CARGO


WARUM 2.O RELEASE – 4 DVD’S
April 3, 2008, 9:50 am
Filed under: DANIEL DEMOUSTIER, PAUL VIRILIO, WARUM 2.0

Warum 2.0 DVD RELEASE

WARUM 2.0 in 4 dvd’s with interviews with Paul Virilio and cameraman Daniel Demoustier; a visual and sound tour through the installation arena & ‘the unbearable lightness of doom’ sequence as bonus. The dvd package is for sale (50 euro plus shipment costs).

Contact cargoweb@pandora.be

Here under and previous: texts, images and videos as they were posted during the first instalment of the installation arena. More information in pages and links.

 



THE UNBEARABLE LIGHTNESS OF DOOM
February 10, 2008, 12:52 pm
Filed under: IMPACTOLOGY, PAUL VIRILIO, WARUM 2.0

Paul Virilio says: whereas before the visible, there is the domain of the possible, after the visible, what is left then, is the unpredictable, the unexpected, plus the revelation of the accident in knowing, in understanding.

‘What is here to see? Is there anything visible?’ That could well be the ‘warum’ question some visitors might put forward. In the end, with Warum 2.0, what I would like them to see, is a way out of doom. As a maker (of documentaries), what was not possible anymore for me to do the last 10 years, could well be possible again now. Not exactly making documentaries that is, but having the tools and the posse force ready to start up processes of ‘seeing’ and ‘making visible’ out of the logic of the ‘war of images’, far from impact that is, outside the global revolving panorama in closed circuit of the audiovisual scene. WARUM 2.0 may be a practical version of that ‘delirious networked worktable’ so needed for making my (your, our) views visible.

(Paul Virilio in ‘Art as far as the eye can see’ (published by Berg, 2007). Sound on the clouds by Edwin Uytenbroek for Warum 2.0. The ‘delirious networked worktable’ concept, in This Is As If It , by Stefaan Decostere for CARGO, 2007).



PAUL VIRILIO FROM DARFUR
February 6, 2008, 3:51 pm
Filed under: PAUL VIRILIO, WARUM 2.0


WARUM PAUL VIRILIO
January 27, 2008, 2:03 pm
Filed under: IMPACTOLOGY, PAUL VIRILIO, WARUM 2.0

PAUL VIRILIO: “We are now moving from the politically correct of the written, writing, the oratorical and the speaker, from the tribune, from politically correct to optically correct for the screen”.



FAR FROM IMPACT – SOME INTENTIONS
January 22, 2008, 2:56 pm
Filed under: IMPACTOLOGY, PAUL VIRILIO, WARUM 2.0

SOME INTENTIONS. In the WARUM 2.O installation project, we try to install distances. We try to create a possible but concrete context ‘far from impact’.

We want to get away from the daily ‘dressage’, that ‘training’ (by media, by programs, by gadgets and by technology expertise) that constantly imposes, educates and breaks-in onto us, but that in effect is based on the military model (again a military model) once instituted by Roman traditions.

Because in the end, they who wish for, refine and execute this ‘training’ are not concerned with us (users, makers, who want to express works and opinions of their own). They are mostly operating from a specific strategy and a certain desire for power – call it: populist circumstantial interventionism; a certain cult of a scientific-military messianism; a cult of the arsenal; a lust for unheard of strategic possibilities of social, environmental and psychological management; a kind of extermination of the personal expression on a daily basis, bypassing arenas, open public forums, even institutions of justice.

So then, again, far from impact, with some distance to impact. Can we exist, if not without impact, then at least, can we find ways to act, make and think from a certain distance (a critical distance that is) from impact? That is what we try to explore with WARUM 2.0. A real challenge. It is possible to ‘be’ as we are, pro-creators that is, far from impact? – and intervene?

(the formulation of this question I have only discovered during and after years of discussions I had with makers, programmers, critics and artists, during many workshops and developments. The ‘university of disaster’ Virilio calls for, is indeed a ‘fact’ since a long time… There are indeed many who look for, or are already engaged in this kind of research.)

Is this a situation then of ‘this as if it’? (‘This is as if it’ was the title of a little book CARGO published last year http://www.cargoweb.org/, subtitled ‘Weak Media’ http://dit.weakmedia.becoming.be/page.php?label=dit ). If not a universal (‘university’) then at least, it can become a situation of meetings of individuals, groups and organizations, who are willing to ask questions, if not to find some answers.

Far from impact. My feeling today is: it will never be that far from it. Especially if we want to intervene as well. And what if we phrase it as: far from war?

What I suggest here, with IMPACTOLOGY, is not so much a radical critique that is itself impact, but a tool for analysis that may add that extra critical investigating rhythm to the world as it is.

I guess we are done with the idea of the spectacle, for a while. So far from impact, so far from war, at least from the logic of it.

HOWEVER it could also well be that YouTube, just like TV and ‘corporate science’ before it, as such also offers a way out, because as it is, it definitely triggers all the violence and excess there is, and it puts it in the open and onto the public stage. Let’s always be aware of individuals and organizations (of ‘us’ that is) who offer their unique alternative, especially so if they are as arrogant to say: this is for your own good.

Stefaan Decostere, January 2008.



FAR FROM IMPACT – EVENT 6
January 22, 2008, 2:15 pm
Filed under: IMPACTOLOGY, PAUL VIRILIO, WARUM 2.0

Draft for WARUM 2.0 installation-arena

VILEM FLUSSER & HENRI LEFEBVRE. In 1983 Vilem Flusser published his book ‘Für eine Philosophie der Photographie’ (Towards a philosophy of photography). In it we may find some helping tools for analysing the technics of impact. Talking about photography and pictures and visual media in general, he offers a model of investigation based on four basic concepts: the image – the apparatus – the program – and the information. And what is important, I think, is that he defines ‘information’, not as information as data, but as the unique expression of the critical ‘handling’ of this trinity of image/machine/program.

http://www.claudia-klinger.de/flusser/

 

Coincidence or not (and very probably not), also in the eighties, Henri Lefebvre started to publish work developing his notion of ‘rhythmanalysis’. He introduces the ‘rhythmanalist’, a person he describes not as a user, but as an observer who intervenes, in a situation of ‘mediatised everyday’, an everyday that is simultaneously fashioned and ignored by these (technological) means that make the apparatuses. Just like Virilio after him, he proposes to study the disasters we live in (futurism, impact, the synchronization of instantaneous emotions – what Virilio calls ‘the communism of affects’) – and to intervene.

http://www.notbored.org/space.html

http://hjem.get2net.dk/gronlund/Lefebvre_Rhythmanaslyses.html



FAR FROM IMPACT – EVENT 5 : 1984
January 22, 2008, 1:37 pm
Filed under: IMPACTOLOGY, PAUL VIRILIO, WARUM 2.0

WHY WE MEN LOVE THAT MUCH TECHNOLOGY

FAR FROM IMPACT – EVENT 5 : 1984. ‘1984’ is not only Orwell, it is also the year Paul Virilio published his book ‘The negative horizon’. As I interviewed Paul Virilio again a few months ago, for the installation project Warum 2.0 (after the first interview we did together nearly 25 years ago), I read the book again. I had read it at the time, of course, but now reading it again (in the wonderful translation by Arjen Mulder and Patrice Riemens), it was as if I read a new book. Obviously because I had changed, my understanding had changed, but also because the times have changed. Today the book reads like a prophecy that came true.

http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=566 

In the book I even found descriptions which were like literal descriptions of the main element of the physical installation-arena Warum 2.0. At one point he describes the ‘dromosphere’ (the sphere of speed) as a ‘centrifuge’, a stadion for one person, in which one is witness of the anamorphosis of the speeded up reality, a with technology driven environment in which one experiences the grotesk deformations of what we once called ‘reality’.

FLOOR PLAN WARUM 2.0

In the interview (of which excerpts are posted here, and of which a dvd is on offer), Paul Virilio again and again repeats a quote by Octavio Paz, and keeps on expanding on it: ‘The impact of the moment is as uninhabitable as the future’. ‘L’impact de l’instant est aussi inhabitable que le futur’.

And he goes on saying that life in the impact means futurism. When we say that an artist is an impact-maker, we actually are saying he is a futurist. And remember, he says, futurists inspired fascism. Futurism leads to fascism, to new kinds of fascism which have nothing to do with pantzers, Mussolini or Hitler, but to Fascism linked to technical achievements.

“Why do men love that much technology? If you would ask me that question again”, Virilio says, “I would answer: because they think they are God! They have gone beyond the mastery of knowledge, towards an illusion of divinity. They create accidents of knowledge.”

That is the reason, after having introduced before the ‘musée des accidents’ (the museum of the accident), Virilio now calls for a university of the accident (une université du désastre), a contra arsenal.