10.09.2015 Views

ARTIFICIAL HELLS

1EOfZcf

1EOfZcf

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

artificial hells<br />

investigated An Event for the Post Office . . . for two months and Knížák<br />

recorded an account of their meeting with the residents in a samizdat newspaper<br />

of that year. 19 While offering an amusing and vivid description of the<br />

discussion, Knížák provides no photographs, and offers no analysis of his<br />

intervention, only a testimony to the diverse responses it solicited. He<br />

reports that about half of the people are ‘not too much against us, and the<br />

rest are totally against us’; infighting between the different factions in the<br />

building (an army major, a mouthy blonde, a teacher, and so on) seems to<br />

predominate. 20 His tone is rather distant and brusque, as if poking fun at the<br />

protagonists. It is clear that the residents failed to understand the artistic<br />

aim of his intervention, focusing on questions of time and money, the anxiety<br />

caused by the packages (they could be bombs), and so on. The text<br />

shows Knížák’s commitment to documenting participant feedback, but it<br />

prompts more questions than it answers. What were his criteria of success<br />

for such a piece? Since none of the participants actually went to the cinema,<br />

did he consider this work to be a failure? Was the conceptual proposition<br />

more important than its actual realisation and consequences? Bereft of<br />

photographic documentation, the work nevertheless stands as an idiosyncratic<br />

combination of aggression, generosity, absurdity, didactics and<br />

provocation. It’s worth recalling that at the time of this performance,<br />

Knížák was still only twenty- six years old.<br />

Alongside these provocations of the anonymous public, Knížák founded a<br />

social organisation in Prague between 1963 and 1971 called the A- Community,<br />

which also had a branch in West Bohemia. ‘A’ stood for ‘Aktual’,<br />

reiterating his Fluxus attachment to the everyday. Under Knížák’s charismatic<br />

leadership, the group explored music, performances, mail art and other ‘necessary<br />

activities’ not always framed as art, and which demanded a maximum<br />

level of personal engagement from the participants. Knížák later described the<br />

A- Community as a group of self- elected people who desired to be different,<br />

and that this was the sole criterion for joining: its basic aspiration was to find<br />

a more vivid, all- encompassing experience of everyday life. (Knížák reports<br />

that ‘drunkenness, drug abuse and sex became burning elements of a wild<br />

asceticism aiming towards the unveiling of the quintessence of experience’. 21 )<br />

Photographs of the A- Community are typical of countercultural gatherings<br />

anywhere in the mid to late 1960s: long hair, flowing clothes, beaming smiles<br />

and musical instruments. The heightened consciousness sought by the A-<br />

Community was not tied to political awakening but to the formation of an<br />

alternative parallel community. Unlike Argentinian actions of the late 1960s<br />

(discussed in Chapter 4), which intended to create a transitive link between<br />

awareness of one’s situation and the desire to change it, Knížák’s primary<br />

concerns were aesthetic rather than political: to change one’s life into art,<br />

rather than changing the system under which you live. From his perspective,<br />

capitalism or communism were irrelevant categories; what mattered was<br />

one’s freedom of perception and experience of the world.<br />

136

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!