Dok budeš ovo čitao
ja te se više neću sećati.
from
English to in Serbian is do
and from is od.
Just as the verbalization of directions
od-do [from-to] create a palindrome, it is
connoting reversed action.
Oddly, in Japanese ‘do’ means a way, a road.
Sunčica Lambić-Fenjčev
2
PROSTORNA REZONANCA
Svaka nova izložba za Galeriju je nova priča, nova relacija, novi izazov, novo
iskustvo...
U prostoru Galerije evociramo neki drugi prostor... U realnom, trodimenzionalnom prostoru, drugi prostor, stvaran ili izmišljeni, inkorporisan je instalacijama,
slikama, fotografijama, video-projekcijama, zvucima, mirisima... Stvarno stojimo u
jednom prostoru, a mislima i emocijama boravimo u drugom.
Prostor Savremene galerije Zrenjanin postoji i egzistira, beo, uglancan, ozbiljan,
svečan („modernistička bela kocka“) nezavisno - sam po sebi, ali i kao deo arhitektonske celine zgrade pozorišta izvedene takođe u pročišćenom i pomalo strogom
klasicističkom stilu na Trgu slobode u okviru živopisnog starog jezgra grada. Takav,
naizgled hladan i nezainteresovan (lep, kako ljudi često kažu), ovaj prostor je razlog
i povod brojnih razmišljanja, interesovanja, diskusija, događanja, čak i konflikata,
različitih viđenja, spolja i iznutra, struktura unutar same institucije, gradske vlasti
kao njenog osnivača (ali nažalost u poslednje vreme ne i blagonaklonog mecene),
srodnih institucija, medija, umetnika, stručnih lica, zainteresovanih posetilaca,
slučajnih prolaznika, kao i suseda iz ustanova i firmi unutar iste zgrade. Prostor
Galerije je istovremeno i centar i deo mnogobrojnih relacija svih ovih činilaca,
umetničkih i neumetničkih (ako se danas uopšte može praviti ovakva razlika),
definisan ponašanjem, delovanjem i mišljenjem ljudi koji su u njemu i koji gravitiraju
oko njega, kao i specifičnim okruženjem u kojem se nalazi. U njemu se ukrštaju javan
i privatan život - javan, opštepoznat, često ušminkan javnim prezentacijama i medijskim izveštavanjima, ali i skrnavljen pojedinačnim, ličnim animozitetima i privatan,
skriven, poznat samo zaposlenima i bliskim saradnicima.
Ipak, ovaj prostor nalazi smisao svog postojanja u funkciji koju svakodnevno
ispunjava. Različite izložbe oživljavaju, redefinišu, osmišljavaju uvek iznova ovaj
prostor u skladu sa intencijama kustosa i umetnika, kao i publike bez koje sve ovo
ne bi možda uopšte imalo smisla. Prostor Galerije je možda na prvi pogled bezličan
i sterilan, ali istovremeno je i povlašćeni prostor čiji se identitet svaki put ponovo
konstruiše u zavisnosti od događaja i odnosa koji se stvaraju u njemu. Galerija je prostor mogućnosti, prostor fantazije – mesto gde se nešto može dogoditi.
Sunčica Lambić-Fenjčev
3
Formalistička vera u autonomnost umetničkog
dela nije potrajala, pa se već tokom šezdesetih
godina prošlog veka ponovo uspostavlja odnos umetnosti i okruženja u kojem umetničko delo nastaje
i u kojem se prikazuje, a smatra se da značenje ne
može biti u potpunosti oslobođeno od društvenog
konteksta i kulturoloških konotacija. Čak i dela
stvarana potpuno nezavisno od konkretnog
prostora u kojem će biti izlagana stvaraju ambijentalnu celinu sa galerijskim prostorom i dobijaju
mogućnost za uvek novim sagledavanjem, razumevanjem i interpretacijom.
Na izložbi Mirjane Bobe Stojadinović
ko-egzistiraju i prepliću se prostori – galerijski prostor sa prostornim okvirom
Beograd – Roterdam. Ovaj prostorni okvir ujedno je i mentalni, emocionalni okvir
sa društvenim, čak političkim, konotacijama koji je nastao kao lično „osvešćivanje
pozicije“ umetnice, kao umetnika i ličnosti, pozicije koju zauzima iz mesta iz kojeg
potiče (polazi, govori, stoji) u odnosu na uži holandski i širi evropski društveni kontekst.
„Tekstualni rad“ sastoji se od providnih folija zalepljenih na tri galerijska prozora, koja gledaju ka Trgu slobode. Na ovim folijama nalazi se tekstualni opis pogleda
sa neka tri druga prozora u Holandiji. Gledanje kroz prozore Galerije na Trg slobode
i istovremeno čitanje opisa pogleda kroz neke druge prozore na neka druga udaljena
mesta dovodi do psihičkog multiplikovanja prostora koji će u trenutku iščitavanja
teksta i gledanja prizora postojati na istom mestu u isto vreme. Ali, ovde postoji i
jedna lokalna „dobrosusedska“ začkoljica koja može povremeno osujetiti nameru umetnice i realizaciju ovog umetničkog čina – prozori Galerije, inače prilično zatvoreni
i nepristupačni samom svojom konstrukcijom, često su još i spolja zaklonjeni velikim
pokretnim panoom koji je bezobzirno postavljen od strane čuvenog kafe-kluba koji
se nalazi na spratu iste zgrade. Ali, to je već neka druga priča, neka druga relacija. U
suštini, i to može biti primer, iako u negativnom kontekstu, koliko dela savremene
vizuelne umetnosti danas ne mogu postojati i opstajati sama za sebe, već su uvek u
interakciji sa okruženjem i ljudima.
Tekst na folijama ispisan je na engleskom jeziku, koji je drugačiji jezik od jezika
koje umetnica govori i poznaje od rođenja, prema svom poreklu (srpski i bugarski), i
drugačiji od mnogobrojnih jezika sredine u kojoj se ovaj rad izlaže (Zrenjanin, odnosno Vojvodina je multinacionalna, pa time i višejezična sredina), ali istovremeno nije ni
maternji jezik holanđana sa čijih prozora potiče ovaj opis. Engleski jezik možda jeste
(nametnuto) univerzalni jezik, ali on je i jezik stranaca, putnika, ljudi koji su u tranzitu, koji ne pripadaju jednom mestu. Ovaj sudar, preplitanje ili ograničenje koje nastaje
usled korišćenja različitih jezika nije samo formalne prirode. Jezik postaje možda
suštinski element u radu Bobe Mirjane Stojadinović. To je odnos - zvuk različitih
kultura, običaja, ideja, razmišljanja u kojem pronalazimo mnoge sličnosti (sazvučje,
konsonanca), ali i brojne razlike i nesklade (disonanca). Da li je ovde reč o dislociranju, dezorijentaciji, deteritorijalizaciji, o večitom putovanju, tranzitu, traženju,
Sunčica Lambić-Fenjčev
4
bez konačnog odredišta, stalnog mesta boravka, identiteta? Istovremeno, biti svuda,
a zaista nigde. Da li smo onda zaglavljeni u zvuku? Ipak i onda ne možemo izbeći
različita ograničenja i zahteve – pitanja ko smo i odakle smo bitno su određujuća i
teško možemo da se odupremo i prevaziđemo barijere nasleđa jezika, kulture, običaja,
nacije. U svojim radovima Boba Mirjana Stojadinović ujedno preispituje i mesto koje
ostavlja za sobom (tamo) i novo mesto (ovde) kao i njihovu međusobnu interakciju,
problematizuje pozicije insajdera i autsajdera. Mesto porekla distancom dobija na
većem intenzitetu i drugačijem značenju. Istovremeno novo mesto pruža mogućnost
konstruisanja novog, hibridnog identiteta. Lična memorija i zakopana osećanja izviru
u novoj svetlosti. A usamljenost je ono što nas čini ranjivim i daje nam osećanje nostalgije, bez obzira što smo i tamo, odakle smo pošli bili, možda, isto tako usamljeni.
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović nam ovom izložbom pruža uvid u delić svog
osećanja, sećanja i iskustva kroz slike, zvuke, jezik, reči... Prostori i relacije koji se
stvaraju i oživljavaju na izložbi čine od publike aktivnog učesnika i kreatora celokupnog umetničkog događaja, što je takođe važan element u umetničkom radu Bobe
Stojadinović. U tom smislu bitan je i performans „Procep u celini“ koji će biti izveden na izložbi. Uz video projekciju umetnica će čitati tekst koji će poprimiti oblik
obraćanja i razgovora sa publikom i istovremeno učiniti od publike integrativni deo
umetničkog rada. Izložba u Savremenoj galeriji Zrenjanin jeste nova mogućnost za
stvaranje novog iskustva. Mogućnost za novo sagledavanje i preispitivanje radova u
celini u novom, drugačijem prostoru, njihovog odnosa sa samim prostorom i publikom, kao i međusobnog uzajamnog odnosa ovih radova u stvaranju i podeli novih
iskustava, stavova i emocija. Izložba pruža mogućnost za odlazak na neko drugo
mesto, u neku drugu sredinu, sa drugačijim pogledima, razmišljanjima, životom i
mogućnost za povratak u sopstveni prostor, u sopstveni život koji dobija šansu da se
sagleda i iz nekog drugačijeg ugla u svetlu novih relacija koje smo doživeli i kreirali na
ovoj izložbi.
Želimo Vam prijatno putovanje!
Sunčica Lambić – Fenjčev, kustoskinja izložbe
Zrenjanin, maj 2010.
ODA PRODŽESİ
5
Da li možemo da napravimo haolog?
“Odlučile smo da se prema “publici” odnosimo kao prema gostima,
pokušavajući da izbegnemo pasivnost koja se podrazumeva u ulozi
publike, kao i objektivizirajući nameru
da se ovaj događaj realizuje – sa/za goste.”
Iz projekta HOTEL NJUJORK, tekst Bobe Mirjane Stojadinović
“misafir umduğunu değil, bulduğunu yer”.
„Gost ne može da bude izbirljiv, on/ona mora da prihvati kakvogod se gostoprimstvo ponudi.“
Približni prevod anadolijske izreke
Vraćajući se stanu – prostoru u našem komšiluku. Potpune
dimenzije su 45m2. Tri sobe; sve su otvorene jedna prema
drugoj i sve sobe gledaju ka unutrašnjem dvorištu koje okružuju
šestospratne zgrade. Unutrašnje dvorište vodi ka pasažu gde je s
jedne strane duga ulica koja je užurbana 24 sata, a drugi izlaz ide
do trga gde je kula na sredini.
Kakvi modeli odnosa mogu da postoje u takvoj okolini?
Jedna mogućnost; zamisli da se vratimo na to mesto; soba
u sredini počinje da priča o sebi. Onda druge dve sobe počinju
dijalog među sobom dok se soba u sredini pridružuje. Dvorište
želi da dođe do izražaja, ali mu treba doprinos i pasaža, ulice,
čak i trga. Svako mesto počinje da biva prostor u trenutku u
kome ti prepoznaš da se dešava haolog. Ako je dijalog razgovor
između dvoje ili više ljudi, to je manje-više pozicija publike;
onda je „haolog“ trenutno prepoznat neprekinut razgovor
između gradskih komponenti (ljudi, kola, kuća, životinja,
drveća, vetra...) koji ionako postoji, ali se identifikuje kome god
želi da ga sluša; razgovor treba da se održi u javnim prostorima
ili privatnim prostorima koji se tretiraju kao javni prostori. Tako
je dijalog ono što može da se desi ili se verovatno dešava između
umetničkog rada i publike. Tu gde se zamišlja da haolog treba
da se desi ti treba da budeš više od publike; ujedno sakupljač i
distributer rada.
Iskustvo Ode Projesi [1] u različitim mestima tera članove
grupe da razmišljaju o takozvanoj publici procesa i proizvoda od
trenutka kada članovi odluče da otvore prostore svojih privatnih
ateljea „publici“. Prostor i naši odnosi nisu imali publiku, već
goste i komšije pre 2000. godine. Strategije i taktike su počele
da se uobličavaju sa pojavljivanjem „publike“; pre nego što smo
[1] Oda Prodžesi (Oda Projesi) je
umetnička grupa koja je bazirana u
Istanbulu. Ona se sastoji od tri člana (Ozge
Ačikol/Özge Açıkkol, Guneš Savaš/Güneş
Savaş i Sečil Jersel/Seçil Yersel) koje su
transformisale njihovu dugotrajnu saradnju
u umetnički projekat 2000.g. Članice
projekta su se srele 1997.g. i odlučile su
da iznajme i dele stan kao atelje. Iako
inicijalno nenamerno, stan koji su iznajmile
u Galati (deo Istanbula, prim. prev.) se
vremenom razvio u višenamenski i javni
prostor. Tokom 5 godina one su koristile
isti stan za razmišljanje o prostoru i mestu
i projekte u saradnji sa mnogim drugim
umetnicima i komšijama. Od 2005.g. one
su bez prostora i nastavljaju da rade na
potencijalima prostora i modelima odnosa.
www.odaprojesi.org
ODA PRODŽESİ
imale sumnje koje su se ticale onoga koji posmatra, onoga ko
dođe da vidi, da čita ili samo da gleda. Kako mogu uloge da
se pomere? Šta možemo da naučimo od svakodnevne prakse
u gradu Istanbulu gde je svako aktivni učesnik i doprinosi
gradu, ali gde su u umetnosti uloge ekstremno formirane i
organizovane? Kako mogu dela participatornih građana da se
razmatraju različitim tehnologijama koje bi nam dozvolile da
delujemo između umetničkog sistema i dnevnog života? Kako
mogu prirodni alati kreirani za preživljavanje u Istanbulu da
budu ponovo mišljeni, da budu vraćeni građanima, a ne samo
umetničkom sistemu? Sa prepoznavanjem stana, kao što je to
uradila Oda Prodžesi, „sobe kao izlagačkog prostora“, i komšije
su postale publike u nekom trenutku.
Razmišljajući o dešavanjima Stan [2] ili Hotel Njujork.
Upit u lokaciju [3] Bobe Mirjane neko bi mogao da pomisli
na početnu tačku projekta u prostoru Ode Prodžesi. Ozge
Ačikol iz grupe bila je prva koja je otvorila privatnost stana za
javnost svojim projektom „O neupotrebnom prostoru“. Ona je
ispraznila srednju sobu i pretvorila je u „prostor za izlaganje“
ostavljajući je praznu, otvorenu za intervencije, a prevedeni tekst
Žorža Pereka je mogao da se nađe u sobi. Tekst je iz knjige Vrste
prostora i drugi tekstovi [4] u kojoj Perek piše:
6
[2] Rad Stan, Beograd, 2009.g.
[3] Projekat “Hotel Njujork. Upit u lokaciju”,
Roterdam, 2007.g.
Kolaborativni projekat, čiji je nezavistan
nastavak usledio u Beogradu sa Ponovnom
posetom Beograda. Oba projekta su
realizovana u prostoru hotela. Publikacija
Roterdam ponovo posećen. Ponovna
poseta Beogradu objavljena je u Beogradu
2009.g.
„Prostor bez upotrebe: nekoliko puta sam pokušavao da mislim o stanu
u kome bi bila beskorisna soba, apsolutno i namerno beskorisna. Ona ne bi
bila soba za otpatke, ne bi bila rezervna spavaća soba, ili hodnik, ili ćumez, ili
ćošak. To bi bio prostor bez funkcije. On ne bi služio ni za šta, ne bi se odnosio
ni na šta. Uprkos svim mojim naporima, nisam uspeo da isteram ovu ideju do
kraja. Sam jezik, naizgled, se ispostavio neodgovarajući da opiše ovo ništa, ovu
prazninu, kao da možemo da pričamo samo o onome što je puno, korisno i
funkcionalno. Prostor bez funkcije. Ne „bez bilo kakve precizne funkcije“ već
upravo bez bilo kakve funkcije; ne više-funkcionalan (svi znaju kako to da rade),
već a-funkcionalan. To očigledno ne bi bio prostor koji je namenjen samo da
„oslobodi“ druge (ostava, kredenac, prostor za ostavljanje, skladište, itd.) već
prostor, ponavljam, koji ne bi služio ama baš ni u kakvu svrhu...“
Sa takvim prostorom na umu kroz sve projekte, uloga
publike postaje malo zamućena.
[4] Jacques Perec, Species of Spaces and
Other Pieces, Penguin Books, London,
1997, str. 33
ODA PRODŽESİ
7
Prostorna empatija
„[Empatija] je ono što nam se dešava kada napustimo naša tela… i zateknemo sebe
bilo trenutno ili na duži period vremena u umu nekog drugog. Mi posmatramo
realnost kroz njene oči, njene emocije, delimo njen bol.” [5]
“Stan” te poziva da proživiš iskustvo koje dovodi u odnos
tebe i mesto. U ovom “stanu” nema domaćina, tako da nema
potčinjavanja vlasniku. Pozvan u ovaj prostor, ti si više od
publike. Ali ko te poziva, to je pitanje. Ako nema domaćina
onda šta je sa gostom? Dakle, ti nisi ni gost. Situacija između
toga da budeš gost i publika postavlja takođe sam prostor u
drugačiju kategoriju. Ti si u fizičkom stanu, ali sa kakvom
vrstom identiteta? Ti si gost, domaćin, duh, ili si jednostavno ti
sàm? Tako “stan” takođe više nije stan.
Tvoj odnos prema prostoru se menja u skladu sa time
ko si; postoji mnogo vrsta susreta sa/u prostoru. Šta je zahtev
kada si već jednom u “stanu”? Da li je još uvek važno da ne
zaboraviš da je to umetnički rad ili da si ti samo u “prostoru”?
Ako ovo nije “umetnički” poziv u prostor, da li treba još uvek da
posmatramo ljude kao publiku? U stanu si ostavljen da proživiš
svoje iskustvo. Ovde se ne radi o tome da budeš publika ili
gost, već je stvar volje da se oseti empatija sa prostorom. Kako
može da se oseti empatija sa prostorom? Kakav je osećaj misliti
o sebi i samom prostoru kao o živom organizmu? Bukvalno,
kako je biti kontejner, masivan, imati određeni kapacitet? Ti
imaš memoriju i uspomene, kao i prostor. Kada si u još uvek
nenastanjenom prostoru, empatija postaje još teža, ali je i izazov
pun entuzijazma.
Prostor kao živi organizam je mesto koje korisnici
transformišu u skladu sa svojim različitim praksama/potrebama.
To je organski prostor koji nema ništa zajedničko sa pogledom
dizajnera/planera iz ptičje perspektive. Ovo je prostor u koji
možeš da „uđeš“, da se igraš, da napraviš pauzu i da se baviš
njime.
Ako se vratimo na Odu Prodžesi, njena praksa takođe ima
empatiju sa gradom; kako umetnička grupa može da koristi
iste strategije kao i grad/stanovnici? Uprkos tome što se tok
„urbanih transformacija“ dešava uz podršku manifestacije
Istanbul 2010 Evropski glavni grad kulture, grad Istanbul još
uvek ima potencijal da služi prostorima „bez bilo kakve precizne
funkcije“ za moguće korisnike kojima treba „mesto“ iz različitih
razloga. Ono što je rečeno da je „neformalno“ je struktura za
preživljavanje. Što više stan nema funkciju, to više ti imaš pravo
na prostor.
ODA PRODŽESİ
İstanbul, April 2010.
[5] Khen Lampert, Traditions of
Compassion: from Religious duty to Social
Activism, Palgrave-Macmillan, 2005, p.
157.
Zoran Erić
8
„PRAVILA UČEŠĆA“ ZA SAMOUPISIVANJE U PROSTOR
U dvodnevnim dešavanjima Hotel Njujork. Upit u lokaciju,
organizovanom 2007. godine u Roterdamu, i Ponovna poseta
Beogradu, održanom u Hotelu Kasina u Beogradu 2008. godine,
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović je pozvala [6] kolege umetnike da
donesu svoje radove, u saglasnosti sa rasporedom i ritmom koji
je ona postavila, na taj način transformišući hotele u izlagački
prostor. Umetnica je odredila „pravila učešća“ u kompleksnom
strukturalnom poretku. U roterdamskom Hotelu Njujork
umetnici „posetioci/izlagači“ su bili zamoljeni da rezervišu
mesto i posete prostor u trajanju od trideset minuta. Njihova
poseta nije bila dokumentovana. Promenljive stavke koje su
uzete u obzir su: broj posetilaca u istom trenutku, radovi koji su
bili postavljeni za svaku posetu; doba dana; i mesto za izlaganje
rada u korišćenom prostoru hotela.
[6] Hotel Njujork. Upit u lokaciju je bio
zajednički projekat sa Majom Bekan i
Gunndis Yr Finnbogadottir i bio je podržan od
strane Instituta Pit Cvart, Roterdam.
U Hotelu Kasina u Beogradu, kompleksnost postavljene
strukture i saspens za publiku je bio pojačan „pravilom“ da
posetioci, koji su morali da najave posetu e-mail-om, nisu
bili obavešteni o stvarnom dešavanju kojem je trebalo da
prisustvuju u sobi 701. Posetioci su bili otpraćeni do sobe gde
su bili ostavljeni sami da gledaju izbor od najviše tri rada, svih
proizvedenih za ovu priliku.
Ovi događaji su postavili pravac za istraživanje
kompleksnog odnosa između umetnika i prostora koji ona
zauzima svojim intervencijama – prostor koji može da služi kao
sredstvo izražavanja; isto tako i međuzavisnosti relacije umetnik
– publika koju ona namešta za intervenciju tako što uspostavlja
granice kontrole sugerisane konstelacije.
Ova vrsta prakse je namenjena da izazove očiglednu
neutralnost, bar u domenu umetnosti, prostora koje je
umetnica koristila. Aspekt specifičnog konteksta odabranih
prostora je bačen u drugi plan kreiranjem skupa relacija između
svih faktora u “igri”, i procesa samog događaja/intervencije.
Profil takvog rada stoga polazi od pojma umetnosti koji je
kontekstualno određen, zavisan od njegovih prostora izlaganja
i pokušava da otkrije svoju okolinu tako što pravi vidljivim
društvenu organizaciju i ideološke operacije u tom prostoru.
S druge strane, ono o čemu se ovde radilo, osim dislokacije od
konvencionalnih umetničkih izlagačkih prostora, je (skriveni)
prostor praznog označioca koji je umetnica, njene kolege i
publika trebalo da ispune malom simboličkom razmenom. Svi
oni su učestvovali u produkciji određene mikro-zajednice koja
Fotografije odozgo na dole
Hotel Njujork, Roterdam, 2007.
Hotel Kasina, Beograd, 2008.
Stan u Mirijevu, Beograd, 2009.
Zoran Erić
9
je umetničkom intervencijom bila ubačena u igru i provocirana.
Sledeći korak za Bobu Mirjanu Stojadinović je bio da
se oslobodi kontrole događaja i dešavanja u prostoru koji je
koristila za intervencije i da ne izloži radove u prostoru, već
da pretvori prostor i same njegove protagoniste u umetnički
događaj. To se desilo u projektu Stan, koji je organizovan u
Beogradu 2009. godine. [7]
[7] Rad je izveden u okviru projekta
BEOGRAD: NEMESTA, kustoskinja Una
Popović i Dušica Dražić, produkcija MSUB.
Za ovu priliku, umetnica je odabrala novi još uvek
neuseljeni stan u udaljenom beogradskom naselju Mirijevo,
u rastućoj novoj naseobini gde čak ulice još uvek nemaju
ime. Umetnica je ponudila prostor na slobodno korišćenje
zainteresovanoj publici. Ona je lansirala lanac poseta tako što
je dala ključeve i svesku sa adresom prvoj osobi koja je bila
zamoljena da nastavi sa procesom predaje ključeva sledećoj
osobi koju on ili ona izabere nakon okončanja posete stanu.
Ovaj proces se nastavio tokom trajanja izložbe.
Posetioci su u stanu našli sprave kao što je snimač zvuka,
fotoaparat, diktafon, svesku, itd. koje su mogli da koriste po
sopstvenom nahođenju da beleže svoj boravak. Sam stan i
publika koja ga je posećivala postali su materija umetničkog
rada i njihov međusobni odnos je „proizvodio“ sam prostor o
kome govorimo. Ova relacija bi mogla da se dovede u vezu sa
pojmom reprezantacionih prostora (prostora reprezentacije) koje
je uveo francuski teoretičar Anri Lefevr u svojoj konceptualnoj
trijadi koja se još sastoji od prostornih praksi materijalnog ili
funkcionalnog prostora i predstava prostora – prostora kao
kodifikovanog jezika. Po Lefevru, reprezentacioni prostori su:
„direktno proživljeni kroz slike i simbole koji mu koreliraju, a stoga i prostor
„stanovnika“ i „korisnika“... Ovo je dominantan – i stoga pasivno doživljen –
prostor koji imaginacija traži da promeni i prilagodi sebi. On prekriva fizički
prostor, koristeći na simboličan način njegove objekte. Ovi prostori teže prema
više ili manje koherentnim sistemima ne-verbalnih simbola i znakova.“ [8]
Lefevr je sugerisao da društvena produkcija prostora
funkcioniše kroz interakciju ova tri različita procesa. Ono što
nas najviše interesuje, je prostor koji je nađen, korišćen, zauzet i
transformisan kroz svakodnevne aktivnosti. Lefevr insistira na
važnosti promatranja životnih praksi i simboličkog značenja i
bitnosti određenih prostora i oprostoravanja. [9] On je sugerisao
da pojedinci proizvode prostor tako što uvode pravac, obrt,
orijentaciju, zauzimanje i organizujući topos kroz gestove,
tragove i oznake. [10]
[8] Henri Lefebvre, The Production of
Space, Blackwell, Cambridge MA & Oxford
UK, 1991. pp. 36-39
[9] Doreen Massey, ‘Politics and Space/
Time’, in Michael Keith and Steve Pile
Eds. Place and the Politics of Identity,
Routledge, London, New York, 1996. p.143
[10] Susana Torre, Claiming the Public
Space: The Mothers of Plaza de Mayo‘,
in Jane Rendell, Barbara Penner and lain
Border eds., Gender Space Architecture,
Routledge, London New York, 2000. p.145
Zoran Erić
Drugi aspekt istog problema bi mogao da se vidi u tvrdnji
da je način na koji ljudi definišu svoje prostore i na koji ih
doživljavaju važan u procesu konstrukcije identiteta. [11]
Štaviše, mogli bi da tvrdimo da prostor definiše ljude koji su u
njemu i da tu postoji jak međuodnos između ponašanja osobe i
prostora koji ona zauzima. Tako materijalizovani životni prostor
predstavlja „oprostoren život“, sve aktivnosti individue su
sabijene i projektovane u njega, i prestavljaju život koji može da
se nađe u određenom prostoru.
Kao što je umetnica sama sugerisala, posetiocima praznog
prostora novog stana data je šansa da „se upišu“ u taj prostor
[12], ili da definišu i označe “teritorije sopstva” (termin Irvina
Gofmana) [13], “zaštićen prostor” koji su imali pravo da
poseduju, kontrolišu, koriste i da ga se oslobode.
Razmatrajući ovaj prostor ne kao „permanentno u
vlasništvu, egocentrično potraživanje, već kao privremenu,
situacionu rezervu u čijem centru se individua kreće“ [14],
mogli bismo da pratimo umetanje svake osobe u lanac
intersubjektivnih konstrukcija društvenih interakcija u datoj
prostornoj situaciji. Kroz međuodnos sa prostorom koji su
oni privremeno zauzeli i ostavljajući tragove svog prisustva
u dokumentarnom obliku, svi „korisnici“ pričaju priče o
reprezentacionom prostoru koji su konstruisali.
10
[11] Jane Rendell, Introduction: ‚Gender,
Space‘, in Jane Rendell, Barbara Penner
and lain Border eds., Gender Space
Architecture, Routledge, London New York,
2000. p.106
[12] Boba Mirjana Stojadinović, ‚U stanu’,
dokumentacija umetnice
[13] Gofman (Erving Goffman) je napravio
razliku između “fiksiranih”, “situacionih”
i “egocentričnih” teritorija u skladu sa
načinom na koji su organizovani; takođe
je sugerisao da pojam teritorijalnosti može
da bude proširen u značenje koje ne mora
obavezno da ima prostorne konotacije.
Ono što je bilo bitno u analizi različitih
“teritorija sopstva” je njihova društveno
određena varijabilnost.
[14] Charles Lemert and Ann Branaman
(Eds.) The Goffman Reader, Blackwell,
Cambridge MA & Oxford UK, 1997. str. 45
dr Zoran Erić, kustos Centra za vizuelnu kulturu, MSUB
Frans-Vilem Korsten
11
Voda, led, vatra ili šta je TO što tu treba znati:
komad SUN_CE Bobe Mirjane Stojadinović
Kako gledati slajd projekciju fotografija koje oslikavaju
grad, uvek isti grad, ili bolje siluetu grada (Roterdama), iznad
kog je nebo ispunjeno uvek menjajućim se formacijama oblaka
i kondenzacionim tragovima, probušeno suncem, pretvoreno u
spektakl pun sunčeve boje? Ako je spektakl, čega je on spektakl?
Zašto su kadrovi uvek različitih veličina, ili su malo nagnuti? Da
li je to slajd projekcija?
Hajde da se pozabavimo prvo oblacima i njihovim
pravljenjem, kako u realnosti tako i njihovim različitim
formama reprezenaticije.
Same oblake čovek ne može da napravi, bar nam tako
deluje. Da bi postali vidljivi kao oblaci, hiljadama sićušnih
kapljica vodenih isparenja su potrebne male čestice unaokolo
koje para može da prikupi. Izvor tog okupljanja ostaje
nedostupan oku. Nekako, negde, nekoliko čestica počne da se
okuplja i ovaj proces, nakon njihovog kolektivnog, masivnog
okupljanja, može da vodi ka krhkim ili moćnim objektima
koje vidimo. Ovi su, zauzvrat, bili predstavljani kroz vekove u
umetnosti, u slikama, skicama, fotografijama, filmovima; istina,
nikad u svojim počecima, jer oni ne mogu da se vide. To su
oblaci i predstavljeni su kao takvi. Medijum kroz koji ili u kom
su oblaci predstavljeni se ipak znatno razlikuje i kao rezultat
toga oblaci funkcionišu na različit način u pogledu ikoničnosti,
indeksikalnosti ili simbolike u različitim medijumima.
U fundamentalnoj studiji rada Fra Anđelika, pod
nazivom Fra Anđeliko: različitost i figuracija [15], francuski
istoričar umetnosti Žorž Didi-Huberman zastupa tezu da je
„oblak“ bio piktoralni element koji je izbegao vektorizaciju i
instrumentalizaciju perspektive, i da je stoga bio najpogodniji
da otelotvori i simbolizuje nepredstavljivo, što je u slučaju Fra
Anđelika bilo božansko. U ovom pogledu Didi-Huberman
je naglasio činjenicu da su postojali elementi renesansnog
slikarstva koji nisu u toj meri funkcionisali ikonički, podsećajući
na ili ogledajući neku vrstu realnog objekta, već indeksički.
Oni su formirali trag prema nečemu što nije moglo da bude
obuhvaćeno u jednom pogledu. Bog je bio drugde, ali je mogao
da bude predstavljen kroz ili u „oblaku“.
Fra Anđeliko, Bogojavljenje,
1435-45, tempera na drvetu, Prado muzej
u Madridu
[15] Georges Didi-Huberman, Fra Angelico:
Dissemblance and Figuration, University Of
Chicago Press, 1995
Frans-Vilem Korsten
12
Sa fotografijom, ovo je postalo mnogo komplikovanije.
Fotografije mogu lako da budu viđene kao indeksički motivisane
ikone. U njhovom slučaju indeks je trag ka poziciji iz koje su
fotografije zaista rađene, bukvalno hvatajući nešto što je zaista
bilo tamo. Fotografije su uglavnom čitane ikonički, što bi oblak
pretvorilo u stvar koja može da se obuhvati, dok je zamrznuta na
slici.
Možda je zbog ovoga Boba odlučila da predstavi slike
putem slajd prezentacije, pretvarajući svaki zamrznuti trenutak
u nešto što je samo trenutno zamrznuto, i neprekidno na svom
putu da postane nešto drugo. Štaviše, način na koji su slajdovi
pokazani, uhvaćeni u različitim veličinama i sa ramovima od
crne pozadine, daje fotografijama kvalitet slikane slike. Kao
da je jedna tema sa istom tematikom predstavljena nizom
slikanih slika pokazanih na izložbi, kao rezultat čega slike
ponovo otvaraju potencijal koji je Didi-Huberman video da
postoji u radovima Fra Anđelika. Konačno, ove slike nisu
okačene savršeno ispravljene na njihovim digitalnim zidovima
od crnog somota. One su malo iskošene, čime kao da sugerišu
da će gledalac morati da pomera glavu zajedno sa slikom. Ovo
nas dovodi do pitanja na koji način gledalac treba da se odnosi
prema onome što vidi. U tom kontekstu postaje bitno da se kaže
da ima mnogo oblaka na ovim slikama koje je napravio čovek?
Nisu svi oblaci napravljeni od vodenih kapljica, pogotovo
ne takozvani kondenzacioni tragovi koje ostavljaju avioni. Oni
su zapravo napravljeni od leda, kome treba takozvani ledeni
nukleator da bi postali ledeni kristali (nukleatori su najčešće
bakterije). Tako imamo vatrene mašine koje proizvode tragove
od leda na nebesima, oblikujući na ovaj način neke oblike
perspektive, koji ipak mogu da se pretvore u visoke oblake kada
u nekom trenutku budu razduvani. Na izvestan način, ljudska
bića su postala slikari nebesa na način koji je bio nezamisliv u
prethodnim vekovima. To je promenilo naše ideje o tome šta
je nebo i kako mi gledamo na njega. Mi itekako učestvujemo
u onome što vidimo, i kao rezultat toga smo postali vladari
nebesa, iako ostaje neizvesno šta je to što zapravo ovladavamo.
Kada se Didi-Huberman u drugoj studiji, Suočavanje sa
slikama: preispitivanje krajeva izvesne istorije umetnosti [16],
uposlio sa prirodom istorije umetnosti, on se bavio izvesnošću
toga kako proizvodimo znanje, ne samo o umetnosti, već budući
da je njegova tema bila umetnost: u umetnosti. Ta izvesnost,
Slajd projekcija SUN_CE, 2006-2008. g.
[16] Georges Didi-Huberman, Confronting
images: questioning the ends of a certain
history of art, The Pennsylvania State
University Press, University Park, PA, 2005
Frans-Vilem Korsten
13
tvrdi on, zavisi od i uveličava se zbog sposobnosti da postavi
stvari u perspektivu. Okrećući se oblacima on se susreo sa
objektima koji su delovali kao da se suprotstavljaju ovom obliku
ovladavanja, jer su suštinski nepojmljivi.
Istoričar je, u svakom smislu reči, samo fiktor, što će reći modelar, artizan,
autor, izumitelj bilo koje prošlosti koju nam ponudi. I kada je to u elementu
umetnosti da on tako razvija svoju potragu za izgubljenim vremenom, istoričar se
više čak ni ne nalazi suočen sa opisanim objektom, već pre sa nečim kao tečnim
ili gasovitim naponom – oblakom koji neprekidno menja oblik dok prolazi
iznad glave. Šta možemo da znamo o oblaku, osim nagađanjem, a da ga nikad u
potpunosti ne ovladamo? (str. 2)
Još jednom, fotografije mogu da deluju kao se
suprotstavljaju upravo onome o čemu Didi-Huberman ovde
govori. Jer kako fotograf može da bude modelar ili pronalazač?
Zar fotografija ne svedoči o onome što je bilo, hvatajući smrt,
pretvarajući u ne-tečne stvari koje su bile tečne, pretvarajući ono
što je bilo tečno u čvrsti led?
Bobin komad oslikava nebesa ispunjena oblacima koji
kao da su fotografski obuhvaćena i predstavljeni u obliku slajd
projekcije. U obliku slajd projekcije oni skoro da nas pozivaju da
prihvatimo njihovu obuhvatnost, kao da formiraju neku vrstu
potvrđujuće pozadine koju znamo. U neprekidnom novom
aranžiranju mesta i rama, ipak, ili u njihovom ponavljanju
sa razlikom, one nas mole da ih gledamo na slikarski način,
prisvajajući slikarski stav. One nas mole da gledamo izbliza i da
se čudimo koji trag bismo trebali da pratimo koji će nas odvesti
negde drugde, do nečega nepredstavljivog.
Nepredstavljivo bi ovde moglo da se odnosi na činjenicu
da je to grad Roterdam koji do danas nije zaboravio, ili nije
bio sposoban da zaboravi, činjenicu da je bio otvoren grad koji
je ipak bio bombardovan 14. maja 1940. godine, oko 13.30.
Njegovo srce je bilo iščupano, i takva slika još uvek definiše
stav roterdamskih stanovnika. Ipak, to srce je sada sve više i
više ispunjeno čudima arhitekture. Roterdam je jedini grad
u Holandiji sa siluetom, horizontom - linijom neba. Neko
može da čita spektakl nebesa, ovako sa tamnom linijom grada
ispod nje, kao simboličku reprezentaciju bivšeg razaranja,
nepojmljivom u svom uticaju i sadržaju. Ipak mislim da bi to
bilo isuviše simbolično. Pretvorilo bi komad u memento mori
u duplom smislu reči, reflektujući u natrag i u napred (ka
mogućim budućim razaranjima). Ovo samo radi ako znamo da
Roterdam, Holandija, pre i posle
II svetskog rata.
Frans-Willem Korsten
14
je to Roterdam, dok bi mogao da bude i bilo koji drugi moderan
grad. Prihvatanje ove mogućnosti bi ubilo rad.
Nepredstavljivo u ovom komadu, paradoksalno, biva
predstavljeno, ali ne pod sopstvenim veoma strogim uslovima.
Ono se odnosi na sunce koje nam dopušta da vidimo i da
znamo, ali je takođe i sposobno da bljesne i da nas zaslepi
ako pogledamo direktno u njega, kao što je Derida primetio
u Marginama filozofije [17] (reflektujući na Dekartovu ideju
Boga). Ono se obznanjuje kroz boje nebesa. Ali se još pokazuje,
kako polako uzdižući se, tako i momentalno pojavljujći se, i kao
sila koja se probija kroz materiju oblaka, bilo da ih je napravila
priroda ili čovek. Sunce je to koje daje siluetu grada ispod sebe,
njegov oblik, bez dubine.
[17] Jacques Derrida, Margins of
Philosophy, University Of Chicago Press,
1985
Samo po sebi impozantna, zaslepljujuća jačina sunca je
održana u ovom komadu, ne zaslepljući nas u potpunosti, već
probijajući malu rupu u našem viđenju, svaki put iznova na
drugom mestu. Na ovaj način geometrijski oblik linije horizonta
ispod nebesa koje mi možemo da vidimo i koje bismo mogli
da naučimo da poznajemo, postepeno dobija parnjaka koji ne
vidimo, ali možemo da ga osetimo kao papir u kome je figura
prosečena iglom. Ovo nije uzvišenost sunca koje nas razbija
u našem čudu i fascinaciji, već postepeno, hirurško izviđanje
čovekovog ovladavanja. Lepo, bolno. Ono nas ostavlja u takvom
stanju da kada trepnemo silueta grada će nestati, ali sunčev
obrazac će još uvek biti tu, kao indeks onoga što mislimo da
možemo da vidimo, ali čime nikada nećemo uspeti da ovladamo.
Frans-Vilem Korsten, Erazmus univerzitet u Roterdamu, Univerzitet u Lajdenu
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
15
OBLIK REČI U KOJIMA ŽIVIMO
U ovom tekstu sam razmišljala o mestima odsustva i
mestima prisustva. Ali, počnimo od početka.
U bavljenju prostorom polazno mesto, za mene, ne
označava samo fizičke koordinate, već i mrežu odnosa u koje
smo uhvaćeni, a iz kojih u nekom trenutku možda poželimo
da istupimo. Svako ponovno otkrivanje polazne tačke znači
obnavljanje intenziteta veze sa sadašnjim trenutkom.
„U razgovoru“ sa Katrin Dejvid, Irit Rogof razmatra
mogućnost promene ustaljenih odnosa između subjekata i
mesta koje je ustanovila tradicionalna geografija:
„Kako možemo da napravimo od od-pripadanja neku vrstu aktivnog fluksa sa
kojim da nekako napravimo odnos prema mestu, a ne preko identifikacija koje
nalaže nacionalna država? Kako možemo da otkrijemo ceo skup strategija kojima
pravimo odnos prema određenom mestu tako što se aktivno od-pripadamo od
njega? Za mene je to veoma aktivni, gotovo dnevni proces po kome konstantno
pokušavaš da razmišljaš o pozicionalnosti – sopstveni konstantno neizvestan,
konstantno izmeštajući odnos prema mestu“ [18]
Možda upravo pod od-pripadanjem Irit Rogof
podrazumeva transakciju između pripadanja i nepripadanja
određenoj sredini. Ta sredina zapravo može da bude samo ona
koja se preispituje, sredina sa kojom su uspostavljene veze pre
nego što smo ih postali svesni, možda upravo sredina iz koje
izlazimo. Od-pripadanje je repetativni proces uspostavljanja i
obnavljanja odnosa sa sredinom sa kojom jake veze već postoje,
proces osvešćivanja i senzibilizovanja odnosa prema sopstvenim
ličnim konstitutivnim silama.
Ono što mi je dvogodišnji boravak u Holandiji [19]
dao jeste prepoznavanje sopstvene hronologije različitog
teritorijalnog porekla. Kroz seriju radova koje predstavljam na
izložbi „Zaglavljeni u zvuku“ nastalih u periodu 2006-2009, koji
iz ličnog rakursa sagledavaju multifasetnost vremena i prostora
u okvirima kraja nultih godina XXI veka u prostornom okviru
između Beograda i Roterdama [20], ja se bavim upravo time –
iskustvom novog, i pokušajem da kroz novo iskustvo sagledam
ono što sam doživljavala kao staro, zaokruženo, završeno.
Prvobitna ideja je zapravo bila preispitivanje pozicije koja je
izmeštena, pozicije koja ne pripada Beogradu iz kog sam pošla,
ali ne pripada ni Roterdamu gde sam stigla, pozicija ujedno
insajdera i autsajdera, pozicija koja stalno iznova otkriva zašto
ne pripada određenoj sredini u trenutku dok je njen deo.
[18] Irit Rogoff
“In conversation, Catherine David and
Irit Rogoff”, From Studio to Situation, ed.
Claire Doherty, Black Dog Publishing
Limited, London/England, 2004.
[19] U periodu 2006 - 2008. g. sam
pohađala i završila magistrarske studije
likovnih umetnosti na Institu Pit Cvart u
Roterdamu, Holandiji.
http://pzwart.wdka.nl/fine-art/
[20] Beograd Roterdam 44°49′14″N
51°55′51″N
20°27′44″E
4°28′45″E
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
Sada predlažem da krenemo u obilazak izložbe.
*
Galerija ima tri prozora koji gledaju ka centralnom
zrenjaninskom trgu - Trgu slobode. Gledajuci kroz prozor
vide se spomenik kralju Petru I Oslobodiocu, Rimokatolička
katedrala, Gradska kuća [21]. Na svakom prozoru, koji je
za ovu priliku prekriven providnom folijom u drugoj boji:
narandžastom, plavom i žutom, nalazi se tekstualni opis pogleda
sa neka druga tri prozora. Ta druga tri prozora nalaze se u
stanu gde sam stanovala u Holandiji, koji sa visine jedanaestog
sprata gledaju na tri strane sveta, ka Roterdamu, ka Hagu i
ka roterdamskoj luci. Kao kontemplativni gest, ovaj opis je
definisao sopstveno mesto, mesto iz pogleda „kuhinje“, „terase“ i
„spavaće sobe“ otkrivajući geografsku, demografsku i društvenu
poziciju. Tekst ovog „Tekstualnog rada“ (2008.) napisan
originalno na engleskom jeziku, a ne na mom maternjem
bugarskom, ili očinskom srpskom jeziku, što je takođe i pitanje
govora, jezika, izražavanja sopstvenog pogleda na svet, ali i
načina na koji percipiramo i sagledavamo stvarnost van sebe. Na
pitanje stranog jezika ću se vratiti još jednom.
Jednog dana sam iz ateljea u centru Roterdama videla da
su komšije iznele nameštaj koji im više nije bio potreban i da su
ga ostavili ispred zgrade, tako da svako može da ga uzme ako
misli da bi mu koristio. Dve očuvana dvoseda i kožna fotelja,
stočić između, ormar i čiviluk bili su namešteni kao da se
nalaze u sobi, u zatvorenom privatnom prostoru, iako su bili na
trotoaru, na ulici [22]. Ljudi su počeli da prilaze i smeštali su se
komotno u ovu sobu bez zidova, omeđenu samim nameštajem.
Ovo je bio prvi prizor iz serije fotografija „Unutrašnji prostor
spolja“ (2007-2008.): fotografijama sam počela da beležim
situacije u kojima se telo prolaznika, posmatrača ili publike
upisuje u prostor, odnosno u haptički prizor. Tako je otirač za
cipele bio na pragu, ali pragu trotoara, a zapravo na prometnoj
16
[21] Savremena galerija u Zrenjaninu
nalazi se u zgradi Narodnog pozorišta Toša
Jovanović i osnovana je 1964. godine kao
direktna posledica postojanja Umetničke
kolonije u Ečki (osnovane 1956. godine).
Ne postoje pouzdani izvori koji bi
pružili tačnu godinu izgradnje zgrade
pozorišta, ali je to svakako bilo pre 1839.
godine kada je prvi put spomenuta u
istorijskim dokumentima.
Izgradnju pozorišta prati priča koja
ovo zdanje povezuje sa bečkerečkom
tvrđavom. Po njoj su Španci, koji su
doseljeni u Bečkerek u 18. veku, tridesetih
godina tog stoleća porušili i poslednje
ostatke tvrđave i od preostalog kamena
sagradili žitni magacin, najveću zgradu u
tadošnjoj varoši. Čitav vek kasnije, gradski
Magistrat otkupljuje građevinu od jevrejske
porodice Džendženfi i unutrašnjost
pretvara u pozorište sa 246 sedišta u
parteru, 210 sedišta u ložama, uz 200
mesta za stajanje na trećoj galeriji.
Upoređenja radi, Srpsko narodno
pozorište u Novom Sadu je osnovano
1861.g., a Narodno pozorište u Beogradu
osnovano je 1868.g.
[22] Roterdam, 2008.
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
ulici u Flardingenu, plavi kofer i zeleni usisivač u Parizu su
bili odloženi uz saobraćajni znak ili kantu za đubre kao da je
upravo to mesto gde oni inače stoje, par belih ženskih cipela je
bio uredno odložen ispred bioskopa u Amsterdamu, kao i par
praznih vešalica za odeću koji su bili zakačeni za fasadu kao
za orman, ili svežanj ključeva odloženi na izbočini stare fasade
u Beogradu kao da su ostavljeni nakon ulaska u stan koji su
upravo otključali.
Medijumi sa kojima radim koriste određenu materijalnost,
pa tako tekst postaje slika; odštampana fotografija pravi konus;
prostor ne sadrži, već ukazuje na nečije iskustvo; zvuk u jednom
prostoru meri vreme drugog prostora... Da li fotografije imaju
zvuk? Da li možeš da namirišeš oblik predmeta?
Fotografija mi se uvek nametala kao medijum za
dokumentovanje situacije, za beleženje vizuelne informacije
o određenoj situaciji u određenom kontekstu. Za rad „Stan“
(2009.) fotografija upravo to radi. Situacija samog rada je
sledeća: prvog dana izložbe BEOGRAD: NEMESTO [23]
ja dajem svesku sa uputstvima kako doći do stana čiji je ključ
priložen. Posetilac je zamoljen da ključ i svesku u roku od
jednog dana prosledi sledećem posetiocu po sopstvenom
izboru, koji će ključ proslediti nekom trećem, itd. Stan se nalazi
u novoizgrađenoj stambenoj zgradi u Beogradu, u Mirijevu, u
ulici koja još uvek nema ime. Kada posetilac sam/a ili u društvu
ode u stan, zatiče potpuno prazan prostor malog dvosobnog
stana sa lepim pogledom na susedno uzvišenje i Dunav u daljini.
Ne postoji niko ko motri na dolazak i odlazak posetilaca, njihov
boravak se ne beleži ni na jedan način osim tragova koji oni sami
ostave – beleškama u svesci, fotografijama na fotoaparatu ili
snimkom na diktafonu koji se nalaze u stanu. Poslednji gost, ko
god to bio, poslednjeg dana avgusta 2009.g. je zamoljen da mi se
javi i da mi vrati ključ.
Od celog procesa 188 fotografija su bile najobimniji
materijal koji je ostao i uz audio snimak šumova stana koji su
snimili troje posetilaca to je ono što može da približi nekome
ko nije bio u prostoru šta je posetilac mogao da vidi i doživi u
stanu. Veliku nekoherentnu seriju fotografija je napravila grupa
ljudi koji se međusobno ne poznaju, mikro zajednica stranaca.
Ono što nije ostalo zabeleženo, a što je bitno, je da tokom
mesec dana trajanja rada i posete ljudi čiji broj ne mogu
precizno da rekonstruišem, nije bilo ni jedne problematične
situacije; fotoaparat, diktafon i ključ su uredno vraćeni, a stan
je ostavljen onako kako je i zatečen. Iako su ključevi dati “na
reč”, oni su sa posvećenošću i ozbiljnošću uvek bili prosleđivani
nekome sledećem.
17
[23] Izložba BEOGRAD: NEMESTO je
održana u Salonu Muzeja savremene
umetnosti, Beograd, avgust 2009.g,
kustoskinje Una Popović i Dušica Dražić
http://belgradenonplaces09.wordpress.com/
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
Iz reakcija koje su stigle do mene shvatam da su se
posetioci uglavnom bavili sobom u stanu – lenji letnji dani u
senci novog prostora su davali slobodu da se bude sa sobom
neuznemiravano, da se mašta ili drema ili projektuje sopstveni
život u taj prostor. Rad „Stan“ je bio poklon posetiocima koji
im je poklanjao njihovo vreme i njihovo telo na vremenski
period za koje se sami odluče. Prosleđivanjem ključa od jednog
posetioca drugom prećutno je formirana mala zajednica ljudi
koji se mahom nikad neće sresti, koji su bili u privatnom
prostoru nekoga koga nikad neće upoznati, ljudi koji jedino što
dele je uspomena na boravak u prostoru nekog praznog stana u
Beogradu avgusta 2009.g.
Kroz ovaj i neke druge radove otkrila sam i preispitivala
duboko interesovanje za publiku. Ovo je možda zbog činjenice
da se u Beogradu, kao mestu mog osnovnog umetničkog
obrazovanja i susreta sa umetničkim svetom, za publiku mnogo
ne haje. Razmena kao da je isključiva između umetničke
institucije i umetnika. Umetničko tržište je u rudimentarnom
stadijumu, a kritika i promišljanje umetnosti ovih godina
kako u stručnoj, tako i u širokoj javnosti nije mnogo bolje ili je
potpuno hermetično. Čak i druga krajnost može da se sagleda u
situacijama gde se publici podilazi sa populističkim projektima,
što je neka sasvim druga priča.
Takođe me interesuju načini na koje se prave odnosi
između umetnika i publike. Kada pogled i doživljaj svakog
člana publike postaje rad u unapred zadatim uslovima umetnik
se povlači u senku, kao da istupa iz rada i ustupa mesto publici
da ga ‘popuni’. Ova situacija može da postane manipulacija
publikom, i ovaj rizik se neminovno pravi kada se radi o svakoj
interaktivnoj umetnosti gde su posredi akcija i reakcija. Ovo
može da bude pokušaj da se detektuje stanje odnosa između
umetnika i publike i rada u prostoru i da se utiče na njih. Kao
i sa pojmom i praksom publike, tako i po pitanju prostora i
društvenih normi, mene zanima da preispitujem stvari koje
se uopšteno podrazumevaju na način na koji se one neće
podrazumevati. Na primer, na koji način umetnik opstaje u ovoj
raspodeli moći i nemoći? Kako se ovi odnosi materijalizuju,
kako da se posreduju nekome ko nije bio direktan učesnik?
S druge strane, istraživanje prostora je nešto što me
duboko intrigira: prostor sobe u kojoj si, prostor između tebe i
mene, istorija prostora u kome ću pokazati svoje radove... Pod
pojmom prostora rekla bih da me interesuju i kvaliteti tela u
prostoru, pokret tela, ili pre odnos dva tela u prostoru, njihova
privremenost, ne-trajnost sama po sebi, (ne)stabilnost fizičkih
granica prostora.
18
Vizuelizacija mogućih odnosa dva mesta:
razdaljina može da spaja i može da
razdvaja.
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
19
Gledajući iz određenog ugla rekla bih da potičući sa
teritorije koja se smatra periferijom, mene privlači tzv. centar.
Posebno me interesuje da sagledam put koji se prelazi između te
dve tačke. Zanima me istraživanje nijansi i tonova definitivnih
i čvrstih pozicija, a još više njihova nekozistentnost, pomeranje
i iskliznuće pojmova centra i periferije, nemogućnost da se oni
fiksiraju. Svaka dva „sveta“, bilo koja dva entiteta koji mogu da
se međusobno prepoznaju i da uoče međusobne razlike, su ta
dva sveta koji mene privlače. Zanima me pozicija nekoga ko ima
uvid u oba, kome su dva entiteta transparentna, mogućnost da
se jedan svet sagleda kroz drugi, a pogotovo u odnosu na treći.
„Ono što me ovde interesuje nije toliko nestanak kao način postojanja, već pre
„sistem diskontinuiteta“ koji predstavlja toliki broj različitih modova pojavljivanja
ili istupanja.“, Danijel Birnbaum [24]
„HEMA/HEMA“ (2006-2008.) je serija radova koji su
nastali iz mog (pogrešnog) čitanja reklamnog znaka robne kuće
HEMA (HEMA = Hollandsche Eenheidsprijzen Maatschappij
Amsterdam, holandska radnja za robu ujednačenih cena) na
roterdamskom berzanskom trgu (Beurse), refleksno ga čitajući
na srpskom, ćirilicom, kao „nema“. Baveći se znakom HEMA,
rečju, slovima, grafičkim kodom, kontrastom između smisla
koji sam ja čitala i okoline, suočila sam sa pojmom nestajanja ili
odsustva.
U trenutku suočenja sa grandioznim crvenim slovima
koja su vrištala da nečeg nema, ja sam kroz jezik doprla do ideje
onoga što nedostaje. U toku adaptacije
na novu sredinu, preispitivala sam ono
što više nije bilo oko mene, kao i značaj i
smisao onoga za šta sam intelektualno bila
svesna da je ekstremno – bombardovanje,
nedostatak osnovnih životnih sirovina iz
prodavnica, otvoreno sistemsko nasilje.
Na izvestan način sam pokušavala da
emotivno „svarim“ ono što sam mentalno
već znala. Problem je nastao kada sam
naslutila da ne želim da „formule“ iz
prošlosti primenjujem u budućnosti, što
sam vremenom u Holandiji sagledavala
kao mogućnost. U tom smislu „HEMA/HEMA“ je serija
radova koji su nastali iz potrebe da fiksiram prošlost ne bih
li onda mogla da projektujem budućnost. Začkoljica je,
retrospektivno sagledavam, bila u tome što svet u kome sam se
obrela nije bio neutralan, on je prosto bio drugačiji. Niti sam ja
[24] Birnbaum, Daniel
Who Is Me Today?, FORART, Institute
For research within international
contemporary art,
http://www.forart.no/index2.php?option=com_
iarticles&no_html=1&Itemid=28&task=file&id=129
Trg Beurs (trg berze), Roterdam, 2008.
Levo je robna kuća HEMA, pravo je
podzemni tržni centar koji prolazi ispod
centralnog bulevara Kolsingel (Coolsingel).
Visoka plava zgrada desno je zgrada
berze, a odmah pored je Svetski trgovinski
centar. Visoki zvonik oglašava dnevno
otvaranje centralne svetske berze u
Njujorku.
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
bila spremna da mu se odmah prilagodim, niti je moje okruženje
imalo kapaciteta da me instant asimiluje. Proces usklađivanja
ove dve strane je kroz znak HEMA pokazivao određenu
nekompatibilnost koja je po meni otkrila mnoge pregibe i ugibe
kako u srpskoj tako i u holandskoj ili evropskoj sredini koji
mogu da se nazru samo iz takve neukorenjene, od-pripadajuće
pozicije.
Suočavajući se sa nerazumevanjem intelektualne okoline
mog prepoznavanja „nečega čega nema“ u društvenom,
ekonomskom i političkom smislu, čitajući ga kroz prizmu
političke i ekonomske situacije u Srbiji, ali i u Evropi u izvesnom
smislu, reč HEMA je postala šibolet [25], reč koja mi otključava
rastrzani svet.
Upotreba određenog jezika znači potencijalno obraćanje
svakoj osobi koja može da razume taj jezik – što veću oblast
ona pokriva – to više ušiju mogu da ga protumače, više očiju
mogu da ga čitaju, što bi u mom slučaju bio engleski; što manju
oblast jezik pokriva to je specifičnije značenje i više je osobena
poruka koju prenosi - srpski i bugarski. Govoriti strani jezik
znači da koristiš tuđe reči, navike, mimiku tela, usta... to je
kao sećanje na stvari koje su se desile nekome drugom, ali
one pronalaze način da se pojave u rečima koje ti zapisuješ, ili
kroz vazduh koji prostruji kroz tvoje zube i napravi zvuk koji
i drugi ljudi razumeju. Korišćenje jezika koji nije maternji ili
očinski može da bude veoma udobno, jer ono može da dođe sa
lakoćom pozajmljene stvari koju niko ne očekuje da vratiš. On
nikada neće biti tvoj, ali te nikada neće ni napustiti. Ogledalno
ovo može da se sagleda u pogledu čoveka koji ne razume
srpski i kome će reč „nema“ biti možda objašnjiva, ali će ostati
neprevodiva.
Fotografija „HEMA/HEMA ruka“ (2007.) je snimak
trenutka kada je prepoznatljivi logo HEMA utisnut u meku
i nežnu kožu nadlanice, da bi potom zapis o iritaciji kože u
narednih par minuta nestao bez traga. Na performativan način
ova stigma realizuje ono čega nema.
Video rad „Procep u celini“ (2008) predstavlja snimak
petnaestominutne šetnje od ateljea, kroz zgradu napolje u
dvorište, preko ulice i trotoara do stvarnog znaka HEMA na
trgu. Video snimak otkriva roterdamsku urbanu rutinu u 9h
ujutru, dok prateći glas nevidljivog „oka“ koje pešači razmišlja
o sopstvenom iskustvu i mogućnostima transgresije sistemskog
nasilja države, koji je rezultirao raspadom Jugoslavije; on isto
tako otvara pitanje ličnog stava i zauzimanja pozicije osobe
odrastale sa takvim iskustvom.
20
[25] Šibolet je bilo koja praksa razlike
koja je indikativna za nečije socijalno ili
regionalno poreklo. Ona se obično odnosi
na jezik, i posebno na reč čiji izgovor
identifikuje govornika kao pripadnika ili
nepripadnika određene grupe.
Piter Brojgel Stariji
“Mala” vavilonska kula
Oko 1563, ulje na dasci, Muzej Bojmans
fan Boningen, Roterdam
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
Video snimak „Sirene“ [26] (2007-2008.) prikazuje mirne
dnevne prizore uz korespondirajući zvuk probojne sirene u
slučaju opšte opasnosti - zvuk ovih sirena meni nepogrešivo
evociraju uspomene na sirene za vazdušnu opasnost iz perioda
bombardovanja Jugoslavije 1999.g. Na snimku niko od
prolaznika ne deluje kao da primećuje uznemirujući zvuk. [27]
Sirene su snimci mesečnih proba koje se u Roterdamu dešavaju
svakog prvog ponedeljka u mesecu tačno u podne. Dobro je
napomenuti da je Roterdam jedna od najvećih pomorskih luka
u svetu, a deo luke je prostrana industrijska zona za preradu
nafte i drugih hemijskih derivata, kao i da je celokupan centar
Roterdama na početku II svetskog rata bio bombardovanjem
sravnjen sa zemljom.
Ova dva video rada razmatraju rikošet prošlih iskustava,
gledajući ono što deluje kao već viđeno, ili slušajući ono što
deluje kao već čuto. Zvuk sirene može da se percipira kao eho
prošle, ali i trening za buduće katastrofe.
Slajd projekcija oko 350 fotografija izlazaka sunca
fotografisanih sa istog mesta u toku godinu ipo dana čini rad
„Sun_ce“ (2006-2008.). Ovaj sled mirnih osunčanih fotografija
daje meditativni ton o ritmu grada, ritmu koji ga daleko
prevazilazi. Ove fotografije su pravljene sa prozora čiji je opis na
jednom od obojenih prozora u galeriji...
*
Pripremajući se da odem u Roterdam ja sam anticipirala da
ću proći kroz period adaptacije na novu okolinu i da ću u tom
periodu formirati percepciju sredine u koju, kao i iz koje, sam
došla. Vremenom je počela da me fascinira ideja da obuhvatim
i radim sa ovim periodom svežih utisaka, da radim sa stanjem
konfuzije. Nisam mogla da znam šta i kako će se desiti, ali sam
želela da budem potpuno otvorena prema procesu adaptacije
na novo. Centralna razmišljanja u ovom procesu su se bavila
razmenom između sebe i memorije sebe – posmatrajući sebe
kao drugog. Boravak u nepoznatoj sredini mi je pružio poziciju
nekoga ko se ne identifikuje sa kodovima sredine u kojoj se
nalazi i isto tako da se distancira od kodova sredine iz koje
dolazi.
Odluka da privremeno promenim mesto stanovanja
je bila i želja za otkrivanjem sopstvene ranjivosti. Preseliti
se u nepoznatu sredinu je značilo razmatrati na koje načine
sam insajder, a na koje autsajder. Ali ono što nisam unapred
mogla da znam je da se promenom habitusa menja i pojam
celovitosti, ili u mom slučaju sagledala sam jasnije svoje
nepripadanje mnolitnoj sredini, jednom jeziku i na izvesnu
postojeću raspolućenost - moji roditelji dolaze iz različitih
21
[26] U grčkoj mitologiji sirene su bile
opasne žene-ptice, koje su prikazane kao
zavodnice koje su mamile mornare sa
svojom opojnom muzikom i glasovima na
brodolom na stenovitim obalama njihovih
ostrva.
[27] Vremenom sam shvatila da su
stanovnici Roterdama naviknuti da čuju
zvuk sirena početkom svakog meseca.
Ali, kada čuju isti taj zvuk neki drugi dan i
u drugo vreme, kao što se ispostavilo na
izložbi “My Travels With Barry” u Centru za
savremenu umetnost TENT. gde je ovaj rad
pokazan, onda im to unosi veliki nemir.
Izlazak sunca iznad Roterdama
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
zemalja – Srbije i Bugarske, dodajući treće gravitaciono polje
– Holandiju. Borba sa „monolitnom sredinom“ je naravno
kontemplacija o nacionalističkom nasleđu kraja XX v. u Srbiji,
ali podjednako, iako možda ne toliko prokaženo, i o osnovi
svake evropske zemlje. Visoka retorika zajedništva je nepovratno
kompromitovana.
Deo radova je skoncentrisan na pitanje koliko je teško da
se kritikuje i da se radi na problematičnim pojmovima, kao što
je nalaženje pozicije koja je navodno tvoja ukoliko je neko čita
iz „nacionalnog“ konteksta, ili jednostavno konteksta okoline,
suprodstavljajući se struji konvencija, gde god one vodile,
analzirajući ih, promišljajući ih. Takođe, koliko je teže doći do
stvarne pozicije koju neko može da zauzme, da stvarno nađe
izraz makar u „pisanju bez mržnje, bez gorčine, bez straha, bez
protesta, bez propovedanja“, kao što je Virdžinija Vulf to rekla
[28]; šta znači biti u sredini, osetiti sav pritisak, svu hitnost,
a ipak biti sposoban da izraziš poziciju koja je delikatna, da
zauzmeš poziciju koja je neporeciva, koja postavlja pitanja ali
je i sama pozitivna, dovoljno široka da obuhvati tuđe greške i
pritom ne odbaci sopstvene.
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
Maj 2010.
22
[28] Virginia Wolf, A Room of One’s Own
[1929], The Hogarth Press, London, 1978
str. 101
OD
DO
Соба коју користим је окренута ка истоку, сунце излази са
ове стране. Зими не можеш да видиш излазак сунца, али од
средине фебруара до неког доба у новембру сунце искаче иза
ротердамских облакодера, осим ако није кишни или магловит
дан, што се често дешава. Прозор покрива целу ширину зида. Ако
би погледао надоле, видео би: паркинг, крај метро линије изнад
земље, око шест возних траса које се укрштају, маркирајући
место где се возови који долазе из правца Ротердама раздвајају,
затим велика раскрсница, па ауто пут, зона са складиштима,
неко дрвеће и градски хоризонт.
Занимљиво је посматрати овај свет са висине једанаестог
спрата. Возови, кола и камиони могу да се виде у било које доба
дана и ноћи, голубови долазе редовно и галебови прелећу. Људи
су ређи призор на видику. Нема буба, паукова, мрава, слепих
мишева.
Понекад сусед из доњег стана пева и понекад неко куче лаје из
неког од станова који се налазе испод.
Ако се спустиш до поштанских сандучића налазићеш се два
метра испод нивоа мора, тј. уколико би била поплава и уколико
би море повратило своју територију. У том случају соба би
постала удобно острво.
Увече је пријатно вратити се овом миру. Понекад се касно вратим
кући и не палим уопште светла, простор је осветљен споља и
уз тај велики прозор још увек могу да се оријентишем по соби.
Могу да пружим своје мисли до далеко у простору радио етра
међу жутим уличним лампама. Ту и тада, овде и сада, користим
простор да замислим да сам негде другде.
The room
You can’t s
some time
Rotterdam
The windo
there is: a
six train lin
the trains
cross-road
city skyline
It is curious
Trains, ca
pigeons co
frequent p
the neighb
barking fro
If you go d
sea level,
territory. In
It is nice to
home late
and beside
room well.
among the
use the sp
The room I am using is turned to East, the sun rises on this side.
You can’t see the sun rise in the winter, but from mid-February until
some time in November the sun pops behind the skyscrapers of
Rotterdam, if it is not a rainy or foggy day, which often happens.
The window covers the whole width of the wall. If you look down,
there is: a parking lot, the end of a metro over-ground line, about
six train lines that cross over and over, marking the point at which
the trains coming from Rotterdam choose to separate, then a big
cross-road, a highway, a ware-house zone, some trees, and the
city skyline.
It is curious to look at this world from the height of the eleventh floor.
Trains, cars, and trucks can be seen at any time of day or night,
pigeons come regularly and seagulls fly over. People are a less
frequent part of the view. No bugs, spiders, ants, bats. Sometimes
the neighbor from downstairs is singing, and sometimes a dog is
barking from one of the apartments below.
If you go down to the mailboxes, you are about two meters below
sea level, that is if there was a flood and the sea resumed its
territory. In that case the room would become a cozy island.
It is nice to return to this stillness in the evening. Sometimes I come
home late and I don’t turn the lights on, it is lighted from outside
and besides that big window I can still see the whereabouts of my
room well. I can expand my thoughts far away in the radioether
among the yellow street lamps. Then and there, here and now, I
use the space to imagine I am somewhere else.
Sunčica Lambić-Fenjčev
36
SPATIAL RESONANCE
For the Gallery every new exhibition is a new story, new relation, new challenge,
new experience...
In the space of the Gallery we evoke another space... In the real, three dimensional space, another space, real or invented, is incorporated by employing the installations, paintings, photographs, video-projections, sounds, scents... In reality we stand
in one space, and in our thoughts and emotions we inhabit another one.
The space of the Contemporary Gallery Zrenjanin exists independently as white,
polished, solemn (“modern white cube”) – on its own, but also as architectural part
of the building of the Theatre executed as well in a purified and slightly strict classical
style on the Square of Freedom within the colourful old city core. As such, seemingly
cold and distant (beautiful, as people often say), this space is a reason and the cause
for numerous thoughts, interests, discussions, happenings, even conflicts, different
points of view, outside and inside within the institution itself, city government as its
founder (alas, lately all the less benevolent benefactor), sister institutions, medias,
artists, experts, interested visitors, accidental passer buys, as well as neighbours from
the institutions and companies within the same building. The Gallery space is simultaneously a centre and a part of the numerous relations by all these factors, artistic and
non-artistic (if today one can make such a distinction at all), defined by behaviour,
act and thought of the people who are in it and who gravitate towards it, as well as a
specific surrounding in which it is situated in. In it one can find public and personal
life crossing paths – the public one, widely known, often polished in its public presentations and media reports, but also profaned by individual, personal animosities and
the personal one, hidden, known only to the employees and close associates.
Still, this space finds the purpose of its existence in the function it fulfils daily.
Different exhibitions revive, redefine and design always afresh this space in accordance with the intentions of the curator and the artist, as well as the audience without
which all of this would have no sense at all. The Gallery space is perhaps at first glance
impersonal and sterile, but at the same time it is the privileged space whose identity
is over and over reconstructed depending on the event and the relations created in it.
The Gallery is a place of possibilities, a space of fantasies – a place where something
can happen.
Sunčica Lambić-Fenjčev
37
The formalistic faith into the autonomy of artwork didn’t last and already during
the 1960s the relation between art and the environment where the artwork is being
created and exhibited is being re-established and it is considered that the meaning
cannot be entirely freed from the social context and cultural connotations. Even the
works created entirely independent from a particular space in which they will exhibited create an ambient whole with the gallery space and they gain the possibility to be
always seen afresh, understood, interpreted.
There are different spaces in the exhibition by Boba Mirjana Stojadinović which
co-exist and intertwine – gallery space and the Belgrade-Rotterdam spatial framework. This spatial framework is simultaneously a mental one, emotional framework
with social, even political, connotations that was created as a personal „positional selfawareness“ of the artist, as an artist and a personality, a position she takes from a place
she comes from (starts from, speaks, stands) in relation to the more narrowly speaking
Dutch and wider European social context.
The „Text Piece“consists of transparent folios glued onto the three gallery
windows, overlooking the Square of Freedom. There is a textual description of the
view from some other three windows in Holland on them. By looking through the
windows of the Gallery onto the Square of Freedom and simultaneously reading the
description of the view through some other windows onto some other distant places
brings in the psychological multiplication of the spaces that are going to exist at the
same place and at the same time while one reads the text and looks through the sight.
But, there is also one local „well-neighbour” catch that can occasionally disrupt the
artist’s intention and the realization of this artistic act – the windows of the Gallery,
otherwise rather closed and unapproachable by way of its construction, are often
overshadowed from the outside with a big sliding panel which is ruthlessly positioned
on behalf of the famous cafe-club from the upper floor of the same building. But, it is
another story, some different relation. Basically, it can also be an example, although in a negative context, how much the works of the contemporary visual culture today cannot exist and survive on their own, but
are always interacting with the surrounding and the people.
The text on the folios has been written down in English, which
is a different language from the one the artist knows and speaks from
birth, according to her origins (Serbian and Bulgarian), and different
from numerous languages of the environment where this work is being
exhibited (Zrenjanin, and Vojvodina is multinational, and thus multilingual environment), but at the same time it is neither a mother tongue
of the Dutch where this description comes from. English is perhaps an
(imposed) universal language, but it is also a language of foreigners,
people in transit, who do not belong to one place. This clash, intertwining or limitation that arises out of the usage of different languages
doesn’t have only formal nature. The language becomes perhaps the
essential element in the work by Boba Mirjana Stojadinović. It is the
relation – sound of different cultures, customs, ideas, thoughts in which
we find many similarities (unison, consonance), but also numerous differences and
discrepancies (dissonance). Are we talking here about dislocation, disorientation, de-
The gallery plate in
the official languages
spoken in Zrenjanin:
Serbian, Hungarian,
Romanian and Slovak.
Sunčica Lambić-Fenjčev
38
territorization, eternal voyage, transit, search without a final destination, permanent
residence, and identity? At the same time being everywhere, and actually nowhere.
Are we then stuck in the sound? Still, even then we cannot avoid different limitations
and demands – the questions who we are and where we come from are important and
we can hardly resist and overcome the barriers of the inheritance of languages, culture,
customs, and nation. In her works Boba Mirjana Stojadinović unitely questions the
place she leaves behind (there) and the new place (here) as well as their mutual interaction; she problematizes the positions of the insider and outsider. The place of origin
gains more intensity and different meaning by distancing from it. At the same time
the new place gives the possibility to construct a new, hybrid identity. The personal
memory and burried feelings come out in the new light. And loneliness is what makes
us vulnerable and gives us the feeling of nostalgia, regardless if perhaps we have been
there, where we started from, just as lonely.
With this exhibition Boba Mirjana Stojadinović gives us an insight into her feelings, memory and experience through images, sounds, language, words... Spaces and
relations that are created and revived in the exhibition make from the audience an
active participant and creator of the overall artistic event, which is also an important
element in the artistic work by Boba Mirjana Stojadinović. In that sense, the performance „A Hole in the Whole“ which will be perfomed in the exhibition is important.
With a video projection the artist will read a text that will take shape of addressing
and conversation with the audience and at the same time will make the audience become an integrative part of the artwork. The exhibition in the Contemporary Gallery
Zrenjanin is a new possibility to create new experience. The opportunity for afresh
overview and questioning of the works all together in the new, different space, their
relation with the space of these works in creating and distribution of new experiences,
attitudes and emotions. The exhibition gives a possibility to depart to another place,
another environment, with different views, thoughts, life and possibility to return to a
space of one’s own, into the life of one’s own, gaining a chance to observe oneself from
a different angle, in the light of some new relations we have experienced and created
in this exhibition.
We wish you a pleasant journey!
Sunčica Lambić – Fenjčev, curator, Contemporary Gallery Zrenjanin
Zrenjanin, May 2010
ODA PROJESİ
39
Can we make a chaologue?
“We decided to refer to the ‘audience’ as guests,
trying to escape the implied passivity in the role
of the audience, as well objectifying the purpose
of realizing this event – for/with the guests.”
From HOTEL NEW YORK project, text by Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
“misafir umduğunu değil, bulduğunu yer”.
“A guest can´t be choosy; he/she has to accept whatever hospitality is offered.”
A nearly translation from an Anatolian proverb
Coming back to the flat - space in a neighbourhood. Total
measurement is 45m2. Three rooms; all opening to one another.
And all the rooms face a courtyard which is surrounded by 6
storey buildings. The courtyard leads to a passage where on one
side opens to a long street that is busy 24 hours, and the other
exit opens to a square where you have a tower in the middle.
What kind of relationship models can exist in such an
environment?
One possibility; imagine we go back that place; the room
in the middle starts to talk about itself. Then the other two
rooms start a dialogue in between while the room in the middle
joins. The courtyard wants to express itself but also needs the
passage, the street, even the square to contribute. Every place
starts to become a space at the moment you recognize there is a
chaologue going on. If a dialogue is a conversation between two
or more people; that is more or less the position of the audience.
Then a “chaologue” is a momentarily recognized uninterrupted
conversation between city components (people, cars, houses,
animals, trees, wind…) which exists anyway but identifies itself
to whoever wants to listen to it; the conversation needs to
take place in public spaces or private spaces treated as public
spaces. So dialogue is what can happen or probably is happening
between the art work and the audience. Where as imagining of
a chalogue to happen you need to be more then an audience;
the collector and the distributer of the work as well.
Oda Projesi’s [1] experience in different places force the
members of the group to think about the so called audience
of the process and product from the moment the members
decided to open their private studio to “public”. The space and
our relationships had no audiences but guests and neighbours
before 2000. Strategies and tactics started to be shaped with the
appearance of the “audience”; before we had doubts concerning
the one that observes, the one that comes to see, to read or just
to look at. How can the roles shift? What can we learn from the
[1] Oda Projesi is an artist collective
based in Istanbul. It is composed of three
members; (Özge Açıkkol, Güneş Savaş
and Seçil Yersel), who transformed their
long-lasting collaboration into an art project
in 2000. The project members met in
1997 and decided to rent and share an
apartment as a studio. Although initially
not intended, the apartment they rented
in Galata eventually evolved into a multipurpose, and public space. For 5 years
they used the same flat for thinking on
space and place; projects in collaboration
with many artists and neighbours. Since
2005 they are spaceless and continue
working on the potentials of space and
relationship models.
www.odaprojesi.org
ODA PROJESİ
daily life practice in the city of İstanbul where everyone is an
active participant to and of the city but where in art the roles
are extremely shaped and organized. How can the acts of the
participatory citizens be discussed with different terminologies
that will allow us to act in between the art system and the daily
life? How can the natural tools created to survive in Istanbul
can be re-thought on, to be given back to the citizens not just
to the art world system? With the identification of the flat, Oda
Projesi had, as “room an exhibition space”, the neighbours as
well became the audiences at some point.
Thinking of the Apartment [2] or Hotel New York. Inquiry
in Location [3] events by Boba Mirjana one can think of the
starting point of the project in the space of Oda Projesi. Özge
Açıkkol from the group was the first to open the privacy of
the apartment to public, with her project “About a Useless
Space.” She emptied out the middle room and turned it into
an “exhibition space” leaving it empty, open to intervention, a
translated text by Georges Perec can be found in the room. The
text was from Species of Spaces and Other Pieces [4], Perec writes:
40
[2] Artwork “Apartment” BMS, Belgrade, 2009.g.
[3] Project “Hotel New York. Inquiry in
Location”, Rotterdam, 2007
This was a collaborative project that had
an independent continuation in Belgrade
with Revisiting Belgrade. Both projects
have been realized in hotel spaces. The
publication Rotterdam Revisited. Revisiting
Belgrade was published in Belgrade in
2009.
“A space without a use: I have several times tried to think of an apartment
in which there would be a useless room, absolutely and intentionally useless.
It wouldn’t be a junkroom, it wouldn’t be an extra bedroom, or a corridor, or
a cubby-hole, or a corner. It would be a functionless space. It would serve for
nothing, relate to nothing. For all my efforts, I found it impossible to follow this
idea through to the end. Language itself, seemingly, proved unsuited to describing
this nothing, this void, as if we could only speak of what is full, useful and
functional. A space without a function. Not ‘without any precise function’ but
precisely without any function; not pluri-functional (everyone knows how to do
that), but a-functional. It wouldn’t obviously be a space intended solely to ‘release’
the others (lumber-room, cupboard, hanging space, storage space, etc.) but a
space, I repeat, that would serve no purpose at all…”
Having such a space in mind all through the projects, the
role of the audience becomes a bit blurry.
[4] Jacques Perec, Species of Spaces and
Other Pieces, Penguin Books, London,
1997
Spatial Empathy
“[Empathy] is what happens to us when we leave our own bodies... and find
ourselves either momentarily or for a longer period of time in the mind of the other.
We observe reality through her eyes, feel her emotions, share in her pain.” [5]
The “apartment” invites you to live an experience of
relating yourself to a place. There is no host in this “apartment”,
so there is no submission to an owner. Invited to this space, you
are more than an audience. But who invites you is a question. If
there is no host then what’s about guest? So you are not a guest
either. The in-between situation of being a guest and audience
[5] Khen Lampert, Traditions of
Compassion: from Religious duty to Social
Activism, Palgrave-Macmillan, 2005, p.
157.
ODA PROJESİ
puts the space itself also in a different category. You are in a
physical apartment, but with what kind of identity? Are you a
guest, a host, a ghost, or simply yourself ? So the “apartment”
also is not an apartment anymore.
Your relation with the space changes according to who
you are, to the many types of encounters with/within the space.
Once you are in “the apartment” what is the demand? Is it still
important to not forget that it is an artwork or you are just in
a “space”. If this was not an “arty” invitation to the space, were
we still to consider the people as audience? In the apartment
you are left to live your own experience. It is not about being
an audience or guest, but it is a matter of willing to have an
empathy with the space. How is it possible to have empathy
with the space? How does it feel as a living organism, to think
about you are the space itself. Literally, how is to be a container,
massive, to have a certain capacity? You have the memory and
emotions so is the space. Once you are in a yet uninhabited
space, the empathy becomes even more difficult but also, it is an
enthusiastic challenge.
The space as a living organism is a place that the users are
transforming according to their different practices/needs. This
is an organic space which has nothing to do with the designer/
planner’s birds eye view. This is a space where you can “enter”,
play, pause and interfere.
If we go back to Oda Projesi, its practice has also an
empathy with the city; how an artist collective can use the
same strategies as the city/habitants does? Despite the flow
of “urban transformation” acts also supported by the Istanbul
2010 European Capital of Culture, the city of Istanbul has still
the potential to serve spaces “without any precise function” for
possible users in need of a “place” for different reasons. What
is said to be “informal” is a structure of survival. The more the
apartment has no function, the more you have the right to the
space.
ODA PROJESİ
İstanbul, April 2010
41
Zoran Erić
42
‘PARTICIPATORY RULES’ OF SELF-INSCRIPTION INTO SPACE
In two-day events, Hotel New York. Inquiry in Location
organized in 2007 in Rotterdam and Revisiting Belgrade held in
Hotel Kasina in Belgrade in 2008, Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
invited [6] her fellow artists to bring over their works, following
the schedule and rhythm she had set, thus transforming the
hotels into the exhibiting space. The ‘rules of participation’
were set by the artist in a complex structural order. In New
York Hotel in Rotterdam the ‘visiting/exhibiting’ artists
were requested to make a booking and visit the space in the
duration of thirty minutes. No record was made of their visit.
The variables that were taken into account were: the number of
visitors at the same time; the works that were installed at each
occasion; the time of the day; and the place for display of work
in the used hotel space.
[6] Hotel New York. Inquiry in Location was
a collaborative project with Maja Bekan and
Gunndis Yr Finnbogadottir, supported by Piet
Zwart Institute, Rotterdam.
In Kasina Hotel in Belgrade, the complexity of the set
structure and the suspense for the audience was strengthened by
the ‘rule’ that visitors, who had to announce their visit by e-mail,
were not informed on the actual happening they are going to
witness in the room 701. The visitors were escorted to the room
where they were left alone to watch the selection of three works
at most, all produced for this occasion.
These events have set the track for exploration of complex
set of relations between the artist and the space that she
occupies with her intervention – space that could serve as means
of expression; as well as the interdependence of artist - public
relation that she is setting for the intervention by establishing
the limits of control of the suggested structure.
This kind of art practice is intended to challenge the
apparent neutrality, at least in the art realm, of the spaces the
artist has used. The context specific aspect of chosen spaces is
put in the shadow by creation of sets of relations between all
agents in the ‘game’, and the process of the event/intervention
itself. The profile of such work departs therefore from a notion
of art that is contextually biased, dependent on its spaces of
display and tries to expose their environment by making the
social organization and ideological operations of that space
visible. On the other hand, what was at stake here, besides the
dislocation from the conventional art venues, was the (hidden)
space as an empty signifier that has to be filled with symbolic
exchange among the artist, her colleagues and the public. All
Photographs top bottom
Hotel New York, Rotterdam, 2007
Hotel Kasina, Belgrade, 2008
Mirijevo apartment, Belgrade, 2009
Zoran Erić
43
of them were engaged in the production of certain microcommunity that was set into play and triggered by the artistic
intervention.
The next step for Boba Mirjana Stojadinović was to let go
of control over the events and happenings in the space she used
for intervention, and not to display art works in the space but
to turn the space and its protagonists themselves into an artistic
event. This happened in the project Apartment, organized in
Belgrade in 2009. [7]
For this occasion, the artist has chosen the new and not yet
inhabited apartment in the remote Belgrade’s neighbourhood of
Mirijevo, in the growing new settlement where even the street
didn’t get a name yet. The artist offered the apartment for the
use at free will of interested public. She has launched the chain
of visits by giving the keys and a notebook with the address to
the first person who was asked to continue with the process by
handing out the keys to the next person he or she chooses after
concluding the stay at the apartment. This process went on and
lasted over the course of the exhibition.
[7] The work was organized in the
framework of the project BELGRADE:
NONPLACES, curated by Una Popović
and Dušica Dražić, production MoCAB,
Belgrade.
The visitors found in the apartment devices like soundrecorder, a photo-camera, dictaphone, a notebook etc. that
they could use at their own will to make a record of their stay.
The apartment itself and the public that was visiting it became
the substance of the artistic work and their interrelation was
‘producing’ the very space in question. This relation could
be linked to the notion of representational spaces (spaces of
representation) introduced by French theorist Henri Lefebvre
in his conceptual triad consisting also of spatial practice of
material or functional space and representations of space - space
as codified language. According to Lefebvre, representational
spaces are:
“directly lived through its associated images and symbols, and hence the
space of ‘inhabitants’ and ‘users’... This is the dominated - and hence passively
experienced - space which the imagination seeks to change and appropriate. It
overlays physical space, making symbolic use of its objects. These spaces tend
towards more of less coherent systems of non-verbal symbols and signs.” [8]
Lefebvre suggested that the social production of space
works through the interaction of these three different processes.
What interest us the most, is the space found, used, occupied
and transformed through everyday activities. Lefebvre insisted
on the importance of considering lived practices and the
symbolic meaning and significance of particular spaces and
spatializations [9]. He implied that individuals produce space
by introducing direction, rotation, orientation, occupation, and
[8] Henri Lefebvre, The Production of
Space, Blackwell, Cambridge MA & Oxford
UK, 1991. pp. 36-39
[9] Doreen Massey, ‘Politics and Space/
Time’, in Michael Keith and Steve Pile
Eds. Place and the Politics of Identity,
Routledge, London, New York, 1996. p.143
Zoran Erić
by organizing a topos through gestures, traces and marks. [10]
Another aspect of the same problem could be seen in
the claim that the way people define their own spaces and
experience them is important in the process of construction of
identity. [11] We could argue even further that the space defines
people in it and that there is strong interrelation between the
behaviour of the person and the space it occupies. The living
space thus materialized represents the ‘spatialized life’, all
activities of an individual are condensed and projected into it,
and represent the life that was to be found in a certain space.
As the artist suggested herself, the visitors of the empty
space of a new apartment were given the chance to ‘inscribe’
themselves into that space [12], or to define and mark the
‘territories of the self ’ (Erving Goffman’s term) [13] a ‘protected
space’ that they had the right to posses, control, use and dispose
of.
By considering this space not as ‘permanently possessed,
egocentric claim, but as a temporary, situational preserve
into whose centre the individual moves’ [14], we could follow
the insertion of each person into a chain of intersubjective
constructions of social interactions in the given spatial
situation. Through the interrelation with the space they
temporary occupied, and by leaving traces of their presence
in documentary form, all ‘users’ tell stories about the
representational space they constructed.
44
[10] Susana Torre, ‚Claiming the Public
Space: The Mothers of Plaza de Mayo‘,
in Jane Rendell, Barbara Penner and lain
Border eds., Gender Space Architecture,
Routledge, London New York, 2000. p.145
[11] Jane Rendell, Introduction: ‚Gender,
Space‘, in Jane Rendell, Barbara Penner
and lain Border eds., Gender Space
Architecture, Routledge, London New York,
2000. p.106
[12] Boba Mirjana Stojadinović, ‚In the
Apartment’, artist’s documentation.
[13] Goffman made distinction between
‘fixed’, ‘situational’ and ‘egocentric’
territories according to their organization,
and suggested that the notion of
territoriality could be extended into the
meaning that doesn’t necessarily have
spatial connotations. What was important
in the analysis of different ‘territories of
the self’ was their socially determined
variability.
[14] Charles Lemert and Ann Branaman
(Eds.) The Goffman Reader Blackwell,
Cambridge MA & Oxford UK, 1997. p. 45
Dr Zoran Erić, curator of the Centre for Visual Culture at MoCAB
Frans-Willem Korsten
45
Water, ice, fire or what is there to know:
Boba Mi rjana Stojadinović’ piece SUN_CE
How to look at this slide show of pictures depicting a
city, always the same city, or better the silhouette of a city
(Rotterdam), above which the sky is filled with ever changing
formations of clouds and condensation trails, pierced through
by the sun, turned into spectacles full of colour by the sun? If
it is a spectacle, what is it a spectacle of ? Why are the frames
always different in size, or slightly tilted? Is it a slide show?
Let’s deal with the clouds first and the way they are made,
both in reality and in different forms of representation.
Clouds themselves cannot be man-made, so it seems.
In order to become visible as a cloud, thousands of tiny little
droplets of water vapour need small particles around which the
vapour can gather. The source of that generation remains illusive
to the eye. Somehow, somewhere, a few droplets start to gather
and this process, after their collective, massive gathering, can
lead to the fragile or mighty objects that we see. These, in turn,
have been depicted throughout the ages in art, in paintings,
sketches, photographs, films, never in their beginnings though,
because these cannot be seen. Clouds are, and are depicted as
such. The media through or in which clouds are represented
differ substantially, however, and as a result clouds work
differently in terms of iconicity, indexicality or symbolization in
different media.
In a fundamental study into the work of Fra Angelico,
entitled Fra Angelico: Dissemblance and Figuration [15], the
French art historian George Didi-Huberman argued that a
‘cloud’ was the pictorial element that escaped the vectorization
and instrumentalisation of perspective, and that was most fit
then to embody and symbolize the un-representable, which in
the case of Fra Angelico was the divine. In this respect DidiHuberman highlighted the fact that there were elements in
renaissance painting that did not so much work iconically,
resembling or mirroring some kind of real object, but
indexically. They formed a trace towards something that could
not be grasped in one view. God was elsewhere but could be
represented through or in a ‘cloud’.
Fra Angelico, The Annunciation,
1435-45, tempera on wood, Museo del
Prado at Madrid
[15] Georges Didi-Huberman, Fra Angelico:
Dissemblance and Figuration, University Of
Chicago Press, 1995
Frans-Willem Korsten
46
With photography, this has become much more
complicated. Photographs can easily be seen as indexically
motivated icons. In their case the index is a trace to the position
from which the photographs were really taken, literally
taking in something that was actually there. Photographs are
predominantly read iconically, therefore, which would turn the
cloud into a thing that can be grasped, having been frozen in the
image.
This may be why Boba has chosen to present the pictures
by means of a slide show, turning each frozen moment into
something that is only momentarily frozen, and constantly on
its way of becoming something else. Moreover, the way in which
the slides are being shown, caught in different sizes and frames
of a black background, gives the photographs a painting-like
quality. It is as if the one topic with the one theme is being
represented by a number of paintings shown at an exhibition, as
a result of which the images re-open the potential that DidiHuberman saw present in the Fra Angelico’s works. Finally,
these paintings are not hung perfectly straight on their digital
wall of black velvet. They appear to be slightly tilted, as if to
suggest that the viewer will have to move his head with the
painting. This brings in the question how the viewer is supposed
to relate to what he sees. In that context it becomes relevant to
note that there are a lot of clouds on these images that are manmade.
Not all clouds are made up of water droplets, especially
not the so-called contrails or condensation trails left behind by
airplanes. These are actually made up of ice, which need socalled ice nucleators to become ice crystals (nucleators that are
bacteria most of the time). So we have fire-machines producing
trails of ice in the skies, shaping some forms of perspective
in this way, that nevertheless may turn into high clouds once
blown apart. In a sense, human beings have become painters of
the skies in a way that was unimaginable in previous centuries.
It has changed our ideas of what the sky is and how we look at
it. We are very much taking part in what we see, as a result of
which we have both become masters of the skies, although it
remains unsure what we are actually mastering.
When Didi Huberman in one other study, Confronting
Images: Questioning the Ends of a Certain History of Art [16],
busied himself with the nature of the history of art, he was
very much concerned with the certainty of how we produce
Slide projection SUN_CE, 2006-2008
[16] Georges Didi-Huberman, Confronting
images: questioning the ends of a certain
history of art, The Pennsylvania State
University Press, University Park, PA, 2005
Frans-Willem Korsten
47
knowledge, not just about art, but since his topic was art: in
art. That certainty, so he argued, depended by and large on the
ability to put things in perspective. Turning towards clouds
he encountered the object that seemed to counter this form of
mastery because it is essentially ungraspable.
The historian is, in every sense of the word, only the fictor, which is to say the
modeller, the artisan, the author, the inventor of whatever past he offers us. And
when it is in the element of art that he thus develops his search for lost time, the
historian no longer even finds himself facing a circumscribed object, but rather
something like a liquid or gas expansion – a cloud that changes shape constantly
as it passes overhead. What can we know about a cloud, save by guessing, and
without ever grasping it completely? (p. 2)
Again, photographs may seem to contradict the very
thing Didi-Huberman is arguing for here. For how can a
photographer be a fictor, or an inventor? Do not photographs
testify of what was, capturing death, de-liquifying things that
were liquid, turning into solid ice what was fluid?
Boba’s piece depicts skies filled with clouds that seem
to be grasped photographically and are presented in the
form of a slide show. In the shape of a slide show they almost
invite us to accept their grasp-ability as if they form some
kind of reasserting background that we know. In the constant
rearrangement of place and frame, however, or in their
repetition with a difference, they ask us to look at in a painterly
way, adopting a painterly attitude.
They ask us to look more closely, and to wonder what trace
we are supposed to follow to bring us elsewhere, to something
un-representable.
The un-representable, here, could concern the fact that
this is the city of Rotterdam, which up until today has not
forgotten, nor does it seem able to forget, the fact that it was
an open city which was bombarded nevertheless on the 14th of
May 1940, around 1.30 pm. Its heart was taken out, such is still
the image that defines the attitude of Rotterdam’s inhabitants.
Yet, that heart is now filled more and more with wonders of
architecture. Rotterdam is the only city in the Netherlands
with a silhouette, a skyline. One could read the spectacle of
the skies, then, with the dark line of the city underneath, as a
symbolical representation of former destruction, ungraspable
in its impact and content. I think, however, that this would be
too symbolical. It would turn the piece into a memento mori in
the double sense of the word, reflecting backwards and forwards
Rotterdam, The Netherlands, before and
after WWII
Frans-Willem Korsten
48
(to possible future destruction). This only works if we know
this is Rotterdam, whereas it could have been any modern city.
Accepting this option would kill the work.
The un-representable in this piece is, paradoxically, being
represented, but not in its own strict terms. It concerns the
sun, that allows us to see and to know, but is also able to dazzle
and blind us if we look into it directly, as Derrida noticed in
Margins of Philosophy [17] (reflecting on Descartes’ idea of God).
It announces itself through the colours of the skies. But it shows
itself also, both slowly rising and immediately appearing, as a
force piercing through the fabric of clouds, whether made by
nature or man. It is the sun that gives the silhouette of the city
underneath it, its shape, depthless.
[17] Jacques Derrida, Margins of
Philosophy, University Of Chicago Press,
1985
Remarkably enough, the blinding force of the sun is kept
alive in this piece, not by blinding us entirely, but by piercing
a little hole in our vision, each time anew on a different spot.
Thus, the geometrical shape of the skyline underneath the
skies that we can see and could learn to know, gradually gets a
companion that we do not see but can feel as paper in which
a figure is cut out by a needle. This is not the sublime of a
sun blasting us apart in awe and fascination, but the gradual,
chirurgical reconnaissance of man’s mastery. Beautiful, painful.
It leaves us in such a state that when we blink our eyes, the
silhouette of the city will be gone, but the sun’s pattern will still
be there, as an index to what we think we can see, but will never
be able to grasp.
Frans-Willem Korsten – Erasmus University of Rotterdam, University of Leiden
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
49
THE SHAPE OF THE WORDS WE LIVE IN
In this text I was considering the places of absence and
places of presence. But let’s start from the start.
In dealing with the space the starting point, for me, is not
signified by physical coordinates only, but also by a network
of relations we’re being caught in, and which we might wish
to transcend at some point in time. Each new discovery of
the starting point means restoration of the intensity of the
relationship to the present moment.
”In conversation” with Catherine David [18], Irit Rogoff
discusses the possibility of changing the naturalized relations
between subjects and places that traditional geography has
established:
“How can we make un-belonging a kind of active realm by which to
somehow relate to place and not through the identifications demanded by the
nation-state? How can we find a whole set of strategies by which we relate to
a particular place by actively ‘un-belonging’ ourselves from it? For me, it is a
very active, almost daily process by which you are constantly trying to think of
positionality – one’s constantly contingent, constantly shifting positionality
towards place.” [p. 81]
Perhaps with un-belonging Irit Rogoff understands the
transaction between belonging and not belonging to a certain
environment. That environment can be only the one that is
being re-questioned, an environment that has been related to
before we became aware of it, perhaps the exact environment
we are stepping out from / leaving. Un-belonging is then a
repetitive process of establishing and renewing the relation with
the environment with which we already have strong relations,
a process of becoming aware and making more sensitive the
relation among own constitutive forces.
What a two-year stay in Holland [19] provided me with
is the recognition of own chronology of disparate territorial
origin. Through a series of works I present within the exhibition
“Stuck in the Sound” produced in the period 2006-2009, which
from a personal viewpoint consider the time and space multifacetness within the end of the first decade of the 21st century
in the spatial confines between Belgrade and Rotterdam [20], I
am dealing namely with that – the experience of the new, and
through the new experience the effort to envision what I had
experienced as old, rounded up, and completed. The initial
idea has been to question the position that has been dislocated,
a position that doesn’t belong to Belgrade I started from, but
[18] Irit Rogoff, “In conversation, Catherine
David and Irit Rogoff”, From Studio to
Situation, ed. Claire Doherty, Black Dog
Publishing Limited, London/England, 2004.
[19] From 2006 - 2008 I attended and
graduated Master Fine Arts programme at
Piet Zwart Institute Rotterdam.
http://pzwart.wdka.nl/fine-art/
[20] Belgrade
Rotterdam 44°49′14″N
51°55′51″N
20°27′44″E
4°28′45″E
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
also doesn’t belong to Rotterdam I arrived to – a simultaneous
position of an insid(er) and outsid(er), a position that keeps
rediscovering why it’s not belonging to a certain environment
while it’s part of it.
At this point I suggest we take a turn around the
exhibition.
*
The gallery has three windows that overview Zrenjanin
central square – the Square of Freedom. Looking through the
windows one can see the monument to the king Petar I the
Liberator, Roman Catholic Church, the City Hall [21]. Each
window, which for this occasion has been covered with different
coloured transparent folio: orange, blue, yellow, there is a
textual description of the view from another three windows.
Those another three windows are situated in an apartment
where I lived in Holland, which from the height of the eleventh
floor overlook three sides of the world, towards Rotterdam, The
Hague and the Port of Rotterdam. As a contemplation gesture,
this description has defined a position of one’s own, a looking
position from the “kitchen”, the “terrace” and the “bedroom”,
revealing geographical, demographical and social position.
The text of this “Text Piece” (2008) has originally been written
in English, and not in my mother tongue Bulgarian, or father
tongue Serbian, which is also an issue of speech, language,
expressing own world view and the ways we perceive and behold
the reality around us. I will return to the issue of language once
more.
One day from my studio in Rotterdam I saw the
neighbours taking out the furniture they didn’t need any more,
which they left in front of the building so that anyone who
thinks might use it can take it. Two well preserved sofas and
an armchair, a table in between, a wardrobe and a coat-hanger
have been arranged as if they were in a room, in enclosed private
space, although they were on the pavement, in the street [22].
People started approaching and situated themselves comfortably
into this room without walls, outlined by the furniture itself.
This was the first sight from the series of photographs “Inside
space out” (2007-2009): with photographs I started noting
the situations in which the body of the passer-bys, viewers and
audience is inscribed into space, or a haptic sight. Thus the
doormat was on the threshold, but on a threshold of a sidewalk,
and actually on a busy street in Vlaardingen, the blue suitcase
and the green vacuum cleaner in Paris were stored by the street
sign or a garbage bin as if this was their regular house place, a
pair of white female shoes was neatly put aside in front of the
50
[21] The Contemporary Gallery in Zrenjanin
is situated in the building of the National
Theatre Toša Jovanović and it was founded
in 1964 as a direct consequence of the Art
Colony in Ečka, a village nearby Zrenjanin
(founded itself in 1956).
There are no reliable sources that
would provide the precise date the theatre
building was erected, but it must have been
before 1839 when it was first mentioned in
the historical documents.
The building of the theatre has a
legend that connects this edifice with the
Fortress of Bečkerek (former name of
Zrenjanin). According to it the Spanish,
who had been settled in Bečkerek in the
18th centrury, tore down the last remnants
of the fortress around 1730 and from
the remaining stone have had build the
wheat storage, the biggest building in the
settlement at the time. A century later the
City Magistracy bought the edifice from a
Jewish family and turned the interior into a
theatre with 246 stalls seats, 210 balcony
seats and 200 standing places on the third
gallery.
As for a comparison, Serbian National
Theatre in Novi Sad was founded in 1861,
and the National Theatre in Belgrade in
1868.
[22] Roterdam, 2008.
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
Amsterdam cinema, as well as a pair of empty coat hangers
which were hanging on the facade ornament as they would be
on the closet door, or a bunch of keys left on the facade brim in
Belgrade as if they were dropped upon entering the apartment
they had just unlocked.
The mediums I work with use certain materiality, making
the text become an image; printed photograph shapes a cone;
the space doesn’t contain, but points to someone’s experience;
the sound in one space measures the time of another... Do
photographs have sound? Can you smell the shape of the
objects?
Photography has always superimposed itself as a medium
for documenting a situation, for marking down visual
information about a certain situation in a certain context. For
the piece “Apartment” (2009) photography does exactly that.
The situation of the work itself is as follows: on the first day
of the exhibition BELGRADE: NONPLACES [23] I give a
notebook with instructions how to reach an apartment and
a key to it enclosed. The visitor is asked to forward the key
and the notebook within one day to the next visitor of one’s
choice, who will forward the key to someone third, etc. The
apartment is situated in a newly built block of flats in Belgrade,
in Mirijevo, in an unnamed street as yet. When the visitor alone
or accompanied with friends goes to the apartment, s/he finds
perfectly empty space of a small two-room apartment with a
beautiful view of the neighbouring hill and river Danube in
the distance. There is no one watching over the comings and
goings, the stay of the visitors is not being tracked in any way
apart from the traces left by visitors themselves – the notes in
the notebook, the photographs on the camera or recording
the sound on a Dictaphone, which were gadgets left in the
apartment. The very last guest on the last day of August 2009,
whoever it is, is asked to call me and return the key.
From the whole process 188 photographs were the most
extensive material that remained and along with the audio
recording of the noises of the apartment recorded by three
visitors, this is what can bring closer to someone who hadn’t
been there what a visitor saw or experienced in the apartment.
The big incoherent series of photographs was made by a group
of people who do not know each other, a micro community of
strangers.
What wasn’t noted, and which is important, is that during
that one month of the work functioning and visits of people
who’s number I can’t reconstruct precisely, there wasn’t a single
problematic situation; the photo camera, Dictaphone and the
51
[23] The exhibition BELGRADE:
NONPLACES, curated by Una Popović and
Dušica Dražić, was held in the Salon of
Museum of Contemporary Art Belgrade in
August 2009.
http://belgradenonplaces09.wordpress.com/
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
key have been neatly returned, and the apartment was left as it
was found. Although the keys were given ‘upon a word’, they
were keenly and earnestly forwarded to the each next person.
From the reactions that reached me the visitors mainly
dealt with themselves in the apartment – the lazy summer days
in the shadow of the new space provided the freedom to be
with oneself uninterruptedly, to dream or nap or project own
life onto the walls of that space. The work “Apartment” was
a gift to the visitors that gave them their time and their body.
By forwarding the key from one visitor to another a small
community of people tacitly formed, people who might never
meet, people who spent some time in a space of someone they
will never meet, and all they share is a memory of a sojourn in
some empty apartment-like space in Belgrade in August 2009.
Through this and some other works I have discovered deep
interest in the audience and questioned it. This might be due
to the fact that in Belgrade, as a place of my fundamental art
education and encounter with the art world, the audience is not
much cared for. As if the exchange between the art institution
and the artist is exclusive. The art market is in a rudimentary
stadium, and art critique and thinking about art these years
hasn’t been much better or is completely hermetic as in the
high-profiled, so in the general public. The other extreme can
be viewed in situations where the audience is approached with
populist projects, which is alltogether another story.
I am also interested in the ways in which relations are
established between the artist and the audience. At times when
the gaze and the experience of each member of the audience
becomes an art work in in-advance given conditions, the artist
often withdraws as if s/he steps out of the piece and gives
place to the audience to ‘fill it up’. This situation can become
manipulation with the audience and this risk appears inevitably
in every interactive art with action and reaction. This can be an
effort to detect the state of relations between the artist and the
audience and the piece in space, and affect them. As with the
notion and practice of audience, so with the issue of space and
social norms, I am interested in questioning the issues that are
generally self-understood in a way that will not be self-implied.
For example, how does an artist survive in this distribution
of power and incapacity? How to materialize these relations?
How to mediate these relations to someone who wasn’t a direct
participant?
On the other hand, researching space is something I am
deeply intrigued by: the space of the room you’re in, the space
between you and me, the history of the space where I will
52
A visualization of possible relation of two
places: the distance can relate and connect
and it can also divide.
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
53
show my works, etc. Under the notion of space I’d say I’m also
interested in the qualities of the body in space, the movement
of the body, or rather the relation of two bodies in space, their
temporality, impermanence, and the (in)stability of physical
limits of space.
Looking from a certain perspective I’d say that coming
from a territory that is considered a periphery, I am being
drawn to the so called centre. I am especially interested in
looking at the way that is being traversed between these two
points. I am interested in the research of the nuances and
tones of definitive and hard positions, and even more their
inconsistence, displacement and glide of the notions of centre
and periphery, the impossibility to fix them. Any two “worlds”,
each two entities that can mutually recognize each other and
spot mutual differences are the two worlds I am drawn to. I am
interested in the position of someone who obtains an insight in
both of them, the possibility to envision one through the other
and especially in relation to the third one, and to whom these
entities are transparent.
„What interests me here is not so much disappearance as a manner of being,
but rather the “system of discontinuities” that represents so many different modes
of appearance or emergence.“, Daniel Birnbaum [24]
“HEMA/HEMA” (2006-2008) is a series of works that
were created after I (mis)read a commercial sign of the chain
of stores HEMA (HEMA = Hollandsche Eenheidsprijzen
Maatschappij Amsterdam, Holland shop for equally-priced
merchandise) on Rotterdam stock-market square (Beurse),
instinctively reading it in Serbian, in Cyrillic, as „nema“,
meaning „there is no“, „none“. Dealing with the sign HEMA,
with the word, letters, graphic code, the contrast between
the sense I read and the surrounding, I faced the notion of
disappearance and absence.
In the moment of confrontation with the grandiose red
letters that screamed that something was missing, through
the language I reached the idea of something missing. While
adapting to the new environment, I examined what was no
more surrounding me, as well as the significance and the
meaning of what I was intellectually aware that is extreme –
the bombing, the lack of basic living supplies from the stores,
the straightforward state violence. In a way I tried to “digest”
emotionally what I already knew mentally. The problem arose
when I sensed that I don’t want to apply the “formulas” from
the past onto the future, which in time opened as a possibility
in Holland. In that sense “HEMA/HEMA” (2006-2008) is a
[24] Daniel Birnbaum
Who Is Me Today?, FORART, Institute
For research within international
contemporary art,
http://www.forart.no/index2.php?option=com_
iarticles&no_html=1&Itemid=28&task=file&id=129
Beurs Square (stock market square),
Rotterdam, 2008
To the left is the shop HEMA; ahead is the
underground shopping mall that traverses
under the central boulevard Coolsingel; to
the right is the building of the stock market,
and next to it is the World Trade Center.
The high bell-tower signals the daily
opening of the world stock market in New
York.
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
series of works that stemmed out of the necessity to secure the
past in order to envision the future. Looking back, the twist was
that the world I found myself in wasn’t neutral, it was simply
different. I was neither ready to adjust to it, nor my surrounding
had the capacity to assimilate me instantly. Through the sign
HEMA the process of harmonization of these two sides
showed certain incompatibility, which revealed many folds
and deflections, as in the Serbian so in the Dutch or European
environment that can be beheld from such an uprooted, unbelonging position.
Facing the misunderstanding of the intellectual
surrounding of my recognition of “something that is not there”
in a social, economical and political sense, reading it through
the prism of political and economical situation in Serbia, and
also in Europe in a way, the word HEMA became a shibboleth
[25], a word that unlocked a world torn apart.
The usage of a particular language potentially implies
addressing every person who can understand that language
– the bigger area it covers – the more ears who can decipher
it, the more eyes who can read it, which in my case would be
English; the smaller area the language covers the more specific
the meaning and the more distinctive message it conveys –
Serbian and Bulgarian. Speaking a foreign language is like using
someone else’s words, habits, body mimic, mouth... It is like
the memory of things that had happened to someone else, but
they still find a way to show in the words you note down, or
through the air that bristles through your teeth and makes the
sound other people understand too. Using a language that is not
maternal or paternal can be very cosy, as it can come with the
ease of a borrowed thing that no one expects to have it returned.
It will never be yours, but it will never abandon you either. Like
in a mirror this can be seen in the gaze of a person who doesn’t
understand Serbian and to whom the work “nema” might be
explainable, but will remain untranslatable.
The photograph “HEMA/HEMA hand” (2007) is a
snapshot of a moment when the recognizable logo HEMA was
pressed into the soft and tender skin of the forearm, only to
have the inscription of the skin irritation disappear without a
trace in the coming minutes. In a performative way this stigma is
actualizing what is not there.
The video “A Hole in the Whole” (2008) is representing
footage of a fifteen minute walk from the studio, through the
building outside to the courtyard, on the street and the sidewalk
to the actual sign HEMA on the square. The video reveals
Rotterdam urban routine at 9 a.m., while the simultaneous
54
[25] A shibboleth is any distinguishing
practice which is indicative of one’s
social or regional origin. It usually refers
to features of language, and particularly
to a word whose pronunciation identifies
its speaker as being a member or not a
member of a particular group.
Pieter Bruegel the Elder
The “Little” Tower of Babel
c. 1563, Oil on panel, Museum Boymans-van
Beuningen, Rotterdam
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
voice of the invisible walking “eye” thinks about one’s own
experience and the possibilities to transgress systematic violence
of the state that resulted in the dismemberment of Yugoslavia;
it also opens up the questions of personal attitude and striking a
position by a person who grew up with such experience.
The video “Sirens” (2007-2008.) [26] shows quiet daily
sights with a corresponding sound of the piercing sirens in case
of general danger – the sound of these sirens unmistakably
evoke the memories of the air raid sirens I witnessed during
the bombing of Yugoslavia [27] in 1999. In the video none of
the passer-buys seems to notice the disturbing sound. [28] The
sirens are a recording of monthly try-outs that take place in
Rotterdam every first Monday in the month at noon sharp. It is
worth mentioning that Rotterdam is one of the world’s biggest
harbours and that part of the harbour is a vast chemical industry
industrial zone, and also that Rotterdam’s entire centre was
carpet bombed in the beginning of WWII and thus erased.
These two video works are considering the ricochet of past
experiences, observing what appears as already seen, or listening
to what appears as already heard. The sound of sirens can be
perceived as an echo of the past, but also as a training for future
disasters.
The slide projection of 350 photographs of sun-rises
taken from the same spot over a year and a half comprises the
work “Sun_ce” (2006-2008). This sequence of peaceful sunny
photographs gives a meditative colouring about the rhythm of
the city, a rhythm that far surpasses it. These photographs have
been taken from one of the windows a description of which is
on one of the coloured windows in the Gallery...
*
While preparing to go to Rotterdam I anticipated a period
of adaptation to the new environment and that in that period
I’d shape the perception of the environment I came to, as well
as the one I came from. In time I started being fascinated by
the idea of embracing and working with this period of fresh
impressions, to work with the state of confusion. There was no
way I could know what and how things were bound to happen,
but I wished to be open towards the process of adaptation to
the new. The central thoughts in this process dealt with the
exchange between me and the memory of self – trying to make
a stance to look upon myself as someone else. The stay in the
unknown environment offered me the position of someone who
doesn’t identify with the codes of the environment one finds
oneself in and just the same to take a distance from the codes of
the environment one comes from.
55
[26] In Greek mythology, the Sirens were
dangerous bird-women, portrayed as
seductresses who lured nearby sailors
with their enchanting music and voices
to shipwreck on the rocky coast of their
island.
[27] In 1999 the Yugoslavia consisted of
Serbia and Montenegro.
[28] In time I realized that the inhabitants of
Rotterdam are used to hearing the sound
of the sirens in the beginning of every
month. However, hearing the same sound
another day and in another time brings
great discomfort, as was the case with the
exhibition “My Travels With Barry” in the
Centre for contemporary art TENT. where
this work was shown.
Sun rise above Rotterdam
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
The decision to temporarily change the place of living
was also a wish to discover own vulnerability. Moving to an
unknown environment meant considering the ways which
make me an insider and also an outsider. But what I couldn’t
foresee is that by changing the habitus one changes the notion
of wholeness or in my case I saw more clear my own not
belonging to a monolith environment, to one language and
being bisected – adding a third gravitational field to my original
two. The struggle with the “monolith environment” is of course
contemplation on the nationalistic inheritance of the late XX
c. in Serbia, but just the same, although not as condemned,
the basis of each European country. The high rhetoric of the
communality has been compromised without much chance of
restoration.
The part of the works has been focussed on the question
how hard it is to criticize and work on the problematic issues,
like finding a position that is supposedly yours if one reads it
from the ‘national’ context, or simply environmental context,
of opposing the current of the conventions, wherever they
may lead, to analyze it, think it through. And also how much
more hard is it to suggest an actual position one may take,
to actually find expression in “writing without hate, without
bitterness, without fear, without protest, without preaching”
as Virginia Wolf puts it [29]; to be in the middle of it, to feel all
the pressure, all the urge, and yet to be able to express a position
that is delicate, to strike a position that is undeniable, that arises
questions but is positive itself, wide enough to encompass other
people’s faults without dismissing own ones.
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
May 2010
56
[29] Virginia Wolf, A Room of One’s Own
[1929], The Hogarth Press, London, 1978,
p. 101
BIOGRAFIJA
57
BIOGRAPHY
Mag. Boba Mirjana Stojadinović [1977, Srbija/Bugarska]
Diplomirala i magistrirala na Fakultetu likovnih umetnosti u Beogradu,
i magistrirala na Institutu Pit Cvart u Roterdamu, Holandija i Fakultetu
umetnosti u Plimutu, Engleska.
http://bobaart.wordpress.com
MFA Boba Mirjana Stojadinović [1977, Serbia/Bulgaria]
Graduated and received MA fine arts at the Faculty of Fine Arts in
Belgrade, RS and received MA fine arts at the Institute Piet Zwart in
Rotterdam, NL and Faculty of Arts in Plymouth, UK.
http://bobaart.wordpress.com
SAMOSTALNE IZLOŽBE
2010, Zaglavljeni u zvuku, Savremena galerija Zrenjanin
2009, Procep u celini, Kulturni centar Rex, Beograd
2006, Ulaz, Galerija FLU, Beograd
2005, Galerija, Galerija Doma omladine Beograda
2003, Punkt, Galerija Remont, Beograd
2002, Šetači/ šaptači = Razgovor sa senkom = Rasipanje senke, Galerija
DOB, Beograd
1999, Neutrino, Galerija Kulturnog centra “Laza Kostic”, Sombor
1998, Inventar ličnosti, Galerija SKC, Beograd
SOLO EXHIBITIONS
2010, Stuck in the Sound, Contemporary Gallery Zrenjanin, RS
2009, A Hole in the Whole, Cultural Centre Rex, Belgrade
2006, Entrance, FLU Gallery, Belgrade
2005, Gallery, House of Youth Gallery, Belgrade
2003, Punkt, Remont Gallery, Belgrade
2002, Walkers/whisperers= Conversation with the Shadow =
Dismemberment of the Shadow, DOB Gallery, Belgrade
1999, Neutrino, Cultural Centre Gallery “Laza Kostic”, Sombor
1998, Inventory of Personality, SKC Gallery, Belgrade
PROJEKTI
2010. Umetnik kao publika, sa organizacijom Anonymous said: ,
Beograd
2008, Ponovna poseta Beogradu, Hotel Kasina, Beograd
2007, Hotel Njujork. Upit u lokaciju, sa Majom Bekan i Gunndis Yr
Finnbogadottir, Hotel Njujork, Roterdam
2006, Autoplay, Galerija Kontekst, Beograd; organizacija DEZ ORG;
učesnici ODA PROJESI, Turska; H.arta, Rumunija; Vizionarsko
društvo, Bosna; Kontekst galerija i DEZ ORG, Srbija
Od 2005, Projekat DEZ ORG – grupa umetnika
[http://dezorgbgd.wordpress.com]
2001-2002, Meeting Line – Linija susreta®, sa Tomasom Saracenom,
Beograd
PROJECTS
2010. Artist as Audience, with organization Anonymous said: , Belgrade
2008, Revisiting Belgrade, Hotel Kasina, Belgrade
2007, Hotel New York. Inquiry in Location, with Maja Bekan and Gunndis
Yr Finnbogadottir, Hotel New York, Rotterdam, NL
2006, Autoplay, Kontekst Gallery, Belgrade; participants ODA PROJESI,
Turkey; H.arta, Romania; Visionary Society, Bosnia; Kontekst gallery and
DEZ ORG, Serbia
Since 2005, Project DEZ ORG – artist group
[http://dezorgbgd.wordpress.com]
2001-2002, Meeting Line – Linija susreta®, with Tomas Saraceno,
Belgrade
PUBLIKACIJE
2010, Zaglavljeni u zvuku, objavila Savremena galerija Zrenjanin
2008, Roterdam ponovo posećen. Ponovna poseta Beogradu, objavio
DEZ ORG, Beograd
ODABRANE GRUPNE IZLOŽBE
2009
BEOGRAD: NEMESTA, Salon Muzeja savremene umetnosti, Beograd
2008
Post Dort, Centrum Beeldende Kunst Dordrecht, Dordrecht, Holandija
My Travels With Barry, TENT. Roterdam
Singingchairs, interaktivni performans, kustos Lucia Babina, NAi,
Roterdam
Kolekcija, Telenorova kolekcija savremene srpske umetnosti,
Umetnički paviljon Cvijeta Zuzorić, Beograd
Perfect Society, Schouwburg, Roterdam
2006
Keine Wunderkammer, kustos Ivana Moncolova, C2C Gallery, Prag,
Češka Republika
Keine Wunderkammer, HIT Gallery, Bratislava, Slovačka
Plus plus, Galerija Zvono, Beograd
Zoom to Fit, Galerija O3ON, Beograd
2005
Real Presence – Floating sites, prateći program 51. esposizione
internationale d’arte, Venecija, Italija
2nd Attitude festival, Cultural Center Magaza, Bitola, Makedonija
Speak up!, Myymala2 Gallery, Helsinki, Finska
PUBLICATIONS
2010, Stuck in the Sound, published by Contemporary Gallery Zrenjanin
2008, Rotterdam revisited. Revisiting Belgrade, published by DEZ ORG,
Belgrade
SELECTED GROUP EXHIBITIONS
2009
BELGRADE: NONPLACES, Salon of the MoCA, Belgrade
2008
Post Dort, Centrum Beeldende Kunst Dordrecht, Dordrecht, NL
My Travels With Barry, TENT. Rotterdam
Singingchairs, interactive perfomance, curated by Lucia Babina, NAi,
Rotterdam
The Collection, a collection of contemporary art from Serbia by
TELENOR, Art pavillion Cvijeta Zuzorić, Belgrade
Perfect Society, Schouwburg, Rotterdam
2006
Keine Wunderkammer, curated by Ivana Moncolova, C2C Gallery, Prague,
Czech Republic
Keine Wunderkammer, HIT Gallery, Bratislava, Slovakia
Plus plus, Galerija Gallery, Belgrade
Zoom to Fit, O3ON Gallery, Belgrade
2005
Real Presence – Floating sites, 51. esposizione internationale d’arte,
Venice
2nd Attitude festival, Cultural Center Magaza, Bitola, Macedonia
Speak up!, Myymala2 Gallery, Helsinki, FI
SADRŽAJ
58
CONTENTS
TEKSTOVI
TEXTS
2 PROSTORNA REZONANCA
Sunčica Lambić-Fenjčev
36
SPATIAL RESONANCE, Sunčica Lambić-Fenjčev
5 Da li možemo da napravimo haolog?
ODA PRODŽESI
39
Can we make a chaologue? , ODA PROJESİ
8
„PRAVILA UČEŠĆA“ ZA SAMOUPISIVANJE U PROSTOR, Zoran Erić
42
‘PARTICIPATORY RULES’ OF SELF-INSCRIPTION INTO SPACE, Zoran Erić
11 Voda, led, vatra ili šta je TO što tu treba znati: komad SUN_CE Bobe Mirjane
Stojadinović, Frans-Vilem Korsten
15 OBLIK REČI U KOJIMA ŽIVIMO,
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
57
Biografija
45
Water, ice, fire or what is there to know: Boba Mirjana Stojadinović’ piece SUN_CE, Frans-Willem Korsten
49
THE SHAPE OF THE WORDS WE LIVE IN,
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
57
Biography
A LIST OF TEXT WORKS
LISTA TEKSTUALNIH RADOVA
Korice spolja
Korice iznutra
23, 25
33
Zaglavljeni u zvuku, 2006.
S vremena na vreme, 2009.
Od/Do, 2008.
Deo Tekstualnog rada, 2008.
Covers outside
Covers inside
1, 60
35
Stuck in the Sound, 2006
From Time To Time, 2009
From/To, 2008
A piece of the Text piece, 2008
CENTRAL PAGES - LIST OF IMAGES
STRANICE U SREDINI - LISTA SLIKA
left - Photograph from Hotel Kasina, project 24 Revisiting Belgrade, 2008
right - The view from the window towards Rotterdam, 2007
24
levo - Fotografija iz hotela Kasina, projekat Ponovna poseta Beogradu, 2008.
desno - Pogled kroz prozor ka Roterdamu, 2007.
26
gore levo - Trg berze, Roterdam, 2007.
gore desno i dole - Postavka rada Procep u 26 upper left - Beurse Square, Rotterdam, 2007
upper right and below - The setup of the piece
27
Zastava, rad u nastajanju
27 The Flag, work in progress
28
gore - Trg berze, Roterdam, 2007.
dole - Postavka rada Procep u celini, TENT., upper - Beurse Square, Rotterdam, 2007
lower - The setup of the piece A Hole in the Whole, Roterdam, 2008.
28 29
HEMA/HEMA ruka, fotografija, 2007
29 HEMA/HEMA hand, photograph, 2007
30
gore - Kadrovi iz videa Sirene, 2007-2008.
dole - Fotografija iz serije Unutrašnji prostor spolja, 2008-2009.
upper - Frames from the video Sirens, 2007-8
30 lower - Photograph form the series Inside Space Out, 2008-9
31
Kadrovi iz videa Procep u celini, 2008.
31
Frames from the video A Hole in the Whole, 2008
32
Dokumentarne fotografije rada Stan, 2009.
34
Slajd iz rada Sun_Ce, 2006-2008.
32 Documentary photographs for the piece Apartment, 2009
34 Slide from the piece Sun_Ce, 2006-2008
celini,
CBK, Dordreht, 2008.
A Hole in the Whole, CBK, Dordrecht, 2008.
TENT., Rotterdam, 2008.
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
ZAGLAVLJENI U ZVUKU / STUCK IN THE SOUND
Katalog povodom izložbe u Savremenoj galeriji Zrenjanin
A catalogue published on the occasion of the exhibition in Contemporary Gallery in Zrenjanin
15-28. maj / May 2010.
SAVREMENA GALERIJA ZRENJANIN / CONTEMPORARY GALLERY ZRENJANIN
Trg slobode 7, 23000 Zrenjanin, Srbija
Tel: +381 23 562 566, +381 23 561 775, tel/fax: +381 23 562 593
E-mail: [email protected]
www.galerija.rs
Direktor / Director: Radovan Živankić
Kustos / Curator: Sunčica Lambić-Fenjčev
Umetnički savet / Art Council: Dr Ješa Denegri, Sava Stepanov, Sunčica Lambić-Fenjčev
Tehničko osoblje / Technicians: Ivica Đuričin, Slavko Kujundžić, Saša Đuričin
Hvala / Thanks to: Slavica Popov
Katalog u celini pripremila (urednik, dizajn, prevod) / Catalogue prepared in its entirety (editor, design, translation):
Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
Izdavač / Publisher: Savremena galerija Zrenjanin
Za izdavača / For the publisher: Radovan Živankić
Štampa / Print by: Art Concept, Zrenjanin
Tiraž / Print run: 100
Sve fotografije osim na str. / All photographs except on p. 11 & 45, 13 & 47, 20 & 54 © Boba Mirjana Stojadinović
Fotografija “HEMA/HEMA ruka” - zahvalnica / photo credits “HEMA/HEMA hand” - Maurice Brandts
Tekstovi / Texts © Boba Mirjana Stojadinović i autori tekstova / and the authors
CIP - Каталогизација у публикацји
Библиотека Матице српске, Нови Сад
Katalog je realizovan uz pomoć
Ministarstva kulture Republike Srbije
75.071.1:929 Stojadinović M. (083.824)
BOBA Mirjana Stojadinović : katalog / [autori tekstova
Sunčica Lambić-Fenjčev ... et al . ]. – Zrenjanin : Savremena
galerija, 2010 (Zrenjanin : Art concept). – 60 str.:
ilustr.; 21 cm
Tiraž 100.
ISBN 987-86-6063-013-3
1. Ламбић-Фењчев, Сунчица [autor]
а) Стојадиновић, Мирјана (1977-) – Изложбени каталози
COBISS.SR-ID 252073223
Realizaciju izložbe omogućili:
Grad Zrenjanin
Centar za vizuelnu kulturu
"Zlatno oko" Novi Sad
to
By the time you read this
you will have disappeared
from my memory.
Download

BOBA Zvuk_Sound - Boba Mirjana Stojadinović