Everything is Desintegrated and Functioning on Separate Orbits, interview by Marta Tarabuła (1989) [fragment]

(The text was published in art magazine “Magazyn Artystyczny”, No. 3(64), 1989, pp. 35-36)

 

Marta Tarabuła — Getting back to the Polish exhibition in Oxford:. did the presented works in any way justify its name „Art at the Edge”?

Jerzy Bereś — I am not quite able to see it as a participant… From the British point of view, however, there must have been some justification if such a title was given.

My impression is that it was a typical „show with a thesis”: Poland perceived as a tragic country which has found itself situated at the edge of political systems, religions and cultures. Elliot, who made a highly natural reference to Witkacy in the introduction, mentions an extreme anxiety which seems to have been embedded in the heart of Polish culture. He writes about Poland as a country of innumerable divisions, splits, unanswered questions and unaccountable accidents. It is a vision of Poland which, in a conscious but also a schizophrenic way, occupies a position between the Eastern and Western Europe as both a bridge and a buffer. As such, it is equally susceptible to a military invasion as to cultural influences. In conclusion, Elliot observes that the tragic history of Poland is engraved on its art, and that it provides a source of inspiration for its best artists.

It should be presumed that the exhibited artists were chosen in accordance with that criterion. Abakanowicz, Bereś, Dwurnik, Gustowska, Nowosielski, Tarasewicz: do you think that it was an adequate selection? Perhaps, somebody was missing or should not be there at all?

— I have not thought about that because I think that all of today’s choices are quite accidental … (…)

What was the purpose of the „Edge” festival in London? Was it to be an objective review of trends in the performance art and its derivatives, or was the choice of invited artists clearly dominated by an ideology? Brisley and his circle are known for their leftist inclinations…

— Their major intention was to appear on the world map as a centre. They think that they have been outdistanced by other, more active centres. such as Paris, New York. Germany… They are simply trying to bridge that gap. The event is to be repeated.

Yes, as a biennial. The subtitle was „Biennale of Experimental Art”. But what was experimental in it? Was that quality really noticeable?

—  It was the most controversial issue of the festival, probably provoked by the organizers and not the artists; I know it because I was talking about it — most of them were rather against the name of “experimental art”. This term is rather associated with a scientific approach and in that case it would testify to some lack of responsibility on the part of those who experiment… Nevertheless, the actions and biographies of people who took part in this event prove their full responsibility while taking up — and realizing — highly risky concepts.

Did the festival had any definite character? In what respect was it distinctive?

— There was some clearly perceptible, hard line of opposition — primarily against commerciality, any form of promotion, an easy success — for the sake of finding that fundamental resistance… This is a characteristic feature of those people — and I mean here artists, first of all.

Was performance dominating?

— I do not think so, although it seemed to be the most lively element. because many installations were very discreet. just like the whole festival which did not pretend to be a publicity event. It was just the opposite, as seen in the fact of locating it in the Clerkenwell district, which is the so called London village — a derelict quarter in the centre of London where artists have found some bankrupt factories to stage their actions. (…)

On the preceding day at the same place , in Slaughterhouse at 61, Cherterhouse Street — you made a manifestation.

— That place which I was offered, or rather assigned to, was slightly surprising for me. Moreover, I learned about my performance only at the last moment — the day before — so I did not have time to see what type of a place that was.

Didn’t you have any choice?

— No, the festival organizers arranged it, and in that situation… we went on location, in the vicinity of a huge meat market hall, the slaughterhouse… There was a room nearby. You entered it by a shabby side door. Right behind, there were stairs, long and narrow, leading down to some cellars, vaults — it was quite a low-profile entrance. Some old store rooms were down there, open. What could be seen below was only a railing, while slightly above the bottom level there was a room rounded at one side, with the other wall flat. being a kind of both the audience hall and the stage. It looked very austere. Several persons waited inside to help us arrange and prepare materials for my prospective performance. When asked what I needed I answered that practically nothing — only a table to put my paints on. They were very surprised and told me that I was a „diamond”. I was the least troublesome person (he chuckles) they ever met, because many artists were more demanding than they could afford, requiring monitors etc. The action was entitled „Picture from Poland”. In the evening, at the fixed time, I was waiting for the audience in that rather grim and cold room (he laughs). The spectators were coming in, and they were quite numerous, as it turned out later, so there was only little space left for me — but I practically did not need it because I decided to make a painting, which I announced when everybody arrived. I told them that there would not be any performance because I do not stage many, but that I had decided to paint a picture and that the public would be able to evaluate the effect. So, I took the brush and the white paint, and I painted a sinuous line on the front of my body. Then I turned my back to the audience and painted a red stripe with a sharp. swift motion. On my back.

Did you await the audience naked?

— Yes. Then, I continued the white sinuous part of the line which formed a question mark. Naturally, it was not complete, because I interrupted it every time I turned around and alternatively painted red lines on my back — on the left and right. Later, while making corrections, I tried to paint that question mark the best. I could; as a result I had many red stripes on my back. Then, to close off, I took first the white and then red paint and put a point on the phallic organ of my body. First the white, then the red. It was an introductory stage of my manifestation, because my main programme was what followed later, namely at the moment when I finished painting and turned to the audience to ask for an… evaluation of the picture. Is it good or bad? I am asking because I think that it is good — I declared right away. Immediately, somebody protested. saying that it was bad. As a result we had two different opinions. so this faltering. difficult discussion gained some starting point.

What was next? Did you manage to make the audience talk?

— Yes, naturally. I kept saying that the picture was good and invited more comments. Gradually, the spectators joined in, argued with one another, but— and it is typical for art appreciation — a clear element of relativity crept in… The point was that as a picture of situation in Poland it was, well, acceptable, but then it could be discussed from another point of view: was it good as a performance, or as a painting — however, all the time the whole situation was marked by avoidance. Nobody wanted to take a definite standpoint on the question whether this concrete, just painted picture is good or bad. Later, the discussion became so sophisticated and precise that I was no longer able to continue it in English, but there was somebody who could translate for me. The debate was highly animated. However, because the actual evaluation was becoming an ever more distant prospect. I finally said that if we could not reach a common conclusion then we would have to vote. I announced it several times: besides, it was so cold in there that I was freezing but… they still wanted to talk. But eventually there was no way out but the voting.

After what time?

— Well, it could have lasted an hour, it is hard to keep time in such situations, but the whole evening somehow passed… With the help of the translator we held the voting. The results were as follows: fifty or sixty persons were for, a dozen or two were against— meaning, that it was a bad picture — and some abstained. So, the majority was for, declaring that the picture was good. This allowed me to make my point at the end, which I did.

What is your opinion of the „Edge” venture in general? Would you take part in it next time?

— From my point of view there is one strange thing, which is still present in England: the contestation complex. The specific sphere of contestation that has developed there does not offer any opportunity of going beyond it. There has been a loss of motivation for which something is contested. resulting in contestation for the contestation’s sake. There is another aspect. always disputable for me: art. after all, cannot be based on the exposition of the physical condition. However. this criterion has been frequently used here: MacLennan was the absolutely extreme case, while Brisley did „a zero work”. Here, the action alone is to suffice for an artwork. without resulting in anything permanent.  What remains is a photographic record, but this is another kind of work. Brisley MAKES NOTHING working really hard. This is why I could not find a place for myself there; that sphere misses the commitment of human condition. Warpechowski is much closer to it. This is an excess of means over effects — with no chance to account for the use of means. The means seem to be acting in-dependently. Therefore. „Picture from Poland” is primarily the transposition of a symbol, a report on the situation in Poland, and secondly it is the necessity of determining whether something is good or bad. It is a moment which can overrule contestation for the contestation’s sake and the finding of values in „making nothing”.

Here in England, in a short time one could experience two separate orbits of art: on the one hand it was the long-prepared Polish art exhibition at the Oxford Museum, and on the other hand it was performance. This is the course of events, so it is difficult to make any judgements…Everything is disintegrated and functioning on separate orbits. Meanwhile, the history of art has become a history of the market.

copyright Fundacja im. Marii Pinińskiej-Bereś i Jerzego Beresia, 2022 | made by studio widok

maria
pinińska
bereś