centrul Bucureøtiului timp de o oræ, scurtæ, dar intensæ, ræmînînd, de atunci, apropiafli. În aceste condiflii, pentru mine conteazæ mai mult sæ-mi expun perspectiva asupra legæturilor din lumea artei, pe care le-am observat øi træit între MoMA øi Bucureøti. Luîndu-mæ dupæ ce am væzut în lumea lui Perjovschi de la Bucureøti, nu pot sæ nu observ ruptura accentuatæ dintre clædirile vechi, præfuite, aflate în ruinæ în care træieøte el øi zidurile albe, imaculate de la MoMA. Deosebirea nu e una neobiønuitæ, dar a ieøit în evidenflæ pentru mine cînd i-am væzut instalaflia acolo. Observaflia mea n-a fost declanøatæ de vina tipic occidentalæ a lui „a avea“ øi „a nu avea“. E o experienflæ ce survine din ce în ce mai frecvent datoritæ micøorærii lumii, în care douæ locuri sau idei foarte diferite sînt alæturate în absenfla unui protocol formal sau a abilitæflii de prudentæ adaptare la un nou context. Opera sa abordeazæ færæ probleme acea rupturæ socialæ ciudatæ øi adesea frustrantæ, care arareori îøi gæseøte un echilibru. Figurile øi simbolurile fruste ale lui Dan Perjovschi, ce-øi gæsesc un termen de comparaflie în graffiti, sînt menite, prin simplitatea lor, sæ vorbeascæ un limbaj îmbibat de generic. El næscoceøte limbajul contemporan al culturii globale. Opera sa îl flipæ în gura mare: coduri de bare, logouri ale unor produse de lux, graffiti, Coca- Cola, McDonalds etc. Fiecare dintre aceste obiecte/simboluri traverseazæ færæ efort culturile, pæstrîndu-øi mesajul intact. E un limbaj care e inventat pentru cei mulfli de cætre acei cîfliva aflafli la guvernare, care pun laolaltæ vastul conglomerat de locuri regionale øi de oameni de pe cuprinsul planetei, rezumîndu-i în cîteva propoziflii sau imagini. Perjovschi foloseøte acest limbaj global pentru a descrie experienflele individuale ale culturii locale, fie cæ o face prin umor, frustrare, injustiflie sau autoconøtientizare. Precum douæ linii de înaltæ tensiune, el alæturæ eterogenul stræzii cu politica instituflionalæ øi le combinæ, lipsit de inhibiflii, cu limbajele globale ale guvernæmîntului øi ale culturilor acestuia. Ar fi prea simplist sæ spunem cæ vorbeøte pe limba tuturor, însæ el reuøeøte sæ propunæ un dialog al diplomafliei care îi înfæfliøeazæ pe tofli, în aceeaøi mæsuræ goi øi în aceeaøi mæsuræ îndreptæflifli sæ fie buni øi ræi. Opera dobîndeøte o dimensiune extrem de ingenioasæ atunci cînd el suprapune øi interconecteazæ complexe legæturi între stradæ øi instituflie, între publicul global øi intimitatea a ceea ce e local. Ca atîflia alfli artiøti români înaintea lui, el oferæ un nou mod de examinare a condifliei umane. I met Dan by accident, a couple of years ago around Christmas time in his home city of Bucharest, Romania. I had traveled there for the holidays. I was sent by some friends to meet him. Our meeting was by chance since his never ending lineup of international artist’s residencies made it that he was rarely ever home. We sat in his downtown Bucharest offices and talked for a short but intense hour and we have been colleagues ever since. Under these circumstances, it makes more sense for me to tell my perspective of the art world connections I have observed and experienced between MoMA and Bucharest. Going by what I have seen in Dan’s world in Bucharest, I cannot help but notice the vast rupture between the dusty, old, condemnable buildings that he lives in and the pristine white walls of MoMA. The disparity is not an unusual one but was punctuated for me when I saw his installation there. My observation is not ignited by a typically Western guilt of have and have not. It is an experience that happens more and more frequently because of a shrinking world where two very different places or <strong>idea</strong>s are paired together without a formal protocol or the ability to cautiously re-adjust to a new context. His work comfortably embraces that strange and often frustrating social rupture that can rarely find a balance. Dan’s starkly graffiti-esque figures and symbols are designed, in their simplicity, to speak a language that is swaddled in the generic. He coins the contemporary language of global culture. His work screams it: bar codes, luxury logos, graffiti, Coca-Cola, McDonalds, etc. Each of these objects/symbols effortlessly crosses cultures carrying their messages intact. It is a language that is made up for many by a governmental few who piece together the vast patchwork of regional places and peoples across the planet, summing them up in a few sentences or images. Dan uses this global language to describe the individual experiences of local culture whether it is through humor, frustration, injustice or self-awareness. Like two exposed electrical lines, he brings together the mixture of street with institutional politics and blithely combines them with the global languages of government and its cultures. It is too simplistic to say he speaks a language for everyone but he does manage to propose a dialogue of diplomacy that renders everyone equally naked and equally entitled to being wrong and right. The work acquires a dimension beyond the clever when he overlaps and interconnects complex links between the streets and the institution, the global public and the intimacy of what is local. Like so many Romanian artists before him, he offers a new way to examine the human condition. A novice art lover and fan of Dan and his work, once innocently compared it to the simple line drawings of Henri Matisse. I dismissed her <strong>idea</strong> as I thought the connection between the two was incidental. Later I kept returning to that comment. In light of this seemingly simplistic comparison, it becomes interesting that Dan’s simple sketches have come to grace the walls of MoMA. An institution that was founded on the works of European artists like Matisse, Picasso and other Modernists whose desires were to create the avant-garde, the subversive and the radical, the new MoMA building is a testament of Modernism freezing within the new walls and glass the very tenets that defined art in the twentieth century. The brick whitewashed walls in the studios and galleries of nineteen sixties Soho are the original aesthetic impulse from which the MoMA building took its cue. Its gargantuan proportions are the aspects that carry it into the twenty-first century. MoMA’s project space is probably one of the most important contemporary spaces in the Western world because it embodies one very influential history of Modernism that becomes the context for any new work shown there. The new building commands a dialogue, a niche that has been forcibly carved out by the institution’s desire to make closure on the Modernist canon. MoMA goes to parodic lengths to produce a space that is “themed“ by Modernism. If that is the case, what relevance does a forty-foot wall of graffiti by Dan Perjovschi in a bastion of Modernism have to works by Matisse, 122
What Happened to Us?, 2007, permanent marker on wall, installation view, Museum of Modern Art, New York, © 2007 Dan Perjovschi
- Page 1 and 2:
w artæ + societate / arts + societ
- Page 3 and 4:
Aspirafliile celor care ar vrea sæ
- Page 5 and 6:
+ (Debord) 129 Spectacolul ca iluzi
- Page 7 and 8:
arhiva Nostalgia Antichitæflii øi
- Page 9 and 10:
arhiva færæ precizie, prea variat
- Page 11 and 12:
arhiva decît împinsæ pînæ la c
- Page 13 and 14:
arhiva - trebuie sæ afle în ce mo
- Page 15 and 16:
arhiva øi folosul cu totul special
- Page 17 and 18:
arhiva (Fig. 9): „Andromeda / fic
- Page 19 and 20:
arhiva 26. Michael Maier, Lusus ser
- Page 21 and 22:
arhiva 76. Helmut Grötzsch øi Jü
- Page 23 and 24:
arhiva Odatæ ce ideea unui muzeu d
- Page 25 and 26:
arhiva mare de instalaflii de artæ
- Page 27 and 28:
arhiva Istorisirea artei în noul m
- Page 29 and 30:
arhiva sæ onoræm cultura burghez
- Page 31 and 32:
arhiva vite de artæ. Însæøi ace
- Page 33 and 34:
arhiva O revendicare largæ în fav
- Page 37:
galerie 35
- Page 41:
galerie 39
- Page 45:
galerie 43
- Page 48 and 49:
Am aflat povestea aceasta în vara
- Page 50 and 51:
o întrevedere cu mine. Ulterior, d
- Page 52 and 53:
Din pæcate, n-am avut øansa unei
- Page 54 and 55:
Nu e nicio problemæ ca ruøii sæ
- Page 56 and 57:
O prezentare vizualæ spectaculoas
- Page 61 and 62:
galerie Nedko Solakov Discussion (P
- Page 63 and 64:
scena Un spafliu al artei. Tradifli
- Page 65 and 66:
scena Detail, photo: Studio Protoko
- Page 67 and 68:
Details, photo: István Bíró scen
- Page 69 and 70:
scena Yinka Shonibare MBE How to Bl
- Page 71 and 72:
Neil Hamon Ben Roberts, C-Company,
- Page 73 and 74: scena Statelor Unite, dupæ locul l
- Page 75 and 76: scena The Biennale has no position
- Page 77 and 78: scena specificitate a artei romani,
- Page 79 and 80: scena David Lamelas: Time As Activi
- Page 81 and 82: scena 79
- Page 83 and 84: scena mare acuratefle, curatorul ar
- Page 85 and 86: scena cu Giovanni Carmine, curatoru
- Page 87 and 88: scena 4.13.81, 1987, Kurfürstendam
- Page 89 and 90: Noch Fragen?, 1998, installation, S
- Page 91 and 92: scena √ Nu, fiindcæ voiam de la
- Page 93 and 94: scena Stammheim, 1984, 300 × 50 cm
- Page 95 and 96: scena [Portocala mecanicæ]. Atunci
- Page 97 and 98: scena Note: 1. Kurfürstendamm, cun
- Page 99 and 100: scena Shoes for Europe, 2002, 16 mm
- Page 101 and 102: scena √ Aceste experimente le con
- Page 103 and 104: scena ¬ Efectele acestei izolæri
- Page 105 and 106: View from the exhibition, Neue Nati
- Page 107 and 108: scena în domeniul artistic øi o l
- Page 109 and 110: J. D. ’Okhai Ojeikere Headgear Se
- Page 111 and 112: scena superficiale, are, într-adev
- Page 114 and 115: Yael Bartana Productionsphotos, 200
- Page 116 and 117: constæ în presupunerea cæ israel
- Page 118 and 119: Martha Rosler Backyard with Bunker
- Page 120 and 121: aøa cum a fost pictat de vechii ma
- Page 122 and 123: What Happened to Us?, 2007, permane
- Page 126 and 127: Page of the newspaper, What Happene
- Page 128: insert Stimatæ Redacflie, Mæ nume
- Page 132 and 133: 5. Trebuie spus totuøi cæ „marx
- Page 134 and 135: 29. Aluziile la explicaflia troflki
- Page 136 and 137: Debord øi autenticul Anselm Jappe
- Page 138 and 139: 2. Ibid., §128 [p. 115]. 3. Ibid.,
- Page 140 and 141: 21. Homer, Iliada, traducere în me
- Page 142 and 143: Teorie, autobiografie, strategie Vi
- Page 144 and 145: 12. Perioada letristæ: aprilie 195
- Page 146 and 147: 20. Cette mauvaise réputation, in
- Page 148 and 149: „Adeværul poate fi væzut øi î
- Page 150 and 151: 5. „Codul Hays“ (dupæ numele l
- Page 152 and 153: 13. În francezæ: maître et posse
- Page 154 and 155: 16. În francezæ: là où était l
- Page 156 and 157: 3. Filosof ceh (1926-2003), autor a
- Page 158 and 159: 8. Intrarea în noua realitate a ca
- Page 160 and 161: 11. Economia acestui text nu ne per
- Page 162 and 163: Solidaritatea dupæ un sfert de vea
- Page 164 and 165: Se pot da douæ tipuri de ræspuns
- Page 166 and 167: Un ræspuns întîrziat lui János
- Page 168 and 169: Orice s-ar fi întîmplat în cei
- Page 170 and 171: doar de niøte idealizæri. Aøadar
- Page 172 and 173: uia oare sæ pæstræm monarhia abs
- Page 174 and 175:
Asta ar fi poate adeværat dacæ gu
- Page 176 and 177:
programul revolufliei burghez-liber
- Page 178 and 179:
susflii pe tot parcursul textului t
- Page 180 and 181:
Drumurile s-au despærflit Încæ u
- Page 182 and 183:
ca în sistemele premoderne. Preflu
- Page 184 and 185:
Acest fenomen e atît de pregnant a
- Page 186 and 187:
sugrumase ultimele mari revolte ale
- Page 188 and 189:
vorbesc „verzi øi uscate“. Ace
- Page 190 and 191:
ecologiste, feministe, gay sau quee
- Page 192 and 193:
400117 RO Cluj Str. Dorobanflilor,
- Page 194 and 195:
400117 RO Cluj Str. Dorobanflilor,
- Page 196:
15 September 2007 Opening of the pr
Change language