17–19 February 2012
Press viewing 16 February.
Opening hours: Fri 11am–10pm, Sat 11am–8pm, Sun 11am–6pm.

Kulturhuset, located in the city centre of Stockholm.
3rd and 5th floor

Exhibition: Hundreds of artists, 79 artist-run galleries and similar artists’ initiatives from 30 countries.
The programme includes the seminar series TALKS, the performance stage RED SPOT, network meetings and much more.

Official Facebook event: http://www.facebook.com/events/367610426587792/

A video installation with works of Mark Jeffery, Judd Morrissey and Rune Peitersen

Installation view - from left to right: Rune Peitersen, Judd Morrissey, Mark Jefferey

Installation view - Rune Peitersen

Installation view - from left to right: Rune Peitersen, Judd Morrissey, Mark Jefferey

Mutualisms: September 9 – September 25, 2011
at Co-Prosperity Sphere, 3219-21 South Morgan Street
Opening: Friday September 9, 6- 10 pm

‘Mutualisms’ is a collaborative curatorial project organized by Lise Haller Baggesen and Kirsten Leenaars, exploring the ways in which networks of friendship and artistic collaboration can be used as a model for curating. ‘Mutualisms’ is looking into artistic strategies for finding hospitality and exchange in the context of contemporary art practices as well our own social domain.

Eight Dutch and eight American artists/artist duos were paired and worked together to create a collaborative presentation of their works. Iris Kensmil & Carol Jackson, Rune Peitersen & Mark Jeffery &/Judd Morrissey, Marjolijn Dijkman & Lora Lode/Kevin Kaempf, Jonas Ohlsson & Selina Trepp, Magnus Monfeldt & Harold Mendez, Maurice Bogaert &Trevor Gainer, Caroline Stikker/Philippine Hoegen & Aron Gent and Saskia Janssen/George Korsmit & Adelheid Mers.

Mutualisms Symposium

Sunday September 1-5 pm at Co-Prosperity Sphere

A conversation with the participating Mutualisms artists will be followed by a panel discussion on ‘art and reciprocity’ moderated by Dutch art critic Erik Hagoort and Chicago based writer Caroline Picard.

Art & Reciprocity

In general reciprocity is valued positively, and so in contemporary art. Reciprocity has become a buzzword, especially since the rise of interactive art practices, in which the public in one way or another is invited to participate. The appreciation of reciprocity has challenged the conventional distance and hierarchy between art, artists and the public. It has also triggered collaboration among artists. Yet, if reciprocity becomes normative, we may start to feel uneasy. Expectations for ‘something in return’ can restrict freedom and autonomy. In the arts a strong tradition has opposed reciprocity; art’s autonomy should prevail above exchange. So, the question is: what about art and reciprocity?

Panel to be announced on our blogs at a later date.

Mutualisms blog: http://mutualisms.wordpress.com/

Art & Reciprocity blog: http://artandreciprocity.wordpress.com/

For info and opening times: lise@baggesen.org and kirstenleenaars@hotmail.com

‘Mutualisms’ is supported, in part, by public funds from the Netherlands Cultural Services, the Mondriaan Foundation and the Propeller Fund.

The retinal image is an image in a mathematical sense; it is a projection or a mapping. The retinal image is not an image in the sense of picture – or, if it is, this is entirely accidental. How it looks, or how it reads, plays no role in its performance of its neuropsychological job description. Once we appreciate that the retinal image isn’t something that we see, we lose a grip even on what it means to say that it’s upside down. Upside-down, one must ask relative to the tasks faced by the nervous system?
[…] Again, we don’t experience the retinal image; we don’t experience any image, in that sense. We experience the world.

Alva Noë, Out of our heads. Why you are not your brain, and other lessons from
the biology of consciousness, 2009

At Ellen de Bruijne Projects, the 3rd and final installment of Rune Peitersen’s project, Saccadic Sightings will be on view. Last year’s presentation was focused on the relation between art and science, and the position of these two disciplines in relation to our ideas on the perception of reality. This year, Rune Peitersen, goes back to his initial question it all started from: What do we see, when we look at something.

In Saccadic Sightings this question is investigated already in a very strict way. But Peitersen is also interested in going beyond, to the question of: how do we create an opinion, how do we create meaning?
To further investigate different ways of approaching these questions, Peitersen invited a number of artists on 21st of July to reflect on what it is or means to “see”.

It will be an evening of fascinating, touching, rational, inspiring presentations, musings and performances in which questions will be raised – and possibly answered – about how artists look at and see the world, and how they use this process in their work.

Invited artists: Gwenneth Boelens, Katrin Korfmann, Roland Schimmel, Martijn Schuppers, Rein Jelle Terpstra en Ruth Verraes.

Opening: 16 July 17:00 – 19:00 hrs
Exhibition: 16 July – 20 Augustus
During this summer show, the gallery will have special opening times:
Thursday to Saturday 11:00 – 18:00 hrs
Special event: 21 July doors open: 19:30 hrs. Starts at 20:00 hrs. sharp!

Saccadic Sightings is sponsored by Fonds BKvB, Stephen Oliver Associates and The Arts & Genomics Institute

Installation view: Looking at Seeing: Lightmast, Looking at Seeing: Tree, Manifest Gaze: Sky, Manifest Gaze: Path

Looking at Seeing: Lightmast (detail)

Looking at Seeing: Tree (detail), 2011

Installation view: Homunculus 11_35, Homunculus 02_02, Homunculus 02_01

Installation view: Manifest Gaze: Path, Looking at Seeing: Lightmast, Looking at Seeing: Tree

Installation view: Looking at Seeing: Tree, Manifest Gaze: Path, Manifest Gaze: Sky

Rune Peitersen, A Tree in the Forest: Ophelia 02, 2011

Rune Peitersen, Observer Effect: A Tree in the Forest, 2011

Installation view: Video installation Looking Out, Observer Effect: A Tree in the Forest

Rune Peitersen, Homunculus 02_01, 2011

Rune Peitersen, Homunculus 02_02, 2011

Rune Peitersen, Homunculus 11_35, 2011

Rune Peitersen, Manifest Gaze: Sky, 2011

Rune Peitersen, Looking at Seeing: Lightmast, 2011

Rune Peitersen, Looking at Seeing: Tree, 2011

Rune Peitersen, Observer Effect: A Tree in the Forest (detail), 2011

Rune Peitersen, Observer Effect: A Tree in the Forest (detail), 2011

On Saturday July 21st the event ‘Looking at Seeing’ took place in the gallery. Amidst the exhibition a number of invited artists spoke about their work, inspiration and ideas. The starting-point was a question posed by me on what it means ‘to see’.

The talks were enlightening, touching, inspiring and thought-provoking. Every artist approached the question and subject-matter from his/her own specific angle, and so helped to create an extraordinary evening. I am deeply grateful to the artists invited and I hope visitors of this site will take the time to look at their talks (in Dutch). The speakers were: Gwenneth Boelens, Roland Schimmel, Martijn Schuppers, Rein Jelle Terpstra en Ruth Verraes.

Intro, Rune Peitersen – Looking at Seeing, Ellen de Bruijne Projects 2011

So it must be a stone
Ruth Verraes – Looking at Seeing, Ellen de Bruijne Projects 2011

To read Ruth’s presentation please go here: tijdschriftterras.nl/altijd

Blijken en lijken
Martijn Schuppers – Looking at Seeing, Ellen de Bruijne Projects 2011

Negative rather than truth
Gwenneth Boelens – Looking at Seeing, Ellen de Bruijne Projects 2011

7 fragmenten
Roland Schimmel – Looking at Seeing, Ellen de Bruijne Projects 2011

To read Roland’s presentation please download here: 6 fragmenten(21.7.11)

Terugkijken
Rein Jelle Terpstra – Looking at Seeing, Ellen de Bruijne Projects 2011

July 21~2011

See the rest here: http://moussemagazine.it/rune-peitersen-looking-at-seeing-at-ellen-de-bruijne-projects-amsterdam/

The retinal image is an image in a mathematical sense; it is a projection or a mapping. The retinal image is not an image in the sense of picture – or, if it is, this is entirely accidental. How it looks, or how it reads, plays no role in its performance of its neuropsychological job description. Once we appreciate that the retinal image isn’t something that we see, we lose a grip even on what it means to say that it’s upside down. Upside-down, one must ask relative to the tasks faced by the nervous system?
[…] Again, we don’t experience the retinal image; we don’t experience any image, in that sense. We experience the world.

Alva Noë, Out of our heads. Why you are not your brain, and other lessons from
the biology of consciousness, 2009

At Ellen de Bruijne Projects, the 3rd and final installment of Rune Peitersen’s project, Saccadic Sightings will be on view. Last year’s presentation was focused on the relation between art and science, and the position of these two disciplines in relation to our ideas on the perception of reality. This year, Rune Peitersen, goes back to his initial question it all started from: What do we see, when we look at something.

In Saccadic Sightings this question is investigated already in a very strict way. But Peitersen is also interested in going beyond, to the question of: how do we create an opinion, how do we create meaning?
To further investigate different ways of approaching these questions, Peitersen invited a number of artists on 21st of July to reflect on what it is or means to “see”.

It will be an evening of fascinating, touching, rational, inspiring presentations, musings and performances in which questions will be raised – and possibly answered – about how artists look at and see the world, and how they use this process in their work.

Invited artists: Gwenneth Boelens, Katrin Korfmann, Roland Schimmel, Martijn Schuppers, Rein Jelle Terpstra en Ruth Verraes.

Opening: 16 July 17:00 – 19:00 hrs
Exhibition: 16 July – 20 Augustus
During this summer show, the gallery will have special opening times:
Thursday to Saturday 11:00 – 18:00 hrs
Special event: 21 July doors open: 19:30 hrs. Starts at 20:00 hrs. sharp!

Saccadic Sightings is sponsored by Fonds BKvB, Stephen Oliver Associates and The Arts & Genomics Institute

Revolutions do not occur when a population gains the capability to implement it, but only when it acknowledges this capability.*
Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff, The Brain*

Over the last six months or so, a lot of effort has been put into trying to make the current Dutch government change its mind concerning the budget cuts on culture. Leading professionals from the fields of art, economists, philosophers, politicians and many more have all tried to persuade the government to be more sensible in its approach to the cultural sector. In order to speak a language that was believed to be understood and appreciated by the government, a lot of the arguments used where based on the language and the reasoning of economics. The main arguments generally revolved around 1. The destruction of capital as a consequence of the rigorous cuts, 2. The importance of cultural activity as an incentive for foreign investors to settle, 3. The (economic) innovation which springs from a diverse and rich cultural climate. All in vain.

Any argumentation based on economics proved pointless. If anything, so much capital is being destroyed, so much well invested money is being forcibly removed, so many institutions are being ruined, that economically speaking, this is about the worst course of action conceivable. From an economical point of view it is clear, that the best argument would be for an increase of the investments in arts and culture, as it is a sector, which time and again has proven its economical worth and stability, as opposed to e.g. the housing market, professional football, the banking sector etc.

The drastic cuts can therefore only be seen as an ideological move on behalf of this government, and the talk of ‘cleaning’ or ‘curing’ the sector as a euphemism of the worst sort; neoliberal newspeak for administering shock treatment. The much debated ‘lack of vision’ is another argument used against the budget cuts, but it only stresses the complete misunderstanding of what is happening. There is no cultural vision, because the government does not care about culture as such. There is, however, a  clear neoliberal vision, that of the scorched earth. Just as the farmers in the Amazon ruthlessly cut down ancient forests and replace delicate, fertile and rich environments with uniform genetically modified soya-plants, so this government plans to cut down the Dutch cultural rainforest and replace it with the barren wasteland of the neoliberal ideology. Centers for knowledge and innovation, libraries and institutions which have evolved over decades are replaced with the uniform seeds of entertainment and market-approved ‘culture’. And all the while they tell us in a patronizing voice: It’s for your own good, we are liberating you.

And here is where it gets really depressing: We, the cultural sector, the public sector and the opposition parties, do not seem to get it! We still go along with the notion, that, indeed we need to cut the budgets for the cultural sector, sell off our public utilities, we need to tighten the belt all around because, well, there is the crisis, right? We try to pretend we understand why and try to act just like the ‘grown ups’, we ‘take responsibility’. We try to come up with arguments that we believe would make sense to them, economical, ethical, historical. But the fact remains, there is no sound reason for the budget cuts or the general dismantling of the welfare state. There is only the ideologically driven desire to tear down all that stands in the way of making a buck. Public utilities? Waste of money! Sick people? Business opportunity! Arts and education? Freeloaders and know-it-all’s – up against the wall!

The government means to demolish all the public structures at once. Now, while they are in ‘power’. They know they may not be in power for long, hence the sycophantic insistence on the mantra of the 18 billion euro. Once destroyed, it will take decades to rebuild. It will not matter who wins the next elections, the damage will be done. The cultural sector, healthcare, public utilities etc., all destroyed. To the neoliberal each sector is a new Iraq, a new Green zone. It may cost an insane amount of money to ‘liberate’ it – but, hey, that is just taxpayer-money – in the end all that matters is, that the multinationals can expand their markets. And if we dare question that simple fact, we are quickly and forcefully reproached for being against freedom and democracy.

Well, perhaps we need to be against that kind of freedom and democracy. Perhaps freedom is not worth defending if it means the freedom of the strong and wealthy to financially subjugate and enslave the weak and the poor. Perhaps freedom is not worth defending if it means the freedom to invade other countries and loot their resources. Perhaps a democracy in which the soundbite, the tweet and the outright lies of the elected officials are the main sources of information, is not worth defending. Perhaps a democracy ruled more by fear of the other, than the promise to help your fellow man, is not worth defending. Perhaps it is time to rethink the very foundations of our society and ask ourselves ‘is there really no other way?’

Of course there is another way. It may be unclear at the moment, but as we regain our voices, formulate our ideals and puncture the neoliberal bubbles, it will become clearer. It may not bring the promise of a new utopia. It may require us to be a lot more humble than we have become accustomed to over the last centuries, but perhaps it is time we became part of the world instead of always trying to be above it. If we dare climb down from our Western pedestal, we may find ourselves in a sustainable world among neighbors, instead of in a gated community among enemies.

Or not, who knows.

The only certainty we have now is, that if the neoliberal ideology is allowed to continue its unfettered rampage, then the fire-brigade coming to the aid of the burning cities of the near future, will be the tsunami of melted polar ice caps – finally flooding the very last remnants of Dutch culture.

*my translation

The retinal image is an image in a mathematical sense; it is a projection or a mapping. The retinal image is not an image in the sense of a picture – or, if it is, this is entirely accidental. How it looks, or how it reads, plays no role in its performance of its neurophysiological job description. Once we appreciate that the retinal image isn’t something that we see, we lose a grip even on what it means to say that it is upside-down. Upside-down, one must ask relative to what? Who’s to say what counts as upside-down in the head relative to the tasks faced by the nervous system?
[...]
Again, we don’t experience the retinal image; we don’t experience any image , in that sense. We experience the world.

Alva Noë, Out of our heads. Why you are not your brain, and other lessons from the biology of consciousness, Hill and Wang 2009