Email From Burak Delier
"Who Thinks of Art in the Absence of Others" Play#1
Hello;
We are sharing the content of the email from Burak Delier.
Hello;
I'm Burak Delier; I realized the performance in Play #1, "Who Thinks of Art in the Absence of Others" a few times on Thursday evenings between 9 and 9:30 p.m. at my home, in my room, and at Kasa Gallery. Before I get into the notes I took -I can send scanned documents or photos of them- I would like to say a few things about this art form of plays played together at a distance via distributing announcements/scripts. I'll keep it short.
When the email first arrived, I didn't understand it very well, and after I understood it a bit, I found it strange. But then a few things seemed important and worthwhile. The first thing I liked is that the plays establish a relationship of “responsibility” or, for a better term, some kind of “expectation” with distant, unheard, unseen, unrelated, possible others. One says, “Someone became the tree or the wind somewhere, so I should make this 'Who Thinks of Art in the Absence of Others' performance, and the play will be completed.” The main point is not to leave the other players alone, to realize the play together with the others one doesn't see or hear - at least that's how I interpreted it. It's like, “There is something that depends on me, something I can do, I have to do it.” It's a form in which you choose and realize a small task in a whole; and this feature is the opposite of the current way of being in art and life today which demands self-sufficient, super-individuals with various talents and skills. To be a part of a mechanism, rather than to bear the entire burden as an artist/individual...
In line with this, I think they are not what is called “performance” in the art field. Performance, in its most conventional sense, is a one-time art form, usually based on endurance, limit-pushing, and related to the cult of the person, of singular subjectivity. These plays, on the other hand, are more or less like “tasks” that anyone can perform. Moreover, the competence with which these tasks are accomplished does not matter; in other words, the kind of evaluation from outside and judgment of an outside eye is not valid. In fact, since Play #1 is specifically suggested to be performed in isolated spaces, it is questionable whether there is an outside eye at all. Within the framework of the Plays, there are no outside eyes evaluating; there are performers, participants, actors, players - whatever we call them - who realize a play/project together from a distance. But I think it is important to share, reflect and write about the experience afterwards. Thus, the isolation during the play turns into an excuse for sharing, an object of reflection. The play may be closed, but the collective reflection afterwards is open. I think this is crucial, because if, for example, the performers of the performance “Who Thinks of Art in the Absence of Others” were to send the notes they wrote, a collective writing, a collective product would emerge. It would also be interesting to see the overlaps and differences between these thoughts. Like an indirect collective production.
If the plays are performed, perhaps even many times at the same time in different places, they also create a sense of participation in an imaginary collectivity. It is not based on an economy of desire that is stuck in a psychotic refrain based on instant gratification, individual recognition and validation relations that prevail in the art world and social media. It is like a proposal, an invitation, focused on a certain self-discipline and a distant goal that is not exhausted in the moment. It is also quite demanding... the performance will be performed, at that time, at that interval, and then it will be written, shared... And this is quite different from today's forms of relationships based on audience flattery. I'm skipping the issue of resistance against the regime of imprisonment, isolation, and confinement in today's societies, especially in Turkey's social and political reality. That's obvious. What interests me is the form of addressing the public and the audience, and the contrast of this with the dominant forms of subjectivity embodied in today's world, especially in social media and the art world.
Anyway, let's move on to the notes I took during the performances. I did it a few more times, but since the themes repeat, I'm sharing the three interesting sessions. As I wrote during the performance, without improving them.
"Who Thinks of Art in the Absence of Others"
May 22
Art in the absence of others... is it possible?
Basically not possible... let's assume. Art is a social activity (Framed). Which kind of art? Theater, gallery, concert, cinema --- these are forms of sociality and moreover publicness --- always with others.
Well, in isolation, confinement, closure --- these are not possible. Poetry and literature are possible (Poetry, literature, in a circle.). Because they work with portable media. So they work from a distance, more resistant forms?
Literature, poetry are more resistant forms. The more a form of art needs sociality and physical space, the more fragile, weak, unreliable it is.
In the absence of others, another art is possible.
Or, in the absence of others - is it possible for oneself? What is possible for oneself? Writing, painting.... To the future audience, thinking, thinking... (the first "thinking" is in the round.)
BY IMAGINING (capital letter in frame) by imagining the audience? Indirectly... maybe. And it's a very elusive, uncertain audience, it's a horrible experience.
There is such a thing as prison art--- decorating the cell, decorating the body, reappropriating the space, because the space is taken, the body is detained.
This creates time ("time" in the round), this form creates another time. Ambitious words, but I'm with myself, I can get as high as I want!!!
June 12
Art is a fully social phenomenon, it is not possible without others. Or there are always imaginary others. When I paint or write, the audience, the reader is not directly present.
Especially galleries, theater, cinema... these are forms are based on immediate sociality, they cannot function at a distance.
When sociality is blocked, there is no sociality, no technology, no internet. (These are crossed out.) The new situation is that there are other performances in the space. (When I performed at Kasa Gallery, people, my friends (Şafak Çatalbaş and İnci Furni did some performances.) But if it is detached, if there is no direct interaction, if it works remotely, there is no problem. PARTICIPATION is important, but the important thing is PARTICIPATION AT DISTANCE. (I used capital letters while taking notes.)
The gallery or the theater - not only the audience but the play within itself works also with the actors' via reactions to each other, the relationship between objects and actors. In other words, the exhibition or the theater is a social form in itself, even without an audience, relational and communicative in itself. In other words, it's like in a painting - the elements of the composition are cut up separately.
Like in a Hamlet play where the actors play at a distance, without seeing or hearing each other.
The idea of interaction, not interaction itself. (This is framed vertically.)
NON-RELATIONAL ART. (This is written in large vertical type, framed.)
It is important to know what people in prison feel and think, if they are practicing it.
It seems possible to develop it / but will people do it on their own? Then they should tell, but is it a MUST?
June 19
It is always possible to escape to the outside, to engage with the world. In fact, this work is also engaged in the world, it is not an escape, it is a ...
It is possible to the extent that it can open other temporal dimensions - not in terms of experience, but in terms of the relationships it will indirectly establish.
So there are others again --- abstract others, "COMRADES".
It differs from performance not in terms of experience - as a self-discipline and a task. It's not something that a single artist can do and it makes sense in that way. Anyone can do it, and as long as they do it, it exists, otherwise it doesn't.
But the question is "art in the absence of others", as notes to myself => To be shared later but notes. Then it is not possible. Or even if it is possible, it is not meaningful. Let's imagine someone on Mars--- The Last Man. Actually it is possible. He/she/they is taking notes to keep their mind stable. Robinson Crusoe (Framed.) => Think about this. Michel Tournier, Friday. Real art -> Sovereign, real sovereign. BATAILLE (in frame) "inner experience". These sources exist.
The question is: Art in the minimum of conditions - a complete detachment from the world - is what resists.
To perform "Art in the Absence of Others" when there are others. Especially in the case of political oppression, prison torture.
This, this art idea is not the current today, Robinson and Friday (in the frame). but--- there is such a field of experience. And can this field of experience be used as a political tool, as a tool of struggle?
An excuse, a ground for not abandoning others. ---> Dramatic. Against this, there are political struggles, legal struggles. There is this way, because I make a distinction between this and the artistic.
