Syndicate: comment on letter of support

[fargfab@algonet.se (fargfabriken)]

COMMENT TO EDA CUFER'S LETTER OF SUPPORT

I received through the V2-syndicate and through others the report on the
Alexander Brener trial and the letter of support by Eda Cufer/Irwin. Since
Eda Cufer is writing about the incidents related to the Interpol-project I
want to make a few comments on what she is writing.

I just want to give my version of the story, so that things do not have to
be "primitive and nonchalant", to quote Eda's own words. It seems as if the
mythological dimension of the project has allowed different versions of
what actually happened to float around. Maybe none is more "true" than the
other. But when I read what Eda writes I'm surprised. Even though we have
been present in the same project and witnessed the same discussions and
actions there is very little in her story that is correct. Anyway, this is
my version, be it correct for Eda or not, if anybody would find it
interesting to know about it.

Eda Cufer writes: "When we actually came to realize the project, we were
all shocked to see that an enormous work by Wenda Gu took up the central
alley of the space, with no attention to any other artist presented there.
The disappointment was even bigger when we realized that the organizers
represented by Jan Aman were very proud of this work, accepting no
objection that this work by definition broke the rules of the game
established in three years of prior communication."
My comment: Wenda Gu had been clear about his intentions during the whole
three year process. Since there was an idea of "openness" in the project I
felt Ok with it, and that any artist (i.e. including Eda Cufer and Irwin)
were free to express their opinions and start a dialogue with that person
(in this case Wenda).
   Further: three months prior to the opening in Stockholm the two curators
of the project, Victor Misiano and myself, had a four-day meeting in
Moscow, to define how to make the final presentation at FÅ rgfabriken after
the three-year process. Partly present during this meeting were also
Dimitrij Gutov and Jurij Leiderman. During the discussions we (Misiano and
myself) came to realise that Interpol had "turned into a project about its
own history" (see further the Interpol catalogue). We made - together -
sketches/plans with the only large physical work that appeared from any of
the artists in the project, the "tunnel of human hair" by Wenda Gu, in the
center of the large space of FÅ rgfabriken.
   Since there were very few physical art works that were even planned
Misiano and myself finally decided to treat it by letting it get a "double"
function - as a art work by Wenda Gu, but also as a stage for the whole
Interpol-project, as a sort of scenography for the other art-works (where
very few were even planned at this time, since most artists hesitated to
come forward with any concrete ideas) - with the mattresses by CM von
Hauswolff, Andrew McKenzie and Ulf Bilting all around it, almost forming
"one piece". The work by Wenda Gu could have been no surprise to Eda Cufer
and Irwin. It was there during the whole process. If Eda feels that it
broke any kind of "rules" set by Misiano or me it must stand for her - and
the rules she put into the game herself. What about if there were no rules?
(Further: Wenda Gu had for a very long time tried to get in contact with
the artists in Moscow, but never got a reply.)

Eda Cufer writes: "As Jan Aman was the financial supporter of the project,
the whole story became West-East polarised, also the more so because it was
obvious that Victor Misiano was ultimately thrown out of the game."
My reply: I was of course not in person the financial supporter, but the
Swedish state and the city of Stockholm provided a limited funding for the
project. I do not understand why this should have made it West-East
polarised. As to Victor Misiano's involvment - he clearly stated (to my
surprise and disapointment) to me and to the Russian financial supporter
(the State Contemporary Art Center), that he regarded himself as involved
only in the initial idea of the project, i.e. the process until
realisation, but that he did not want to have any part in the actual
realisation of the project into the exhibition at FÅ rgfabriken. He was
again asked when coming to Stockholm, but was reluctant to be included in
the final process.

Eda Cufer writes: "Therefore, on the day of the opening, Brener simply
destroyed Wenda Gu's work. For that he was accused of being  a fascist by
the group of artists and by the organizers of the exhibition, and a very
primitive and nonchalant letter was sent to all important addresses of
contemporary art institutions, claiming that Misiano and all Russian
artists present are a group of fascists."
My reply:
1. Alexander Brener was never accused of being a fascist, more than being
asked by the French critic Olivier Zahm during a press conference if Brener
regarded himself as a fascist or not. In the letter there was no such
accusation.
2. The idea to write this letter came from the Oliver Zahm and Elein Fleiss
of Purple Prose who were at the opening to receive a prize that was the
project of Maurizio Cattelan for the Interpol-project. The positive
response to the idea of a letter, from me and the organizers and the
artists that signed it, was a reaction to the fact that the action that
Brener did was apparently known within the "eastern" group (i.e. the
Russians and the Irwin-group) before it happened. There was no dialogue,
and the whole story (or the feelings) that Eda Cufer now sends out to the
world were completely unknown. On the contrary there were many talks during
the two weeks before the opening (also with Eda Cufer) that gave the
complete opposite feeling. (I could accept that this might be a
misunderstanding because of us coming from apparently different
"socio-political and cultural contexts", but nevertheless that was my
feeling.) The letter was a sign of "action" as well as that of Alexander
Brener in the show - if regarded by Eda as primitive, well, so would some
say of Brener's action.

Eda Cufer writes: "Our position toward this action is that his action was
completely legitimate in the described context because, after three years
of talking and constructing a bridge of values between individuals of two
different
socio-political and cultural contexts, the organizers allowed an art work
that totally negated the basic ethical imperatives of the project to be
presented in the classical and universally accepted manner. None of these
actions could be called vandalism or Fascism--the method by which even
people from a sophisticated contemporary art community usually stigmatise
them. They are based on a very consistent and carefully built value
system presented in his literature, essays and public speeches."
My reply: The text by Alexander Brener in the Interpol-catalogue clearly
states his intentions (I understand that now better than before the opening
of Interpol).

Stockholm 970221

Jan Â?man, FÅ rgfabriken

fargfab@algonet.se