of a certain speed would be a privilege, given to certain people. Faster networks for state promoted information leads majority to choose state subsidised information channels and be brainwashed. Take the case of TV in Russia (with Rain TV channel ///) and 1 channel - and you arrive to 86% of support for Putin and mass delusions about fascists everywhere but not at home. When only state-controlled or one group of elite aligned information distribution channels are available at higher speed to people, it is proven that users will prefer to use higher speed networks. If the network with higher speed offered in line with others, sooner or later absolute majority would switch for it, as researches show.
If the fictive or not aligned with the state network providers would be cut off the speedy connections and infrastructure will be fractured, we risk arrive to a moment where there will be no more possibility to challenge the narration of reality only by limited number of actors. We have oligarchy in everything: energy and food production are among examples. Network access oligarchy will lead to a high risk of mass manipulations and mass delusions, driven by desire to communicate ‘reality’ profitable for certain interest group.
2. Extra-territoriality
territorialisation of server data storage, digital Westphalisation and nationalism vs. opening domains and multiple storage options & dynamic copying and back ups of data by multiple actors
We tend to move in the digital ‘cloud’. Our lives depend on the digital data already in big extent and in the future this dependency is going to amplify. Where our data will be stored is for now the question that is answered by yourself, but this freedom is about to be taken away. Primarily Germany is worrying about storing personal data of it’s citizens beyond it’s territory. German government’s paranoia, which is justified by certain cultural factors around violating privacy concerns, can lead to what I’d call territorialisation of the Internet. It is not that Internet did not have territorial mapping before that - domains are still managed on .(country) mainly. This is one of the things that has to be liberated for the sake of making Internet more of a ‘thing in itself’, a space of opportunities, instead of what it is seemingly becoming now - just another network of supporting power infrastructures, like television. Ambiguity and chaos of Internet is a guarantee of innovation, disruption and is executes permanent function of ‘Damocles sword’ hanging above the heads of usurpation of political, economic and cultural power. It did not realise it’s potential even to the slightest extent yet, while the power structures already appropriated and categorised it as an existential threat to them and made a far-fetched decision of limiting it to a tight bureaucratic control.
Facebook, Instagram and (to some extent) Google, despite prejudices, for the moment guarantee us much more extraterritorial freedom than our very own national passports. If you upload a picture on Facebook, it is stored on several servers of the social network, which are (in most of the cases) physically located on different continents. If tomorrow there will be a revolution, let’s say, in Philippines and server field of Facebook will be destroyed by angry mob - your data is automatically backed up in several other locations. Constant transfer of the data between servers provide high level of protection, probability of overall collapse of all of the servers at the same time is very low. You are backed up.
On the pre-text of defending citizens’ privacy, political elites want to take away on of the few available tools for individual independence from territorially-based external institutional frameworks, called states.
3. Fictiality
grey area between fiction and reality, keeping ambiguity for the sake of fighting manipulations of narration by power structures, anonymity of the authorship which provides potential for liberation and structural changes
Postmodernism and poststructuralism are not the darlings of the political strategists and planners. Their vagueness is too unpredictable and provides a big room for possibilities to create alternative disruptive actors of social, political and cultural changes. When elites perform cooptation of members on the basis of inheritance, largely ignoring meritocratic component and importance of talent, change and development - we get the society of retrogrades, just like it seems to be happening today in more and more places around the world. Disruptive technologies and networks give us the hope for potential of evolutional, civilised change of the society towards universal enlightenment.
Playing the roles situated between fiction and reality will not be possible any longer. You are either fictive or real. Identity of content creator would have to be confirmed by finger print or eye scan of your computer. Can artist create alter-egos, fictive individuals or groups to make a point or just to speculate in this environment, where his identity is automatically tracked?
Literature and achievements of postmodernism, that is questioning hard narratives of our reality and history, are challenged and turned back on the wheels of reincarnation of Westphalian in the classic tradition of Otto von Bismarck. Realpolitik revival with cold resource assessments of cost/benefits in the area of humane is back as well. Atrocities of new wars can be justified again, just like in WWI or WWII and other horrors of human history. Love is reduced to biology, storytelling - to propaganda.
Establishing border between fiction and reality is a bullet in a head of relativity of narration. Useful tools of social and political progress, like irony, are placed therefore in the box of ridiculous. Humour, fiction, literature, poetry loses it’s political power and plays role of mindless spectacle for plebs.
More information about the installation