[rohrpost] Fwd: Paffi Nueppel rejects offers to lead the transmediale team

[beate zurwehme]

For Paffi Nueppel and all the residents of previously released 
adventure suckers

By Imke Oibrüstl, recent director of the Schkeuditz Media Lab

Pre-publication of an interview intermixed and compiled on the occasion 
of the 52 birthday of Paffi Nueppel, former director of Schkeuditz 
Media Lab, now Chief Artistic Archiver (CAA) of Schkeuditz Media Lab 
and the New Museum for Fluid Media, Schkeuditz

In regard - it's back to the daily grind tomorrow
An exhibition with video works of Paffi Nueppel, Beate Zurwehme and Eva 
Brain

An introduction and an interview in between two media artists

During the last few decades of the 20th century, the so-called “New 
Media” became an integral part of art and are so well established today 
that it is meaningless to argue their existence as a separate genre. In 
the spectrum of artistic disciplines alongside painting and drawing, 
sculpture, installation and photography they have opened new avenues of 
creative potential. Through the work of the three artists we have 
invited to this exhibition, we are given confident examples of how much 
the new media, especially video, have contabuted to an intertwining of 
artistic disciplines. Whereas Beate Zurwehme, born in 1957 in 
Switzerland, has progressed from photography to video films, the 
Austrian Paffi Nueppel, born in 1954, sees himself as a sculptor who 
has for years carried out his sculptural fieldwork with the help of the 
video camera. Eva Brain, an artist of the generation after Zurwehme and 
Nueppel, born in 1966 in Germany has always worked outside the confines 
of traditional genre limits. He confidently encompasses everything in 
his oeuvre: pictures, installations, photographs and videos.
It is easy to confirm that Brain, Zurwehme and Nueppel are in no way 
“videoartists”, but artists who might use video as a medium in their 
work. This normal use of the electronic medium  as one possible 
artistic technique amongst others  allows the assumption that it is the 
content that determines whether or not the videocamera is used.
There is a great fascination for everything that is “technically 
practicable” as expositions with the emphasis on the “New Media” have 
shown in recent years. The price we may have to pay for this, is that 
the actual artistic ideas may be in danger of being forced to take a 
back seat. If this happens it will be detrimental to art in the long 
term, because the technical innovations of today will not even be worth 
talking about ten years on.
What we need is art in which the technological possibilities are 
understood as tools, and used to serve the artist in a functional 
manner.
Characteristically, the video-works of our three artists, are very 
pragmatic: the central focus is always - indisputably - that which is 
shown; not how it is shown. There are no sweeps of the camera that 
divert attention from the essential point. Neither is there any later 
editing of the pictures, unless it has to do with the reason for 
choosing this medium: an interest in time! Brain, Zurwehme and Nueppel 
all perceive the use of video primarily as a key to: a wider artistic 
autonomy; independence from place; and surmounting the traditional view 
of time. Beate Zurwehme can somehow feel at home anywhere in the world 
and observes the passers-by in various cities from New York to Tokyo, 
from London to Sydney. He does this with the aid of artistic tools that 
allow him to move around freely - and almost unobserved - in urban 
public space. Paffi Nueppel re-enacts his One Minute Sculptures in the 
video-work Adelphi, but this time in a hotel room, with himself as the 
sole performer. This shows his profound artistic autonomy, and the 
intimacy the video medium nowadays (through its easy availability and 
handiness) allows. Finally the circle is completed by Eva Brain's work 
Endymion, which is also set in hotel rooms. It is laid out as a “work 
in progress” - which apart from fulfilling its original true intention, 
also indirectly records the (life1working-)journey of the artist from 
Texas, via Spain to Germany and from there back into the world.
Presenting the video works of Brain, Zurwehme and Nueppel together in a 
joint exhibition is a meaningful combination, as the attention in all 
three works is focussed on man. Beate Zurwehme behaves more like a 
chronicler. She observes the protagonists of a world ever more linked 
together. The magic of her observations results from a symbiosis of 
proximity and distance. We are brought very close- almost like peeping 
Toms - to the individuals without gaining any knowledge of their 
origins, characters, hopes or dreams. Paffi Nueppel on the other hand, 
treats the individual as a variable for his sculptural and 
psychological experiments, an attempt to make no halt at his own 
person! Perhaps we only find the key to our real true selves in a state 
of physical contortion or in embarrassing situations. Finally, Eva 
Brain presents the most archetypical picture. His “felt-figures” are 
devoid of all individuality in an archaic way, and are thereby open to 
every form of projection. In existentially exceptional circumstances in 
which even the rules of time and space seem to lose their importance - 
these figures touch on the myths of our history. The theme is eternal 
sleep, death and an unfulfilled longing for earthly happiness.

The Interview

Nueppel: For some time I have been considering the work of Michel de 
Montaigne more intensely. His way of thinking about the world, in that 
he takes a deep look into himself is exemplary and very impressive. 
When I saw your most recent work and we discussed it together, I 
thought I could discern certain parallels to his thinking in your work. 
I woald like to confront you with them. Or is this reference to 
Montaigne misleading?

Brain: I like Montaigne, but until now it hasn't crossed my mind to see 
my work in this context. If there is one philosopher whose work I have 
always admired, then it has to be Heraklit. Not really because of what 
he said but more the way in which he said it, or else the way it has 
been passed down and in which it is received today. Throughout the 
centuries and despite many differing interpretations, Heraklit has 
always been regarded as the original foundation on which philosophy 
stands, in spite of - or perhaps even due to - the very meagre sources. 
There seems to be something very existential that is conveyed by his 
work, but no explicit formulae. It allows for a direct philosophical 
experience without intense intellectual discourse. I perceive this as a 
very emotional quality. You don't have to work it out, it's simply 
there. And it is open to many sides. It would be wonderful if this 
could find expression in art.

Nueppel: But isn't there a similar existential quality evident in 
Montaigne's work? Except that he doesn't present it with the usual 
pretension to absolutism of many other philosophers.

Brain: That's true. You can count me amongst his sympathisers in that 
view. I like his associative method, his basic scepticism towards 
everything that claims to represent a model of truth and valid wisdom. 
I like his standpoint that every deliberation on our existence remains 
an attempt because we can never escape the human sphere. Montaigne 
certainly has the best.

Nueppel: Is your interest in Greek enzythology based on this pre 
understatement of all philosophers. If he had been so sure of his miss? 
I mean of course your “work in progress” project Endy facts, he would 
not have continually reviewed or discarded his mion. Can you tell me 
what it was that interested you feel when you read the essays. I think 
that at the bottom Gt this is the very sincere cogni-explicating an 
ancient myth?tion: We know that we don't know anything. A true virtue!

Brain: The use of an ancient myth has nothing to do with antiquitiy.

Nueppel: One of the chapters in a book about Montaigne is head- 
antiquity itself. I just attached myself on to something that wasted 
“Subjectivity as a discipline”. Can you make anything of it? already 
there and that I could make good use of I am often asked why I combine 
so many different media and also let them be useful?

Brain: “Subjectivity as a discipline” - as Montaigne perceives work 
through each other. I try to explain this as “economy of it seems to me 
only possible if it is understood to be the only ex-means” i.e. each 
medium is allocated the role that it is best suit listing discipline. 
If subjectivity is ever present, because the world edit to perform. The 
gist of the work is defined by the content, not is always seen from a 
human point of view, then it would be the by the artistic technique 
employed. I think that this form of only conceivable platform for 
thought. Questioning the scope of economy - to make the best use of 
things and have the greatest possible subjectivities is more 
interesting. Every individual has freedom of choice - can also be used 
for ideas. The story of Endymionter produces its own idiosyncrasies. 
How then are we still capable of quality Endymion just happened to come 
up by chance. Last year a visitor too initiative and knowledgeable 
communication? I would prefer to see the exhibition asked me if the 
telt figure in the Sleep installations. In regard to the term 
“subjectivity” as a collective on an abstract plane. I on was supposed 
to represent Endymion. This didn't ring any don't like this 
egocentricity where everyone considers himself the bells initially, but 
I thought it was an interesting point and navel of the world. decided 
to read up on it. And so 7 learned that - according to legend - the 
youth Endymion sits in a cave in eternal sleep. His eternity.

Nueppel: What does the term “subjectivity” mean in relation to beauty 
remains preserved, he owns the privilege of immortality your own 
artistic work? but he cannot partake of life. He sees the seasons 
passing him by, but remains completely autistic and inactive.

Brain: I think it means less to me than it did to the generations many 
ancient myths that explain how this happened. One of of artists before 
us, at least those of the 20th century. I don't these says that Zeus 
offers Endymion the chance to exchange his motions, we agree with 
Montaigne on this point either: I don't think that one mortality for 
eternal life - at a cost. The price would be that he should see oneself 
to be a measure of all things. Art should not would spend his 
immortality ih a state of sleep. Endymion exhausts himself in the 
observation of one's self. 7 never understood chooses eternal sleep. 
What an amazing subject! You cast a line the moaning over the end of 
Modernism, nor am I a follower of back into the history of mankind, and 
receive an eternal dilenziusmasm those attitudes reinventing art again 
and again from itself. I ma. Would you swap the treadmill, uncertainty 
and finality of think that is totally outdated. your life for the 
passivity of eternal sleep? Would that be a fair price to pay?

Nueppel: Escape the human sphere. Montaigne certainly says the best 
understatement of all philosophers. If he had been so sure of his 
facts, he would not have continually reviewed or discarded his essays. 
I think that at the bottom Gt this is the very sincere cognition: We 
know that we don't know anything. A true virtue! One of the chapters in 
a book about Montaigne is headed “Subjectivity as a discipline”. Can 
you make anything of it?

Brain: “Subjectivity as a discipline” - as Montaigne perceives it seems 
to me only possible if it is understood to be the only existing 
discipline. If subjectivity is ever present, because the world is 
always seen from a human point of view, then it would be the only 
conceivable platform for thought. Questioning the scope of possible 
subjectivities is more interesting. Every individual has their own 
idiosyncrasies. How then are we still capable of qualitative and 
knowledgeable communication? I would prefer to see the term 
“subjectivity” as a collective on an abstract plane. I don't like this 
egocentricity where everyone considers himself the navel of the world.

Nueppel: What does the term “subjectivity” means in relation to your 
own artistic work?

Brain: I think it means less to me than it did to the generations of 
artists before us, at least those of the 20th century. I don't agree 
with Montaigne on this point either: I don't think that one should see 
oneself to be a measure of all things. Art should not exhaust itself in 
the observation of one's self. I never understood the moaning over the 
end of Modernism, nor am I a follower of those attitudes reinventing 
art again and again from itself. I think that is totally outdated.

Nueppel: Is your interest in Greck mythology based on this prcmiss? I 
mean of course your “work in progress” project Endy mion. Can you tell 
me what it was that interested you in explicating an ancient myth?

Brain: The use of an ancient myth has nothing to do with antiquity 
itself. I just attached myself on to something that was already there 
and that I could make good use of I anT often asked why I combine so 
many different media and also let them work through each other. I try 
to explain this as “economy of means” i.e. each medium is allocated the 
role that it is best suited to perform. The gist of the work is defined 
by the content, not by the artistic technique employed. I think that 
this form of economy - to make the best use of things and have the 
greatest freedom of choice - can also be used for ideas. The story of 
Endymion just happened to come up by chance. Last year a visitor to the 
exhibition asked me if the telt figure in the Sleep installation was 
supposed to represent Endymion. This didn't ring any bells initially, 
but I thought it was an interesting point and decided to read up on it. 
And so I learned that - according to legend - the youth Endymion sits 
in a cave in eternal sleep. His beauty remains preserved, he deserves 
the privilege of immortality but he cannot partake of life. He sees the 
seasons passing him by, but remains completely autistic and inactive. 
There are many ancient myths that explain how this happened. One of 
these says that Zeus offers Endymion the chance to exchange his 
mortality for eternal life - at a cost. The price would be that he 
would spend his immortality in a state of sleep. Endymion chooses 
eternal sleep. What an amazing subject! You cast a line back into the 
history of mankind, and receive an eternal dilemma. Would you swap the 
treadmill, uncertainty and finality of your life for the passivity of 
eternal sleep? Would that be a fair price to pay?

Nueppel: Was it clear to you from the beginning that a video would 
result from this?

Brain: No. I used this theme for an exhibition in Texas. It consisted 
of a mural, diverse inscriptions made up of felt letters, and a felt 
figure outside in the open. The inscriptions retold the myth. The mural 
consisted of hundreds of rivulets of light blue paint cascading down a 
seventeen meter long wall; at some point in their flow the paint 
congeals. .The figure - devoid of arms - sits as if paralysed in the 
shadow of a tree and stares day and night up into the sky. The idea for 
the video first came after the opening of the exhibition, as I drove 
east alongside the Rio Grande up to the Gulf of Mexico. During a stay 
at an hotel I decided to put the felt figure - that I had already 
established in other video-works - into a bed and concentrate on 
filming its breathing: the calm rising and falling of its chest. I took 
a photograph of it in each situation too. The scene changes with each 
consecutive day, with every change of hotel or motel. But the figure's 
vital situation does not. It just lies there, breathes and stares 
straight ahead. The decision to play back the video at accelerated 
speed, that is - to propel the figure into a hectic hyperventilating 
condition occurred back home whilst editing.

Nueppel: It is an amazingly weird scenario. We go from interior to 
interior and the figure is always just Iying there panting. One doesn't 
know how one could adequately describe it. It is like a small, stricken 
animal panting tensely, and quivering in fear. How did you edit the 
film?

Brain: I didn't do any actual editing in the real sense of the word. 
There is a fade in, 30 seconds of film, a fade out, and then the next 
scene follows. The film was only accelerated during the replay. I like 
to be pragmatic in the use of artistic material. I would for example be 
very loathe to edit something on the computer. I value the fact that 
the result is still part of the reality; that the viewer can still see 
how the result was achieved. In this instance, the simple acceleration 
of the film hugely intensifies the atmosphere. However, the technical 
“trick” involved is something the viewer already knows from experience. 
If you watch a video film and think you need to use the picture 
tracking function, your impatience causes you to want to see what comes 
next. The fast-forward function saves you nerve tracking waiting. This 
is exactly the situation here. Time is compressed to satisfy your 
impatience, but you remain disappointed, because nothing has changed. 
Nothing changes in the 30 seconds you watch the sleeper, and when the 
camera returns minutes later to the same room, still nothing has 
changed. The figure still lies there breathing rapidly and stariTzg. 
This gives the impression of a never ending circle, from which there is 
no escape. The action is present, hectic and impatient, but it doesn't 
move on. Energy is forced to the surface but cannot discharge itself. 
It is the fact that this tension cannot be relieved that makes it so 
agonising to watch. Ultimately, it makes no difference whether the 
figure is called Endymion or not. The crux is the psychological 
situation that manifests itself. The title “Endymion” only acts as a 
trip through history. It lends the phenomenon a cultural-historical 
dimension.

Nueppel: Did you arrange the hotel rooms you filmed in, in any way?

Brain: The rooms are exactly as I found them. I only considered the 
angle, the camera perspective and the posture of the figure. However, I 
did occasionally wonder whether I should intervene in the arrangement. 
In Gijon in Spain for instaTzce, there was a room with a picture of the 
crucifixion hung above the bed; a bad copy of a work by Dali. This went 
completely against the grain. I didn't want my figure to be associated 
with martyrdom. On the other hand, once you start to set the scene, 
where do you stop? The room in Texas with the picture of a cowboy 
appears really “cool”. The German rooms are more of an embarrassment. 
But maybe an American viewer would see this the other way around. So 
what criteria should one use as a mise en scene? I think it best if I 
don't intervene in the arrangement at all, but just take the situations 
as they come.

Nueppel: Let's talk about the type of figures you use. Some are felt 
figures, dolls or dummies in fact, that are integrated in the 
installation or exhibition. And then there are actors in the videoworks 
who don a felt mask and felt gloves to make them unrecognisable as 
people. Are you not suppressing a part of your own personality in this 
way? Couldn't you have confidently put yourself in the bed, as a 
recognisable person and artist?

Brain: I don't think so. It would then become a completely different 
work. I don't want to use myself as a role model for a situation. I 
want to have a fairly neutral, lay figure at hand that I can arrange, 
is not defined and has a variable character. The static figures in the 
exhibition and the figure in the videos are in a way two manifestations 
of the same figurative idea: a human-like being, made of felt. No more 
and no less. It has eyes, a head, body, legs and arms (sometimes 
without arms). The felt surface lends it a somewhat likeable quality, 
because of its softness. The eyes - sometimes just buttons or holes, 
sometimes balls of glass - lend it a facial expression. The fact that 
the manufactured features of the figure (i.e. the seams holding it 
together) are visible and not concealed, support its function as a lay 
figure. It is purposely sewn together in such a way that it is accepted 
as being a substitute for a human being. In our occidental culture this 
behaviour has go7Ze out ol fashZon. At a particu ar point il~ European 
cultural history, artistic interest became only concerned with the 
portrayal of the individual. I am more interested in an archetype, such 
as those found in archaic and African cultures.

Nueppel: Are there any concrete examples referring to this?

Brain: For me there was a sort of key experience when I came across the 
Muzidi dolls from Central Africa. Only a few of these still exist as 
they were made of cloth, not wood. They were made as lay figures; a 
substitute through which the family could communicate with their dead 
ancestors beyond the grave. They were very flimsy things, quickly put 
together using scraps of cloth stuffed with palm leaves, and often 
given buttons as eyes. This f.imsiness has nothing to do with a lack of 
respect however, neither should it suggest that their makers were not 
capable of better handiwork. There was just no necessity to make them 
better, or differently. And so we return to the question of economy of 
artistic materials. These Muzidis serve as a projection surface for an 
imaginary communication. They don't 7:eed to mimic the deceased, 
because their image is already part of the message. They only have to 
be good enough to serve as a medium; their appearance just enough to 
encourage dialogue.

Nueppel: To finish let us talk about the time factor in your work. It 
seems to me that the fascination of your videos is nurtured by the 
simultaneous aspects of progress and standstill. We are aware of 
movement, but remain stuck in the same place.

Brain: For a long time I was not really particularly conscious of this. 
But, it is true. Movement has always had an introverted character in my 
work. It isn't so much about progress, but more of a going around in 
circles.

Nueppel: Can you say where this comes from?

Brain: I think that there are several reasons. First, it shows me the 
fundamental difference between a work of art that uses film materials, 
and a film itself. The film begins at point A, runs on for a certain 
length and ends at point B. The essence of the film is concealed within 
the visual running distance to be completed. To see a film over and 
over again means to go the same distance over and over again. The idea 
and meaning of a work of art however is manifested at a point. It is 
constrained in a certain material and seems to be eternally available. 
A film has to be shown from the beginning each time. The art work on 
the other hand remains on show. As soon as I use film materials in art, 
the scope of my expression is widened to include movement, action etc., 
but at the same time I am weakening the aura of timelessness. That's 
why I believe if a video-clip is used in an artistic context, its 
essence must be apparent at the first glimpse. The duration of the 
showing brings further aspects into play, but the key idea or a certain 
basic atmosphere should be immediately present. If a video work is only 
understood through its storyline, then it is out of place in the realms 
of art.

Nueppel: But there is also a psychoZogical component.

Brain: The psychological level is certainly the most important. In 1998 
I made a video called To the End Of the World, And Beyond. In a cellar 
roonz lit by a single light bulb, a felt figure dances very slowly and 
introverted to an old “Ska song of the early 1 960s. The song has the 
sanze title as the video and is played monotonously over and over 
again. The atmosphere is very emotional, very upsetting, pathetic and 
sad. The cue is that I didn't use an endless loop of film, the figure 
moves continually anew to the music. The song repeats itself 
notoriously, but not the movements of the figure, which change 
slightly. In time the figure seems to be near exhaustion, but pulls 
itself together and begins anew. This is no doubt a pensively sad 
picture but not a depressive one, it gives no cause for resignation. In 
the end it is really our situation. The sciences research like mad, the 
arts rack their brains without ceasing, and yet we have not really 
moved an iota in the history of mankind. The true secret lies in the 
fact that every generation tirelessly takes up the search for 
understanding, anew?

-- 
--------------------------------
vom verschwinden der medienkunst
--------------------------------
nachrichten aus der zwischenwelt


__________________________________________________________________
Nur bei Netscape: Ihr KOSTENLOSER Netscape WebMail-Account und der 
Instant Messenger unter http://www.netscape.de
_______________________________________________
serverfestival mailing list
serverfestival at listner.org
http://listner.org/mailman/listinfo/serverfestival