21 January - 26 January 2010
THE OBSTACLE IS TAUTOLOGY
studio D1 cité des arts montmartre, 24 rue Norvins, 75018 Paris
"the obstacle is tautology": this statement rests on a general proposition according to which conceptual art does not exist except when it is brought into being by repetition. This is a strong proposition. I claim that a being is an object belonging to the world and that it has no meaning when it is outside of "the stream of life", as Lawrence Weiner would say. A tautology, on the other hand, does not state anything apart of itself, its pure form, and destroys the Saussurian structure of a sign (signifier/signified) by not indicating anything outside of itself. In this sense, the traditional tautological conceptual art is not an object of the world - it can become one only when it is treated as a model and when its tautological functioning is taken as a reference. If we treat tautology as an obstacle we can use words in time and space to speak against it and produce echo.
It is not the aim of this exhibition to prove what I have insisted on above. I am only saying that "the obstacle is tautology" is the title of this exhibition. Within it one can see Philippe Fernandez' cinematographic adaptation of the myth of the Plato's cave, a portait of Jiri Kovanda remembering his first joy and sculpture of a flower without a why by Boris Achour, a mesmerizing sculpture by Alex Cecchetti, an electric lamp which casts light on its socket by Etienne Chambaud, a newspaper collage by Jesse Ash, an instruction for a collage made from motorbike magazine by Liam Gillick, several paintings of a new kind by Valentina Liernur, a photograph made by Bruno Serralongue one day after the event which motivated the decision to make the picture. In this exhibition there is also a sculpture open to transformation by Reto Pulfer and a plate by Gintaras Didžiapetris which changes when it is rotated. Finally, a site-specific painting by Amir Mogharabi. A speaking painting, perhaps.
I have a feeling that these works by themselves and within each of these artists corpus are questioning a certain outside. This outside is indicated by the fact that these works make a sidestep akin to the one requested by structural and non-hermeneutical analysis. This sidestep allows to move outside of the structure.