xelovnebis saerTaSoriso Jurnali - Artisterium

g l o b a l
s p o t l i g h t
o p i n i o n
site-specific
i n t e r v i e w s
r e v i e w s
The International Art Magazine
xelovnebis saerTaSoriso Jurnali
loop’A
3 / 2006

8. 0.06 / . 0.06
ArT CAuCAsus AssoCiATioN
Tbilisi NATioNAl ChildreN GAllery
Tbilisi sTATe ACAdemy of ArTs
Tbilisi GoeThe iNsTiTuTe
briTish CouNCil iN GeorGiA

loop’A
Spotlight
Site-specific
Reviews
Anthea Nicholson, Molten Borders and House-keeping 4
anTea nikolsoni, gamqrali sazRvrebi da Sinameurneoba 6
Keti Japaridze, Shoes for Departure, 8
qeTi jafariZe, samgzavro fexsacmelebi 12
Iliko Zautashvili, ‘Transparent’ Walls of Caucasian Labyrinth 16
iliko zautaSvili, kavkasiuri labirinTis ‘gamWvirvale’ kedlebi 18
Koka Ramishvili, Evil and its Revelation in the Works of Francis Bacon 22
koka ramiSvili, boroteba da misi gamovlenis
gzebi frensis bekonis SemoqmedebaSi 25
David Hockney, British Council Collection / devid hokni 29
Nathaniel McBride, Art and Risk 30
naTaniel makbraidi, xelovneba da riski 33
Audrey Bartis and Alexios Papazacharias about Rachel Whiteread 36
odri bartisi da aleqsios papazaqariasi reCel vaiTridis Sesaxeb 40
Ella Gibbs, From London with Love / ela gibsi, londonidan siyvaruliT 45
Nino Dzandzava, Experimental Films of Giga Chkheidze 49
nino ZanZava, giga CxeiZis eqsperimentebi kinoSi, 50
Annie Lovejoy, Mac Dunlop / eni lavjoi da mak danlopi 52
PMP Group / pmp jgufi 56
Carolyn Black, The Forest of Dean / kerolin bleki, dinis tye 59
Lena Milosevic, Do not be Neutral about Art 62
lena miloseviCi, mTavaria ar iyo neitraluri xelovnebis mimarT 64
Natalia Mali, Many of them feel sorry form me as they see me as crazy person 66
natalia mali, bevrs vecodebi, radgan SeSlilad mimiCneven 68
Black Box Recorder / Savi yuTi 70
Electric Earth, /eleqtronuli dedamiwa 71
Carolyn Black, Process and Practice 73
kerolin bleki, procesi da praqtika 74
Random Dance Company 76
Ma, 77
Ellen Mara De Watcher, Arsenal: sound as a weapon 78
elen mara de voCeri, arsenali, bgera, rogorc iaraRi 80
Nia Roberts, Wales at Venice 82
nia robertsi, uelsi veneciaSi 84
Selected Articles in Russian /rCeuli statiebi rusul enaze 88
Publisher: Art Caucasus Association; Founder: Nana Kirmelashvili; Editor in chief & Art director: Iliko Zautashvili; Sub editor: Magda Guruli;
Translation: Magda Guruli, Maka Sakhvadze; Supervisor of English version: Servane Laine /France/, Guy Archer /USA/; Consultant: Peter
Nasmyth /UK/; Supervisor of Georgian version : Nana Zardiashvili Design: MAGICON GrOup
Printing: ‘Forma LTD’.
British Council in Georgia
Publishing and printing of
the third edition was possible
through the financial support
of The British Council in Georgia
© Art Caucasus Association
loop’A established in 2005
CENTRE FOR GLOBAL
COORDINATION OF
CULTURE & ART
The publishers of this magazine do not bear responsibility for advertising content. Also, views expressed herein are not necessarily those of the publisher.
Global
Opinion
Interviews
Front cover: Jasmin Jodry,
Mo Stoebe,
Audio Addiction, 2006, UK
Back cover: Artists’ Action
on the Freedom Square,
photography by
Anthea Nicholson.
Tbilisi, 2006

MOLTEN BORDERS AND HOuSE-KEEPING
Anthea Nicholson
The long and fruitful contact between artists from the UK and the Caucasus is a good example of the way that creative dialogue refuses to
submit to the constraints of political boundaries, cultural divides and language differences. Since 1992, when Bristol first saw the work of
Georgian artists at Arnolfini Gallery, a bond has developed; a stretchable, flexible link that shrinks and grows as the climate permits or detains
growth. It is a complex set of people, art, ideas, conversation, frustrations, real projects and future dreams. For me it has been a relationship of
love that is inseparable from my creative practice. My partner and occasional collaborator, Mamuka Japharidze, is as bound up as I am in the
peripatetic passage between the UK, his native Georgia and to other parts of the world.
Artists these days are rather like global nomads, we belong to a restless tribe who easily transfer themselves from workshop to workshop, city
to city, culture to culture. We are unshockable, us artists. These calls from beyond one’s native land are often pivotal moments for creative
realization, we await them eagerly, we initiate them ourselves when we can. Mamuka and I have also followed this path. Tbilisi feels like just
another touchstone when seen in the context of this International contact and travel. Bristol, where I live, is also just another touchstone, as is
London, Delhi, Yerevan, Baku, Belfast, Los Angeles, Berlin, Paris, Moscow, Taipei and on and on beyond the big cities to the less known towns,
the valleys, the seashores and the deserts of the world.
This is not to say that everywhere is the same, but to feel at home on the earth and to say that making art is a kind of home-making, a kind of
house-keeping of the human state. There is a mood in art practice in the UK that embraces this attitude of creative house-keeping, where the
line between art and the everyday or the banal activity is almost erased. There is a sense of the artist-at-work cherishing the ordinary human
scale of events, of nurturing involvement with the public by engaging in socially inclusive activities. Sometimes it is hard to say if the results are
art or social work, creative statements or therapeutic sessions. The uncertainty, a kind of melting of borders, is exactly what makes the work
interesting. The point being that neither high nor low matter, but that what matters is the underlying readiness for response to the call and
preparedness to connect to the context whatever its status.
Molten borders and house-keeping – that seems to sum up the nature of Mamuka’s and my way of being creative. Of the handful of collaborative
works we have made over the last twelve years the key quality has been connectedness to the context, poetic free association and a light touch
with materials. It is not easy to be both partners and collaborators and more often than not Mamuka and I go our separate paths in art and life.
Trust is involved.
I believe artists have an unusual propensity for trust and we ask in exchange for the trust of our audience. It is a strange business. A very
human business is our fragility often exposed and raw. Our fellow travellers, whether they make art or not, recognise in each other’s footprints
- our leavings and droppings, our creative tracks - the weight and moment of being a human. Meeting, somewhere in the world, it is an ancient
desire; to make camp, build a fire, cook food and sit around the flames telling our stories and listening to the experiences of the other. Art-life
constructs new versions of real-life and when it brushes closest to real-life a kind of static builds up, an energy that jumps across the so called
divide between the art and the non-art.
A work titled Table, which I made in collaboration with my UK colleague Bruce Allan and with Mamuka Japharidze embodied the attributes of an
energetic, connective friction between art and life. Table was inspired by the Georgian concept of Supra, where a meal shared around a table is
given poetic significance and raised to a sacral level by the intoned toasts and songs which come unplanned, out of the moment, and yet have
a timeless ritualistic quality.
We organized a banquet for one hundred guests; the constraints of space gave us the number, the site (a community hall in Bristol) gave us
the zone from which most of our guests would arrive (although several special guests came from abroad). In the months leading up to the
banquet, using our network of artists, friends and contacts we sent out a call across the world. The call was for a postable ‘something’ that
would represent the sender in some way. The ‘something’ would be placed on or near the banquet table and in the absence of its sender it would
speak for their presence. We were overwhelmed by the response, the care and the quality of the various objects, texts, images, recorded film
and music that came in tenderly wrapped packages through the mail. We had not been able to offer any fee to these contributors, the things

they sent came purely from a desire to connect to the moment of the banquet and the guests.
On the evening of the banquet our one hundred guests were able to handle and examine the sent contributions. The objects sent from around
the world mingled with the table-ware, films were projected on the walls of the hall, performative actions took place, texts were read aloud. In
the sensuality of eating and drinking, the exchange of talking and singing, the curious examining and impact of the contributed materials it was
impossible to distinguish any tangible boundary between art and life.
Mamuka made a record of the banquet tables using paper treated with cyanotype to capture an imprint of the surface clutter at the end of the
evening. Along with the shadows of plates, glasses, cutlery, fragments of food and stains of spilled wine, the shapes of the things sent from our
absent guests were also captured on the cyanotype prints. Compellingly present from far across the world.
Since making Table, the idea has continued to inspire, we have made other table events and feasts and other people have initiated their own
table events. The tribe of art-life mingled with life-art is alive and well.
© Anthea Nicholson, artist and writer, Bristol.
g l o b a l
Eyeyeyeye circle - Walked in the sand as the tide came in.
Mamuka Japharidze. Pembrokeshire 1998.
Table - surface of table with objects and remains of
the feast after Table. southmead Community Centre,
bristol 000.

6
anTea Nnikolsoni
gamqrali
sazRvrebi da
Sinameurneoba
xangrZlivi da nayofieri kontaqtebi kavkasiel da
britanel xelovanTa Soris naTlad gvaCvenebs, rom
SemoqmedebiT dialogs verc politikuri sazRvrebi,
verc kulturuli Taviseburebani da verc enobrivi
barieri ver SeaCerebs. yvelaferi 1992 wels daiwyo.
maSin bristolSi, arnolfinis galereaSi qarTvel
xelovanTa namuSevrebi pirvelad gamoifina.
mogvianebiT, es urTierTobebi adamianebis,
xelovnebis, ideebis, urTierTgaziarebis procesis,
damsxvreuli imedebis, realuri proeqtebisa da
samomavlo gegmebis namdvil sinTezad iqca.
piradad CemTvis ki, es yvelaferi Cemi Semoqmedebis
ganuyofeli nawili, siyvaruliT gamTbari
gamocdilebaa. qarTveli mxatvari mamuka jafariZe,
Cemi partniori xelovnebasa da pirad cxovrebaSic,
swored is ganmsazRvreli faqtoria, romlis gamoc
drodadro Cems samSoblos, britaneTs vtoveb
da mis samSobloSi, saqarTveloSi mivemgzavrebi.
aRarafers vambob, imaze, rom xSirad msoflios
sxvadasxva kuTxeSic erTad varT. Tanamedrove
xelovani nomadurobisTvisaa ganwiruli. Cven im
daudgromelTa toms mivekuTvnebiT, romelic
dauRalavad mogzaurobs vorqSofidan vorqSofze,
qalaqidan qalaqSi, kulturidan kulturaSi. Cven
veravin SegvaCerebs, radgan ucxo miwaze xSirad
Cveni TviTrealizaciisTvis gadamwyveti momenti
dgeba. aseT wuTebs mouTmenlad veliT da imasac
vcdilobT, rom davaCqaroT maTi moaxloeba.
me da mamukac ase vcxovrobT. msoflio konteqstSi
aRqmuli, mogzauris TvaliT danaxuli Tbilisi,
erT-erTi aseT adgilTagani da erTgvari sasinji
qvaa, Cems mSobliur bristolTan, londonTan,
kalkutasTan, erevanTan, baqosTan, belfastTan,
los anJelesTan, berlinTan, parizTan, moskovTan,
Tu taipeisTan erTad. CamonaTvali SeiZleba
usasrulobamde gagrZeldes: didi, cnobili da
patara, yvelasaTvis ucnobi qalaqebi, zRvis napirebi
da udabnoebi. TiTqos Znelia maT Soris msgavsebis
aRmoCena, magram vfiqrob, dedamiwis nebismier
kuTxeSi Tavi ise unda igrZno, rogorc sakuTar
saxlSi, swored amitom, sadac ar unda viyoT, saqme,
romelsac vemsaxurebiT Cveni Sinameurneubaa.
britaneTSi art-praqtika swored amgvarad aRiqmeba.
sazRvari xelovnebasa da banalur yoveldRiurobas
Soris TiTqmis waSlilia.
aseTia Semoqmedis bunebrivi mdgomareoba: is
Cveulebrivis, adamianuris sawyiss efuZneba da
sociumidan sazrdoobs. xandaxan verc ki arCev
socialur aqtivobas ewevi, Tu xelovani xar,
Terapiul sesias atareb, Tu SemoqmedebiT procesSi
imyofebi.
swored es aragarantirebuli sivrce da gamqrali
sazRvrebi aniWebs namuSevars Rirebulebas. mTavaria
namuSevris safuZvelSi arsebuli mzadyofna
gamoexmauro Zaxils da daukavSirde konteqsts.
gamqrali sazRvrebi da ‘Sinameurnebis’ gancda Cemi
da mamuka jafariZis Semoqmedebis ganmsazRvreli
faqtorebia. 12 wlis manZilze, Cvens mier Semqnili
arcTu mravalricxovani erToblivi namuSevrebis
mTavar Rirsebad konteqstTan uSualo kavSiri,
Tavisufali, poeturi asociaciebi da masalasTan
frTxili damokidebuleba mimaCnia. cxovrebis

TanamgzavrTan Tanaziari Semoqmedeba sakmaod
rTulia. albaT, amitom xelovnebasa da cxovrebaSi
me da mamuka sakuTar gzebs mivuyvebiT, rac ndobis
gareSe warmoudgeneli iqneboda.
mxatvrebi gansakuTrebulad mimndobni varT
da sazogadoebisganac igives viTxovT, radgan
xelovneba is ucnauri sivrcea, sadac gaSiSvlebuli
da sruliad daucveli xar. daucvelobas mxatvrebi
erTmaneTSic vamCnevT, vxedavT urTierTis sulis
moZraobas, Semoqmedebas, sust mxareebs. sadRac,
msoflios romeliRac kuTxeSi, karavTan, cecxlis
garSemo Sekreba sakuTari gamocdilebisa da
ubralo cxovrebiseuli istoriebis gaziareba, Cveni
umTavresi moTxovnilebaa. xelovneba realobis
axal versiebs qmnis da misi yovlismomcveli energia
swored amgvari urTierTobebisas warmoiqmneba.
‘magida’ Cemi, mamuka jafariZis, Cveni britaneli
kolegis brus alanis erToblivi namuSevari iyo
da xelovnebasa da realurs Soris energetikul
urTierTkavSirs asaxavda. is inspirirebuli iyo
qarTuli sufris fenomeniT, romlis koncefciac
kvebis profanur process poetur aqtad aqcevs
da misive msvlelobisas uSualod dabadebuli
sadRegrZeloebiT da simRerebiT mTels qmedebas
sakraluri ritualis funqcias aniWebs.
proeqti ‘magida’ 100 kacian sufras warmoadgenda.
stumarTa simravle sivrcis parametrebma
(bristolis saTemo darbazi) da im adgilTa
Taviseburebebma ganapiroba, saidanac namuSevrebs
velodebodiT (maT Soris ucxoeTidan). ramdenime
TviT adre, Cveni kolegebisa da megobrebis
meSveobiT mTel msoflios davukavSirdiT.
stumrebs aseTi pirobiT viwvevdiT: yovel maTgans
sufrisTvis raRac iseTi unda gamoegzavna, rac
misi reprezentatoris funqcias Seasrulebda da
surfaze Tavis adgils daikavebda. gzavnili, magidis
stumrebs, im SemTxvevaSic ki, Tu avtori RonisZiebas
piradad ver daeswreboda, mis Sesaxeb garkveul
warmodgenas Seqmnida. marTlac gasaocrad bevri
adamiani gamogvexmaura, gamogvigzavnes uamravi
nivTi, teqsti, obieqti, imiji, filmi. internetiT
saguldagulod SefuTuli musikac ki miviReT. Cven
RonisZiebis monawileT anazRaureba ver SevTavazeT,
magram, rogorc aRmoCnda, is arc aravis sWirdeboda.
TiToeuli maTgani proeqtSi monawileobis, danarCen
stumrebTan kontaqtis uangaro surviliT iyo
motivirebuli. saRamos msvlelobisas ‘magidis’ asma
stumarma msoflios sxvadasxva kuTxidan miRebuli
gzavnili ixila. es obieqtebi sufrisTvis Cveuli
nivTebis gverdiT ganlagda, kedelze filmebi
proecirdeboda, xmamaRla ikiTxeboda teqstebi,
mimdinareobda perfomansebi. warmoidgineT qeifis,
xmamaRali saubris, simReris xmebi, magidaze
mimofenili eqsponatebi, realobisa da xelovnebis
iseTi miqsi, rodesac TiTqmis SeuZlebelia gaarkvio,
sad mTavrdeba erTi da sad iwyeba meore.
saRamos miwuruls, foto emulsiiT damuSavebuli
cianiferis qaRaldis meSveobiT, romelic
magidis zedapirs faravda, mamukam magidaze
arsebuli sagnebis moxazulobaTa qaosuroba
aRbeWda. TefSebis, Wiqebis, dana-Canglis, sakvebis
fragmentebis da magidis zedapirze dasxmuli
g l o b a l
Rvinisgan darCenili laqebis CrdilebTan erTad
cianiferis anabeWdma msoflios sxvadasxva
kuTxidan monawileTa mier gamogzavnili sagnebi da
maTi sufraze datovebuli kvalic aRbeWda.
pirveli magidis Semdeg, romelic Semdgomi aqciebis
Zlier inspiratorad iqca, sxva ‘magidebic’ Sedga,
sxva adamianebis monawileobiT.
bevrma analogiuri ‘magida’ ukve Cvengan
damoukideblad gaakeTa. ase rom, xelovnebisa da
realobis urTierTqmedebis idea cocxlobs da
kvlavindeburad aqtualuria.
© anTea Nnikolsoni, mxatvari, mwerali, bristoli.
ART - Gsufra
TvalTvalTval wre,
qviSaSi xetiali
okeanis moqcevisas.
mamuka jafariZe,
pembrokenSiri, 1998.

8
Keti Japaridze SHOES FOR DEPARTuRE
‘Why shoes?
‘Always buy a travel card,’ I said to my teenage son from the
beginning after our relocation from Georgia to U.K. when
against a background of cultural difference and London traffic
and public transport control I was wondering how to prevent
him from getting a criminal record, … for him, and for his future.
‘Do not forget your buss pass’, I repeat to him since then, or
alternatively ‘JUST WALK’.
Because in our circumscribed world, where space is completely
inhabited by invisible and visible borders, by political and
institutional framings such as ‘nation-state’, ‘property’,
‘legitimacy’ and ‘law’, by systems and networks… Where we
are either included or excluded and are constantly situated
in between, struggling to fit in… Where our subjectivity is
produced so that we are all involved and are already part of
it, appropriated, engendered and enslaved in different forms
of belongings and. So alienated from ourselves and from the
other humans, we still want to be liberated and to be free…
Where space for our life becomes increasingly limited; in a
black and white world, where transparency is only utopia and
just an illusion…
Shoes are left for us as the only possible form of our
independent transportation and the things which comfort us
in our journeys, for us, for our moving, for our desires.
Because shoes are all about us, about our identities and about
our desires to find them. Here shoes become the site of out
departure for ‘finding one’s feet’, not just in the system of
one’s time and one’s space, rather in the complicated map of
many geographies, in the field of many agencies where we are
all implicated and multiplied.
Because shoes are our camouflage like all other invented
forms of identities, very much about our loneliness and a site
where we can hide…
Because I am still utopian and believe in fairy stories, where
shoes have often a strange correlation with our fate too; in
magic flying shoes as well, which can take us against gravity
and against constructed spells.’
This text I place in here comes from my own film work, which I
made in Summer 2002 next to the German Embassy, London,
where people from different backgrounds come together
in order to apply for Schengen visas. They are waiting to be
accepted from 5 a.m. every morning; some of them come
for whole night; everybody holds their application forms and
passports, everybody is ready to pay their fees. I filmed the
peoples’ shoes in the space of queue, where there was not
much movement, where all the feet were tired and almost
‘sleeping’ until they were called by officials in order to be
‘evoked’.
I was one of them as well waiting for a visa. My desire was to go
to the opening of the Venice Biennale. It was my final year and
Goldsmiths College and I wanted to take an upcoming event as
the subject for my dissertation.
I was forced to be there because of my Georgian citizenship
and because of the strict Italian visa procedures, which meant
that I did not have any chance to get an Italian visa by the time
I needed it. It was quicker to obtain the German/Schengen
visa, even though I did not intend to go there; despite my
hesitations and frustrations, when I knew that me conduct was
not completely honest, despite my anxieties.
Soon after waiting it, in The Guardian newspaper there was
an article: ‘Tassels on your shoes? Then Britain’s not for you’
(Gibbons, 2003), which was about a new book written by an
ex-immigration officer, in relation to asylum seekers who come
to UK but are refused because of their ‘wrong shoes’. The
article had a strange correlations with my work; it made me
think more about the ‘panoptical’ eye, my subordination under
a ‘transcendental’ observer; a site of ‘complete visibility’ and
‘confidentiality’ in relation to identities and their movements.
Since then I have often noticed how shoes replace faces when
there is a need to keep secret someone’s identity, especially
in confessional conversations; for example, shoes instead of
faces are shown in television programs and BBC reports on

migrants, or on the Home Office.
It was then when I detected ‘invisible’ (secret, clandestine
identities) on all levels of ‘representation’ and under different
signs; invisible in the systems of visibility… on the borders and
on the control lines, behind passport and other ‘uniforms’
of identity framings; invisible which are ‘all-too-visible’ or
‘more-visible-than-the-visible’ (Baudrillard, 1985: p131), in
symbolic, spatial and temporal orders; in terms of the fluidity
ad movement as well which inhabit ‘solid’ structures, or what
Derrida calls ‘difference’ – perpetually self-deconstructing
movement.
I decided to write my dissertation on the Venice Biennale when
I was in Tbilisi, Georgia, the city I am originally from. It was
just before Easter; my deadline to hand in the proposal for a
dissertation was coming soon and I was very much concerned
to find a subject for it. Meanwhile, being in Georgia for me,
after three years of my and my family’s relocation to the UK,
appeared as a most confusing experience. It was then when I
was asked by close friends of mine (artists), who had recently
felt alienation from the international art world, to think in future
about curating the Georgian Pavilion at the Venice Biennale. I
was not ready for that request at all, but at the same time the
artists’ desire and motivations were very understandable for
me, under which the Venice Biennale seemed to technically
approachable site of their possible participation.
The Venice Biennale was already an upcoming event; the
most celebrated art exhibition in the field of art geographies,
an extremely charged site accumulating art forces from all
around the world, where I had never been, and wanted to
go. It had a great deal of correspondence with my special
subject (Geographies), which I wanted to tale as my main point
of departure in terms of the dissertation. When the same
g l o b a l
suggestion was made the second time I responded that I
would rather write my dissertation on it.
At the same time the conception of the national pavilion
seemed outdated and very odd for all of us, very much
resembling old imperial archetypes; art and artists under its
framework seemed ‘enslaved’; films from my childhood were
remembered where Venice, like Cairo and Baghdad, was
involved in the slave trade… in negative terms, in terms of
market and market values… Notions of a Caucasian and of
a whole race were interchanging with each other, providing
more questions about our identity and sense of curiosity… it
was a beautiful evening, almost dreamlike, under the shelter
of my ‘home’ and with my friends, very inspiring in terms of
openings and suggestions, in terms of beginning; an evocation
of traumas, a ‘combination of memory and amnesia’ (Ernest
Renan, referred to in Bhabha, 1990). In association with the
spectacle of Venice and the spectacular event of the Venice
Biennale made it even more challenging…
Since that original decision the issue of nationality became
central for me. In the first place in terms of the opening-up of
my subject and my imaginary (smooth) traveling and later in
terms of the real journey, in terms of imposed scenarios in it
and ‘blockages’ (visa regulations and their established ‘rules’
and ‘roles’), where signs of nationality in forms of different
representations were multiplied everywhere and prevailed
in the space I was passing though. Nationality appeared as
‘familiar’ and ‘foreign’ for me; a site where I felt belonging and
alienation, contradictory thoughts and emotions.
In 1997 the Georgian artist Koka Ramishvili asked all the
international representatives in Georgia for permission to
make a film about embassies. He was asking to film only a
single object from behind their closed walls. This was his

0
response in terms of the new territorial becomings in the
capital of the newly independent republic. Embassies were
one of the first signs of reterritorialization on the landscape
of his/my generation: after the soviet system collapsed, after
the independence movement, after civil war, after long lasting
isolation, against the background of ruins, uncertainties and
chaos; also in terms of our desire to be recognized, of our
expectations and our hopes, when with the establishment
of embassies suddenly the desirable distant world became
close to real. However, ‘open’ embassies soon became sites
‘closure’, with long queues and frustration in front of heavy
guarded doors, where all our previous dreams fell short.
Koka Ramishvili wanted to pass that frontier in order to question
the homogeneity of their facades in their interior design.
Inside, things (objects, furniture, technology) were eclectic, as
was expected, from different countries and manufacturers.
I remembered all that when I was in Belgravia Square,
surrounded by several embassies. There was a moment of
close parallel evocations, bridges between my past experience
and future journey, with the Venice Biennale, which stages art
and artists in similar frameworks (the Biennale gives the artist
a ‘green cars’ in terms of her worldwide acceptance); very
different landscapes and buildings resembled each other in
terms of uniformity, at the same time providing the same sort
of questions: about their interiors, about ‘invisible’ and about
‘heterogeneity’.
My initial questions were produced by the same circumstances
and by the same sort of proliferations. They were about
identity and subjectivity, about identity and difference. But
not in terms of their binary presuppositions, or any sort of
causalities in between them, rather in terms of becomings;
becoming ‘which lacks a subject distinct from itself’, or any
sort of form (Identity), just in it’s pure process (Deleuze and
Guattari, 1999: pp 283-284). ‘Take off your shoes, with naked
feet, put on the two crystal shoes, close your eyes, don’t move,
and make you departure,’ those were the instructions of the
performance artist Marina Abramovic to her audience, in
order to turn viewers into participants, to show perspectives
opening through relations with the art. Crystal shoes, or shoes
for departure, were one of the rare art objects which this
artists ever made, for the mental journey, for the metaphysical
departure.
I took the words ‘Shoes for Departure’ as the title of my work,
it order to indicate another category of participation, spaces of
frustrated imaginations in our society and human gatherings,
in transitory spaces such as embassies. I also took them to
as a reminder that beyond the misery of mundane thresholds
which ironically thwart our desires, there is always a possibility
for the imagination, for art.
There is a general desire for a common, international space
and there are social and political reproductions of that desire:
institutional formations and structures, such as the Venice
Biennale, which are founded on that interest. This desire
expands into more and more areas of advanced technologies
and new media of communication. Within those systems,
neither borders nor subjectivities are static anymore, especially
in terms of art and creativity, in terms of the constant process
of transformation and becoming. Art, as the medium of
proliferations, of affects and/or desires, challenges all sorts of
borders, ‘stereotypes’, ‘framings’ and boundaries.
Borders are simultaneously real and abstract, territorial
and temporal phenomena; invisible lines of divisions with
different manifestations: in mythologies, in politics, in art, in
language; sites or negotiations and differences, segregations,
relationships and conflicts; symbolic but still ‘heavily armed’,
borders are always in a process of becoming, of transformation;
zones where an alternative history takes place; places of
placeless histories and placeless geographies.
Today art is maybe more mobile that anything else, despite
strict regulations and complicated rules concerning it. Attempts
to administer art have resulted in a whole set of policies and
institutional hierarchies for it. In many countries there are still
restrictions in terms of art traveling, involving bureaucratic
scenarios and official governing bodies dealing within it, where
the dream of a free space for art and artists often fails. But
sometimes, on the contrary, it inspires the changing of its
own boundaries. It is interesting that very contemporary art
is almost invisible (in the sense of ephemeral, or immaterial)
in terms of border crossing, in terms of control. The art
which resists selective judgments about it (judgments about
what is valuable and none-valuable), and cannot be defined
in terms if bureaucracy (customs declarations); far from
any particularities (styles or genres) and the moral rhetoric
of heritage, it escapes sight completely and is smuggled
without being noticed. It is just a matter of curiosity and
further frustrations, when to the question whether they carry
with them or not any artwork, artists deny their mission.
© Keti Japharidze, art critic, Tbilisi – London
Images:
Koka ramishvili,
uK Embassy to Georgia, Tbilisi. 1998 from
the series ‘pronostic Eventuel’.
Color photography, on aluminum, limited
edition, courtesy of the artist.
The uSA Embassy to Georgia, Tbilisi.
1998 from the series ‘pronostic Eventuel’.
Color photography, on aluminum, limited
edition, courtesy of the artist.
German Embassy to Georgia, Tbilisi. 1998
from the series ‘pronostic Eventuel’.
Color photography, on aluminum, limited
edition, courtesy of the artist.

Borders
are
simultan-
eously
real
and
aBstract

qeTi jafariZe
samgzavro fexsacmelebi
_ yovelTvis iyide bileTi! _ vuTxari Cems mozard vaJs saqarTvelodan did britaneTSi sacxovreblad
gadasvlisTanave. kulturuli gansaxvavebebis, londonis sagzao moZraobisa da sazogadoebriv transportSi
aqtiuri kontorlis gamo, vfiqrobdi mis momavalzeE da imaze, Tu rogor damecva igi policiisgan. ‘ar
dagaviwydes avtobusis bileTi!’ _ mas Semdeg amas vumeoreb, an alternativas vTavazob: ‘ubralod fexiT
iare!’
radgan Cvens SemosazRvrul samyaroSi, romelic mTlianad aris Sevsebuli xiluli da uxilavi sazRvebiT,
sistemebiTa da qselebiT, iseTi politikuri da dadgenili CarCoebiT, rogoricaa ‘erovnuli saxelmwifo’,
‘sakuTreba’, ‘legaluroba’ da ‘kanoni’...
Cven, ki CarTulebi an gandevnilebi, mudmivad SuaSi moqceulni, vibrZviT imisaTvis, rom movergoT mas...
Cveni pirovneba yalibdeba ise, rom ukve mis nawils warmovadgenT, misadagebulni, dabadebulni da
damonebulni sxvadasxva formiT. amgvarad, gaucxoebulebs sakuTar TavTan da sxvadasxva adamianebTan,
mainc gvsurs Tavisuflebi viyoT...
Cveni sacxovrebeli sivrce ufro da ufro izRudeba. Sav-TeTr samyaroSi, sadac gamWvirvaloba mxolod
utopiaa da iluzia, fexsacmeli gvrCeba damoukidebeli gadaadgilebis erTaderT SesaZleblobad, im
natvrad, romelic gvamSvidebs mogzaurobis dros... radgan fexsacmeli yvelafers ambobs Cvens Sesaxeb,
Cvens pirovnebasa da survilebze. fexsacmeli gansazRvravs Cveni mogzaurobis mimarTulebas, raTa ‘fexze
davdgeT’ ara viRacis droisa da sivrcis sistemaSi, aramed rTul geografiul rukaze, saagentoebis
sivrceSi, romelic yvelas gvakavSirebs...
fexsacmeli identifikaciis erT-erTi saSualebaa, romliTac viniRbebiT. mas bevri ramis Tqma SeuZlia Cveni
martoobis Sesaxeb, im adgilis Sesaxeb, romelsac Tavs vafarebT...
me jer kidev utopisti var da mjera jadosnuri zRaprebis, sadac fexsacmelebi ucnauradaa dakavSirebuli
Cvens bedTan. mjera mfrinavi fexsacmelebis, romelTac jadosnobis daZlevac ki SeuZliaT.
es teqsti im namuSevars efuZneba, romelic 2002 wlis zafxulSi gadaviRe londonSi, germaniis saelCos
mimdebare teritoriaze, sadac Sengenis vizis misaRebad sxvadsxva warmoSobis xalxia TavSeyrili. isini
saelCoSi Sesvlas yovel dilas 3 saaTidan elodebian. zogierTi maTgani mTel Rames iq atarebs. xelSi
anketebi da pasporti ukaviaT. yvela mzadaa, gadaixados aucilebeli safasuri. me rigSi mdgomi xalxis
fexsacmelebi gadaviRe, rigSi, romelSic ar aris moZraoba, sadac fexebi daRlilia an TiTqmis ‘miZinebuli’,
vidre maT oficialuri piri ar gamoiZaxebs, raTa kvlav ‘gamoaRviZos’.
mec erT-erTi maTgani viyavi. mec vizas velodi. msurda, veneciis bienales gaxsnaze Cavsuliyavi.
goldsmitis kolejSi es Cemi bolo weli iyo da mindoda, disertacia am gamofenaze damewera. iZulebuli
viyavi iq mivsuliyavi, saqarTvelos moqalaqeobis damadasturebeli pasportisa da mkacri italiuri savizo
procedurebis gamo, rac imas niSnavda rom Sansi ar mqonda, italiis viza droulad mimeRo. germaniis
an Sengenis vizis aRebas naklebi dro dasWirdeboda. Tumca, miuxedavad ukmayofilebisa da yoymanisa,
germaniaSi Casvlas mainc ar vapirebdi.
Cemi naSromis dasrulebidan maleve ‘gardianSi’ (Guardian) statia gamoqveynda saTauriT - ‘foCebiani
fexsacmelebi? ese igi britaneTi TqvenTvis ar aris’ (GGibbons, 2003). statia saemigracio samsaxuris yofili
TanamSromlis mieri ltolvilis statusis miRebis msurvelTa Sesaxeb daweril wigns exeboda. did
britaneTSi uamravi ltolvili Cadis, magram maT uariT istumreben ‘araswori fexsacmelebis’ gamo. statia
ucnaurad iyo dakavSirebuli Cems samuSaosTan. davfiqrdi ‘yovlismxedvel’ Tvalze, Cems damokidebulebaze
‘transcendentur’ damkvirvebelTan, ‘absolituri xilulobisa’ da ‘konfidencialurobis’ problemaze
adamianebis cxovrebaSi. mas Semdeg xSirad SeminiSnavs, rogor enacvleba fexsacmeli saxes, rodesac saWiroa

vinmes pirovnebis miCqmalva, gansakuTrebiT,
aRsarebis tipis saubrebSi. saxeebis magivrad
fexsacmelebs aCveneb Tundac satelevizio
programebisa da BBC-is gadacemebSi emigrantebis
an didi britaneTis Sinagan saqmeTa saministros
Sesaxeb.
‘gamoxatvis’ yvela doneze swored maSin aRmova-
Cine ‘uxilavi’, dafaruli identuroba, aRbeWdili
sxvadasxva niSniT. sxvagvarad rom vTqvaT, aRmova-
Cine uxilavi xilul sistemaSi. sazRvrebisa da sakontrolo
xazebze, pasportebisa da gansxvavebuli
identurobis gamomxatvel ‘uniformebSi’. uxilavi,
romelic ‘yvelasaTvis xilulia’ da ‘ufro xiluli
vidre xiluli’ (Baudrillard) simbolur, sivrciT da
droiT wesrigSi, rbili, gadasvlisa da moZraobis
TvalsazrisiT, riTac dasaxlebulia ‘myari’ struqturebi
da rasac derida ‘diferanss’ (difference) uwodebs,
anu mudmiv TviTdaSlas.
veneciis bienaleze disertaciis dawera TbiliSi,
saqarTveloSi, Cems mSobliur qalaqSi yofnis dros
gadavwyvite. es aRdgomis win iyo. disertaciis
Temis wardgenis bolo vada axlovdeboda da amis
gamo Zalian vRelavdi. saqarTveloSi yofna, Cemi
da Cemi ojaxis did britaneTSi sacxovreblad
gadasvlidan sami wlis Semdeg, yvelaze ufro
damabneveli gamocdileba aRmoCnda. swored maSin,
axlo megobrebma (xelovanebma), romlebmac cota
xnis win saerTaSoriso xelovnebis samyarosTan
gaucxoeba igrZnes, mTxoves, momavalSi veneciis
bienaleze qarTuli pavilionis kuratorobaze
mefiqra. absoluturad moumzadebeli viyavi
amisTvis, magram amave dros, xelovanebis survili
da motivacia gasagebi iyo CemTvis. es SesaZlebels
gaxdida veneciis bienaleSi maT monawileobas.
veneciis bienale ukve kars iyo momdgari.
xelovnebis yvelaze ufro cnobili gamofena,
uaRresad damuxtuli adgili, romelic mTeli
msofliodan xelovnebis akumulirebas axdens. im
adgilebidan, sadac arasodes vyofilvar da sadac
didi siamovnebiT wavidodi. es Cemi sfero iyo da
rodesac igive meoredac SemomTavazes, vupasuxe,
rom merCivna, amaze disertacia damewera.
amave dros, erovnuli pavilionis koncefcia yvelas
ukve moZvelebulad da Zalian ucnaurad gveCveneboda.
is Zalian hgavda Zvel imperiul arqetips.
xelovneba da xelovanebi TiTqos ‘emonebodnen’ am
CarCoebs. maxsendeboda bavSvobaSi nanaxi filmebi,
romlebSic venecia, qairosa da baRdadis msgavsad,
monebiT vaWrobda... cudi gagebiT, bazrisa da sabazro
Rirebulebebis TvalsazrisiT... kavkasiuri da
TeTri rasis warmomadgenlebis SexedulebaTa urTierTgacvla
met SekiTxvas badebda Cveni identurobis
Sesaxeb... mSvenieri saRamo iyo, TiTqmis rogorc
sizmarSi,... Cemi ‘saxlis’ WerqveS. megobrebTan er-
Tad, Zalian STamagonebeli aRmoCenebisa da Semo-
Tavazebebis saRamo... gacocxlebuli tramvebi,
‘mexsierebisa da amneziis kombinacia’ (Ernest Renan),
rac veneciis spektaklTan asocirdeboda, rasac
veneciis araCveulebrivi bienale kidev ufro met
elfers Zenda... mas Semdeg, rac gadawyvetileba mivi-
Re, erovnulobis sakiTxi CemTvis mTavari gaxda. is
mniSvnelovani iyo rogorc Temis ‘gaxsnis’ Tvalsaz-
g l o b a l
KOKKOKOKOKOKOKB
koka ramiSvili
germaniis saelCo saqarTveloSi, Tbilisi, 1998
seriidan ‘Ppronostic Eventuel’, feradi fotografia
aluminiumze, limitirebuli gamocema,
mxatvris sakuTreba.
risiT, aseve Tavdapirvelad warmosaxviTi, Semdeg ki
namdvili mogzaurobis gamo, romelsac Tan sdevda
mravali xelisSemSleli piroba (magaliTad, vizis
miRebis wesi) da Tavs moxveuli gegma. erovnuli niSnebi,
romelic sxvadasxva formiT vlindeboda da
TiTqosda dominirebda kidec sivrceSi, sadac moZraoba
miwevda.
1997 wels qarTvelma mxatvarma koka ramiSvilma
saqarTveloSi moqmedi saerTaSoriso warmomadgenlobebisgn
saelCoebis Sesaxeb filmis gadaRebis
nebarTva iTxova. mas daxuruli kedlebis miRma mxolod
erTi sagnis gadaReba surda. es iyo pasuxi
damoukidebeli respublikis dedaqalaqSi axali

teritoriebis warmoSobaze.Cveni Taobis landSaftSi reteritorializaciis pirvel niSans saelCoebi warmoadgenda.
sabWoTa sistemis rRvevis, damoukideblobisTvis brZolis, samoqalaqo omisa da xangrZlivi
izolaciis Semdeg, ngrevis da qaosis fonze, romelsac molodini da imedic sdevda, Soreuli saocnebo samyaro,
swored saelCoebis gaxsnasTan erTad, uecrad axlobeli da realuri gaxda. Tumca ‘gaxsnili’ sael-
Coebi male gadaiqca ‘Caketil’ sivrced kargad daculi karebis win Tavmoyrili grZeli rigebiTa da gacruebuli
imedebiT. ocneba sakmarisi ar aRmoCnda.
koka ramiSvils surda gadaelaxa es sazRvari, raTa epasuxa kiTxvaze, ramdenad Seesabameboda erTmaneTs
saelCoebis fasadi da Sida interieri. sagnebi (aveji da teqnika), rogorc mosalodeli iyo, ekleqturi
aRmoCnda.
belgraviis moedanze, saelCoebiT garSemortymuls, maxsovda yvelaferi es. Zneli ar iyo paralelis
gavleba warsul gamocdilebasa da momaval mogzaurobas Soris, veneciis bienalesTan, romelic xelovnebas
iseve, rogorc xelovanebs, msgavs CarCoebSi aqcevs. (Tuki gaviTvaliswinebT, rogor cvlis is msoflios
damokidebulebas, bienale xelovans erTgvar green card-s aZlevs). erTi SexedviT gansxvavebuli landSaftebi
da Senobrbi erTmaneTs uniformebiviT hgavda da amave dros, imave kiTxvebs badebda maTi interieris gamo.
Tavdapirveli SekiTxvebi kvlav identurobas, individualurobasa da gansxvavebas Seexeboda. ara maT Soris
arsebuli pirobiTi kavSiris, aramed Camoyalibebis TvalsazrisiT (Camoyalibebisa, ‘rodesac ar arsebobs
misgan gansxvavebuli sagani’ an ramenairi forma (piroba) Deluze & Guattari).
...’gaixade fexsacmeli!...SiSveli fexebiT!...Caicvi brolis fexsacmeli, Tvalebi daxuWe, ar gainZre da
wadi, gaemgzavre!...’ _ am sityvebiT mimarTa perfomansis sferoSi moRvawe mxatvarma marina abramoviCma
auditorias, raTa mayurebelebi monawileebad eqcia da xelovnebasTan urTierTobis perspeqtiva eCvenebina.
brolis an samgzavro fexsacmeli xelovnebis im iSviaT saganTa Sorisaa, romelic xelovans gonebrivi
mogzaurobisTvis, metafizikuri mgzavrobisTvis Seuqmnia.
Cemi naSromis saTaurad ‘samgzavro fexsacmelebi’ avirCie, raTa mimeTiTebina saelCoebTan adamianTa
TavSeyris satranzito sivrcesa da gacruebul imedze. avirCie, rogorc Sexseneba, rom miwier tanjvas iqiT,
romelic TiTqos anadgurebs Cvens survilebs, yovelTvis rCeba adgili warmosaxvisa da SemoqmedebisTvis.
arsebobs erTiani saerTaSoriso sivrcis Seqmnis survili, romelsac Tavisi socialuri da politikuri
gamoxatulebebic aqvs – garkveuli warmonaqmnebi da struqturebi. iseTebi, rogoricaa veneciis bienale. es
survili sul ufro metad moicavs ganviTarebul teqnologiebsa da komunikaciebs, axali mediebis sferos.
am sistemebis SigniT sazRvrebi da individualoba aRaraa mdgradi, radgan isini mudmivi Camoyalibebis,
gardaqmnisa da Semoqmedebis procesSi imyofebian. xelovnebac, romelic amave dros efeqtebisa da
survilebis sferoa, ayalibebs ‘stereotipebs’, ‘CarCoebsa’ da ‘sazRvrebs’.
sazRvrebi, rogorc teritoriuli da droiTi fenomeni, erTdroulad reluricaa da abstraqtulic. es
miTologiaSi, politikaSi, xelovnebasa Tu enaSi sxvadasxva formiT gamoxatuli uxilavi gamyofi xazebia,
romlebic izolaciaSi, urTierTobebsa da konfliqtebSi vlindeba. simboluri, Tumca jer kidev ‘kargad
aRWurvili’ sazRvrebi mudam gardaqmnis procesSia. es ‘uadgilo’ istoriebisa da geografiebis adgilia, is
zonaa, sadac alternatiuli istoria viTardeba.
SesaZloa, xelovneba dRes ufro mobiluria vidre sxva ram, miuxedavad mkacri ganawesisa da masTan dakav-
Sirebuli rTuli wesebisa. xelovnebis marTvis survilis Sedegad warmoiSva politikisa da instituciuri
ierarqiis mTeli jaWvi. araerT qveyanaSi xelovnebis transportirebasTan jer kidev bevri akrZalvaa da biurokratiuli
proceduraa dakavSirebuli. masSi mravali oficialuri samTavrobo struqturaa CarTuli.
es xels uSlis xelovnebisa da xelovanTa ocnebis asrulebas Tavisufali sivrcis Sesaxeb. magram xandaxan,
swored is STaagonebs xelovans, Secvalos Tavisi sakuTari sazRvrebi. sainteresoa, rom ultraTanamedrove
xelovneba TiTqmis mouxelTebelia (efemeruli an aramaterialuri), sazRvrebis gadalaxvisa da kontrolis
TvalsazrisiT. es is xelovnebaa, romelic uZlebs kritikas (kritikas imis Sesaxeb, Tu ra aris faseuli
da ra ara) da romelic ar isazRvreba biurokratiuli niSniT (sabaJo deklaracia) detalebisgan (stilis
an Janrisgan) da moraluri ritorikisgan daclili, is Tavs aRwevs konkretul garemos da aralegalurad,
SeumCnevlad gadakveTs sazRvrebs. es ubralod cnobismoyvareobis an Semdgomi ukmayofilebis sakiTxia.
SekiTxvaze, miaqvT Tu ara Tan xelovnebis nimuSi, mxatvrebi uariT pasuxoben da uaryofen TavianT misias.
© qeTi jafariZe, xelovnebaTmcodne, Tbilisi – londoni

Art, as the medium of proliferations, of affects and
desires, challenges all sorts of borders, ‘stereotypes’,
‘framings’ and boundaries...
‘venecia’, 2005, mariana eigenheeri
didi britaneTi/Sveicaria
Calling Venice, 2005, Marianne Eigenheer
uK/Switzerland

Iliko Zautashvili
6
‘TransparenT’
Walls
of The
CauCasian
labyrinTh
Independence and freedom are the priorities defining valuable relations between free personality and society.
I do not think that creative process depends on power, (government, law) society or their ordinary needs. They are only capable
to providing guarantees for free choice and self-expression.
In the light of latest developments in contemporary art in the South Caucasus, it is important to emphasize curatorial practice
and some positions of alternative art history and multi-culturalism. I look at these aspects in a context of global art, history and
artistic activity. The problems and questions raised today have certain reasons in past and present.
IN ThE GEOpOLITICAL prISON. The South Caucasus is a cross point of the geopolitical interests of the west as well as the
east. Each interested sides tries to involve Georgia into the sphere of its influence. It makes society excessively politicized and
distrustful in terms of free choice, unstable both politically and economically.
Despite the extreme geopolitical situation in the South Caucasus, the west is familiar only with some aspects of mixed problematic
of this boundary region, found itself between east and west. Multiple nationalities, ethnic groups, religious confessions and
communities as well as multi-cultural layers coexist here during millenniums. Unfortunately, the events of the Caucasus’ are
usually assessed on the bases of ‘projections’ elaborated in other contexts, on the base of apparently similar situations.
Contemporary art in Georgia has originated and developed in the centre of Caucasian course of events, in multi-ethnical, multicultural
surroundings. Against a background of Western sociopolitical and cultural processes, Contemporary art in Georgia, while
never breaking the link with the West, is characterized by specific traits, both in ideological and aesthetical terms.
It is an art in which we can see a number of differences between on the one hand the criteria formed in a western context and
on the other the specificities of the Caucasus ‘character’. The events that have taken place in Eurasia over the last two centuries
have proved to be rich and stimulating, even contradictory, all of which has led to the formation of the mentality and aesthetics
culture and art in Georgia. Today, despite the problems afflicted the whole Caucasian region, we are witnessing an intensification
of cultural processes, born of society’s need to resolve social problems within the frameworks of the extension and modernization
of cultural exchanges. It is in Tbilisi the capital of Georgia and the traditional cultural center of the Caucasus, that we see the
most striking and varied aspects of new trends. The artistic movements which are developing in this city are indicative of the fact
that there are radical changes afoot at least at the regional level, in terms of values.
ArT Being in art is full of contradictions. Perhaps it goes beyond commonplace, norms and morals. It might be perplexing for
some. However, an artist is almost the same as the rest but the rest not always risk becoming an artist. Being a contemporary
artist means position rather then profession. Under the pressure of consumerism art gets dependant on the ‘fancy’ and needs
of society. History of contemporary art in the form it has developed, offers multiple clichés and ready answers. It seems that,
from the very beginning, it was forming due to already established prototypes of criteria and evaluations, not considering new
ideas and a given context. From this point of view, the alternative history of art is quite important. One of the similar clichés is the
definition, that the crisis of society motivates contemporary art. It is hard to argue with this notion, since art emerges and exists
in concrete environment and intersects with the progressive as well as destructive tendencies. We can always attach this or that
aesthetic position with a certain situation, like drawing parallels with the climate, order of stars, daily routine or subconscious
fears. However, there is always something more then straight reflections. Art cannot be perceived only as a time notion. Art is a
spatial, unlimited category. In this matter, the mission of an artist is carrying out through the penetration and capture of various
levels, forming psychological spheres of society.
TOdAy. I have marked the 1970s as Today, as something not accomplished or passed, but the present outstretched in time.
Events taking place in that period greatly defined the general orientation of counter-tendencies of art as the world view and
the life position. Questions raised in that time are deciding until now. It was breaking stage of the 20th century. Past had left

in museums and archives for good. This was a period of searching and new ways of expression. The process itself but a result
became important.
The 1980s were a fertile and radical decade for the progressive movements in art. It was at this time that contemporary art
in Georgia attempted to overcome regional limits and to go beyond the boundaries of local issues. In this period art activity of
Georgian artists moves to the west, actively exhibiting and carrying out joint projects with western artists.
During last years, art processes in Georgia became more dynamic. Nevertheless, Georgia is still facing the typical problems
characterizing the post Soviet space. In the past, it was the dictatorship that hindered the development of art. Obstacle is now
poorly established capitalism. Today art in Georgian is facing a dilemma: on the one hand, the integration into European cultural
reorganization and on the other, the conservation of national identity.
FuTurE. The newest, economic and geopolitical climate demands the implementation of new strategy in culture and art.
Despite the difficulties, it is extremely important to benefit from the results of accumulated experience, theoretical and aesthetic.
The current geopolitical, economical and cultural configuration is leading us to imagine the new relations in arts and culture
between the Europe and the Caucasus. Tbilisi has a possibility to play an important role in European artistic mobility and cultural
exchange. Historically too, placed in the middle of the Caucasus, Tbilisi was a crossroad of cultural as well as economic and
political interests.
WhAT AN ArTIST ExpECTS FrOM A CurATOr? Today, around the world, a lot more curatorial then artists’ projects are being
realized. In this respect, I’d like to see curators being more open regarding artists and not simply to use them as a material in
their mental games. It is obvious that curatorial intervention can make an art project and exhibition more substantial. However,
this means that an artist as a person stays in the shade. In such situation, curators are not interested in farther fate of an artist.
Thus, only instant success and profit from the realization of the project is important for the curator. Unfortunately, curators ready
for a longer-term cooperation with an artist or group of artists is rear indeed. As a result, nowadays is emerging a new type of
professional combining artistic activity with curatorial practice.
IN ThE CONTEMpOrAry WOrLd Or hOW TO LIVE ONE’S OWN LIFE. Each epoch is distinguished by its actuality and dynamics.
For the inhabitants of any epoch there is their ‘own time’. The phrase ‘our time’ always invokes a sense of the past. Though in
the past people also use to say: ‘our time’. The only thing that might be said about the past is that the attitudes of the past are
slightly different from those of nowadays.
For us our century is still uncompleted ‘past’ or the ‘present’, stretched in space and time. However, the ‘future’ seems to be
another epoch. One thing is for certain: the charm of our era is inspired by the man’s aspiration to gain freedom as a condition
for self-expression and sense of life.
We should learn to live our lives in our time. ‘To live one’s own life’, as used by Marcel Duchamp, only implies one thing: unconditional
freedom, the moral category within which a new type of personality is being formed. For this reason, being an artist is
more a position then a profession. Whether true or not, analyzing the past from our point, we find that, the process by which one
becomes aware of innovative effort, involves accepting freedom as a categorical imperative. The experienced freedom orientates
us towards the future that won’t be that different from the present. Just as with the creative so the destructive processes will be
more dynamic. In any case, priority of free will is going to define society moving forward. Seeing and perceiving today’s charm
means accepting the present as it is. It makes us neither to regret the past, nor to fear the future.
© Iliko Zautashvili, artist, art historian, independent curator.
g l o b a l
Iliko Zautashvili, ‘Labyrinth‘, diptych, 2006, photography

iliko zautaSvili
8
kavkasiuri labirinTis
‘gamWvirvale’ kedlebi
Tavisufleba da damoukidebloba is prioritetebia, romlebic mniSvnelovnad gansazRvraven urTierTobebs
Tavisufal pirovnebasa da damoukidebel sazogadoebas Soris.
SemoqmedebiT process arasodes gansazRvravs Zalaufleba (mTavroba, kanoni), sociumi da misi yoveldRiuri
moTxovnilebebi. am ukanasknelTa daniSnuleba mxolod isaa, rom Tavisufal arCevans da TviT gamoxatvas
Seuwyos xeli. samxreT kavkasiaSi, Tanamedrove xelovnebaSi bolo dros ganviTarebuli movlenebis
gansaxilvelad mniSvnelovania kuratoruli praqtikis, zogierTi istoriuli aspeqtis, xelovnebis
alternatiuli istoriisa da multi-kulturalizmis aqcentireba. am aspeqtebs globaluri xelovnebis,
istoriisa da xelovanTa aqtivobis konteqstSi ganvixilav. dRes warmoqmnil problemebs warsulSi da
awmyoSi arsebuli mizezebi gansazRvraven.
geo-politikur sapyrobileSi
samxreT kavkasia dasavleTis da aRmosavleTis geo-politikur interesTa gadakveTaze mdebareobs, sadac
orive mxare cdilobs Tavisi gavlenis qveS moaqcios saqarTvelo. yovelive es sazogadoebis undoblobas
da mis zedmetad politizirebas iwvevs, rac Tavis mxriv ganapirobebs Tavisufali arCevanis SezRudulobas,
iseve rogorc politikur da ekonomikur arastabilurobas. miuxedavad samxreT kavkasiis eqstremaluri
geo-politikuri mdebareobisa, dasavleTi am mosazRvre regionis mravalferovani problematikis mxolod
zogierT aspeqts icnobs. aq aTaswleulebis manZilze Tanaarsebobdnen sxvadasxva erovnebebi, religiuri
konfesiebi da eTnikuri jgufebi TavianTi mravalSriani kulturiT. magram, samwuxarod, kavkasiaSi mimdinare
movlenebi xSirad gansxvavebul garemoSi SemuSavebuli kriteriumebiT fasdeba. Tanamedrove xelovneba
saqarTveloSi kavkasiuri movlenebis SuagulSi, multi-eTnikur, multi-kulturul garemoSi Camoyalibda.
dasavleTSi mimdinare socialur-politikuri da kulturuli movlenebis fonze, qarTuli Tanamedrove
xelovneba xasiaTdeba gansxvavebuli ideologiiT da esTetikiT, Tumca yovelTvis inarCunebs kontaqts
dasavlur wyaroebTan. amis gamo xSirad warmoiqmneba gansxvavebuli ‘wakiTvis’ problema, erTis mxriv dasavleTSi
damkvidrebul kriteriumebsa da meores mxriv, kavkasiuri ‘xasiaTis’ Taviseburebebs Soris.
bolo ori aTasweluelis manZilze evraziaSi mimdinare movlenebma bevrad ganapiroba qarTuli xelovnebis
mentalobis da esTetikis Camoyalibeba. dRes, miuxedavad saerTo kavkasiuri problemebisa, saqarTveloSi
SeiniSneba kuturuli procesebis gaaqtiureba da sazogadoebis moTxovnileba, gadaWras socialuri problemebi
kulturuli aqtivobis gafarToebis da kulturuli gacvlebis gziT.
TbilisSi - tradiciulad kavkasiis kulturul centrSi – SeimCneva axali, mniSvnelovani tendeciebis warmoSoba
da ganviTareba. TbilisSi mimdinare art-procesebi safuZvels qmnian radikaluri cvlilebebis da
faseulobaTa gadafasebisTvis, Tundac regionaluri masStabiT.
xelovneba.
xelovanis cxovreba winaaRmdegobebiTaa aRsavse. is Cveul normebs da morals scildeba, rac zogierTisTvis
gamaRizianebelia. xelovani sazogadoebis iseTive wevria, rogorc yvela danarCeni, magram cota vinme Tu
bedavs gaxdes xelovani, radgan iyo xelovani, samyaros Tavisebur aRqmas da pozicias ufro niSnavs, vidre
profesias. momxmarebluri damokidebulebis zegavleniT xelovneba sul ufro metad xdeba damokidebuli
sazogadoebis moTxovnilebebze da socialur dakveTas asrulebs.
Tanamedorve xelovnebis istoria, Tavisi ganviTarebis Taviseburebebidan gamomdinare uamrav kliSes da mza
pasuxs gvTavazobs. mas TiTqos dasawyisSive gaaCnda kriteriumebis ukve Camoyalibebuli prototipebi da
Sefasebis sistema da arasodes iTvaliswinebda axal ideebs da mocemul konteqsts. am TvalsazrisiT savsebiT
SesaZlebelia xelovnebis alternatiuli istoriis arseboba. erT erTi aseTi kliSe imaSi mdgomareobs,
rom TiTqos Tanamedorve xelovnebis warmoSobas sociumis krizisi ganapirobebs. Znelia SeewinaaRmdego am
azrs, radgan xelovneba konkretul garemoSi Cndeba, arsebobs da rogorc pozitiur, aseve negatiur tendenciebTan
gadaikveTeba. yovelTvis SegviZlia esa Tu is esTetikuri pozicia movargoT konkretul situacias,
iseve rogorc gavavloT paralelebi amindTan, varskvlavTa wyobasTan, yoveldRiurobasa da qvecnobierTan.
magram yovelTvis arsebobs raRac, rac anareklze ufro metia. xelovneba ar aris mxolod droiTi
kategoria. xelovneba sivrcobrivi, aralimitirebuli kategoriaa.
dRes.
periods, 70-ani wlebidan dRemde, vixsenieb rogorc, ‘dRes’ radgan xazi gavusva imas, rom es periodi mxolod
droSi ganfenili awmyoa. maSindelma movlenebma didad ganapirobes xelovnebis ZiriTadi orientacia da
kontr-tendenciebi, rogorc msoflmxedveloba da cxovrebiseuli pozicia. maSin wamoWrili sakiTxebi
dRemde gadaWris procesSia. es iyo gardatexis xana me-20 saukuneSi, rodesac warsuli samudamod darCa

muzeumebsa da arqivebSi. es Ziebis da gamomsaxvelobis axali gzebis aRmoCenis
dro iyo. aq mniSvnelovani ufro procesi iyo, vidre Sedegi.
80-ani wlebi nayofieri da radikaluri iyo axali tendenciebis TvalsazrisiT.
swored am periodSi Tanamedrove xelovneba saqarTveloSi cdilobs
gascdes regionalur sazRvrebs da gavides saerTaSoriso arenaze. am periodSi
qarTvel xelovanTa moRvaweoba dasavleTSi inacvlebs, sadac isini ifinebian
da ucxoel kolegebTan erTad erTobliv proeqtebs axorcieleben.
miuxedavad progresuli cvlilebebisa saqarTvelo igive problemebis
winaSe dgas, rogorc post sabWoTa sivrcis TiTqmis yvela qveyana. Tu adre
xelovnebis winaaRmdeg diqtatura gamodioda, axla ZiriTad winaaRmdegobas
jer kidev Camouyalibebeli kapitalizmi warmoadgens. dRes saqarTvelo
mniSvnelovani dilemis winaSe dgas, rac erTis mxriv evropul kulturul
sivrceSi integrirebaSi, xolo meores mxriv erovnuli identifikaciis
SenarCunebisTvis brZolaSi gamoixateba.
momavali.
axali ekonomikuri, geo-politikuri klimati xelovnebasa da kulturaSi
axal strategias moiTxovs. siZneleebis miuxedavad Zalian mniSvnelovania
dagrovili Teoriuli da esTeturi gamocdilebis SenarCuneba. dRevandel
geo-politikur, ekonomikur da kulturul konfiguracias evropasa da kavkasias
Soris urTierTobebis Camoyalibebisken mivyavarT. Tbiliss saSualeba
aqvs CaerTos evropul saxelovnebo moZraobaSi da kulturul gacvlebSi.
istoriuladac, kavkasiis SuagulSi mdebare Tbilisi yoveTvis, ara
marto kulturuli, aramed politikuri da ekonomikuri interesebis gzajvaredini
iyo.
ras elodeba mxatvari kuratorisgan?
dRes msoflioSi xorcieldeba ufro meti kuratoruli, vidre mxatvarTa
proeqtebi. amitom visurvebdi, rom kuratorebi ufro yuradRebiani yofiliyvnen
xelovanebis mimarT da ar gamoiyenon isini masalad sakuTari mentaluri
‘TamaSebisTvis’. kuratoris Careva saxelovnebo proeqts da eqspozicias
ufro fundamenturs, konceptualurs da SemecnebiTs xdis, Tumca Tavad mxatvars
es CrdilSi aqcevs. kurators TiTqmis arasodes ainteresebs xelovanis
Semdgomi bedi. aseT SemTxvevebSi misTvis mxolod momentis warmateba da
Semosavalia mniSvnelovani. samwuxarod, Zalian mcirea iseTi kuratorebis
ricxvi, romlebic dainteresebulni arian xangrZlivi urTierTobiT xelovanTan
an xelovanebis jgufTan. swored amis gamo, ufro aqtiurad vidre
adre, axali tipis profesionali yalibdeba, romelic artistul moRvaweobas
kuratorul saqmianobasTan aTavsebs.
Tanamedroveoba, anu rogor vicxovroT sakuTari cxovrebiT.
yvela epoqa gamorCeulia Tavisi aqtualobiT da dinamizmiT. yvela epoqis
mcxovrebTaTvis arsebobs fraza: ‘Cveni dro’. fraza ‘Cveni dro’ yovelTvis
warsulTan Sexebis SegrZnebas iwvevs. magram warsulSi adamianebi aseve
ambobdnen ‘Cveni dro’. warsulis Sesaxeb mxolod is SeiZleba iTqvas, rom
warsulSi arsebuli damokidebulebebi mcired gansxvavdebian Tanamedrove
Sexedulebebisgan. CvenTvis Cveni epoqa jer kidev dausrulebeli ‘warsuli’
an ‘awmyoa’, romelic drosa da sivrceSia ganfenili. ‘momavali’ ki ‘sxva
epoqaa’. erTi ram cxadia, dRevandeloba gamoirCeva adamianis miswrafebiT
cxovrebis azris Ziebasa da TviT-gamovlenisken. unda viswavloT vicxovroT
Cvens droSi sakuTari cxovrebiT. ‘icxovro sakuTari cxovrebiT’ – marsel
diuSamisTvis upirobo Tavisuflebas niSnavs. swored am upirobo Tavisuflebis,
anu moraluri kategoriis safuZvelze yalibdeba axali tipis
pirovneba. albaT swored amitom, iyo xelovani ufro poziciaa, vidre profesia.
ase Tu ise, warsulze fiqrisas axali aTaswleulis mijnaze sruliad
aSkaraa, rom, inovaciur Zalisxmevas ganapirobebs mxolod Tavisufleba,
rogorc kategoriuli imperativi. gancdil Tavisuflebas momavlisken mivyavaT,
romelic ar iqneba didad gansxvavebuli awmyosgan. amave dros SemoqmedebiTi,
iseve rogorc destruqciuli procesebi ufro dinamiuri gaxdeba.
nebismier SemTxvevaSi swored Tavisufali arCevanis prioritetuli xasiaTi
gansazRvravs sazogadoebis winsvlas. dRevandleobis mimzidvelobis
dasanaxad da aRsaqmelad saWiroa miviRoT awmyo, rogoric is aris. es saSualebas
gvaZlevs ar davrCeT warsulSi da ar gveSindes momavlis.
© iliko zautaSvili, mxatvari, art kritikosi,
Tavisufali kuratori.
luka zautaSvili, ‘minareTi‘, 2006, fotografia Luka Zautashvili, ‘Minaret‘, 2006, photography

0
Temur Javakhi, ‘russian politician’s dream, 2004,
object: bedroom-slippers decorated by Georgian map,
Courtesy of the artist

Niko Tsetskhladze, Galaktion Kintsurashvili, ‘Capriccios in New york‘, 2006, L - print

EVIL
AND
ITS
REVELATION
IN THE
WORKS
OF
FRANCIS
BACON
Koka Ramishvili
‘here is wisdom. Let him that hath
understanding count the number
of the beast: for it if the number of a man;’
revelation (13;18)
This essay will touch upon some of the aspects of the artwork
of Francis Bacon (1909-1992) in the context of phenomena
and events from the end of 19th century through the middle
of the 20th century.
What is its context of this time period?
First, it is from a predominantly scientific and materialistic
outlook. In balance to this, elements of spiritualism and the
use of mediums are brought in. Surprisingly, this creates a
platform for political influence.
Second, the development of photography and cinema liberated
painting from pure naturalism and being purely illustrative.
This in turn created the preconditions for developing new
methods of creativity and the rise of such new currents as
Impressionism, Expressionism, Surrealism, Dadaism, Cubism,
and Futurism.
Third, political scheming and private interests incited the First
World War, which in turn laid the ground for the rise of the Russian
Bolshevik Party, financially supported by groups in Europe
and America (Anthony Sutton,’Wall Street and Bolshevik Revolution’,
1974, pub.‘Arlington House’).
Fourth, while the young Bolshevik nation was gaining strength,
other circles in Europe and America financed and supported
Hitler, making way for the oceans of blood, suffering, and horror
that would later overflow throughout Europe (‘Wall Street
and Rise of Hitler’ Stan Monteith interviews Anthony Sutton, ).
Bacon expanded on these events and interlaced them with
powerful images by tracing one layer of reality, then another.
Traditionally, art criticism consigns the artwork of Francis Bacon
to expressionism and considers him as one of the brightest
representatives of modernism.
His creativity, like a magnifying glass, focuses and turns in-
side out, similar to that of a demon-genius, the distortions and
dramas of 20th century European culture. Through the secret
channels of his own instinct, he moved still further down the
darkness of historical evil.
Archival photos and artistic reproductions of Michelangelo,
Rembrandt, Velazquez, Goya, Ingres, Van Gogh, Picasso, Hitler,
Woodrow Wilson, Eduard Maybridge appear in Bacon’s works
and enable us to enter the deep and latent historic layers of
his paintings.
A ‘collective method’ is clearly visible in ‘Study after Velazquez’s
Portrait of Pope Innocent X’. It is remarkable that the image of
the person with the opened mouth is from Sergey Eisenstein’s
‘The Battleship Potyomkin’. We also see an opened mouth in
furious ecstasy and hands lifted up like those of a chimpanzee
in other works. Is it a casual concurrence or the labels uniting
the inquisitions of the NKVD and Gestapo? In any event, it is an
instinctive hit at a level of imagination, though it is not a fantasy
of the artist or his subjective vision. This is the imagination
that Bacon extends as an enraged impulse. In ‘Grotesque
as Modus Operandi in a Work of Art’ Albina Leibman-Kliks
writes: Bacon’s art is absolutely removed from so-called
naive realism when the reality seen by the often blind eye is
diligently represented without any attempt to get deeper than
the upper layers of it. Bacon’s art is illustrative – images on his
canvases look as if they are extracted from subconsciousness,
from any other world; or to be more correct, they are extracted
from the deeper layers of reality into which he could penetrate
only thanks to his perception. He tries to reach these spheres
somehow, having opened himself without the rest for the
process of communication between him and those unknown
worlds. In other words, the artist extracts the images not from
imagination but from reality.’
The Image of an animal extends from the image of the Pope
in ‘Study’. Shredding the clothes of sanctity, he appears in a
wild fury from the deep layers of reality. The power of authority
suppresses and destroys sanctity. Here there are flashes of
Dostoevsky’s Great Inquisitor – the powerful prince with a

head of Bolshevik/fascist and a body in the vestments of the
Pope.
‘ … As if during the following moment, it will leave for liberty
and will appear to the spectator already without protecting
lattices. Bacon’s pope is a certain product of the suppressed
subconsciousness. This is a repugnant demonic essence,
which has emerged from deep, hidden layers of reality. At any
moment, the demonic phantom can release itself from a cell
and appear in front of an audience in all-frightening beauty.
Strips in Bacon’s work ‘Study after Velazquez’s Portrait of
Pope Innocent X’ can be considered as layers of reality hiding
a frightening truth.’ (Albina Leibman-Kliks)
The force behind the works of Bacon and the logic of his
collective method certainly remain in the construction of
images related to historical events, particularly to a rhythm of
historical evil. If considering Bacon’s works as the results of
hallucinations, the forces interested in it are the ones wishing
to hide the historical truth.
‘It is enough to recollect the concordat concluded by Hitler
with Vatican in 1933 and the political support received at
the turning point of his battle for authority from the German
Catholic Party (the so-called party of ‘the Centre’). Likewise,
an anti-Semitic forgery, ‘Reports of Zionist Wise Men’, written
by Jesuits and distributed in Russia in 1912, was taken up by
German Nazis as the basis for ideology of the total destruction
of the Jews.’ (S.O.Prokofiev)
Here we should consider Bacon’s attitude toward religion. A
staunch atheist, he nonetheless admired the force of religious
painting, and it influenced his style to some extent. According
to him, the crucifixion is a ‘magic armature on which different
sorts of feelings and sensations can be hung’. His constant
return to the theme of crucifixion is hypnotizing. However, what
he places on the ‘magic armature’ is not the image of Christ.
Bacon considered Durer and Velazquez’s belief in resurrection
as vanished.
A transformation of the human body is traceable in his works.
X-rays of teeth become canine and legs turn into paws.
s p o t l i g h t
Other mediums and aspects of spiritualism in western culture
are involved in Bacon’s work. He explained that his only
interest was in the visual aspect, namely in the photos of Albert
von Schrenk Notzing and his use of ectoplasm. We do not
challenge the plausibility of these photos: The important point
is that the phenomenon of materialization of invisible forces
and the parities of those forces affected Bacon’s creativity.
The appearance of strong expressive strokes differing from
the general mood of the picture is reminiscent of von Schrenk
Notzing’s use of ectoplasm.
Maybe Bacon wished to become a medium and to penetrate
other layers of reality. In any event, his method is similar enough
to the mediumistic state. As an expressionist, he was also
trying to shape the imagination by delimiting it from the object.
The following is a statement by Heinz Demisch concerning the
artistic imagination .
In expressionism the artistic imagination arises though
conscious or unconscious efforts and the increase of certain
visible elements, mainly colour and form. In an emotional flame
flashing in the artist, the paints and pictures start to flare,
reaching a level not known for centuries. Vincent Van Gogh
[who inspired Bacon] having cleared the way for the future
colourful imagination of expressionism, wrote many times to
his brother Teo about this kind of creative process .
It is also necessary to explain the surrealist method of work,
as Bacon is sometimes considered of this school as well.
The method consists in the intentional creation of an ‘empty
consciousness’ and the suppression of the conscious ‘I’ by the
introvertive efforts of will. It enables all that lies on the other
side of consciousness, or in the subconscious, to become
known in the form of visionary images that surrealist artist
should embody in their chosen style.
It is possible to assume that the two processes, the suppression
of the conscious ‘I’ by the introvertive efforts of will and the
process of creation, were merged in Bacon in one impulse.
Moreover, Bacon’s lifestyle formed the direction and the
purposes of this impulse and drew the sort of imagination that
s p o t l i g h t

was peculiar to these purposes.
These and other questions concerning the method and
participation of consciousness in the creation of Bacon’s works
are complex and debatable. The main thing is to specify the
doubtless property of the new epoch: It was the tendency to
change consciousness, as many aspects of life and creativity
could not be read through usual perceptions any more.
Below, in an interview, Bacon offers a description of the
process of creativity. This description brings us to a certain
substance, which has a certain material aspect and even a
certain excessive weight, hence the gravitation very peculiar
to Bacon’s works.
In his interview with art critic, David Sylvester, Bacon speaks
about the strange phenomenon present at the creation
process. Bacon describes it as follows: ‘It seems that it is not
you who creates a picture, but that the picture creates itself
through you’.
‘There is something, some substance (we do not know its
name), that participates in the creation of a picture. It seems
that this substance has its own existence independent of an
artist’s will, but closely connected to his perception… You
know, in my case, an image in a picture is accidental, and as I
become older, more strongly expressed. It turns out that I foresee
it in my head. However, I can hardly express what I foresee.
It has never been studied why such a way of making pictures is
sharper than an illustration. I think it happens since the picture
has an independent life. It lives completely independent and
thus transfers the essence of an image more sharply. Therefore
the artist should be capable to open himself, or more correctly,
to open slices of the feelings. Consequently he returns
to life more furiously.’ (In Camera, Martin Harison)
According to Delez, the subject of Bacon’s painting are the
forces and relations between those forces that counteract not
only pictorial and figurative clichés, but also the forces inside
the picture such as ‘body and space’. Marks in his latest works
frequently turn into arrows similar to the vectors of the application
of force. These are pictorial and vital works employed during
the formation of represented body and space.’ (N.A. Kash)
That in turn either constrains or untwists a body in space. As
Bacon once said, ‘I don’t know what to do with a background
behind a figure or a portrait’. Perhaps, therefore his backgrounds
are not completely finished. Amazingly, the chamber-cells
that Bacon creates by drawing direct lines on canvas
constrain and structure the strong-willed bends of coiling and
shouting bodies. This confrontation between space and body
inside the picture is a form-building force at the same time.
Methods used by Bacon and other modernists working in
surrealism and expressionism show that, despite different
approaches, the common tendency is to leave the boundaries
of usual consciousness. Such an approach became peculiar
to painting and sculpture after the withdrawal of nature as a
model. According to the sharp formulation of Paul Klee, ‘art
does not reproduce anything simply visible; art makes visible
something that is otherwise hidden’.
Despite all of its contradictions, Francis Bacon’s work puts
painting on a higher hierarchical step; it becomes a powerful
means for the visualization and materialization of invisible
non-physical processes. Mechanical or digital devices, Xrays,
radiography, and other modern methods of diagnostics
show only the hidden physical substances. Painting has an
opportunity to show what is beyond the physical world. The
doubtless advantage of painting as a practice is the ability to
be procedural and to provide the full (physical and spiritual)
involvement of a person in the creative process.
If we consider the works of Francis Bacon in this key, we
have an opportunity to see and comprehend through this
powerful imagination the evil that bewitched the people and
events of his time. This was possible only through a change of
consciousness. Modernism has been the major platform for
this purpose.
© Koka Ramishvili, artist, curator, Geneva

Kkoka ramiSvili
s p o t l i g h t
boroteba da misi
gamovlenis gzebi
frensis bekonis
SemoqmedebaSi
‘aq aris sibrZne: visac gageba aqvs gamoiTvalos
mxecis ricxvi, radgan ricxvi adamianisaa...’
/gamocxadeba ioanesi, 13;18/
eseiSi frensis bekonis (1909-1992) ferweris zogierT delikatur aspeqtebze im movlenaTa konteqstSi
visaubrebT, romelic me-19 saukunis dasasrulisa da me-20 saukunis Sua wlebisTvis ase damaxasiaTebeli
iyo. da mainc, ras vgulisxmobT am konteqstSi?
upirveles yovlisa, es sabunebismetyvelo mecnierebaTa da materialisturi msoflmxedvelobis
dominantia, romlis sapirispirod, garkveuli wreebi sazogadoebaSi spiritizmis seansebis praqtikas
amkvidrebdnen, rasac sruliad moulodneli Sedegi mohyva _ swored es seansebi iqca politikuri
gavlenis platformad. meores mxriv, fotografiisa da kinos gamoCenam ferwera ilustraciulobisa da
naturalizmisgan gaaTavisufla, ramac, Tavis mxriv, kulturaSi axali meTodebisa da mimdinareobebis
Camoyalibebis winapiroba Seqmna, esenia: impresionizmi, eqspresionizmi, siurrealizmi, dadaizmi, kubizmi,
futuruzmi da a.S. mesame, garkveuli politikuri wreebis piradi interesebiT motivirebulma maqinaciebma
pirveli msoflio omis dawyebas Seuwo xeli. omis Sedegad ruseTSi xelisufleba bolSevikebma Caigdes
xelSi, romelTac evropisa da amerikis zogierTma finansurma jgufebma dauWires mxari. (Anthony Sutton,’Wall
Street and Bolshevik Revolution’, 1974, pub.‘Arlington House’). meoTxe, axlagazrda, mzardi bolSevikuri saxelmwifos
sapirwoned evropisa da amerikis garkveulma wreebma hitleris mxardaWera gadawyvites da, ufro metic, misi
xelisuflebaSi mosvla daafinanses. Sedegad ki, meore msoflio omi daiwyo. sisxlis, tanjvis, SiSis okeanem
mTeli evropa waleka. (‘Wall Street and Rise of Hitler’ Stan Monteith interviews Anthony Sutton, ). yvelaferi es, mZlavr
imaginaciebSi gadaxlarTuli, bekonma, am sityvis pirdapiri mniSvlobiT, realobis Sreebs gamoglija.
xelovnebaTmcodneobiT tradiciaSi bekons omis Semdgomi figuratiuli eqspresionizmisa da modernizmis
erT-erT yvelaze gamoCenil warmomadgenlad miiCneven. misi Semoqmedeba gamadidebeli SuSis msgavsia, bekoni,
rogorc geniosi demoni meoce saukunis evropuli kulturis dramas, yvela mis xarvezzs fokusSi axvedrebs,
saaSkaraoze gamoaqvs da instiqtis faruli arxebiT istoriuli borotebis wyvdiads sul ufro Rrmad
miyveba. bekonis mier gamoyenebuli saarqivo masala: miqelanjelos, rembrandtis, velaskesis, goias, engris,
van gogis, pikasos, hesis, vudro vilsonisa, edvard meibrijis da sxvaTa reproduqciebi da fotografiebi,
romlebic mxatvris ferweris dafaruli, Rrma Sreebis wvdomaSi gvexmareba, missave Semoqmedebaze aranakleb
STambeWdavia. namuSevarSi ‘diego velaskesis portretis papi inokenti X-is Seswavla’, TvalnaTliv Cans
bekonis ‘krebiTi meTodi’. aRsaniSnavia, rom saxe, romelsac risxviTa da sasowarkveTiTa aqvs daRebuli piri,
eizenSteinis film ‘javsnosan potiomkinis’ erT-erTi scenidanaa nasesxebi. mis sxva namuSevarSi seriidan
‘portretis Seswavla’, (1957) bekoni ukve ganrisxebul, eqstazSi pirdaRebul da SimpanzesaviT xelaweul
hitlers gamosaxavs. ra aris es, uneblie damTxveva, instiqturi qmedeba, Tu... niSnebi, romlebic inkvizicias,
suks da gestapos aerTianebs? vfiqrob, imaginaciis doneze mainc instiqtur qmedebasTan gvaqvs saqme. es is
imaginaciaa, romelsac ganrisxebuli bekoni realobas gamoglejs. saqme mxolod mxatvris fantaziasTan, mis
subieqtur xedvasTan rodi gavqvs. Tavis kvlevaSi ‘groteski, rogorc nawarmoebis modus operandi’ albina
leibman-kliqsi wers: ‘bekoni Tavisi SemoqmedebiT absoluturad daSorda im miamit realizms, romelic
gulmodgined aRwers ‘usinaTlo’ TvaliT danaxul sinamdviles da arc ki cdilobs realobis zedapiruli

6
Sreebis miRma SeRwevas. bekonis Semoqmedeba arailustraciulia _ mis tiloze gamosaxuli xatebi TiTqos
aracnobierSi, sruliad sxva samyaroSi daibada. ufro swori iqneba Tu vityviT, rom man Tavisi aRqmis
wyalobiT realobis Rrma SreebSi SeaRwia da am xatebs iq miagno. mxatvris groteskuli xedva axal sferoebs
aRmoaCens. is cdilobs Cawvdes maT bolomde, gaxsnas sakuTari raoba da ucnob samyaroebTan komunikacia
moaxerxos. SeiZleba iTqvas, rom mxatvari Tavis xatebs fantaziaSi ki ara realobaSi eZebs...’
namuSevarSi ‘diego velaskesis portretis papi inokenti X-is Seswavla’, mxecis xat-suraTi papis saxidan
ibadeba. siwmindis saburveli ukugdebulia da is realobis Rrma Sreebidan saSinlad ganrisxebuli mogvevlineba...
avtoritetis Zalaufleba Trgunavs da sabolood acamtverebs siwmindes. aq uneblied gaxsendeba
dostoevkis didi inkvizitori. ama soflis Tavadi, misi Zalaufleba... bolSeviki-faSistis Tavi da papis samoselSi
gaxveuli pontifikis sxeuli... ‘iqmneba STabeWdileba, rom sul ramdenime wuTSi is gaTavisufledeba,
galiis cxaurebs Tavs daaRwevs da mayurebels ase moevlineba. bekonis papi daTrgunuli aracnobieris
produqtia, saZageli demonuri arseba, romelic sinamdvilis Rrma wiaRSi daibada da realobis zedapiruli
Sreebis miRma miimala. nebismier momentSi is galiidan gamoiqceva da mayurebels Tavis SemaSinebel arss
daanaxebs. xazebi bekonis namuSevarSi ‘diego velaskesis portretis papi inokenti X-is Seswavla’, realobis
im zedapirul Sred unda miviCnioT, romelic Tavzardamcem sinamdviles malavs’. (Albina Leibman-Kliks).
bekonis Zala swored imaSia, rom misi ‘krebiTi meTodis’ logika xats istoriuli xdomilebebis Sesabamisad
agebs, is istoriuli borotebis dabadebis ritmis adekvaturia. rodesac mis Semoqmedebas halucinaciebis
produqtad acxadeben, unda vicodeT, rom amas isini akeTeben, vinc istoriis boroti arsis dafarvas cdilobs.
‘sakmarisia gavixsenoT konkordati, romelic hitlersa da vatikans Soris 1933 wels daido da is mxardaWera,
romelic ZalauflebisTvis brZolis gadamwyvet momentSi hitlers germaniis kaTolikurma partiam
(ew. ‘centris’ partiam) gauwia. da kidev, iezuitebis mier Seqmnili da 1912 wels ruseTSi ‘Segdebuli’
nayalbevi, ‘sionis brZenTa oqmebi’, romelic Semdgom germaniis faSisturma reJimma ebraelTa totaluri
ganadgurebis ideologiur safuZvlad gamoiyena’. (S.O.Prokofiev)
aqve bekonis religiisadmi travmatul damokidebulebas unda SevexoT. miuxedavad, ukompromiso aTeizmisa,
bekons sasuliero ferwera aRafrTovanebda, swored am ferweris zegavleniT Camoyalibda misi SemoqmedebiTi
stili. jvarcma, bekonis azriT erTgvari ‘magiuri armaturaa, romelzec nebismier gancdasa da
sensacias Camokideb’. misi mudmivi dabruneba jvarcmasTan, hipnozur zemoqmedebas axdens. magram is, rasac
is ‘magiur armaturaze’ kidebs qristes xats aSkarad upirispirdeba. bekonis sxeuli aRdgomis nacvlad
xorcSi, xSirad mkvdar xorcSi inTqmeba, xolo sisxli myar substanciad iqceva.
bekons miaCnda, rom rwmena aRdgomisa, romelic ase aSkaraa diurerTan da velaskesTan, sabolood daikarga.
erTaderTi, riTac bekoni sikvdils upirspirdeba, animalizaciaa. bekoni Riad gveubneba, rom adamiani mxecia.
misi namuSevrebi adamianis sxeulis transformacias aRwers: rentgeniT gadaRebul suraTze adamianis
kbilebi eSvebad moCans, fexebi _ TaTebad.
bekonis Semoqmedeba evropul kulturaSi am dros arsebul meore tendencias, mediumebis gamoCenasa da
spiritizmis seansebis materializaciis fenomensac exmaureba. is Riad ambobda, rom am fenomenis mxolod
vizualuri aspeqti ainteresebs, kerZod ki albert fon Srenk-notcingis mier spiritizmis seansebis dros
gadaRebuli eqtoplazma (materializaciis fenomeni).
fotografiebis damajereblobaze aRar vikamaTeb, cxadia, rom isini eWvs iwvevs. mniSvnelovania, rom uxilav
ZalTa fenomenma da zogadad ZalTa Tanafardobam bekonis Semoqmedebaze Zlieri zegavlena iqonia. rac
Seexeba albert fon Srenk-notcingis fotosuraTebs, romlebzec materializaciis fenomens vxedavT, maTi

s p o t l i g h t
zemoqmedeba bekonze, aseve TvalnaTelia _ eqspresiuli monasmi, romlebic mis namuSevrebSi Cndeba da romlebic
Zalian mogvagonebs eqtoplazmas, swored am zegavlenis dasturia.
iqneb bekons mediumoba surda da realobis gansxvavebul plastebSi SeRwevas lamobda. yovel SemTxvevaSi
misi meTodi Zalian waagavs mediumis mdgomareobas, miT ufro, rom is, rogorc eqspresionisti obieqtTan
distancirebis meSveobiT, imaginaciis warmoqmnas cdilobs. aq Tanamedrove xelovnebis mkvlevaris hainc
demises gamonaTqvami unda gavixsenoT, rodesac is eqspresiulad Semoqmed mxatvrebTan imaginaciis warmoqmnaze
laparakobs. van gogi erTerTi maTgani iyo da amitom is bekonis SemoqmedebaSi mniSvnelovan adgils
ikavebs. eqspresiuli mxatvruli imaginacia cnobieri an aracnobieri ZalisxmeviT Cndeba, xiluli movlenis
elementebis formisa da feris zrdas moyveba. mxatvris almodebul sulSi ferebi, suraTebi elvarebs
da iseT gamomsaxvelobiT Zalas aRwevs, romelic saukuneebia aRaravis unaxavs. vinsent van gogi, romelmac
pirvelma gaukvala gza feradovan imaginacias, xSirad werda msgavs SemoqmedebiT procesze Tavis Zmas, Teos.
(werili 504, aprili, 1888 w.)
zemoTqmulTan dakavSirebiT, aucilebelia siurialistebis samuSao meTodic aRvweroT, miT ufro, rom
bekons xSirad akavSireben maTTan. siurrealistebi mizandasaxulad qmnidnen ‘cariel cnobierebas’, nebisyofis
intravertuli daZabviT aqrobdnen ‘mes’ aRqmas, rasac vizionerul xatebad gardaqmnili aracnobieri
saaSkaraoze gamohqonda. Semdeg ki mxatvari siurrealisti am xatebs misTvis Cveuli stiliT aRbeWdavda.
unda vivaraudoT, rom bekonTan nebisyofis intravertuli ZalisxmeviT ‘me’-s gaqrobisa da Semoqmedebis
procesi erT suliskveTebaSi gaerTianda. aqve unda iTqvas, rom bekonis Semoqmedebis miznebs, ZiriTad
mimarTulebebs, romlebic imaginaciis garkveul tipebs warmoSobda, misive cxovrebis wesi ganapirobebda.
sakiTxebi, romlebic mxatvris meTods, SemoqmedebiT procesSi cnobierebis monawileobas ukavSirdeba,
rTuli da sakamaToa. magram aucileblad unda iTqvas, rom epoqis mTavar maxasiaTeblad cnobierebis
Secvlis tendencia unda miviCnioT, radgan arsebobisa da Semoqmedebis mravali aspeqti Cveuli cnobierebiT
ukve aRar ikiTxeboda. qvemoT bekonis mier Tavisi Semoqmedebis procesis aRweras SemogTavazebT. am
aRwerilobas iseT substanciamde mivyavarT, romelic materialur aspeqts moicavs, ufro metic, zedmetad
materialuri da amitom gravitaciulia. Tavis interviuSi xelovnebaTmcodne daviT silvestrTan bekoni
saubrobs fenomenze, romelic xelovnebis nawarmoebis SeqmnaSi monawileobs: ‘giCndeba gancda, rom suraTs
Sen ar qmni, ubralod, suraTi Seni meSveobiT qmnis sakuTar Tavs’. arsebobs raRac, substancia (Cven misi
saxeli ar viciT), romelic tilos Seqmnis procesSi monawileobs. geCveneba, rom substancia TavisTavad,
mxatvris nebisgan damoukideblad arsebobs, magram uSualod ukavSirdeba mis aRqmas. bekoni am movlenas ase
xsnis: ‘Sen ici, rom Cems namuSevarSi xat-suraTi SemTxvevis wyalobiT iqmneba. rac ufro didi dro gadis,
miT ufro xSirad memarTeba ase. gamodis, rom yvelafers winaswar vWvret, vWvret, magram ganWvretils ver
warmovTqvam. jer aravis Seuswavlia, ratomaa aseTi Semoqmedeba, ufro mZafri, vidre ilustracia. vfiqrob,
aseTi suraTi damoukideblad arsebobs, is TavisTavad cocxlobs da amitom xat-suraTis arss ufro mZafrad
gamoxatavs. amitomaa aucilebeli, rom mxatvari gaixsnas, ufro swored, man aucilebelad farTod
unda gauRos karebi Tavis grZnobebs da danaxuli, uCveulo ZaliT gamoxatuli, realobas daubrunos.’
(In Camera, Martin Harison)
‘delizis azriT, bekonis ferweris obieqti is Zalebi da im ZalTa urTierTqmedebaa, romlebic ewinaaRmdegebian
ara mxolod ferwerul da figuratiul kliSes, aramed suraTis SigniT arsebul Zalebsac, magaliTad
iseTebs, rogoricaa ‘sivrce-sxeuli’. ‘niSnebi’ mis bolo namuSevrebSi xSirad gardaiqneba isrebad, romlebic
ferweruli da vitaluri Zalisxmevis veqtors waagavs. es Zalisxmeva gamosaxuli sxeulisa da sivrcis
formirebaSi monawileobs.” (N.A. Kash) is an akavebs an, piriqiT, xels uwyobs sxeulis gaSlas sivrceSi. ro

8
gorc erTxel Tavad bekonma aRniSna: ‘... ar vici, ra movuxerxo fons figuris an portretis miRma’. iqneb
amitom misi foni ujredi-struqturaa, romelic bolomde ar aris dasrulebuli. es ujredebi, romlebsac
bekoni tiloze swori xazebis meSveobiT gamosaxavs, ucnaurad akaveben da astruqtureben daklaknili, myvirala
sxeulebis moZraobas. suraTis SigniT arsebuli sivrce-sxeulis es dapirispireba amave dros formis
warmomqmneli Zalacaa. is, rac ukve iTqva bekonis da modernizmis epoqis sxva mxatvrebis, kerZod siurrealistebisa
da eqspresionistebis meTodze, erT tendenciaze migviTiTebs _ isini Cveuli cnobierebis
sazRvrebis gadalaxvas cdilobdnen. mas Semdeg, rac buneba, rogorc modeli aRar ganixileboda, axalma
ferweram da skulpturam aseTi midgoma airCia. pol klees absoluturad zusti formulirebis Tanaxmad,
xelovneba aRar awarmoebs raRacas, ubralod xiluls; xelovnebis meSveobiT xiluli xdeba is, rac mis gareSe
uxilavi darCeboda. miuxedavad misi winaaRmdegobrivi bunebisa, frensis bekonis xelovnebas, ferweras
ierarqiis ufro maRal safexurze ayavs _ amieridan ferwera uxilavi, ara-fizikuri procesebis vizualizaciisa
da materializaciis uZlieres saSualebad gvevlineba. rentgeni, radiografia diagnostirebis sxva
Tanamedrove saSualebebi, romlebic meqanikur an cifrul aparats iyeneben mxolod adamianis TvalisTvis
uxilav fizikur substancias aRbeWdaven, maSin roca ferwera imas warmoaCens, rac fizikur realobaSi saer-
Tod ar arsebobs. ferweris, rogorc xelovnebis erT-erTi dargis, Rirseba swored isaa, rom is bolomde
inarCunebs procesualobas da adamianis srul (fizikur da sulier) Tanamonawileobas SemoqmedebiT procesSi.
da Tu Cven frensis bekonis Semoqmedebas aseTi TvaliT SevxedavT, maSin mis imaginaciebSi mojadoebul,
epoqaSi, adamianebsa da movlenebSi dafarul borotebas SevimecnebT. mxolod Secvlil cnobierebas
Zaluls aseTi imaginaciebis gamovlena da modernizmma am procesebSi umniSvnelovanesi roli Seasrula.
All quotation are translated from the russian version of the
article.
yvela citata naTargmnia statiis rusuli versiidan
images:
Francis Bacon studio
frensis bekonis saxelosno
Working document of Francis Bacon
photo by Sam hunter
frensis bekonis samuSao dokumenti
sem hanteris foto
diego Velasquez, ‘pope Innocent x’, b/w illustration, 1650,
‘papi inokenti X’ Sav-TeTri ilustracia, 1650,
diego velaskesi
Still from the Eisenstein film ‘ Battleship Potyomkin’
kadri eizenSteinis filmidan ‘javSnosani potiomkini’
Francis Bacon, ‘Study after Velazquez’s portrait of pope Innocent
x’, 1953, 198x149, oil on canvas
frensis bekoni, ‘velaskesis papi inokenti X-s portretis
Seswavla’, 1953, tilo, zeTi
Francis Bacon in 1971
Francis Bacon, ‘Study for a portrait of Van Gogh’ II, oil on
canvas, 1957, oil on canvas
frensis bekoni, ‘van gogis portertis Seswavla’ II,
1957, tilo, zeTi
Francis Bacon with Georgia dyer, c. 1960
frensis bekoni jorj daierTan erTad, 1960
Francis Bacon ‘Crucifixion’, 1965, oil on canvas each panel
197.2 x 147 cm . Staatsgalerie Moderner Kunst, Munich
frensis bekoni, ‘jvarcma’, 1965, tilo, zeTi, ‚Staatsgalerie
Moderner Kunst, Munich’ sakuTreba
‘realization phenomenon with Eve’, photo by Albert von
Schrenk Notzing,Munich, 17/05/1912
‘realizaciis fenomeni evasTan erTad’, albert fon
Srenk notcingis foto, miunxeni, 17/05/1912
‘realization phenomenon with’ Stanislava’, photo by Albert
von Schrenk Notzing,Munich, 25/05/1913
‘realizaciis fenomeni stanislavasTan erTad’,
albert fon Srenk notcingis foto, miunxeni,
25/05/1913
Francis Bacon, Triptych, ‘ In memory of George dyer, left part,
oil on canvas, 1971, 198x149
frensis bekoni, triptixi, ‘jorj daieris samaxsovrod‘,
marcxena nawili, tilo, zeTi, 1971
© koka ramiSvili, mxatvari, kuratori, Jeneva

‘Inside the Castle‘ 1969, Etching and aquatint.
From the British Council Collection ‘Screen portfolio‘
‘A Black Cat Leaping‘ 1979, Etching and aquatint.
From the British Council Collection ‘Screen portfolio‘
David Hockney

Nathaniel McBride
0
ART AND RISK
Guram Tsibakhashvili ‘Playing Boys’, from the series ‘Definitions’, pencil,
aniline, technical photo sensitive paper.
I was in Georgia a little over two weeks, a period that barely qualifies one to speak on any aspect of its visual arts, and least of all to
a readership that is likely to know far more about the subject than I do. In view of this a purely descriptive survey seems pointless,
but a comparison between the British and Georgian art scenes – which also occurred to me - equally so, given that the two are,
or so at least I think, too different to be meaningfully compared. Instead I plan to concentrate on a single theme – of defining
what seems to me conspicuous by its absence in Georgian art - and on a very few artists, beginning with the photographer Guram
Tsibakhashvili (born 1960). For Tsibakhashvili’s work seems somehow representative in that it appears to register most clearly
wider developments in Georgian art over the last two decades, of which I believe three distinct moments can be identified: one of
cautious optimism in the late 1980s (coinciding with the Neo-Expressionism of the Tenth Floor Group), sudden and precipitous
disillusionment in the mid to late 1990s (coinciding with the rise of conceptual art), and gradual accommodation to the new
reality in the early 2000s (where performance rapidly becomes the dominant form). Admittedly not every artist follows this
progression: the work of Mamuka Japharidze (born 1962), for example, might be said to have remained throughout this period
cautiously (or even not so cautiously) optimistic, concerned as it is with themes of transcendence and revelation, while that of
Oleg Timchenko (born 1956) has stayed stubbornly and deeply disillusioned, his sinister, imperious Velasquezian dwarfs bearing
witness to his conviction that art’s greatest works are all in the past, and we are now reduced to parodying them in degraded
idiom of kitsch. But I believe such a progression does provide the pattern of a general trend along which the work of others may
be plotted, and in so doing something of the present situation defined.
Thus Tsibakhashvili’s series Ulysses (1989), which placed photographs of Tbilisi taken on long and apparently aimless wanderings
around the city alongside short excerpts from Joyce’s novel, might be said to represent the moment of cautious optimism. The
oblique and somewhat mysterious relation between the novel’s text and the images of a dilapidated urban landscape produces
a sense of immanent meaning, as if, hidden behind a crumbling everyday reality, some inconceivably new one were waiting to
break out. Joyce’s text is surely as crucial here as the images themselves, drawing as it does unexpected but obviously pertinent
parallels between the colonial capital that was Dublin in 1904 and the one that was Tbilisi in 1989.
His next work, Definitions (1997-8 and 2001), again places images alongside text, but they now signal the destruction of this
optimism and the emergence of a condition of generalized disillusionment. The series is composed mainly of found photographs
taken from an anonymous family album of the 1950s and 60s, from each of which a Barthesian punctum – a key, a hat, a propeller
– has been picked out and its name written beneath the image, followed by its dictionary definition. Thus a lexicographical text
replaces a literary one, substituting for the open resonances and possibilities of Joyce’s novel the closed tautologies of the
dictionary. This closing off of hermeneutic space, which re-routes meaning from image to text and back into image again in a
deadening circularity, stands for the moment when, just as reality seemed poised to transform itself into something utterly new,
it collapsed back into itself with a crushing literalness.
Finally Masks (2004) marks a new departure: the exploration of just one part of this new, disenchanted reality. Here colour
film has replaced black and white, and the textual accompaniment been abandoned; the images no longer stand in need of
commentary for they no longer hide nor obscure anything, rather the hidden element in the picture – the subjects’ faces – is
now contained within the picture itself. Thus the images are no longer searching for nor trying to reveal, as the older series did,

o p i n i o n
a social totality; merely a succession of individuals. The photographer has retreated from the street to the domestic apartment,
where his posed subjects sit for him in parodies of the conventional portrait photograph. Clearly these works aim at representing
the new sense of estrangement that has crept into personal relations, of people no longer being ‘what they seem’; but the overt
aestheticization of the ‘masks’ so many of his subjects wear, as well as the glossy magazine feel to some of the images, threaten
to turn their disguises into a variety of fashion accessory, as if intimating that in the new social reality the best one can hope to
do is wear one’s alienation stylishly.
Why is it that this latest series seems so much less successful than the earlier two? Here I want to concentrate on just one aspect
of these photographs - the turning of the gaze away from the street, the public space, to the private one of the apartment – by
comparing them with the work of the Ukrainian photographer Boris Mikhailov (born 1938). In the course of our conversation
Tsibakhashvili, who knows and admires Mikhailov, told me that he had found his recent work disappointing and felt this was a
sign the older photographer had lost his way since emigrating to the west. To me this statement was extremely interesting, one
of those that seemed to define a fundamental difference in perspective between east and west; for what Tsibakhashvili had
seen as a falling off in Mikhailov’s work I had seen as a breakthrough. In the latter’s Case History (1997-9) especially, which
documents the lives of homeless people in his native city of Kharkov, all the horror and destruction wrought by the ‘economic
transition’ of the last decade seems suddenly to break in, overwhelming the lyrical and wistful nostalgia of his earlier ‘late Soviet’
work. Where Tsibakhashvili saw a ‘commercial work’ done to satisfy western appetites for scenes of post-Communist abjection
and degradation, I saw one of unusual integrity that set out straightforwardly to record human suffering, a subject it has become
virtually impossible to represent without betraying it. Mikhailov, who is acutely aware of this, understood that the exploitative
nature of his relation with his subjects could not be circumvented; it could only be incorporated into the work itself as a negative
indice of everything that is loathsome in the new society.
The antipathy such work evokes can come from its being misunderstood, or it can come from its being understood too well (and
in these circumstances the two are not always easily distinguishable), precisely because it must contain within itself this radical
ambiguity. In Case History Mikhailov opposed exploitation with work that teeters on the brink of exploitation itself, because it
recognized that the same processes that had enabled him to take these photographs, that had elevated him to the ranks of
an ‘international artist’, had relegated others to those of the dispossessed. It seems that to many artists still, and in the east
especially, an ambiguity of this kind remains outrageous - at best a kind of tasteless sensationalism, at worst a variety of moral
degeneracy. I believe this is a great mistake. To see why this is so one need only turn to what to a westerner seems so conspicuous
by its absence in Georgia – a critical art, an art of protest. Why is it particularly that there seems to be so little art that addresses
the vast ocean of suffering that was unleashed in the wake of the Soviet Union’s collapse? Could it in part be because many
artists intuitively sense that the subject faces them with two intolerable alternatives, those of either sentimentalizing or exploiting
it, and so avoid it altogether? If this is the case they risk trivializing their work by averting their eyes and concentrating on things
that are of secondary importance. Facing the dilemma will, I believe, involve taking specifically ethical risks, since we are dealing
with an injustice so monstrous that ‘ethics’ itself – the moralizing of apologists for the present status quo – is itself complicit
Kote Sulaberidze, ‘playing War’, 1998-2003, video still.

in it. There is as yet little sign of an art of ethical risk in Georgia. But there is though an art of physical risk, as is evident in the
performances of George Kevle (born 1971) and Nik u. sha (born 1979), whose effectiveness depends partly on the potential
physical harm the artists subject themselves to. This is combined with a directness and an extreme, almost facile simplicity. In
Kevle’s Alubily (2005), for example, the artist received a general anaesthetic before a gallery audience and then slept for twelve
hours, the apparent inconsequentiality of this act being precisely its point: Kevle’s performance, like death itself, was a nonevent,
an event outside time, in so far as it did not properly begin before he received the injection, by which time, of course, it was
in effect already over. In Nik u. sha’s Hop (2005) the dangerous act – jumping from the Metekhi Bridge in the middle of the night
– evoked metaphors both of death and rebirth, suggesting that the terrors of the one must be a precondition for the other.
In their simplicity and directness these performance have some affinities with Mikhailov’s work, but their greatest similarity is
in a readiness not to fear consequences, to potentially sacrifice everything, in pursuit of their purpose – in Kevle’s case, that of
shocking his friends out of the depressive stupor that seems to pervade Georgia’s younger generation. It doesn’t of course follow
from this that their work will develop in the same direction: ethical risk is not a necessary progression from physical risk, only a
possible one. Such a shift would require these artists to turn their work from one that potentially harms only themselves to one
that might potentially harm (and here I include the notion of outraging or offending) others. But if an art of this kind were ever
to emerge in Georgia, it seems possible it will come from this direction. Unless and until it does the human tragedies of the last
fifteen years, of war, dispossession and economic collapse, are likely to go largely unrecorded in any serious art.
© Nathaniel McBride, writer, translator, London
Sophia Tabatadze, ‘Subu -diet’, 2005 posters in the
streets of Tbilisi.

NnaTaniel makbraidi
x e l o v n e b a d a
r i s k i
saqarTveloSi or kviraze cota met xans davyavi. aseTi mokle viziti ubralod ar maZlevs uflebas vimsjelo
qarTuli vizualuri xelovnebis aspeqtebze. miT ufro, mkiTxvelisTvis, romelic, SesaZloa, Cemze
kargad icnobs gansaxilvel sakiTxs. zemoTqmulis gaTvaliswinebiT, mxolod aRwerilobiTi mimoxilvis
SemoTavazebac uazrobad miviCnie. rac Seexeba qarTuli da britanuli art-scenebis SedarebiT daxasiaTebas,
razec erT xans vfiqrobdi kidec, es ori sivrce ise gansxvavdeba erTmaneTisgan, rom maTi Sedareba
principulad SeuZleblia. mokled, gadavwyvite im Temaze SemeCerebina Cemi yuradReba, romelic ase aSkarad
ugulebelyo qarTulma Tanamedrove xelovnebam. imasac davamateb, rom mxolod ramdenime xelovanis
Semoqmedebas Sevexebi da guram wibaxaSviliT (dab. 1960) daviwyeb. misi namuSevrebi nimuSad gamogvadgeba,
radgan isini yvelaze cxadad gamoxataven bolo oci wlis ganmavlobaSi Tanamedrove qarTuli xelovnebis
ganviTarebis etapebs. Cemis azriT, es etapebi ase SeiZleba daxasiaTdes: frTxili optimizmi 80-ani wlebis
dasasruls (romelic zustad emTxveva Tenth Floor Group-is neo-eqspresionizms), uecari da Tavbrudamxvevi
imedgacrueba 90-iani wlebis Sua periodSi (Tanxvedraa konceptualuri xelovnebis aRmasvlasTan) da,
bolos, Tanmimdevruli kompromisi 21-e saukunis dasawyisis realobasTan (perfomansi dominanturi forma
xdeba). ra Tqma unda, es etapebi yvela xelovanis SemoqmedebaSi ar asaxula. ase magaliTad, mamuka jafariZis
(dab. 1962) namuSevrebi mTeli am drois ganmavlobaSi frTxili optimizmiT gamoirCeva (an iqneb arc Tu ise
frTxili), misi xelovneba transcendetulsa da zebunebrivs ukavSirdeba. oleg timCenko (1956) jiutad
da Rrmad imedgacruebulia. misi pirquSi, qedmaRali velaskesianuri jujebi TiTqos imaze migvaniSneben,
rom xelovnebis udidesi qmnilebani warsulis kuTvnilebaa, Cven ki mxolod am qmnilebaTa degradirebuli,
kiCuri parodirebaRa dagvrCenia. miuxedavad calkeuli gamonaklisebisa, mjera, rom zemoT aRwerili
etapebi Tanamedrove qarTuli xelovnebis ZiriTad tendenciebs gansazRvravs da zustad aRwers arsebul
situacias. SeiZleba iTqvas, rom guram wibaxaSvilis seria ‘ulise’, romelSic TbilisSi umiznod xetialis
dros gadaRebuli fotoebi, joisis romanis fragmentebis gverdiTaa ganlagebuli, swored frTxili
optimizmis magaliTia. romanis teqstsa da dangreuli, dakninebuli qalaqis imijebs Soris warmoqmnili
idumali urTierTmimarTeba, imanenturi mniSvnelobis gancdas badebs, TiTqos pirquSi yoveldRiurobis
miRma warmoudgenlad axalma raobam unda ifeTqos. joisis teqsti aq iseve mniSvnelovania, rogorc imijebi
da, erTis SexedviT moulodnelad, Tumca savsebiT samarTlianad avlebs paralels 1904 wlis kolonialur
dublinsa da 1989 wlis Tbiliss Soris.
misi Semdegi namuSevari ‘gansazRvrebebi’ (1997-8 and 2001), imijs kvlav teqstis gverdiT aTavsebs, magram
amjerad is optimizmis dasasrulze migviTiTebs da sazogado imedgacruebas warmoaCens. kompozicia
ZiriTadad 1950-iani, 60-iani wlebis fotosuraTebiTaa Sedgenili. maT CvenTvis ucnobi adamianebis saojaxo
guram wibaxaSvili, ‘sayvarlebi’, seriidan ‘magritis Semdeg’
Guram Tsibakhashvili, ‘Lovers‘, from the series ‘After Magritte‘, 2006

albomebSi miakvlies. suraTebis qveS leqsikonis msgavsad
terminTa mniSvnelobaa ganmartebuli: propeleri,
bartezianis xazi, qudi. leqsikografiuli
teqsti literaturulis magieria, is joisis Ria,
rezonansul, SesaZleblobebiT aRsavse enas Caketili
leqsikografiuli tavtologiebiT anacvlebs.
daxuruli hermenevtikuli sivrce dausruleblad
abrunebs mniSvnelobas teqstidan imijze, Semdeg
isev teqstze da am usicocxlo cirkulirebas mxolod
wamiT aCerebs, rodesac, ise rogorc realoba,
TiTqos mzadaa radikaluri transformaciisTvis,
magram Zalagamoclili sakuTar Tavs ubrundeba da
nadgurdeba.
da bolos ‘niRbebi’ (2004), romelic gansxvavebul
mimarTulebaze migvaniSnebs: axali, ganxibluli
realobis kvleva. aq ferad firs Sav-TeTri cvlis
da teqstualuri akompanimenti qreba. suraTs aRar
sWirdeba komentari, radgan is aRarafers malavs.
misi yvelaze faruli elementi, personaJis saxe
suraTis sivrceSi rCeba. am namuSevarSi avtori
aRar eZebs, aRar cdilobs warmoaCinos sociumi
mTlianobaSi, ise, rogorc amas winamorbed
seriebSi akeTebda. axla mas mxolod individTa
monacvleoba ainteresebs. fotografi quCidan
binaSi Sedis, sadac personaJebi tradiciuli
portretis gadasaRebad misuli adamianebis
parodirebas cdiloben. aSkaraa, rom es namuSevari
piradul urTierTobebSi SeumCnevlad Semoparuli
gaucxoebis reprezentacias isaxavs miznad _
pirovneba aRar aris is, rasac vxedavT. niRbebis
TvalnaTeli esTetizacia imas gvagrZnobinebs, rom
adamianebi, ise, rogorc ‘glamurul’ JurnalebSi,
sakuTar SeniRbulobas modur aqsesuarad aqceven,
radgan axal socialur realobaSi isRa dagvrCenia
sakuTari gaucxoeba moxdenilad vataroT.
ratom aRmoCnda bolo seria nakleb saintereso
vidre ori winamorbedi? am kiTxvaze sapasuxod mxolod
erT aspeqtze SevCerdebi _ mxatvris mzeram
quCa, socialuri sivrce miatova da privatuli
sacxovreblis velSi gadainacvla. modiT, es fotosuraTebi
ukraineli fotografis boris mixailovis
namuSevrebs SevadaroT (dab. 1938). saubrisas
wibaxaSvili, romelic kargad icnobs da moswons
mixailovis Semoqmedeba, gamomityda, rom ukmayofiloa
misi bolo namuSevrebiT. wibaxaSvilis azriT,
mixailovma dasavleTSi emigrirebis Semdeg
sakuTari saxe dakarga. CemTvis es gancxadeba gansakuTrebiT
saintereso iyo, radgan kidev erTxel
cxadyo, aRmosavluri da dasavluri xedvis fun-
Oleg Timchenko, ‘Midget’, 2004, oil on canvas
oleg timCenko, ‘juja‘, 2004, tilo, zeTi.
Mamuka Japharidze, ‘Flying Lili‘, 2005, photography
mamuka jafariZe, ‘mfrinavi lili’, 2005, fotografia
Giorgi Kevle, ‘Alubili‘, 2005 performance
giorgi kevle, ‘alubili’, 2005, perfomansi.

damenturi sxvaoba. is, rac wibaxaSvilisTvis ukusvlaa,
me udides miRwevad aRviqvi. mixailovis erTerTi
bolo namuSevari ‘SemTxvevaTa istoria’ mis
mSobliur xarkovSi usaxlkaroTa cxovrebas aRwers,
im saSinelebasa da ngrevas, rac bolo oci wlis man-
Zilze am adamianebs gardamavalma ekonomikam moutana.
es Tema uceb SemoiWra mixailovis SemoqmedebaSi
da misi adreuli namuSevrebisTvis ase damaxasiaTebeli
sevdiani lirikuli nostalgia gandevna. wibaxaSvilma
mixailovis sastik post-sabWoTa scenebSi
angarebiani gaTvla, dasavlur apetitze morgebuli
komerciuli manevri dainaxa. me ki, mimaCnia, rom
adamianuri satajveli aq uCveulo patiosnebiT, piruTvneladaa
naCvenebi. saqme isaa, rom amgvar Temebze
muSaobisas faqtobrivad SeuZlebelia ar uRalato
saTqmels. mixailovi amas kargad acnobierebs
da xvdeba, rom Temisadmi mis ramdenadme eqspluatatorul
damokidebulebas versad damalavs. gamosavali
erTia, CarTos es damokidebuleba namuSevar-
Si, rogorc axali, gulisamrevi realobis erT-erTi
negatiuri gamovlineba.
amgvari namuSevrebi anTipatias ori mizeziT iwvevs:
mas an ver, an piriqiT, zedmetad kargad gauges (am
ori mizezis erTmaneTisgan garCeva arc Tu ise advilia).
gansakuTrebiT ki imitom, rom is sakuTar
TavSive atarebs orazrovnebas, bundovanebas. ‘Sem-
TxvevaTa istoriaSi’ mixailovi upirispirdeba namuSevris
eqpluatacias, radgan TviTon namuSevari
sakuTari Tavis eqspluataciis zRvarze meryeobs
da gvacnobierebinebs, rom midgomam, romelmac
mixailovi saerTaSoriso rangis xelovnad aqcia,
sxvebs yvelaferi daakargvina. amitomacaa, rom Zalze
bevri mxatvari, gansakuTrebiT aRmosavleTSi,
amgvari orazrovnebisadmi ukiduresad negatiur
damokidebulebas inarCunebs da mas ugemovno sensualizmad
an moraluri gadagvarebis niSnad miiCnevs.
darwmunebuli var, rom es udidesi Secdomaa. amisTvis,
sakmarisia gaazreba imisa, Tu ratom aris aseTi
saeWvo vTqvaT CemTvis, dasavleTelisTvis saqarTveloSi
kritikuli, saprotesto xelovnebis ararseboba.
ratom xdeba, rom saqarTveloSi Tanamedrove
xelovnebis mxolod umniSvnelo nawili eZRvneba
tanjvis im usazRvro okeanes, romelic sabWoTa kavSiris
daSlam gamoiwvia. bevri xelovani grZnobs,
rom am TematikasTan Sexeba pirispir tovebs autanel
alternativasTan _ daimsaxuros sentimentaluris
an eqspluatatoris reputacia, an saerTod
gaeqces problemas. Tu sakiTxi marTlac ase dgas,
maSin qarTveli xelovanebi sakuTari Semoqmedebis
gaufasurebis riskze midian, radgan Tvals arideben
pirvelxarisxovans da meoxarisxovans uRrmavdebian.
saqme isaa, rom arsebul dilemas eTikur problemamde
mivyevarT, sanam Cven veguebiT ganusaz-
Rvrel usamarTlobas, manam Cven am usamarTlobis
Tanamonawileni viqnebiT.
ai, aseTia qarTuli xelovnebis sarisko zneobrivi
dilema. Tumca aqve arsebobs xelovneba, romelic
fizikur risks ar erideba, rogorc es naTlad
aCvena giorgi kevles (1971) da nik. u. Sas (1979).
perfomansebma. maTi efeqturoba mTlianadaa
damokidebuli im potenciur fizikur safrTxeze,
romelSic mxatvrebi sakuTar Tavs igdeben.
o p i n i o n
yvelaferi pirdapirobisa da iqstrimis zerele,
martiv kombinacias warmoadgens. magaliTad kevles
perfomansi ‘aAlubili’ Semdeg qmedebas moicavs:
galereaSi auditoriis Tvalwin is anelgetiks
ikeTebs da 12 saaTis ganmavlobaSi sZinavs. am aqtis
moCvenebiTi alogikuroba migvaniSnebs, rom kevles
perfomansi, iseve rogorc sikvdili, anti-movlenaa
anu movlena drois miRma. misi qmedebis centralur
aqtamde – ineqciis miRebamde. perfomansi jer kidev
ar aris dawyebuli da misi miRebis Semdeg ki igi ukve
damTavrebulia.
nik. u. Sa-s ‘hop’-Si avtori SuaRames metexis xididan
xteba. es aqti sikvdilis da aRdgomis ormag metaforaze
migvaniSnebs: erTi maTganis saSineleba meoris
dabadebis winapirobaa.
es perfomansebi Tavis sworxazovnebasa da simartiveSi
mixailovis namuSevrebs waagavs. yvelaze
didi msgavseba ki isaa, rom maT ar eSiniaT araswori
daskvnebis da savalalo Sedegebis. sakuTari
Canafiqris ganxorcielebisTvis isini yvelafers
Seswiraven msxverplad. kevle Tavis megobrebs
SokSi agdebs depresiuli umoqmedebis CvenebiT,
romelic saqarTveloSi misi Taobis nawils moedo.
es sulac ar niSnavs, rom axalgazrdebis aqtivoba
momavalSic amave mimarTulebiT unda warimarTos:
fizikur riskze wasvlis mzaoba sulac ar niSnavs
eTikur riskze wasvlis SesaZleblobas. aseTi ganviTarebis
perspetqiva mravalTagan mxolod erTia.
sasurveli saxecvlileba garkveul etapze axlagazrda
SemoqmedT, ara mxolod sakuTari Tavis, aramed
sxvaTa gaRizianebis aucileblobasac mosTxovs.
(amaSi me aRSfoTebis gamowvevisTvis codvis Cadenis
ideasac vgulisxmob). miCndeba STabeWdileba,
rom Tu saqarTveloSi odesme kritikuli xelovneba
daibadeba, is swored zemoxsenebul mimarTulebaSi
daidebs saTaves. manamde ki arsebobs saSiSroeba,
rom bolo TxuTmeti wlis ganmavlobaSi gaTamaSebulma
pirovnulma tragediebma, omebma, siRatakem,
ekonomikurma kolafsma ise Caiaros, rom saerTod
ar aisaxos saqarTveloSi Tanamedrove xelovnebis
ramdenadme mniSvnelovan nimuSebSi.
© naTaniel makbraidi, mwerali, mTargmneli, londoni
guram wibaxaSvili, seriidan ‘ulise’, 1989, bromvercxluri beWdva
Guram Tsibakhashvili, from the series ‘ulysses’, 1989, brome-silver print.

Audrey Bartis
6
IN A VERy DEEP WAy - A CONVERSATION ABOuT RACHEL WHITEREAD
Art is meeting. Theoreticians work, write about art, this is what they show,
and what we see from them, usually. However, first of all, they talk about art,
with other theoreticians, with artists, with themselves. Loudly, with good wine
and food, or silently, in the depth of their minds. Audrey Bartis and Alexios
Papazacharias, two young art theoreticians, met in Brussels in 2006, in an
academic context, and they began to talk about art, with the same intensity,
same passion, same pleasure. They began to think and work together because
theirs looks and thoughts about art goes really well together. Art theory is not
a cold and abstract-only production, it is more about life, cigarettes, coffee,
arguments and smiles. il is alive, and this is how it goes when a Greek and a
French art theoreticians talk passionately about Rachel Whiteread...

Gordon Matta-Clark, ‘Splitting’, 1974. Courtesy The Estate
of Gordon Matta-Clark and david Zwirner, New york
o p i n i o n
rachel Whiteread, ‘untitled’ (Basement)
Courtesy Anthony d’Offay, London / Ellen Labenski
ALExIOS PAPAzACHARIAS: Yes but she (Rachel Whiteread) has influences from tradition and things that were already released.
She has deep influences that are sometimes obvious. However, the thing is that her concept usually is quite different so it is not
copying or something like that. It is something different. She has a very strong relation to some works of Bruce Nauman where
he is also signifying spaces that usually are not perceptible – she is doing this also, she has a kind of manipulation of the space
which is, in someway, a very abstract way, is similar to Gordon Matta-Clark for example.
Audrey Bartis: We were talking about Gordon Matta-Clark and the link between him and Rachel Whiteread, obviously because of
the house as a life unit, a psychological box, there is also a lot of meanings about family, individuality, identity… But they are both
working on what Gordon Matta-Clark explained that he wanted to transform a space into a state of mind. What I really wanted
to analyze, is the way she’s transforming the void into a matter. Gordon Matta-Clark by cutting the matter, the architecture, he
makes voids, and makes the matter visible. It’s about making impossible things visible, invisible things tangible…
AP: Signifying… it’s a process of signifying. They are both castrating the experience of the space, but Rachel Whiteread is making
this directly, it’s a petrified place, it’s full of plaster so you can not enter the space. You can experience it but by looking at it,
maybe by touching it, but it’s not possible to enter inside…
AB: But there is an (physical) experience…
AP: There is, of course, but is not the usual one. With Gordon Matta-Clark you have a rich experience, which is completely altered
from the usual experience of the space. So they both propose an experience of the space, like opposite. They have two, we could
say, opposite kind of techniques, but in the result, not exactly the same result, they both manage to alter the experience of the
space… For example, the House of Rachel Whiteread was a normal house, in front of normal houses, ant it looked like them. And
suddenly, there is one of them that’s in concrete. In fact, it is concrete, and it looks like a grave, like a fossil. Looking at something
that looks like your house but it’s petrified, it’s quite shocking…
AB: It’s like a face-to-face process…
AP: Yes
AB: It was the same with Gordon Matta-Clark because the house was inside of, you know, a middle-class kind of American suburb
where the houses look all the same, so it’s the same case, the house was a regular house, like the others, and obviously, cutting
this house in two, was both transforming their point of view on their own environment, as you said, but also pushing them to the
limits in a very subtle way. It was not possible to take a body and cut it in two, it was not possible to take a person in London, and
full it with concrete…
AP: (smiling) None, it was not possible…
AB: But, what is interesting is that the people reacted in front of those pieces the same way, they reacted the same way, in front
of those new ‘beings’. Just like in alchemy, in the alchemy imaginary, there are those beings that are created through alchemy,
they are like monsters. So in the alchemy imaginary, when these kinds of monsters live, people have to kill them. And it’s like that,
those houses got killed. Those houses got killed because it was unbearable to let them live, to let them stay in front of them (the
other houses). This is what interests me in Rachel Whiteread, is that she was shocking, by destroying the link with reality and the
way people just see the reality, and the House got destroyed, but now she has this strong image of one of the best British artists…
She is one of the best British artists. Now, she’s recognized by the institution. As you said for the public space, it was possible to
put Rachel Whiteread’s pieces back into public spaces because she came into the institution, and the institution was like eating
it, eating her work, because it was not possible to let it stay outside, and for me, having this institution wanting her being inside,
was for protecting the outside world from this work. It’s quite instinctive, what I will say, but I think that even institution doesn’t
know what to do with this work, except presenting it, but it is not really possible to make it quiet. You see?
AP: I can totally get it because, the thing with Rachel Whiteread is that her pieces are silent, but they are not quiet at all. That’s
one of her amazing qualities, it’s petrified, it’s completely silent but it’s not quiet, it’s talking in a silent way…
AB: In a very deep way

8
rachel Whiteread, ‘untitled’ (Library) 1999, Courtesy Anthony d’Offay, London
AP: In a very deep way…
AB: And this depth goes really on… it goes deep in human
mind, and what I think really interesting and strong is this
kind of universality… It (universality) is something really, really,
really important. Just like in Gordon Matta-Clark’s work, it’s
something that’s spread itself into the world. Because cutting
a house is a simple idea, filling a house is a simple idea, filling
a void is a simple idea, creating a void is a simple idea, it’s
like the simplest human gesture. So it’s dangerous for human
mind and the outside world because it can change reality, but
in a very large way, because of this spreading thing. People get
transformed for a few minutes, in their own cognitive abilities,
first, then, they keep the sensation which is completely
physical, you feel that your body can be a void, that’s it’s not
completely full, that… You have a very strange contact with this
matter, because you know it was a void, it’s not a void anymore
it’s full. And then you feel your own body like really heavy, you
feel your own matter… For my part, this is something I feel with
Rachel Whiteread pieces, my bones are like vibrating, and I
actually feel my bones…
AP: Yes, you can not resist penetrating this concrete space,
this petrified emptiness. And I think this was, with large spaces
like House or Ghost, her preoccupation was to make you feel
this, to make you feel and souligner (underline) your inability
to enter the space and your constant trying, to make you
understand what is going on and use your usual perception
methods you have.
AB: Because also it’s not only about experiencing, it’s about
being…
AP: Yes, it’s experiencing living in it… Yes you can feel the void.
However, not only as feeling ‘f.e.e.l’ but also as ‘f.i.l.l’ and you
know, by filling the void, is also the way dancers work. They
have to do ‘1,2,3,4’, you remember, they have to feel the
movement. It’s a very basic thing, the way you experience
the world, with voids, and suddenly, matter. Matter, void, and
the links in between. And suddenly, someone castrates that,
totally. And that’s violent.
AB: You are talking about the violent part, which is interesting.
You use the word ‘castration’, which is really meaningful.
It’s cutting. It’s cutting but also making something sterile…
Unchangeable and sterile. OK. But maybe we can also say that
it’s not only about castration, but also about making something
visible. So we have, let’s say, the ‘negative’ meaning…
AP: It’s not exactly negative, the word is negative, but it’s not
a negative concept…
AB: This ability to be in the space, to enter the space, to
breathe in the space, (is castrated)… and also because this
matter is full, completely full, there won’t be any possibility to
survive in it. In fact, if you were in the space when it was filled,
then, ah ah…
AP: Ah aah… (Laughing)
AB: We will be just disappearing, crushed…!
AP: You know, it happened, it happened several times in
history. Pompeii. But anyway, what’s important, and where
I can see the very positive meaning of castration, is that
usually, the best way, the most complete way to experiment
something is by its loss.
AB: Yes, absolument…
AP: You experience the value of something by its loss. So for
me, well… Rachel Whiteread’s work looks dark, but it has a
very positive beauty.
AB: Ok I see, you’re talking about melancholy…
AP: Not exactly…
AB: When you experiment something by its loss, then …
AP: But it’s not your personal loss
AB: No, no, not especially, but there is a kind of melancholy in
Rachel Whiteread’s work. For example with the books… But,
can we say that in a way, this loss meaning can be transformed
into something else? When I tell about positive and negative
thing, I think more about the photographic concept, you know,
plain and void, void and plain, it’s the same, it’s positive and
negative of the same thing, the same object. So we have… The
works are more like positive voids.
AP: Yes!
AB: And in fact … What is interesting… Because i used to talk
with many architects, as you know (laughing), and what they
say is that architecture is not about building but creating
spaces. So it’s about creating voids, in fact. It’s about building
limits…
AP: Exactly…
AB: … of the space. It’s about inventing the way people will
experiment it, living in it, go through it, etc… So, by destroying
the structure, the pure beauty of the space is appearing to us.
So and this is the positive side, I can see the beauty of the void
of the stairs…
AP: In the case of Stairs, and the concept of architecture the
way you explained it, it’s an ideal piece to talk about that. The
difference between an architect who’s working and creating
spaces where people live or go through, etc… Because a
staircase is a passage, so in a staircase you never stay, it’s
a place where you’re not supposed to stay; it’s a place where
you always move. And the architect is obviously creating a
space by putting limits, the stairs, the wall, the roof, anyway…
In the case of the Rachel Whiteread’s stairs, she… she did a
composition of the space, without using the limits, she used
pure space in order to make a composition, and there is, by
this work … This work makes obvious her great ability of deeply
understanding this void concept… This is why it is a late piece;
it’s not one of the early pieces. She gets mature and mature
and mature all the time in using the concept of void and
emptiness, so she can manipulate the space on a first level,
while the architecture is manipulating the space on a second
level. The architect manipulates the limits of the space. She
manipulates the space directly, for itself.
AB: Yeah and she makes it an object.

AP: And she makes it an object.
AB: She makes it an object and she removes it from its original
place, into another one. This is why, in fact, artistic institution
is not really able to make it quiet, because it’s transforming
the art place itself. So, for example the stairs, they get made,
made into an object, for the Basement Stairs, it’s turned, just
like a fallen thing, but it’s not falling, it becomes a complete
plastic object, …
AP: Completely.
AB: … then, and it’s the case also for Richard Nonas, because
you know I’m working on his work too, when you have an
architecture sign into another kind of space, into any kind of
space, then, the object that has been put here transforms the
space, but it’s not like other objects, not like other sculptures,
it’s different. Why? Because our mind is rebuilding the
architecture from, for example with Richard Nonas, from a
corner, and Rachel Whiteread also used corners, which is really
interesting, and a corner means ‘two walls’, or ‘at this place it
could have been two walls’, so, it signifies at this precise place
in the space, that another architecture is possible.
AP: Exactly, another possibility…
AB: Yes, so there is a virtual architecture in the architecture.
The stairs for example. They are upside down, so two things:
first, there is a virtual space here, it’s not a possibility, it Is
there. This is why the ‘ghost’ idea, the word, is really good.
Because we have this space that has been made of matter, - so
there is a matter – so the thing is visible. Just like a ghost, it’s
not supposed to be there but it does exist. And it’s there, and
it’s visible, and it’s tangible. So this architecture does live in
the space, in the exhibition place, in the museum, or whatever,
so it is happening, it’s not a virtual thing, it is a concrete and
tangible object that tells ‘here is an architecture, a piece of it’.
And the mind is reconstructing the rest, all the possibilities
of architectures all around the stairs. For example, Richard
rachel Whiteread, ‘untitled’ (Air Bed II) 1992.
Courtesy Anthony d’Offay, London
Nonas is the same, he’s putting a stone or a huge steel piece
that usually is on the roof (beam), he puts it on the floor and
then, what happens, we can imagine there is a wall, or there is
a roof, or any kind of thing… There is a rebuilding of reality.
AP: It triggers. You know, the thing with Rachel Whiteread is
that her work rebuilds also your behavior, it rebuilds also in
your mind, your own behavior in spaces. So it king of generates
a very nice dialog, a very poetic one, like a sign, like a book that
brings you things in your mind, it works this way, in a more
abstract way, in a more freer way…
AB: Just like Proust! (Laughing)
AP: Just like Proust (smiling). Well Proust is more precise in the
directions he wants you to take, but there is still a lot of freedom.
Actually, nobody can put borders in your imagination.
I told you that, it’s a conversation we often have, if you want
to crash yourself on the wall go crash it- it will make you feel
better. Even for a little while …
AB: Just doing it, just to do it.
AP: Just move. I think that’s our sterilization nowadays, when
we have needs and we kind of silent them off.
AB: Yes. So the sound is inside but it is not shouting out.
AP: the sound is inside, and like a very irritating voice is
scratching you inside –it’s very annoying- until it shuts the fuck
up or until you collapse.
AB: Mind is silently collapsing and then we need this kind
of shock. And that’s why Whiteread is fitting perfectly in our
contemporary world, because she is making a silent art to make
everything explode. Explosion. Explosion is something about
her. Because in a way she puts the precise amount of matter
to not make the thing explosion. The matter she is putting in
the spaces is filling slowly the space or PAF! Explosion. The
result is not shouting; the object is perfectly well done – this
is something amazing also the perfection of the objects, very
smooth- very precise very sharp. Perfect.

odri bartisi
‘saxlis dekonstruqcia’, 1993, sakuTreba Anthony d’Offay, londoni
The destruction of house courtesy Anthony d’Offay, London
0
xelovneba Sexvedraa. Teoretikosebi muSaoben, fiqroben, weren
xelovnebaze. isini saubroben xelovnebaze sxva TeoretikosebTan,
mxatvrebTan, sakuTar TavTan. saubari xSirad xmamaRalia karg
RvinosTan da saWmelTan erTad, xSirad ki Cumi da mxolod sakuTari
sulis siRrmeSi ismis. odri bartisi da aleqsios papazaqariasi,
ori axlgazrda Teoretikosi erTmaneTs briuselSi 2006 wels
Sexvda. xelovnebaze saubrisas maT bevri saerTo aRmoaCines da
erTad muSaoba gadawyvites. xelovnebis Teoria ar aris mxolod
mentaluri an abstraqtuli ram. is iseTive realuria, rogorc
cxovreba, sigareti, yava, kamaTi da Rimili. is cocxldeba maSin,
roca berZeni da frangi art-Teoretikosebi aseTi
grZnobiT ganixilaven britanel mxatvars reCel vaiTrids...
s i R r m i s e u l i s a u b a r i r e C e l v a i T r i d z e

o p i n i o n
aleqsios papazaqarias: ... saqme isaa, rom mis
(reCel vaiTridis) SemoqmedebaSi xSirad igrZnoba
tradiciis gavlena. drodadro es gansakuTrebiT
TvalSisacemia. Tumca, vaiTridi arasdros baZavs
pirdapir. misi koncefcia yovelTvis gansxvavebuli
da TviTmyofadia. me reCelis namuSevrebi
brus naumanisas magonebs, sadac naumani aRqmis
miRma darCenil sivrceebs aRwers. am xerxs xSirad
vaiTridic iyenebs. Tumca, xSirad misi sivrciT manipulireba
gordon mata-klarkis msgavsia.odri
bartis: Cven axla imaze vsaubrobdiT, Tu ra akav-
Sirebs gordon mata-klarkisa da reCel vaiTridis
Semoqmedebas. orive saxls sacxovrebel sivrced
ganixilavs. bina, rogorc erTgvari fsiqologiuri
yuTi, romelic savsea mniSvnelobebiT: ojaxi, individualoba,
identoba. orive cdilobs sacxovrebeli
msoflSegrZnebad aqcios. yvelaze metad imis
gaanalizeba minda, Tu rogor aniWebs vaiTridi
sicarieles, ukmarobas xdomilebis, materialuri
raobis saxes. gordon mata-klarki aqucmacebs materias,
arqiteqturas, is ‘awarmoebs’ sicarieleebs
da amis meSveobiT, xiluls xdis materias. es imas
waagavs, SeuZlebeli ram TvalsaCinoebad aqcio, uxilavi _ cxadad.
a.p: aRniSvna... es aRniSvnis procesia. orive, klarkic da vaiTridic asaWuriseben sivrcis gancdas. magram
vaiTridi ufro Riad, ufro TvalsaCinod moqmedebs. misi gaqvavebuli, TabaSiriT gadavsebuli sivrceebi
SeuRwevadia. SegiZlia Sexedo maT, dainaxo, Seexo, magram SigniT ver SeaRwev.
ob: magram xom arsebobs (fizikuri) gamocdileba...
ap: ra Tqma unda, arsebobs, magram es ar aris Cveulebrivi ram. gordon mata-klarkis mravalferovani
gamocdileba Zireulad gansxvavdeba sivrcis miRebuli, gavrcelebuli aRqmisgan. orive mxatvari sivrcis
gansxvavebul versias gvTavazobs, magram amisTvis TiToeuli sakuTar, erTmaneTisgan gansxvavebul xerxs
mimarTavs da gansxvavebul Sedegsac aRwevs. rezultatSi ki orive axerxebs sivrceze Cveuli warmodgenis
Secvlas. magaliTad reCel vaiTridis saxli, erTis SexedviT, normaluri saxlia, yvela danarCenis msgavsi.
magram uecrad aRmoaCen, rom is mTlianad betonisaa da saflavs mogvagonebs, naprals... ucqer raRacas, rac
Seni saxlis msgavsia da uceb xvdebi, rom is erTianad gaqvavebulia. es Sokis momgvrel efeqts axdens.
ob: es TiTqos dapirispirebaa...
ap: diax
ob: igivea gordon mata-klarkTan. misi saxli, ici, albaT, saSualo klasis amerikuli gareubnebi, sadac
yvela nageboba erTnairia, swored iq dgas da sxva saxlebisgan arafriT gansxvavdeba, Tumca oradaa gaWrili.
es ki, rogorc ukve vTqvi, saxlis aRqmas radikalurad cvlis. ukiduresobis gancdas gitovebs. warmoidgine,
londonSi, rom saxli Suaze gaWra da naprali betoniT amoavso, SeuZlebelia, ara?
ap: (icinis). ho, ra Tqma unda SeuZlebelia...
ob: yvelaze saintereso isaa, rom adamianebi am namuSevrebze ise reagireben, rogorc alqimiur arsebebze.
asea miRebuli _ alqimikosis mier Seqmnili cocxali arseba monstria, urCxuli da saswrafod unda
ganadgurdes. amitom es saxlebic mokles, maT arsebobas sazogadoeba ver Seurigda, Tvali ver gauswora.
reCel vaiTridi realobasTan kavSirs arRvevda, sinamdvilis aRqmas cvlida, swored esaa mis SemoqmedebaSi
yvelaze saintereso da amave dros yvelaze SemaSinebeli. amitom misi ‘saxli’ gaanadgures, daangries. am
dros is ukve erT-erT saukeTeso britanel xelovnad iTvleboda da iyo kidec. vaiTridi instituciebmac
ki aRiares. gaCnda imedi imisa, rom misi namuSevrebi sajaro sivrces daubrundeboda, magram es Tavad
instituciebma ar dauSves. rogorc Cans, maT sakuTar movaleobad miiCnies gare samyaros dacva vaiTridis
namuSevrebisgan. es instiqturi qmedeba iyo, radgan maT ar icodnen ra eqnaT vaiTridis namuSevrebisTvis...
erTaderTi gamosavali maTi Cveneba iyo. magram imasac acnobierebdnen, rom amas didi xmauri, didi aurzauri
moyveboda.
ap: Zalian kargad mesmis. saqme isaa, rom misi namuSevrebi TiTqos duman, magram sulac ar arian Cumad. es
saocari ramaa, gaqvavebuli, mdumare obieqtebis xmauri, molaparake siCume...
ob: saubari mdumarebis siRrmidan...
ap: mdumarebis siRrmidan...
ob: es gonismieri siRrmea. yvelaze saintereso misi namuSevrebis universalobaa... es (universaloba)
marTlac Zalian, Zalian, Zalian mniSvnelovania. es iseTi ramaa, rac TavisTavad moipovebs gavlenas, advilad
vrceldeba. erTis SexedviT, sruliad martivia gaWra saxli orad, amoavso sicariele betoniT, Seqmna
sicariele... es yvelaferi umartivesia, iseTive martivi, rogorc ideaTa umravlesoba... magram adamianis
cnobierebisa da saarsebo sivrcisTvis SesaZloa saxifaTo aRmoCndes, radgan realobas aqtiurad cvlis da
swored amitomac advilad ikidebs fexs. da uceb, sul ramdenime wuTSi adamianis TviT-aRqma da fizikuri
reCel vaiTridi, ‘skami da magida’, 1994, sakuTreba Anthony d’Offay, londoni
Rachel Whiteread ‘Table and Chair’ 1994. Courtesy Anthony d’Offay, London.

SegrZnebebi icvleba.. Sen xvdebi, rom Seni sxeuli SeiZleba dacarieldes, rom SesaZloa is sulac ar aris
savse, rom... am movlenisadmi ucnauri damokidebuleba giCndeba, Sen ici, rom sicariele sisavsem Secvala
da sakuTar sxeulis simZimes grZnob, grZnob sakuTari arsis ‘materialurobas’. CemSi reCel vaiTridis
namuSevrebi swored amgvar gancdas badebs _ Zvlebi vibrirebas iwyeben, me amas realurad vgrZnob.
ap: marTlac Znelia win aRudge betonis sivrceSi, gaqvavebul sicarieleSi SeRwevis survls. maxsendeba
‘moCvenebaTa saxli’. vaiTridis am namuSevris mizani is iyo, rom cxadad gvegrZno sivrceSi Sesvlis
gamudmebuli survili da, amave dros, Cveni uunaroba. mxolod ase SeiZleba gaacnobiero garemo, sivrce,
aRiqva es yvelaferi.
ob: radgan es mxolod aRqma aRar aris, es yofierebaa...
ap: diax, es yofierebis aRqmaa... ho, sicarieles sxeuliT grZnob, mocekvaveebiviT : ‘1,2,3,4’, gaxsovs, albaT,
isini moZraobiT avseben sicarieles. es Zalze mniSvnelovania, samyaro mxolod ase SeiZleba aRiqva:
sicarieliT da materiiT, maT Soris arsebuli kavSiriT. da uceb viRaca orives kastrirebas ukeTebs, gana
es Zaladoba ar aris?
ob: Sen Zaladobaze laparakob, es marTlac sainteresoa. sityva ‘kastrireba’ am SemTxvevaSi damatebiT
Sinaarss iZens. raRacas kveTen, Wrian da amave dros sterilizacias ukeTeben. ucvleli da steriluri.
geTanxmebi, magram iqneb es mxolod kastracia ar aris? iqneb saqme isaa, rom is, rac ar Canda, xiluli xdeba.
SeiZleba iTqvas, rom negatiur konteqstTan gvaqvs saqme
ap: pirdapiri mniSvnelobiT negatiurTan _ ara. SesaZloa sityvebia negatiuri, magram koncefcia aseTad
ar mimaCnia.
ob: sivrceSi arsebobis, masSi Sesvlis, sunTqvis SesaZlebloba kastrirebulia... imitom, rom is sruliad
savsea da sisavse gadarCenis saSualebas aRar gitovebs. aq, am sivrceSi misi amovsebisas, rom moxvedriliyavi,
maSin. ah, ah...
ap: ah, aah... (icinis)
ob: Cven gavqrebodiT, gavnadgurdebodiT... !
ap: aseTi ram istoriaSi ukve momxdara _ pompei. rac yvelaze mniSvnelovania, kastracias pozitiuri mxarec
aqvs, radgan srulad raime movlenis mniSvnelovnebas xSirad mxolod misi dakargvis Semdeg aRviqvamT.
ob: ra Tqma unda...
ap: bevr rames mxolod misi dakargvis Semdeg afaseb... ase rom, CemTvis reCel vaiTridis Semoqmedeba mZimea,
magram es pozitiuri da mSvenieri simZimea. ho, mesmis, aq melanqoliac aris...… da ara mxolod...
ob: rodesac raimes, adekvaturad mxolod misi dakargvis Semdeg afaseb.
ap: ho, magram is, rac daikarga, piradad Sen arc gekuTvnoda...
ob: ara, ara, ra Tqma unda ara, magram reCel vaiTridis SemoqmedebaSi xSirad igrZnoba melanqolia.
ai, magaliTad wignebi... iqneb danakargis mniSvneloba axal raobad gardaiqmneba? rodesac negatiursa
da pozitiurze vlaparakobdi, me fotografiul koncefcias vgulisxmobdi. sicxade da bundovaneba,
bundovaneba da sicxade, es xom erTi da igive movlenis, erTi da igive obieqtis pozitiuri da negatiuri
aspeqtebia... misi Semoqmedeba ufro pozitiuri sicarielis sivrcea.
ap: marTali xar.
ob: marTlac... ici, ra aris saintereso... me xSirad vesaubrebi arqiteqtorebs (icinis), isini amtkiceben,
rom arqiteqtura sulac ar niSnavs mxolod mSeneblobas, is sicarielis Seqmnis xelovnebaa da sicarieles
sazRvars udebs, Semofarglavs.
ap: zustad asea.
ob: is sivrcis aRqmis, masSi arsebobis gzebs aRmoaCens... srulyofili mSvenierebis gamomzeureba mxolod
struqturis ganadgurebiTaa SesaZlebeli. kibis mSvenierebas sivrceSi mxolod maSin aRiqvam, rodesac kibe
am sivrceSi aRar aris.
ap: arqiteqturis im koncefciis aRsawerad, romelsac Sen Seexe, ‘kibe’ marTlac idealuri magaliTia.
arqiteqtorisTvis, romelic Cveulebriv sacxovrebel sivrces qmnis, kibe mxolod pasaJia. kibeze moZraob,
kibeze ar rCebi. arqiteqtori sivrces Semofarglavs, SemosazRvravs, aSenebs kibes, kedlebs, saxuravs...
reCel vaiTridi Tavisi kompoziciebis Sesaqmnelad sazRvrebs ar iyenebs, misi namuSevrebi pirveladi, sufTa
sivrceebiT iqmneba. cxadia, rom mas Rrmad esmis sicarielis koncefcia... ‘kibe’ misi gviani namuSevaria.
am droisTvis is ukve Camoyalibebuli xelovania da absoluturad flobs sicarielis koncefcias. is
pirveladi sivrciT manipulirebs, arqiteqtura _ meoradiT. arqiteqtori sivrces sazRvrebiT qmnis,
vaiTridi uSualod sivrciT, Tavad sivrciT.
ob: swored asea, is sivrces obieqtad aqcevs da Tavisi pirvandeli adgilsamyofelidan sxvagan gadaaqvs.
swored amitom ver aCumeben instituciebi mis obieqtebs _ isini cvlian sagamofeno sivrces, adgils, sadac
maTi demonstrireba xdeba. magaliTad, namuSevarSi ‘sardafis kibe’ obieqti TiTqos sadRac vardeba, magram
ara, is moqnili, cocxali obieqtia.
ap: swored asea.
ob: igive iTqmis riCard nonaszec. rogorc ici, me mis Semoqmedebazec vmuSaob. nonass arqiteqturis niSnebi
sxva, nebismier sivrceSi gadaaqvs da amiT sruliad cvlis garemos. misi obieqtebi absoluturad ar gavs sxva
namuSevrebs, magaliTad, skulpturas, ratom ? imitom, rom Cveni cnobiereba Tavad qmnis arqiteqturul
formebs. riCard nonasTan aseTi forma kuTxea. kuTxe reCel vaiTridTanac sainteresoa. kuTxe or
kedelze migviTiTebs, imaze, rom ‘aq SesaZloa ori kedeli yofiliyo’. gansazRvruli adgili, sadac ‘sxva

eCel vaiTridi, ‘moCveneba’, 1990, mxatvris sakuTreba
o p i n i o n
rachel Whiteread, ‘Ghost’, 1990. Courtesy of the artist
arqiteqturas’ SeeZlo arseboba.
ap: anu gansxvavebuli SesaZlebloba...
ob: diax, virtualuri arqiteqtura realurSi. magaliTad kibe – is sxvadasxva sarTuls erTmaneTTan
akavSirebs. kibis sivrce mxolod realoba rodia, is virtualuradac kibea. amitom momwons ase ‘moCvenebis’
idea. mocemul SemTxvevaSi sityva ‘moCveneba’ zustad gamoxatavs arss. sivrce materialuri, xiluli,
xelSesaxebi xdeba. moCvenebasaviT, romelic ar arsebobs, magram aqaa, ar unda Candes, magram xilulia. mas
SeiZleba Seexo kidec. es arqiteqtura sivrceSi binadrobs, gamofenaze, muzeumSi, nebismier adgilas. is
ukve aRaraa virtualoba, is ukve xdomilebaa, konkretuli, xelSesaxebi obieqti, romelic TiTqos geubneba:
‘ai, esaa arqtiteqtura, misi nawili’. Semdeg adamianis goni Tavad agebs kibis garSemo arqiteqturis
niSnebs. magaliTad, riCard nonasi, qvas, metalis uzarmazar detals, sagnebs, romelTa adgili Cveulebriv
saxuravzea, sagamofeno sivrcis iatakze alagebs da mayurebeli ukve Tavisuflad warmoidgens kedels,
saxuravs, nebismier sagans... swored esaa realobis rekonstruqcia.
ap: vaiTridi kidev ufro Sors midis: is Seni qcevis, Seni azrovnebis, sivrceSi Seni moqmedebis
rekonstruirebas axdens. is gibiZgebs Zalian sasiamovno, poetur, abstraqtul da Tavisufal dialogze
sakuTar TavTan.
ob: prustiviT (icinis)
ap: (iRimeba). prusti ufro zustad migiTeTbs mimarTulebas, magram, amave dros, Tavisuflebasac ar
gizRudavs. veravin daudebs zRvars Sens fantazias. Cven amaze xSirad vsaubrobT, Tu kedlis Sengreva ginda,
midi da Seangrie... es Svebas mogitans, cota xniT mainc...
ob: gaakeTe is, rac unda akeTo.

ap: ubralod imoqmede. Cven survilebs siCumiT vaxSobT. vfiqrob, Cveni Tanadroulobis steriloba swored
amaSi mdgomareobs.
ob: ho. es Sinagani xmaa, romelic gareT ver gamodis.
ap: Sinagani xmaa, gamaRizianebeli xma, romelic Signidan gitevs da Tavs gabezrebs manamde, sanam xmas ar
Caawyvetineb, an sanam bolos ar mogiRebs.
ob: cnobiereba Cumad kvdeba da misi gacocxleba mxolod Soks ZaluZs. Cveni TanadroulobisTvis vaiTridis
xelovneba swored amiTaa mniSvnelovani: misi mdumare Semoqmedeba yvelafers afeTqebs. is TviTon hgavs
afeTqebas. is sivrceSi materiis zustad im raodenobas aTavsebs, ramdenic afeTqebas gamoiwvevs, is nelnela
avsebs sivrces da uceb bax! afeTqeba. Sedegi uxmauroa. misi obieqtebi idealuradaa Sesrulebuli,
maTi srulyofileba marTlac gasaocaria, daxvewili, zusti, srulyofili obieqtebi.
© odri bartisi, aleqsios papazaqariasi
rachel Whiteread, ‘untitled’ (house), 1993.
Courtesy Anthony d’Offay, London
‘usaTauro’ (saxli), 1993, reCel vaiTridi,
sakuTreba Anthony d’Offay, lLondoni.

Ella Gibbs
Dear Loop’A,
The photograph is of a railway watch- tower near to where I live.
I’ve passed this sight almost everyday since living in Whitechapel,
East London. It’s derelict, abandoned, about to be demolished
because of new Rail track plans. Nearby, despite local
opposition, the local Shoreditch train station has recently
closed which is a sign of imminent change in the area.
The watch-tower (house on stilts) has an inspirational presence.
It’s a good spot to meet friends, to sit and drink coffee
or beer beneath it in the field - an unusual bit of park that
doesn’t lock its gates at night. The wide paths around it are
cobbled, marguerita daisies and all sorts of wild flowers are
poking through every crack.
At night we have attempted to climb up and get inside the
house - a fine architectural concrete structure, but the stilted
legs are impossible to climb without a giant ladder. So I sit beneath
it imagining how it would be to live there, to work there.
To make it a habitable place again. Where things can happen,
informally. It is a house for dreamers.
London is a playground - full of imaginings, of potential and
the increasing feeling of ‘if only’… There are countless empty
buildings in the East End, that have been bought up and then
systematically made inaccessible by the Local Council and Developers.
The procedure is to clad the building with high security
CCTV, then brick up or board the windows, splash anti climb
paint all over and finally attach lethal razor wire to every ridge.
Inevitably the buildings stand for years, completely empty.
East London is in Flux, In the state of in-between. Scaffolding
structures have become temporary monuments of this time,
displaying a dynamic facade of the city, a climbing frame of
construction and dismantling, of re design and building into
a future vision. Between these massive construction projects
there seems to be a visible resurgence in occupation... squatters
are coming back! Climbing up and through the scaffold,
dismantling the high security alarms, engaging in the art of unpicking
locks and opening doors. Celebrating necessity as an
action - even if short lived, is a hopeful glimpse at a chance to
create an environment of personal choice, of one’s own space.
Of creating time and space. One example – On Drum Street,
in the midst of a traffic roundabout in there is an occupation
July 2006, London Zvirfaso loop’A
ivlisi, 2006, londoni
suraTze, romelsac gigzavni, rkinigzis maxlobeli
koSkia. mas Semdeg, rac vaiTCepelSi, aRmosavleT
londonSi vcxovrob, yoveldRe am koSkTan
miwevs Cavla. is axali rkinigzis mSeneblobis gamo
TiTqmis mTlianad mitovebuli da dangreulia. adgilobrivebis
winaaRmdegobis miuxedavad, SordiCis
sadguric daketes. rogorc Cans, aq didi clile-
bebia mosalodneli. es koSki (Senoba oCofexebze)
inspiraciuli sivrcea. misken mimavali gza qviTaa
mokirwyluli. qvis napralebs Soris gvirilebi da
mindvris yvavilebi xarobs. zustad is adgilia, sadac
megobrebs unda Sexvde, Camojde parkSi, romlis
WiSkari RamiTac ar iketeba, dalio ludi da yava.
erTxel, RamiT koSkze vcade asvla da SigniT SeRweva,
magram giganturi kibis gareSe, es ver SevZeli.
vijeqi mdeloze, koSkis win da vfiqrobdi, neta rogor
vicxovrebdi aq, rogor vimuSavebdi? kargi iqneboda,
vinmes daedo am koSkSi bina _ ocnebaTa saxl-
Si, sadac araferia moulodneli. londoni saTamaSo
moedania _ warmosaxvis, ‘potenciuris’ teritoria,
adgili, sadac uneburad amogxdeba ‘netav...’. istendSi
uamravi mitovebuli nagebobaa. adgilobrvi
samSeneblo organizaciebi da sabWoebi yiduloben
maT, mere ki usargeblod toveben. yvelaferi am sqemiT
midis: Senobaze umaRlesi xarisxis damcav videosistemas
daayeneben, iseTi saRebaviT SeRebaven,
romelic masze aZromas SeuZlebels xdis, fanjrebs
aguriT amoqolaven, samarTebeliviT basr mavTuls
Semoaxveven... da wlebis manZilze dgas saxli, ase
sruliad carieli. aRmosavleT londoni mudmivad
moZraobs, mudmivad droTa gasayarzea. xaraCoebi
Cveni drois monumentebad gadaqceulan da qalaqis
dinamikur arss warmoaCenen, cisken mimarTuli konstruqciebi
da demontaJisTvis gamzadebuli Senobebi
momaval saxecvlilebaze migviTiTeben.
masiuri mSeneblobebi aRorZinebis niSania... isini,
visac aq skvoterebs uwodeben da vinc mitovebul
saxlebSi ukanonod saxldeba, brundebian! xaraCoebs
zeviT miuyvebian, iolad Slian damcav sistemebs,
ela gibsi

6
going on. Once the home of City of London Symphonia, this
grand house witnesses a final liberation prior to demolition.
It’s a place of sanctuary, the eye of the storm, in glamorous
decay, a living theatre - where the huge rooms, now cater for a
painters studio, a recording studio, a guest room come party
room and animation space. It is thriving with activity. It is alive.
This is one of many, making the most of a short lived experience
- holding in place a grand romantic vision, but a reality
and daily life too. It’s a moment of synthesis, a survival strategy,
an alternative economy, where passion is most employable
here. Flexibility and mobility is the name of the game – there
is a rise in the capacity and ability to move swiftly from place
to place, to take transience as a part of the consciousness,
to turn this into a positive moment for change, into a love of
life, akin to the feeling of falling in love, of the energy charge,
of positivism and feeling of liberation. Of generating alternative
futures, and living in the saying that ‘home is where the
heart is’ – a place to feel free in all this unsettlement. Home
could be on the road now, to rent a place to live is an average
of £120 per week for a miniscule one bed flat in East London
- and probably double that amount in the West. In East London
there is a property boom. The Olympics are coming in 2012.
Megalomania and all things ‘bigger and better’ monopolise
the Skylines. Regeneration schemes are extinguishing many
existing local businesses - in front of our eyes a face- lift is in
order. Under cover fruit and veg and local trade markets are
rapidly turning into corporate branded highways – networked
into super cleansing strategy, a global unit that seeps onto the
streets to street furniture and corporate signage, shaping daily
experiences into a kind of feeling like ‘becoming a visitor to
your own home’. But just as there is an resurgence in occupation
in temporarily abandoned buildings, so there is appearing
a contingent space of action. where alley ways are turned into
spontaneous trading and exchange places, where grass verges
are transformed into community gardens, where events
and ad-hoc happenings, street parties, and inventive alternative
economies are rising through the cracks of the pavement.
Where things by chance are growing, also out of a necessity, in
parallel, out of boredom of ‘fitting in’, out of a desire to live life,
and not ask permission to do so. It’s what I call Optimism.
An artist colleague, Amy Plant and I have formed an evolving
project called Pilot Publishing. Recently we were donated a
small plot of land on an 100 year old allotment site. It is located
exactly where Olympic planners propose to completely
flatten with concrete pathways in time for the games. In a few
ostaturad amsxvreven klites, kars aReben da SigniT
Sedian. es adamianebi Tavis sabaziso saWiroebas,
TavSesafris moTxovnilebas SemoqmedebiTi aqtis,
dResaswaulis saxes aZleven _ Tundac droebiT,
Tundac cota xniT irCeven saarsebo garemos, drosa
da sivrces qmnian. dram stritzec igive xdeba. londonis
simfoniuri orkestris uzarmazarma Senobam
momaval demontaJamde Tavisufleba moipova. es
WknobaSeparuli wminda adgili cxovrebis Teatrad
iqca: uzarmazari oTaxebi samxatvro da xmis Camwer
studiebad, artistul sivrceebad gadakeTda. aq aqtiurobis
pikia, aq sicocxlea. SesaZloa yvelaferi
es arc Tu didxans gagrZeldes, magram jerjerobiT
am SenobaSi romantikuli xilvebis gverdiT cocxalma
yoveldRiurobam daisadgura. am sivrceSi sin-
Tezis, gadarCenis strategiis, alternatiuli ekonomikis,
vnebis momenti dadga. am TamaSs moqniloba
da mobiluroba sWirdeba. unda SegeZlos myisierad
gadaxvide adgilidan adgilze, warmavloba cnobierebis
ganuyofel nawilad aRiqva, cvalebadoba
– sikeTed, sicocxlis siyvarulad, energiis muxtad,
gaTavisuflebad. unda moiZio arsebobis alternatiuli
gzebi da mixvde, rom Seni bina iqaa, saiTac
suli migiwevs. Seni mouwyebeli yofa sxva araferia
garda Tavisuflebisa. imas, rasac dRes saxls vuwodebT,
mudmivi adgilsamyofeli aRar gaaCnia, saxlma
SeiZleba imogzauros. Tavad gansajeT, erTsawoliani
oTaxi aRmosavleT londonSi kviraSi 120 funti
Rirs, dasavleTiT, albaT, ukve orjer meti.
aRmosavleT londonSi sakuTrebis bumia. aq 2012
wels olimpiada gaimarTeba. megalomania cxovrebis
wesad iqca, ‘ufro didma da ufro kargma’ horizonti
gadafara. samSeneblo aqtivobam aqaur mcire bizness
safrTxe Seuqmna. pirdapir Cvens Tvalwin xilisa da
bostneulis maRaziebi korporatiulma brendebma
Secvala, sareklamo niSnebma dafara yvela quCa da
adamiani sakuTar saxlSi stumrad aqcia. droebiT
usargeblo Senobebis aTviseba aqtivobis axal Sesa-
Zleblobebs aCens. maT axlomaxlo xeivnebi vaWrobisa
da gacvla-gamocvlis adgilad iqceva, balaxovani
mdeloebi _ sazogadoebriv baRebad, romlebSic
sxvadasxva dResaswaulsa da daugegmav RonisZiebas
aRniSnaven. aq, trotuarebis napralebs Soris alternatiuli
ekonomikuri praqtika ikidebs fexs, aq
yvelaferi sicocxlis xalisiT sunTqavs da araferi

years - the bigger picture will come into play; a massive eviction
and destruction of a place I call a kind of paradise. It’s not
only an abundant community vegetable garden, but a unique
eco system full of rare plant species, trees, flowers, insects
and birds. To get to it you have to cross a bridge - over the River
Lee - into a wild place - the countryside within the city, where
you have a chance to breathe. You can see the allotments if
you type in Manor Gardening Society, Waterden Road, London
E15, on Google Earth. You can zoom into the area, view the
patches of land like an abstract painting.
Pilot Publishing have adopted the plot as part of the campaign
to try to save the site. We have called it ‘Demo Plot’ - a piece
of free land where we are learning with others how to grow
fresh food. Where we cook, have bonfires and generate ideas
for possibilities of how this ground can be incorporated into
Olympic proposals. It could be a fantastic eco-educational
resource, a living example of the art of sustainability. We are
working on it. Back to the East London streets, where there’s
a heat wave going on, a kind of meltdown with an immense
energy charge, full of every culture, backgrounds, differences
and connectivity. The contradiction of itself is a beautiful thing,
a carnival of architecture, of experiences, of political reference
points and social structures.
There are many galleries in the East End. The art map is over
spilling. Public and Independent Art galleries are open as usual
exhibiting the current trends. There is a lot of Public Art too,
works that are site specific, or respond to different contexts,
places and people, outside or in tandem with a gallery
commission. Often there’s an open brief that comes with a
contract, of public liability, health and safety issues, insurance,
reliability, guaranteed audience access and quality of outcome.
It’s a labyrinth, through which to navigate a positive process
and open situations for questioning, to feel where the life
and work meet, to spark possibilities, in temporary moments
or fragments of time. To inject an inspiration whilst working
with people that is independent of major capital, but rich with
existing resources, energy and exchange. I used to co-run a
space called Belt - a space in-between (1997 – 2001). It was
a disused belt factory, a small ground floor space on Vyner
Street, neighbored with textile factories filled to the brim with
black market workers scraping for their living night and day.
Belt was a meeting place - where people from different fields
of life and professions could experiment. For three years I lived
xdeba mosawyeni angarebiT. optimizmad me swored
amgvar msoflaRqmas miviCnev. Pilot Publishing Cemi kolegis
emi plantis da Cemi erToblivi proeqtia. axlaxan
100-wliani ijariT Sesawiris saxiT miwis patara
nakveTi miviReT. is swored iq mdebareobs, sadac
olimpiuri kompleqsis mSeneblobis gegmiT betonis
gzebi unda daigos. sul ramdenime weliwadSi aRar
iarsebebs adgili, romelic ‘samoTxed’ mimaCnda: iSviaTi
mcenareebiT, frinveliT, mwerebiT dasaxlebuli
unikaluri ekosistema. am sofelSi misasvlelad,
romelic qalaqis SuagulSi mdebareobs da
sadac sufTa haeriT SegiZlia datkbe, iq misasvlelad
mdinare li-ze xidi unda gadakveTo. am adgilis
monaxuleba internetiTac SegiZlia, Google Earth-Si
Sesabamis misamrTs (Manor Gardening Society, Waterden
Road, London E15) miuTiTeb da abstraqtuli naxatis
msgavs miwis nakveTebs daaTvaliereb. Cveni proeqti
‘Pilot Publishing’ am adgilis gadasarCenad wamoviwyeT.
is erTgvar sademonstracio sivrced vaqcieT, sadac
xilisa da bostneulis movlas vswavlobT, vamzadebT
saWmels, vikribebiT koconTan da vfiqrobT
imaze, Tu rogor SevinarCunoT aqauroba olimpiuri
TamaSebis dros. mas SeiZleba saganmanaTleblo
eko-sivrcis funqcia hqondes, arsebobis xelovnebis
Sesaswavlad. amJamad swored am sakiTxebze vmuSaobT.
aRmosavleT londonis quCebs sicxis talRebi
awydeba. aqauroba istoriis, kulturaTa, gansxvavebaTa
da maTi energetikuli urTierqmedebis sivrcea.
aRqmaTa, arqiteqturul stilTa, politikur da socialur
mimarTebaTa kontrasti karnavalur konteqsts
qmnis. aRmosavleT londonSi uamravi galereaa.
aqauri art-ruka mimofenilia amgvari dawesebulebebiT.
sazogadoebrivi sivrce da damoukidebeli
galereebi aqtualur tendenciebs asaxaven. sajaro
xelovnebis nimuSebi, romlebic xan damoukideblad
Ria sivrceSi, xan ki galereebis dakveTiT iqmneba,
aqaurobis konteqsts, adgilis Taviseburebebs, aq
mcxovrebi adamianebis arss Seesabameba. namuSevarTa
labirinTi, iseT gancdas aCens, rom aqauroba
cxovrebisa da xelovnebis Sexvedris adgilia, sadac
warmavloba, mxolod axali SesaZleblobebis
aRmoCenisken gvibiZgebs. aRmosavleT londoni
cxovrebiseuli gamocdilebiT, urTierTobaTa en-

8
Ella Gibbs, artist, curator, London
there and kept it open as a space to be filled with live activity,
from nights of total darkness, to rock bands, to poetry nights,
to discussions, dinners and Gameshows. It generated a small
income through fundraising events, like jumble sales. It was
not supported by an art grant, just by enthusiasm and ideas
around creating an autonomous space that could spread its
wings. People heard about it, it grew through word of mouth.
It felt like living in the back streets. Now Vyner Street is the
hippest place in the East End, the front line of the London Art
world. As you walk down the street you nudge up against a
display of Art galleries and artists studios. Private view nights
witness a street filled with black outfits. Gallerists, collectors,
art viewers, art students flock to the occassion. The engine
is perpetually in motion. Driven by desire, by the constant
networking ‘ of who you might bump into’ who might recognise
you, who? I often wonder where is this lucky dip leading?
Around the corner a supermarket called Bestway now stands
proud in the place of where factories and local shops once
were. There is something about this juxtaposition, of galleries
and a supermarket, its changing face feels something like a
parasite, that is far from the locality that it inhabits. A species
all of it’s own. It’s the end of July, another hot summer night.
There’s something in the air. A kind of restlessness. Right
now I can hear the sound of cars passing, from my window I
can see the Gherkin building and Nat West tower rise above
the tree tops. The sky is clear tonight. London is a playground
– constantly changing, triggering motivation to dream up new
possibilities… of not just what to do, but how to do it. Being in
flux, when nothing is still, and everything is uncertain. Possibly
it’s a moment to relocate, to work with existing resources,
to renovate, to make life improvements as best possible, to
offer imaginative solutions, to build collectively alternative
conditions to learn and share in, to link with other places and
people. To create time and space for the making of ideas and
activities that spring from informal moments and unexpected
distractions, like sitting in a field under an abandoned watchtower.
With love from London
Ps: if you ever need a place to stay here in London contact
hotel c’est la vie a creative accommodation network scheme.
ergiiT damuxtuli da inspiraciiTaa ganmsWvaluli.
1997-2001 wlebSi erT adgils, saxelad ‘Belt’ vxelmZ-
Rvanelobdi. es qamrebis qarxnis mitovebuli Senoba
iyo. patara sivrce pirvel sarTulze, romelic teqstilis
yofil manufaqturebTan axlos, vainerstritze
mdebareobs da sadac odesRac aralegali
muSebi dRe-Rames asworebdnen, sxvadasxva profesiisa
da warmomavlobis adamianebis Sexvedris adgilad
iqca. iq sam weliwads vcxovrobdi da vmuSaobdi:
rok-jgufebi, mxatvrebi, poetebi regularulad
xvdebodnen erTmaneTs, sadilobdnen, saubrobdnen,
sportuli TamaSebiT irTobdnen Tavs da aqaurobas
sicoxliT avsebdnen. Zveli nivTebis gayidviT
mcire Semosavalsac vSoulobdiT, granti ar mogvipovebia.
proeqtma ‘Belt’ Cveni enTuziazmis wyalobiT
am sivrces avtonomia SeunarCuna. dRes vainer
striti aRmosavleT londonis art-samyaros centrad
iqca. mxatvris saxelosnos, galereas yovel
nabijze waawydebi. axali gamofenis gaxsnisas quCa
SavebSi gamowyobili adamianebiT ivseba _ galeristebi,
koleqcionerebi, stundebi uwyvet nakadad
modian. kontaqtebisa da urTierTobebis surviliT
ganmsWvalul samyaroSi, arasdros ici, vis Sexvdebi,
vis naxav. atmosferos mxolod supermarketi ‘bestvei’
arRvevs. is saxelosnoebsa da galeerebs Soris
ucxo sxeuliviT gamoiyureba. am adgilas odesRac
saamqroebi da patar-patara maRaziebi iyo ganlagebuli.
ivlisis miwuruls, cxel RameSi mousvenroba
igrZnoba. oTaxebSi quCis xma Semodis. fanjridan
Gherkin Building da Nat West Tower-is saxuravebs vxedavT.
ca sufTaa... londoni saTamaSo moedania _
mudmivad cvalebadi, SesaZleblobebiT aRsavse, adgili,
sadac ar SeiZleba ar gagiCndes kiTxva: ra gavakeTo,
rogor? yofierebis mdinareba garkveulobas
arasdros gTavazobs. iqneb amitom, yvelaferi
unda mosinjo, sicocxles energia STabero, moZebno
gamosavali, miiRo gadawyvetileba, iswavlo raRac
axali, gaiziaro gansxvavebuli ideebi, aRmoaCino
manamade ucnobi adamianebi, adgilebi, sakuTari xeliT
Seqmna saarsebo sivrce, dro. realobad aqcio
yvelaze daujerebeli survilebi, survilebi, romlebic
sarkinigzo koSkTan jdomisas gebadeba.
londonidan siyvaruliT
Ps: Tu odesme londonSi Ramis gaTeva dagWirdebaT,
miakiTxeT hotels ‘c’est la vie’, romelic kreatiuli
gansaxlebis qselis proeqtis nawilia.
ela gibsi, mxatvari, kuratori, londoni

Nino Dzandzava
E x P E R I M E N TA L F I L M S O F G I G A C H K H E I D Z E
Experimental cinema is generally less popular than feature or even documentary film. People working in this genre often shun
the limelight, as experimental cinema is usually too challenging for mainstream directors. Directors working in experimental
cinema are akin to mad professors trapped in closed rooms. One of their functions has always been the manipulation of space.
However while directors of some feature films do the same they do not begin working from such a premise. To them such
experiments are incidental. The role of a director is therefore double. First, the experimental director removes the function of a
scene/object from its normal context. Second, he/she then improvises around the adjusted product. So many developments in
modern cinema arrive out of such experimentation. This applies to other spheres of art as well. People engaged in experimental
film are not inventors, they merely wish to observe and research from new perspectives. Rarely do they consider the audience.
They understand that their work will only be shown at special festivals and demonstrations.
Until now Georgian cinema has been mainly represented by feature films. However numerous documentaries were produced
during Soviet times (including news-chronicles). Social realism was the style of the time, but many films (feature or documentaries)
still found themselves on the shelf. As a result the purely experimental films never surfaced during the totalitarian period. Only
the grandiose and more monumental received public airing - forcing experimentalism virtually out of existence during the mid
to late Soviet period. All that can be mentioned are moments within larger, formalized films. Today however experimentalism is
back. Young Georgian director Giga Chkheidze is in the vanguard. He started to create independent films in 1991. From 1993,
he worked on indie-productions in Moscow, Munich, Berlin and London. Currently he lives in Germany, although occasionally
works in Georgia. The short film ‘Brazil’ was his first German production. This illustrates a German lesson – set around the Karl
Plaza, National Theatre and German Museum. The movie starts with a black screen set against voices wishing to visit the sites.
However the cultural institutions turn out not to be the ones we see later. Munich in fact transforms into the micro model of the
world. We see flashes of people but don’t see the sites. People appear on moving staircases with their backs to us, interchanged
with others in screen-saver mode. At first sight the movie appears to be aimed at the foreign audience, ie people who do not
speak German. This has an alienating effect on German speakers. It is alienation not only from language but also from the city
itself. That explains the title of the film - ‘Brazil‘ – which is in fact about Munich. The director returns us to the world of childhood
experimentation – a time when we craved new knowledge. This refers to a nostalgia for something formative, without a name,
neither Brazil not Munich.
In one episode, rhythmic movement on a subway staircase is juxtaposed with the sound of words - like futuristic poetry. By
dissolving the meaning of words the director defies literal interpretation. Such an approach is developed in his later films - ‘Lake’
(2002) and ’Eve’ (2004). In these Giga Chkheidze plays not only with words but also foregrounds. In his latest work ‘Sunny Week’
(2005) he observes the exact same place for an entire week. He explores the effects of light and shade on water, it’s bottom and
surface. By changing the lightning, he moves up and down and vice versa – a strikingly picturesque effect. The ‘Sunny Weak’ is
reminiscent to the work of Kiki Smith.
In ‘Eve’ we see talking woman. The image is blurred despite a long monologue. Only the landscape behind her is in focus, and
the voice of the actress is overlaid with Debussy. This kind of overplay splits the frame and the image of the woman becomes the
background for a graphic landscape.
Giga Chkheidze’s work has been shown at many festivals – including the Oberhausen Festival for Short Films, Rotterdam, San
Sebastian and Texas International Festivals. His movies have been shown at the Museum of Modern Art in New York (MOMA)
and in the Lincoln Centre Film Society (NYC). His works ‘Khorumi’, ‘Sunflower and March’, ‘Fin’ are included in the Tbilisi 7th
International Film festival in October 10-15, 2006 in Tbilisi.
© Nino Dzandzava, film Critic, Tbilisi

nino ZanZava
0
giga CxeiZis eqsperimentebi kinoSi
eqsperimentuli kino gacilebiT nakleb popularulia,
vidre mxatvruli an Tundac, dokumenturi.
amitom adamianebi, romlebic ar qmnian masobriv xelovnebas
xSirad yuradRebis miRma rCebian. eqsperimentuli
kino misTvis damaxasiaTebeli kamerulobis
gamo reJisorebisTvisac naklebad mimzidvelia. amas
am sferoSi dakavebuli kinematografistebis raodenobac
mowmobs. eqsperimentuli kinos avtorebi
sakuTar laboratoriebSi Caketil profesorebs
gvanan. isini xSirad sivrcis garkveuli monakveTiT
manipulireben iseve, rogorc mxatvruli kinos re-
Jisorebi. magram gansxvaveba isaa, rom eqsperimentatorebi
eqsterieris Tu interieris sivrceSi
moxvedrili obieqtebis funqciebis, formebisa da
konotaciebis xelaxla gaazrebas iwyeben. radganac
TavianTi pirveladi daniSnulebiT (rac unda umniSvnelo
da mcire Candes es daniSnuleba) es obieqtebi
ukve arseboben, Semoqmedi maTTan mimarTebaSi ormag
aqts Cadis. is jer klavs am funqcias (masalis
funqciis Secvlis/gadarCevis an axleburad danaxvis
TvalsazrisiT) da Sedegad miRebuli mkvdari masaliT
iwyebs TamaSs. kinoSi karga xnis win damkvidrebuli
mravali xerxi ara SemTxveviTi warmatebuli
mignebis, aramed swored eqsperimentirebis Sedegia,
ara mxolod kinoSi, zogadad xelovnebebSi. eqsperimentatorebi
xom arc gamomgoneblebi arian da arc
aRmomCenebi. ubralod, maT Ziebis, dakvirvebis da
sagnebis ukuRma amotrialebis survili aqvT. procesSi
isini naklebad fiqroben potenciur mayurebelze,
radganac, TavisTavad cxadia, maT filmebs
mayurebeli mxolod safestivalo programebSi an
specialur Cvenebebze Tu naxavs.
qarTuli kino, ZiriTadad, mxatvruli filmebiT iyo
reprezentirebuli saqarTveloSi da mis farglebs
gareT. sabWoTa periodSi Cvens qveyanaSi uamrav dokumentur
filmsac iRebdnen (qronikebis CaTvliT).
formalizmi Sefasebis is kriteriumi iyo, ris gamoc
uamravi filmi (rogorc mxatvruli, ise dokumenturi)
Taroze moxdva. Sesabamisad, wminda saxis
eqsperimentuli kino totalitaruli reJimis dros
ar arsebobda. maSin modaSi pompezuroba da monumenturoba
iyo, rac eqsperimentul midgomas safuZvelSive
gamoricxavda. Sedegad, dRes Znelia saubari
imaze, arsebobs Tu ara qarTuli eqsperimentuli
kino. SeiZleba visaubroT calkeul adamianebze,
romlebmac nawilobriv, ufro iSviaTad ki mTlianad
miuZRvnes TavianTi Semoqmedeba kinematografis am
sferos. maT Sorisaa axalgazrda qarTveli kinore-
Jisori giga CxeiZe. damoukidebeli filmebis Seqmna
man 1991 wlidan daiwyo, xolo 1993-dan moskovSi,
miunhenSi, berlinsa da londonSi axorcielebs damoukidebel
proeqtebs. amJamad germaniaSi cxovrobs,
Tumca filmebs saqarTveloSic iRebs. misi
pirveli germanuli produqciaa moklemetraJiani
filmi ‘brazilia’. es aris germanuli enis gakveTilis
imitacia, sadac Cven vecnobiT personaJebs, romlebic
ilustraciebidan gvesaubrebian da gvacnoben
sakuTar Tavs. personaJebi (da reJisori) gvTavazoben
eqskursias miunhenis garSemo; gvpirdebian qalaqis
RirSesaniSnaobebis _ karl placis, nacionaluri
Teatris, germanuli muzeumis monaxulebas.
filmi Savi ekranis fonze am SeTavazebis gaJRerebiT
iwyeba. Tumca, e.w. kulturis kerebi sulac ar aris
is, rasac misi Semdgomi ganviTarebisas vxedavT. war

mosaxviTi miunheni samyaros mikro modelad iqceva,
romelic aTeulobiT adamianis saxis wamieri gaelvebiT
warmoCndeba, wignis naxati personaJebis, eskalatorebze
moZravi zurgSeqceuli xalxis, screen
saver-isa da ilustraciebis CvenebiT. erTi SexedviT,
filmi ucxoel mayurebelzea gaTvlili, maTze, vinc
germanuli ar icis. germanelebisTvis es sakuTari
enis mimarT gaucxoebisa da misi xelaxla aRmoCenis
aqtia. es aris gaucxoeba ara mxolod enasTan, aramed
qalaqTan. qveyanasTan. swored amitom JRers ase absurdulad
saTauri filmisa, romelic miunhenze
mogviTxrobs. reJisori gakveTilebis samyaroSi
gvabrunebs, samyaroSi, romelic bevrs enatreba. magram,
pirvelyovlisa, es aris nostalgia imaze, rac
pirvelqmnilia, rac ar aris saxeldebuli, rasac
arc brazilia hqvia da arc miunheni. amitom statikuri
kadrebisgan awyobili filmi Zalian myudro da
mravlismetyveli xdeba. erT-erT epizodSi, eskalatorze
adamianebis moZraobis gamosaxulebas JReradobis
mixedviT mimsgavsebuli sityvebi adevs, isev
da isev saxelmZRvanelodan. ritmulad warmoTqmul
sitva-savarjiSoebs futuristuli poeziis elferi
dahkravs. Tumca sityvebis konotaciis gabaTilebiT
reJisori kvlav maT diskreditacias eweva iseve,
rogorc mis momdevno filmebSi ‘tba’(2002 w.), ‘eva’
(2004w.). giga CxeiZes ara marto sityvebiT, planebiT
TamaSic uyvars. es Cans mis erT-erT ukanasknel namuSevarSi
‘mziani kvira’ (2005). reJisori erTsa da
imave adgils Svidi dRis ganmavlobaSi akvirdeba, wylis
fskerisa da zedapiris SuqCrdilovan efeqtebs
ikvlevs. mas xan fskeri amoyavs zedapirze, xanac
piriqiT. amas igi ganaTebis cvalebadobiT aRwevs,
rac films saocrad ferweruls xdis. ‘mziani kvira’
arafriT Camouvardeba kiki smitis eqsperiments.
‘evaSi’ Cven vxedavT mosaubre qalbatons, romlis
gamosaxuleba xangZlivi monologisas mudmivad
bundovania. samagierod, fokusSia mis miRma arsebuli
peizaJi. (msaxiobis xma klod debiusis musikiT
ifareba). aseTi gadaTamaSebiT xdeba kadris gaxle-
Ca da swored qalis gamosaxuleba iqceva im fonad,
romelzec grafikuli landSafti ikiTxeba. giga
CxeiZis filmebs mraval festivalze aqvT monawileoba
miRebuli, maT Sorisaa oberhauzenis mokle
filmebis saerTaSoriso kinofestivali., roterdamis,
san sebastianis, texasis saerTaSoriso kinofestivalebi.
mis filmebs aCveneben niu-iorkis Tanamedrove
xelovnebis muzeumSi (MOMA), linkolnis
centris kinosazogadoebaSi, niu-iorkis kinoarqivSi
(NYC).
wels, Tbilisis meSvide saerTaSoriso kinofestivalze
(10-15 oqtomberi) programaSi ‘qarTuli panorama’
CarTulia misi ramdenime moklemetraJiani
filmi: ‘xorumi’, ‘mzesumzira da marti’, ‘Fin’.
© nino ZanZava, kinomcodne, Tbilisi
o p i n i o n

ANNIE
LOVEJOy
MAC
DuNLOP
Project title: marking the transition: arts & health care
A series of site-specific art works for a newly built Health Centre in Bristol, UK.
artists: Annie Lovejoy & Mac Dunlop (InSites design)
This centrepiece, hangs in the surgery atrium above the reception desk, and visibly responds to changes in temperature levels.
The LED colour changing technology combined with sensor – led electronics was developed in collaboration with Mark
Newbold, an electronics engineer.
proeqti: ‘kontaqti - xelovneba da janmrTeloba’
namuSevarTa seria, axlad aSenebuli janmrTelobis centrisTvis bristolSi.
mxatvrebi: en lavjoi da mak danlopi (InSites design)
namuSevari kidia bristolis janmrTelobis centris qirurgiul ganyofilebaSi, mimRebis Tavze da
TvalnaTliv reagirebs temperaturis cvlilebaze.
namuSevari Seicavs sensors da tyviis saRebavs. teqnologia SemuSavebuli iqna eleqtro inJinerTan, mark
niuboldTan erTad.

Title: ‘You’ve got beautiful eyes’ an ongoing series of editions / multiples / interventions
A play between simple poetics & optical glare for an ‘advert’ in ‘Five’ magazine
curated by Gavin Turk: The Labyrinth of the Gaze - limited edition publication Feb 2004.
‘You’ve got beautiful eyes’ edition no 3: carrier bags. Open Sduios, Spike Island, Bristol, 30th Apr. 2005 - 2nd May, 2005
proeqti: ‘lamazi Tvalebi gaqvs’, proeqti grZeldeba. urTierToba martiv poeziasa da Zlier Suqs Soris,
JunralisTvis ‚Five’. kuratori gevin turki: ‚mzeris labirinTi’ – SezRuduli gamoSveba, daibeWda 2004
wlis TebervalSi. ‘lamazi Tvalebi gaqvs’. gamocema 3: ‘CanTa‘, Ria saxelosnoebi, Spike Island, bristoli,
30.04.2005 – 2.05.2005
An exploration of tactile, aesthetic & emotive computing in
the public domain
Exhibited at SIGGRAPH 2004 Cyberfashion Show, Los
Angeles, California USA
artist: Annie Lovejoy
technology: Cliff Randell (Univ. of Bristol Wearables Group)
Another persons’ heart rate becomes visually illuminated
within a highly tactile & crafted design. Via a Polar heart rate
monitor, pulsating data is wirelessly communicated to the
decorative sleeve. This aesthetic visualisation of responsive
data extends beyond the user/wearer (one to one connection)
into the wider public domain.
SexebiTi, esTetikuri da emociuri gamoTvlis kvleva
sazogadoebriv sivrceSi.
SIGGRAPH 2004 Cyberfashion Show, los anjelesi, aASS.
mxatvari: en lavjoi
teqnologia: specialuri monitoris da gadamcemis
saSualebiT xdeba adamianis guliscemis vizualizeba
sazogadoebriv sivrceSi. teqnikuri mxardaWera:
kilf randeli (bristolis universiteti).
s i t e - s p e c i f i c
River Tawe - video projection and performance event Swansea, 2002 also exhibited at the Visual Arts Pavillion, National
Eisteddfod of Wales UK August 2006
‘a lyrical and yet political journey’
‘The River Tawe reveals the histories and present day realities of the Lower Swansea Valley. The local community and city of
Swansea have reclaimed the riverbanks & neighbouring land, previously poisoned by the industrial waste from tin, zinc, and

copper. Plants, trees and wildlife now thrive where before nothing would grow. The video takes us on a journey through time
- compressing a 45min boat trip through the Lower Swansea Valley. This contemplative journey through the historic industrial
landscape ends with a poetic and moving performance by the Welsh concert harpist, Nia Jenkins.’
mdinare tave – video proeqcia da perfomansi, svansea, 2002. namuSevari gamofenili iyo aseve vizualuri
xelovnebis pavilionSi, uelsis nacionalur eistedfodSi, didi britaneTi, agvisto, 2006
‘liriuli da Tanac politikuri mogzauroba’.
‘mdinare tave gamoxatavs qvemo svanseas xeobis istorias da DdRevandel dRes. qalaq svanseas adgilobrivma
mcxovreblebma daibrunes mdinaris napiri da axlomdebare teritoria, romelic wlebis manZilze iwamleboda
Tunuqis, cinkis da spilenZis industriuli narCenebisgan. mcenareebi da cxovelebi gamoCndnen
iq, sadac sul cota xnis win veraferi xarobda. video gvTavazobs droSi mogzaurobas, es aris 45 wuTiani
curva naviT mdinare taveze. saintereso da mravlismTqmeli mogzauroba yofil industriul garemoSi
mTavrdeba
nia jenkinsnis (arfa) koncertiT.
site-specific glazing for Bedminster Library, Bristol. UK
artists: Annie Lovejoy & Mac Dunlop (InSites Design)
A series of glazed panels for the library foyer, developed in association with staff and users.
moWEiquli paneli bristolis bedminsteris biblioTekisTvis
mxatvrebi: en lavjoi da mak danlopi
moWiquli panelebis seria SemuSavebuli biblioTekis TanamSromlebTan da vizitorebTan erTad.

Exhibition Title: Hotel
Artwork Title: The Polisher’s Travels (part 1)
Location: Room #5, Ashley Hotel, Ashley Hill, Bristol, UK
Media: Installation
Description: “The Polisher’s Travels (part 1)” incorporated 3
main areas of focus and interaction:
A half polished brass musical instrument (French Horn), placed
beside polishing tools. Any person entering the room could use
the tools to continue with polishing the musical instrument.
A DVD playing on the television. Any person entering the room
could select different sound and visuals from Piano compositions
to Poetry videos. The intention was to encourage people
to a) take part in polishing, and b) to contemplate the meditations
of the absent Polisher.
Various books, and other intimate possessions of the Polisher
which anyone could read or browse.
“The Polisher’s Travels” is a series of ongoing site-specific installations,
which take place in temporary and transient locations
such as hotels, hostels, caravans, etc.
‘Hotel’ was the local arts scene at its most anarchic, whimsical
and inspired” Venue magazine
Mac Dunlop, visual artist, Bristol, UK
© Annie Lovejoy, Mac Dunlop,
s i t e - s p e c i f i c
gamofena: ‘hoteli’
namuSevari: gamprialeblis mogzaurobebi (nawili I)
adgili: oTaxi #5, eSli hoteli, eSli hili,
bristoli, didi britaneTi
media: instalacia
‘gamprialeblis mogzauroba (nawili I)’ moicavs
fokusirebisa da urTierTqmedebis sam ZiriTad
etaps: naxevrad gaprialebuli sasule instrumenti
(franguli sayviri) moTavsebulia saprialebeli
xelsawyoebis gverdiT. nebismier pirovnebas,
romelic Semodis oTaxSi SeuZlia gaagrZelos
sayviris gaprialeba. CarTulia video pleeri,
sadac nebismier pirovnebas, SeuZlia SearCios
gansxvavebuli xma da vizualuri rigi dawyebuli
safortepiano kompoziciiT damTavrebuli
leqsebis kiTxviT.
proeqtis mizani iyo is, rom adamianebs a) mieRoT
monawileoba gaprialebaSi b) Camwvdariyvnen
ararsebuli gamprialeblis fiqrebs. iqve iyo
wignebi da ‘gamprialeblis’ sxva piradi nivTebi.
yvelas SeeZlo maTi daTvaliereba.
‘gamprialebelis mogzaurobebi’ aris grZelvadiani
adgilis specifikidan gamomdinare (site-specific)
instalacia, romlebic ewyoba adgilebSi,
rogoricaa hotelebi, patara sastumroebi,
qaravanebi da sxv.
mak danlopi, mxatvari, bristoli, didi britaneTi.

6
P M P - P R I G O V M A L I P R I G O V
The Ingenuous New Churchill, 2004
Performance
Duration – 25 min
Any culture is aggressive. We say this not to stigmatize culture
– after all aggression drives all sorts of anthropological
activity – but to call to circumspection when treating this
phenomenon.
Within the boundaries of its expansion, high culture, like any
other form of aggression, affects the least protected social
strata and the individuals incapable of adaptation. Increasingly
sensitive to physical aggression and cultural expansionism,
civil society has made considerable progress over the past
few decades in protecting various ethnic, religious and sexual
minorities, people with disabilities, children and animals. The
borderline between the protected zone and the area of total
vulnerability and defencelessness has now shifted in the
direction of our universally adored, dearly loved toys.
In almost every European culture, the Teddy Bear has always
been the paragon, standing out among all other toys. A quasiliving
being, our loyal companion throughout the vagaries of
our heavily urbanized existence in almost total separation
from Nature, the Teddy Bear is invested with so much infantile,
adolescent and even adult love, pain and unfulfilled longing
that it can’t help being anthropomorphized. Within the
transcendental world created by the Russian esoteric writer
Daniil Andreyev a whole aeon is allocated to this kind of
‘axali CerCilis gulwrfeli gamocxadeba’,
2004, perfomansi
xangrZlivoba - 25 wT.
yvela kultura agresiulia. magram mxolod amis
gamo misi gansja ar Rirs. kultura xom anTropologiuri
aqtivobis energetikuli wyaroa. Tumca
sifrTxile mainc gvmarTebs.
bunebrivia, rom iseve, rogorc nebismieri agresori,
maRali kulturac Tavisi eqspansiis farglebSi,
samizned socialurad yvelaze daucvel fenebsa da
yvelaze sust individebs irCevs.
SeSfoTebulma sazogadoebam bolo dros kargad
iswavla, rogor daicvas sxeulebrivi agresiisa da
kulturuli eqspansiisgan erovnuli, seqsualuri,
religiuri umciresobani, bavSvebi da cxovelebi.
amitom sruli daucvelobisa da umweobis zRvarma
Cveni usayvarlesi saTamaSoebisken gadainacvla.
maTi niSneuli reprezentatori TiTqmis yvela evropul
kulturaSi pluSis daTuniaa. am arsebebSi,
romelTac Cvens megapolisur urbanistul, bunebrivi
garemosgan maqsimalurad distancirebul
realobaSi gverdidan ar vicilebT, investirebulia
uamravi bavSvis, mozardis da xandaxan zrdasruli
adamianis siyvaruli, imedgacrueba, pretenzia. amitom
savsebiT SeiZleba iTqvas, rom isini ‘gavasuliereT’,
‘gavaadamianureT’.

creatures. In the afterlife they are to meet their diseased
owners as equals. It is only natural that in the context of our
highly urbanized life, with almost no trace of living Nature
left in it, the Teddy Bear has turned into Nature’s exclusive
representative. It is now the principal object of the human
beings’ intrinsic - and nowadays rarely realized – drive to
“cultivate” or rather “culturalize” everything around them.
With respect to the Teddy Bear, this is something they mostly
do unconsciously. Or, if they are conscious of what they are
doing, they will be unwilling to acknowledge it. Suffice to recall
all those lengthy sentimental conversations people – not all of
them of a tender age - conduct with their teddy bears.
PERFORMANCE EXECUTION: In our performance a teddy bear
is subjected to “culturisation” by means of trepanning. The
operation on Teddy’s brain is conducted by the participants
in the Performance, all of them wearing white smocks and
equipped with surgical instruments. The cotton-wool the teddy
bear is stuffed with is removed from its head to be replaced
with pages from a book by Winston Churchill, symbolic of high
culture. The teddy bear is a target of cultural aggression. At the
same time, it is a receptacle of hitherto unrealized sentimental
- and sensual – “culturising” effort.
And then a miracle happens: the Teddy Bear starts mouthing
Winston Churchill’s words in the great man’s own voice. We
are listening to the language of high culture.
s i t e - s p e c i f i c
rusi ezoTerikosi daniil andreevi Tavis teqstebSi
imasac ki amtkicebs, rom am kvazi sulier arsebebs
zecaSi sakuTari eoni aqvT, sadac isini postmortum
Tavis miwier mflobelebs xvdebian.
ukiduresad urbanizebul yofaSi, romlidanac
eliminirebulia cocxali bunebis niSanwyalic ki,
daTunia bunebis TiTqmis erTaderT srulfasovan
warmomadgenlad unda miviCnioT. maszea mimarTuli
adamianis ararealizebuli ‘gamakulturebeli’ Zalisxmeva.
Tumca am faqts is xSirad ver acnobierebs
da ar aRiarebs. gana niSneuli ar aris xangrZlivi,
gulis amaCuyebeli dialogi daTuniasa da adamians
Soris? unda vaRiaroT, rom dialogSi mxolod bavSvebi
rodi monawileoben.
perfomansis msvleloba: perfomansSi, pluSis
daTunias ‘gamakulturebel’ qirurgiul operacias
ukeTeben. trepanirebuli daTunia, romelsac bambis
SigTavss CerCilis naSromis (maRali kulturis
niSani da reprezentatori) ramdenime furcliT
ucvlian, swored zemoT naxsenebi agresiis daucveli
obieqtis TvalnaTeli magaliTia. magram amave dros
is im saTavsis rolSi gamodis, romelSic adamianis
ararealizebuli, sentimentalur-mgrZnobelobiTi
‘gamakulturebeli’ Zalisxmeva ideba.
da ai, saocreba: daTunia ‘maRali kulturis enaze
iwyebs laparaks!

8
© peter Nasmyth, ‘Last day‘, 2006 photography, uK

Carolyn Black
THE FOREST OF DEAN –
A PLACE IN CONTINuOuS
TRANSITION
The Forest of dean Sculpture Trail in Gloucestershire,
uK, was established in 1986 and has since
built a strong, on-going practice of creating opportunities
for artists to engage with the particularities of
this special place and the people who live there.
The Forest has a fascinating history and the immediate
impression of rural idyll belies the tensions between industrial
and sylvan, man-made and natural, utopian and dystopian,
settlements and forest, which have shaped this unique
environment. As such it presents a rich source of inspiration for
artists, and a distinctive place in which to make and site work.
The Sculpture Trail began with a large number of permanent
land works being installed between 198 and 1989 by land
artists such as Magdalena Jetalova, David Nash and Cornelia
Parker. The works were sited in hidden areas of this woodland
landscape and many people began to search for them,
eventually driving pathways to all of them and requiring that
the landowners, the Forestry Commission, provide facilities for
visitors who came from far afield. The Trail became established
as a key rural venue to view contemporary art in the UK and a
Trust was formed to ensure the works were maintained.
In 2000 the Trustees decided to restart the commissioning
programme due to the decline and removal of some of the
works. Two new permanent works were commissioned, one by
Erika Tan and another by Neville Gabie. Woven around that
programme, temporary works were also shown and a more
research-based approach encouraged. In 2002 the Forest
was hit hard by an outbreak of foot & mouth disease and it’s
livestock were culled and the Forest more or less closed down
to visitors. On the reopening of the area to the public, the
Trust put on a huge celebratory event called Lightshift and
the activity of the Sculpture Trust yet again hit the public eye.
Audiences were huge and it became clear that the Sculpture
trail continues to be enjoyed and that people want more from
it. The Trust has continued to programme temporary works and
is currently in the process of researching for a new permanent
work. Next year sees 21 years of the Trust & Trail activities and
we plan to celebrate in style with a special midsummers event.
Earlier this year, we presented ‘reveal’, a natural progression
from Lightshift, yet much more quiet and thoughtful in many
ways. The mix of temporary and permanent commissioning
opens up new approaches for more socially engaged practice
and we look forward to a rich and varied programme in coming
years.
© Carolyn Black, Projects Director for the Forest of Dean
Sculpture Trust. Gloucesterhsire, UK.
dinis tye –
uwyveti
moZraobis
adgili
organizacia Forest of Dean Sculpture Trail didi britaneTSi,
glosesterSirSi 1986 daarsda da dinis tye-
Si, rogorc am adgilis TaviseburebebiT dainteresebul
xelovanTaTvis, aseve adgilobrivebisTvis
kreatiuli suliT ganmsWvaluli saxelovnebo
sivrce Seqmna. tye, romelsac saintereso istoria
aqvs, pastoraluri idiliurobiT gxiblavs. aq
TiTqos uqmdeba dapirispireba industriulsa da
naturalurs, xelovnursa da bunebrivs, utopiursa
da distopiurs, adamianebiT dasaxlebul sivrc-
esa da ukacriel tyes Soris. aqauroba inspiraciis
wyaroa, xelovans SemoqmdebisTvis da am Semoqmedebis
produqtis warmosaCenad saukeTeso pirobebs
uqmnis.
yvelaferi 1986-1989 wlebSi daiwyo. maSin aq, dinis
tyeSi magdalina jetalovam, david neSma da kornelia
parkerma lend-artis namuSevrebis mudmivi eqspozicia
moawyves. mayurebelma tyis farul adgilebSi
gadamaluli namuSevrebis Ziebesisas, maTTan misasvleli
bilikebi sakuTari fexiT gakvala. mogvianebiT
satyeo komisiam Soridan Camosuli damTvaliereblisaTvis
aq damxmare nagebobebi aago. male
didi britaneTis sofelTagan ‘Treili’Tanamedrove
xelovnebis namuSevarTa Tavmoyris yvelaze mniS-
kerolin bleki

60
vnelovan adgilad gadaiqca. mogvianebiT namuSevrebis dasacavad organizacia Forest of Dean Sculpture Trust-i
Seiqmna.
2000 wels lend-artis programis farglebSi tyis meurveTa sabWom zogierTi ukve dazianebuli an ganadgurebuli
eqsponati axliT Secvala. swored am dros erika tanisa da nevil gabis ori namuSevari tyis
permanentuli instalaciebis ricxvs Seemata. programis farglebSi aq droebiT eqsponirebuli da kvlevaze
orientirebuli namuSevrebi ganTavsda. 2002 wels tye daavadda da seriozulad dazianda. is gamoxSires
da mnaxvelTa raodenobamac iklo. ganaxlebuli tye sazeimo RonisZiebiT, ‘Lightshift’-iT gaixsna da Sculpture
Trust-i isev sazogadoebis yuradRebis centrSi moeqca. eqspozicia uamravma mayurebelma naxa, ramac kidev
erTxel daadastura dinis tyis mniSvneloba kulturul procesSi.
dRes Forest of Dean Sculpture Trust-i agrZelebs droebiT sagamofeno programebs da mudmivi eqspoziciisaTvis
axal namuSevrebs eZebs. momaval wels organizacias 21 weli usruldeba. am TariRs specialuri RonisZieba,
‘zafxulis bunioba’ mieZRvneba. 2006 wels dinis tyeSi lend-artis gamofena ‘Reveal’ moewyo. is winamorbedi
eqspoziciis LL’LLightshift’-is
organuli gagrZeleba iyo. ‘Reveal’ SedarebiT uxmaurod Catarda, Tumca Tavisi
mniSvnelobiT sulac ar Camouvardeboda tyeSi ganxorcielebul sxva xalxmraval RonisZiebebs.
dinis tye savsea socialurad mniSvnelovani droebiTi da mudmivmoqmedi eqspoziciebiT da kvlavindeburad
saintereso da mravalferovani namuSevrebis molodinSia.
© karolin bleki, Forest of Dean Sculpture Trust-is
proeqtis direqtori. glosesterSiri, didi britaneTi.
david Nash, ‘Fire & Water Boats’ , 1986
devid neSi, ‘cecxli da wylis navebi‘, 1986

Hhamilton finli, ‘siCume’, 1986
hamilton Finlay, ‘Silence’, 1986
6

Jake and dinos Chapman, double deathhead, 1997, screen print
6
DO NOT BE NEuTRAL
ABOuT ART
loop’A’s Magda Guruli and Nana Kirmelashvili, the
director of Art Caucasus Association met with Lena
Milosevic, the director of British Council in Georgia at
the presentation of the ‘British Council Collection’.
LOOP’A: HOW DO YOU ASSESS THE COOPERATION OF THE
BRITISH COUNCIL WITH THE ART CAUCASUS?
LENA MILOSEVIC: First of all, the British Council is very proud
and pleased to have been able to support Art Caucasus last
year. I went to the event, as you know, and see as much of it as
I could see. It is a major event for this part of the world and for
this region, bringing visual artists together not only from South
Caucasus but internationally, to exchange ideas, to exchange
inspiration, to exchange methodology, work, techniques, and
practical issues. I am extremely excited about it
So it’s a major achievement. It is exciting. It is new and fresh
for Tbilisi for students of the visual arts and for professional
artists to exhibit their works. It looked modern, contemporary,
fresh, different, and challenging. It pushed the boundaries.
Therefore, it is a good thing to be supported.
LOOP’A: WILL THE BRITISH COUNCIL COOPERATE WITH THE
UPCOMING CAUCASUS BIENNALE NEXT YEAR?
LENA MILOSEVIC: We would love to. The British Council, as
you know, has a tradition of supporting the Venice Biennale,
for example, and I would love to see the Council being able to
support Art Caucasus and bringing over the best of names.
I understand that the artist Tracy Emin will do the British
Pavilion at the next Venice Biennale. And that is the calibre
of the name, you know, a Turner Prize winner; it’s the best of
British contemporary art supporting Art Caucasus. Let’s book
it in advance. I would love to be able to get that calibre of name
here.
LOOP’A: TELL US ABOUT THE MARVELLOUS COLLECTION
OF BRITISH CONTEMPORARY ARTISTS ExHIBITED IN YOUR
OFFICE
LENA MILOSEVIC: I am proud of the art that we have managed
to bring over. I personally love the visual arts, as you know
and the arts generally. The British Council art collection is
something that we are lucky to have. It is not just luck. As an
Ian Tyson, ‘The utamaro Variations II‘, 1977, etching
Mat Collishaw, ‘untitled‘, 1997, screen print

Fay Godwin, ‘Farm Buildingsm Bonytown‘, 1980, silver print
i n t e r v i e w s
organisation that been in existence for 72 years, we have supported artists, their international shows, exhibiting them around
the world. Some of the art we bought; some has been donated to us. So it is a marvellous collection and it is for our office and
our public to enjoy when they come to us.
For me personally, when I arrived, I saw that the office needed refreshing. It was beautiful, but it needed repainting like every
office that is used daily by the public. It needed repainting and here was an opportunity to bring over some artwork. I love the
British Council art collection. We were able to discuss with the whole staff what images we would select for our office. Some
things we loved and some we hated. I loved the reaction. Art should provoke. You should love it or you should hate it, in my view.
Do not be neutral about art; have a reaction. That is how I think about it personally. I loved the process we went through.
The classic one is of two skulls by. Dinos and Jake Chapmans, that are in the finance office. Because we all, including myself, were
all kind of [saying]: ‘Ah, what is this? We can’t have this at all in our office!’ And zaza, our Assistant Director, loved it. He was the
only person that liked it, so we said, ‘OK, zaza, you like it, so you have it in your office. You live with it’. Then it arrived. It arrived
with the [plastic eyes sticking out from the image]. You could not see the eyes from the digital image. Everybody was like: ‘This is
quite nice’. Now it goes perfectly in that space and now we all like it. If we were bolder, we would have put it in our reception.
We have this wonderful opportunity to bring these works over. And why not make it for all our public, our customers, to enjoy and
for our staff to work with? I hope the Georgian customers that come to our library enjoy it. I hope it looks fresh and different to
the art students we invite. We are producing a catalogue for reference. We are very happy for groups of art students to come to
the British Council if the experience can be of value to them.
LOOP’A: WHY HAS THE BRITISH COUNCIL BECOME INTERESTED IN SUPPORTING LOOP’A, A CONTEMPORARY ART MAGAzINE?
LENA MILOSEVIC: Because it enriches. The audience is made of young, Georgian art students and groups that are interested in
art. We are interested in reaching young people. Clearly it’s a magazine for a young audience. We are interested in engaging with
young people in art, young Georgians that are thinking creatively. It is our target audience, that’s for sure.
When I see young Georgians, young Georgians are interesting – demonstrated in the way they are dressed, their interest in the
funky, cool, and contemporary. It might be they do not have the money to buy the latest high-fashion designers, couture designers,
but they are either copying some of those trends, or they are setting some of those trends. It is a give-and-take relationship in
that symbiosis.
LOOP’A: WHAT KIND OF BRITISH ART MIGHT BE INTERESTING FOR GEORGIAN AUDIENCES AND WHAT GEORGIAN ART FOR
BRITISH AUDIENCES?
LENA MILOSEVIC: The sure answer is all of it, whether it is music, fashion design, architecture, the visual arts, or the theatre. I
see exciting things going on in the UK that are mirrored in Georgia. You have a huge creative energy here, across all art forms.
This is from what I see, from what I’ve experienced, and from the people I meet. So there is a mutually beneficial relationship
going on across all genres.
Music, theatre, and the visual arts are the areas we have worked the most in and that I know the most about. There is a huge
appetite among Georgians for British influence, for want of a better word, and vice versa. I have not yet met a British visual artist
who has come here and that has not said, ‘Wow, I want to come back! I want to work with Georgian artist, photographers’. There
is such huge talent here.
LOOP’A: WHAT WAS THE WORST PIECE OF ADVICE THAT YOU WERE GIVEN IN YOUR LIFE?
LENA MILOSEVIC: I became a volunteer in Africa for two years. I gave up my job. I had been a teacher of English and I gave it up to
go and be a volunteer. I was strongly advised against that. It was like: ‘You’re crazy. You’re mad. You are giving up a well-paid job,
security, to take this huge risk’. I went against that advice. It was that experience of working in Africa overseas that helped me get
a job with the British Council. So, sometimes you can’t listen to advice and you have to take risks. You have to take risks.
Fay Godwin, Pill Box Near Royal Military Canal’, 1977, silver print
6

6
MmTavaria ar iyo
neitraluri
xelovnebis mimarT
magda guruli LOOP’A-dan da asociacia
art kavkasiis direqtori nana
yirmelaSvili britanuli sabWos
direqtors lena miloseviCs
britanuli Tanamedrove xelovnebis
koleqciis prezentaciaze Sexvdnen.
LOOP’A: rogor afasebT britanuli sabWos TanamSromlobas art kavkasiasTan?
lena miloseviCi: britanuli sabWo gansakuTrebuli siamayiTa da siamovnebiT aRniSnavs gasuli wlis
TanamSromlobas art kavkasiasTan. ra Tqma unda, daveswari gamofenas da vnaxe mxolod nawili imisa,
rac warmodgenili iyo. yvelafris naxva SeuZlebeli iyo RonisZiebis masStaburobidan gamomidnare. es
didi RonisZiebaa, vizualur xelovnebaSi momuSave mxatvrebi Camodian sxvadasxva qveynebidan, xvdebian
erTmaneTs, cvlian ideebs, meTodebs, teqnologiebs, saubroben xelovnebaze. es Zalian maxarebs. piradad me
aRfrTovanebuli var Tqveni (mimarTavs nana yirmelaSvils) enTuziazmiT, energiiT da TavdadebiT. advili
ar aris aseTi didi RonisZiebis Catareba. ase rom, es Tqveni da Tqveni kolegebis udidesi damsaxurebaa. es
siaxlea, studentebisTvis dAAaAAAA
profesionali mxatvrebisTvis visac saSualeba eZleva gamofinos sakuTari
namuSevari. es Zalian Tanamedrove, gansxvavebuli, saintereso RonisZiebaa, romelic scildeba lokalur
sazRvrebs. aseTi RonisZiebis mxardaWera mxolod saamayoa.
LOOP’A: iTanamSromlebs Tu ara britanuli sabWo momavali wlis kavkasiis bienalesTan?
lena miloseviCi: moxaruli viqnebodi. Tqven iciT, veneciis bienalesTan TanamSromloba britanuli sabWos
tradicaa. moxaruli viqnebodi, Tu britanuli sabWo daexmareboda art kavkasias msoflio mniSvnelobis
xelovanebis CamoyvanaSi. magaliTad, britaneli mxatvari treisi amani veneciis momaval bienaleze britaneTs
warmoadgens. es cnobili saxelia, terneris premiis laureati. imisTvis, rom art kavkasiasTan britaneTis
mxolod saukeTeso saxelebma iTanamSromlon, modiT ukve daviwyoT maTTan saubari. miTxariT sami-oTxi
saxeli visTanac gsurT muSaoba da bednieri viqnebi, Tu maT mowvevaSi dagexmarebiT.
LOOP’A: ras ityodiT britanuli sabWos koleqciis Sesaxeb.
lena miloseviCi: meamayeba rom saqarTveloSi aseTi xarisxis xelovnebis Camotana SevZeliT. iciT es rogor
moxda? piradad me Zalian miyvars vizualuri xelovneba da saerTod xelovneba. marTlac gamarTlebaa
ofisSi aseTi koleqciis arseboba da ara marto gamarTleba. rogorc iciT, Tavisi arsebobis 72 wlis manZilze
britanuli sabWo yovelTvis TanamSromlobda mxatvrebTan, awyobda maT saerTaSoriso gamofenebs msoflios
garSemo. nawili am koleqciisa SevisyideT, nawili ki Semowirulobis saxiT miviReT. es fantastikuri
koleqcia Cvens ofisSi Cveni stumrebisa da TanamSromlebisTvisaa. rodesac Camovedi da ofisi vnaxe, Zalian
momewona, magram, faqtia, ganaxleba sWirdeboda, rogorc yvela im adgils, sadac didi raodenobiT xalxi
iyris Tavs. swored maSin, rodesac aq saremonto samuSaoebi mimdinareobda, saSualeba mogveca Camogvetana
cnobili britaneli mxatvrebis nawarmoebebi. namuSevrebs yvela erTad varCevdiT. Tavdapirvelad imijebi
cifruli saxiT miviReT. zogi mogvewona, zogic ara. magram mTavari xom reaqciaa. xelovneba maprovocirebelia.
mTavaria ar iyo neitraluri xelovnebis mimarT. mTavaria gqondes sakuTari damokidebuleba dadebiTi
an Tundac uaryofiTi, magram mTavaria gqondes... Zalian saintereso procesi iyo, mxiaruli. yvelaze kargad
Cepmenebi maxsovs. axla es namuSevari safinanso ofisSi kidia. rodesac kompiuteris ekranze Tavis qalebi
davinaxe SevZrwundi: ‘es ra aris? amas aq ver davkidebT’ – aseTi iyo Cemi pirveli reaqcia. erTaderTi visac
namuSevari moewona direqtoris TanaSemwe zaza iyo. mec vuTxari: ’Tu ase mogwons iyos Sens ofisSi’. rodesac
britaneTidan originalebi Camovida Cepmenebis namuSevars ori mxtunavi Tvali mohyva. yvelas mogvewona,
radgan davinxeT is, rac cifrul gamosaxulebaze ar Canda. namuSevari Zalian uxdeba safinanso ofiss
da yvelasTvis gansakuTrebulia. vfiqrob, sakmarisad gambedavebi rom viyoT misaRebSi davkidebdiT, magram
Tavis qalebi safinanso ofisSi ganumeorebelia. minda sakuTari damsaxurebac avRniSno. Cven gvqonda Sansi
Camogvetana saukeTeso xelovneba da gamoviyeneT kidec igi Cveni klientebisTvis, Cveni TanamSromlebisTvis
da Cveni stumrebisTvis, romlebic Cvens biblioTekaSi dadian. studentebsac viwvevT maT sanaxavad.
vfiqrob es maTTvis saintereso unda iyos.
LOOP’A: ram ganapiroba britanuli sabWos mier saxelovnebo Jurnalis dafinanseba?
lena miloseviCi: is amdidrebs. yvelaze saintereso CvenTvis axalgazrda TaobasTan TanamSromlobaa

da vfiqrob, rom Jurnali swored maTTvisaa. amaze meti motivacia ra unda iyos. rodesac axalgazrdebs,
studentebs vxedav, vTvli rom isini Zalian sainteresoni arian, Zalian Tanamedroveni da Zalian ‘quul’. maT
yovelTvis sainteresod acviaT. SeiZleba ar aqvT imdeni fuli, rom saukeTeso dizainerebis tansacmeli
Caicvan, magram isini an imeoreben maRali modis msgavs Cacmulobas, an Tavad qmnian axal tendenciebs.
rusTavelze kafeSi vijeqi. universitetSi im dRes swavla daiwyo da kafeSi axalgazrdebis teva ar iyo. isini
lamazebi, Tanamedroveni arian da zustad imeoreben msoflio axalgazrdul tendenciebs, SeiZleba baZaven
kidec, magram sakuTaric bevri aqvT.
LOOP’A: rogor fiqrobT ra saxis britanuli xelovneba iqneboda yvelaze saintereso qarTveli
mayureblisTvis da piriqiT?
lena miloseviCi: musika, moda, dizaiani, vizualuri xelovneba, Teatri. britaneTSi dRes Zalian
saintereso procesebi mimdinareobs kulturasa da xelovnebaSi, rac saqarTveloSic meordeba. Tqven
udidesi SemoqmedebiTi energia gaqvT da arasodes CamorCebiT msoflio movlenebs. amis Tqma Tamamad
SemiZlia imaze dayrdnobiT, rasac aq vxedav da im adamianebidan gamomdinare visTanac aq vurTierTob.
Teatri, musika da vizualuri xelovneba albaT is Janrebia, sadac britanuli sabWos moRvaweoba yvelaze
nayofieria saqarTveloSi maTi Camotanis kuTxiT. magram rasac vakeTebT sakmarisi namdvilad ar aris,
imisTvis rom qarTvelebis didi moTxovnileba davakmayofiloT. igive SeiZleba iTqvas qarTul xelovnebaze
britaneTSi. jer ar minaxavs TbilsSi Camosuli britaneli mxatvari, visac ar undodes dabruneba da aqaur
mxatvrebTan, fotografebTan TanamSromloba. aq udidesi talantia.
LOOP’A: SegiZliaT Tu ara gaixsenoT yvelaze cudi rCeva, romelic odesme migiRiaT?
lena miloseviCi: ori weli moxalised vimuSave afrikaSi. mivatove samsaxuri, inglisuris maswavlebeli
viyavi da wavedi. meubnebodnen: ‘ras akeTeb? gagiJdi? aseT karg samsaxurs toveb aseTi xelfasiT da aseT
riskze midixar?’. magram rCevas yuri ar davugde. swored afrikaSi muSaobis gamocdilebam ganapiroba Cemi
daniSvna britanuli sabWos direqtorad. ase rom, xandaxan ar aris saWiro yurad iRo rCevebi. xandaxan
swored riskia saWiro. xandaxan unda garisko.
Michael Landy, ‘I’m Forever Blowing Bubbles‘,
1991, steel, wood, gloss paint
i n t e r v i e w s
Alan davie, ‘untitled - Imagines Solares’, 1988, lithograph
6

66
MANy OF THEM
FEEL SORRy
FOR ME AS THEy
SEE ME AS A
CRAZy PERSON...
loop’A’s Magda Guruli spoke with Natalia Mali at the international exhibition ‘Caucasus‘, held in the Centre for
Contemporary Arts, in Moscow in May 2006.
Natalia Mali, artist, member of the pMp art group, currently lives and works in London.
LOOP’A: WHAT IS ART FOR YOU?
NATALIA MALI: For me, art is a way of acting, thinking and the life philosophy of an artist. It is obvious that art is not a way to earn
much money. It is therefore more of a hobby, but a hobby you are seriously engaged in, to which you are giving the best of you.
What consoles is that humankind has been engaged in art from the Stone Age. Therefore, art is not just a way of spending time.
You understand how serious it is to contribute to the culture of humankind, to its spiritual and intellectual development.
I do not wish to go deeper into the question of what art is for me and which role it plays in my life. It may be too extensive and
multidimensional. Nevertheless, I have defined for my own understanding the meaning of art and the importance of being a
contemporary artist. First, in my opinion, an artist working in contemporary art should be active 24 hours a day. It is an absolute
‘modus vivendi’ and ‘modus operandi’ at the same time. A modern artist remains in such a modus every day, year after year.
Even while sleeping, an artist should think, create and work. Ingenious ideas often come to me in dreams. I try to remember
them. Then I try to write them down and decide if it is feasible. Such a way of life demands high expenses of mental and physical
energy. It is important to always be in tone, to be engaged in meditation, yoga, to be strong, to have a healthy body and to be
psychologically fit. An artist with bad health or less self-confidence cannot hold on. I shall give an example. As we all know, these
days the success of artists greatly depends on curators, who promotes them, invites them to exhibitions, writes about them, etc.
Therefore, a modern artist tries to meet the needs of a curator in every possible way, to make her visit their studio, etc. There
are many ways to do this. If a curator dislikes the work or thinks is does not fit a context, the artist might get terribly upset, might
start to pout. Hatred towards a curator creeps in her soul. The artist becomes depressed because he is not recognized. He stops
working or rapidly starts to work on something new, switches to different techniques, etc. A modern artist rarely understands
that a curator should meet the artist’s needs, rather than otherwise. An artist with weak willpower often breaks in this kind of
situation. But the willpower may be strengthened too. Meditations and a steady mentality may help as much as a healthy lifestyle
and ‘no alcohol’.
LOOP’A: HOW DO YOU SEE THE RELATION BETWEEN ART AND REALITY?
NATALIA MALI: I shall consider this question from an individual point of view. A mutual relation between art and reality is gradually
building up. It greatly depends on how an artist manages to achieve the required balance. It is common that an artist, who lives
in her world, does not notice the difference between art and reality, which makes her the happiest of people. Some members of
my family and/or friends deeply feel for me, as my image, values and preferences horrify them. Many of them feel sorry for me as
they see me as a crazy person. I do not have money, a private apartment or the expensive things that people of my age usually
have. My status is not clear; my image is not readable. My life is strange and unreal for them. If reflecting on such an attitude, it
becomes clear that these people do not feel art and they lack spirituality, completeness of sensation and the unique feeling of
universe. Only thanks to art do I REALLY see the world, do I feel it. Everything that surrounds me - sky, water, nature, war, people,

i n t e r v i e w s
tears, illness – goes through me as through a prism. Then I process these elements and give out a real product.
My world is the world of images. These images rarely have anything in common with reality. Then I try to find a connection, to
hook them onto reality. Recently, I worked with some archaic images in which I tried to catch and underline ‘purity’. Sometimes,
this ‘purity’ becomes close to ‘nothingness’. As it is in one of my photographic projects named ‘the Vector of Temptation’. In the
work, I have tried to recreate images and the symbolic line of man’s archetypes. My hand represents such an archetype acting as
a substitute when taking a picture. My hand can be viewed as the hand of a righteous person or ‘holy man’. Representing men,
I represent objects of desire. While working on the series, I concluded that the image of a man is a phantom, or pure ‘nothing’.
In the end of the series, the image of emptiness replaces the image of man. In fact, a body according to Lacan is only a certain
form, ‘a place of symbolical existence of a person’. Representing someone, an artist is giving himself up to all imaginations. It
is difficult to tell whether they are real or not. These images are, however, real for an artist. If the audience is able to read them
then the imaginations become real. Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa is a good example. Indeed when Da Vinci was drawing it, only he could
represent a woman in such a way. He thought of her as a beautiful woman. Now we all know that and identify Mona Lisa.
The other side of REALITY can be observed in my performances. As a rule, I carry out performances alone or in a group. One of
such groups is a PMP Group (Prigov/Mali/Prigov) whom I have worked with over the last several years. It formed naturally, as the
group participants are my relatives, my family. My partner Andrey Prigov, his father Dmitry Prigov and I are the members of the
group. We are a professional-industrial family. We deal with the term ‘FAMILY’ as this word is flashing in all our works. It means
that the participants not only lead a joint art-practice but also that they share a number of responsibilities in real life. It is the
substance and pre-substance (as Germans would say ‘Urinhalt’) of any gesture, action or project of the group, even before our
names appear next to our joint artwork.
The PMP Group almost falls into a greater family – extended family when reconstructing some kind of real family experience in
a neo-ritualized or neo-magic way. Sometimes it even refers to the periods when there was no such notion of modern family.
In other words, in its activity the PMP Group realizes an imaginary, fantastic, heaven-modelling and fibrillating-pervasive type
of family. According to sociological researches, the only type able to survive the ultrapoliced environment of nowadays would
be the well-educated lonely middle-aged homosexual type, free from the psychological and financial obligations that demand
a permanent home and the education and rising of children. Therefore, in this kind of situation the idea of a family can seem
quite nostalgic and archaic with nothing in common with the modern arrangement of the world. Especially today, when the word
FAMILY is more often used metaphorically – a firm as a family, a professional group as a family, a religious society, a soccer team,
a mafia association as a family, etc.
This example of the form of artists’ behavior, namely the unification in the art group, in my opinion, superbly shows the ways of
modification and transformation of reality into art. In other words, the balance is most important.
LOOP’A: IN YOUR OPINION, ARE THERE ANY CAPITALS OF CONTEMPORARY ART?
NATALIA MALI: I would say London, New York and Moscow, currently on its way up in my opinion. I think these are the three basic
capitals of contemporary art with powerful base and great potential. I am lucky. I have lived and worked in all these ‘capitals’. It
certainly had a strong influence on me.
LOOP’A: I AM ThE BEST WhEN IT COMES TO.... am the best when it comes to cooking. I really do it with great pleasure and it is
good.
LOOP’A: NOBOdy KNOWS, ThAT I… Nobody knows that I’m a very good dancer… That’s true.
LOOP’A: ThE WOrST AdVICE yOu hAd IN yOur LIFE... Oh, I don’t know. There are no such advices. At least I never listen to them.
I do everything in my own way…
Natalia Mali and Magda Guruli
in the Moscow Centre for Contemporary Arts,
2006.
6

68
bevrs
vecodebi,
radgan
SeSlilad
mimiCneven...
magda guruli loop’A-dan esaubra natalia
malis proeqtis ‘kavkasia‘ msvlelobisas moskovis
Tanamedrove xelovnebis saxelmwifo
centrSi, 2006 wlis maisSi
natalia mali, mxatvari, pmp art jgufis wevri,
cxovrobs da muSaobs londonSi.
LOOP’A: ra aris SenTvis xelovneba?
CemTvis xelovneba mxatvris qceva, misi azrovneba,
misi filosofiaa. cnobilia, rom xelovnebiT, ver
gamdidrdebi, amitom es erTgvari hobia, oRond
hobi, romelsac seriozulad ekidebi da romelSic
100 procentiT xar CarTuli. erTi ram gamSvidebs,
ici, rom xelovneba jer kidev qvis xanaSi arsebobda,
e.i. Sen fuWad ar kargav dros da kulturis istoriisTvis,
kacobriobis sulieri da inteleqtualuri
ganviTarebisTvis ixarjebi. ra aris xelovneba, ra
rols asrulebs is Cems cxovrebaSi _ am kiTxvebs Zalianac
ar vuRrmavdebi. es zedmetad farTo da multidimensionaluri
problemaa. magram, rodesac vcdilob
ganvsazRvro xelovnebis raoba, pirvel rig-
Si, mxatvris daniSnulebis, misi rolis dadgena minda,
mxatvrisa, romelic sakuTar Tavs, ‘contemporary
artist’-ad moiazrebs da am terminis meSveobiT axdens
sakuTari adgilis pozicionirebas. TANAanamedrove
mxatvari, Cemis azriT, aqtiuri unda iyos 24 saaTis
ganmavlobaSi. Tanamedrove mxatvris cxovrebis wesi
erTgvari permanentuli qmedebaa, romelsac arc
erTi dRiT, arc erTi saaTiT ar Cerdeba. es aris absoluturi
‘modus vivendi’ da absoluturi ‘modus
operandi’. mxatvari sizmarSic ki unda fiqrobdes,
qmnides, muSaobdes. swored sizmarSi mewveva xolme
yvelaze gamorCeuli ideebi. Semdeg maT damaxsovrebasa
da Semdeg realizebas vcdilob. arsebobis es
modeli mentalur da fizikur Zalebs ukiduresad
Zabavs, aucilebelia tonusis SenarCuneba, meditacia,
ioga, sakuTari sxeulis movla, da Zlieri fsiqika.
mxatvari, romelsac Seryeuli aqvs janmTeloba
da fsiqika, dRes didxans ver gastans. am mosazrebas
konkretuli magaliTiT dagisabuTebT. yvelam
viciT, rom Cvens droSi mxatvris warmateba didadaa
damokidebuli kuratorze, romelic mis popularobaze
zrunavs, iwvevs gamofenebze, wers statiebs mis
Semoqmedebaze da a.S. Sesabamisad, Tanamedrove mxatvari
mudmivad cdilobs dauaxlovdes kurators,
Seityuos is saxelosnoSi. am miznis misaRwevad
uamravi xerxi arsebobs. Tu kuratorma mxatvris namuSevari
daiwuna, an miiCnia, rom is arasakmarisad
srulyofilia, amas mZime Sedegebi mosdevs. mxatvari
nirwamxadaria, ibuteba, epareba zizRi kura-
torisadmi. imis gamo, rom ar aRiares uimedoba da
sasowarkveTa awamebs, xSirad dawyebul namuSevars
Tavs anebebs da axali stilis, axali xerxebis Ziebas
iwyebs. samwuxarod, Tanamedrove mxatvari xSirad
ver acnobierebs, rom is ki ar unda moergos kurators,
aramed piriqiT. cnobilia, rom susti nebisyofis
mxatvrebi Zalian xSirad ver uZleben amgvar
gamocdas. magram xom SeiZleba nebisyofa gamoviwrToT?
aq isev meditacia da mdgradi fsiqika unda
vaxseno. da kidev, araviTari alkoholi, mxolod
jansaRi kveba
LOOP’A: realobisa da xelovnebis urTierTkav
Sirze ras ityvi?
am sakiTxsac mxatvris individualuri poziciidan
ganvixilav. urTierTobas xelovnebasa da realobasTan
mxatvari TandaTanobiT unda ayalibebdes.
Zalian bevri ramaa damokidebuli imaze, Tu ramdenadaa
dabalnasebuli es urTierTmimarTeba. mxatvari,
romelic sakuTar samyaroSi cxovrobs, xSirad
realobasa da xelovnebas Soris ubralod ver xedavs
gansxvavebas, sxvaTa Soris amis gamoa is ubednieresi.
Cemi ojaxis zogierTi wevri da/an megobari
miTanagrZnobs kidec imis gamo, rom Cemi Rirebulebebi,
cxovrebis wesi, romelTac me gansakuTrebul
yuradRebas vuTmob, mas Tavzars scems. bevrs vecodebi,
radgan SeSlilad mimiCneven. arc fuli maqvs,
arc bina, arc Zvirfasi nivTebi, yvelaferi is, rac,

wesiT, Cemi asakis adamians unda hqondes. Cemi statusi gaurkvevelia, Cemi imiji _ bundovani. ucnauri, ararealuri
cxovrebiT vcxovrob. CemTvis cxadia, ratom fiqroben ase, isini bevrs arian moklebuli _ xelovnebas,
gancdaTa sisavses, sulierebas, samyaros unikalurobis SegrZnebas. xelovnebis daxmarebiT me samyaros
realurad vxedav, me vgrZnob mas. yvelaferi, rac Cems Tvalwinaa _ ca, wyali, buneba, omi, cremli, sneuleba
_ CemSi Semodis, me yvelafers Cems prizmaSi vatareb, vxarSav da realur produqtad vaqcev. Cemi samyaro
Cemsave warmosaxvaSi Seqmnili xat-suraTebia. xSirad maT realobasTan araferi akavSirebT da maSin vcdilob
am or raobas Soris Sexebis wertili aRmovaCino. bolo dros arqaul saxeebze vmuSaob, maTSi siwmindes
daveZeb. xandaxan es siwminde vlindeba, rogorc ‘arara’. ase moxda Cems erT-erT fotografiul proeqtSi,
‘cdunebis veqtorSi’, romelSic Sevecade mamakacuri arqetipebi da maTi simboluri rigi aRmedgina. arqetipebze,
romlebic surogatis saxiT vlindeba, Cemi xelia mimarTuli, xeli, romelic amave dros wmindanisaa,
igive, rac ‘Holy Man’. rodesac mamakacebs gamovsaxav, me survilis obieqts vgulisxmob. am proeqtze muSaobisas
gavacnobiere, rom mamakacis saxe fantomia, wminda wylis ‘arara’, amitom seriis dasasruls mamakacis
adgils sicariele ikavebs. lakanic xom miiCnevs, rom sxeuli, mxolod formaa ‘adamianis simboluri arsebobis
adgili’. viRacis gamosaxvisas, mxatvari sakuTar fantazmebs miyveba. ramdenad realuria maTi arseboba,
Zneli saTqmelia. mxatvrisTvis isini realuria da Tu mnaxveli maT wakiTxvas SesZlebs, isini sazogadoebis
kuTvnilebad iqcevian da Sesabamisad realurni xdebian. magaliTad moviyvan jokondas portrets, romelic
yvelasTvis kargad nacnobma Lleonardo da vinCim Seqmna. mxolod leonardos SeeZlo ase daexata qali, da
efiqra, rom is realurad mSvenieria. dRes Cvenc aseve aQRviqvamT ‘jokondas’. realobis kidev erT waxnags
Cems perfomansebSi miagnebT. rogorc wesi, me maT an marto an jgufTan erTad vasruleb. erT-erTi aseTi
jgufia pmp (prigovi/mali/prigovi). maTTan me ukve wlebis maZilze vmuSaob. jgufi bunebrivad Camoyalibda,
misi wevrebi Cemi axloblebi, Cemi ojaxis wevrebi arian. pmp mravalwliani proeqtia, masSi monawileoben
Cemi partniori Aandrei prigovi, mamamisi _ dmitri prigovi da me. Cveni jgufis manifesti imas gulisxmobs,
rom Cven sawarmoo-profesiul ojaxs warmovadgenT. Cven sityva ‘ojaxis’ cimcimis fenomenTan gvaqvs saqme,
es igive fsevdonimia, romelic erToblivi samuSao procesiT da warmoebiT dakavebul adamianebs da amave
dros realurad arsebul ojaxur mijaWvulobas aRniSnavs. jer kidev konkretul-gaformebul warmodgenamde,
es mijaWvuloba nebismieri Jestis, aqciis, proeqtis Sinaarssa da pre-Sinaarss (rogorc germanelebi
ityodnen Urinhaltv) Seadgens. rodesac PMP jgufi ojaxis TiTqos realurad arsebuli fenomenis rekonstruirebas
axdens mis neo-ritualizirebul da neo-magiur funqciaSi, is TiTqmis dainTqmeba did ojaxSi
_ extended family da, ufro metic, sagvareuloSi, droSi, rodesac ojaxi Cveneuli gagebiT, jer ar arsebobda.
SeiZleba iTqvas, rom jgufis SemoqmedebaSi realizdeba ojaxis fantomuri, fantastikuri, zeciuri
nimuSis msgavsi, mocimcime-perversiuli tipi. sociologebis kvlevis Tanaxmad Tanamedrove megapolisur
garemoSi ganaTlebuli, martoxela, saSualo xnis homoseqsualis tipi yvelaze ufro sicocxlisunariania.
mas ar sWirdeba fsiqologiuri Zalisxmeva da finansebi mudmivi sacxovreblis, bavSvebis gazrdis, aRzrdisa
da ganaTlebisTvis. swored amitom ojaxis xatisken mibruneba SeiZleba gavigoT, rogorc wminda wylis nostalgiuri
da arqaizebuli Jesti, romelsac aRaraferi akavSirebs Tanamedrove samyarosTan. miT ufro, rom
dRes sityvas ‘ojaxi’ metaforuli mniSvneloba mieniWa. firma, rogorc ojaxi, profesiuli jgufi, rogorc
ojaxi, religiuri sazogadoeba, rogorc ojaxi, fexburTis gundi, rogorc ojaxi, mafiozuri gaerTianeba,
rogorc ojaxi da a.S. da a.S. mxatvriseuli qcevis es forma, ufro zustad ki art jgufSi gaerTianeba, Cemis
azriT, Cinebulad warmoaCens im faqts, rom mxatvris, misi axloblebisa da naTesavebis yoveldRiurobis
miaxloeba realobasTan am realobis modificirebiT, misi gadamuSavebiTa da xelovnebis produqtad
gadaqceviTaa SesaZlebeli. erTi sityviT, balansi yvelaze mniSvnelovania.
LOOP’A: rogor fiqrob, arsebobs Tanamedrove xelovnebis dedaqalaqebi?
ueWvelad arsebobs. erTi maTgania londoni, niu-iorki da albaT male moskovic. vfiqrob, am qalaqebs Zlieri
baza da Tanamedrove xelovnebisTvis aucilebeli potenciali aqvT. me bedma gamiRima, radgan samivegan
momiwia cxovreba da muSaoba. aman, ra Tqma unda, Cemze didi gavlena iqonia.
LOOP’A: me saukeTeso var, rodesac saqme exeba...
me saukeTeos var, rodesac saqme saWmlis momzadebas exeba. amas marTlac siamovnebiT da kargad vakeTeb.
LOOP’A: aravin icis, rom me... aravin icis, rom kargad vcekvav, marTla
LOOP’A: yvelaze uaresi rCeva, romelic odesme
migiRia... arc ki vici. mgoni, aseTi ram ar momxdara. rCevebs yurs ar vugdeb da yvelafers Cemeburad
vakeTeb.
6

0
BLACK
BOx
RECORDER
This exhibition was curated by Simon Morrissey and Colin Ledwith, and aimed to highlight some of the most interesting video
and film work being made in Britain at the start of the 21st century. It encompassed different trends within the media such as
appropriation, performances to camera, observations or documentation, and the moving images’ relationship to other media such
as drawing and sculpture. The idea of rooting the exhibition in one form of presentation only - that of single-screen monitor-based
work - provided a formal base that allowed the fundamental quality of single screen work: simplicity of physical manifestation
capable of encompassing almost all conceptual tendencies. It also provided a clarifying focus, through which the viewer could
examine the plethora of positions within video practice.
The title Black Box Recorder brings to mind something that is submerged but holding the key to things. It suggests the importance
of recorded information to decode and deliver those vital moments that may have seemed like nothing at all. Although the video
works selected for the accompanying exhibition were all made by young artists from Britain, the subjects of the videos have
the fascination and near universal appeal of moments with which we can all identify. Often these are private moments, usually
experienced without self-consciousness or a sense of being watched.
The exhibition included works by Roderick Buchanan, Adam Chodzko, Mark Dean, Sarah Dobai, Graham Fagen, Douglas Gordon,
Graham Gussin, Rachel Lowe, Christina Mackie, Kenny Macleod, Ross Sinclair, Carl von-Weiler.
The Exhibition took place at Karvasla Gallery 14 – 23 March 2003. It was preceded on 13 March by a lecture on Video art at the
Media Art Farm in Tbilisi given by Carl von Weiler, one of the exhibiting artists.
Savi
yuTi
gamofenas, romlis mizani did britaneTSi 21-e saukunis dasawyisSi Seqmnili yvelaze saintereso video da
kinonamuSevrebis wardgena iyo, saimon morisi da kolin leviTi kuratorobdnen. eqspozicia Zalze mravalferovani
aRmoCnda: apropriacia, perfomansi, dakvirveba, dokumentalistika, moZravi imijis kavSiri sxva
saxis mediasTan, magaliTad, mxatvrobasa da skulpturasTan. gamofenis saeqspozicio koncefciis Tanaxmad
yvela namuSevari mxolod erT ekranze proecirdeboda. aseTi midgoma, namuSevarTa demonstrirebis
aseTi simartive, saSualebas iZleoda erTi eqspoziciis farglebSi asaxuliyo konceptualuri xelovnebis,
video-praqtikis TiTqmis yvela tendencia da aiolebda damTvaliereblis mier am mravalferovani masalis
aRqmas.
saTauri ‘Savi yuTi’ iseT ramesTan asocirdeba, rac uxilavia, dafarulia, magram mTavar, Zireul ambavs
inaxavs. aq Cawerili informacia vinmem SeiZleba umniSvnelodac miiCnios, magram realurad sasicocxlo
mniSvnelobisaa da amitom misi gaSifvra da gamomzeureba aucilebelia. gamofenisTvis mxolod axalgazrda
britanel xelovanTa namuSevrebi SearCies. maTi videonamuSevrebi momnusxav da amave dros universalur
momentebs aRwerda. swored aseT momentebSi vaxerxebT movlenaTa identificirebas. umetes wilad, es Zalian
piradi gamocdilebaa, iseTi ram, rac aracnobiers ukavSirdeba.
gamofenaze warmodgenilni iyvnen: roderik buSnani, adam Cocko, mark dinis, sara dobai, grem feigeni, daglas
gordoni, grem guzini, reCel lou, kristin maki, keni makliodi, ros sinkleri da karl fon-veileri.
gamofena 2003 wlis 14-23 marts ‘qarvaslaSi’ Catarda. gamofenis gaxsnis win 13 marts ‘media art farmSi’
gamofenis erT-erTma monawilem karl-fon veilerma videoartis Sesaxeb leqcia waikiTxa.

ELECTRIC EARTH
This exhibition of video-based works examined alternative
ways of living and systems of belief. The artists included in
the exhibition adopt a left field position in relation to predetermined
social structures and in doing so, attempt to give
voice to the dispossessed elements of society. Often acting
as a ‘director’ or ‘facilitator’ for people asked to participate in
their practice, these artists seek to appropriate and subvert
the basis of power within their chosen subject matter through
simple interventions and documentation. In this way, the
artists in Electric Earth look to expand our understanding
of social systems and codes, re-positioning the viewer’s
expectations. A sequel to the popular Black-Box Recorder
video exhibition, Electric Earth also seeks to create debate
concerning the narrative and appropriated mainstream
broadcast developments in recent video art. Partly aided
by wider availability of sophisticated editing programmes
for home computers, and partly through the conflux of pop
promos, documentaries, mainstream cinema and art film
genres, artists working in video today are taking their practice
out of the gallery and integrating it into social structures and
advertising.
The exhibition was presented on three large cinema-style
screens with surround-sound, enabling a journey through the
social landscapes of corporate commerce, fashion, youth and
club culture, religion, employment and the interconnected
information flow of the 21st century city.
Artists represented in the Electric Earth exhibition were: Adam
Chodzko, Volker Eichelmann & Roland Rust, Folk Archive, Luke
Fowler, Rob Kennedy, Torsten Lauschmann, Mark Leckey,
Hilary Lloyd, Oliver Payne & Nick Relph, Paul Rooney, Stephen
Sutcliffe, Szuper Gallery, Wolfgang Tillmans, Mark Titchner,
and Carey Young.
The two-week exhibition was opened on 6 September 2004.
eleqtronuli dedamiwa
eqspoziciam warmoadgina iseT videonamuSevrebi,
romelTa mizani arsebobisa da rwmenis gansxvavebuli
sistemebis kvleva iyo. eqspoziciis avtorebi
memarcxeneobisken ixrebodnen da amitom sazogadoebis
yvelaze daCagruli elementebis pozicias
gamoxatavdnen. isini xSirad diqtorisa da fasilitatoris
rols irgebdnen da adamianebs ase mouwodebdnen
aqciaSi monawileobisken. mxatvrebis mizani
Zalauflebis safuZvlebis Seryeva, misi damxoba
iyo. ‘Electric Earth’-is avtorebi socialuri sistemebisa
da kodebis Cveneul gagebas aRwerdnen da
damTvalierebelTa molodinis reorientacias axdendnen.
EElectric Earth-i, romelic ‘Savi yuTis’ Semdeg
moewyo, Tanamedrove videoarts, samauwyeblo praqtikis
meinstrims da mis Sesaxeb arsebuli narativis
garSemo debatebis inspirirebas cdilobda.
r e v i e w s
erTis mxriv, personaluri kompiuterebisTvis
xelmisawvdomi, daxvewili samontaJo programebis
wyalobiT, meores mxriv ki popularuli sareklamo
klipebis, dokumentalistikis, meinstrimuli da art
kinos sinTezis daxmarebiT videoartSi moRvawe mxatvars
imis saSualeba mieca, rom Tavisi Semoqmedeba
galeerebidan socialur struqturebsa da reklamis
sivrceSi gadaetana.
eqspozicia sami didi zomis ekranze iyo warmodgenili.
maRali xarisxis audioTanxleba mayurebels
21-e saukunis qalaqis korporatiuli komerciis,
modis, axalgazrduli da saklubo kulturis, religiis,
sainformacio nakadis socialur landSaftSi
mogzaurobas sTavazobda.
gamofenaSi monawileobdnen mxatvrebi: adam ricko,
volker eixelmani da roland rusti, ‘folk arqivi,
luk fouleri, rob kenedi, torsten lauSmani, mark
leki, hilari loidi, oliver peini da nik ralfi,
pol runi, stiven sadklifi, zuper Ggeleri, volfgang
tilmansi, mark tiCneri, keri iangi.
gamofena 2004 wlis 4 seqtembers gaixsna da or kviras
gagrZelda.

ELECTRIC EARTH
Szuper Gallery, ‘Nirvana’, 2002, video, 6min.
‘Cinema is life with the boring bits Cut out’
ALFRED HITCHCOCK

Carolyn Black
PROCESS & PRACTICE -
ANTICIPATION & RISK
When working on temporary public art exhibitions, one has to
depend largely on trust and belief. Essentially, the commissioner
has to select on the belief that the artist commissioned will be able
to create a new work, in a given period of time, with an absolute
rock-solid reliability. It can be a gamble. One is always up against
the unknown, never more so than working in a rural environment
such as the Forest of Dean. All planning of a public event carries
with it anticipation and risk, but few are as unnerving as working
in an unstable location, with little or no infrastructure to underpin
it. Some sculpture parks have residential accommodation,
galleries and studios, but the Forest of Dean Sculpture Trust has
no such thing. The Trust itself is ephemeral in so many ways.
‘The Trust’ was formed to act as guardians for the land art which
was installed in the then quiet, remote Beechenhurst area, in
the mid 1980s. Only at the turn of the century was the decision
made to begin a period of commissioning new works, including
both temporary and permanent. But the landscape is no longer
remote and unspoilt, ironically due to the very presence of the
sculptures, the Beechenhurst area has become an exceptionally
popular area for tourism. With a series of activity since 2000,
the Sculpture Trust has been experimenting with a range of
commissioning programmes. Temporary and permanent works
have been programmed and, most notably, an after-dark festival
of lightworks occurred in 2002, at the end of foot & mouth. The
realisation that there are big audiences out there who want to
see art in the forest was clearly demonstrated by huge visitor
numbers to Lightshift, over 40,000 people came in only one week.
So it was back to the drawing board for the Trustees, to evaluate
what had happened and why, the strengths and weaknesses of
such mass appeal activity. It was decided to leave a gap before
considering the possibility of a follow up to Lightshift. That gap
of over three years led to ‘reveal’ being planned, which is where
I joined the Trust to deliver that programme. It was hoped that
although popular opinions still held that Lightshift was amazing
and fantastic, enough time had lapsed to allow new works,
coming from a more research-led practice, to exist without direct
comparison to their huge, spectacular predecessor. The truth is,
there will never be enough gap in time, as when people mention
Lightshift, even now, with smiles of reminiscence on their faces
and rosy memories, they talk of it as happening ‘last year’. They
forget the traffic bedlam, the safety risks taken, the overrun of
budget. Despite huge effort to quell the buzz that Lightshift Two
is coming, it is too deeply planted in people’s experience to erase
it, to wipe their disks clean of afterimages of lasers and fireworks,
flashes and bangs. So onto Reveal, fewer artists, quieter works and a publicity campaign emphasizing it as an art exhibition, not
a festival of light. It is, of course, impossible to avoid the notion of spectacle when, in truth, a tea-light lit in a forest has such
a visual impact on its environment. The works could not fail to be spectacular, even though the term is so often considered
derogatory. The works that were shown were in direct response to the forest - physically, conceptually and poetically. They drew
both literally and metaphorically from the place they inhabited, referencing ochre mining activity in the area, coal mining and
the concept of trees creating a portal between urban and rural. You could split the works into two approaches - Laura Daly and
Katayoun Pasban Dowlatshahi made work that is research led in traditional terms, inspired by local history and landscape,
whilst Nathaniel Rackowe and Tabatha Andrews responded more physically and created works that confronted the trees and
their occupation of the space - clashing urban with rural in a very direct, uncompromising manner. Tabatha created filmworks
that offered a visual space of transition, a glimpse of the other side, making almost minimalist references to how we perceive
the forest in terms of popular imagination and mythology. The Forest as a gateway, enter at your risk. The trees as guardians

procesi da praqtika - molodini da riski
of this wild and threatening place, brought to order by seemingly theatrical effects, made simply with light-upon-nature. There
were suggestions of the fairytale here, but also of the horror story. Think Grimms meets Terminator - twinkling foliage and violent
slashes of light, it was there to disturb the audience, making them see the forest anew. Nathaniel seemingly decided to ignore
this romantic woodland of dreams and mythology and instead deliberately imposed his masculine urban vision onto this restless
place. Order from chaos. Whilst one of his works used light to expose the underbelly of the environment - scanning the surrounds
and drawing straight lines to bisect it visually, the other had a truly alien presence. Glowing wires constructed a 3D illusion of
a digitally rendered wireframe drawing. Suspended high up in the trees, the rectangular form appeared to move in and around
them, constricting and containing them, ignoring their structural dominance, cutting through their power. Suggestions of urban
neon, of advertising, of technology, juxtaposed against the rural defying it.
© Carolyn Black, Projects Director for the Forest of Dean, Sculpture Trust, Gloucesterhsire, UK.
sajaro xelovnebis demonstrirebisas, Sens mier SerCeul xelovans unda miendo da irwmuno, rom is axal
namuSevars daTqmul droSi Seqmnis. yvelaferi es erTgvar TamaSs hgavs, gansakuTrebiT, Tu RonisZiebis
mowyoba dinis tyeSi gaqvs gadawyvetili. Znelad Tu moiZebneba vinme, vinc am garemoSi, sadac arc Sesaferisi
infrastruqturaa da arc sxva raime xelSemwyobi piroba, auRelveblad imuSavebs. amitom moTmineba
da riskze wasvlis unari ueWvelad gamogadgebaT. qandakebis parkebSi, rogorc wesi, rezidenciebi, galereebi
da saxelosnoebia ganlagebuli, magram dinis qandakebaTa trests amgvari araferi hqonda. TviTon
trestic, garkveulwilad, efemerulia. is 1986 wels biCenharstis mxareSi, gancalkevebul, wynar adgilas
instalirebuli lend-artis namuSevrebis dasacavad Seiqmna. mudmivi eqspozicia am tyeSi mxolod 21-e saukunis
dasawyisSi gaCnda: axal namuSevarTagan zogi droebiTi eqsponatis saxiT ganTavsda, zogic mudmivi
eqspoziciis nawili gaxda. dRes biCenharstis landaSafti Zveleburad ukacrieli da xeluxlebeli aRaraa,
iq instalirebulma qandakebebma mxare popularul turistul sivrced aqcia.
2000 wlidan Sculpture Trust-ma lend-artis uamravi proeqti ganaxorciela. gansakuTrebiT aRsaniSnavia
2002 wels Catarebuli ‘Lightshift’-i, igive Suqis festivali, romelic erTi kviris ganmavlobaSi 40 000-ma
damTvalierebelma moinaxula. aman kidev erTxel cxadyo, rom msgavsi RonisZieba sazogadoebisTvis Zalze
sainteresoa. mas Semdeg, rac Sefasda RonisZiebis dadebiTi da uaryofiTi mxareebi, meurveebic darwmundnen,
tyeSi mimdinare art-aqtivobis mniSvnelobaSi.
dinis tyeSi Catarebuli meore didi RonisZieba, ‘Reveal’ ‘Lightshift’-is organuli gagrZeleba iyo. Sculpture Trusts
swored am dros SevuerTdi. ‘Lightshift’-i sazogadoebas fantastikur da uCveulo sanaxaobad daamaxsovrda,
magram ukve sakmao drom ganvlo imisTvis, rom dauRalavi Ziebis Sedegad Seqmnil axal eqspozicias
Tavis popularul da STambeWdav winamorbedTan SedarebisTvis gaeZlo. Tumca imasac vacnobierebdiT,
rom veraferi waSlida mogonebebs ‘Lightshift’-ze. dResac, 4 wlis Semdeg am festivals ‘gasuli wlis’
saukeTeso RonisZiebad moixsenieben. ukve yvelas daaviwyda, uzarmazari sacobebi, tyeSi gadaadgilebasTan
dakavSirebuli problemebi, ‘gaberili’ biujeti. amitomac gagviWirda im xmebis gabaTileba, romelTa
Tanaxmadac dinis tyeSi ‘Lightshift 2’ mzaddeboda. rogorc Cans, lazeris sxivebma, feierverkebma, naTebam da
Tanmdevma akustikurma efeqtebma damTvalierebelze imdenad didi STabeWdileba moaxdina, rom misi waSla
mexsierebidan ukve SeuZlebeli iyo.
‘Reveal’-ma ramdenime xelovani da ufro ‘wynari’ namuSevrebi warmoadgina. presaSic mas ukve Suqis festivals
ki ara xelovnebis nimuSebis gamofenas uwodebdnen. tyeSi, sadac anTebuli sanTelic ki fantastikur
vizualur imijs qmnis, yvelaferi efeqtur sanaxaobad iqceva, am faqts versad gaeqcevi. da Tumca sanaxaobriobiT
gataceba namdvili xelovnebisTvis Seuferebelia, ‘Reveal’ sulac ar ewinaaRmdegeboda sanaxaobis
ideas. aq gamofenili namuSevrebi fizikurad, konceptualurad da, ufro metic, poeturad Seerwya sagamofeno
sivrces _ tyes. isini adgilis metaforul, vizualur gamoxatulebad iqcnen da aqaur Jangmiwis
maRaroebs asociaciurad daukavSirdnen. xeTa koncefcia ki TiTqos qalaqsa da sofels Soris axal karibWes
xsnida. warmodgenilma namuSevrebma naTlad gamokveTa ori pozicia. lora delim da kataion doulaCahim
tradiciuli midgoma arCies da yuradReba adgilis istoriasa da landSaftis Taviseburebebze SeaCeres.
naTaniel roukovma da tabaTa endriusma sofeli da qalaqi erTmaneTs ukompromisod daupirispires. maTi
namuSevrebi TiTqos oms ucxadebednen xeebs da maT bunebriv ganlagebas sivrceSi.
tabaTas kinonamuSevarSi gardamavalma vizualurma sivrcem Cveni fantaziebi, Cveni miTosuri warmodgenebi
tyeze minimalisturi xerxebiT aRwera. tye karibWea, masSi Sesvla sarisko, xeebi am veluri da SemaSinebeli
garemos mcvelebad gvevlinebian. vizualur efeqts Teatraluri midgoma aZlierebda: bunebrivi garemo
specialurad gaanaTes. aq bevri ram gaerTianda: zRapari da saSinelebaTa filmi, Zmebi grimebi da terminatori,
sibneleSi mocimcime foTlebi da moZalade xelovnuri Suqi. namuSevari mayureblis SeZrwunebas,
tyis axleburad aRqmas isaxavda miznad. naTanielma uari Tqva tyisadmi romantikul, miTosur damokidebulebaze
da ukiduresad urbanistuli, maskulinuri xedva gagvacno. miseuli wesrigi tyis qaosidan warmoiqmna.
naTanielis erT-erT namuSevarSi sworxazovani sxivi garemos skanirebas ukeTebs, cdilobs is seqtorebad
dayos. meores ki tyeSi absoluturad ucxo sxeuli Semoyavs _ maRla xis totebSi daxlarTuli,
gaxurebuli mavTuli samganzomilebian, cifrul naxats qmnis. xeebi geometriul formebSia Casmuli, isini
zRudaven maT, struqturulad dominireben, sivrceSi SemoWriT urbanistuli teqnologiebi, reklama,
neoni Riad upirispirdeba bunebriv garemos da oms ucxadebs mas.
© karolin bleki, Forest of Dean Sculpture Trust-is proeqtis direqtori. glosesterSiri, didi britaneTi.
kerolin bleki

...tye karibWea, masSi Sesvla sarisko, xeebi am veluri
da SemaSinebeli garemos mcvelebad gvevlinebian...
Tabatha Andrews, ‘dilate’, 2006, video still projected onto conifer trees, photographed by Jamie Woodley

6
THE TRILOGY
In June 2002 British Council Georgia introduced the awardwinning
Random Dance Company to Georgian audiences,
when the company presented its unconventional production
The Trilogy.
An integrated, multi-media performance for eight dancers and
their virtual partners, The Trilogy (Water Fire Earth/Air) takes
place in virtual, physical and screen-based space and develops
a fresh look at dance and new technology. Technology has
stimulated every aspect of creative stage, leaving its futuristic
impression upon choreography and design. At the same time,
McGregor’s (choreographer) physical vocabulary pushes
dancers to amazing new limits with its lightning speed and
mesmerising articulation, questioning and exploring ideas
about the technology of the human body.
The creative process of The Trilogy has been varied and
experimental, with the dancers, choreographer and
collaborators working closely together in the studio to push
the boundaries of a shared vocabulary. There has been an
exhaustive investigation of resources and approaches: from
technology to dancer, from dancer to technology, from dancers
alone, dancers together, and technology alone.
The Trilogy consists of The Millennarium (water) 1997, Sulphur
16 (fire)1998 and Aeon (earth/air)2000, The Trilogy combined
elements of these tree pieces into a harmonious whole.
trilogia
2002 wlis ivnisSi britaneTis sabWom saqarTveloSi
warmoadgina prizis mflobeli sacekvao dasi Random
Dance Company produqciiT ‘trilogia’.
‘trilogia’ (wyali, cecxli, miwa/haeri) aris erTiani,
multimediuri warmodgena 8 mocekvavis da maTi vitrualuri
partniorebisTvis. moqmedeba xdeba virtualur,
fizikur da ekranul sivrceSi. namuSevari
axleburad warmogvidgens baletisa da axali teqnologiebis
urTierTqmedebas. teqnologia sasceno
warmodgenis yvela aspeqtSi igrZnoba da qoreografias
da dizains futuristul elfers aZlevs.
uein makgregoris (qoreografi) TanamoazreebTan
erTad ikvlevs cekvas, teqnologias da saerTos
maT Soris, teqnologias da mocekvaves, mocekvaves
da teqnologias, mxolod mocekvaves, mxolod teqnologias.
makgregoris moZraobis leqsika mocekvaveebs
axali sazRvrebisken ubiZgebs, elviseburi
SuqiT, momajadovebeli artikulaciiT, ideebiT da
kvlevebiT adamianis sxeulis Sesaxeb.
trilogia warmoadgens uein makgregoris cifruli
teqnologiiT STagonebuli sami proeqtis sinTezs.
esenia: milenariumi (wyali) 1997, sulfuri 16 (cecxli)
1998 da eoni (miwa/haeri) 2000.
RANDOM DANCE COMPANy

Akram Khan Company
A’
Akram Khan is a leading British dancer and choreographer, acclaimed for the vitality he brings to cross-cultural expression, influenced
by his training in Western contemporary dance and Kathak, the Indian classical genre.
Akram launched his own company in 2000. His repertoire since then has included , two Kathak solos: Polaroid Feet and Ronin,
Related Rocks: a major collaboration with the London Sinfonietta to a Magnus Lindburg score, and Kaash: the hugely successful
collaboration with Anish Kapoor and Nitin Sawnhey. As Choreographer-in-Residence and later as an Associate Artist at the South
Bank Centre, Akram also initiated Eye-Con: an education project with teenagers, a recital with Guru Maharaj and his own guru Sri
Pratap Pawar, and A God of Small Tales: a piece for mature women for which he collaborated with writer Hanif Kureishi.
‘To bring together a company of such diverse cultures, experiences and voices is a blessing for me and for my work. It is a
reflection of what I am today, which is to be in a state of ‘confusion’, where boundaries are broken, languages of origin are left
behind and instead, individual experiences are pushed forward to create new boundaries and a singular emerging language that
becomes universal to us all. To know is nothing at all… to imagine is everything.’ (Akram Khan)
In May 2004 he created Ma, his largest and most ambitious company work to date. In this full length work for ten performers
(7 dancers and 3 musicians) Akram Khan continues his innovative exploration into the Indian and Western dance and music
aesthetics that have shaped his choreographic style. Unlike his previous work , where the inspiration and starting points were
sourced in Hindu mythology and cosmic notions of parallel universes, Ma occupies a more earthly environment invaded by ideas
of Sacred Seeds, Displaced Humans, Silent Bells, Decaying Movement and Burnt Music. The rich symbolism of the Indian musical
language - played live - and its spontaneous and intimate relationship to the dance is expressed and performed through exploring
the role of the Kathak dancer as narrator, musician and dancer.
akram xani wamyvani britaneli mocekvave da qoreografia. farTo aRiareba akram xans, romelmac zedmiwevniT
Seiswavla Tanamedrove dasavluri da induri klasikuri cekva - kataka, kulturaTaSorisi urTierTobebis
kvlevam moutana.
akramma sakuTari kompania 2000 wels daarsa. am droidan mis repertuarSi Sedis: induri klasikuri cekvis,
katakas ori solo nomeri ‘polaroidis fexi’ da ‘ronini’; “London Sinfonietta-sTan erTad ganxorcielebuli
proeqti, romelic magnus lindbergis nawarmoebebis mixedviT Seiqmna da ‘kaaSi’, romelic aniS kapurTan da
ninit stounTan misi warmatebuli TanamSromlobis Sedegia.
rogorc qoreografma da, mogvianebiT, rogor South Bank Centre-is partniorma, akram xanma guru maharajisTan,
guru Sri pratar pavarTisTan erTad Seqmna programa ‘Eye-Con’, romelic auditoriad mozardebs
moiazrebda da SinaarsiT saganmanaTleblo iyo. akram xans ekuTvnis proeqti ‘patara zRaprebis RmerTi’,
romelic mweral hanif kureiSisTan erTad qalebisTvis ganaxorciela.
‘amdenad gansxvavebuli kulturebis, gamocdilebis, xmebis Tavmoyra, CemTvis dalocvis tolfasia.
yvelaferi es erTgvar refleqsiad momevlina, refleqsiad imaze, Tu ras warmovadgen dRes, rogoria aR-
moCnde mSfoTvare wertilSi, sadac sazRvrebi qreba, enebi da maTi warmomavloba aRaravis axsovs, xolo
individualuri gamocdileba axali sazRvrebis, universaluri, sayovelTao enis Seqmniskenaa mimarTuli.
codna araferia, warmodgena _ yvelaferi’ (akram xani).
2004 wlis maisSi akram xani Tavis yvelaze did, yvelaze ambiciur proeqt ‘mas’ qmnis. am namuSevarSi, romelic
10 Semsrulebelzea gaTvlili (7 mocekvave da 3 musikosi), xelovani kvlav induri da dasavluri cekvis,
musikis esTetikis safuZvlebs ikvlevs. gansxvavebiT wina namuSevrebisgan, romlebic induri miTologiiT,
paraleluri samyaroebis arsebobis ideiT iyo STagonebuli, ‘ma’ ufro miwier sakiTxebs swavlobs: damfrTxali
Tesli, gzaabneuli adamiani, dadumebuli zarebi, xrwnaSeparuli moZraoba, daferflili musika.
katakas mocekvave-naratorisa da musikosis urTierTmimarTebebis kvleva akram xans induri hangebis, misi
simboloebis, cekvisa da musikis spontanuri da amave dros intimuri kavSiris warmosaCenad sWirdeba.
‘akram xan kompani’ ‘M

EEEllen
Mara De Watcher
8
ARSENAL - SOUND AS A WEAPON
Arsenal: artists exploring the potential of sound as a weapon was an exhibition I curated that ran from June 23rd to August 6th
2006 at an independent art space called Alma Enterprises in London’s East End. The show gathered together eleven artists
whose work explores the potential of sound in different ways by highlighting the dangers of beauty, the power of voice and
language, the sounds and noises of industry and modern life, discourses around sound and noise, and the latent forces in rhythm
and repetition. Some of the works refer to historical moments in which sound has literally been deployed as a military weapon
through sheer volume and repetition, while others make subtle use of the medium and allude to its less obvious potential as a
weapon.
Although the works are very diverse in form and content, they all use sound as an artistic material, manipulating and tailoring
it to suit particular needs. The history of recent art reveals a staunch loyalty to the visual; it has been explored in its countless
ramifications through photography, film, video, digital art and more classical mediums such as sculpture and painting. Sound has
enjoyed less of a starring role, and its potential may still be further realized. The artists included in Arsenal combine mediums
and materials in various ways, but they have all incorporated sound into their work in effective and affecting ways, engaging with
the medium’s potential as a weapon.
The works in Arsenal were specially commissioned for the exhibition; in some cases they resulted in versions of actions and
performances that used sound as a weapon, and which until now only existed as ephemeral performances. In other cases, the
artist’s practice was heading in a direction that seemed relevant to the theme of the exhibition, and it made sense to invite them
to make a new work for Arsenal. Each artist was also invited to create an image or text especially for the accompanying catalogue.
These contributions sometimes related directly to works on display, but in other cases they offered the artists an alternative
opportunity to engage with the concepts of the show.
Rod Dickinson’s Nocturn: The Waco Re-enactment, September 16 2004 (2006) was a newly edited video of footage taken
during his 2004 re-enactment of a sonic siege carried out in 1993, when the FBI surrounded the compound where Branch
Davidian leader David Koresh and his followers were living. During the siege the FBI used psychological warfare tactics against
the Davidians. This “psychotronic” warfare involved blasting the compound buildings with loud, continuous audio and bright
light. Dickinson’s re-enactment of the siege reconstructed some of the sound material used by the FBI, based on the artist’s
research and conversations with a survivor of the event. The resulting soundtrack is a baffling mixture of unpleasant noises
such as a dentist’s drill or rabbits being killed, disorienting sounds such as pop songs played at varying speeds and repetitive
re-transmissions of conversations between Koresh and an FBI agent. Extracts from the transcript of these dialogues were also
reproduced in the catalogue.
Thomas Altheimer’s expedition to Guantanamo Bay in November 2005 was the subject of his video triptych Impossible. And yet
there it is! No, impossible. Parallel Action #3.3.048 - A Sonic Attack On Guantanamo Bay (2006). Under the guise of his alter
ego Thomas Herzen, the artist’s mission involved recruiting a column of ‘Europeans’ in Jamaica, sailing to Guantanamo Bay
and playing Beethoven’s Symphony No. 3 in E Flat Major (1805), also known as the Eroica, from a mountaintop overlooking
Camp Delta. The aim of this sonic attack was, according to Herzen’s account, to liberate the Camp “with the hope of turning
Guantanamo Bay into a huge European, neo-colonial, spatial installation.” The minor failures that dogged this theatrically
ambitious plan create a fascinating narrative, and highlight in a very timely way the tragic absurdity of both the mission and the
situation at Guantanamo Bay.
Mattin weaves together text and sound to examine noise and its commodification. His Thesis on Noise (2006), included in the
publication, is a series of polemical aphorisms about his understanding of the medium of noise and its potential. In eleven
succinct points, Mattin explores the past, present and future of noise as a concept and form, from early instances in industrial
settings to the possibilities generated by current noise practice. Mattin’s participation in the exhibition also included a sound
improvisation performance with the legendary improvisation artist Eddie Prévost and Argentinean avant-garde musician Alan
Courtis, from the band Reynols. Their concert was introduced by a noise set from Culver, an artist based in the United Kingdom.
Moving away from noise, the brutal potential of sound can sometimes defy expectations and manifest itself in muted tones. The
soundtrack to allsopp&weir’s To the Place or Being in the Place (2006) was based on a foreign language-learning cassette for
speakers of English. The artists edited together instructions, words and phrases that were spoken in English by the instructor on
the tape. Set to languid shots of foliage swaying in the wind and fragments of city living, the words and sentences are repeated
by an actor, whose native tongue is not English. An auxiliary soundtrack, played out in the gallery space, features the original
phrases as read by the teaching voice. The contrast between the two deliveries evokes the struggle of belonging, which swings
between a desire for assimilation and the impossibility of absolute integration. The words are read in rapid-fire succession, and
the actor struggles to keep up, sometimes missing out phrases entirely. Sound, through the voice and language, becomes the
enemy of identity.
Tillmann Terbuyken and Thomas Baldischwyler’s Untitled (2006) is a sculpture with audio that uses extracts of Glenn Gould’s
legendary 1955 recording of Johann Sebastian Bach’s Goldberg Variations (1741). The soundtrack emphasizes the beauty of
Bach’s composition, while also making a feature of the repetition that is characteristic of the Variations. This repetition holds the
potential to be disturbing to listeners. Untitled draws attention to the power of such divinely beautiful music, which is so exquisite
that it risks being almost unendurable to humans. The sculpture’s painted surface makes a subtle allusion to clouds, and is
suggestive of the magnificent yet volatile nature of Bach’s music.
Audio Addiction (2006) by Jasmin Jodry and Mo Stoebe is a music video for the track 9 Samurai by dj kode9 and dubtronic poet
Spaceape. Using a high contrast black and white aesthetic, the work traces a fantasy narrative that follows the development of

e v i e w s
an audio virus in a scientific laboratory, and its impact on society and music lovers. Dealing with the possibility of aestheticising
antagonistic sounds in music, Pablo Gav’s composition sat at the threshold between public space and the gallery, playing for the
duration of the exhibition, and functioned as an invitation to the visitors. Gav is a composer based in Mexico City, and for Arsenal,
he designed a sound piece that incorporated both transformed and natural sounds. His essay ‘Music Pissing on Flies Shitting
on Bombs’ (2006), about his composition of the same title, explains the visual nature of his music and gives an account of the
creative process of making the work, and was included in the catalogue as a companion to the composition.
Giorgio Agostoni’s A text for an exhibitions that regards sound as a weapon (2006) was a text-based montage of different
narratives that explore various perceptions of the possibility of sound as a weapon, and was written specially for the exhibition
catalogue. The three sections in the piece highlight the subjectivity of definitions of noise, silence and aggression. It was important
to emphasize that work exploring the potential of sound as a weapon could be presented in any medium. The idea was not to
attack the gallery visitor, but rather to convey the different layers of possibility that lie inherent in a medium such as sound.
The key academic text in the catalogue was Sonic Warfare: the Logistics of Affection by Steve Goodman. It traced a history of
sonic warfare, from biblical times to the present, sampling minor events, scientific discoveries and technological innovations, and
demonstrating that the drive to use sound as a weapon is not new, and that innovations in sonic weaponry are often the result
of a warped but highly developed form of creativity.
The works in Arsenal: artists exploring the potential of sound as a weapon addressed the multiple possibilities of looking at
sound as a force, a medium, and a subject matter. The exhibition has been critically well received in London, and visitors have
commented about the quality of the work and the intriguing nature of the subject matter. While I could have written about many of
the challenges involved in curating this show, such as the need to work entirely without funding, the risks of curating an exhibition
made up solely of newly commissioned, or the difficulties of presenting several sound-based works in one same space, I thought
it worthwhile in this instance describing the works in Arsenal in order to allow the reader a virtual and imaginary visit to the
exhibition.
© Ellen Mara De Wachter, curator, London.

arsenali - bgera, rogorc iaraRi
80
gamofenaSi, romelsac me vkuratorobdi da romelic 2006 wlis 23 ivlisidan 6 agvistomde londonis ist
endSi, Alma Enterprises-Si, damoukidebel art sivrceSi moewyo, TerTmetma mxatvarma miiRo monawileoba. maTi
kvlevis obieqti xmis alternatiuli SesaZleblobebi iyo (bgera, rogorc sabrZolo iaraRi): ramdenad saxifaToa
mSveniereba, raSi mdgomareobs bgerisa da metyvelebis Zlevamosileba, rogor funqcionirebs xma da
xmaurebi Tanamedrove industriul garemoSi, rogor asaxavs diskursi xmisa da xmauris problemas, axorcielebs
Tu ara ritmi da misi usasrulo ganmeorebadoba latentur Zaladobas? mxatvarTa nawilma istoriul
konteqsts mimarTa, momentebs rodesac xmas, mis Zalasa da ganmeorebadobas marTlac sabrZolo iara-
Rad iyenebdnen. sxvebma ufro faqizi, gawonasworebuli pozicia airCies da mxolod migvaniSnes imaze, rom
SesaZloa xma iaraRad iqces. miuxedavad imisa, rom yvela mxatvrisTvis sawyisi masala xma iyo da sasurvel
Sedegs TiToeuli maTgani xmis gadamuSavebiT, modelirebiT aRwevda, warmodgenili namuSevrebi formiTac
da SinaarsiTac mkveTrad gansxvavdeboda erTmaneTisgan. Tanamedrove xelovneba, yvela misi nairsaxeoba:
fotografia da kino, video da cifruli arti, klasikuri skulptura da ferwera vizualobisadmi arnaxul
erTgulebas iCens. xmas aqamde mTavar rolSi aravin ganixilavda, amitom misi SesaZleblobebi jer kidev gamosakvlevia.
A’arsenal’-Si monawile mxatvrebi mediumisa da masalis kombinirebis sxvadasxva xerxs mimar-
Tavdnen, magram yovelma maTganma xma Tavis namuSevrebSi maqsimalurad efeqturad, ufro metic afeqturad
gamoiyena da Seeceda xmisa da sabrZolo iaraRis kavSiri aRmoeCina.
A’arsenalze’ warmodgenili yvela namuSevari specialurad am eqspoziciisTvis Seiqmna. avtorTa nawilma
Tavisi proeqti erTjeradi perfomansis, efemeruli aqciis saxiT ganaxorciela. nawils, romelTa Semoqmedebac
exmaureboda gamofenis Temas, specialurad A’arsenalisTvis’ axali namuSevari daamzada. bevrma
maTganma Seqmna imiji da teqsti specialurad eqspoziciis Tanmxlebi katalogisTvis. mxatvrebis mier Sesrulebuli
namuSevari zog SemTxvevaSi mxolod sagamofeno sivrcisTvis iyo gansazRvruli, zogi mxolod
katalogisTvis.
rod dikinsoni Nocturn: The Waco Re-enactment , September 16 2004 (2006). avtorma gamofenaze 2004 wels gadaRebuli
da xelaxla gadamontaJebuli video warmoadgina. firze aRbeWdili iyo 1993 wels ‘daviTianTa Stos’
lideris daviT koreSisa da misi mimdevrebis winaaRmdeg ganxorcielebuli akustikuri alyis rekonstuqcia.
maSin, aSS-s gamoZiebaTa federalurma biurom ‘daviTianelTa’ winaaRmdeg fsiqologiuri omis meTodebi
gamoiyena. Senobas, romelsac Tavs afarebdnen alyaSemortymulebi, ‘bombavdnen’ autaneli, ganuwyveteli
xmauriTa da kaSkaSa naTebiT. dikinsonis rekonstruqciaSi aRdgenilia xmovani masala, romelsac am fsiqotronul
omSi iyenebdnen. amisTvis mxatvars xangrZlivi kvleva da alyaSi gadarCenili ‘daviTianelebis’
monaTxrobi daexmara. Soundtrack-i, romelic Catarebuli rekonstruqciis Sedegad miviReT Semdegi komponentebisgan
Sedgeboda: dantistis burRis xma, momakvdavi kurdRlis xriali, aCqarebuli pop-musika, kore-
Sisa da gamoZiebaTa federaluri biuros agentebis molaparakebaTa usasrulod ganmeorebuli fragmentebi.
es fragmentebi katalogSic moxvda.
tomas alTemerma videotriptixSi ‘Impossible’ 2005 wlis noemberSi guantanamo beiSi Catarebuli eqspedicia
asaxa. (paraleluri aqcia _ ‘ai, isic, es SeuZlebelia’ #3.3.048’ - akustikuri Seteva guantanamo beize
(2006). eqspediciis mizani iyo, iamaikelTa jgufTan erTad, guantanamos cixeze, sadac amerikelebis mier
datyvevebuli patimrebi wlobiT elodebian sasamarTlos, akustikuri ieriSis ganxorcieleba. alTersa da
mis megobrebs naviT unda miecuraT sasurvel adgilamde, Semdeg mTis mwvervalidan, romelic guantanamos
cixes gadahyurebs, banaki ‘delta’ beThovenis me-3, gmiruli simfoniiT unda ‘daebombaT’. am qmedebis mizani
banakis gaTavisufleba iyo. aqciis zeamocanas Tavad avtori ase xsnis: ‘gvindoda guantanamo gadagvecia
uazrmazar evropul neokoloniur sivrcobriv instalaciad’. im winaaRmdegobebma, romelmac alTemers
Tavisi ambiciuri, Teatralizebuli gegmis Sesrulebisas garkveuli problemebi Seuqmna, saTave daudo
gasaocar ambavs da gausva xazi, rogorc misiis, aseve guanatanamoze Seqmnili viTarebis tragikul absur-
elen de mara voCeri

dulobas. matini teqstsa da xmas erTmaneTSi aqsovs
da xmaurisa da misi modifikaciebis gamocdas cdilobs.
‘xmauris Tezisi’ (2006), romelic katalogSic
moxvda, polemikuri aforizmebis seriaa da xmisa
da xmauris SesaZleblobebis matiniseul xedvas
gvacnobs. mxatvari ikvlevs xmauris koncefciasa
da formebs warsulSi, awmyosa da momavalSi, mas
ainteresebs adreuli industriuli sazogadoebis
gamocdilebac da Tanamedrove praqtikac. matinma
gamofenaze kidev erTi namuSevari warmoadgina: perfomansi,
romelSic legendaruli musikosebi edi
prevosti da argentineli avangardisti musikosi,
jguf ‘reinolsis’ wevri alan kurtisic iRebdnen
monawileobas. maTi koncerti britaneli musikosis
kulveris xmaurebis TanxlebiT mimdinareobda. xmis
avbediTi potenciali, xandaxan molodinis sapirispirod,
arcTu ise xamamaRali bgerebiTac SeiZleba
gamoixatos. namuSevars saxelwodebiT allsopp&weir’is
soundtrack-s To the Place or Being in the Place (2006),
safuZvlad ucxo enis enis gakveTilebis Canawerebi
udevs. es gakveTilebi ucxoenovani auditoriisTvisaa
gankuTvnili. avtorebma Tavi mouyares
maswavleblis mier inglisurad warmoTqmul instruqciebs,
sityvebs, frazebs da yvela es epizodi
msaxiobis xmiT Caanacvles. aSkarad Cans, rom msaxiobisTvis
inglisuri ucxo enaa, is gauTaveblad
imeorebs Sesabamis frazebsa da winadadebebs, misi
teqsti qarSi moSriale foTlebis, qalaqis xedebis
dune, apaTiur kadrebiTaa ilustrirebuli. meore
saundtrekze, romelic aseve sagamofeno sivrceSi
ismis, maswavleblis originaluri teqstia Senar-
Cunebuli. kontrasti am or audiorigs Soris imaze
migvaniSnebs, rom rogori Zlieric ar unda iyos asimilirebis
survili, sruli integracia SeuZlebelia.
msaxiobi cdilobs SeinarCunos tempi, warmoTqvas
sityvebi gansazRvruli TanmimdevrobiT, magram
drodadro misi xma saerTod qreba. xma am namuSevar-
Si identobis mtrad gvevlineba.
Tilman terbaikenma da tomas boldiSvailerma
gamofenaze Tavisi namuSevari ‘usaTauro’ (2006)
warmoadgines. es skulpturaa musikaluri TanxlebiT.
audio-rigi glen guldis mier 1955 wels Sesrulebuli
baxis cnobli nawarmoebis ‘goldbergis
variaciebis’ fragmentebisgan Sedgeba. (1741). saundtreki
xazs usvams baxis nawarmoebis mSvenierebas
da amave dros yuradRebas im ganmeorebad pasaJebze
amaxvilebs, romelic ase axasiaTebs ‘variaciebs’ da
romelmac SesaZloa msmenels garkveuli diskomforti
Seuqmnas. ‘usaTauro’ im xifaTze migvaniSnebs,
romelic umSvenieresi musikis arsSia dabudebuli:
srulyofileba msmenelisTvis SesaZloa gausaZlisi
gaxdes. skulpturis moxatuli zedapiri msubuq
aluzias qmnis RrublebTan da mayurebels baxis
didebuli musikis, mouxelTebel arsze miuTiTebs.
Jasmin jodris da mo stroebes musikalur videos
‘bgeraze mijaWvuloba’ (2006) dijei kode 9-isa da
poet speiseipis musikaluri piesa ‘9 samurai’ daedo
safuZvlad. Savisa da TeTris esTetikis kontrastuli
gamoyenebiT avtorebma mogviTxres, Tu rogor
warimarTa audiovirusis ganviTarebis etapebi samecniero
laboratoriaSi da ra zegavlena iqonia am
movlenam sazogadoebasa da melomanebze.
r e v i e w s
bgerebis antagonizmi, maTi esTetizaciis problema
Ppablo geis namuSevris MmTavari Temaa. is sagamofeno
sivrcis zRurblze ukravda da Tavisi musikiT
mayurebels eqspoziciaze iwvevda. gei meqsikeli
kompozitoria, mexikoSi cxovrobs da ‘AarsenalisTvis’
iseTi kompozicia Seqmna, romelSic bunebrivi
da xelovnuri xmebis erTobliobaa warmodgenili.
misi ese ‘Music Pissing on Flies Shitting on Bombs (2006),
romelic pablo geis amave saxelwodebis nawarmoebs
efuZneba, mayurebels xmis vizualur SesaZleblobebs
acnobs da SemoqmedebiT processac aRwers. es
namuSevari gamofenis katalogSic Sevida.
jorjo agostinis namuSevari ‘AText for an exhibitions that
regards sound as a weapon’ (2006), sxvadasxva naratiuli
teqstebis montaJs warmoadgens da xmis, rogorc
iaraRis sxvadasxvagvar aRqmas sTavazobs mayurebels.
es namuSevari specialurad gamofenis katalogisTvis
Seiqmna. xmauris, siCumis da agresiis subieqturi
gansazRvrebebi misi teqstis sam nawilSia
aRbeWdili. Zalze mniSvnelovani iyo imis xazgasma,
rom refleqsia xmisa da iaraRis urTierTdamokidebulebaze
nebismieri mediis saSualebiT SeiZleba
warimarTos. jorjo agustini damTvalierebelze
Tavdasxmas ar apirebda, mis survili iyo daefiqsirebina
is faqti, rom moCvenebiToba mediumSi xmis
meSveobiT SeiZleba gamovlindes.
katalogis sakvanZo akademiur teqsts ‘akustikuri
omi: lojistikuri miziduloba’ ewodeba. misi
avtori stiv gudmania. man mimoixila akustikuri
omi uZvelesi droidan dRemde. avtori gviyveba
patar-patara istoriebs, aRwers samecniero
aRmoCnebs, teqnologiur inovaciebs da amtkicebs,
rom akustikuri omi sulac araa mxolod Ceni drois
aRmoCena. inovaciebi, romlebic am mimarTulebiT
iqmneba, perversiul azrovnebaze migvaniSnebs,
magram amave dros imasac gvidasturebs, rom am
inovaciis avtorebs didi SemoqmedebiTi potenciali
aqvT. A
’arsenalze’ uamravi saintereso namuSevari iyo
warmodgenili. gamofena londonSi sakmaod kargad
miiRes. damTvalierebeli aRniSnavda eqpoziicis
maRal xarisxs da intrigas, romelic avtorebma
namuSevrebSi Cades. am proeqtis ganxorcielebas
uamravi sirTule axlda: dafinanseba TiTqmis
ar gvqonda, sarisko iyo isic, rom eqspozicia
mxolod axlad Seqmnili namuSevrebisgan Sedgobda,
xolo sxvadasxva xmovani proeqtis ganTavsebas
erT sivrceSi SesaZloa problemebi mohyoloda.
magram vfiqrob, saboloo jamSi, RonisZiebam
warmatebiT Caiara, xolo TqvenTvis misi aRwera
namdvilad Rirda, Tundac imitom, rom warmosaxvaSi
mainc SegZlebodaT gamofenaze warmodgenili
namuSevrebis daTvaliereba.
© elen de mara voCeri, kuratori, mwerali, londoni
8

Nia Roberts
8
WALES AT VENICE
Little did I imagine, back in 1993, when I first visited the Venice Biennale of Art, that ten years later Wales would be represented
at this most unique of Biennales. Following devolution of a National Assembly Government to Wales and a Scottish Parliament
to Scotland in 1999, Wales and Scotland had national representation at Venice for the first time in 2003 and were joined by
Northern Ireland in 2005. In this short time-span all have made a significant impact and established a position on this worldstage,
strengthening and adding diversity to the British presence with its long established, beautiful pavilion in the Giardini.
In Wales the excitement among artists was genuine and palpable when the realization of the opportunity to be chosen to exhibit
in Venice became a reality. There was initial concern in the arts community about the amount of funding required to establish
and run the project. Being a small country, with limited funding available for the arts, the financial commitment needed was
substantial but an equally important factor was the good will and support of the network of galleries and arts organizations
that exist in Wales. As there is very little commercial gallery backing for artists in Wales, the presence at Venice is an important
platform for international recognition and debate.
The Arts Council of Wales took the decision to host the presence at 2003 (through Wales Arts International) with a further
commitment for 2005 and 2007 under its own stewardship. With two Biennales behind us and looking forward to 2007 the
question must surely be now “how can Wales not be at Venice?” and not the sceptical “how can Wales be at Venice?”
The exhibition in 2003 made a huge visual impact during the opening week of the Biennale, with Cerith Wyn Evans’ light
beam from a World War II searchlight sending out morse code messages high into the Venetian night sky. The text, taken from
‘Gweledigaethau y Bardd Cwsc’ (Visions of the Sleeping Bard), a classic from Welsh literature written by Ellis Wynne in 1703,
which was based on Suenos y Discursos (Dreams and Discourses) by Spanish author Francisco de Quevedo written in 1627. In
Ellis Wynne’s book the main character climbs to the top of the highest mountain in Wales so that he is able to view far beyond
his own boundaries using a telescope. He falls asleep and is carried by an angel into space where he looks down at the political
and social order of the world. As Cerith Wyn Evans says “it speaks about the importance of positioning oneself in order to see
beyond the boundaries of the geographical place you are in.”
This work, alongside work by the other exhibiting artists; Bethan Huws, Simon Pope and Paul Seawright, surely announced in
2003 – ‘we are here, full of confidence and looking over our horizons to position ourselves on the world stage’. The challenge,
then, was to follow in 2005 with an exhibition that would speak with an equally confident voice, but without the dazzling visual
spectacle that became a talking point in Venice.
I started working on the project in July 2004, the same day as the Curator for 2005, Karen MacKinnon. We joined Michael Nixon,
the Commissioner for Wales, who had been in post for 2003 and will continue until after the 2007 Biennale. With our small team
established, Karen MacKinnon could concentrate on selecting the artists for the 2005 show, presenting her exhibition proposal
for endorsement by the Wales at Venice Committee in October 2004. She said of the selected artists – Peter Finnemore, Laura
Ford and Paul Granjon: “All of them initially draw you into their work through a sense of humour and play, but beneath this there
are serious concerns – human desire and notions of progress, the use and misuse of power and the complex relationships
between local and global, the personal and political.”
In November 2004, a fourth artist, Bedwyr Williams, was selected as part of the representation in Venice – this time to undertake
a residency, which was a collaboration between Wales at Venice and Cywaith Cymru . Artworks Wales, the national organisation
for public art in Wales. With the artists selected the workload grew like a snowball, culminating in the exhibition opening in
Venice in June 2005, under the collective title of Somewhere Else/Rhywle Arall. All the artists decided to make new work for the
exhibition, which did pose some difficulties, but they all felt that it was worth the extra effort as this could be their only opportunity
to shine on this very special global stage.
The Wales Pavilion in Venice is based on the island of Giudecca – a short vaporetto (waterbus) ride from the main island, or the
Dorsoduro, but a world away from the commercial tourist honey trap that is the central area around San Marco. Based in an
old brewery building (Ex-Birreria) with a beautiful garden at the rear it is our oasis – complete with a supply of wonderful Welsh
drinking water, kindly supplied by Tŷ Nant, a Welsh based company with an Italian owner!
For the lower floor of the Ex-Birreria, Laura Ford, born in Wales but now based in London, created a series of sculptures under
the title Glory Glory. Five of them dressed in forms of nationalistic costume, but all revealing conflicting signs of identity, while
the sixth was a solitary creature named Beast. Half human, half-animal, an emasculated lion figure that drew on images from
hostage videos, where prisoners are treated with extremes of cruelty. Laura’s sculptures are often a mix of animal and human
creations - based on childhood mythology, tv, literature, dreams and nightmares. It’s a mix that shocks but has a strangely
familiar, emotional contact.
In the mezzanine room Paul Granjon, French by birth but now settled in Wales, constructed a robotarium - an artificial, closed
environment for his three robotic creatures. The two largest robots, male and female sexed robots, which consisted of two
aluminium platforms on plastic wheels, roamed around freely in their floor space. They were programmed to find each other at
intervals and when they were both ‘in heat’ mode – they had only one priority task to fulfil: locate the partner and engage in sexual

e v i e w s
intercourse. While these two went about their daily activities the other robot in the space was well and truly trapped. Smartbot
– who was so obviously not smart – lived on a small table top, navigating his space aimlessly, swearing in French and English in a
synthetic human voice when he collided with the table edge, and blinking his long-lashed humanoid eyes. Once drawn into Paul’s
funny, crazy world we soon realize that there is a darker side, where he questions notions of progress and how far technology
should go in a culture obsessed with change.
Located in the garden of the Ex-Birreria, we have another industrial space, which we have named ‘The Green Shed’ because of
the color it is painted inside. It was here that Peter Finnemore presented his three-screen installation video work. Based in his
family home in rural west Wales after periods of study in Scotland and USA, Peter Finnemore makes all his films within his home
and garden, often using friends and family members or even the family pets as characters. His work is bursting with references
from both ‘low’ and ‘high’ culture. His film Potato Eaters for example is a direct reference to Van Gogh’s painting of the same
name – but in the Finnemore world the characters sit around a wobbly kitchen table, dressed in combat gear miming actions to
a popular local folk tune. Peter’s humour belies a deep seriousness and complexity regarding who we are and our very existence
in the world today.
Bedwyr Williams was ‘our man in Venice’ – for 12 weeks he became an intrepid detective, reporter and non-participant observer
on the island of Giudecca. Armed with his trusty camera and laptop he created a book – BASTA (Italian for ‘enough’) about his
experiences and a series of posters linking Wales with Giudecca. Observing the strange, the mundane and the obvious around
him, whilst simultaneously critiquing what he did, he found a very different Venice to the one portrayed in the tourist guides.
Living and working in rural north Wales Bedwyr was recently short-listed for a Beck’s Futures Art Prize and in 2004 was a recipient
of a Paul Hamlyn Foundation Award, the funding enabling him to concentrate fully on his art practice over three years.
Installation in Venice took one month, with the artists going out at various intervals after all the artwork, equipment, materials,
furniture, catalogues and virtually everything else we could think of, was driven over from Wales by Castle Fine Art, and then
shipped by crane boat from Piazzale Roma. Getting things to Venice by post or courier is very expensive and not very easy
logistically so it was important to get as much as possible over in the one trip…..although we did have to send a few bundles of
camouflage netting and various other bits and pieces in the post!
For the opening night we had music from Wales with a very special acoustic performance by Gruff Rhys, lead singer with the
Super Furry Animals and a DJ set by Jakokoyak with Bethan Elfyn and Huw Stephens from Radio 1. Culinary consultants from
Wales had worked with our catering company in Venice and created a menu that was a fusion of Welsh and Italian produce, not
forgetting the Welsh Black Mountain liqueur mixed with Venetian prosecco – a match for the ubiquitous bellini any day!
Over the five months of the Biennale we arranged for art students and young artists from Wales to invigilate the exhibition
alongside our Italian Head Invigilator, Nicoletta Aramu. This gave invaluable experience and an insight into the career world
on which they are embarking. The generous feedback and comments in the visitor book were welcome confirmation that the
exhibition was a success and that 2005 would be another hard act to follow! The work was shown in Wales in the spring of
2006 at Oriel Davies in Newtown – a central location that enabled people from all over Wales, who had not been able to travel
to Venice, to see it.
Our preparations for 2007 have already started. Hannah Firth, Curator at Chapter Gallery in Cardiff, has been appointed as
Curator and is currently undertaking research and studio visits before we announce the artists for the 2007 exhibition in October
2006. Fund-raising is also underway as the Arts Council’s funding has to be matched from other sources including the public
and private sector.
Schemes in Wales, such as the excellent Creative Wales Awards, administered by the Arts Council of Wales and awarded to artists
at significant points in their careers to enable them to develop their artistic practice, are invaluable in ensuring the pool of artistic
talent in Wales has opportunities to explore and push boundaries. These are complemented by artist-run initiatives such as
contemporary temporary art-space provide exhibiting opportunities for emerging artists and recent graduates in their g39 gallery
space in Central Cardiff.
As Anthony Shapland, artist and Director of g39 puts it so well: ‘Why fail at the little things when you can attempt to do the bigger
ones’. Wales might be a small country but it has big ambitions and establishing the presence at the Venice Biennale of Art is an
important step in gaining recognition for our talented artists.
© Nia Roberts, Project Manager, Wales at the Venice Biennale.
8

8
nia robertsi
uelsi
veneciaSi
1993 wels, rodesac pirvelad daveswari veneciis bienales, verc ki warmovidgendi, rom sul raRac aTiode
wlis Semdeg uelsi am unikaluri bienales monawile gaxdeboda. 1999 wels uelsis nacionalur samTavrobo
asambleasa da Sotlandiis parlamentSi ganxorcielebuli cvlilebebis Semdeg, Sotlandia da uelsi pirvelad
warsdgnen damoukidebeli eqspoziciebiT 2003 wlis veneciis bienaleze. 2005 wels maT CrdiloeT irlandiac
SeuerTdaT. sul mcire droSi samive qveyanam msoflios Tanamedrove xelovnebis scenaze Rirseuli
adgili daimkvidra da jardinis britanuli pavilioni kidev ufro mravalferovani da saintereso gaxada.
miuxedavad imisa, rom proeqtis gansaxorcieleblad aucilebeli dafinansebis mopoveba sakmaod rTuli
iyo, uelseli mxatvrebi, bienaleSi monawileobis perspeqtivam, bunebrivia, Zalian gaaxara. patara qveyanaSi,
sadac xelovneba sakmaod mwired finansdeba, galereebis qselisa da sxvadasxva saxelovnebo organizaciebis
Tanadgoma proeqtis warmatebisTvis Zalze mniSvnelovania. uelsSi sakmaod mcirea im komerciuli galereebis
raodenoba, romelTac finansuri mxardaWeris aRmoCena SeuZliaT. amitom veneciis bienaleSi monawileobas
miT ufro didi mniSvneloba eniWeboda. am gziT patara qveynis Tanamedrove xelovneba diskusiis
epicentrSi moxvdeboda da saerTaSoriso aRiarebas moipovebda.
uelsis xelovnebis sabWom 2003 wels da Semdgomac 2005 da 2007 wlebSi veneciaze warsadgeni proeqtis finansuri
uzrunvelyofa (organizacia ‘uelsis saerTaSoriso xelovnebasTan’ erTad) sakuTar Tavze aiRo.
2007 wlis bienales mijnaze, veneciaSi uelseli mxatvrebis ori prezentaciis Semdeg (2003, 2005) skeptikurad
aRaravin kiTxulobs: ‘rogor, uelsi veneciaSi moxvdeba?’. dRes SekiTxva ukve ase JRers: ‘gana Sei-
Zleba, rom uelsi veneciaSi ar iyos?’. 2003 wlis bienales eqspozicia Zlieri vizualuri impulsiT daiwyo.
keriT vin evansma damTvalierebels namuSevari ‘sinaTlis sxivi meore msoflio omidan’ SesTavaza. avtori
didi proJeqtoris saSualebiT veneciis caSi morzes anbaniT mesijs agzavnida. gzavnilSi warmodgenili
iyo uelsis literaturuli klasikis nimuSi, elis vinis mier 1703 wels Semqnili teqsti ‘Gweledigaethau y
Bardd Cw’ (“mZinare bardis xedvebi”), romelic, Tavis mxriv, espaneli avtoris francisko de quvedos nawarmoebs
‘Suenos y Discursos’ (‘sizmrebi da saubrebi’) efuZneboda. elis vinis nawarmoebis mTavari gmiri uelsis
yvelaze maRali mTis mwvervalze adis da teleskopiT horizonts miRma gaxedvas cdilobs. sizmarSi mas
angelozi gamoecxadeba, misi daxmarebiT gmiri caSi adis da msoflios politikur da socialur mowyobas
swored am simaRlidan akvirdeba. keTrin vin evansi TqmiT: ‘misi namuSevari sakuTari poziciis im mniSvnelobaze
migviTiTebs, romelic geografiul sazRvrebs scildeba’. 2003 wels veneciis bienaleze warmodgenili
evansis namuSevari beTan hius, saimon houpis da pol sivraiTis namuSevrebTan erTad amtkicebda: ‘Cven aq
varT, sakuTar TavSi darwmunebulni, horizontis gadalaxva da msoflio scenaze sakuTari adgilis damkvidreba
gvinda’. 2005 wlis bienale kidev erTi nabiji armoCnda uelseli mxatvrebisTvis sakuTar ZalebSi
dasarwmuneblad. Tumca gansakuTrebuli vizualuri efeqtebi, romlebmac 2003 wels didi miTqma-moTqma
gamoiwvia, amjerad aRar gamouyenebiaT.
proeqtze muSaobas 2004 wlis ivlisSi me da 2005 wlis veneciis bienales uelsis eqspoziciis kuratori karen
makkinoni erTsa da imave dRes SevudeqiT. CvenTan erTad iyo maikl niqsonic, romelic 2003 da 2005 w.w. uelsis
eqspoziciis komisari iyo da 2007 welsac imave funqcias Seasrulebs. mas Semdeg, rac Cveni patara gundi Cam

e v i e w s
oyalibda, karen makkinonma mxatvarTa SerCeva daiwyo, 2004 wlis oqtomberSi uelsis veneciis komitetisTvis
warsadgenad. mxatvarTa nusxa ase Camoyalibda: piter finemori, lora fordi da pol granioni. ‘yovel
maTgans sakuTari namuSevrebis samyaroSi SevyavarT, iumorisa da TamaSis sivrceSi, romlis miRmac seriozuli
konteqsti ikiTxeba: adamianTa survilebi, Zalauflebis borotad da adeqvaturad gamoyeneba, progresis
niSnebi, rTuli urTierTdamokidebuleba lokalursa da globalurs, pirovnulsa da politikurs
Soris’. 2004 wels CamoTvlil mxatvrebs meoTxe, bedvir viliamsi daemata, rogorc veneciaSi Wales at Venice,
Cywaith Cymru da Artworks Wales TanamSromlobis safuZvelze Seqmnili sarezidencio programis monawile. mas
Semdeg, rac mxatvarTa kandidaturebi dazustda, samuSaom imata. 2005 wlis ivnisSi veneciis bienalaze gaxsnili
gamofena saerTo saTauriT ‘sadRac sxvagan/’Rhywle Arall’ wina mosamzadebeli procesis kulminaciad
iqca. mxatvrebma namuSevrebi specialurad gamofenisTvis Seqmnes. miuxedavad wina mosamzadebel periodSi
arsebuli problemebisa, maT yvelaferi gaakeTes imisTvis, rom Tanamedrove xelovnebis umniSvnelovanes
scenaze Rirseulad warmdgariyvnen.
uelsis nacionaluri pavilioni kunZul guidekaze mdebareobs. veneciis ZiriTadi turistuli marSrutebi,
romlebic san markos garSemoa Tavmoyrili, aqedan sakmaod Sorsaa. guidekamde kunZul dorsudorodan
patara wylis avtobusi, vaporeto midis. yofili ludsaxarSi fabrika, romlis ukana ezoSic patara
baRi gauSenebiaT, uelsis pavilioni da Cveni oazisia. yofili ludsaxarSis pirvel sarTulze londonSi
mcxovrebma uelselma mxatvarma lora fordma qandakebebis seria ‘dideba, dideba’ gamofina. xuTi skulptura
nacionalur kostumSia gamowyobili, TiToeuli maTgani Sinagani konfliqtis niSnebs atarebs, xolo
meeqvses, sruliad gansxvavebuls, avtorma ‘mxeci’ uwoda. naxevrad cxoveli, naxevrad adamiani, es maskulinuri,
lomisebri figura videoze nanax im mZevals waagavs, romelsac gansakuTrebuli sisatikiT epyrobian.
loras qandakebebi, naxevrad cxovelebi, naxevrad adamianebi, saTaves sabavSvo literaturaSi, satelevizio
miTologiasa da Ramiseul koSmarebSi iReben. es Sokismomgvreli figurebi raRac Zalian nacnobs mogvagoneben
rac maTTan emociur kontaqts aadvilebs.
pol granionis robotariumi ludsaxarSis antresolSia ganlagebuli. poli safrangeTSi daibada da axla
uelsSi cxovrobs. misi robotariumi xelovnuri, Caketili sivrcea, masSi sami roboti binadrobs. ori maTgani
qalsa da mamakacs ganasaxierebs, maT cxadad etyobaT sqesis niSnebi. robotebi aluminis borblebian
platformaze dganan da robotariumSi Tavisuflad gadaadgildebian. drogamoSvebiT isini erTmaneTis
Zebnas iwyeben, pouloben da seqsualur kavSirsac amyareben. sanam pirveli ori erTmaneTs daeZebs, mesame,
‘smartroboti’ (Wkviani roboti), romelic sulac ar aris Wkviani, patara magidis zedapirze cxovrobs, xafangSi
gabmuliviT magidis kideebs aqT iqiT awydeba, grZel, humanoidur wamwamebs axmaxamebs da sinTetikuri
xmiT frangul-inglisurad igineba. rogorc ki polis mier Seqmnil mxiarul, giJur garemoSi Sedixar,
imave wamSi acnobiereb, ra SeiZleba daemarTos kulturas, romelic teqnologiebis ganviTarebis ideiTaa
Sepyrobili. ludsaxarSis baRSi kidev erTi industriuli sivrcea, romelsac kedlebis feris gamo ‘mwavne
farduli’ davarqviT. piter finemorma sam-ekraniani videoinstalacia swored aq gamofina. man ganaTleba
dasavleT uelsSi, SotlandiaSi da amerikaSi miiRo. finemori Tavis filmebs sakuTar saxlsa da baRSi iRebs,
misi gmirebi, misive ojaxis wevrebi da Sinauri cxovelebi arian. finemori ‘dabali’ da ‘maRali’ kulturis
urTierTkavSirs ikvlevs. mis namuSevarSi ‘kartofilis mWamelebi’, romelic van gogis amave saxelwodebis
nawarmoebs exmaureba. jariskacis formebSi gamowyobili gmirebi samzareulos dakonkil magidas Semosxdomian
da uelsuri xalxuri simReris personaJebs baZaven. piteris namuSevrebi, msubuqi, iumoristuli
intonaciis miuxedavad, Cveni Tanadroulobis umniSvnelovanes problemebs exeba: ras niSnavs TviTidenti- menejeri
fikacia, rogor moviZioT Cveni adgili samyaroSi?
bevdir viliamss ‘Cveni kaci veneciaSi’ SevarqviT. 12 kviris manZilze is kunZul guidekaze uSiSari deteqtivis,
reportioris da pasiuri damkvirveblis rols asrulebda. ganuyreli kameriTa da leptopiT SeiaraRebulma
viliamsma wigni ‘basta’ (kmara) da plakatebis seria Seqmna. wignSi avtori kunZulze Tavis cxovrebas
bienalze’
aRwers, xolo plakatebSi guidekasa da uelsis erTmaneTTan dakavSirebas cdilobs.
venecia bedvir viliamsis namuSevrebSi radikalurad gansxvavdeba gzamkvlevebSi aRwerili qalaqisgan. veneciis
gansxvavebuli saxe avtorma garemomcvel realobaze yoveldRiuri dakvirvebebis Sedegad Seqmna.
bedviri, romelic CrdiloeT uelsSi cxovrobs da muSaobs, bekis jildoze BFuture Art Prize-ze iyo wardgenili. veneciis
2004 wels man hemlinis fondis dafinanseba moipova, ramac sami wlis ganmavlobaSi artproeqtebze muSaobis
saSualeba misca. veneciaSi namuSevrebis instalirebas erTi Tve dasWirda. mxatvrebi monacvleobiT
Cadodnen veneciaSi. bolos, namuSevrebi, aRWurviloba, masala, aveji, katalogebi da saerTod yvelaferi ‘uelsi
guidekaze CavitaneT. veneciaSi safosto momsaxureba Zalian Zviria. amitom vcdilobdiT, yoveli Casvlisas
Tan raRac wagveRo, Tumca, safosto momsaxureba mainc dagvWirda. gamofena graf raisis, jguf ‘Super Furry
Animals’-is momRerlis jakokoiakis, radio I-is dijeis beTan elfinisa da hiu stivensis erToblivi akustikuri
perfomansiT gaixsna. uelselma kulinarma, romelic veneciis Sesabamis ofisTan TanamSromlobs,
proeqtis
uelsuri da italiuri samzareulos Zalze saintereso nakrebi SemogvTavaza, uelsuri liqioris Black Mountain-isa
da veneciuri proseqos miqsic Zalian gemrieli aRmoCnda.
2007 wlis bienalesTvis mzadeba ukve dawyebulia. kuratorad kardifis Chapter Gallery–is kuratori hana fri-
Ti dainiSna. uelsis samxatvro sabWo ukve cdilobs moipovos dafinanseba. rogorc galerea ‘g39’-is kuratori
entoni Seplandi ambobs: ‘uelsi patara qveyanaa, magram mas veneciis bienaleze monawileobis ambicia robertsi,
aqvs’. es ki imas niSnavs, rom uelsuri Tanamedrove xelovneba, niWieri axalgazrda mxatvrebi saerTaSoriso
nia
aRiarebis mopovebas SeZleben, rac udavod, Zalian mniSvnelovania. ©
8

86
Georgina Starr, ‘you Stole my Look!’, 1997,
screen print. British Council Collection

Karen Knorr, ‘A Model of Vision’, 1994,
Cibachrome on Aluminium.
British Council Collection
8

88
ПРОцЕСС И ПРАКТИКА, ОжИДАНИЕ И РИСК
ЗЛО И МЕТОД ЕГО ВЫЯВЛЕНИЯ В РАБОТАХ ФРЕНСИСА БЭКОНА
© Carolyn Black, Projects Director for the Forest of Dean
Sculpture Trust. Gloucesterhsire, UK.
Когда вы собираететсь выставлять произведения Public Art на всеобщее обозрение, да еще и в лесу Дина, вам остается полагаться на то, что выбранный
вами художник успеет выполнить работу к сроку. Это похоже нa игру, которая осложняется отсутствием в лесу в всякой инфраструктуры. Любое
общественное мероприятие в лесу Дина связано с риском и ожиданием. В отличие от парка скульптур, где размещаются резиденции, мастерские
и галереи, в этом лесу функционирует лишь эфемерный Dean Sculpture Trust, который ничем подобным не располагает, созданный в 1986 году для
охраны инсталляций ленд-арта в уголке Бичерхаст. В начале века лесное пространство стало заполняться новыми экспозициями. Сегодня это уже
не тихий ландшафт, Бичерхаст очень популярен среди туристов именно благодаря лесу скульптур. С 2000 года Sculpture Trust осуществил множество
проектов, среди них самый значительный в 2002 году Lightshift, (фестиваль света), на котором за неделю побывало 40000 посетителей. Мы еще раз
убедились в интересе публики к лесной экспозиции, а попечители леса – в значении и пользе артистической активности. Органическим продолжением
Lightshift, было другое большое мероприятие Reveal. Необычайный эффект и популярность Lightshift не должно было затмить другое, более скромное
мероприятие, которое в прессе анонсировалось как выставка искусств с участием нескольких художников, предлагавших зрителю новые работы.
Нисколько не умоляя значение Reveal, публика упорно называла его Lightshif-2, настолько ярким и незабываемым было впечатление от первого
фестиваля: от разноцветных лазеров и феерверков, свет которых совершенно затмил вспоминания о неудобствах передвижения в лесу, дорожных
пробках и бюджетных перерасходов. Конечно же, представленные на Reveal работы не противоречили идеи зрелищности, да это и невозмождно в
лесу, где даже свет от чаинной свечи создает необычайный эффект. Работы совершенно соответствовали выставочному пространству концептуально, и
поэтически. В метафорах и визуальных образах отразилась природа этого края, с его красноземом и угольными копями; связь между урбанистическим
и сельским элементами олицетворяли деревья. В работах прослеживалось два направления: Лора Дели и Катайен Доулачах выбрали традиционный
подход, взяв за тему ландшафт и историю края. Натаниэль Раков и Табата Эндрюс создали работы, в которых фронтально противопоставили городской
и сельский ландшафты. Их работы мешают деревьям, они используют деревья как подпоры для конструкций, опутывают их проводами, закрывают
щитами. Табата в своей киноработе минималистскими средствами сумела рассказать о фантастическом и легендарном отношении к лесу: лес как
ворота в неизвестное, деревья – как стражи. Были использованы театральные эффекты, игра со светом – он то мерцал на листве, то врывался
насильником. В сюжете переплелись сказка и история ужасов, некий синтез братьев Гримм и Терминатора. В работе реализовалась попытка заново
показать и рассказать о том таинственном и мистическом, что кроется для нас в лесу.
Натаниэль, напротив, убрал из своего представления все романтическое, вместо мифа он представил маскулинизированный, урбанистический
подход. Работа «наводит» строгий порядок в лесу. Этот порядок «насаждается» светом, который буквально сканирует пространство, его прямые лучи
делят лес на сектора, лес представлен как хаос, в котором жесткая рука наводит урбанистический порядок. Другая работа абсолютно отчуждена от духа
леса – раскаленные провода повисают на деревьях, создавая вокруг них трехмерное цифровое изображение. Деревья заключены в геометрические
фигуры, которые стесняют и подавляют их, рекламный неон навязывает урбанистические формы в естественной среде, абсолютно доминируя над
ней.
© Koka Ramishvili, artist, curator, Geneva
Здесь мудрость. Кто имеет ум, тот сочти число зверя, ибо это число человеческое. (13; 18) Откровение Иоанна.
В этом эссе речь пойдет о некоторых аспектах живописи Френсиса Бэкона (1909-1992) в контексте явлений и событий, характерных для эпохи конца
19-го и середины 20-го века. Что же это за контекст? Во-первых, это доминанта естественно-научной области и материалистического мировоззрения и в
противовес им внедрение определенными кругами и распространение в обществе практики спиритических сеансов с использованием медиумов, что
дало абсолютно противоположный ожидаемому результат, а именно, эти сеансы стали платформой для политического влияния. Во-вторых, возникновение
фотографии и кино, которые освободили живопись от натурализма и иллюстративности, что в свою очередь создало предпосылки для разработки новых
методов творчества и, естественно, для возникновения новых течений в культуре - таких, как: импрессионизм, экспрессионизм, сюрреализм, дадаизм,
кубизм, футуризм и т.д. В-третьих, политические махинации отдельных кругов, преследовавших частные интересы, послужили толчком для первой мировой
войны. Она же в свою очередь создала почву для прихода к власти в России Большевистской партии, которая была поддержана определенными
финансовыми кругами Европы и Америки. В-четвертых, определенными кругами в Европе и в Америке в противовес набиравшему силу молодому
большевистскому государству был поддержан и даже финансирован приход к власти Гитлера. И как следствие этого прихода, начало Второй мировой
войны. Океан крови, страдания и ужаса заполнил все части Европы перехлестывая через её края. Это все, переплетаясь в мощных имагинациях в
буквальном смысле высасывается и вытягивается Бэконом из следующих друг за другом пластов реальности. В искусствоведческой традиции Френсиса
Бэкона принято относить к послевоенному фигуративному экспрессионизму, а также считать одним из самых ярких представителей модернизма. Его
творчество, наподобие увеличительного стекла, фокусирует и выворачивает наружу, подобно демону-гению, всё искажение и драму европейской культуры
20 века и по тайным каналам инстинкта ведёт дальше вниз, во мрак исторического зла. Архив используемых им материалов репродукций и фотографий:
Микеланджело, Рембрандта, Веласкеса, Гойи, Энгра, Ван Гога, Пикассо, Гитлера, Гесса, Вудро Вильсона, Эдварда Мейбриджа и многих других впечатляет
не меньше его живописных работ и дает возможность проникнуть в глубинные и скрытые исторические слои его живописи. В работе “Изучение портрета
Диего Веласкеса Папа Иннокентий Х” отчетливо виден “собирательный метод” Бэкона. Примечательно то, что образ лица с открытым в ярости и отчаянии
ртом, взят из сцены фильма Сергея Эйзенштейна “Броненосец Потёмкин”. А раскрытый рот в яростном экстазе у Гитлера и его поднятые руки, как у
шимпанзе были использованы Бэконом в другом произведении - “Изучение портрета. 1957” из серии пап. Случайное совпадение, инстинктивное
попадание или же… метки, объединяющие инквизицию, НКВД и гестапо? Во всяком случае, на уровне имагинаций это инстинктивное попадание. И это
не фантазия художника и не его субъективное видение. Это те имагинации, которые Бэкон вытягивает в яростном порыве… В своем исследовании
“Гротеск как модус операнди в произведении искусства” Альбина Лейбман-Кликс пишет: “ Искусство Бэкона совершенно удалено от так называемого
наивного реализма, когда старательно изображается реальность, увиденная часто слепыми глазами, без какой-либо попытки проникнуть глубже верхнего
слоя реальности. Искусство Бэкона неиллюстративно – образы на его полотнах выглядят так, как будто они добыты из подсознания, из какого-то другого
мира, или правильнее сказать, они добыты из более глубоких слоёв реальности, в которые он мог проникнуть благодаря своему восприятию. Какие-то
новые сферы открываются художнику, обладающему гротескным восприятием, и тогда он пытается как-то дотянуться до этих сфер, открыв всего себя без
остатка для того, чтобы произошёл процесс коммуникации между им и теми неизвестными мирами, которые открылись ему. Другими словами, художник
добывает свои образы не из области фантазии, а из реальности» …Образ зверя буквально вытягивается из образа папы в работе “Изучение портрета
Диего Веласкеса Папа Иннокентий Х”. Сбрасывая с себя одежду святости, он в дикой ярости предстает перед взором из глубоких слоев реальности …
Власть авторитета подавляет и вконец уничтожает святость. Мелькает Легенда о Великом Инквизиторе Ф. М. Достоевского. Власть Князя мира сего… с
головой большевика-фашиста и с телом облачённое в одеяние папы… «… Кажется, что в следующий момент он выйдет на волю и явится зрителю уже без
заградительной решётки. Бэконовский папа это некий продукт подавленного подсознания, это противное демоническое существо, явившее себя из какихто
глубоких слоёв реальности, скрытыми за верхним слоем реальности. В любой момент демонический призрак может освободить себя из клетки и
явиться зрителю во всей своей пугающей красе. Полосы на Бэконовской работе “Изучение портрета Диего Веласкеса Папа Иннокентий Х” могут
рассматриваться как слои реальности, которые прячут пугающую правду. » Сила работ Бэкона, безусловно, и в том, что логика его “собирательного

метода” в построении образа адекватна историческим событиям, в частности проявления ритма исторического зла. Когда же хотят представить
работы Бэкона, как результат галлюцинаций, то в этом заинтересованы силы, которые хотят скрыть историческое зло. «Достаточно вспомнить о
конкордате, заключенном Гитлером с Ватиканом в 1933 году, и о политической поддержке, полученной им в решающий момент его борьбы за власть
от Католической партии (так называемой партии «центра» ). Или написанная иезуитами и заброшенная ими в 1912 году в Россию антисемитская
фальшивка, ставшая известной под названием «Протоколы сионских мудрецов», которая потом была взята на вооружение нацисткам режимом в
Германии и положена в основании идеологии тотального уничтожения евреев.» Здесь должно быть сказано о своего рода травматическом отношении
Бэкона к религии. Будучи ярым атеистом, он восхищался силой религиозной живописи прошлого, которая в какой-то степени сформировала стиль его
картин. Распятие, по его словам было «магической арматурой, на которую можно было повесить разного рода чувства и сенсации». Его постоянное
возвращение к теме распятия гипнотизирует. Но то что он вешает на «магическую арматуру» становиться полностью противоположным образу Христа.
Тело Бэкона не воскресало, а низвергалось до плоти, зачастую до мертвой плоти, где кровь сгущалась до твердого вещества. Бэкон считал, что
утрачена вера в воскресение, какая была у Дюрера и Веласкеса. Единственное, что предпринимает Бэкон как противодействие силам смерти, это
анимализация. Бэкон открыто говорит, что человек - это зверь. В его работах прослеживается трансформация тела человека: зубы из рентгеновских
снимков становятся клыками, а ноги превращаются в лапы зверя. Другая история с внедрением в западную культуру медиумов и так называемых
спиритических сеансов с феноменом материализации также коснулась творчества Бэкона. Он в довольно резкой форме высказался о своём интересе
к этому феномену, пояснив, что его привлекает лишь визуальная сторона, а именно фотографии Альберта фон Шренк-Нотцинга, который запечатлел
на фотографиях создание так называемой эктоплазмы (феномен материализации) во время медиумических сеансов. Здесь не будет оспариваться
правдоподобность этих фотографий, которые по сути довольно сомнительные. Важно то, что феномен материализации невидимых сил и соотношений
сил повлиял на творчество Бэкона. Что же касается фотографий Альберта фон Шренк-Нотцинга с феноменом материализации то Бэкон в какой-то мере
был под влиянием этих фотографий, о чем свидетельствует появление в его работах сильно экспрессивных мазков очень напоминающих эктоплазму
на фотографиях и отличающихся от общего настроения. Может, Бэкон хотел уподобиться медиуму и прорваться в другие пласты реальности. Во всяком
случае его метод довольно схож с медиумическим состоянием, если также учитывать, что он как экспрессионист добивался появления формообразования
имагинаций путем размежевания себя самого с объектом. Здесь к месту было бы привести высказывание Хайнца Демиша, исследователя
современного искусства, о возникновении имагинаций у экспрессивно творящих художников. Ван Гог был одним из них, и он же занимает особое
место в творчестве Бэкона. В экспрессионизме художественная имагинация возникает путем сознательно или бессознательного усилия, возрастания
определенных элементов зримого явления по преимуществу цвета и формы. В душевном пламени, вспыхивающем у художника, начинают пылать
краски, картины, достигая силы выражения незнаемой уже веками. Винсент Ван Гог, первый проложивший дорогу будущим красочным имагинациям
экспрессионизма не раз писал об этом творческом процессе своему брату Тео .( письмо 504 из Арле в 1888 году) В связи со сказанным выше
необходимо охарактеризовать также метод работы сюрреалистов, тем более, что Бэкона иногда называют и сюрреалистом. Метод сюрреалистов
состоит в намеренном создании художником «пустого сознания» и погашении сознания «я» интровертным усилием воли, это даёт возможность тому,
что лежит по ту сторону сознания, а именно в подсознании, выйти наружу в виде визионерских образов, которые потом художник сюрреалист должен
запечатлеть в выбранном стиле. Можно предположить, что у Бекона эти два процесса, а именно погашении сознания «я» интровертным усилием воли
и процесса творения, были слиты как бы в единый порыв. Здесь также необходимо указать, что образ жизни, который вел Бэкон, формировал
направление и цели для этого порыва и притягивал тот род имагинаций, которые свойственны этим целям. Эти и другие вопросы, касающиеся метода
и участия сознания в его формировании, сложны и спорны. Поэтому главным в рассмотрении нашего вопроса является указание на то, что является
несомненным свойством новой эпохи и явилась тенденция изменить сознание, так как многие аспекты бытия и творчества уже не могли быть
прочитаны обычным сознанием. Ниже дается одно из описаний Бэконом процесса своего творчества. Это описание подводит нас к некой субстанции,
которая имеет материальный аспект и даже чрезмерную материальность и, следовательно, гравитацию, очень свойственную работам Бэкона. В
своём интервью с искусствоведом Давидом Сильвестером Бэкон говорит о странном феномене, участвующем в процессе создания произведения
искусства. Бэкон описывает его следующим образом: “Кажется, что не ты делаешь картину, но картина делает саму себя через тебя”. Существует чтото,
какая-то субстанция (мы не знаем её имени), которая участвует в процессе создания картины. Кажется, что эта субстанция имеет своё собственное
существование, независимое от воли художника, но тесно связанное с его восприятием. Бэкон говорит об этом следующее: “Ты знаешь, в моём
случае образ, который возникает на картине, это случайность – и чем старше я становлюсь, тем сильнее это выражается. Так получается, что я
предвижу это в голове, я предвижу это, и тем не менее я едва ли могу выразить то, что я предвижу. Никогда никем не было ещё изучено, отчего такой
способ написания картин более острый, чем иллюстрация. Я думаю, что это оттого, что картина имеет свою самостоятельную жизнь. Она живёт
полностью самостоятельно и поэтому передаёт суть образа более остро. Поэтому художник лишь должен быть способным открыться, или наверное
будет правильнее сказать, открыть шлюзы своих чувств, и поэтому он возвращает увиденное к жизни более яростно”. «Предметом живописи Бэкона,
по Делёзу, являются силы и соотношения, противодействующин не только живописным и фигуративным клише, но и самим силам внутри картины,
таким, как пространство-тело. «Метки» в его последних работах зачастую превращаются в стрелки, похожие на обозначения вектора приложения сил
как живописных, так и витальных действующих в формировании изображаемого тела и пространства.» Которое в свою очередь либо сдерживает, либо
раскручивает тело в пространстве. Как сказал однажды сам Бэкон: «… я не знаю, что делать с фоном за фигурой или портретом ». Может быть, поэтому
его фоны - это не совсем законченные структуры-клетки. Удивительным образом эти камеры-клетки, созданные Бэконом нанесением прямых линий
на полотне, сдерживают и структурируют волевые изгибы извивающихся и орущих тел. Это противостояние пространства-тела внутри картины является
в то же время и формообразующей силой. Опираясь на сказанное выше о методе Бэкона и других художников времен модернизма, в частности
сюрреализма и экспрессионизма, можно сказать, что, несмотря на разные подходы, видна обшая тенденция - выйти за рамки обычного сознания.
Такой подход был свойствен новой живописи и скульптуре после отхода от природы как модели. Согласно чеканной формулировке Поля Клее, искусство
вовсе не воспроизводит нечто, просто зримое; искусство делает зримым нечто, без него незримое. Несмотря на всю противоречивость, пример
Френсиса Бэкона ставит живопись на следующую более высокую иерархическую ступень - она становится мощным средством визуализации и
материализации невидимых не-физических процессов. Рентген, радиография и другие современные методы диагностики, использующие механический
или цифровой аппарат, показывают только физические субстанции, скрытые от глаз человека, живопись же имеет возможность показать то, что не
находиться в физическом мире. Несомненным достоинством живописи как рода искусства сегодня является и то, что она сохраняет процессуальность
и полное (и физическое и духовное) участие человека в творческом процессе. И если мы будем рассматривать работы Френсиса Бэкона в этом ключе,
то мы имеем возможность в мощных имагинациях увидеть и познать то зло, которое заколдованно и скрыто в эпохе, в событиях и в людях. Выявление
же этих имагинаций стало возможным только благодаря изменению сознания. И модернизм явился и является важнейшей платформой для этого.
8

0
ИСКУССТВО И РИСК
© Nathaniel McBride, writer, translator, London
В Грузии я пробыл немногим более двух недель и поэтому не берусь судить с обстоятельностью знатока об изобразительном искусстве этой страны,
особенно перед аудиторией, которая гораздо более информирована об этом. Такой поверхностный обзор по-моему лишен смысла, также невозможно,
по-моему, судить о современном грузинском арте, сравнивая его с британским, как я намеревался, берясь за статью, ввиду выраженных различий
между этими арт-сценами. Учитывая все это я решил рассмотреть один конкретный аспект, отсутствие которогов грузинском искусстве меня удивило.
Я хочу оговориться, что в статье я коснусь творчества лишь нескольких грузинских художников. Я начну с Гурама цибахашвили, род. 1960. Творчество
этого художника хорошо отразило все три этапа развития грузинского изобразительного искусства последних двадцати лет. Первый этап – осторожный
оптимизм конца 80-ых, созвучный с нео-эксперессионизмом «10-тый»Этаж», который сменился в середине 90-ых неожиданным разочарованием
(кстати, явившемся инспирацией взлета концептуализма в этот период), а в начале 3-его тыс. наступает этап растущей адаптацией к новой реальности,
которая находит отражение в перфомансах, ставших доминирующей формой арта этих лет. Надо тут же отметить, что не все художники следовали этой
прогрессии, она в какй-то мере субъективна, как и все попытки, что-то обозначить, формализовать. Например, работы Мамуки Джапаридзе, род 1962,
всего этого периода остаются более или менее оптимистическими, акцент прерносится на поиск чего-то исключительного. Олег Тищенко (род 1956)
упорствует в своем глубоком разочаровании, его несчастные карлики сохраняют повелительную мину во многом напоминая Веласкевсовских, и как-
будто говорят, все великое в искусстве уже создано и сегодня мы вынуждены удовлетворяться его китчевым пародированием. И все-таки, я думаю,
что этапность творчества, прослеженная мною на примере Г.цибахашвили, отражает тенденции развития современного грузинского арта. В серии
Г.цибахашвили «Улис» (1989 г) многочисленные фотоснимки, сделанные за время долгих и бесцельных хождений по улицам Тбилиси, чередуются с
выборками из произведений Джеймса Джойса. В этом образчике «осторожного оптимизма» связь текста непрямая и даже таинственная с ущербным
урбанистическим пейзажем создает некую иммонентность, которая обещает выдать нечто совершенно новое из недр лоскутной реальности. Текст
Джойса здесь также важен как и собственно образы, которые прихотливо, хотя и абсолютно оправдано на мой взгляд рождают параллели между
колониальным Дублином 1904 года и Тбилиси 1989 года. В его следующей работе «Определения» (1997-98 и 2000 гг) мы снова видим рядом с
образами текст, но здесь образы повествуют окрахе оптимизма и всеобщем разочаровании. Серия состоит из фотографий, найденных или собранных
по разным семейным альбомам. Из фотографий вырезаны фрагменты, например ключ, шляпа, пропеллер и т.д., а вместо них вставлены лексические
пояснения. Такой лексографический текст заменяет овествовательный, а резонерство Джойсовского роман раскрывается через словарную тафтологию.
Такая блокировка герменевтического пространства, постоянный прернос акцента с изображения на текст и обратно создает ощущение новой
реальности, которая, сталкиваясь со своей разъясненной сутью, погибает сама в себе. В «Масках» (2004 г) мы видим уже измененное отношение
к действительности – попытку исследовать епредвзято, хотя бы часть этой новой реальности. Тут цветная пленка заменяет черно-белую и текстовой
аккомпанемент исчезает. Образ более не нуждается в комментариях, так как он ничего не скрывает, ......, кроме лица объекта. На это раз образы
не прячутся и не боятся проговориться, и серия не отражает всего лишь последовательности ряда лиц на фоне искомого социального знаменателя.
Фотограф входит с улицы в помещение, где персонажи позируют среди интерьера для портрета. Это скорее автопородия, замечена новая форма
отчуждения – модная маска: люди не есть то, чем они кажутся, они рядятся в маски, как в модный аксесуар, это передано ....глянцем фотографий,
подчеркнутой эстетизацией персонажей и фотопространством. Выбор маски не случаен, она олицетворяет отношение к действительности, маски
отчуждены от хозяев, хозяева общаются посредством масок – новая реальность как будто не оставляет людям иного выхода, как стильно носить
свою отчужденность. Почему оказались последние серии Г.цибахашвили менне успешны, чем первые две? Я хочу сравнить его последние серии с
работами украинсого фотографа Бориса Михайлова (1938) и подчеркнуть один аспект у Г.цибахашвили. Это отказ от улицы, социального пространства
и уход в приватную атмосферу квартиры. Во время нашей беседы Г.цибахашвили сказал, что не одобряет последних работ Михайлова, хотя ранними
его сериями он восторгался, объясняя это эмиграцией украинского фотографа на Запад. Меня чрезвычайно заинтересовали его слова, еще раз
поразило фундаментальное различие между Востоком и Западом. То, чтол не понравилось Г.цибахашвили в эмигрантских сериях почтенного маэстро,
мне показалось, напротив, прорывом в его творчестве, особенно его работа «Исторя случаев» (1997 г), где показана жизнь беждомных в его родном
городе Харькове, как будто вернулась разруха эпохи перестройки. Уже не слышны ностальгические ноты, в работе нет и следа, характерных для его
поздних советских произведений лирической ностальгии. Там, где Г.цибахашвили усмотрел коммерциализацию творчества (посткоммунистический
протест и показ деградации, долженствующий удовлетворять западный вкус), я вижу пронзительную прямоту передачи человеческого страдания,
которая невозможна без некоторого отчуждения. Михайлов хорошо это знает и понимает, что нельзя приукрашивать отношение к теме собственного
творчества. Он передает это в работах, помечая негативным индексом все, что неприемлемо в новой действительности.
ОДРИ БАРТИС (ОБ) И АЛЕКСИС ПАПАЗАКАРИЯ (АП) БЕСЕДУюТ О РЭЧЕЛ ВАйТРИД В БРюССЕЛЕ, ИюЛь 2006Г.
АП: Рэчел испытывает сильное воздействие уже созданных работ и традиций,но она никого и никогда не повторяет, ее концепции всегда оригинальны.
Я хотел бы проследить влияние одной из работ Брюса Наумана, где он манипулирует пространством, остающимся вне восприятия зрителя. Это
делают и Вайтрид, и Гордон Матта-Кларк.
ОБ: Связь Рэчел и Гордона Кларка особенно видна в их отношении к дому. Дом-жилье, психологический ящик, ассоциированный с персоной, с семьей.
Их роднит сказанное Гордоном Кларком: « …сделать пространство выразителем своего душевного состояния, мироощущения». Самое интересное в
работах Вайтрид- ее умение передать пустоту материально, показать то , что увидеть невозможно и сделать доступным недоступное.
АП: Они оба кастрируют восприятие пространства, но Рэчел делает это прямо. Окаменелость, застывший гипс, туда не войти, можно увидеть, потрогать,
но проникнуть в него невозможно. Например, «Дом» Рэчел, нормальный с виду дом среди себе подобных, но вдруг ты обнаруживаешь, что он
– сплошная бетонная глыба, от крыши до основания, это похоже на могилу, на ископаемое. Смотришь на него, очень похоже на твой дом, но это
бетонное ничто способно ввергнуть в шок.
ОБ: Это как будто противостояние. У Гордона Кларка есть схожая работа: дом в американском пригороде для среднего класса, где все дома похожи
друг на друга. Стоит дом, аккуратно распиленный пополам. Это меняет твой взгляд на собственный дом, далее ты впадаешь в крайность, но слегка и
ненадолго – ведь в Лондоне никого не пилят и не заливают бетоном.
АП: (смеясь) Конечно, нет
ОБ: Но интереснее всего отношение людей к этим работам, оно похоже на отношение к существам из реторты алхимика: этих монстров следовало
уничтожать сразу же, как только они оживали. Так поступили и с этими домами – их убили, потому что невозможно было смотреть на них, ужиться
с ними. То, что интригует меня более всего в творчестве Вайтрид - ее шокирующее умение рвать связи с реальностью, менять отношение к ней.
Сломан и «Дом» Рэчел, но он успел принести ей славу лучшего британского художника, ее признали и официальные институции от искусства, появилась
надежда, что ее работы вернут в социальную среду, но воспротивились общественные структуры. Создается впечатление, внешний мир пытаются
оградить от работ Р.В. Это инстинктивный акт, можно сказать, что и они не знали, что с ними делать и решились показать, хотя понимали, что без шума
не обойтись.
АП Понимаю, хотя работы РВ беззвучны, они не молчат. Это одна из ее сильных сторон. Ее окаменелые работы не говорят, но они и не молчат – это

как разговор молчанием, немая речь.
ОБ: Очень глубокомысленно…
АП: На этом уровне человеческое восприятие почти универсально.
ОБ: Это очень важно потому, что сама по себе идея – распилить дом и залить его бетоном – проста: просто создать пустоту, просто ее заполнить. Эта
простота опасна для человеческого ума, она доступна, и она может изменить реальность. Человеческое восприятие изменчиво: можно почувствовать
пустоту своего тела, или относительную его пустоту, очень интересный контакт с материей – ты знал, что нечто было пустым, а сейчас оно полно…
ощущаешь необычную тяжесть своего тела, и в то же время отчужден от него. Именно таковы мои ощущения от работ Р.В. более того, я даже ощущаю,
как вибрируют мои кости. И, вообще, я ощущаю свою «материю»
АП: Да, невозможно устоять против вторжения бетонного пространства, этой застывшей пустоты. Мне вспоминается «дом привидений», таково и было
намерение Вайтрид – вызвать в нас желание войти в эту пустоту, пытаться вновь и вновь проникнуть в окаменелость. Странности нашего сознания
– через необычное осознавать обычные наши восприятия.
ОБ: А так как это не только восприятие, но и бытие, то..
АП: Это восприятие бытия. Можно почувствовать пустоту, но она сразу же и заполнится – ведь ты ее почувствовал… танцовщики так, и работают, на
счет
«1 ,2, 3, 4» они должны почувствовать движения. Это очень важно, это путь к пониманию мироздания: пустота и материя, материя и пустота, связь
между ними, и вдруг, кто – то прерывает этот процесс, это – как кастрация, насилие.
ОБ: Ты говоришь, о кастрации и насилии, т. е. о стерилизации: стерильный и неизменный, но после того, как что – то отрежешь, видишь то, чего раньше
не было видно, пожалуй, мы имеем дело с негативом…
АП: Само слово – негатив, но не концепт
ОБ: Кастрирована возможность быть в пространстве, войти в пространство, дышать в нем еще и потому, что оно совершенно заполнено, так забито,
что, если бы ты в нем очутился, тебе несдобровать, а потом – ах, ах… Мы бы разбились, исчезли…
АП: В истории много раз так случалось…Помпея…Позитив кастрации в том, что это наилучший способ понять, что ты потерял. Начинаешь дорожить тем,
что потерял, для меня работы Р. В. тем и дороги, что при всей их мрачности они позитивны, в этом их красота.
ОБ: Понимаю, ты имеешь в виду меланхолию.
АП: Не столько меланхолию...
ОБ: ДА, но когда страдаешь от потери
АП: Но ведь это не личная потеря
ОБ: Нет, конечно, но в работах Р. В. есть определенная меланхолия. Например, книги. Но можем ли мы утверждать, что происходит эманация
утраченного? Когда мы говорим о негативе и позитиве, мы подразумеваем фото – контекст: то, что просто разглядеть, а что - нет…негатив и позитив
одного предмета , зафиксированный одним объектом. Так что, можно согласиться с тем, что ее работы позитивны.
АП: Согласна
ОБ: Ты знаешь, я беседовал со многими архитекторами, они говорят , что архитектура - не построение, а сотворение пространства ( смеется ) , т. е.
искусство создания пустоты, ограничения пространства
АП: Именно так
ОБ: А строительное искусство - это поиск новых путей освоения и осознания пространства, т. о. Лицезреть первозданную красоту пространства
можно, лишь разрушив строение. И это сторона позитивная, т. к. в несуществовании лестницы я могу увидеть красоту.
АП: Лестница – идеальный пример для предложенной тобой концепции архитектуры. Возьмем архитектора, который возводит обычный жилой дом.
Лестница – пассаж, на ней долго не простоишь, на ней и не надо долго стоять , она предназначена для движения . Архитектор создает пространство
посредством его ограничения, т . е . проектирует лестницы стены, крышу .
Р. В. создает пространство, не нуждаясь в границах, лестница появляется в ее поздних работах, когда она уже вполне «владеет» пустотой.
ОБ: Она превратила пространство в объект и сместила его с привычного места, вызвав возмущение среды, кстати, это свойство ее работ не позволяет
долго их замалчивать. Вспомним «Лестницу в подвал», которая провалилась, но никуда не падает, она остается в пространстве как живой, пластичный
объект
АП: Да, совершенно
ОБ: Ричард Нонас, творчеством которого я занимаюсь, тоже располагает детали архитектуры в пространстве, его углы вызывают в нашем мозгу
образы недостающих частей строения. Вайтрид тоже использует углы как символ двух стен, как знак существования и другой архитектуры.
АП: Или другой возможности…
ОБ: Да, потому что в архитектуре присутствует виртуальное. Например, те же лестницы: они спускаются сверху вниз, олицетворяя реальность и
виртуальность одновременно. Напрашивается сравнение с привидением, которое мы видим, хотя оно не существует, и по этой причине его не должно
быть видно, но, однако, оно зримо настолько, что его можно коснуться. Подобную архитектуру мы встречаем всюду, она реальна и конкретна, ее же
мы видим и в музее, и в галерее. Например, Ричард Нонас кладет на пол выставочного зала камень или железную деталь, место которой обычно
на крыше – и что происходит? Мы представляем и стены, и крышу, и каждую деталь на крыше.
АП: Вайтрид идет дальше, она восстанавливает твое настроение и поведение во времени и в пространстве, вызывая тебя на откровенный диалог
с самим собой
ОБ: Как Пруст
АП: Да, но Пруст более конкретен, хотя и оставляет почти неограниченную свободу в представлениях и ощущениях, да и невозможно ограничить
человеческое воображение.
АП: Я часто повторяю, если хочешь разбиться об стену, иди и расшибись – полегчает, хотя и ненадолго.
ОБ: Это надо делать, чтобы сделать.
АП: Только сделай шаг. Думаю, наша стерилизованная натура не дает заявить о себе некоторым нашим потребностям
ОБ: Да, это внутренний голос, которого не слышно вовне.
АП: И, как всякий назойливый голос, он царапает тебя изнутри, но вот он замолк, и ты – руина ОБ Мозг потихоньку разрушается и нужен шок.
Потому и актуально творчество Вайтрид: оно взрывает все вокруг, оно само – взрыв, хотя Р. В. «кладет» ровно столько материи в свои
работы, чтобы не взорвалось, но иногда взрыва не избежать.
Объекты в ее работах выполнены безукоризненно – это отдельная тема для обсуждения – спокойные и аккуратные, точные и четкие
– они само совершенство.

ИСЧЕЗНУВШИЕ ГРАНИцЫ И ДОМАШНЕЕ ХОЗЯйСТВО © Anthea Nicholson, artist and writer, Bristol.
Давние, плодотворные контакты британских и кавказских художников - наглядный пример того, что творческий диалог не считается ни с политическими,
ни с культурными и ни с языковыми различиями. Эти контакты зародились в 1992 году в Бристоле во время первой выставки работ грузинских
художников в галерее Арнольфини. Прошедшие годы вместили многое: людей, отношения, искусство, реализованные проекты и несбывшиеся планы.
Этот сложный клубок пронизан и моим личным чувством: грузинский художник Мамука Джапаридзе, мой партнер в жизни, а порой и в искусстве, и есть
тот фактор, который движет нашими перемещениями из моей родной Британии в его Грузию и по всему остальному свету. Художники сегодня похожи
на некие глобальные номады, мы принадлежим к тому неутомимому племени, которое перемещается с воркшопа на воркшоп, из города в город,
из культуры в культуру. Нас трудно озадачить, а импульс чужбины зачастую подводит художника к поворотному моменту в творчестве, мы ждем таких
моментов с волнением и пользуемся случаем для того, чтобы создать их. В этом контексте Тбилиси стал для меня пробным камнем, как и Бристоль,
Лондон, Калькутта, Ереван, Баку, Белфаст, Лос-Анжелес, Москва, Париж, Тайпеи. Список можно длить вечно: от больших городов к малым, от пустыни до
морского побережья. При всей разнице между ними, человек, по-моему, может чувствовать себя дома всюду, если дело, которым он занят, превратится
для него в хозяйствование. В Британии многими арт-практика так и воспринимается - хозяйствование такого рода, когда границы между искусством
и банальной повседневностью тают. Это состояние художника, который творит, находясь в гуще общественной жизни, связан с ней так плотно, что
порой не разобрать – это арт или социальная практика, творческое состояние или курс лечения. Отсутствие критериев и границ делают работу еще
интересней, главное, отозваться на призыв и оставаться в контексте, .каким бы он не был. Мы с Мамукой 12 лет занимаемся хозяйством среди
тающих границ. Совместных работ было не так уж много, но их отличала связь с контекстом, легкое касание к материалу и поэтичность ассоциаций...
Сотрудничать в искусстве с партнером нелегко, поэтому чаще мы с Мамукой идем каждый своим путем и в жизни и в творчестве, без обоюдного
доверия это невозможно. У нас, артистов, особое свойство доверять и того же требуем от зрителя, искусство - странное место, где ты обнажен и
хрупок. Мы видим эту незащищенность друг в друге, видим движения души, творчество и слабости. Для нас собраться в каком-нибудь уголке мира,
поставить палатку, приготовить еду и посидеть у костра, обмениваясь пережитым – первейшая потребность, творческая жизнь предлагает новые
версии действительности, из этого контакта рождается энергия искусства. Энергообмен между жизнью и искусством мы хотели показать в работе
«Стол» – совместном проекте с Мамукой Джапаридзе и Брюсом Аланом, моим британским коллегой. В основу легла концепция грузинского застолья,
опоэтизированного древнего ритуала совместной трапезы с тостами и песнями, отражающими его сакральную суть. «Стол» был устроен и накрыт
(в прямом смысле) в Бристольском Зале общин на 100 человек. Гости съехались из разных городов и стран. За несколько месяцев, используя все
возможные связи, мы оповестили наших друзей и коллег о готовящемся «застолье» и положили единственным условием, привезти, или прислать некий
артефакт, который представлял бы гостя и его город или страну за столом. Откликнулось множество наших друзей и знакомых художников, знакомых
наших друзей, мы получили большое количество артефактов в виде предметов, текстов, музыки и фильмов, Финансовой поддержки участникам мы
предложить не могли, но об этом никто и не вспомнил, все были захвачены идеей общего застолья, встреч и интересного времяпрепровождения .100
гостей «Стола» в течение всего вечера общались друг с другом, разглядывали, слушали и смотрели присланные со всего мира репрезентативные факты,
которые лежали на столе, среди приборов и еды, висели на стенах зала, тут же проецировалось видео, шли перфомансы, звучали музыка и тексты.
За трапезой, громкой беседой , песнями и тостами в пространстве , созданном из артефактов, различить грань между искусством и реальной жизнью
было невозможно. В конце вечера, с помощью специально обработанной цианифером бумаги, Мамука снял оттиск со стола, где среди винных пятен
вперемежку лежали остатки еды, столовые принадлежности, артефакты…, следы пиршества, оставленные гостями. После первого «Стола», который и
сегодня остается сильнейшим инспирационным моментом, последовали другие столы и застолья, с другими людьми, многие создали собственные.
Идея взаимопроницаемости жизни и искусства жива и актуальна в мире тающих границ.
ИЗ ЛОНДОНА С ЛюБОВью
Ella Gibs, artist, curator, London
Дорогой LOOP, На фотографии, которую я вам прислала, запечатлена башня, неподалеку от железнодорожного полотна. С тех пор, как я живу в
восточном Лондоне, в Вайтчепеле, я прохожу мимо нее каждый день. Из-за строительства железной дороги она почти заброшена и разрушается.
Несмотря на протесты местных жителей, закрыли вокзал и в Шордиче, видно, предстоят большие перемены. Башня на сваях по-настоящему
инспирирует. К ней ведет дорожка, выложенная камнем, из расщелин растут ромашки, вокруг парк, калитка которого не закрывается и ночью, здесь
хочется посидеть с друзьями, выпить кофе и пива. Однажды я попробовала взобраться на башню и проникнуть внутрь, но без гигантской лестницы
этого было не сделать, я сидела перед ней на лужайке и представляла, как бы мне здесь жилось и работалось. Хорошо бы, кто-нибудь поселился
в этой башне мечты, где нет места неожиданностям. В Ист-Энде много заброшенных зданий, местные власти покупают их и за ненадобностью
консервируют: оплетают колючей проволокой, наглухо забивают оконные проемы, красят такой краской, чтобы невозможно было взобраться по
стенам и ,наконец, устанавливают охранные системы. Все, здание обречено на годы запустения, а рядом могут возводить другое, ведь в Ист-Энде
настоящий строительный бум - устремленные ввысь строительные конструкции и готовящиеся к демонтажу здания превратились в монументы наших
дней. Массовое строительство – символ возрождения, люди селятся и в заброшенных зданиях. Сквоттеры, так их здесь окрестили, взбираются по
стропилам, легко справляются с защитными системами, мастерски разбирают замки и занимают здание. Эти люди удовлетворяют свою насущную
потребность в жилье посредством творческого акта, пусть ненадолго, но они сами выбирают среду обитания, создают пространство и время. И на
Драм-стрит происходит то же: здание Лондонского симфонического оркестра временно обрело свободу в ожидании демонтажа. Но очень скоро
это заброшенное святилище превратилось в театр жизни, огромные залы заняли под художественные мастерские, артистические ателье и студии
звукозаписи. Здесь пик активности, здесь – жизнь. Возможно, это продлится недолго, но сегодня в этом здании рядом с романтическими видениями
прошлого бурлит настоящая жизнь, работает стратегия выживания, общности, альтернативной экономики и страстей. Это похоже на игру и требует
от участников мобильности: надо уметь легко менять места, нестабильность принять за норму, а изменчивость – за благо, импульс и свободу. Надо
искать альтернативные пути существования и понимать, что твой дом там, где ты хорошо себя чувствуешь, а неустроенный быт – не что иное, как
свобода. То, что мы сегодня называем домом, перестало быть местом постоянного проживания, дом может и путешествовать. Судите сами – комнат
с одной кроватью в Ист-Энде стоит 120 фунтов, в Вест-Энде, наверное, вдвое больше. В восточном Лондоне бум собственности – в 2012г. здесь
пройдут Олимпийские Игры. Гигантомания завладела сознанием «больше и лучше» закрывает горизонт. Строительный размах создает риск для
малого бизнеса: на наших глазах исчезли фруктовые и овощные лавки, их место заняли корпорации ,рекламные щиты перекрыли улицы, и человек
превратился в гостя в собственном доме. Заселить временно пустующее здание – значит вдохнуть новую жизнь и в его окрестности, там возникает
подобие рынка, где покупают, продают и обмениваются, зеленые лужайки превращаются в общественный парк, где можно устроить и праздник, и
спонтанную акцию. Тут рождается самая настоящая альтернативная экономика, здесь все дышит жизнью и ничего не происходит по скучному расчету.
По-моему, это и есть истинный оптимизм. Pilot Publishing – совместный наш с Эми Плант проект по спасению маленького природного рая, чтобы
добраться до него, надо перейти мост через речку Ли, и попадаешь в почти не тронутый ландшафт с редкими птицами , растениями и насекомыми.
Этот оазис с уникальной эко-системой передали нам в аренду на 100 лет совсем недавно, а вскоре обнаружилось, что предстоящая Олимпиада его не
минует – по участку пройдет бетонная подъездная дорога к будущему комплексу. Посетите это место в Интернете: в Goodle Earth укажите адрес Manor
Gardening Society, Waterden Roud, London E-15 и перед вами появятся похожие на абстракции земельные участки. В рамках проекта, мы превратили
эту местность в демонстрационное пространство, где учимся выращивать фрукты и овощи, готовим еду, собираемся у костра...

размышляем о том, как спасти эти места во время Олимпийских Игр. У этого пространства есть образовательная функция – здесь можно учиться
искусству существовать. Волны жара накатывают на Ист-Энд. Пространство насыщено энергией взаимодействия прошлого и настоящего, смешения
разных культур, верований, архитектурных стилей, социальных и политических устремлений. Контраст и насыщенность – разительны, в этом есть что-то
карнавальное. В восточном Лондоне много гаперей, можно сказать, они встречаются на каждом шагу, в них кипит артистическая жизнь. Работы в духе
public art , выставляемые в Ист-Энде, соответствуют здешнему духу и отражают актуальные тенденции социальной и культурной жизни. Порой из работ
выстраивается настоящий лабиринт, проходя по которому чувствуешь энергетический прилив и настоящую инспирацию. В 1997-2001г. я руководила
одним местом , под названием Belt,оно находилось в заброшенном здании фабрики по производству поясных ремней на Вайнер – стрит, неподалеку
от бывших текстильных мануфактур, где когда-то трудились рабочие- нелегалы. Маленькое помещение на первом этаже мы превратили в место встреч
самых различных людей: художники , поэты, рок- музыканты регулярно встречались, обедали, беседовали, развлекались спортивными играми,
принося оживление в запустевший дом. Грант мы не получили, зарабатывали, продавая старые вещи, но благодаря проекту, это здание уцелело,
наш энтузиазм сохранил этому месту неприкосновенность. Сегодня Вайнер – стрит – центр лондонского арта. На вернисажах улица заполняется
людьми в черном – галеристы, коллекционеры, гости стекаются сюда в ожидании интересных встреч и новых впечатлений. Среди галерей и ателье
супермаркет Best Way выглядит чужеродным телом, не так давно здесь были маленькие магазины и ремесленные мастерские. На город опустилась
жаркая июльская ночь, в комнатах душно, из окон доносится уличный шум, небо чистое и видны крыши Gherkin Building и Nat West Tower…. Лондон
– игровая площадка, полная возможностей, здесь нельзя не задаться вопросом: что сделать и как сделать? жизнь редко предлагает простые решения,
может быть поэтому стоит перепробовать все, что можно, искать и находить выход из любого положения , вдохнуть в жизнь азарт , энергию, не
бояться принимать решения, искать новое , знакомиться с новыми людьми, идеями. Своими руками создавать свое жизненное пространство, время
и реальность. Претворить в жизнь самые невероятные желания, как , например , те , что рождаются у подножья Башни…
«АРСЕНАЛ: ЗВУК, КАК ОРУжИЕ»
© Ellen Mara De Wachter, curator, London.
В выставке в «Alma Enterprises», в Ист-Энде, с 23 июля по 6 августа участвовали 10 художников. Объектом их исследования стал голос и его возможности
в качестве боевого оружия. Насколько опасно прекрасное, в чем состоит сила и власть голоса и речи, шумы в современной индустриальной
реальности, творят ли ритм и бесконечные повторы тайное насилие? Часть авторов прибегла к историческому контексту, когда голос и его мощь
впрямую действовали как оружие. Другие были осторожней, всего лишь указав на возможности использования голоса в этом плане. Несмотря
на то, что материалом для всех служил голос, участникам удалось добиться четко различимых результатов, и по форме, и по содержанию. До сих
пор в современном арте голос не позиционировался, прима и соло, предпочтение отдавалось визуальным формам. В своих работах на выставке
участники постарались вполне выявить поражающий потенциал голоса, доводя впечатление до аффекта. Все работы были созданы для «Арсенал»-а
, некоторые представили эфемерные акции – перфомансы, другие создали образы и тексты. Часть работ создавалась для экспозиции, часть – для
каталога. Род Дикинсон Nocturn. (The Waco Re/enactment, Sept. 16 2004 (2006) Автор представил новый монтаж снятого в 2004 г. видео. В работе
воссоздана звуковая атака, которой подверглись лидер «Давидовой ветви» Давид Кореш и его последователи в 1997г. ФБР использовало методы
психологической войны против окруженных в здании участников группы. «Бомбардировка» проводилась безостановочным шумом и ослепительным
светом. В воссоздании шумового материала Дикинсону помогли уцелевшие «давидовцы» .Его компоненты: сверлящий звук бор-машины, кроличий
визг, ускоренная поп-музыка, повторы фрагментов переговоров Кореша с агентами ФБР. (в каталог попали фрагменты переговоров). Томас Алтемер
в видео-триптихе « Impossible” описал экспедицию в Гуантанамо Бей в ноябре 2005г. ( параллельная акция-«Вот оно, это невозможно . №3.3.048»
цель экспедиции состояла в акустической атаке тюрьмы Гуантанамо, где пленные годами дожидались суда. Съемочная группа собиралась подплыть
к горе, с которой просматривался лагерь «Дельта» и атаковать его звуками «Героической симфонии» Бетховена. цель – освобождение узников.
Смысл акции сам автор формулировал так: «Мы хотели превратить Гуантанамо в пространственную инсталляцию европейского неоколониализма».
Проблемы и сложности, возникшие при проведении акции, оттенили и акцентировали трагизм и абсурд происходящего на Гуантанамо-Бей. Матин в
«Тезисах шума» задался целью исследовать модификации шума (2006г.) Голос выговаривает полемические афоризмы на фоне разнообразных шумов.
Шум исследуется автором и во временном аспекте – он сравнивает восприятие шума в раннем индустриальном мире и в современном. Еще одна
работа Матина – перфоманс, в котором участвовали легендарный Эдди Превост и член группы» «Рейнольдс» Алан Куртис. Их концерт сопровождался
шумовым оформлением английского музыканта Кулвера. В работе под названием allsopp & weir s soundtrack To the Place or Being in thePlace (2006)
голос подавляет без громких звуков и устрашения. За основу взяты уроки английского языка для не – англоязычной аудитории. Автор передал «роль»
педагога артисту, для которого английский язык чужд. Он пытается подражать педагогу, старательно повторяя слова и фразы, но у него мало что
получается. Подстать настроению и фон – вялые, апатичные кадры городского пейзажа. В другом саундтрэке, который слышен в том же пространстве,
записан голос настоящего преподавателя английского. Контраст между этими звуковыми рядами подчеркивает невозможность, поной ассимиляции
при самом большом желании. Артист из первого саундтрэка пытается сохранить ритм, повторять слова в заданной последовательности, но его
интонации неуверенны, а голос порой и вовсе пропадает. В этой работе голос враждует с идентичностью. Тильман Тербайкен и Томас Болдишвайлер
представили свою работу «Без названия» (2006).Это скульптура в музыкальном оформлении. Аудио-ряд состоит из фрагменов «Вариаций Гольдберга»
Баха в исполнении Глена Гулди (1955г) В саундтрэке передана вся красота музыки Баха, но в то же время акцентируется повтор пассажей, который так
характерен «Вариаций», и, возможно ,создает некоторый дискомфорт для слушателей. «Без названия» намекает на опасность, которая гнездится в самой
прекрасной музыки- совершенство может стать невыносимым для слушателя Разрисованная поверхность скульптуры напоминает облака и это тоже
указывает на изменчивость и неуловимость сути великой музыки. В музыкальном видео жасмин жорд и Мо Строэбе «Прикованность к звуку» (2006) за
основу взята пьеса Ди-джея Коле 9 и поэта Спейсепа «Девять самураев». В эстетике черно-белого контраста авторы показали фантастическую историю
о том, как в научной лаборатории вырастили аудио-виру, и какие последствия это имело для меломанов и для всего общества. В произведении Пабло
Гея главная тема – эстетизация музыкального диссонанса. Он мексиканец, работает в Мехико. Для “»Арсенал» а создал композицию из настоящих и
искусственных голосов. На выставке он играл у порога экспозиционного зала ,приглашая зрителей посетить выставку. Его эссе Music Pissing on Flyes
Shitting on Bombs (2006) знакомит с визуальными возможностями голоса и описывает творческий процесс. Эта работа вошла и в каталог. Джорджо
Агостини в своей работе A text for an exhibitions that regards sound as a weapon (2006) представил монтаж нескольких работ , в которых голос так
или иначе играет роль оружия. Текст передает субъективные ощущения автора. (Специально создано для каталога). Автору важно было подчеркнуть
,что поражающий контекст голоса под силу выразить любой медиа. Показав , как медиум голосом вызывает духов, он не пугал публику- он всего
лишь исследовал и эту возможность голоса. Ключевой академический текст каталога – «Акустическая война: логистическое притяжение», его автор
– Стив Гудман. В обозрение попала вся история акустических войн, с древности и по сегодняшний день Автор рассказывает маленькие истории,
описывает научные открытия, технологические новшества. Стив Гудман утвержлает, что изобретение все новых форм акустической агрессии говорит
о перверсии человеческого мышления и о его большом творческом потенциале. В Лондоне выставку приняли довольно хорошо, зрители отмечали
высокий класс экспозиции, интригу, которую авторы вложили в свои произведения. Осуществление проекта сопровождалось трудностями: почти не
было финансирована, риск был и в самих работах, создаваемых непосредственно к выставке, и то, что в одном помещении надо было разместить
столько звуковых конструкций, не могло не создать проблем. И, все же, мне кажется, проект удался, и выставка прошла с успехом, а описать для вас
это мероприятие стоило хотя бы для того, чтобы вы представили, что там происходило.

peter Nasmyth, ‘Queen’s Birthday‘, Montserrat, 2006, photography

CREATING OPPORTuNITy FOR PEOPLE WORLDWIDE
The British Council is the United Kingdom’s principal agency for cultural
relations with other countries. We were established in 1934 and over 72
years later we have offices in 218 towns and cities in 109 countries.
British Council Georgia have been constantly expanding and they now cover:
support for the learning of English (including military personnel)
support for State Education reform
a collection of books and information from Britain
bringing together British and Georgian art and artists
active encouragement of good governance and respect for human rights in
Georgia
access to British education and qualifications through scholarship
programmes, a paid education placement service and international
examinations activities
ARTS
Artistic innovation, cutting edge creativity, and productions new to Georgia –
we bring it all to your doorstep. We bring top quality artists and performers from
the UK, and at the same time, we contribute to the development of the arts
scene in Georgia. We concentrate on the performing arts, visual arts, design,
film and literature. We believe these areas of arts and creative industries
offer most potential for changing perceptions and building partnerships. Our
current strategy is to work with both the innovative and lead young artists
in Georgia but also to recognise that the established arts scene cannot be
ignored and we need to have a dialogue and interactions with both sides if
the UK’s reputation is to be enhanced. We draw on arts from throughout the
UK.
OuR EVENTS ARE DESIGNED TO STIMuLATE INNOVATION AND CHANGE
IN THE ARTS IN GEORGIA. WE WORK WITH LOCAL PARTNERS WHO ARE
COMMITTED TO SIMILAR AIMS
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
Keep up to date with British Council Georgia’s news and events
http://www.britishcouncil.org/georgia-newsletter-subscribe.htm

6
loop@caucasus.net
www.caucasusbiennale.com