It's OK I Know What I'm Doing

top

It’s OK I Know What I’m Doing

Authors: Siniša Radulović, Chitka, Slavica Obradović, Dušan Rajić, Jelena Pantelić, Ma Qiusha, Isidora Krstić, Marko Tirnanić, Rora Blue

gallery Reflektor, Užice, September 2019.

READ CURATORIAL CONCEPT

Pitanje koje se rađa iz urbanih punktuma savremenog sveta i koje isti konstantno postavlja: “šta se dešava sa granicom kada kartografska linija kolabira?”, mutira i postaje još glasnije kao metafora. Svakodnevno, i na svim planovima, susrećemo se sa bezbrojnim, nevidiljvim granicama koje osvešćujemo obično tek pošto ih dodirnemo, i tek tada, suočeni sa ugrožavanjem, ili potpunim kolapsom fiktivne slobode postajemo svesni okruženja koje je formira i definiše. Živetiu savremenosti obećava maksimalnu slobodu, mogućnost realizacije, i otvoreni sistem ali se isti ispostavlja kao fantazija, i privid slobode kao osnovna odlika “društva kontrole” o kom Delez govori, postaje stvarnost koju zapravo živimo. Paradoksalno, mnogo toga je u svojoj suštini dobrovoljno: sarađujemo sa korporativnim nadgledanjem i kamerama, jer nam obećavaju sigurnost, pristajemo na deljenje podataka i nadziranje jer nam obećava zaštitu, dozvoljavamo da budemo locirani, jer je komfornije. Kontrola se prodaje pod različitim pseudonimima i nalazimo se u onoj tački u kojoj ništa ne počinjemo od nule, ali nikada ni ne završavamo. U kojoj smo slobodni, ali konstantno nadgledani. U kojoj možemo da “radimo šta god poželimo” sve dok “smo se tako dogovorili” i dok ne dotaknemo staklenu granicu koja kaže da ne bi trebalo dalje, i izložba “It’s ok, I know what I’m doing” kroz spektar radova koji tretiraju pojam i koncept kontrole, promišlja i reflektuje prirodu društvene i lične kontrole u svoj svojoj kompleksnosti, obeleženu sopstvenim kontradiktornostima, i mnogobrojnim pukotinama.

Ništa manje delikatna i paradoksalna nije ni eksterna priroda kontrole, veza između kontrolišućeg i kontrolisanog faktora, između kontrole i sigurnosti, želje za slobodom i udobnosti koju kontrolisano područje nudi, budući da pravila već poznajemo, i Isidora Krstić postavlja pitanje, u kojoj meri ono što štitimo istovremeno i ograničavamo, i obrnuto? Kada govorimo o granicama kontrole, da li su to one kojima ograničavamo i kontrolišemo sami sebe (Rora Blue), ili limiti do kojih nas neko ili nešto može kontrolisati na političkom, društvenom, fizičkom ili emotivnom planu? Uočiti makar i nazirati, izazivati, ispitivati te granice, već samo po sebi znači delovati, i u kontekstu izlagačkog prostora koji je nekada bio sinonim za kontroliosanu sredinu, disciplinu, i zavođenje reda, a sada paradigma aktivnog delovanja i preuzimanja akcije, radovi mapiraju oblike kontrole danas. U duhu Franka Berardija da se samoubistvo može shvatiti i kao jedina efikasna akcija protiv opresije, a autodestrukcija kao vrhunski gest spasavanja i povratka kontrole, Siniša Radulović dešifruje kako se “samoizbrisati”. Ma Qiusha progovara o prepuštanju koje posledično utiče na subjekat i snazi koju pristanak na aposlutno odsustvo kontrole traži, Slavica Obradović o zahtevima pozicije balansiranja između onog što “želim” i onog što “moram”, Anetta i Lucia o realizaciji sopstvene agende i dinamici koju uspostavlja sa spoljnim faktorima, a Jelena Pantelić o kontroli spram sopstvenog identiteta, kako pravog tako i fiktivnog. Tako, govoriti o kontroli na prvom mestu znači govoriti o granicama koje su lakmus papir njene snage. Onim koje postavljamo, koje su nam nametnute, koje želimo da ispoštujemo, koje moramo da izazovemo, koje su neodržive. O nepostojećim, opipljivim, trajnim, posledičnim, neophodnim, neželjenim, poroznim. O ličnim, društvenim i emotivnim. Koje nas privlače i istovremeno odbijaju. Poziciji onih koje su uskovitlane i pomešane, i koje često i ne vidimo, ali ih neprestano osećamo. Nevidljivi pritisak nevidljivih granica.

Ako znamo da je preduslov za postojanje bilo koje granice, uloga koju ima- da bude zona u kojoj dve strane dolaze toliko blisko u kontakt da gotovo da postaju jedno, dodiruju najbliže moguće, istovremeno zadržavajući integritet i preteći da se svakog trenutka međusobno ugroze, onda je granica jednaka toposu odluke i spoznaje. U takvoj realnosti rečenica “znam šta radim” postaje ekvivalent onoj u kojoj je “sve pod kontrolom” gde kroz (auto)afirmaciju i prividnu sigurnost progovaramo o nesigurnostima, sumnjama, zabinutosti, nemogućnostima, ali i svesti o neminovnosti preuzimanja akcije, i odgovornosti. A ako je granica sinonim za mesto perpetualnog ponovnog upisivanja, i odlučivanja, onda se “It’s ok, I know what I’m doing” postavlja kao poligon, zona transintimnosti gde se kontrola simultano i naizmenično prepušta i preuzima, i bavi se ponovnim upisivanjem individualnosti, a radovi deluju kao katalizatori pitanja kako se uopšte “preuzima kontrola” i formirasubjektivnost u društvu, u kom je teško definisati gde su i šta granice oba?

The question perpetually arising from the urban hiatuses of the contemporary world: “What happens to the frontier once its cartographic line collapses?” is mutating and becoming even louder as a metaphor. Daily and in all fields, we encounter innumerable, invisible boundaries that we become aware of only after we touch them, and only then, faced with endangerment, if not even the complete collapse of the fictitious freedom, we are finally becoming aware of the environment that shapes and defines it. Living in contemporaneity promises maximum freedom, the possibility of realization, and free structures, all of which turns out to be a fantasy, and just a simulacrum of freedom (as main characteristic of the “control society” Deleuze was writing about) proves to be the reality we actually live. Paradoxically, a significant part of this “control society” is voluntarily based: we are accepting corporative surveillance and use of cameras because it promises us protection, we are cooperating with applications and extensions stealing our data under the promise of safety, we are allowing to be tracked by sharing our location with different sites, because its much easier and comfortable to move around that way. Control is nowadays being sold under many different pseudonyms and we are finding ourselves in a position of perpetual confusion, being free but constantly monitored, where we can do whatever we want but as long as we have previously agreed to terms and conditions, and just until we don’t reach glass wall that informs us we shouldn’t go any further. Therefore, by mapping shapes and forms control can take, the exhibition “It’s ok I know what I’m doing” rethinks and reflects the nature of social, personal and emotional control in all of its complexity, its own contradictions and fractures.

Intersubjective, better to say “external”, nature of control is not less delicate, and complicated in any way. Relationship between controlling and controlled factors, overlapping of a zone of control with a zone of safety, an urge for freedom and and the need for comfort that words “under control” bring, prove to be very strongly mixed, and in her work “The Exoticiser” Isidora Krstić is asking, how does protection become confinement or vise versa? When we are talking about limits of control, are we talking about our personal limits of self-control (Rora Blue) or the maximum of control that could be imposed on us, on a political, social, physical, or emotional plan? Noticing, challenging, probing, questioning those limits and boundaries, already means reacting upon them, and in a Berardian sense where suicide could be understood as an ultimately effective action against oppression, and auto-destruction as a supreme gesture of salvation and re-taking control, Siniša Radulović is decoding how to delete yourself. In her work “All My Sharpness Comes From Your Hardness” Ma Quisha is dealing with the idea of giving the utter control to someone, and the consequences that might have on an individual. Slavica Obradović is looking for the safe ground and stabile position between “I have to” and “I want to”, whereas Jelena Pantelić is rethinking control in terms of her own identity both real and artificial. Thus, talking about control at first place means talking about borders and boundaries, which are litmus paper of its potency and strength. Boundaries that we set, ones that are imposed on us, ones we want to respect, the others we are eager to challenge and provoke. The unstable ones, non-existent, tangible, permanent, consequential, necessary, unwanted, porous. Personal, social and emotional. Which attract and repel us simultaneously. Intertwined and fluid ones, which we often do not see, but constantly feel. Invisible pressure of invisible boundaries.

If we know that the precondition that has to be fulfilled in order for boundary to exist, is the role given to it- to be the zone where two sides are coming together so close they are almost becoming one, simultaneously keeping their integrity and being mutually detrimental and threating to collapse into each other, then boundary is the topos of decision and cognition. In such reality, sentence “I know what I’m doing” becomes an equivalent to “everything is under control” and through the words of (self)affirmation and pseudo-certainty, we are in fact speaking up about uncertainties, concerns, doubts, and incapabilities, as well as the necessity of taking actions and responsibilities for them. If boundaries are synonymous for a place of perpetual inscribing and rewriting then “It’s ok, I know what I’m doing” behaves like polygon, a zone of transintimacy, where boundaries are being noticed, challenged, and inverted, and control is alternately being taken and given. As such, it treats the question of re-inscription of individuality and methods of how do we actually “take control” and create subjectivity in an age where is difficult to define what and where are the limits of both?”

EXHIBITION CATALOGUE

READ CURATORIAL CONCEPT

Pitanje koje se rađa iz urbanih punktuma savremenog sveta i koje isti konstantno postavlja: “šta se dešava sa granicom kada kartografska linija kolabira?”, mutira i postaje još glasnije kao metafora. Svakodnevno, i na svim planovima, susrećemo se sa bezbrojnim, nevidiljvim granicama koje osvešćujemo obično tek pošto ih dodirnemo, i tek tada, suočeni sa ugrožavanjem, ili potpunim kolapsom fiktivne slobode postajemo svesni okruženja koje je formira i definiše. Živetiu savremenosti obećava maksimalnu slobodu, mogućnost realizacije, i otvoreni sistem ali se isti ispostavlja kao fantazija, i privid slobode kao osnovna odlika “društva kontrole” o kom Delez govori, postaje stvarnost koju zapravo živimo. Paradoksalno, mnogo toga je u svojoj suštini dobrovoljno: sarađujemo sa korporativnim nadgledanjem i kamerama, jer nam obećavaju sigurnost, pristajemo na deljenje podataka i nadziranje jer nam obećava zaštitu, dozvoljavamo da budemo locirani, jer je komfornije. Kontrola se prodaje pod različitim pseudonimima i nalazimo se u onoj tački u kojoj ništa ne počinjemo od nule, ali nikada ni ne završavamo. U kojoj smo slobodni, ali konstantno nadgledani. U kojoj možemo da “radimo šta god poželimo” sve dok “smo se tako dogovorili” i dok ne dotaknemo staklenu granicu koja kaže da ne bi trebalo dalje, i izložba “It’s ok, I know what I’m doing” kroz spektar radova koji tretiraju pojam i koncept kontrole, promišlja i reflektuje prirodu društvene i lične kontrole u svoj svojoj kompleksnosti, obeleženu sopstvenim kontradiktornostima, i mnogobrojnim pukotinama.

Ništa manje delikatna i paradoksalna nije ni eksterna priroda kontrole, veza između kontrolišućeg i kontrolisanog faktora, između kontrole i sigurnosti, želje za slobodom i udobnosti koju kontrolisano područje nudi, budući da pravila već poznajemo, i Isidora Krstić postavlja pitanje, u kojoj meri ono što štitimo istovremeno i ograničavamo, i obrnuto? Kada govorimo o granicama kontrole, da li su to one kojima ograničavamo i kontrolišemo sami sebe (Rora Blue), ili limiti do kojih nas neko ili nešto može kontrolisati na političkom, društvenom, fizičkom ili emotivnom planu? Uočiti makar i nazirati, izazivati, ispitivati te granice, već samo po sebi znači delovati, i u kontekstu izlagačkog prostora koji je nekada bio sinonim za kontroliosanu sredinu, disciplinu, i zavođenje reda, a sada paradigma aktivnog delovanja i preuzimanja akcije, radovi mapiraju oblike kontrole danas. U duhu Franka Berardija da se samoubistvo može shvatiti i kao jedina efikasna akcija protiv opresije, a autodestrukcija kao vrhunski gest spasavanja i povratka kontrole, Siniša Radulović dešifruje kako se “samoizbrisati”. Ma Qiusha progovara o prepuštanju koje posledično utiče na subjekat i snazi koju pristanak na aposlutno odsustvo kontrole traži, Slavica Obradović o zahtevima pozicije balansiranja između onog što “želim” i onog što “moram”, Anetta i Lucia o realizaciji sopstvene agende i dinamici koju uspostavlja sa spoljnim faktorima, a Jelena Pantelić o kontroli spram sopstvenog identiteta, kako pravog tako i fiktivnog. Tako, govoriti o kontroli na prvom mestu znači govoriti o granicama koje su lakmus papir njene snage. Onim koje postavljamo, koje su nam nametnute, koje želimo da ispoštujemo, koje moramo da izazovemo, koje su neodržive. O nepostojećim, opipljivim, trajnim, posledičnim, neophodnim, neželjenim, poroznim. O ličnim, društvenim i emotivnim. Koje nas privlače i istovremeno odbijaju. Poziciji onih koje su uskovitlane i pomešane, i koje često i ne vidimo, ali ih neprestano osećamo. Nevidljivi pritisak nevidljivih granica.

Ako znamo da je preduslov za postojanje bilo koje granice, uloga koju ima- da bude zona u kojoj dve strane dolaze toliko blisko u kontakt da gotovo da postaju jedno, dodiruju najbliže moguće, istovremeno zadržavajući integritet i preteći da se svakog trenutka međusobno ugroze, onda je granica jednaka toposu odluke i spoznaje. U takvoj realnosti rečenica “znam šta radim” postaje ekvivalent onoj u kojoj je “sve pod kontrolom” gde kroz (auto)afirmaciju i prividnu sigurnost progovaramo o nesigurnostima, sumnjama, zabinutosti, nemogućnostima, ali i svesti o neminovnosti preuzimanja akcije, i odgovornosti. A ako je granica sinonim za mesto perpetualnog ponovnog upisivanja, i odlučivanja, onda se “It’s ok, I know what I’m doing” postavlja kao poligon, zona transintimnosti gde se kontrola simultano i naizmenično prepušta i preuzima, i bavi se ponovnim upisivanjem individualnosti, a radovi deluju kao katalizatori pitanja kako se uopšte “preuzima kontrola” i formirasubjektivnost u društvu, u kom je teško definisati gde su i šta granice oba?

The question perpetually arising from the urban hiatuses of the contemporary world: “What happens to the frontier once its cartographic line collapses?” , is mutating and becoming even louder as a meta-phor. Daily and in all fields, we encounter innumerable, invisible boundaries that we become aware of usually only after we touch them, and only then, faced with endangerment, or the complete collapse, of the fictitious freedom, we are finally becoming aware of the environment that shapes and defines it. Living in contemporaneity promises maximum freedom, the possibility of realization, and a free system, all of which turns out to be a fantasy, and the simulacrum of freedom, being the main charac-teristic of the “control society” of which Deleuze speaks , proves to be the reality we actually live. Paradoxically, a significant part of this “control society” is voluntarily based: we are accepting corpo-rative surveillance and use of cameras because it promises us protection, we are cooperating with ap-plications and extensions stealing our data under the promise of safety, we are allowing to be tracked by sharing our location with different sites, because its much easier and comfortable to move around that way. Control is nowadays being sold under many different pseudonyms and false names and we are finding ourselves in a position of perpetual confusion, being free but constantly monitored, where we can do whatever we want but as long as “we have agreed that way”, and just until we don’t reach glass wall which informs us we shouldn’t go further. Therefore, the exhibition “It’s ok I know what I’m doing” rethinks and reflects the nature of social, personal and emotional control in all of its om-plexity, marked with its own contradictions and fractures, by mapping the shapes and forms it might take.

Intersubjective, better to say “external”, nature of control is not less delicate, and complicated in any way. Relationship between controlling and controlled factors, overlapping of a zone of control with a zone of safety, an urge for freedom and convenience that being controlled brings, prove to be very strongly interbred, and in her work “The Exoticiser” Isidora Krstić is asking, how does protection be-come confinement or vise versa? When we are talking about limits of control, are we talking about our personal limits of self-control (Rora Blue) or the maximum of control that could be imposed on us, on a political, social, physical, or emotional plan? Noticing, challenging, probing, questioning those limits and boundaries, already means reacting upon them, and in a berardian spirit that suicide could be understood as an ultimately effective action against oppression, and auto-destruction as a supreme gesture of salvation and re-taking control, Siniša Radulović is decoding how to delete yourself. In her work “All My Sharpness Comes From Your Hardness” Ma Quisha is dealing with the idea of giving the utter control to someone, and the consequences that might have on an individual. Slavica Obradović is looking for the safe ground and stabile position between “I have to” and “I want to”, wheres Jelena Pantelić is rethinking control in terms of her own identity both real and artificial. Thus, talking about control at first place means ttalking about borders and boundaries, which are litmus paper of its potency and strength. Boundaries that we set, ones that are imposed on us, ones we want to respect, the others we are eager to challenge and provoke. The unstable ones, non-existent, tangible, permanent, consequential, necessary, unwanted, porous. Personal, social and emotional. Which attract and repel us simultaneously. Intertwined and fluid ones, which we often do not see, but constantly feel. Invisible pressure of invisible boundaries.

If we know that the precondition that has to be fulfilled in order for boundary to exist, is the role giv-en to it- to be the zone where two sides are coming together so close they are almost becoming one, simultaneously keeping their integrity and being mutually detrimental and threating to collapse into each other, then boundary is the topos of decision and cognition. In such reality, sentence “I know what I’m doing” becomes an equivalent to “everything is under control” and through the words of (self)affirmation and pseudo-certainty, we are in fact speaking up about uncertainties, concerns, doubts, and incapabilities, as well as the necessity of taking actions and responsibilities for them. And if boundaries are synonymous for a place of perpetual inscribing and rewriting then “It’s ok, I know what I’m doing” behaves like polygon, a zone of transintimacy, where boundaries are being noticed, challenged, and inverted, and control is alternately being taken and given. As such, it treats the ques-tion of re-inscription of individuality and methods of how do we actually “take control” and create subjectivity in an age where is difficult to define what and where are the limits of both?”