Adrian Paci 「believe me I am an Artist」,

Second Planet 「THE FUTURE FOR ART MUSEUM / FORTUNETELLERS PROJECT」

Upon selecting works for this exhibition, my foremost concern was whether the viewer could enjoy the artwork until its end. Outside the context of an exhibition, of being not contained within ‘a white cube’, could the content of the art themselves speak up for themselves?  Personally, I prefer for people to lightly laugh along as they view these works. 

As a curator, my job’s core morale comes down to whether I truly do trust the artist; vice versa, if I am trusted by the artist. I keep this ethic in mind; especially, such was the situation this time, when only the moving images are to be sent by the artists. My work was once based around Fukuoka region; due to this, I am rather familiar (perhaps-too-often, we’ve drunk together) with Second Planet-- the duo who resides in KitaKyushu (in fact, in the Manila section of the piece, I was in charge of the filming). As for Adrian, I had the fortune of getting to know him through the 3 months in San Francisco I’ve spent from this year’s ACC grant.

Now, the main text.
Of the two moving images, both pieces work amongst the given concept of “two people” and “camera”. Whether “fortune-telling” or “interrogation”, a similarity lies in that they are both performed in a secluded, small room. Furthermore, both situations require involvement of two people: a fortune-teller and the listener, one who interrogates and the interrogated. The camera then runs to witness/intrude upon the situation.

Of the two people, who is “author” of this work?
Or, is it the camera in the back, the true “author”?

Here, the “author” seems to take upon an ambiguous role or rather non-existent role. Second Planet asked friends around the globe to ask, “Please fortune-tell the 22nd Century future for the Kanazawa 21st Century Museum!” to their local fortune-tellers. In doing so, Second Planet knowingly decided to let-go their control over the camera in making this work. Unknown as how he had obtained the film in the first place, Adrian showcases the tape from an actual surveillance camera-- where he is under interrogation by the police. Adrian may be the artist; yet, Adrian did not “make” the art. Unlike the numerous moving images that appeal to aesthetics, artfulness, and made by the artists themselves, Second Planet and Adrian’s works seem to form on the opposite axis of contemporary art.

Purposely taking the form of objects outside the walls of art, both works display a questioning attitude as to what art is. Neither questioning why a work of “art” needs to exist nor its conceptual motive, we are only passively consuming and exhibiting art that is “…said to be good.” Perhaps because Yokohama and Tokyo are notorious for doing so, it was my wish to exhibit these two works. Indeed, what I have been pondering over O.V.L.2 was this: If “video” is a medium fit for molding a world out of a second-person-perspective, wouldn’t this inter-personal appeal stand outside art? Or, should this medium have not been encompassed as art in the first place? Although this is a much deep discussion, I will stop here because my paper’s running short of space.

Endo, Mizuki (Curator/ Arcus Project. Director)
Please contact mendo@arcus-project.com for your comments!