Posted on

20230125

Visited Oodi Maija-sali for the SOLA Post-Festival Club. Came late, left early but enjoyed a cinematic performance by Minerva Juolahti. They stood in front of the audience in a dark room with their back leaning against a huge black stage curtain and held a mirror which redirected a projector light beam towards the audience. An odd drone was heard and the mirror trembled a bit as they held it. The reflection which they reprojected onto the floor in front of them shivered like a tongue trying to keep still. The projector showed a slow film of intersecting squares, which corresponded with the shape and size of the mirror. One of these beams remained in place, constantly directed at the mirror. The black curtain folds bent the moving white rectangles, allowing gradients to form on the curtain velvet, which made them appear as floating metal sheets.

This scene lasted for quite a while. The floating metal sheets passed the screen and only the beam directed at the mirror was left. Juolahti then turned the mirror and directed its beam to a disco ball which re-reprojected the projection so that the entire room and everyone in the space was touched by miniscule square rays of light. The projection square then began moving upwards disappearing outside of the screen. As it rose Juolahti followed its movement with the mirror they held and as it went over their reach, they lowered the mirror and suddenly a hairly drone whipped across the room. The sound was revealed emanating from the mirror sheet. The shivers of the reprojections had been produced by a solid transducer attached to its back, which revealed the drone and the reflection being of the same.

I would have loved to listen to the gig with a light to sound device. Ilpo Numminen played the Oodi-modular and presented it as an “instrument” which was a delight. The gig explored feedback loops and krell-like patches. Looking forwards to visiting SOLA on Friday too for gigs by Tomutonttu and Tina Mariane Krogh Madsen. (The gigs where last May)

Posted on

20230109

Nearly finished with Assembling a Black Counter Culture (2022) DeForrest Brown. The book reads as a cross between a blog, a music review magazine and a Marxist analysis of Black American culture. It meets all the criteria of a proper winter holiday read: Nerdy details on synths, snippets of interviews and gossip of notable techno musicians bundled with leftist rants. Brown wants to make it clear that techno is Black which I’m fine with but their mission is so defined that some argumentations cut corners. For example they put a lot of effort in proving that originally acid (in music) had nothing to do with drugs and blame the emerging techno-scene in the UK for building the associative link between drugs and techno. They conveniently leave out that funk, which is framed as a partial foundation of Detroit techno, was a psychedelic movement. Their effort to sever the techno-is-for-drugs link is just in the sense that the US War on Drugs targeted the Black communities disproportionately. There is also a strong judgemental tone to the manner they present the goa-trance-scene, which pains my heart as I came to techno largely trough Texas Faggott and a like. Not for the drugs but for the fun (perhaps trance deployed humour as a substitute for soul? Silverio for the win!).

Brown uses Detroit as a lense for portraying the US from the perspective of Black cultural development. Post jim crow era folk moving from the South to work in Detroit assembly lines, emerging as consumerist middle classes and helping to make Motown to what it was and then being disregarded by industrial capital. The ruins of these developments were later reclaimed for techno, which is presented as soulful emancipation, a process of de-hierarchicalizing the record label industry and distributing production. This story was first passed to me by Jori Hulkkonen during a 2011 Kotimaan teknokatsaus vol. 3 interview (starting from 16:41). The exact bit was cut out from the final interview but Hulkkonen also built a globalist connection between post-industrial youth learning to program to employ themselves (and later to surpass the burden of their [working]class) in Kemi and the Detroit landscape where the Belleville Three developed their sound. The repurposing of abandoned factories as stages for raves was also discussed, which links to East-Berlin too.

Brown mentions Basic Channel (and Hard Wax) but does not explore for example Maurizio or Mark Ernestus’ involvement with Ngadda, which I’d love to have had their take on. Browns Marxist analysis of Black workers and Black cultural expressions is excellent and techno serves as a perfect route for exploring workers transformation from labourers to information-workers. I particularly enjoyed their critique of Kraftwerk’s robotique aesthetics, which celebrate the absence of soul in creative expression and how they contrast this to the Black experience, where artistic expressions cling to soul to combat the robotique reality of everyday and the past of slavery. My peer-group of the white christian punk, electronica, trance and self-educating diy mayham, where youth seeks to destroy patriarchal society by destroying themselves as workers doing drugs, general antagonism and/or criminal records is not celebrated by Brown.

Art is the infrastructure of the imagination #ॐ. It’s not categorically good but something to build thinking on.

Posted on

20221008

We wrote an appeal Chaim “Poju” Zabludowicz’s membership of Kiasma Support Foundation must be revoked (2022) to the Museum of Contemporary Art Kiasma with artist Terike Haapoja. I’m thankful for having the opportunity to work with them. The appeal is direct in its confrontation with the institution. For me it represents a step in a series of inevitable actions, which the 2021 article for No-Niin and it’s later 2022 translation for Tiedonantaja call for. I’m particularly proud that we issued a very clear demand and named people who are responsible for the current state of affairs. Our writing is in accordance to how Aruna D’Souza advices art-writers to engage with institutions, for example not to be afraid to “name names”. The text also includes a short pedagogical snippet informing audiences of “artwashing” and “soft power” (in Finnish), which are cute and could work in a textbook.

Kiasma’s Director Leevi Haapala describes Zabludowicz’s role on the board of the support foundation as unproblematic, for instance, appealing to the organization’s safer-space policy. When someone who represents art organizations being boycotted and who funds the covering up of human-rights violations holds a seat at the heart of a state institution, we have to ask: for whom is the organization keeping the space safe?

The safer-space policy cannot mean that the museum is excused from concern for human-rights violations or for apartheid, nor can it in any way support them. […] We challenge Kiasma – the organization arranging [Ars22 Gathering] discussions – to extend its safer-space policy to its own institutional structures, too. The first step in this would be to revoke Chaim “Poju” Zabludowicz’s membership of the Board. Otherwise Kiasma will endanger its credibility as a platform for discussions of social responsibility, and will be complicit in the artwashing of a political activity that endangers human lives.

Posted on

20221003

Money isn’t power but the lack of it is a symptom for the lack of it. Having worked as an assistant for many artists, I know that wethey often make drastic decisions at the very last minute. In my role as an assistant preparing exhibitions, I grew accustomed to this and would expect Outi Heiskanen to alter exhibition designs right as the museum doors opened. I served as a shield and muscle. As the museum directors met guests at the gate, we swapped the placement of art in the halls. We did this more then once.

I assumed they did this to feel alive: Being relieved of stress feels great and creatives are addicted to it. Perhaps we are afraid that art does not feel like anything and fill this void with adrenalin. A drastic last minute change is also an artists power-grab. Because our societal impact is low, we take the power which is left for us to grab. Exactly when others are most dependent on us: At the very last minute, at the opening while people are attempting to make sense of what they see.

I  think that the emerging-passing generalistshamanist, soft religious and cult aesthetic trend which artists (myself included) are inspired by, is an effort to reclaim power. Artist are becoming fantasy shamans or diy-alchemists, not necessarily to submit themselves to an another domain of reasoning but to re-establish the artist mythos of past (which never existed): We are trying to become vessels for spiritual affairs because articulated forms of power elude us.

This is not a bad thing but it is symptomatic and possibly works against our efforts to self-organize. Cult’s seldom have more then one leader. Also such aesthetics remain very sensitive to appropriation.

Posted on

20220728

Institutional critique has successfully problematized for whom are the spaces of art accessible and safe for and ultimately for whom is art. What is the class of people who enjoy stuff on display? Utilizing this approach to environmental matters and questionging what is nature, yields interesting result. For example: For whom is a spring for and is “drinking water” a desirable category?

Change is natural and as long as there is production, there will be new material. There are always new creatures which benefit from change and even participate in bringing it about. This approach is a branch of the ecosocialist concept of second nature by Bookchin (quoted below) which deems human activity natural by aligning it with other evolutionary processes. As an addition I insist that all manifestations of intellect (or rationales) are equal and maintain that animals form institutions (and that institutions are animals). A horse stable needs all intellects to become.

If one goes beyond that notion of nature as being more than just that which exists, we are talking about the biosphere. And when we talk about the biosphere we are talking about its evolution. Otherwise the word “nature” becomes so big, so promiscuous as it were, so “universal” as to become almost vacuous. It becomes the being that is nothing.

So we are talking, when we speak of a natural world, or when we speak of the biosphere, we’re talking about evolution. And it is always evolving.

When we no longer rank materials on the basis of how natural or man-made they are, it is revealed that human labour is the only constant which we can identify causing harm. Instead of evaluating the environmental impacts of what we define as “waste” (by analysing how materials we produce, such as plastics, change other than humans), we should approach labour itself as the waste. It extracts to sustain human values. All work is preservative, it seeks to halt change, to combats erosion. #ॐ

I now think that all environmental concerns are aesthetic: Nature will always find a way – But when they begin a process of adaptation, they change into something I cannot classify. The terror I feel facing climate change is revealed as a tremor at foundations of the ivory tower I’ve constructed: The position from where I’ve safely classified and framed my relations to others from.

Seems that non human life adapts to change and when it does it super exceeds my understanding of what is natural. It might be that survival is ugly. The (climate) change I’m involved with is a change in values, a change in what is deemed beauty. I can see desperation being normalized and crying emerging as art.

There is an odd bitter (or class-aware, which is which in this turmoil?) tone to the question “what is nature” and “for whom is nature”.  For example, there are currently numerous Safe the Baltic Sea -campaigns, with celebrity enforcements and support from business patrons. They want the people to keep the “sea clean”. When a business patron speaks of saving the sea… I’m left to ask for whom and what is sea.

I don’t have access to the sea they roam nor the clean they speak of. These are synthetized hyperobjects of sorts. The modesty etiquette these folk enforce, taints me like an oil spill. I’m not motivated by the cleanliness the patrons and their celebrity friends are calling – Particularly when their lifestyles and merchant ship are the root of the cause. Their campaigns are waste.

We can return to campaigns, after the fruits of all labour have been distributed fairly. I think this is a continuation of an Ore.e Ref. slogan from way back: “Let’s make de-growth fun!”