Everybody, who reads 1984, was crazy about Big Brother’s policy of rendering memoryless. Yes, Dear Winston Smith, the history is erased and rewritten but how it happens that you may forget so fast?
While the world is globalized, as world citizens we are rendered memoryless. “White” and black are intermingled. The dystopia of Orwell becomes true. “The citizen at the street”, who is the unique subject of statistics, has no name. We lose the resisting points that we own one by one. Becoming a ghetto expresses completely deprivation, beyond being a word defining deprivation regions. The art, which is among last humanitarian intervention means that may protect its existence as long as it resists to global capital, can be counted as the most typical symbol of human deprivation from now on!
With the expression that we often repeat at last years, Istanbul becomes a “center of attraction”. While urban transformation projects are implemented slowly, we witness that the capital of West with art and culture focus starts to flow to Istanbul. The infertility that the West lives in artistic and cultural meaning, with a more realistic explanation, the hollowing of culture capital the contemporary art quite much provide the Western eye to turn towards East once more. The West staying without material used firstly the “other one” at its own periphery again by rendering other: For last twenty years, the most striking works of contemporary art came out of immigrants and immigration. Now the West of capital – the capital of West is following the “other one” outside.
The city, which is cradle of the civilization, is also the site of stratification, social dissolution and advancement according to general modernist opinion. While making the definition of a city, Marxist analysis emphasizes the class discrimination, the domination of a class upon the other one. Today it is quite obvious in which definition we may include Istanbul. With “neo” prefix, liberal model of “Leave them do” dominates also the art identity of Istanbul. The basic opposition between the pure production targeting a limited buyer consisting of producers only and the production to satisfy the expectations of masses that the economy discipline determined describes also very well art medium of Istanbul. The shadow game being formed by adding prestige to the prestige of the enterprise, which is sponsor of culture art foundation that it established; that the smallest section prepared for itself is executed with success. While doing this, the status quo changes inside the class are never forgotten and the “tulips” at various colors are distributed upon different prices as class badge. At café-bar of a private museum, the Bosphorus landscape is sold. The house and atelier of Kuzgun Acar are restored and becomes “the delightful Ottoman and palace kitchen restaurant”.(1) Art heritage of an era is eaten tastefully with accompaniment of beautiful memoirs. You can be “Museum Friend” of another museum, people may profit from privileges by expressing their distinction level as much as their moneys suffice!
The minority, who owns the capital, is conscious of that the consumption doesn’t only create social differences, but at the same time establishes those times after times. Departing from here, it produces imitations among the mass that it standardizes by presenting the art, and creates its new consumers by itself. Especially after 90s, as the change of production relations brings the market domination of white collars, Istanbul is made a business metropolis in the direction of the benefits of new middle class. On one hand the city is cleared from the “dirt” too. “Prestige villas”, “residences” are planned to be built by destruction of İMÇ; AKM is wanted to be destructed by neglecting its short and intense site history; the public area is narrowed; while the regions such as Sulukule, Tarlabaşı are gifted to real estate rent, their inhabitants are aimed to be exiled outside the city. The presentation of art and culture as a popular material to strange and estranged tourist is completed by gentrification of the city by neoliberal policies.
Asmalımescit is converted into “Soho”, while retro comes into fashion again, there are “parties” for 80s, where the left of the country was squeezed first and then grubbed up if the expression is right; the guests coming to Istanbul Biennial are hosted at Pera Palas; being “New Yorker” is in fashion; the favorite site is Babylon; the most beautiful music is “techno with Eastern sound”; the new “trend” at art is contemporary art, whose ground has slipped but as “political” as possible, at a site around Tunnel if possible, inside formal ordinariness whatever its material is but having the claim of being content depth. While the motto of “world city” is a definition leaning on business relations, because of the integration with world art industry, the art is also included inside these frontiers, too. While all of these are lived besides, Istanbul enters among the cities that take the “European Culture Capital” nomination. Well intentioned volunteers, who want to convert this opportunity into the benefit of the city and citizen by saying that it is their duty, and their intentions are boiled inside globalization soup. Local governments lead at strengthening the relations with capital. For instance, Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality organizes a conference at June and declares the aim of the conference as “discussing last developments and trends at world by bringing together municipality staff, international organization managers, academicians, advisors, who are expert in culture and creative industries domains” and certainly “company managers from Turkey and abroad”.(2) At sessions having titles such as “Policies and Predictions For Culture Industries: Global Approaches”, “Culture Industries and Urban Economic Development at 21st century”, “International Commerce of Culture Industry Products” and “The Role of Creative Activities Sets At The Process of Making The Cities A Brand”, people among, whom there aren’t any single artist and of whom the general consists of directly company of company-like the universities or managers of different culture institutions, discuss the industrialization of the culture and how Istanbul will be marketed.
The “culture industry” is continually repeated through neglecting Adorno, by a large section including art environments. However, it is absolutely possible to adapt to today what he determined years ago: Adorno said that the consideration of human who took place inside industrial society, as an industrial product, I mean the becoming of human any object, “human material” with the expression of advertisement, causes his “becoming a thing”. The culture industry obstructs the estrangement of the individual to the system and captures him. The masses are not its criteria but its ideology. The autonomy of the artwork is canceled by the culture industry consciously inside or outside the will of control mechanism.
Once more the system invents various methods for using the purified labor, art production of the human in direction of its own benefits. The reduction of art into fun is lanced as “descending to street”, “attracting the interest of the citizen”; the art is hollowed, too.
The ones, who want to be “Occidental” see the West not as it is, but as they desire it to be; as the seeing of an orientalist, who wants to make the East a research object, in his desired manner. As a result, by creating “other” ones inside us we look at ourselves from West. Now it is necessary to ask and produce answer choices by assuming that we accept all of these: May the making of Istanbul the culture capital create a spontaneous change at lives of the other face of Istanbul, millions of humans belonging to “service sector” growing rapidly for that white collars can consume much more and live a more sterile life; or a slight change at their life area?
Endnotes
1 http://www.d-park.com.tr/hakkimizda.html
2 http://www.cci2007.com/tr/index.html
english etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster
english etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster
9 Kasım 2007 Cuma
Kitsch of Art
The ones at the side of handcraftsmanship against modernist methods rising at 19’th century were qualified as “nostalgic” within time. Because also the almost squeezing by modernist art, of Art Nouveau which is accepted with the hope of getting rid of the deadlock where Western Art entered, which may be counted as last resistance of embellishment, is indicator of this. However the “homemade” adjective being settled at minds as a criteria from this era turned around and faced us in form of kitsch at 20’th century! Art Nouveau movement being adopted for reaching people’s joy of life with esthetical pleasure inside daily usage by targeting the standing against the machine entering between human and material, may be qualified today as “kitsch” with its excessively fragile elegance and excess embellishment. At this writing, let’s try to dig under the kitsch concept which was produced to create contradiction, but couldn’t get rid of contradiction within itself. Even let’s increase our daring, and let’s explain the condemnation to method and idea infertility, of the one in effort of making exist itself only through its opposite!
Although kitsch arises from “socializing” goodwill, at the end its being the one “addressing to low appreciation level” hosts under it an ulterior motive which cannot be quite hidden. Because according to this idea, the general one has low appreciation level!(1) At his famous article “Avant-garde and Kitsch”, while Clement Greenberg was proposing that kitsch was a resisting way against consumption culture of Modernist art, he couldn’t yet get rid of the influences of the ideas putting forth Art Nouveau. Not much later than the article of Greenberg, the conversion of Pop Art from its criticizing the system by using images being appropriated to the system, to the point where it started to produce discourses for affirmation of the system is almost like a lesson of the history. Whatever the esthetical and ethical matter of the producing one, the addressing to kitsch by taking what the one being appropriated to general one has at its hand for criticizing the general with it, reminds the bad destiny of Pop Art. However almost for a century, the production of kitsch continues. The departing point is the same: pulling the art to an anti-elitist line against being unique.
The cultural logic of multinational Capitalism (postmodernism), “kitsch” as esthetical values at art brought to popular level concepts such as “kemp”, “pastiche”, “retro” in purposely kitsch meaning. It rendered them the substance of the uncertainty where entertainment and art were intermingled. It made this with an indifference situation inside an enthusiastic radicalism by adopting cynically the ironic criticism on purpose. Thus the opening of kitsch at art is by now quite far from the its popular, consequently low value, i.e. common definition. Hoe one arrived to this point may be explained by departing from the simulation theory of Baudrillard. Baudrillard mentions firstly about that the human emulating the nature renders it the object of the art with mimesis, i.e. imitation. However he says that within time human fills the example lack being created by the splitting from the nature, with the object itself again, and from here he arrives to simulation theory.(2) The art starts to imitate the imitation. The kitsch provided its “reality” very higher than naturalness level, i.e. in excessive level with imitation of the imitation. Because that it is based on repetitions while being produced among ready patterns, it could be nothing but the repetition of life rules. As it may be claimed for some ones, the claim of that the need for sincerity is felt so that the kitsch can be kitsch, is stalled off at the very beginning with the settling of this concept itself on insincerity at the very beginning. Right here, the looking at the art of our day with the aim of witnessing how the kitsch which is the limpid form of “homemade” sensibility is converted into its opposite, will help us to clarify the matter.
The first name which may come to mind when kitsch is said is Jeff Koons certainly who decided and became an artist while he was broker at Wall Street. The big dogs that he made at city squares out of simple and brilliant material or his several similar works are productions as typical as to bring us to the definition of kitsch. Koons’ porcelain statuettes are the again Art Nouveau based reinterpretation of a part of the tradition of people to embellish their homes. The cheapest, ingenious invention of 20’th century convertible in every form, the petroleum remain plastic is a material often used by artists like Koons who produce kitsch. Then, what is the situation at our country while a kitsch producer like Koons still works at West?
We are at year 2007 and today our recent past years 80s are accepted as kitsch with everything. It is interesting, the years where kitsch in Western meaning starts to appear in our country overlap with this period. With September 12’th intervention, the cancellation of obstacles in front of the passage to open market economy, the social depoliticization, the bourgeoisie being integrated with global capital, new privileged professionals whose welfare levels increase with the roles that they play within these relations, Turkey which is opened to West, especially to USA as a new market... Art galleries being spread in quantity and space... The artist’s and art theorist’s assuming a “professional” identity, their becoming distinguished with the neo liberal conversion being lived. Under these circumstances, while some artists produce anew the avant-garde heritage, they start to gather material for themselves from the box of humor. At nightmare years where the criticism was condemned to be hidden, the kitsch production with its humoristic property ought to be counted as criticism by artists. However when all circumstances are evaluated, the main reason of kitsch production at 80s may be seen as the mentioned social conversion and then imposing itself of an American life style.
Gülsün Karamustafa who works contemporary art for years with her different style, since her early periods so far, is among names who rendered kitsch inevitable one of art form. “The Pains Are Mine” dated 1981 where she “criticizes” arabesque which monopolized every kind of popular product of the era and rendered it the culture of lower class, is a typical kitsch art. Again “The Prayer Rug With Elvis” which has usage value, I mean being produced as a real prayer rug is dated year 1986. Another work of Karamustafa “Starwars” shows a villager woman of which the name of the movie is written on the t-shirt. The quite impossibility of this woman’s being fanatic of Starwars pushes the spectator to think upon what the work relates or whom it criticizes why.
Nationalism too which is accepted as one of the most important values of the society has been the material of kitsch. At “Super Turk” work of Halil Altındere, the typical “Turk figure” with moustache and superman t-shirt is a way of rendering Turkism comic. Although the nationalism almost permeating deeply upon masses is a quite back position from the perspective of political consciousness, here the overlapping of its criticism with rendering lower classes comic doesn’t give a quite ethical impression. Again the work of Altındere where he shows Marlboro box being squeezed inside white sock deciphers lower classes having the “philistinism” of wearing white sock, but at rudeness not abstaining from smoking Marlboro. Another artist Şener Özmen’s fictitious character’s name “Abdülbaki Readymade” too who kidnaps Tracy Emin has a similar attitude.
Another theme that artists who target being traditional and who make this by presenting it to the regards of the “other one” through bringing under spots only at art medium without adding anything upon what is traditional, address, is “inside home”. The “producer mind” tending to expose enters into a kind of process of rejecting itself by being directed towards not so far without doubt, but its own home. Halil Altındere’s “My Mother Likes Fluxus Because Fluxus Is An Anti-Art” dated year 2002 is one of the examples only. Again Şener Özmen’s “The Work” where he shows two woman who blow up balloons of plastic with balloons with all of their seriousness, is a cynical work referring to futile work, idle time, i.e. emptiness, parodying the poor family women’s requirement of getting small work to home for earning money, and making this without having any smallest belief in that the circumstances will change. At art, this way of showing the poverty reveals a situation of getting pleasure form pains anyway. At this example, the house medium where the women are has a “perfect” reality which cannot be fictionalized.
The fiction is the means of damaging the reality of the “real one”. The fiction describing the real one with exaggeration is the easiest way of bringing the real one to the most far point from where it is. A kitsch snapshot departing from the idea of adding a photograph to the artist Ahmet Öğüt’s interview(!) with Şener Özmen as if interviewing, is in form where the fiction starts and where the reality ends are mixed up quite a lot with each other. The attitude being exemplified with this work arrives at the result to claiming that there isn’t such thing as reality. However what is forgotten is that the tragic reality is always on the outlook for arriving anew!
Again Ahmet Öğüt’s work taking as subject first Turkish car “Revolution” with the same name, is because of the car’s almost complete fabrication with hand, with his own expression. At this work, the big interest for craft brought together with it inevitably rendering kitsch as attitude. Because Revolution is drawn to the wall of Platform Garanti Contemporary Art Center again by hand!
One of the works at “Class Hegemony in Contemporary Art” exhibition being realized at month April in Platform Garanti Contemporary Art Center, denounces obviously the bad intention of the one producing kitsch. At the exhibition, San Keller photographed the houses of artists’ families for showing how they exhibit the works of their children at home. The generation gap between mother-father hanging Mona Lisa reproduction which is maybe studentship work of their children right near the stove and the artist child is lanced as a kind of culture difference.(3)
The parading this culture difference which cannot be certainly denied, by rendering it kitsch cannot be defended. Also the works of Burcu Günay, Cengiz Tekin or Volkan Aslan render the life areas of parents the material of the art with spectacle focus. The photographs taken by Neriman Polat from Hafriyat group for the exhibition “Proper To Family” are of kind rendering ironically myth the “Guest Room” that mothers prepare with care or rendering kitsch the handcraft lace etc. works. However not the lace itself, but the mother making the lace is the real material of kitsch by now!
The work of Selda Asal named “My Home My Sweet Home” parodies “bad art appreciation” by showing in the middle, inside a red lake an old house remains within a gold latten frame. Another work “We Are Not Who You Think” from “At the Lap of The Bourgeoisie” exhibition at Platform Garanti gets similar strategies as principle. The producer of the work Annika Erikkson advised to security element of the gallery Fevzi Çakmak to select the painting that he likes from Garanti Bank painting collection and exhibited them at the exhibition in a squeezed manner.
Here the “philistinism” of the society by the eye of someone from the lower class is delivered to the initiative of a person visiting the gallery with a smile at his face.(4) “Kitsch” that artists made accept with their being right in corrupted order criticism is converted into insult to victims of corrupted order. The producer endeavors to clear himself.
Today the artists create kitsch by using their own codes, after having taken mass culture from the hands of the mass. This hides behind it the motive of strengthening his place against the mass even his creativity. Even today kitsch is created at art with least intervention never having been in its history. The one producing kitsch as level lowness at popular meaning, i.e. not the society but the intellectual mind interpreting it, rendering it subject to categorization, deciphering it is in situation of being the real producer.
Baudrillard says “Contemporary art renders the past a play and kitsch, and includes in its account.” and continues; “This recycling operation is a kind of fossilized irony. This irony is the last phase of the art history. It is as if the art searches as history its own rescue way inside remains by fiddling about its own garbage cans.”(5) In such a medium, the aiming criticism with kitsch making itself exist creates a quite dangerous situation. Because what seems criticism, aware or not, approves the system today.(6) Moreover while doing this, it doesn’t allow the spectator to conceive the situation, because the resolving hidden meaning behind kitsch is “expert” work. Consequently the producer who doesn’t leave to anybody the opposition which should be made puts his correspondent spectator under the domination of his dominant discourse with the tools at his hand!
Art and life became intricate in a way that 20’th century avant-gardes couldn2t guess quite. However in a medium where everything is inserted into esthetical domain, the existence, what’ness of art is doubtful. At this point, let’s leave the last word to Hermann Broch: “The kitsch producer, whoever he is... should not be evaluated with esthetic values, the morality of the person producing kitsch is bad; he is a guilty desiring the worst.”(7)
Endnotes
1 For the writing where the relation of the mentioned concept with popular level is discussed sociologically, look at: Hasan Bülent Kahraman, Artistic Realities, Facts and Beyond, “Kitsch: A Regard Essay From The Perspectives of Esthetics-Sociology and Turkey Essay”, Everest Publishing, İstanbul 2002, pp: 237-252.
2 Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation, Translated by Oğuz Adanır, East-West Publishing, İstanbul 2003.
3 This photograph is taken again from the house of artist Ahmet Öğüt’s family living at Diyarbakır.
4 For the sharp spoken writing explaining this exhibition in detail, look at: Elif Dastarlı, “At The Lap of the Bourgeoisie”, rh+sanart magazine, Issue 38, March 2007, pp: 26-31.
5 Jean Baudrillard, Illusion, Lost Illusion and Esthetics, East-West Magazine, Issue: 19 May-June-July 2002, Translated by Oğuz Adanır, pp: 9-29.
6 For the writing at “hurting” obviousness about the form of kitsch at our day, look at: Ahmet Oktay, Art and Politics, “Kitsch Society and Its Human” and “Few More Words Upon Kitsch”, Everest Publishing, İstanbul 2004, pp: 284-294.
7 Donald Kuspit communicating from Hermann Broch, In The End of Art, Translated by Yasemin Tezgiden, Metis Publishing, February 2006, p. 13.
Although kitsch arises from “socializing” goodwill, at the end its being the one “addressing to low appreciation level” hosts under it an ulterior motive which cannot be quite hidden. Because according to this idea, the general one has low appreciation level!(1) At his famous article “Avant-garde and Kitsch”, while Clement Greenberg was proposing that kitsch was a resisting way against consumption culture of Modernist art, he couldn’t yet get rid of the influences of the ideas putting forth Art Nouveau. Not much later than the article of Greenberg, the conversion of Pop Art from its criticizing the system by using images being appropriated to the system, to the point where it started to produce discourses for affirmation of the system is almost like a lesson of the history. Whatever the esthetical and ethical matter of the producing one, the addressing to kitsch by taking what the one being appropriated to general one has at its hand for criticizing the general with it, reminds the bad destiny of Pop Art. However almost for a century, the production of kitsch continues. The departing point is the same: pulling the art to an anti-elitist line against being unique.
The cultural logic of multinational Capitalism (postmodernism), “kitsch” as esthetical values at art brought to popular level concepts such as “kemp”, “pastiche”, “retro” in purposely kitsch meaning. It rendered them the substance of the uncertainty where entertainment and art were intermingled. It made this with an indifference situation inside an enthusiastic radicalism by adopting cynically the ironic criticism on purpose. Thus the opening of kitsch at art is by now quite far from the its popular, consequently low value, i.e. common definition. Hoe one arrived to this point may be explained by departing from the simulation theory of Baudrillard. Baudrillard mentions firstly about that the human emulating the nature renders it the object of the art with mimesis, i.e. imitation. However he says that within time human fills the example lack being created by the splitting from the nature, with the object itself again, and from here he arrives to simulation theory.(2) The art starts to imitate the imitation. The kitsch provided its “reality” very higher than naturalness level, i.e. in excessive level with imitation of the imitation. Because that it is based on repetitions while being produced among ready patterns, it could be nothing but the repetition of life rules. As it may be claimed for some ones, the claim of that the need for sincerity is felt so that the kitsch can be kitsch, is stalled off at the very beginning with the settling of this concept itself on insincerity at the very beginning. Right here, the looking at the art of our day with the aim of witnessing how the kitsch which is the limpid form of “homemade” sensibility is converted into its opposite, will help us to clarify the matter.
The first name which may come to mind when kitsch is said is Jeff Koons certainly who decided and became an artist while he was broker at Wall Street. The big dogs that he made at city squares out of simple and brilliant material or his several similar works are productions as typical as to bring us to the definition of kitsch. Koons’ porcelain statuettes are the again Art Nouveau based reinterpretation of a part of the tradition of people to embellish their homes. The cheapest, ingenious invention of 20’th century convertible in every form, the petroleum remain plastic is a material often used by artists like Koons who produce kitsch. Then, what is the situation at our country while a kitsch producer like Koons still works at West?
We are at year 2007 and today our recent past years 80s are accepted as kitsch with everything. It is interesting, the years where kitsch in Western meaning starts to appear in our country overlap with this period. With September 12’th intervention, the cancellation of obstacles in front of the passage to open market economy, the social depoliticization, the bourgeoisie being integrated with global capital, new privileged professionals whose welfare levels increase with the roles that they play within these relations, Turkey which is opened to West, especially to USA as a new market... Art galleries being spread in quantity and space... The artist’s and art theorist’s assuming a “professional” identity, their becoming distinguished with the neo liberal conversion being lived. Under these circumstances, while some artists produce anew the avant-garde heritage, they start to gather material for themselves from the box of humor. At nightmare years where the criticism was condemned to be hidden, the kitsch production with its humoristic property ought to be counted as criticism by artists. However when all circumstances are evaluated, the main reason of kitsch production at 80s may be seen as the mentioned social conversion and then imposing itself of an American life style.
Gülsün Karamustafa who works contemporary art for years with her different style, since her early periods so far, is among names who rendered kitsch inevitable one of art form. “The Pains Are Mine” dated 1981 where she “criticizes” arabesque which monopolized every kind of popular product of the era and rendered it the culture of lower class, is a typical kitsch art. Again “The Prayer Rug With Elvis” which has usage value, I mean being produced as a real prayer rug is dated year 1986. Another work of Karamustafa “Starwars” shows a villager woman of which the name of the movie is written on the t-shirt. The quite impossibility of this woman’s being fanatic of Starwars pushes the spectator to think upon what the work relates or whom it criticizes why.
Nationalism too which is accepted as one of the most important values of the society has been the material of kitsch. At “Super Turk” work of Halil Altındere, the typical “Turk figure” with moustache and superman t-shirt is a way of rendering Turkism comic. Although the nationalism almost permeating deeply upon masses is a quite back position from the perspective of political consciousness, here the overlapping of its criticism with rendering lower classes comic doesn’t give a quite ethical impression. Again the work of Altındere where he shows Marlboro box being squeezed inside white sock deciphers lower classes having the “philistinism” of wearing white sock, but at rudeness not abstaining from smoking Marlboro. Another artist Şener Özmen’s fictitious character’s name “Abdülbaki Readymade” too who kidnaps Tracy Emin has a similar attitude.
Another theme that artists who target being traditional and who make this by presenting it to the regards of the “other one” through bringing under spots only at art medium without adding anything upon what is traditional, address, is “inside home”. The “producer mind” tending to expose enters into a kind of process of rejecting itself by being directed towards not so far without doubt, but its own home. Halil Altındere’s “My Mother Likes Fluxus Because Fluxus Is An Anti-Art” dated year 2002 is one of the examples only. Again Şener Özmen’s “The Work” where he shows two woman who blow up balloons of plastic with balloons with all of their seriousness, is a cynical work referring to futile work, idle time, i.e. emptiness, parodying the poor family women’s requirement of getting small work to home for earning money, and making this without having any smallest belief in that the circumstances will change. At art, this way of showing the poverty reveals a situation of getting pleasure form pains anyway. At this example, the house medium where the women are has a “perfect” reality which cannot be fictionalized.
The fiction is the means of damaging the reality of the “real one”. The fiction describing the real one with exaggeration is the easiest way of bringing the real one to the most far point from where it is. A kitsch snapshot departing from the idea of adding a photograph to the artist Ahmet Öğüt’s interview(!) with Şener Özmen as if interviewing, is in form where the fiction starts and where the reality ends are mixed up quite a lot with each other. The attitude being exemplified with this work arrives at the result to claiming that there isn’t such thing as reality. However what is forgotten is that the tragic reality is always on the outlook for arriving anew!
Again Ahmet Öğüt’s work taking as subject first Turkish car “Revolution” with the same name, is because of the car’s almost complete fabrication with hand, with his own expression. At this work, the big interest for craft brought together with it inevitably rendering kitsch as attitude. Because Revolution is drawn to the wall of Platform Garanti Contemporary Art Center again by hand!
One of the works at “Class Hegemony in Contemporary Art” exhibition being realized at month April in Platform Garanti Contemporary Art Center, denounces obviously the bad intention of the one producing kitsch. At the exhibition, San Keller photographed the houses of artists’ families for showing how they exhibit the works of their children at home. The generation gap between mother-father hanging Mona Lisa reproduction which is maybe studentship work of their children right near the stove and the artist child is lanced as a kind of culture difference.(3)
The parading this culture difference which cannot be certainly denied, by rendering it kitsch cannot be defended. Also the works of Burcu Günay, Cengiz Tekin or Volkan Aslan render the life areas of parents the material of the art with spectacle focus. The photographs taken by Neriman Polat from Hafriyat group for the exhibition “Proper To Family” are of kind rendering ironically myth the “Guest Room” that mothers prepare with care or rendering kitsch the handcraft lace etc. works. However not the lace itself, but the mother making the lace is the real material of kitsch by now!
The work of Selda Asal named “My Home My Sweet Home” parodies “bad art appreciation” by showing in the middle, inside a red lake an old house remains within a gold latten frame. Another work “We Are Not Who You Think” from “At the Lap of The Bourgeoisie” exhibition at Platform Garanti gets similar strategies as principle. The producer of the work Annika Erikkson advised to security element of the gallery Fevzi Çakmak to select the painting that he likes from Garanti Bank painting collection and exhibited them at the exhibition in a squeezed manner.
Here the “philistinism” of the society by the eye of someone from the lower class is delivered to the initiative of a person visiting the gallery with a smile at his face.(4) “Kitsch” that artists made accept with their being right in corrupted order criticism is converted into insult to victims of corrupted order. The producer endeavors to clear himself.
Today the artists create kitsch by using their own codes, after having taken mass culture from the hands of the mass. This hides behind it the motive of strengthening his place against the mass even his creativity. Even today kitsch is created at art with least intervention never having been in its history. The one producing kitsch as level lowness at popular meaning, i.e. not the society but the intellectual mind interpreting it, rendering it subject to categorization, deciphering it is in situation of being the real producer.
Baudrillard says “Contemporary art renders the past a play and kitsch, and includes in its account.” and continues; “This recycling operation is a kind of fossilized irony. This irony is the last phase of the art history. It is as if the art searches as history its own rescue way inside remains by fiddling about its own garbage cans.”(5) In such a medium, the aiming criticism with kitsch making itself exist creates a quite dangerous situation. Because what seems criticism, aware or not, approves the system today.(6) Moreover while doing this, it doesn’t allow the spectator to conceive the situation, because the resolving hidden meaning behind kitsch is “expert” work. Consequently the producer who doesn’t leave to anybody the opposition which should be made puts his correspondent spectator under the domination of his dominant discourse with the tools at his hand!
Art and life became intricate in a way that 20’th century avant-gardes couldn2t guess quite. However in a medium where everything is inserted into esthetical domain, the existence, what’ness of art is doubtful. At this point, let’s leave the last word to Hermann Broch: “The kitsch producer, whoever he is... should not be evaluated with esthetic values, the morality of the person producing kitsch is bad; he is a guilty desiring the worst.”(7)
Endnotes
1 For the writing where the relation of the mentioned concept with popular level is discussed sociologically, look at: Hasan Bülent Kahraman, Artistic Realities, Facts and Beyond, “Kitsch: A Regard Essay From The Perspectives of Esthetics-Sociology and Turkey Essay”, Everest Publishing, İstanbul 2002, pp: 237-252.
2 Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation, Translated by Oğuz Adanır, East-West Publishing, İstanbul 2003.
3 This photograph is taken again from the house of artist Ahmet Öğüt’s family living at Diyarbakır.
4 For the sharp spoken writing explaining this exhibition in detail, look at: Elif Dastarlı, “At The Lap of the Bourgeoisie”, rh+sanart magazine, Issue 38, March 2007, pp: 26-31.
5 Jean Baudrillard, Illusion, Lost Illusion and Esthetics, East-West Magazine, Issue: 19 May-June-July 2002, Translated by Oğuz Adanır, pp: 9-29.
6 For the writing at “hurting” obviousness about the form of kitsch at our day, look at: Ahmet Oktay, Art and Politics, “Kitsch Society and Its Human” and “Few More Words Upon Kitsch”, Everest Publishing, İstanbul 2004, pp: 284-294.
7 Donald Kuspit communicating from Hermann Broch, In The End of Art, Translated by Yasemin Tezgiden, Metis Publishing, February 2006, p. 13.
After the nostalgia felt for new one; The sculptures of Füsun Onur which are not sculpture!*
“Solution” proposals were brought abundantly to when to call sculpture art as “chipping” is given up, how the sculpture can be defined in most right way other than its cliché definition “three dimensional art product”, where the frontiers of material which can be used to make sculpture can lean and similar problems through smallest or biggest, most colorful, easiest, most protesting, most participatory, most amusing, most amazing sculpture trials realized since nearly last fifty years at West. It is discussable whether there is something “solved”, however new trials continue to be made; anyway art never gives up producing new problems.
We don’t mention about this time; new artistic trials applied at West in an opposing way to making rules aspect of Modernism, are appropriated by Postmodernism with its dominant character of interdisciplinary, pluralist aspects and this caused a certain breaking at art. Since the second half of years 1960s, artists’ courage of using every kind of color and form, fact, event, their individual passions, dreams without hesitation was revealed. To use art itself as a material; the formula of highlighting the concept, what is wanted to be related, by pushing at back plane other value worries, conducted artists to play upon concepts. The most characteristic property of this situation maybe is its carrying messages like objecting to the society, showing the way, cautioning the society, at a quality triggering the form. Within the framework of fast changing era, a new artist typology was born: this was an artist getting as basic principle the criticizing approach, who sees in himself the authorization of questioning almost everything, using fast technological changes or revolting to technology while trying not to be squeezed under it, trying to change dimensions of art by going beyond the frontiers of traditional one with this aim.
Aside with countless trials at West, if a milestone is searched at our country in this direction, year 1967 faces us. Because this year is the date when Altan Gürman came back from France after completing his education and Füsun Onur from USA to Turkey. Gürman preserves his exceptional identity at contemporary Turkish art history as an artist who took painting education at Academy, tried to bring proposals upon basic problems of painting art, signed important works combining conceptualism with form at his works taken at hand with a political attitude. Füsun Onur is an artist having a similar perspective with him and taking at hand sculpture this time at the mentioned early time section. A doorstep of a new era in Turkish art is arrived with the artist who took sculpture education, however who will perpetuate her searches in the direction of going beyond sculpture during all of her art life.
Onur was a student at Ali Hadi Bara Atelier at a period when experimental works, different searches were intensified. After her education at Academy, she goes to USA at 1962, Maryland College of Art and comes back to country at 1967 with Master of art diploma. The geometric, sometimes completely abstract sculptures of Onur seen at these early period works of her, makes feel the effect of the different education that she took. Generally her early period works are artworks explicating, questioning basic concepts of sculpture, forcing the frontiers of this art, at forms rendered minimal. Nilgün Özayten who realized one of the important researches in Turkey upon Conceptual Art summarizes the artist in this context as “...One of the important contributions of Onur to Turkish art medium is that she caused questions, discussions and new perspectives at perception of art in the beginning of 1970s.”(1)
The first personal exhibition of the artist who makes wooden works at white painted structural quality since 1968 until the beginning of years 1970 is composed of geometric “sculptures” at which architectural heaviness is felt, at Taksim Municipality Gallery in year 1970. The works question in the context of depth together with front-back relations built by forms with each other, and “go beyond” the space in some meaning. After 1970 the artist deals mainly with decomposing the sculpture into its elements and thus pushing the mass problem to second plane, making stick out site and space facts providing the perception of the mass, at her works that she will exhibit almost each year and where she aims to change usual, cliché art definitions at spectator. The artist aims the passage to third dimension by deriving two dimensions form single one and folding the site in itself; while explicating verticality/horizontality concepts; elements like trace, surface, the passages and relations between them; formal changes that the site gains at the result. Her second exhibition at year 1972 presents first examples of her works explicating site and space facts. At works associating motion separately or wholly, depth emerges with thin intermingled forms distributed from a single center. One of the sculptures taking place at the exhibition is additionally important by that it allocates place for ready material. The artwork is inside a rectangular frame, a red balloon is hung at the extremity of one of the branches of this abstracted tree form with three branches. It should be underlined that the year is yet 1972.
Since this period she uses more and more transparent, reflective, soft, ready materials like glass, plexiglass, styrofoam and invented objects in a way overcoming the general perception at level of thinking that “sculpture” is marble monument. The first work that the artist who says “I used ready material when it was necessary.”(2), realized completely from ready material is at year 1973 because of works of artists aiming to protest upon the removing of a sculpture of Gürdal Duyar by Erbakan government with the reason that it was obscene. At her artwork named “Pomegranate Girl” where she questions moral comprehension, Onur cuts a plastic doll at horizontal planes, forms optic effects with the help of mirror and glass pieces.
At years 1973, 1974 and 1975, Füsun Onur enters into trials such as forming “time” concept through dividing the site into intervals, deriving two dimensions from single one, folding the site in itself with replacement traces and planes defining it. “Framework, Stone, Earth, Flower” (1977) and “You Said Bread, Apple, It Came Into My Mind” (1978) taking place among works realized at these years are artworks where she attracts attention especially to scope and content problem of the art, thus frontiers of art definition.
Fifth personal exhibition of Onur “From Outside To Inside, From Inside To Outside” dated 1978, is an exceptional example for her era from the perspective of that installation quality dominates with her multi piece order and way of using the site. Onur aims that “the spectator looks at the artwork by getting rid of all stereotypes settled in his head.”(3) The work realized with orange boxes and different ready materials, using wall and ground of the site commonly pushes the watcher to incline, to look at in multi directions, at the same time forces him to perceive the artwork as a whole too.
“They Were 3 Persons, Mind-Love-Peace” where cartoon, raffia, glitter and gelatin are used, dated 1977 is important in that Onur uses “writing” which is among basic materials of Conceptual Art in a way integrating the artwork. This work of three pieces inside three boxes has a relating structure expressing mind, love and peace concepts in an allegoric way as it is understood from its name too.
10 years after her first personal exhibition at year 1980, the artist applies anymore completely an installation to her exhibition “Associations From Bright Circle On The Ground” in Taksim Art Gallery. Onur who creates an art style proper to herself, starts to be interested with site concept from a different perspective this time since years 1980s, along with carrying her works to site, starts to carry the site to her works. The artwork which can be counted as the “extremity” of this approach is her installation named “Third Dimension At Painting, Come Inside” which won silver medal at New Inclinations Exhibition in 1981. The work has a form allowing penetration with dimensions 200 x 183 x 140 cm. Onur says “Why the painting should stay on the wall, in the frame? When we mention about the sculpture, should it be absolutely figure form? Are frontiers always separated as painting, sculpture? What are the possibilities of painting, the ones of sculpture? How are space, time used at painting and sculpture?” and adds “As ‘Third Dimension At Painting - Come Inside’ occurred with momentary activities as such, I want it to be looked at with accompaniment of these questions.”(4) Again “Counterpoint With Flowers” exhibition is among most typical examples which can be given for the distortion of frontiers between sculpture and other arts and passing to a new phase in our country. This artwork resembling to a big tent from blue material, where real-artificial intervened plants are placed inside, points out to the situation of the artist to force the watcher to different perceptions, to push him to wander around, to enter inside the artwork or to look at it from outside; concretizes almost the site concept. Because it is itself of exhibition area, at the moment when the watcher thinks that he enters to exhibition site, anyhow he enters to the site of the artist, his life area.
“Life, Art, Design, Dream Of Left Goods” dated 1985 where she exhibits some old materials “remaining” to her from some ones else, her installation “Mark Of The Mark” having the same name with the exhibition dated 1987 or her work named “Visible-Invisible The Ones That We Know-Don’t Know” at 8 Artists 8 Works B Exhibition in year 1991 are her other works where she continues to discuss concepts which can be listed as image, symbol, object, definition of art, its meaning. Within time Onur made the site a part of her work by removing it from being merely a space where her work is. “Shadow Game” that she realized at a hall of Harbiye Military Museum, which aims to make a criticizing reference to political and social structure of the era, is such a work by that it uses the window and radiator of the hall.
At 1970s her works towards going beyond the sculpture and herself in some sense, with light-shadow theme, starting to take at hand the site as problem, evolve at 1980s into installation highlighting space and time, with various designs where ready objects take place, at 1990s as sticking out of fragile, elegant materials. “Kadans” dated to year 1995 and her last personal exhibition “Prelude” at year 2001 show too that Füsun Onur arrives to new dimensions while spending effort to exit outside of painting and sculpture, even reaches a conceptualism in the line of Beuys. She thinks almost upon not durability of the art that she selected, but its “disappearance”, wants to make think.(5) The standing of Onur against traditionalized art comprehension is not only through art object and idea occurring with form-content, but also contains its value of change.
Without doubt there is a “denying” behind producing of Onur sculptures from temporary materials and his using these at her installations. The artist denies the stability of sculpture development in Turkey, not being able to pass from modernist concepts to postmodernist ones, explicating representation problem, however beyond this the seriousness of traditional or modernist sculpture and its farness to human.(6) While standing against conventional “tangible” reality of sculpture with her fragile works, along with several newness that she brought she is the first contemporary artist inserting permanence-temporariness fact in Turkish art. It should be emphasized that her comprehension of “new” is not the invented new one itself, but always a search.
* The basic source used for the writing; Elif Dastarlı, “The Medium, Circumstances, Discussions Forming Conceptual Art In Turkey Between Years 1970 – 1990 And The Place And Importance Of Füsun Onur As An Conceptual Artist In This Process”, Unpublished Graduate Thesis, Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University Social Sciences Institute Art History Master Department, Western Art and Contemporary Art Program, İstanbul, 2006.
Endnotes
1 Nilgün Özayten, “Conceptual Art”, Eczacıbaşı Art Encyclopedia, volume 2, p. 971.
2 From the interview with Füsun Onur dated January 19’th 2006.
3 mentioned source.
4 Füsun Onur, “The Third Dimension At Painting, Come Inside”, Art Environment, Issue 37, p.14.
5 Beral Madra, “8 Artists 8 Works Exhibition: Art At Other Dimensions”, Hürriyet Gösteri, Issue 122, p.16.
6 Beral Madra, 10 Artists 10 Works: C exhibition catalogue.
We don’t mention about this time; new artistic trials applied at West in an opposing way to making rules aspect of Modernism, are appropriated by Postmodernism with its dominant character of interdisciplinary, pluralist aspects and this caused a certain breaking at art. Since the second half of years 1960s, artists’ courage of using every kind of color and form, fact, event, their individual passions, dreams without hesitation was revealed. To use art itself as a material; the formula of highlighting the concept, what is wanted to be related, by pushing at back plane other value worries, conducted artists to play upon concepts. The most characteristic property of this situation maybe is its carrying messages like objecting to the society, showing the way, cautioning the society, at a quality triggering the form. Within the framework of fast changing era, a new artist typology was born: this was an artist getting as basic principle the criticizing approach, who sees in himself the authorization of questioning almost everything, using fast technological changes or revolting to technology while trying not to be squeezed under it, trying to change dimensions of art by going beyond the frontiers of traditional one with this aim.
Aside with countless trials at West, if a milestone is searched at our country in this direction, year 1967 faces us. Because this year is the date when Altan Gürman came back from France after completing his education and Füsun Onur from USA to Turkey. Gürman preserves his exceptional identity at contemporary Turkish art history as an artist who took painting education at Academy, tried to bring proposals upon basic problems of painting art, signed important works combining conceptualism with form at his works taken at hand with a political attitude. Füsun Onur is an artist having a similar perspective with him and taking at hand sculpture this time at the mentioned early time section. A doorstep of a new era in Turkish art is arrived with the artist who took sculpture education, however who will perpetuate her searches in the direction of going beyond sculpture during all of her art life.
Onur was a student at Ali Hadi Bara Atelier at a period when experimental works, different searches were intensified. After her education at Academy, she goes to USA at 1962, Maryland College of Art and comes back to country at 1967 with Master of art diploma. The geometric, sometimes completely abstract sculptures of Onur seen at these early period works of her, makes feel the effect of the different education that she took. Generally her early period works are artworks explicating, questioning basic concepts of sculpture, forcing the frontiers of this art, at forms rendered minimal. Nilgün Özayten who realized one of the important researches in Turkey upon Conceptual Art summarizes the artist in this context as “...One of the important contributions of Onur to Turkish art medium is that she caused questions, discussions and new perspectives at perception of art in the beginning of 1970s.”(1)
The first personal exhibition of the artist who makes wooden works at white painted structural quality since 1968 until the beginning of years 1970 is composed of geometric “sculptures” at which architectural heaviness is felt, at Taksim Municipality Gallery in year 1970. The works question in the context of depth together with front-back relations built by forms with each other, and “go beyond” the space in some meaning. After 1970 the artist deals mainly with decomposing the sculpture into its elements and thus pushing the mass problem to second plane, making stick out site and space facts providing the perception of the mass, at her works that she will exhibit almost each year and where she aims to change usual, cliché art definitions at spectator. The artist aims the passage to third dimension by deriving two dimensions form single one and folding the site in itself; while explicating verticality/horizontality concepts; elements like trace, surface, the passages and relations between them; formal changes that the site gains at the result. Her second exhibition at year 1972 presents first examples of her works explicating site and space facts. At works associating motion separately or wholly, depth emerges with thin intermingled forms distributed from a single center. One of the sculptures taking place at the exhibition is additionally important by that it allocates place for ready material. The artwork is inside a rectangular frame, a red balloon is hung at the extremity of one of the branches of this abstracted tree form with three branches. It should be underlined that the year is yet 1972.
Since this period she uses more and more transparent, reflective, soft, ready materials like glass, plexiglass, styrofoam and invented objects in a way overcoming the general perception at level of thinking that “sculpture” is marble monument. The first work that the artist who says “I used ready material when it was necessary.”(2), realized completely from ready material is at year 1973 because of works of artists aiming to protest upon the removing of a sculpture of Gürdal Duyar by Erbakan government with the reason that it was obscene. At her artwork named “Pomegranate Girl” where she questions moral comprehension, Onur cuts a plastic doll at horizontal planes, forms optic effects with the help of mirror and glass pieces.
At years 1973, 1974 and 1975, Füsun Onur enters into trials such as forming “time” concept through dividing the site into intervals, deriving two dimensions from single one, folding the site in itself with replacement traces and planes defining it. “Framework, Stone, Earth, Flower” (1977) and “You Said Bread, Apple, It Came Into My Mind” (1978) taking place among works realized at these years are artworks where she attracts attention especially to scope and content problem of the art, thus frontiers of art definition.
Fifth personal exhibition of Onur “From Outside To Inside, From Inside To Outside” dated 1978, is an exceptional example for her era from the perspective of that installation quality dominates with her multi piece order and way of using the site. Onur aims that “the spectator looks at the artwork by getting rid of all stereotypes settled in his head.”(3) The work realized with orange boxes and different ready materials, using wall and ground of the site commonly pushes the watcher to incline, to look at in multi directions, at the same time forces him to perceive the artwork as a whole too.
“They Were 3 Persons, Mind-Love-Peace” where cartoon, raffia, glitter and gelatin are used, dated 1977 is important in that Onur uses “writing” which is among basic materials of Conceptual Art in a way integrating the artwork. This work of three pieces inside three boxes has a relating structure expressing mind, love and peace concepts in an allegoric way as it is understood from its name too.
10 years after her first personal exhibition at year 1980, the artist applies anymore completely an installation to her exhibition “Associations From Bright Circle On The Ground” in Taksim Art Gallery. Onur who creates an art style proper to herself, starts to be interested with site concept from a different perspective this time since years 1980s, along with carrying her works to site, starts to carry the site to her works. The artwork which can be counted as the “extremity” of this approach is her installation named “Third Dimension At Painting, Come Inside” which won silver medal at New Inclinations Exhibition in 1981. The work has a form allowing penetration with dimensions 200 x 183 x 140 cm. Onur says “Why the painting should stay on the wall, in the frame? When we mention about the sculpture, should it be absolutely figure form? Are frontiers always separated as painting, sculpture? What are the possibilities of painting, the ones of sculpture? How are space, time used at painting and sculpture?” and adds “As ‘Third Dimension At Painting - Come Inside’ occurred with momentary activities as such, I want it to be looked at with accompaniment of these questions.”(4) Again “Counterpoint With Flowers” exhibition is among most typical examples which can be given for the distortion of frontiers between sculpture and other arts and passing to a new phase in our country. This artwork resembling to a big tent from blue material, where real-artificial intervened plants are placed inside, points out to the situation of the artist to force the watcher to different perceptions, to push him to wander around, to enter inside the artwork or to look at it from outside; concretizes almost the site concept. Because it is itself of exhibition area, at the moment when the watcher thinks that he enters to exhibition site, anyhow he enters to the site of the artist, his life area.
“Life, Art, Design, Dream Of Left Goods” dated 1985 where she exhibits some old materials “remaining” to her from some ones else, her installation “Mark Of The Mark” having the same name with the exhibition dated 1987 or her work named “Visible-Invisible The Ones That We Know-Don’t Know” at 8 Artists 8 Works B Exhibition in year 1991 are her other works where she continues to discuss concepts which can be listed as image, symbol, object, definition of art, its meaning. Within time Onur made the site a part of her work by removing it from being merely a space where her work is. “Shadow Game” that she realized at a hall of Harbiye Military Museum, which aims to make a criticizing reference to political and social structure of the era, is such a work by that it uses the window and radiator of the hall.
At 1970s her works towards going beyond the sculpture and herself in some sense, with light-shadow theme, starting to take at hand the site as problem, evolve at 1980s into installation highlighting space and time, with various designs where ready objects take place, at 1990s as sticking out of fragile, elegant materials. “Kadans” dated to year 1995 and her last personal exhibition “Prelude” at year 2001 show too that Füsun Onur arrives to new dimensions while spending effort to exit outside of painting and sculpture, even reaches a conceptualism in the line of Beuys. She thinks almost upon not durability of the art that she selected, but its “disappearance”, wants to make think.(5) The standing of Onur against traditionalized art comprehension is not only through art object and idea occurring with form-content, but also contains its value of change.
Without doubt there is a “denying” behind producing of Onur sculptures from temporary materials and his using these at her installations. The artist denies the stability of sculpture development in Turkey, not being able to pass from modernist concepts to postmodernist ones, explicating representation problem, however beyond this the seriousness of traditional or modernist sculpture and its farness to human.(6) While standing against conventional “tangible” reality of sculpture with her fragile works, along with several newness that she brought she is the first contemporary artist inserting permanence-temporariness fact in Turkish art. It should be emphasized that her comprehension of “new” is not the invented new one itself, but always a search.
* The basic source used for the writing; Elif Dastarlı, “The Medium, Circumstances, Discussions Forming Conceptual Art In Turkey Between Years 1970 – 1990 And The Place And Importance Of Füsun Onur As An Conceptual Artist In This Process”, Unpublished Graduate Thesis, Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University Social Sciences Institute Art History Master Department, Western Art and Contemporary Art Program, İstanbul, 2006.
Endnotes
1 Nilgün Özayten, “Conceptual Art”, Eczacıbaşı Art Encyclopedia, volume 2, p. 971.
2 From the interview with Füsun Onur dated January 19’th 2006.
3 mentioned source.
4 Füsun Onur, “The Third Dimension At Painting, Come Inside”, Art Environment, Issue 37, p.14.
5 Beral Madra, “8 Artists 8 Works Exhibition: Art At Other Dimensions”, Hürriyet Gösteri, Issue 122, p.16.
6 Beral Madra, 10 Artists 10 Works: C exhibition catalogue.
Doorstep-November "The Centre of Culture"
If you leave from time and practice, you also leave from place. While ECC project (I am talking about Istanbul, European Capital of Culture in 2010) that is in AKP monopole is lapsing, the whole process is reduced to destroying of AKM, right now. The ECC organization, in which lots of people from almost all sectors are in it, is a culture monopoly and it has been left to the initiative of local administrations; so being “constrain” of the first impression and organizing a “display window” is showed.
The mental of another age dooms to recent date; AKM is wanted to be destroyed because of its “oldness” that also biennial has pointed on. This mentality that is devoid even from archaic protection instinct atomizes to the public; playing an underhand game.
When we start from the idea that we publish to the bill in this issue, we met a catatonic power, who always talk about civility emphasis. “We couldn’t give the bill” answer that came from bureau of Istanbul 2010 repeated itself with “So, you should wait to law’s accepted by assembly” against to our reproach as “But, when the new issue of our magazine will be published, probably the bill will be accepted without any changing.”
The lines of liberal democracy are narrow or wide as much as it applies a comfortable moving area itself. The mentality of rant is only apprehension of a power, which brings market to top, and also who’s itself is a market.
For us, the areas such as we get culture “as a family”, when having fun and shopping open;
swiftly!
The mental of another age dooms to recent date; AKM is wanted to be destroyed because of its “oldness” that also biennial has pointed on. This mentality that is devoid even from archaic protection instinct atomizes to the public; playing an underhand game.
When we start from the idea that we publish to the bill in this issue, we met a catatonic power, who always talk about civility emphasis. “We couldn’t give the bill” answer that came from bureau of Istanbul 2010 repeated itself with “So, you should wait to law’s accepted by assembly” against to our reproach as “But, when the new issue of our magazine will be published, probably the bill will be accepted without any changing.”
The lines of liberal democracy are narrow or wide as much as it applies a comfortable moving area itself. The mentality of rant is only apprehension of a power, which brings market to top, and also who’s itself is a market.
For us, the areas such as we get culture “as a family”, when having fun and shopping open;
swiftly!
4 Ekim 2007 Perşembe
Doorstep - October
We were welcoming the biennial held this year, saying “welcome, biennial of the city!” goody goody! Someone from far away once said “... it is a crucial problem that the modernization model advocated by the Kemalist project is still full of some bolt from the blue, unsolvable contradictions and dilemmas, which are embraced by the system itself..."
Some correspondingly said that,
“In the call of biennial, our Independence War is described as ‘Kemalist project’, ‘bolt from the blue’ and the applied revolutions as ‘against the principle of democracy’. We denounce it.”Then the ones, expected to make the last stroke, said:
“We would expect a university, as an institution of arts and culture, show the sensitivity on free thought, at least, as much as we do and also wish it regarded the activities like biennial on an artistic basis.”
Just as we, “the 4th ones”, were about to say something to “the first one”, “the second one” was uneasy and couldn’t help itself. Then “the third”, contrary to the phrase of its own content, all of a sudden, appeared on the stage, converting the tragedies to comedy, let alone making the last shot!
In fact, that implied “the first one” was satisfactory for everyone and everything with its solo spectacle. For example, see those words, written on the alike platform with the others(1st, 2nd ones), which state “it should get back its social rights against the liberal capitalist powers, like IMF and World Bank, by means of mass movements and resistance.”, uttered prior to these words, “Adverse of capitalism? No, we are not. (No, no, it is not. Of course it is not!) As a response to a question asked on the press meeting, one sponsor beside, the other one by the other side, on the opening day of the activity.
We will not surrender our optimism and get focused on the biennial itself. The entirety is not only comprised of those triples, it always requires a fourth one!
“In addition”, it is necessary after all!
Some correspondingly said that,
“In the call of biennial, our Independence War is described as ‘Kemalist project’, ‘bolt from the blue’ and the applied revolutions as ‘against the principle of democracy’. We denounce it.”Then the ones, expected to make the last stroke, said:
“We would expect a university, as an institution of arts and culture, show the sensitivity on free thought, at least, as much as we do and also wish it regarded the activities like biennial on an artistic basis.”
Just as we, “the 4th ones”, were about to say something to “the first one”, “the second one” was uneasy and couldn’t help itself. Then “the third”, contrary to the phrase of its own content, all of a sudden, appeared on the stage, converting the tragedies to comedy, let alone making the last shot!
In fact, that implied “the first one” was satisfactory for everyone and everything with its solo spectacle. For example, see those words, written on the alike platform with the others(1st, 2nd ones), which state “it should get back its social rights against the liberal capitalist powers, like IMF and World Bank, by means of mass movements and resistance.”, uttered prior to these words, “Adverse of capitalism? No, we are not. (No, no, it is not. Of course it is not!) As a response to a question asked on the press meeting, one sponsor beside, the other one by the other side, on the opening day of the activity.
We will not surrender our optimism and get focused on the biennial itself. The entirety is not only comprised of those triples, it always requires a fourth one!
“In addition”, it is necessary after all!
Kaydol:
Kayıtlar (Atom)