Platform for (un)Solicited Research and Advice

Plattform for (un)Solicited Research and Advice

Who are we?

1. Rousseau defines constitutional law as an “expression of a general will.” Whose general will is involved in this case? Who will establish the content of this constitution?

The participating artists establish the content. These artist are currently students at the Dutch Art Institute and the (soon to be ex-) members of the Platform for Unsolicited Research and Advise. FG will be available as a mediator, facilitating and initiating discussion, helping to distill a goal. Artists can ask FG, his role is not fixed or obligatory and he will not participate unless asked.

2. Are these people the artists and curators and invited advisors – during the preparatory phase of the exhibition?

Participating artists can invite advisors, but the invited advisors won’t be part of the constitution.

3. Do we also include other groups and individuals?

No.

How do we work?

5. What will be the principle for preparing the CTD?

The preparation for the CTD will take place in two parallel ways. The personal trajectory is the individual input and research, which is influenced by and running sideways with the communal vehicle for carrying out the personal research.

6. What form and structure of discourse do we establish? And how will the on-site physical dialogue then be conducted during the installation and opening period, and then for the duration of the display?

The participating artists will communicate through meetings and presentations in person. On the digital side: e-mailing and contributing to the blog-platform. The work on-site will be communal: everybody agrees to commit to put an equal amount into the group. The work on-site will be divided, so not everybody has to focus on all the points. There will be a division for preparation, installation, set up and execution.

7. Can any member of the established body contribute? Only with a limited number of articles or as many articles as he or she wants?

Yes, but all articles can be discussed by anyone in the group (can not must).

8. What are the rules for decision-making? (general agreement, vote, veto…)

General agreement would be best. No time to accept veto at this stage. Goal is to try and all agree, otherwise the situation will tell if the majority vote is acceptable.

Roles, duties and division of labor

11. What is the role of the curators? What is the role of the artists in this setup? Shall we follow the usual matrix that the curatorial collective is responsible to the organizational body?

The artists are the curators.

12. Do we want to find another procedure, inviting all the artists or their representatives to be part of curatorial decision-making?

Everyone is part of curatorial decision-making.

The Temporary Display

About autonomy

16. To what extent can the exhibition space become an autonomous polis?

Not much, it depends too much on licence, permits and the relationship with Manifesta. The project should be a parasite, without having to justify to Manifesta. A symbiosis is also possible, a good platform to benefit both.

17. Can we proclaim that in the exhibition space different – provisional – rules will apply that are different from those in the space beyond?

Yes. Daily change is possible.

18. If at all, in which sense shall it be autonomous?

An atonomous symbiotic parasite.

About form and content

19. Are there any rules and restrictions?

No work from one person should prevent others from being. Work should be tested to the guideline. The platform allows for critique, it is free to question products. One rule (in relation to licences etc.) is that there will be no products for consuming (in a food/drink way).

20. If so, what is it forbidden or allowed to do/ show/ perform in the exhibition space?

See 19.

21. Shall we state the possibility to do/show/ behave in unusual ways in the exhibition space?

Yes, possibility for interventions.

About the organization of resources

Space

22. How do we want to organize the existing space inside the exhibition?

Each product should be considered individually, but don’t get in the way of other members’ space.

23. Should the curatorial collective be responsible for the scenario of the display?

Yes.

24. Do we have to start from a division of the space into projects?

No.

25. How should we organize the non-existent space of the exhibition (i.e. all the virtually existing and usable spaces)?

Decide on that later.

26. Are we interested in procuring the use of any other kind of space besides the one that is available in our proposal?

Not inside this project. If someone is still interested, it won’t be part of this project.

Money

27. How to deal with the budget?

28. Do the artists accept the curators’ role of being responsible for budget sub-management (in the hands of the production office of the organizer / initiator / inviting institution…) and the division of the space for the exhibition?

29. If not, by whom and how shall this distribution be made – who will select the amount of contributions for each project, and according to which criteria?

30. Shall all the artists receive a similar flat fee, with the rest of the production budget being distributed according to the projects? (We suggest that there should be a flat fee of x Eur for each artistic project and participation in the constitutional process.)

31. Can we create some sort of budget that will be allocated to developing the constitutional processes? (We think that this is an important point and we are in favour of it.)

Access and Time:

32. When should the temporary display be opened?

It should be open for approx. 2 weeks, starting at the official pre-opening.

33. Do we accept the logic of an official (given) opening, coinciding with the end of production? Should our activity start any time from now on – earlier or later than the opening?

An online shop will be opened ASAP, that can go on after closing. The shop itself has a definite time, to keep it a group project. The aim is to end the project with a bang, a definite closing.

34. If we decide that our project has started right from the moment of discussing the Constitution – how can we make it public?

Website, e-mail, e-flux, blog, banners. The blog should be used to show souvernir-research.

35. Would we consider scheduling the dates of the exhibition differently?

Yes, but keep the 2 week structure.

36. Would we consider having work / works being on show during regular opening hours and during the entire period of the exhibition? Or do they or you generate/ need another temporality?

Preference is temporality, but nothing is excluded. Up for discussion in each particular case.

37. What is the notion of opening hours for you?

Mainly to do with practicalities (visibility, visitors and weather)

About the audiences

38. How should we include the voices of the audience?

Personal choice of group members. If there are serious visitors to the blog, there should be an option to comment on the blog.

39. Will the visitors and audience of the exhibition be invited to further develop the constitution after the opening?

No.

40. How do we deal with the already existing access restrictions – all of those who are unable to come for various reasons (visa, economic situation, illness, etc.)?

Can’t cover it all, but the project will visit some.

41. Do we want the audience to be involved in a participatory process?

Personal choice.

43. What options should we offer visitors? Viewing, contemplating artworks, studying, relaxing, eating, socializing, sleeping?

Personal choice again. Still up for discussion. Everything between ‘buy or die’ and ‘inviting for a chair and a chat’