ANTI-PERSONAL PERSONAL EXHIBITION OF MOTOLYANTS SEED, WHO UNDERSTANDED THAT HE DID NOT UNDERSTAND ANYTHING IN MODERN ART Automatic translate

Curators: Anastasia Kotyleva, Lizaveta Matveeva, Anastasia Skvortsova and Natalya Shapkina

I do not understand anything in contemporary art, and in classical too. At first I wanted to hide this fact, but then I decided to use it in the name of the exhibition.

Starting to do any project, you build a plan that you will follow. Choosing a language and subject, everyone understands that having chosen one, the project will leave something that will have to be abandoned. This element of choice is a difficult and very important task for each author. Project thinking reduces work to narrow cases, because it is the narrowing of the topic and the specificity of the task that helps to achieve success in a certain area, but at the same time instrumentalizes us, turns us into a function and creates one-dimensionality. You cannot embrace the immensity, but this is what you yearn for, do not want to land your dreams, especially in our time - a time that dictates rationality in the name of survival.

This exhibition is built from observations of the internal working methods in the workshop. I want to do everything without refusing any finds, not preferring media, not choosing priority models from them, because according to my observations, this choice contains self-censorship that degenerates into replicativity. Character or other techniques that allow you to work with different languages ​​at the same time do not interest me in this case. I like to do several projects at the same time, which seem to complement each other - this is a design for shifting the main thing, working with peripheral ideas, although it is impossible to fully understand who plays secondary roles in this performance. The project is constructed out of trust in the methodology of dispersed attention and denial of the work model “artist - machine for the production of art”.

Understanding all the weaknesses of this approach to building the exhibition, I called for help of 4 curators who lead exclusively in one direction of the exhibition, not working with a common history, in this case not so important. Curators help not to build hierarchical values ​​with this approach. More often, the curator acts as a conductor in collective exhibitions, where individual works have the opportunity to perform in a more complex structure - the project. In the same project, we cooperate with the curators from a slightly different angle - this is, in a sense, an anti-personal exhibition, where the curator works with a fragment of the exhibition. The goal is not to stratify and not to come to multi-instrumentalism, but rather to try to grasp something that one way or another, sooner or later, will have to be abandoned. Conditions and opportunities very sharply dictate the method of work to any artist. I hope that each of the announced curators, in cooperation with me, will help to find that implicit conclusion, which will generalize the method of exhibition elements and indicate where the “common” is. The conclusion can lead to a certain refusal, and, consequently, to the clarification of the working method, because the technique and language cannot be the true interest of the artist in my understanding of the role of the artist as such. Language, style, technique - an important element of the presence of the author, and at the same moment - these are the boundaries of the corral, in which their creator rushes. I think that it is important to discover them and then break these boundaries not in the name of expanding the field of art - this is just an empty illusion, but in the name of coming up with complex tasks - beyond ideas. In order not to go into production, it will not turn into a factory for the production of art products - to which, of course, the success of the audience response should lead. And these are more likely hindrances and vaunted working ability, and extreme efficiency, and all other signs of a fruitful and creative personality.

It is difficult to predict what each of the curators sees, whether such a working scheme develops, but, I hope, we will see differences in views on the understanding of art. Here I am, in a certain sense, a “slippery person” who does not want to be determined, who does not want to make a choice. Because, in my opinion, there must be some social significance in the artist’s work, the ability to be an agent for changing the world around him, and if this does not open, then it’s time to look. In principle, I understand that I am disoriented in the search for a method of creating art that suits me as an organic form or language. Why can this dispersal not become the leitmotif of the exhibition?