25.09.11 10:46 It is interesting - we are building oll our discussion on the documents we can have. And stories we heard. But I guess a lot of things a left in past - which do not documented.
25.09.11 10:49 for sure. and those stories which we eventually found or heard, mostly treated as uninteresting for local active community
25.09.11 10:49 I am thinking where it is, in Leonids or in Yurijs interview, where the interviewer says: It is so difficult to find actual events or exhibitions, because there was a lot of activity but no documentation
25.09.11 10:49 Soloviev can remind plenty of situations but he is not as interested
25.09.11 10:50 That is why some small things, details, differences are not visible, but some details start to be crucial
25.09.11 10:50 Tistol or Roytburd as well
25.09.11 10:50 what kinds of details are crucial?
25.09.11 10:51 from the interview with Yuri: Vadim Besprozvannyj: When I try to compare the artistic life of that time with that of today, the main difficulty lies in documenting it: To find actual, real events, not only internal processes, but concrete shows, actions and events.
25.09.11 10:52 that is the sense i get from odessa scene
25.09.11 10:52 in kyiv there are more formalized events
25.09.11 10:53 one question therefore could be, how one could bear in mind, what can not be remembered, in the very act of bringing memories to mind not just as an empty gesture that would acknowledge decomuments etc to be only choices, fragments etc.
25.09.11 10:53 but i have a feeling that the more official events are sometimes more empty/superficial as far as thought and depth of artistic value
25.09.11 10:53 and still a lot of the more important work / idea production happens in-between
25.09.11 10:54 I am wondering between these two things: "That is why some small things, details, differences are not visible, but some details start to be crucial" how a small thing can help to enfold an entire narration, exactly, while on the other hand a lot of documentation, like let's say of the greenhouse project, maybe doesn't give us so much of an idea what happened there
25.09.11 10:57 and how to collect that small things, details?
25.09.11 11:00 I mean that if it is something that has no documentation so you as a person that heard such story some how is a part of a process.
25.09.11 11:04 for instance the guelman archive interviews, do they come to replace that from this time most documentation is missing?
25.09.11 11:04 and it is not just the documents themselves that count in attempting to develope a manner of re-narrating together, but as well the places/moments, where one found them, what was needed to get hold of them etc.
25.09.11 11:07 also, when Inga was showing me some of the documents yesterday, she mentioned that they keep maybe already suggestions, how to tell or collect different situations - so I think, while looking at the documents themselves, we will find a rhythm and form of telling
25.09.11 11:10 cause maybe to some extend the documents are not just a representation of that, what was explicitly or not choosen to be remembered and inscribed in some kind of history, but they may as well bear in them some sort of abyss to what has been forgotten, some trace that opens up to another modality of documentation or else
25.09.11 11:11 So what is our interest? - "illuminating a theoretical pattern"? ore illuminating the ukrainian history of art? no... maybe we are making the "life document", to show that document can not be stable... personal inrerests, interpretations... but throug all this things the reality could be read


Edit - History - Print - Recent Changes - Search
Page last modified on October 09, 2011, at 06:13 PM