When I was the Environment. Previous proposal – before the experience I had been working with the idea of a body as a space and the space as a body. The body can adapt when the movements, the being, the self, the way to relate and communicate is questioned and problematized by the situation. The re-thinking of the movements as strategies to the reactive body in different situations. I explored the environments of the house as a situation to be created, the possibility of tension, opposition and dialogue that the body could propose with movements that are not connected with the functionality of a space. This last process makes me reflect on the idea of the body as a house, as a place of spaces in which we delimit the perception of IN and OUT side. Thinking the body as a map, lines, structures, strategies of relation, subjectivity, metaphors, imaginary and in how the body negotiates in a situation of being crossed. All this information creates in the body mechanisms of being, as if we could “wear” different kinds of behavior for each situation we cross, we change the “house”(body), we re-organize the spaces in the body. What we consider to be a “house”? Where can we identify the body-behavior as a space itself to be worn by the body? What is a house if we think of it as a organization that we “wear”. The public space? The private space? I am interested in discussing the environment of a house as a space for the creative process of the body. The reason that made me choose the Delft project is the possibility to investigating the body in a place that was a house but now it is empty but still as a possibility for living. The space and the body will be problematized as a possibility of a living-becoming-environment. Both of them will be considered as a reactive space. The living as the strategies that both, body and space, could find in dialogue, the becoming as the possibility of body being space and space being body and the environment as the third space that could appear from a dialogue. The house here is being explored as the self in confluence, the self in constant negotiation and adaptation. My proposal is to investigate the environment by the body through an atmosphere of emptiness: apartments without tools, body without organs I would say. I am thinking here also about the group as a body of the project. How will the group communicate IN, OUT and BETWEEN of a space that will be destroyed in the future. After the experience – When I was… The Image, the living has always been the main question. The previous proposal called WHEN I WAS THE ENVIRONMENT, approached the body and space as reactive places as a living – becoming – environment. The house as the self in confluence. The dialogue was the tool and investigative way to make body and space reactive. The image for this was the body crossing the house, touching and sliding through the space. This was a dialogue that happened in a reactive situation somewhere else and that I was trying to behave again. But the WAS that I am looking for isn’t the WAS in the past, the one which we try to correspond again as a strategy of re-living an event. The WAS I am looking is the one who makes the present untouchable and so gives the WAS as counting time. This present is always past, the present that gives the sensation of desplacement is constantly flirting with the accidents. The event in Delft wasn’t this image, the event there was the necessity- the objective and physical way to be reactive in the environment. When the body started to build the house itself it was already questioned by the living. The previous proposal wasn’t replaced by a new one. Actually it was approached in the reality, the process was constantly faced by the living-becoming-environment, as if I were confronted by my own proposition, is if I couldn’t escape or deny the WHAT I was trying to touch. Talking about the present and the reality between body and space, I couldn’t cover what the reactive dialogue was showing. The crossing in the space was experienced as a video work, as a strategy to elaborate more about what I was trying to say with the sliding body in the space, as a mechanism to investigate how much the images could survive in the process of an artist. After words, I think this image is dead, still existent but dead when it is already an image before being experienced by the urgency from body and space.
Video in two parts: CROSSINGLIVINGROOM and CROSSINGKITCHEN
what urgency? what is that? what am I talking about? that was maybe my urgency…I climbed and slide in that space…maybe the urgency was in the skin searching for a non understanding. Realize releasing, slide and perceiving…the negotiation was literal and I like that…the philosophy was the raw thought in the body…crossing impermanent…there are no theory on that…but even I can say that the concrete space wasent that easy.
[...] When I was the Environment [...]