Posted on

20230830

Minä, Marxilainen taiteilija [Me, a Marxist Artists] (2021) by Jyrki Siukonen is an elegant book, its written like a journal and assumes the reader to be well informed. The book reveals an absence of Marxist or Communist theories on aesthetics and depicts intricate political debates where Finnish artists and cultural workers of the 70ties attempted piece together a plan for a leftists artistic program. Marx was bad at art and their theories on production/commodities do not apply to cultural production. Similarly a Marxist depiction of historical progress fails in understanding the intricacies of style (that it does not “progress” but fluctuates). Siukonen reveals that artistic research in Finland is rooted on efforts to make sense of art production, by evaluating an artists responsibilities for society and the particularities of their praxis. Siukonen offers a striking analysis on the utopian function of socialist realism: In actuality communism in the Soviet Union existed only in art. I enjoy the banality which they depict the terrors of great purge… Nearly every artists or cultural theorist from the Soviet Union they cite, is revealed in the footnotes to be have imprisoned or executed by Stalin. By depicting an array of failed creative efforts to align artistry with Marx/communism, the book grinds an opening for imagining contemporary approaches to the question. Being a Marxist Artist is depicted as a learning process, which outcome we should not predict (just like communism!).

I got asked for a comment in a Hyperallergic article on Criticism in Finland Over Country’s Selection Process for the Venice Biennale (2023) Avedis Hadjian. The bit where I shyly hope for institutional change “Perhaps it [the curatorial process] also succeeds in having a lasting impact on the institutions involved in the process.” was cut in the editorial process.

Keho vaatii tunnetta [Body calls for emotion] (2023) Tiia From & Onni Oja. A nice to read, solid review of Crimes of the Future (2022) David Cronenberg. This text was written as an assignment for a course in Kankaanpää Art School and the authors very kindly credit me as a teacher! I also wrote shortly about the film.

Posted on

20221106

Our reception at Glow Up was warm and the evening wonderfully festive. Malla’ gig invited everyone to dance and before this we participated in a performance by Vishnu Vardhani Rajan and admired poses by Tiia Kasurinen. Before the event we were welcomed by Pii Anttila, Sanna Karimäki-Nuutinen and Kunsthalle Seinäjoki staff. Karimäki-Nuutinen gave us a thorough introduction to the Kunsthalle history and current program. During the tour we got to meet and interview artists Ida Sofia Fleming and Vesa Rahikainen who had an exhibition in the top floor. Their work was based on rust, sound and rituals. Pii also hosted us a celebratory lunch and the co-curator of Glow Up, artist Aeon Lux gave us compliments when we parted ways.

We performed together as a group consisting of artists Tonya Björkbom, Julia Elo, Viola Jalaskoski, Uljas Kaitala, Anni-Maaria Leppänen, Sade Marila, Pinja Minkkinen, Piia Muurinaho, Ignacio Pérez Pérez, Sanna Svartström, +1 and myself. Tiia From & Onni Oja, who participated in the planning of the work could not attend. The performance was prepared during a two week intensive performance art course titled “Public and Performance” organized at Kankaanpää Art School. Our group was called Eero Yli-Vakkuri & Co. in reference to recent debates on “& Co.” -style charismatically led performing arts organizations.

During the two week program we wrote a collective study journal with the group, which shares lecture notes, drafts for the performance choreography & score and other notes, general glimpses to discussions and exercises. I particularly enjoyed a day we walked the city and Uljas presented the group with the Kankaanpää cemetery gravestone deposit/storage. The site reminded me of a past gig at the Malmi Cemetery, which hosts a similar deposit of gravestone gravel.

Our performance, perhaps titled as “This is your ancestor” (but not agreed to be titled such) was an effort to transform a rock with the collective will of our group, bodies and by facilitating audience interactions with it. We advised various choreographic motifs, which were be used to exchange experiences, such us temperatures with the stone. I think the majority of the audience came to contact with the stone and some even performed solo actions with it. We developed the performance by gradually growing our collective understanding of the materials of stone, bubble gum (which contrasted the hardness) and by debating what constitutes an audience or public. We loosely defined (but experienced and abided to) collective rules on how to physically engage with each others and the audienceperformers. Trust was built trough intuition and developed a good mood for the club.