Re: [-empyre-] politics of critical fusion?

[Alice Miceli <alicemiceli@terra.com.br>]

> This could take pages and maybe my interpretation of your comment  
> is not
> right, but I really would like to express that there is a kind of  
> critical
> action that is more about contributing to interrogate the  
> boundaries of our
> social behaviour and our global environment and I strongly believe  
> that what
> I call “critical fusion”, just at the limit of the expected  
> explosion, is
> the right place to play this role.
> Maurice

I would like to say that I very much agree with Maurice. I also think  
that there are always risks in falling into a trap, especially if  
artists sometimes end up in stiff and controlled places previously  
assigned for them by the "economy of power they seek to either  
address, expose or intervene".  So, of course, for me at least, works  
should always be self-reflexive on that question, and so many others  
as well. Being self-reflexive meaning to be inquisitive and curious  
about the very own way a work itself is created: by the way an image  
is generated, by the way a work comes to being financially, by the  
way and where it is exhibited. Something that strikes me as very  
essential in my practice is that in making art, one directly  
addresses perception, how things in life are perceived - modes of  
really looking at things. But what it means to really look? What it  
is that you see beyond what is deceivably shown to you by an “economy  
of power”, or merely beyond common sense? That, for me, even if in a  
very small scale, can be a subversive act.