나로서 보고있는 것 Seeing Unaccompanied

권용주_김범_정희승_홍장오展Beom Kim, Jangoh Hong, Heeseung Chung and Yongju Kwon 
김범_Residental Watchtower complex for Security Guards_Edition of 8_손더스 638g 종이에 시아노 타입 프린트, 면종이에 잉크젯 프린트_157×126cm, 50.5×62cm×2_2016

2019_0227 ▶︎ 2019_0330 챕터투CHAPTERⅡ서울 마포구 동교로27길 54(연남동 566-55번지)www.chapterii.org
'Seeing' is a contentious issue. Being controlled by autonomous body features and sensory organs, each 'gaze' continuously operates, revises and accumulates 'its own recognition system' which is a foundation of autonomy. On the supposition that the independent act of seeing guaranteed uniqueness of an individual, phases of development in current societies aiming at hyper-integration and hyper-connection have consequently imposed a gradual restriction on the autonomous 'gaze' of contemporaries. Restricting a right to select targets of their gaze, such as certain objects or images, indicates that an individual's subjectivity no longer demonstrates its maximum in terms of an activity of seeing, rather than only signifying physical limits applied to a body including retinas whose function is a starting point of independently recognizing and processing images.  For example, an individual spends his or her entire day in a big city consisting of buildings, highways, transport facilities, offices, apartments, restaurants and coffee shops established and run by a variety of specific regulations including industrial standards and safety certifications. Under this circumstance, our capacity of vision becomes passive in order to maintain a safe and peaceful day within a territory the present social system and rules allow. Though the progress of IT industries enables people to approach escape-routes having access to an unlimited quantity of digital images, they often remain as passive observers. Michel Foucault (1926–1984) anticipated the advent of this phenomenon and its intensification, insisting that the capitalistic community system in pursuit of increasing and standardizing productivity and efficiency had contributed to universalization and expansion of geometrically organized social structures, called 'Panopticon', in his representative book, 'Discipline and Punish' (1975). Mass media was one of the vehicles that assisted constructing spectacle yet standardized societies, whereas it later has been developed into a subject which voluntarily reinforces the phenomenon. Thus, its infinite ubiquitous reproduction and repetition based upon advanced technologies and an immoderate intermix of the public and commerce have been regulating our daily life, threatening the status of self and weakening a sense of peculiarity. In other words, our instant responses to all things of the universe and a behavior of forming images considerably rely on aspects of social structures we belong to (value system, norms and lifestyles). Accordingly, a source of autonomous contemplation of particular situations and objects which distinguishes one from another actually does not grow in completely independent ground; it is rather influenced by choices made depending on each individual's trait and tendency among equally given information by mass media. Eventually, the dominance of media reduces distinctions between individuals' viewpoints, and at the same time consolidates oligopoly of some particular responses and decisions. This group exhibition at Chapter II is curated to provide visitors an opportunity to gain a critical perspective on our preconceptions and universal ways of thinking widely formed by others, through 'windows' suggested by four artists. Their extraordinary works appeared in shapes which contain atypical properties and appearances or critically invade borderlines of common sense encourage the spectators to activate their own system of cogitation instead of obeying uniformed interpretations guided by an existing structure of value. Although, as mentioned above, the individual's standpoint inevitably depends on regimentally educated and accumulated information, the exhibition will inspire the viewers to lead numerous creative variations and opinions based upon allegories conveyed in each exhibited artwork, and moreover to broaden their understandings by spontaneously speculating the artists' original intentions. 
 본다는 것은 첨예한 문제이다. 각자의 '시선'은 자율적인 신체 기관과 감각 기관에 의해 통제되고 자율성의 기초가 되는 '자기만의 인식 체계'를 끊임 없이 가동하고 보정하며 축적한다. 이러한 주체적인 봄이 개인의 유일성을 담보하고 있음을 상정할 때, 초집약-초연결을 지향하는 현대 사회의 발전 단계는 이러한 현대인들의 주체적인 '시선'을 점진적으로 제한하는 결과를 초래해 왔다. 바라봄의 대상이 되는 이미지와 물체를 선택할 수 있는 권리가 제한된다는 것은, 단순히 우리가 자율적으로 이미지를 인식하고 처리하는 기능의 출발점이 망막에서부터 신체 안에서만 제한적으로만 작동한다는 것이 아니라, 무엇인가를 본다는 행위에서 더 이상 개인의 주체성이 온전히 발휘되지 않음을 뜻한다. 예를 들어, 하루 종일 대도시에서 생활하는 개인의 경우 산업 표준, 안전 인증 등 다양하고 구체적인 룰에 의해 건설되고 운영되는 빌딩, 도로, 교통기관, 사무실, 아파트, 식당, 커피숍 등에서 하루의 대부분을 보낸다. 여기서 우리의 시선은 이러한 룰의 테두리와 사회 시스템에 수용되는 범위 안에서 온전히 자신의 안온한 하루를 보장 받기 위해 수동적으로 기능하게 된다. 물론, 여기서도 IT 기술의 발달로 무한정의 디지털 이미지에 접근할 수 있는 일종의 해방구가 있긴 하지만, 자칫 수동적인 구경꾼이 되기 십상이다. 푸코는 그의 대표적 저서 『감시와 처벌 (1975)』에서 "생산과 효율의 증대 및 규격화를 추구하는 자본주의 사회 구조는 '원형 감옥식 억압 구조'라고 명명된 기하학적 조직화된 사회 구조가 보편화 되도록 작용하여 왔음"을 논평하며, 이러한 현상의 도래와 심화를 예견하였다. 매스미디어는 이러한 획일화되고 스팩터클한 사회의 구축에 동원되었으나 후일에는 자발적으로 이러한 현상을 끊임 없이 공고히 하는 주체로 격상되는데, 기술의 발달에 기반한 유비쿼터스적인 무한정 재생과 반복, 공공과 상업의 무절제한 혼용은 우리의 일상적인 삶을 규정하고, 유일성을 약화시키며 자아의 지위를 잠식해 왔다. 다시 말해, 삼라만상에 대한 우리의 즉각적인 반응과 심상의 형성은 연결되어 있는 사회가 작용해온 양상 (가치 체계, 규범, 생활 방식)에 상당 부분 의지하게 된다. 특정 사안과 물체에 대해 남과 나를 구분해 주는 주체적 사고의 뿌리는 사실 아주 독립적인 토양에 기거함이 아닌, 매스 미디어로부터 공통으로 주어진 정보에서 개인의 특성에 따른 편취의 결과로 나타나게 되고, 미디어의 득세는 이러한 각 개인의 사고간의 차별성이 줄어듦과 동시에 특정 반응과 판단의 과점화를 심화 시키게 된다. 이번 전시는 광범위하게 타자에 의해 형성된 우리의 선입견과 사고 체계를 4명의 작가가 선사하는 '창(窓)'을 통해 비평적으로 바라보는 기회를 제공하기 위해 기획되었다. 비정형적인 물성과 외향을 지닌 혹은 상식의 범주를 아슬아슬하게 침범하는 형태로 등장하는 비범한 작품들은 기존의 가치 체계에서의 일률적 해석을 거부하고 관람자로 하여금 각자의 고유한 사고 체계를 작동 시키도록 독려한다. 비록, 이러한 사고 체계는 서두에서 언급한 것처럼 획일적으로 학습된 누적 정보에 기댈 수 밖에 없는 한계를 지님에도, 관람자 각자에게 작품에 스며있는 알레고리에 기반한 수 많은 변주와 해석을 이끌어 내는 기회가 됨과 동시에 적극적으로 작가의 의도를 유추함으로 각자의 인식의 지평을 한 차원 고양할 수 있는 계기가 될 수 있기를 기대한다.  https://www.neolook.com/archives/20190227f

World Script Symposia 2018: The Golden Chain Catalog

Mar. 2019
Seoul


 세계 문자 심포지아 2018: 황금사슬

주최: ()세계문자연구소종로구 
주관: ()세계문자연구소 
후원서울특별시주한 네덜란드 대사관네이버 
협찬강병인글씨연구소종로 문화재단, ()세종마을 가꾸기 회박록담한국전통주연구소,공간291, 협동조합 사진공간내외 주가
기획: 양지윤
일시: 2018년 10월 4() ~ 10월 7()
장소수성동 계곡영추문옥인동34-1, 상촌재공간291 (세종마을 일대

Minja Gu @ PERFORMANCE X 4A


Performance x 4A at Art Central Hong Kong
Bettina Fung | 馮允珊 , Brian Fuata (Australia/Samoa), Minja Gu (Korea) and Ko Siu Lan (Hong Kong). 
Programmed and produced by 4A Centre for Contemporary Asian Art, Australia.
ART CENTRAL HONG KONG
9 LUNG WO RD, CENTRAL, HONG KONG.
27 – 31 March 2019

Entering the fifth year of partnership with Art Central, 4A Centre for Contemporary Asian Art (Sydney) returns in 2019 with a curated performance programme featuring four interactive and live works by leading contemporary artists from across the Asia-Pacific region.

Ideas of time and duration, questioning the futility and fruits of human endeavour are all addressed by leading contemporary artists through a series of daily on-site performances, interrupting the hum of the fair, with challenging examination of the exhaustive state of perpetual busy-ness and the act of counting down. 

Expanding on a previous project, Korean artist Minja Gu has been commissioned to set up a restaurant-cum-exhibition-cum-relational aesthetics project in an art fair setting, where she adopts the persona of a cooking infomercial personality, using the ubiquitous two-minute noodle packet as a tool to prompt conversational exchange about food culture and societal pressure to conform. Through the performance, the artist seeks to mimic contorted media and commercial imagery in a pursuit of perfection – an act that takes much longer than the prescribed two minutes. Having never travelled to Hong Kong, Gu will use this cooking platform to understand the unfamiliar ingredients, politics and processes of the city – something which she hopes fellow sympathisers at the fair will help her navigate.

26th Mar. 2019. 5:30 pm - 7:30 pm
Central Habourfront Event Space


http://www.4a.com.au/performance-x-4a-2019/ http://artcentralhongkong.com/programme/
http://artcentralhongkong.com/events/performance-x-4a-minja-gu/


World Drawing Class

Robert Estermann solo show
World Drawing Class
14 März -13 April 2019
Hilfiker Kunstprojekte
Museggstrasse 6, 6004 Luzern
hilfikerkunstprojekte.ch
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10216244659062460&set=a.1034343592152&type=3&theater

Robert Estermann: from the series World Drawing Class, 2019
8 parts, pencil on paper, each 56 x 42 cm
courtesy Hilfiker Kunstprojekte, Luzern

Scenic Tongical No.3 – Machinations of Matter (Stills of Contortions for Instant Translation)
Erscheint anlässlich der Einzelausstellung:
World Drawing Class 14. März – 13. April 2019 Hilfiker Kunstprojekte Luzern
Konzept: Robert Estermann, Georg Rutishauser
Druck: BVZ Berliner Zeitungsdruck GmbH Berlin
edition fink, Zürich

2019 풀이 선다

 

 작가: 갈유라, 강홍구, 권동현, 권용주, 권혜원, 금혜원, 기슬기, 김기수, kdk, 김동규, 김범, 김보민, 김상돈, 김영은, 김옥선, 김용익, 김정헌, 김지영, 김지평, 김현태, 노원희, 노재운, 노혜리, 무진형제, 문영민, 믹스라이스, 민정기, 박은하, 박종찬, 박지혜, 박찬경, 송상희, 신지은, 안경수, 안규철, 안유리, 엄지은, 오용석, 옥정호, 윤결, 윤석남, 이기정, 이우성, 이은새, 이은희, 이의록, 이이내, 이제, 이지영, 임소담, 임영주, 임흥순, 장서영, 장파, 정덕현, 정서영, 정은영, 조은지, 주황, 허윤희, 홍명섭, 홍진훤, 홍철기, 홍이현숙, 황세준 (이상 65인/팀)
○ 기간: 2019년 2월 28일(목)~2019년 3월 31일(일)
○ 장소: 아트 스페이스 풀, Seoul
https://www.facebook.com/artspacepoolpage/photos/pcb.2574153785944330/2574113302615045/?type=3&theater

Something Behind

Ingo Baumgarten Solo Show
Feb. 22 - Mar. 22, 2019
United Art Museum, Wuhan (China)









https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2318467015090307&set=pcb.2318467238423618&type=3&theater

자전거의 빛 (Light from a bicycle), 2007


재료: 자전거, 전등, 가변크기

평범한 자전거 한 대가 서 있다. 하지만 자세히 들여다보면, 페달을 밟아야만 움직이는 자전거의 램프가 계속 켜져있고, 이 램프의 불빛은 벽에 난 구멍을 비춘다. 
관객은 호기심으로 이 구멍 너머의 공간을 들여다보지만, 거기에는 별다른 무엇이 존재하는 것 같지 않다. 
정서영의 작품은 관객의 사고를 계속해서 역전시키는 전략을 통해, 허무함과 어떤 희망, 무관심과 호기심, 무의미성과 의미성의 간극을 메운다. 또한, 관객은 작가의 전략에 기꺼이 빠져듦으로써, 간단한 일상의 아이디어가 예술로 변화하는 통쾌한 순간을 경험하게 된다.

http://cafe.naver.com/moca2009/2292



Experiencing Soun-gui



Soun-gui Kim experiences time as matter and matter as time.
She experiences : meaning that she enters the thing and undertakes to go through it, thoroughly across. She undertakes to go altogether across the thing at hand, from edge to edge. These are variously defined : fore and aft, left and right, before and after, yesterday and tomorrow; from shore to shore, from wall to wall, from continent to continent, from East to West, North to South, the Orient to the Occident. Or else, they may be complex boundaries, interwoven with various of the aforementioned edges, limits or extremes, themselves divided and mingled from end to end, so that their own divides and crisscrossings must also be gone through, to the point of utter confusion. Or else it might be that there is in fact but one edge, running through all those limits, matching and merging all their delineations into one surface, something like a skin with intricate folds, simultaneously involved and unfolding into one another.
It is this very "simultaneously" which constitutes the material "time". Time is indeed made up of such twofold one-way journeys, back and forth comings and goings, as well as of goings never coming back but that keep going on and on into infinity; of self-involved goings, shaping themselves into a loop running to another kind of infinity. Time in its process is made up of progresses and lapses, pauses and starts, flows and sputters, jumps, modes, speeds and rhythms. In all these, it is Time, the one and only, ever and always the same. And yet that "same" is just the ceaseless moving and changing of all times at all times.

Thus, always a process : a passage, a portage, a trespassing, a route, a course, a motion. This is what has to be gone through. Experiencing always is a voyage through, through the very end, to the limit; this experiencing is a voyage through the voyage itself, through the raw material which is the voyage through time. Time is the voyage : how shall we go through it ? We should mould ourselves into it, matching it from end to end, which is exactly endless—or else, ending separately every moment. This is experiencing always.
 
"Always" really means "all the time". There is all the time a motion for the subject of experiencing. She is motion herself, she is nothing else, she has to merge herself with it. This is the only way she has of experiencing : nobody is experiencing by just standing there still, watching, as if in front of an object. One has to go through with experiencing, otherwise nothing is done.
(This is the reason why, as onlookers of Soun-gui's experiment or commentators, we should not just watch or talk or even think. We in turn have to go on experiencing her experiment, get on her voyage through, not knowing to which shores, or whether to any, bound. What is called "art" or "artistic practice" means first and foremost the enacting of an experimental material. Before being a matter of "esthetic judgement", of beauty, of the sublime or even just of form and sensitivity, it is a matter of experiencing : art articulates experiencing. We must allow it to articulate us, which also always involves disarticulation. We should remain flexible, even brittle : sense and truth should not be already in our speech. Speech should also be gone through and processed to other ends than speech. Besides, that's how "art" begins : by sending speech off. It is not explicated, just exhibited.)
Thus, experiencing is being the experiment: otherwise nothing will have been done (just represented, imagined, commented upon). Soun-gui Kim is the experiment being here dicussed under her name. Here, she is no individual: she is the person of her experiencing. Which is the reason why from now on we shall name her, Soun-gui Kim, "the experiment" : the experiment which is experiencing matter as time and time as matter.
Is this one and the same experiencing: matter as time and time as matter ? So, is this just one voyage through ? Just one subject ?
In a sense, it is. Matter as time is just what it is, its own substance or its own time. What we are talking about is the material proper of matter as time, in general. Are both matters the same ? (But could we imagine two distinct matters ? does not "matter" signify the oneness of the world, all the rest being just various voyages through ? immaterial voyages through matter ?)
Matter "in general" can exactly not constitute a general term or an abstraction, distinct from specific matters, since the materiality of matter lies in a determined specificity, in the unique substance of all things, thus of every particular thing, singularly experienced one by one. The toughness, resilience, stuff, texture, gravity, thickness, immanence of things as things, which implies it is every time such or such a thing, and none other. Because something which is not a thing is nothing, and if it is not such a thing, then it has to be another one.
Experiencing is also a thing, or nothing at all. And the words to speak it and the things are also things themselves, and the sense of these words are things, as well as their understanding or misunderstanding. So that understanding the experiment is also a thing : experiencing the understanding or misunderstanding which is the experiment. Indeed, the experiencing is not gone through to end up with what is commonly an "idea" or a "view of things". It is no doubt about "seeing" in a sense. But the view of things is itself a thing (whereas the "view" or "notion" philosophers and theorists mention would sometimes only be a non-thing's look on things, produced by a subject who would not undertake the actual voyage through the density of things, but would rather fly over them.) Seeing things is a thing involved in matter just like the voyage through matter. Involved: both trapped in matter's impenetrability and woven into all its threads, exuded from all its processes, oozing from all its runs. The experiment, or the voyage through is matter going through itself, from end to end: but in fact, that very thing is Time already.

So that, if the only matter there is is the one and only matter—"matter" meaning the oneness of the world and that any "other world" if there were one (but there is none, exactly) is still of this world, made of the same matter—the specificity of time as matter is necessarily part of the "general" matter (which has no existence as such). It's the part made up of matter's going through itself. It is the part of the reversing in which the density of matter is gone through itself by itself in all its parts. An immaterial reversal, an internal twisting of matter which is the making, the presenting of matter.
Then, this is no single particle, no atom. But in every atom (call it bead, bubble, mass, piece, shrap, thing) the way the atom of matter turns itself into matter and becomes matter. It is the way this piece is made : how it comes to be, how it comes into being. Not where it comes from (since it never comes from anywhere but the one and only matter), but how its own coming, happening, advent, is done, folded and unfolded in its singular event. This is time as matter : the time of the coming, how it comes to itself, how a matter is connected and folded unto itself, how it coalesces.
In a way, this would be matter as matter : its active substance. For if there was no time through which matter is folded and connected, made up and united, opened and put outside in (can we really imagine this ?), matter would not materialise ? It would remain outside of itself, sheer separate pieces, not even "pieces" really since there would only be their altogether sheer scattering without an end or a beginning. Then there would only be sheer simple space. But this space would not even be space : it would not serve as spacing between things, from one thing to another, it would not hold a single thing. It would not be the space of any end, not of any voyage. There would be no passage or portage. When you have space, that is when you have a thereness (things taking place and thus making space), when you have extension from one point to another, extending the width of a distance and sliding along that distance, then you have time. When you have space, you have time, and you cannot hold these two concepts as distinct.
Time is matter getting space. Time is the thing in the "to" of the phrase "from one point to another". This "to" means "all the way to": it means the voyage through, the passage from one point to another, from one end or one shore to another in each opening of matter. If there is a body—a grain of sand, a big rock—it goes from one end to the other of its own extension. Even if this passage goes quite fast, it takes time.
Time is what it takes to open and cross space, and space is what is opened to have all things happen (their advent is not however from some point behind space : they are the opening of space). Time is what will have to be taken to open space. It is what space takes from itself—from its own sheer immanence—to distance itself within itself and take place.
Time has to be taken for things to be. Time must always be taken : one billionth of a second or billions of light-years. Ten minutes' waiting or an eighteen hours' flight. A bufferfly's wings filckering or the three days it takes to thaw a block of ice. Each time, a suspension is needed, a "not yet" which will be succeeded by an "already here", never anticipated while one exists in its advent. This is no "future" and "past": these categories only have to do with time as already interpreted, as social and historical. What we are discussing here is a finer kind of time : the present time as it presents itself, always not yet and always already there. Time in its very slow flowing, as in an ice block's thawing, an unperceivable yet unremitting deformation, enacted as soon as ice is exposed in a space which is not ice : the setting into motion of difference, outside of which there is no distinction.
Time must be taken for things to present themselves as they are. Which also means (it is the same thing) for things to be experienced, gone through from one end to another, from their first to their last possibility. All things such as a country, its borders, its frontiers, its passes, its straits, its roadways and waterways, its hollows and excesses and levels, its islands and its clouds.

But where should time be taken from ? It is certainly with this question only that the experiencing of time as matter really begins.
Where should time be taken from, if nothing, no thing, is given before it ? "Before" time would be yet another time, that is, the same time already present. Before time, there is only the absence of any "before" and "after". You can go to no before or after to take time from.
Time is taken from nothing. It is nothing, made of nothing, it is "nothing" placed in the core of the thing to go from the thing to itself. It is "nothing" of presence at the core, or in the hollow of the fullness of the thing.
Which is why time as matter is no specific matter nor anything else but matter. It is just matter coming unto itself: matter until matter, the thing until the thing.
Time is taken from this nothing which until is.

"Until then/there", meaning until the other shore, the other end, the other country, the other extreme, and more generally the other fragment of thing needed to make up a thing. For instance: from the Orient until the West and back until the Orient, is what is needed to make up a world.
There is no such thing as first "the world", as if it were a big indefinite lump, self-centered and focused, immediately present to itself in itself by all its ends in contact with one another, no discontinuity there within the immanent mass, no places or directions either : for then you would have no "space" or "time", thus no reason for this dead (not even dead, just raw and thick) lump to exit itself and come unto "itself". There would be no reason for a world to be.
If there is a world, there is a reason. But it should not be pursued outside of this world : it is the arising of the world itself, its advent, the way the lump (thing, matter, what there is, as you may wish to call it) relates unto itself, goes until the end of itself, is stretched towards itself, the way all the atoms of a rock are stretched between one another towards the rock, until the end which is the rock, one rock, this one. Time and space make up the force stretching the world to itself : opening it, making it gape and hold. Rock, planet, galaxy or particles to the most insignificant connected states of quarks.
To put it briefly : "the world" is not an object. It is the subject of the experiment.
Every thing has its orient, and so its occident also as well as its "until" from one the other. Similarly, the world goes from a grain of sand all the way to the cosmos, and from there again to the village, and all the way to a lock of hair, and to this word I am now typing on my computer : time. Just another coming or going every time, another relation to myself, another connection, another voyage. The voyage in a sense is nothing. It is none of those things : it is the coming of the thing. It has to come, it has to happen, otherwise there is nothing. And it does happen : the world keeps opening. It did not begin "one day" : it is every day the infinite opening of time and space.

One should not mistake "It passes" and "It is happening".
"It passes" is the thing in time : it comes and goes, it is to come or past, it exits time or vanishes into it, still leaving time as it was, like a big soft empty shell. With things coming and going, you don't experience time.
"It is happening" is time itself. It is time within the thing itself : it happens is within, the subject, the self, the privacy of things. Time does not pass. It is still here. But it is passage. It is "happening". Its "always" is not immovable, its "here" is no place. Its continuance
(here, I mean here, in this very instant and in this very flying of the very instant it is happening in your very reading, the way sense happens in the portage from one letter to the next, from one word to the next, the way it happens it makes sense and that sense in turn makes sense in your head or elsewhere and thus it is also happening indefinitely in all directions at the same instant)
—it is the continuance of the nothing hollowed out and running itself over to become yet another nothing : a nothingness that keeps altering as it remains the nothingness it is. Thus its place is nowhere, meaning where every part, every piece of thing is altered and never is the same. But this nothingness stretched all the way to the other side of the thing is the force making the thing, the world, come and hold.
Not the thawing ice, not the falling drop, not the sound of the drop moving into my ear, not its vapor exhaled impalpably into the air, not the plane flying from Seoul to Paris, not the artist walking inside this plane, not the line drawn by the artist to represent her two-way flight as an eight-shaped loop that, if turned sideways, resembles the mathematical sign for infinity : it is just happening from one to the other, between one another, endlessly. What is itself, by itself, happening, that absolutely never stops happening : time, its own identity to itself a passing in itself from itself to itself. It passes itself, beyond itself constantly if you want, and still remains within itself. Its inside, what is is proper, is this infinite leaving itself. Its "itself" is nothing else but this always becoming other than itself. Its presence to itself, its substance or its conscience is its own renewed absence, stretched again towards itself. This is what is to be experienced, and this is why much art is here required, much artifice and pretense, much invention and installation, much manipulation, decomposition and interweaving, much turning on and setting off.
Such an absence-taut opening is the hollow which was opened up for all presences—sense as well, at the core of all presences. At the core or in the hollow of those presences, an opening of presence itself, there is time, some time, a spacing of time.
Rather than a lack, it is a surfeit of presence. It hollows out the space of self-outpouring in which every presence comes into presence and is presented.
For such is the secret of presence : it is not just present, it come into presence, it comes to presence, and thus comes to itself. What would just be here present, motionless, not coming from anywhere, going nowhere, that would not be : it would instantly crumble into dust. But presence is still coming, coming unto itself and happening to itself. It rises from its own bottom to its own surface and emerges towards other presences, bottoms: their eyes, ears and skins.
Thus you have pictures. Pictures are not primarily copies : they are first of all outbursts, explosions or outpourings of presence. They are presences that come fully loaded with the time of their own presentations : upsurging, taut and vibrant with the tension thanks to which they offer themselves to our view.
In this sense, pictures have nothing to do with beauty. They have to do with a tenseness of the gaze. A picture pulls the gaze tight, it draws it, it attracts it until its own coming unto it. The tenseness of a picture is time. In time, I move up to face what is coming, I go all the way to a thing itself just coming until itself. I am thus going until the coming of the thing. What is called "an artist's work," is the organizing of this experience.
In art, a picture is not a representation. It does not show something—the shape, figure and color of something—but it shows there is this thing. It shows the presence of the thing, its coming to presence. To say the truth, it is the picture that brings the thing's coming.
Soun-gui's picture is always one that comes and goes, and her video monitors sometimes are also frozen pictures of monitors that begin to melt away as soon as they appear on show. Such a picture does not "reproduce". Rather, what it does "reproduce" (namely, a singer, an astronaut, a frog, John Cage's head) is not at stake as it is "reproduced" (duplicated, imitated) but as it is produced: what is imitated by imitation is the novelty of the original. It does not "imitate" it, it re-produces it.

So that there is always something beginning, upsurging, in this picture. Which means there is a tenseness of time. There is an arising of the thing, (as there is an arising of the sun, or a sunrise). The thing is born out of the night, or rather it is night being born out of itself, tearing itself up, falling to pieces, shaping up its formlessness, lightening up its bottomless darkness (a glassy bottomless darkness, that of the video screen), slicing up its density into slivers and surfaces, splinters and folds.
Thus what comes into the picture, in one stroke (for every picture is in one stroke, line, shape, color, shadow and volume) is the unimaginable of presence : its time, the taut instant of its advent, its inauguration. That after no before anticipates. That now which never freezes, wholly mobilised by this tenseness, this offering of oneself to a possible view, i. e., to another movement of coming, to a mutual tenseness of the eye willing to imagine, to fill up with images, to leave behind the night of its crystalline.
Speech is always behind us and before us. If I talk, I presume I have already done so as well as all the indefinite run of words in this and all other languages, the whole linking and pulling of meanings. Whereas a scream, a song or a picture presume nothing and are linked to nothing.
Rather, they presume the bottomless pit or the darkness they come from and contain in themselves, filled with it to the point of running over.
As we reach this point, experiencing time as our time, as a contemporary experience, must come to terms with the absence of myths. In a myth, the primeval chaos or gloom is figured out by a song or a picture. Through this figuring out, the source is abstracted from its upspringing, removed from its rending up, pacified, laid to rest and offered in a motionless time that contents itself with telling the violent time of beginnings. But we are now left without a tale—we contemporaries of each other throughout the whole extension of this world, from East to West, unable any longer to make out which side or direction is which.
We are left without a tale, or else an infinite tale of the finite being has replaced the finite tale of the infinite being. But an infinite tale is no longer a tale.
We must receive the full shock of those times of beginnings, which are also those of the infinite end, those times no tale has ever reined in, figured nor represented. Soun-gui Kim once wrote: "We are born out of nothing and return to it every instant". This "we," is of us today, contemporaries of the world as it becomes the world {and no longer the earth or nature or the Creation or the cosmos). The slightest start is ever shaking us. This is the time for presence springing ahead of itself, a picture ever new, ever ready to fade out, nothing imaginary, quite the reverse, the inimaginable reality. This is the time for unheard, inaudible songs, and unimaginable images : the time for art to be without any reservation the technique of upsurging.
The origin is no longer the object of a question which gets its answer through a tale. The origin is a matter of experiencing, and an eternal return of the same. It is coming back to us every instant and we are coming back to it, the origin of the very instant and in the instant.
Soun-gui Kim is fond of telling a tale she heard when she was a child. On a trip, an old man has to go over the "three-year hill" : if ever you fall there, it means you only have three more years to live. The old man trips and falls. He laments his destiny. But a boy advises him to fall again and again, thus increasing each time by three years his life expectancy, and so on indefinitely.
Not the origin frozen from the beginning—like a block of ice kept away from all heat, or a fixed view removed from every gaze or a cybernetics program without any random element - nor the origin that dove recklessly into the flux of becoming. Not the eternal nor the ceaseless but something which is neither, or this skipping from one to the other, from one into the other : i. e., time itself, the tenseness of originary time. Death opening onto the eternal return of birth : the most difficult thought, an experiencing that goes all the way, no longer able to know itself or show itself as "experiencing". But "art" does not "talk" of anything else.
One of the following : either the origin is a given, already here, established and told—this rock for instance is a god, or his covering or his power—or else the origin is not a given. In which case, either the rock is still a rock—a mineral aggregate—or some inlet to the origin, and its own inlet into itself has to be looked for in the rock itself.
A whole technique of inletting is required here. Skills are needed to know how to broach a power, an elasticity, an electricity, a blow, a moisture of salt in the rock. Skills are needed to know how to make a piece of rock a piece of work.
To us, "work of art" does not mean a beautiful object, but rather a "thing switched on the power of an originary time". A thing which is open, divided from itself and from the given generally. A thing returned to what is not a state, but a surprise, a jump, an explosion. A thing worked on by an opening technique which brings back within her the upsurging of the origin. A technique of the eternal return of the inaugural time.
To tell the truth, this can no longer be called by us a "work of art". Not by chance has this phrase fallen out of the realm of art in its contemporary form (immediately connoting the merely decorative and the dictates of the market). We speak of an artist's "work" as if to signify indissolubly in one word the work of art and its working, the active continuance in the work of the technical skill that enables our access to the originary time. A "work of art" keeps being under work, or in labour. Ceaselessly, it lets itself be opened again, and spring out, just like a fountain recycling and pumping up its water to have it spurt again from its plugs or lips.
Thus, Soun-gui's experiment is also an experiencing of the voyage through art itself, through this singular apparatus we call "art" and its recent history ; a passage until the other side, where the "artist" no longer achieves "a work of art" but performs something else, still to be named by us, if it is to be named at all. Such an experiment which is that of contemporary art as a whole, is made by Soun-gui in her very own way, as an experiencing of fading out. Each time, her time is one of dissolution, disappearance, evading or erasing. Of an angle closing up or the aperture being shuttered, of a sliding to the side, off screen or into the digital decomposition deep into the monitor or deep into the picture itself. Maps are cast into deep shadows, photographs become blurred, screens melt down, noises die away, figures thin out and the frog jumps off.

Of course, it is impossible to bring back, or go back to, the origin : it is the very essence of impossibility. Death can only return you to a pre-natal locus by leading you into nothingness. But this only means that in the workings of art (in what is darkly agitated under this name so loaded down and downloaded, so downtrodden, so cast down with a whole heap of meanings), what is at issue is just a technique, or techniques, of acceding to the impossible.
But the impossible is not arrived at the way one would reach a place. First of all because it is the impossible, then because it is not somewhere, not even someplace else out of this world (since all places are in this world, all the way to the limits of all galaxies). It is where we are, here and now. The thing is to accede to the very own tenseness of the here and now.
Here and now, the very own tenseness of our time—our own tenseness, what stretches us and lifts us up, what sometimes frets us and exhausts us, or sometimes throbs our blood vessels almost to rupturing—is the tenseness of the infinite beyond measure. Nothing fixes this time under the spell of a definite rhythmical pattern. No gods, no heroes, no views of the world or of destiny have volunteered to effect its enactment and stylisation. On the contrary, that special style carrying us away is one removing all such figures. No form any longer affords us an a priorisheltering from the formlessness of the impossible, nor does it bring us any closer to it. It seems that nothing is at hand to tie up this time with a knot of sense.
But such is the very stuff of our experiencing this time. Such is our very territory; and a voyage through it demands that we go beyond every territory, compelling us to begin from that very same place where we thought we should end.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/comp-lit/tympanum/3/nancy.html
Univercity of Southern California

Kim Kim Sales Shop






Kim Kim Sales Shop:
Action Price or Sales better than Sex

작품의 ‘대체물’을 만들어 사회적 공간에 배치
갤러리 시스템의 환경에 주목하게 하는 프로젝트이다.
Kim Kim Gallery의 이번 작업은 유사 작품이 대중들에게 어떻게 다가갈 수 있는지, 

그리고 그 효과적인 방법과 역할을 좀 더 확장시키려고 한다.
Aug. 2018
Seojong

커피사회

  • 문화역서울 284 Culture Station 284, Seoul





  • 2018. 12. 21 - 2019. 02. 17

https://www.seoul284.org/커피사회/

커피는 우리에게 무엇일까?

<커피사회>는 근현대생활문화에 녹아들어간 커피문화의 변천사를 조명하고 일상 속에서 만나는 우리 사회의 커피문화에 대해서 되돌아보는 시간을 갖고자 기획되었습니다. 19세기 후반에 도입된 커피는 약 100여 년간의 그리 길지 않은 시간이지만 한국의 사회문화사에 많은 영향을 주었으며, 오늘날 기호 식품 이상의 가치를 담아 우리의 일상 속에 자리하고 있습니다. 특히 옛 서울역은 근현대의 상징적 공간이면서, 그릴, 1·2등 대합실 티룸에서 본격적인 커피문화가 시작된 공적 장소이기도 합니다. <커피사회>는 맛과 향기 속에 담겨진 역사와 문화를 보여줌과 동시에 커피를 통한 사회문화 읽기라는 즐거운 경험을 선사할 것입니다.
이번 전시는 커피를 담은 아카이브와 다방, 찻집, 그리고 카페로 진화해온 과정에 담긴 다양한 징후들을 들여다보며 커피가 상징하는 한국 사회의 문화적 의미를 포착하여 전달합니다. 또한 커피와 커피문화를 담았던 시간성과 장소에 대한 기억과 추억, 사물들, 사람들의 이야기로 오늘날 커피의 문화에 대한 담론을 새롭게 형성하고자 합니다. 동시대의 커피문화와 커피를 통한 사회적 관계망 그리고 그 속에 담긴 의미를 통해서 유기적이며 때로는 혼종적인 문화를 담아가고 있는 한국의 커피사회를 들여다봅니다.

커피의 시대

제비다방, 낙랑팔러, 돌체다방 등 커피가 도입되며 활성화되었던 근대 시기의 다방들과 이후 6,70년대 청년문화의 구심점 역할을 담담했던 다방들에 이르기까지, 시대를 거치며 문학, 미술, 철학 등 문화예술의 활발한 교류에 영향을 미친 커피의 문화사를 중심으로 사회적 관계를 읽어 본다.
신청곡 - 성기완
자신의 작은 바람을 담아 DJ에게 요청하는 신청곡을 통해 친구도 연인도 애호가도 음파의 공명 속에서 함께 리듬의 물결을 탄다. 한 시대가 단순한 합의나 수긍의 언어적 긍정의 단계를 넘어 언어 근저에 있는 상상계적 발화로서의 음악에 무의식적으로 동기화된다. 이것이야말로 노래의 힘이다. 노래는 즉각적으로, 구구한 설명 없이, 한 시대와 그 시대에 접속된 정신들의 공감대를 즉각적으로 호출한다. 어쩌면 노래만이 이 엄청난 일을 해낼 수 있다.
제비다방과 예술가들의 질주 - 신범순 외
<제비다방과 예술가들의 질주>에서는 특별히 제비다방을 문예다방의 시초로 해석하고, 후에 시대에 영향을 미친 문학적 성과를 이루어낼 수 있도록 기폭제가 되었던 곳으로 주목한다. 전시 공간에 들어서면 이상과 관련 예술가들의 시, 수필, 소설 등 당시의 문학 자료를 기반으로 한 사료를 마주하게 된다. 동선을 따라 크게 원을 그리며 해당 사료를 들여다보고 벽화, 설치 등 공간 곳곳에 숨겨진 이상 고유의 기하학 사유를 통해 마치 시대를 질주하듯 했던 경성의 모더니스트들의 새로운 관점을 찾아볼 수 있을 것이다.
돌체 2018 - 박민준, 윤석철
일제 강점기에는 서울역 앞에 그리고 이후에는 명동으로 이전했던 돌체다방은 시대를 상징하는 음악다방이었으며 문학, 미술, 음악, 영화, 무용 등 다양한 분야의 많은 예술가들에게 문화적 해방구였다. 특별히 클래식 음악이라는 장르를 선구적으로 소개하며 1930년대 경성에서 이념적, 관념적 차원에서가 아니라 경험적, 물질적 차원에서 근대성을 체험할 수 있었던 대표적인 곳이었다. 2018년, 현대의 관점에서 돌체다방의 의의를 회고하고 재해석하여, 1930년대 ‘클래식 음악’이라는 서구의 문화와 예술을 소개했던 돌체다방처럼 새로운 문화예술 플랫폼을 <돌체 2018>을 통해 전달하고 음악가들과 음악을 좋아하는 사람들의 관계가 형성되는 장을 마련하고자 한다.
방 - 백현진
<방>에서는 개막·폐막 퍼포먼스를 포함하여 전시 중 총 10회 이상의 해프닝 성격을 띠는 퍼포먼스가 진행되며, 작가는 퍼포먼스를 통해 공간을 새롭게 연출한다. 또한 퍼포먼스와 연계되는 라이브 콘서트를, 전시 연계 프로그램으로 진행한다.
다방이야기 - 박정훈, 김창겸, 김진하
80년대 이후 커피숍이나 카페로 불리는 퇴화된 어휘인 ‘다방’은 사람들의 이야기가 있으며, 문학과 예술이 넘쳐나는, 자유가 있는 곳이었다. 현재 복고의 바람과 함께 ‘다방’이라는 이름이 속속 나오고 있다. 그 시절의 낭만과 자유를 그리워하며…. 그 ‘다방’에 대한 이야기를 시작해 본다.
서울역에서 금강산 유람: 천연당사진관 프로젝트 - 이주용
서울역 귀빈실과 고종황제, 황실사진과 사진관 탁자의 커피. 천연당 사진관과 금강산, 그리고 서울역과 금강산의 연결고리를 통해서 한국 근 현대사의 대표 기호품인 커피와 사진관의 관계성을 추적한다.
오아시스 - 양민영
<오아시스>는 일상의 바쁜 관객들에게 커피 자판기를 통해 휴식과 여유의 이미지를 제공하는 작업이다. 시장 아이스박스의 패턴이나 일상 속 존재하는 그래픽 모티브를 발견하고 전유하는 작업을 해왔던 양민영은 커피와 관련되어, 한국에서 나고 자라며 학습해온 시각 기호들을 디자인에 활용해 자판기 2종을 기획 및 디자인한다.
티룸 - 유명상
오늘날의 카페는 한 개인이 시간을 보내기 좋은 공간으로 쓰인다. 1~2인을 위한 테이블, 공간 중심에 놓인 바 테이블 등은 작은 규모의 카페는 물론이고 대형 프랜차이즈 커피숍에서 보다 쉽게 찾아볼 수 있다. 이처럼 한 개인이 사용할 수 있는 최소한의 공간이 중요해진 요즘, <티룸 tea room>은 개인을 위한 공간이자, 1930년대 경성역에 문을 연 '티룸(tea room)'을 새로운 모습으로 재해석하고 시각화한 작업이다.
다방활용법 - 진짜공간(홍윤주) & 안성현
다방은 과거의 것이 아니라 현재도 작동하며 공존한다. 다층적인 커피문화의 한 단면인 다방을 재조명하면서 특정 세대가 향유하는 다방 활용법으로 세대 간 문화의 작은 교집합을 만들어 보고자 한다. 진짜공간을 만드는 건축가 홍윤주와 가짜공간을 만드는 영화미술감독 안성현이 진짜다방을 관찰하고 가짜다방을 만든다.
커피와 밀리터리 - 김찬우 & 더37벙커
<커피와 밀리터리>는 광복 이후부터 한국전쟁, 그리고 경제성장기에 접어들게 된 1960년까지 민간에서 통용된 미군 배급품 및 전투식량, 구호품 등을 통하여 당시의 혼란스러웠던 일면을 살펴보고, 또한 격동의 시대 속에서 커피가 어떻게 한국인들의 기호식품으로 자리를 잡게 되었는가를 살펴본다.



커피대중 - 주재환
<커피사회> 전시 공간 곳곳에서 만날 수 있는 <커피대중>의 여덟 개 작품들은 2010년부터 2018년까지 커피를 재료로 사용해 작업한 것으로 시대와 사회, 개인의 내적 성찰을 유머러스하면서도 진지한 성찰과 사유로 느끼게 할 것이다. 커피와 다방을 모티브로 선별한 작품들은 예술의 사회적 의미와 역할에 대한 오랜 화두를 떠올리게 한다.
사랑방과 광장: 다방 인터뷰 프로젝트 - 김노암 외
이 영상작업은 1945년 해방을 전후해 격동하는 한국의 사회문화의 변화를 읽을 수 있는 하나의 통로로서 다방의 변천사를 실제 다방을 이용했던 사람들의 영상인터뷰로 아카이브한 것이다.

작가회의회보 22호 표지화 & 시



1992.12.7 작가회의회보 22호 표지화 & 시
2010.9.10 120장 인쇄, A4
액자  60매

Water from Ganges River in the Cup Made with Newspaper from Congo

Kim Beom Solo Show 




Untitled (Water from Ganges River in the Cup Made with Newspaper from Congo), 2016, lithography on Fujimori paper. 

Paper Wrapped (Baby Oils), 2016, objects wrapped with pigmented paper pulp on wooden base
Residential Watchtower Complex for Security Guards Schematic Unit Floor Plan, 2016, cyanotype on paper

The solo exhibition Water from Ganges River in the Cup Made with Newspaper from Congo at Kunsthal Aarhus shows a broad range of Korean artist Kim Beom’s (b. 1963) work and his approach to making art. Kim is interested in how we see and interpret the world and what happens to objects, when our point of view is slightly altered. In this simple, but radical change of perception, Kim questions the ways in which recognition is related to the act of seeing. His complex works address the relationship between the image and imagery, between facts and fiction, between the visual and tactile encounter. There are often humorous approaches to his examinations. The words and the titles are playful and crucial denominators in the works. Kim’s subtle imagery and texts are full of puns; they point out absurdities in everyday life and society in general. The title of the exhibition, Water from Ganges River in the Cup Made with Newspaper from Congo, is a good example of Kim’s humble, poetic playfulness and complex worldview. Everything is tied together and nothing is what it appears to be. The exhibition at Kunsthal Aarhus is divided into two parts. The works in Gallery 2 and 3 are mostly pieces Kim Beom developed during a residency at STPI Creative Workshop & Gallery, Singapore, in 2016-2017. In the downstairs’ galleries, Gallery 4 and 5, a selection of older paintings from the 1990's and several video pieces are installed and carefully juxtaposed by Kim Beom. Kim Beom was educated at Seoul National University in the 1980’s, where he lived and refined his art practice until 1997.
On the occasion of the 60-year-anniversary for diplomatic relations between Denmark and South Korea, 2019 has officially been nominated as culture year for our two countries. Kunsthal Aarhus has been given the honour to be in charge of the official opening of the year of culture in Denmark.
https://kunsthalaarhus.dk/en/Exhibitions/Beom-Kim 
photos via instagram & facebook
Jan. 2019
Aarhus