Michael E. Smith at 500 Capp Street Foundation, San Francisco, November 18, 2017 – February 3, 2018 via contemporary art daily

Candice Lin. A Hard White Body

General Intellects with McKenzie Wark, E1: Chantal Mouffe via dis.art

I guess the very existence of the artworld as we know it is hoisted and buttressed by a suspended set of values that must also collapse with the fiction of liberal democracy. And it’s complicated because without the whole circus, none of our work means a thing. The objects become totemic, faith trophies or whatever – at best, that is. At worst, it’s all just a bunch of worthless junk full of stolen tropes and cynical jokes. Most of the problems we spend our time discussing in the artworld are not real problems; they’re philosophical or theological conceits, really, and nothing will change through the value-production-industrial complex of endless panel discussions. The world as we know it may very well be ending, not in the Alt-Right, accelerationist sense but in the Wildersonian afropessimist sense; this would mean the end of the artworld too, of course. We would all have to find some other way to make a living if making a living was still something one did. And/or we would give ourselves wholly to the business of life. There are artistries in everything. But I think again of faith, somehow necessary where art is not. In Octavia Butler’s Parable of the Sower the main character Lauren Olamina is what I would call an artist, and this helps her survive apocalyptic conditions where others cannot. – Jesse Darling on Faith, Crisis, and Refusal via http://momus.ca/

What only a loving, disinterested eye would notice – Sinziana Ravini on Matias Faldbakken, Effects of Good Government in the Pit, Astrup Fearnley Museet, Oslo

Download typefaces by Bea Schlingelhof dedicated to Women against Hitler – https://schloss.no/women-against-hitler

Lucy Skaer at KW, Berlin, October 13, 2017 – January 7, 2018 via Contemporary Art Daily

Okwui Enwezor. Questionnaire on “The Contemporary”

Lewis Stein “Works from 1968–1979” at Essex Street, New York, October 29 – December 22, 2017

Henri Bergson, Quel est l’objet de l’art ?, June 3, 1936

I define the archive as a “para-institution.” And this relates to the fact that I conceive the archive as an artistic instrument of self-historicising (which in many cases blends with the artwork itself). The para-institution of the artist’s archive was designed for recording, presenting and diffusing ephemeral, often subversive activities, and it produced autonomous contexts. Artists’ archives often reflect on how the ideological apparatuses manipulate everyday life, moreover they inscribe the artwork in history from the artist’s standpoint. That does not only mean that they put the artwork in circulation and communicate it within a limited circle of kindred spirits. Frequently the artist’s archive has a further role, involving an attempt to control the reception of the work in the local and international setting. Such an approach takes a number of levels of comparative research into account. Work at the varying levels of textual or pictorial documents demands a re-evaluation of the relationship of original and copy and must reflect the documents’ modes of production and reproduction, and must also take into account their unique, unrepeatable arrangement in the artist’s archive. One cannot reduce the artist’s archive exclusively to purposes of communication. With the deliberate multiplication and diffusion of documents, things come to a point where archival practices break free from the instrumentalisation, reification and commodification of the artwork. – Daniel Grúň, Monument to a Heroine. Július Koller’s Archive and Processes of Self-Historicisation, September 2017

Art & Politics: Alfredo Jaar, Frieze Talks, October 8, 2017

Matmos. California Rhinoplasty ( A Chance to Cut Is a Chance to Cure)

For 10000 gestes, I envision a choreographic forest in which no dancer ever repeats any of the gestures, each of which will be shown only once and will vanish as soon as it has been executed, like an ode to the impermanence of the art of dance. This shower of movements, which could have been a data project generated by lists of digital parameters, will be instead generated in an artisanal way, using the very bodies of the performers, in an absolutely subjective way. (…) 10000 gestes constitutes a choreographic anti-museum aiming to explore the means of escaping the instinct and the strategies of preservation at work in the activity of a dancer… It will be matter of exploring the possibility that one gesture is never completed by another, and that, if 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, or 25 dancers come in contact, each still executes a gesture distinguished from those of others through the exclusion of any symmetrical movement: in this piece, it is impossible to shake someone’s hand. The collection thus constituted is also an anti-collection, since no choreographer worthy of the name would risk incorporating 10000 gestes in his or her score, and this totality cannot be comprehended other than by the idea that generated it. – Boris Charmatz about his work ’10 000 gestes’ (2017)

wfw weekend #430