Düsseldorfwww.kunstsammlung.de

“I put an image in the world …”

We are now in the year 2015. Due to globalisation it is, in principle, possible for us – and even expected of us – to appreciate art through out the world. Many contem-porary artists have become global nomads. Günther Uecker, however, has been travelling to farflung places, including trouble areas, for more than half a century, with invitations to participate in exhibitions around the world, from Taipeh in 1960 to his most recent show in Havana, Cuba. From the very beginning, his work has received international attention within a variety of contexts (concrete art, radical painting, kinetic art, light art, performance, film, in situ installations, etc.), prevailing time and again in diverse frames of reference – not only in cultural terms, but also in political, historical and geographic terms. Yet amid this extensive range of exhibitions there is, as it were, one blind spot: Düsseldorf. The show at Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen is the first museum exhibition in the city where the artist has lived and worked since 1953.

Uecker Zeitung 11 is dedicated to the global reception of Uecker‘s work. We started out by asking: How had it come to be exhibited internationally right from the start? How was it actually perceived in the various places where it was shown? Which facets of his work had a particular impact? How precisely might be described its influence on the art and politics of each country? This also begs the question of how Uecker himself responded specifically, in his work, to various cultural, historical and religious experiences. Uecker in Tehran, Uecker in Beijing, Uecker in Arab countries and in Israel, in Moscow and Warsaw, in Havana. After all, surely it is to be assumed that on more than one occasion there must have been a culture clash – a conflict between divergent cultural mores and aesthetic traditions. We put all of these questions – as in a research project – to the authors of this publication. Most of the authors are relatively young; they were tasked with finding answers from their own viewpoint, with a certain historical detachment, and in their own subjective opinion. We were impressed, and astonished, by the results. No German art historian could have written these texts. They reveal aspects of Uecker’s oeuvre that we would not have been capable of seeing. Each author has linked his or her interpretation to the specific

history of their own country: the Polish contribution references Willy Brandt kneeling before the Warsaw ghetto memorial and the Israeli text addresses the holocaust, while the Russian article takes a more secular slant that includes an association with the image of the working, proletarian artist. Stylistically, too, the essays differ widely. The Egyptian author’s text, for instance, seems to be imbued with a typically Arabic form of writing, while the Iranian author’s singularly poetic contribution evokes the Persian lyrical tradition. The authentic cultural diversity of their viewpoints only adds to their appeal. They unveil the richness of Uecker‘s oeuvre – a body of work whose extraordinary depth and complexity has been enhanced over the decades through extensive travel (often initiated and funded by ifa, the German institution for cultural exchange), through his insatiable curiosity, his growing knowledge and his ability to engage freely with other cultures. Uecker has progressed his work through his encoun-ters with others. One particularly striking example, which completely changed the direction of his art, resulting in his black paintings, was the existential experience of meeting Japanese survivors of Hiroshima. Of course, Japan should also have been included in this publication, as should Uecker’s involvement with the Japanese Gutai group, his exhibitions in Mongolia and in many Eastern European cities such as Budapest, as well as his connections with Africa. The range of coverage could have been so much wider, but a worldwide compilation of all the many and complex effects would not have been possible. Indeed, the selection of authors here in itself refutes the notion that globalisation has resulted in a levelling of the terms of art. The examp-les chosen also indicate quite clearly that Uecker is not one of those contemporary artists who present a more or less self-contained body of work in neutral and thus virtually interchangeable exhibition spaces all over the world. The Chinese author points out that Uecker, in spite of his affirmed success and already extensive oeuvre, has never ceased to immerse himself in the present moment and so has constantly begun anew. In answer to the question of how, at such a juncture, the psychological, intellectual and physical energies converge and flow into his work, Uecker responds: “outrage”. Some of the authors mention the profound humility, high respect and com-plete empathy that Günther Uecker has developed in the course of his travels when encountering other cultures. “Uecker did not forget where he was …” writes the Polish author, noting his combination of humility and a disciplined approach to work. Uecker says, “I put an image into the world; I do not image the world.”

Uecker has always been attracted to the beauty of various languages, scripts and writings. And so it was first and foremost for him that Stefanie Jansen and I chose to publish all the texts in the original as well.

Marion Ackermann

Maria Morzuch (*1954) lives and works in Łódz, and is curator at the Museum Sztuki

Uecker in PolandGunther Uecker demonstrates that an artist is a being entangled in the past, in whom the entire history of Europe and its destiny, its drama and its dreams are captured and illustrated as if through a magnifying lens. The Pre-War Avant-Garde artists, living in one united Europe, not yet divided into the Eastern and the Western blocs, firmly believed in their utopias. The Pre-War Avant-Garde had their centre of arts, Paris, and geometric abstraction and typography were their common language of communication. After the Second World War, the world had to be built anew, from scratch, with some timid dream. Out of concrete and drudgery came art which had to justify its right to exist. Then occurred an artist – with a real nail driven into a plank, and yet another one, and then the next one, like a signature, forming a structured module, in quite regular intervals with some natural departures, with the resilience of a hand and of a body. Like Strzeminski’s unistic pain-tings, which focus precisely on the human imperfection and on the desire to redress deficiencies and to elide weaknesses in exercising rules. The first exhibition of contem-porary West German artists in Poland after the Second World War took place in 1971 at Warsaw’s Zacheta National Gallery. It presented the works by Thomas Lenk, Heinz Mack, Georg Karl Pfahler and Günther Uecker. This ex hi-bition of West German artists marked the very first moment of opening up a narrow channel of cultural exchange with Western Europe which until then focused only on graphics and posters. The date of this event was crucial. Only half a year earlier, in December 1970, Willy Brandt’s historic visit to Poland took place, with his symbolic gesture (der Kniefall / to kneel before a monument) in Warsaw, initiating a new policy of reconciliation (Ostpolitik). On this occasion, a bilateral agreement was signed – a gesture which was so power-ful that both countries (as well as Israel) hardly comprehended, at first, its political and historical consequences. Willy Brandt, who pronounced the following words: “...tat ich, was Menschen tun, wenn die Sprache versagt” (“I did what mankind does when live leaves you speechless”), was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize the following year. As an outcome of this group exhibition at Warsaw’s Zacheta National Gallery and the artists’ visit to Poland, Ryszard Stanisławski, the

director of Muzeum Sztuki in Łódz, in-vited Günther Uecker to have a solo exhibition titled Structures at Muzeum Sztuki in 1974. This was the beginning of a profound and powerful relationship with Muzeum Sztuki, whose collection was created thanks to the artists’ help, and first and foremost thanks to Władysław Strzeminski. Already in 1970, Günther Uecker created a work which traced a line of continuity between the Pre-War Avant-Garde and contemporary artists, be-tween the Eastern and the Western Blocs split by the Yalta Conference, namely Weißes Feld – Hommage a Strzeminski. It is the artist’s manifesto and a gift which he donated in 1971 to the collection of Muzeum Sztuki in Łódz. While Günther Uecker’s art includes elemental phenomena – matter of the Earth, movement and light – the dream of the potential harmony comes true, without collision and in search of unselfish fullness. In 1989, Günther Uecker came back once again to Łódz, just before the political transformation in Poland, and this time with his entire family – mother, wife Christine, their little son, a gallery owner from Munich and a film crew. Today, Günther Uecker could host this meeting himself, as – over the years – he had been associated with the idea of this place – Muzeum Sztuki. The entire community of artists associated with the famous Łódz Film School had also warm memories of Józef Robakowski, the forerunner of new media art. The exhibition occupied almost the entire second floor of the museum, where the Neoplastic Room is located, an exceptional space designed by Władysław Strzeminski for displaying other artists’ works. The collection was founded as a sincere gesture of the world’s avant-garde artists, as their gift. In this exhibition, Günther Uecker literally touches the edges of a partic ular shape, giving us the outline, a shadow of an ash man, a negative of a human silhouette: Aschemensch (Ashes-Man). At the very core of trag edy lies the entire history of the twentieth century: the Second World War, the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and the Chernobyl nuclear disaster of 1986. The time spent on working on the exhibition titled New Works at Muzeum Sztuki in Łódz was very intense, filled with work and emotions. There were a lot of things happening both on the artistic and human level. Günther Uecker did not forget where he was and about the fact that there had been a huge Jewish community in Łódz before the Second World War, enclosed in the ghetto during the war, and about the fact that the largest Jewish cemetery in Europe is situated in Łódz. That is why Günther Uecker decided to visit this place with his family. At Muzeum Sztuki, the artist conti-nued to create his own interpretation of history in the context and as a counter-point to the nearby Neoplastic Room. In this site-specific project designed by Strzeminski, there are works by Theo

van Doesburg, Georges Vantongerloo, Sophie Taeuber-Arp and the sculptures by Katarzyna Kobro on display. Just next to them were Günther Uecker’s works: Ashes-Man, Fall, Ash Ground, Pieta, Ash Field, Ash Garden, Forest, Skin, White Scream, Metaphysical Vision. Günther Uecker asks questions and examines the diagnosis, what is the secret of human struggles, through matter, its edges, through contours and shade. The artist concludes that in the long term even “der Kniefall” can prove to be an extremely powerful gesture of victory, when immeasurable dreams become real. In the publication entitled Man and Ashes, there is a photography documenting the exhibition, where we can see, in the foreground, Günther Uecker’s work Wiping Up. The artist and his son are moving away from each other: Uecker moves vigorously in one direction, while his son lightly walks away in the opposite direction, joyfully expecting – by moving along the work’s contour on the floor – they are to meet again in a short moment.

Uecker w PolsceGünther Uecker udowad­nia, że artysta to jestest­wo historyczne, gdzie jak w soczewce skupia się historia Europy, jej los, dramat i marzenia. Awangarda międzywojenna miała pewność swoich utopii. Była razem bez podziału na wschód i zachód Europy. Miała swój Paryż, wspólny język komuni­kacji – abstrakcję geo­metryczną i typografię. Po II wojnie światowej jeśli trzeba było zacząć nowe życie, to może jedynie od nieśmiałego marzenia. Sztuka jako mozół i konkret miała udowodnić rację bytu. Tak, jak podpis artysty z konkretnym wbitym gwoździem i następnym, następnym, tworząc skupisko modułu, w miarę w regularnych odstępach z biologic­znym odstępstwem wytrzy małości ręki i całego ciała. O takiej ludzkiej niedoskonałości jest również przecież malarst­wo unistyczne Władys­ława Strzemińskiego, o jego pragnieniu zadoś­ćuc zynienia ułomności i o zapomnieniu słabości

w ćwiczeniu reguły. Pierwsza, współc­zesna wystawa artystów zachodnioniemieckich w Polsce po II wojnie światowej, ma miejsce w Zachęcie w Warszawie dopiero w 1971 roku. Biorą w niej udział: Thomas Lenk, Heinz Mack, Georg Karl Pfahler i Günther Uecker. Ta prezentacja grupy zachodnioniemieckich artystów jest równo­cześnie momentem otwarcia dotychczasowej wąskiej wymiany wystaw z Zachodnią Europą (po wojnie jedynie grafika i plakaty). Ta data ma kluc­zowe znaczenie. Zaled­wie pół roku wcześniej w grud niu 1970 r. miała miejsce historyczna wizyta Willy Brandta w Polsce i symboliczny gest uklęknięcia (der Kniefall) w Warszawie, otwierający nową politykę pojednania (Ostpolitik). Podpisano dwustronne porozumienie. Gest tak mocny, że aż trudny od razu do zrozumienia po obu stronach polity­cznych, zarówno niemie­ckiej, jak i polskiej, a także izraelskiej. A autor tych słów, Willy Brandt: »… tat ich, was Men-schen tun, wenn die Sprache versagt.« (»… uczyniłem to, co robią ludzie, kiedy brakuje im słów.«) zostaje nagrodzo­ny w 1971 r. Pokojową Nagrodą Nobla. W konsekwencji wystawy grupowej i pobytu w Polsce, teraz na zaproszenie dyrektora Ryszarda Stanisław­skiego, to Günther Uecker ma indywidualną wys tawę »Struktury« w 1974 r. w Muzeum Sztuki w Łodzi. To jest początek jego niezwykle poważnej i głębokiej relacji i silnego związku z naszą kolekcją, która powstała przecież tylko dzięki artystom a przede wszystkim dzięki Władysławowi Strzemiń­skiemu. Już w 1970 roku Günther Uecker stworzył dzieło wiążące na nowo awangardę między­wojenną i współczesność, Europę Wschodnią z Zachodem Europy roz­dzielonej na mocy traktatu z Jałty: Weisses Feld – Hommage a Strzemiński.

Jest to manifest artysty i jego dar w 1971 r. dla kolekcji Muzeum Sztuki w Łodzi. Kiedy sztuka Günthera Ueckera obej­muje zjawiska żywiołów, materię ziemi, ruch, światło to spełnia się marzenie o potencjalnej harmonii. Bez kolizji i w aspiracji do bezinteres­ownej pełni. W 1989 r. Günther Uecker pojawi się ponownie w Łodzi, chwilę przed transformacją polityczną w Polsce i przyjedzie tym razem z całą najbliższą rodziną – matką, żoną Christine i ich małym synkiem oraz z galerzystą z Monachium i ekipą film ową . Sam teraz może być gospod­arzem tego spotkania u nas , bo przecież od lat związany jest z ideą tego miejsca – Muzeum Sztuki. Dobrze pamiętany jest także przez całe środo­wisko artystów związanych wówczas ze słynną Szkołą Filmową, między innymi przez prekursora nowych mediów Józefa Robakow skiego. Wystawa zajmuje prawie całe II piętro muzeum, tam gdzie jest sala neoplastyczna, bezpreceden sowy projekt przestrzeni autorstwa Strzemińskiego dla dzieł innych artystów. Kolekcja powstała jako bezintere­sowny gest światowej awangardy. Dar artystów. Günther Uecker tym razem chodzi dosłownie po obrzeżach określonego kształtu, dając nam kontur, cień Człowieka z popiołów, negatyw sylwetki ludz­kiej. Jądro tragedii to cały kalendarz historii XX wieku: II wojna światowa, wybuch bomby atomowej nad Hiroszimą i w 1986 r. atomowy wybuch w Czarnobylu. Czas pracy nad wystawą New works w Muzeum Sztuki jest niezwykle intensywny, nasycony pracą i emo­cjami. Mnóstwo spraw dzieje się zarówno na płaszczyźnie merytorycz­nej jak i ludzkiej. Günther Uecker nie zapomina, gdzie jest, o tym, że w Łodzi przed II wojną światową była ogromna

społeczność żydowska a potem w trakcie wojny getto, a także o tym, że w Łodzi jest największy cmentarz żydowski w Europie. Dlatego Günther Uecker koniecznie chce odwiedzić to miejsce i jedzie tam z rodziną. W muzeum kontynuuje tworzenie własnego opisu pejzażu historii w kontekście i tym razem w kontrapunkcie do pobliskiej sali neo­plastycznej. W przestrze­ni site­specific projektu Strzemińskiego dla dzieł m.in.: Theo van Doesbur­ga, Georges Vantonger­loo, Sophie Taueber­Arp, rzeźb Katarzyny Kobro, brzmią tuż obok obrazy Günthera Ueckera z serii Ash Man, Fall, Ground Ashes, Pieta, Ash Field , Ash Garden, Forrest of Only Trunk , Skin White Cry, Metaphysical Vision. Günther Uecker stawia pytanie i rozpatruje diagnozę, jaki jest szyfr ludzkich zmagań, poprzez materię, jej obrzeża, kontur i cień. Artysta zmierza do tego, że w długim trwaniu i Der Kniefall może okazać się niezwykle potencjal­nym gestem zwycięstwa. Wtedy, gdy przemożne marzenia stają się prawomocne. W publikacji zatytułowanej Man and Ashes znajduje się foto­grafia dokumentująca fragment wystawy – na pierwszym planie eksponuje ona dzieło Günthera Ueckera Going round and round, gdzie w przeciwnych kierunkach idą – zamaszyście artysta w jedną stronę, a w drugą – tanecznie oddala się jego syn, by poruszając się wzdłuż konturu pracy na podłodze, móc się ponownie za chwilę spotkać.

Alexander Evangely (*1961) lives and works in Moscow and is curator, critic, art theorist and teacher at Rodchenko School in Moscow, Head of the School of curators and critics of the Institute of History of Cultures (UNIC) and chief editor of the portal www.photographer.ru, Russia

Uecker: The Russian VersionOn the eve of the collapse of the Soviet Union forbidden art appeared to some one who had grown up under socialism as a multitude of names and phenomena that need to be brought into cultural circu lation. Their exclusion made them some kind of exotic, forbid-den emblems of freedom. People queued to see them. In September 1988 one such queue led to the Central House of Artists on Krymsky Val, where a large retrospective of works by Günther Uecker was on show. The Tretyakov Gallery was showing a Francis Bacon exhibition at the same time. The public considered Uecker to be more avant-garde. The legitimization of contem porary Western art in the USSR was initiated by the chief hierarchs of the Soviet art scene, particularly Tahir Salahov, whose daughter Aidan would open the “First Gallery” in 1989. Art was the vanguard and symbol of change in Moscow during Perestroika. The Uecker exhibition was followed a month later by the visit of the West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl to Moscow, and a year later by the fall of the Berlin Wall and the unification of Germany and then of Europe. Uecker`s exhibition suc ceeded to an extent that is hard for us now to comprehend. It impressed by the grandeur of individual physical labour – that fetish of Soviet ideology. Uecker embodied the image of the proletarian artist. A sense of the live, active production of art was pal-pable in his ready-mades and surfaces of nails. His works were not formal, but combined inspira tion from Fluxus with a modernistic problematic of the non-mimetic representation of space, following a thread from the early avant-garde to abstract expressionism, the experiments of the ZERO movement and minimalism. Uecker described these experiments in an interview with a Russian publication: “I was fighting against the museum of illusions, which the art of painting had created over the centuries.” Energy and expressiveness were the most visible aspects of Uecker’s method. Uecker showed expressive objects as they are asserted in the act of their production, and the gesture of

creation has to be well planned in order to be strong: such is the lesson that Russian artists learned, to a large extent, thanks to Uecker. The art of Germany, Austria and France reflected the confrontation of political systems that had split the world and divided Germany. The essence of social contradictions was laid bare through the practice of painting and performance; the artist‘s body became the stage and the operator of this conflict. In the Soviet Union such a plasticity of expression appeared even more danger ous than formalism — it marked oppo sition to the order of things as a personal endeavour and therefore could not be developed concurrently with international art, unlike, for example, Moscow Concep tualism, which was well synchronized with the development logic of world art. In the Soviet perspective, Uecker was perceived as a dissident. The in built censorship of the Soviet viewer distin-guished something problematic — the intrusion of the uncontrolled into a space that seems to be absolutely con-trolled. Uecker’s nail structures were reminiscent of the recent Chernobyl disaster, where the stones were also covered with ashes and emitted aggres-sion. Official Soviet visuality used to hide conflict, it did not allow the repre-sentation of “aggressive fields”: in Socialist Realism sterilized aggression collapses into a sign. Uecker’s surfaces of nails broke through linearity into the dimension of action, light and another experience of time. They were a medium of synthetic expression. The viewer read Uecker`s synthesis as an organic and not an intellectual form of aesthetic research. The curator, Elena Kuprina-Lyakhovich, who organized a Uecker presentation at her art-space in 2002, attributes the suc-cess of the exhibition to the artist’s refer-ence to the sensory side of experience. The noughties in Russia were an era of reaction. The perception of Uecker was depoliticized. This was a time of increasing interest towards interpreta-tions of art through material, which, in Uecker`s works, acquired substantial qualities as an aesthetic sign and a new meaning. Art strove to retain its territory of significations, but it had to forget about interventions in the sphere of politics. Russian artists began to work with material, with contentful reflections on objecthood, substance and the corpo-real. The artist Nikolai Polissky, who at the time was working with village people to create environments in the spirit of an interactive aesthetic, cited Uecker as a paradigm: “Vova bangs nails and can`t force them to go through, he complains that his nails are made of rubber, his nails are bent. Uecker hammered all his nails so neatly, while Vova’s go every-where. But that’s also something we can use. Perhaps we are giving birth to a new form – something, which Russians have never done before.” The problem-atic of material and form was embodied in curatorial projects such as Urban Formalism by Evgenia Kikodze (2006), Ultra-New Materiality by Andrey

Parshikov (2007), Russian Povera by Marat Guelman (2008) and in several smaller projects. Uecker returned to Russia, St. Petersburg at the end of noughties with a monumental project from the 90s and entered the context of intense polit i-cization of the Russian art scene, which revived interest in his heritage as a prac-tice of struggle against the languages of power. Critics gave a warm reception to his exhibition, with such epithets as “retro avant-garde” and “a comment on issues of the day.” Uecker`s installation Man’s Inhumanity. 14 Pacified Imple-ments resonated with the increasingly xenophobic and fascistic policies of the St. Petersburg city government in relation to migrants. The installation was associated by the art community with St. Petersburg Necrorealism and caused disappointment by its naive conceptual-ization of eternal truths. Viewers, espe-cially younger viewers, saw the form but missed the ethical oxymoron, which it concealed: For them Uecker was no longer struggling against the hypocrisy of power and the lies of fathers – he was cosily and gloomily preaching. His interest in the East and generation fear of utopias had transformed into a loss of resolution and betrayal of ideals. But Uecker`s works remain an unquestioned modernistic zenith, the incarnation of a national sense of form and a symbol of Germany’s liberation from its post-war complexes.

Юккер. Русская версияНакануне распада СССР запретное искусство открывалось человеку, выросшему при социализме, как множество имен и явлений, требо вавших включения в культур­ный оборот. Исклю­ченность из культур­ной цирку ляции превращ ала их в экзотический набор запретных знаков свободы. За ними выс­траи вались очереди. Одна из таких очередей тянулась в сентябре 1988 году к Централ­ьному дому худож ника на Крымском Валу, где экспонировалась большая ретрос пектива Гюнтера Юккера. Парал лел ьно с Юккером Третьяковская галерея показывала живопись Фрэнсиса Бэкона, — Юккер

воспринимался авангарднее. Инициатива легити­мации совре менного западного искусства исходила от высших иерархов советского искусства, прежде всего Таира Салахова, дочь которого Айдан в 1989 откроет «Первую галерею». Искусство в перестроечной Москве становилось началом и символом перемен. Через месяц в Москву приедет канцлер ФРГ Гельмут Коль, через год начнет рушиться берлин ская стена и объединяться Германия, а затем и Европа. Выставка Юккера имела ошеломительный успех, сейчас уже не вполне понятный. Она впечат­ляла грандиоз ностью индивидуального физи­чес кого труда, этого фетиша советской идеологии. Юккер воп­лощал образ худож­ника­пролетария. За его реди­мейдами и поверх ностями из гвоздей чувствовалась мощь живого действенного производства искусства. В них соединялись вдохновение флюксуса и модернис тская проблематика немиме­тичес кого пред став­ления пространства, прорастающая из раннего авангарда в абстрактный экспрес­сионизм, минимализм и эксперименты группы Zero. «Я боролся против музея иллюзий, который несколько веков создав ала живопись», — сказал Юккер одному из русских изданий об этих экспериментах. Энергия и выра­зительность приема — самое сильное, что тогда читалось в нем. Юккер показывал выра­зительные объекты в экспрессии их произ­водства, и жест соз­дания должен быть хорошо продуман, чтобы стать сильным — этот урок хорошо усвоен русскими художниками во многом благодаря Юккеру. В искусстве Германии, Австрии,

Франции отражалось противостояние полити­ческих систем, раскол­овшее мир и раз дел­ившее Германию. Конфликт через прак­тики живописи и пер­фор манса обнажал суть общественных противо речий, тело художника становилось сценой и оператором этого кон фликта. В Советском Союзе подобная экспрес­сивная пластика казалась опаснее формализма — она маркировала проти вос­тояние порядку вещей как личное усилие и потому не могла разви­ваться одновременно с интернациональным искусством, в отличие, например, от москов­ского концептуализма, хорошо синхрони­зированного с логикой развития мирового искусства. Юккер воспри­нимался диссидентом в советской оптике. Внутренняя цензура зрителя выделяла то, что могло стать про­блемой — втор­жение некон троли­руемого в пространство, которое кажется абсол­ютно контрол ируемым. Игольчатые структуры Юккера напоминали о недавней чернобыл­ьской катастрофе, где камни также были покрыты пеплом и источали агрессию. Официальная советская визуальность не была конфликтной, там были непред­ставимы «Агрес сивные поля», — в соцреа лизме стерилизованная агрессия коллапсирует в знак. Юккеровские повер хности из гвоздей проры вали линейность в изме рения действия, света и иного переживания времени. Это была среда синтетической вырази­тельности. Зритель прочитывал синтез Юккера как органичную, а не умозрительную форму эстетичес кого поиска. С обращением к чувствен ной стороне опыта связы вает успех его ретрос пективы куратор Елена Куприна­Ляхович, которая устраивала выставку

Юккера в 2002 году. Нулевые в России стали эпохой реакции. Восприятие Юккера депо литизировалось. Рос интерес к интерпретациям искусства через материал, получающий у Юккера содержательные качества эстети ческого знака и новый смысл. Искусство стремилось удержать свою территорию смыслов, но об интервенциях в прост­ранства политики пришлось забыть. Русские худож ники начинают работать с материалом, с содержа тельной рефлексией по поводу предмет ности, субстанции, веществен­ности. Художник Николай Полисский, создававший в это время вместе с деревенскими жителями инвайрон менты в духе эстетики взаимо действия, вспоминал Юккера как эталон формы: «Вова забивает гвозди и не может забить, он говорит, что гвозди у него резиновые, эти загнутые его гвозди. У Юккера так забито все аккуратно, а у Вовы все летит из рук. Но ведь из этого тоже можно что­то сделать — может, мы родим новую форму, чего русские в принципе никогда не делали». Проблематика материала и формы воплотилась в кураторских проектах „Урбанистический форма­лизм“ (2006) Евгении Кикодзе, „Сверхновая вещественность“ (2007) Андрея Паршикова, „Русс­кое бедное“ (2008) Марата Гельмана и ряде менее масштабных проектов. Юккер вернулся в Россию в конце нулевых с монументальным проек­том из 90­х — и попал в контекст интенсивной политизации русской арт­сцены, что вернуло интерес к его наследию как прак тике борьбы с языками власти. Критика

доброжелательно реагиро­вала на выставку оценками в духе «Авангард в стиле ретро» и «высказывание о злободневных вещах». Его инсталляция «Человек Страдающий.14 примиряющих орудий» резонировала со сгущаю­щейся ксенофобией и фашистской политикой правительства Петер бурга в отношении мигрантов. У арт­сообщества инстал­ляция ассоциировалась с петербургским некрореа­лизмом и разочаровывала наивной концептуали за­цией вечных истин. Зритель, особенно молодой, прини­мал форму и пропускал скрытый за ней этический оксюморон, — Юккер уже не боролся с лицемерием власти и ложью отцов, он уютно и мрачно пропове­довал. Его интерес к Востоку и поколенческий страх перед утопиями обернулся утратой беском­про миссности и изменой идеалам. Однако работы Юккера остаются бесспор­ной модер нистской верши­ной, воплощением нацио­нал ьного чувства формы, знаком освобождения Германии от послевоенных комплексов.

Zhao Li (*1967) lives and works in Beijing. He is professor and assistant director of the depart-ment of art history of the CAFA (Central Academy of Fine Arts), Beijing.

Zero Art and Its VitalityFor most Chinese people who loved art, Günther Uecker is undoubtedly an im-portant point of reference in the history of western modern art. This is because in the early 1980s when Chinese contem po-rary art trends raged like a storm, some professional magazines and art news-papers with pioneer consciousness began to introduce German “ZERO” art movement and their leaders, like Günther Uecker, as an important member of this art movement became famous in Chinese art world. At that time, in Chinese artists’ eyes, Günther Uecker and his ZERO movement had admirable and charming qualities, which was a “beautiful new world” constructed outside of ideology — “pursue an ideal, aesthetic and moral new world with science and technology”. Correspon-ding to Chinese art history which was constrained for a long time, especially the artistic personalities distorted under the “Cultural Revolution” ideological pressure had gradually developed into a diversified appeal in art circles in the 1980‘s after the “reflection” and “con-sciousness” during reform and opening up. Getting rid of ideological shackles and respecting personal independent art also became the urgent task at that time, besides, learning and emulating western modern and contemporary art had become a mainstream. Although Chinese young artists would often cheer for western artists such as Günther Uecker, what was more attractive to them was western contemporary art community itself. Chinese young artists keened to imitate western contemporary art movements such as “ZERO”, and then created their own art group and put forward their own artistic ideas and artistic purposes, trying to form their own style through different expression and a new way of creation. Therefore, during the whole 1980‘s, various kinds of contemporary art groups began to outbreak in hustle and bustle, and also declined in loneliness; all these consti-tuted the preparation process and start of Chinese contemporary art history. By reviewing art history in 1980s, we can clearly identify the historical significance of western contemporary art like Günther Uecker and German “ZERO” in promoting the development of Chinese contemporary art. Also during the 1980s, Günther Uecker established his personal relationship with China. In 1984, he visited China for the first time. He came to China by train and crossed

Siberia before he arrived in Beijing, the capital of China. Günther Uecker once stated his first impression of China like this: “My vision and soul was deeply moved by Chinese text symbols and enjoyable writing style; the excitement brought by strange feelings leaves experience deep in my soul, catches my heart, and reconstructs many new images.” As an established artist, Günther Uecker always tried to use his own creations to provide more help for current cultural discourse. In fact, his “trip to China” in 1980‘s embodies artist’s cultural dialogue in his deep mind and beyond the geographic boundaries. In this process, Günther Uecker not only realized the “cultural nomadic” state when he passed “the Near East, Siberia and China”, but also felt “the complexity of cultural conflicts experi-enced by the real entity” due to “cultural movement”. It was based on this under-standing that the artist could “transcend borders during his creation process, and combine images with different art media to express exaggerated changes of language and means, which was full of experiment and exploration spirit”. Günther Uecker once said, “Art cannot save people, but art can instigate a dialog that calls us to actively sustain the lives of other people.” If his “trip to China” in the 1980‘s was the artist’s “personal experience deep in his soul”, then Günther Uecker’s “revisit” to China in 1994 undoubtedly “deepened” his experience, and eventually led him to create Letter to Beijing. In 1995, Letter to Beijing was exhibited in Germany Berlin New Artists Association , but Beijing received this postponed letter 12 years later. In 2007, Günther Uecker once again set foot on Chinese land. It was more like a cross-cultural interaction which left deep impression to people, because when Günther Uecker “revis-ited” China in 2007, he was no longer an ordinary “traveler”, but held his personal exhibition in The National Art Museum of China and Guangdong Museum of Art as an artist. The National Art Museum of China is considered to be the highest palace to exhibit Chinese domestic contemporary arts, and Guangdong Museum of Art has always attached great importance to inter-action with international culture and gained great reputation with its brand “Guangzhou Triennial” of contemporary art. Günther Uecker’s exhibition was launched in these two art museums, which has objectively become an impor-tant event in the history of cultural ex-changes between China and Germany in the new century, and also attracted great attention from Chinese art circles for Günther Uecker’s art. The most eye-catching work in the exhibition 2007 was Günther Uecker’s installation Letter to Beijing. It consists of 19 large canvases, which hung high in the exhibition hall. When audience walked through them, they seemed to explore strange scenery. The artist clearly pointed out that this piece of creation was inspired from his impressive “trip to China” 13 years ago, and these “painted

and written pictures” were about Günther Uecker’s Chinese cultural experience. Günther Uecker especially noted the reason why he hung the work in the hall: “the painting cloth hanging on the wires is separated by aisles, which is like books stapled by threads; the exhibition hall is full of the arranged painting cloth, which is thorough. It makes the exhibition like a book, and people can walk through it. The audiences first see a sentence, and then a passage, just like your thinking process, you will produce more ideas.” But from a practical point of view, these “unconstrained” and “suspended” writing works really made Chinese viewers star tled and for Chinese artists’ the im-pact of the exhibition was a “shock”. Many Chinese artists noticed how Günther Uecker transformed character signals into “flowing images” through painting and calligraphy in his solo exhi-bition Letter to Beijing. And many of them, Gu Wenda, for instance, had already tried to reach such a transfor-mation in the 1980s, but failed. In fact, Günther Uecker never confined his exploration on artistic transformation to forms and languages of art, rather, he went deeper into the level of cultural thinking. First, Günther Uecker’s under-standing of the Chinese freehand calligraphy was based on “an experi-ence at the bottom of his soul” during his trip to China in the 1980s, which was so colourful and emotional that it “deeply touched him.” Second, such an understanding inspired “new images” of signs, which Günther Uecker believed are carriers of the “historical transforma-tion” and “memories about the dramatic development” of a nation, and based on these carriers, a new cultural context was developed with experience of interaction between China and the west, thus bringing us inspirations. Third, Günther Uecker transformed signs into icons based on his impression and perception so that understanding and communication between cultures were achieved, and cultural barriers or biases were removed. “As a non-character way of expression, images express the unutterable part of our world. Although restricted by their own limitations for hundreds of years, characters and images constitute the foundation of understanding, and the peace treaty between nations.” Fourth, people could achieve cultural reflection and retros-pection based on the understanding of and communication with images, so as to promote the development and up-grading of their own cultures. “I hope the Chinese viewers would get a clearer understanding about themselves as well as about China after they see these works.” The solo exhibition of Günther Uecker inspired deep reflection in China, which served as part of the background of Chinese contemporary artistic crea-tion in the new century. Against the background of globalization, Chinese contemporary art, just like China itself, has become increasingly globalized. Nevertheless, “barriers and restrictions, biases and hurts, have confined the

understanding among cultures and make it hard for one culture to sympathize with another,” as Günther Uecker warned, although dialogues and exchanges between cultures have become norma-lity. In order to challenge its own limitations, Chinese contemporary art accepts dynamic cultural opinions, pays attention to activities in daily life and their meanings, embraces innovations of materials in the hi-tech era, tolerates the ruptures, limitations, contradictions and transforma tions at the cultural level, and conveys the universal cultural spirit. But how to engage in more active dialogues with the world on a broader international stage? Thanks to Günther Uecker’s Letter to Beijing, Chinese contemporary artists no ticed the sincerity and effec-tive practice of western artists, and there-fore were inspired to actively reflect upon the contemporary art of China. Seeing traveling as a way of cultural intervention and thinking, Günther Uecker has spent most of his life travel-ling around the world, discovering, and practicing new art. Many western critics attach equal importance to Günther Uecker’s cultural travels as to his art. In the 1970s, Günther Uecker travelled across Africa, ending up with his series on Africa. In the 1980s, except for his travel across Asia and Europe, he also went to research on the history of Indians in America and created wood sculptures in Japan. He still can be seen travelling around the world until today, practicing art in the way that suits himself. Just as he stated in his own introduction of the trip to China, “I usually make a lot of sketches during my trips, like journals. I’m not sure how long it takes me to finish one piece of work, but the process of the creation is contin-uous, lasting for one month or more. These sketches remind me of China, and inspired this letter.” More and more Chinese contemporary artists seem to have been aware of the normality of cultural reflection and the significance of experiences. And in the works of young Chinese artists, we can find the breakage of geographic restrictions and the re-definition of the artists’ life and them-selves through artistic creation against the background of dynamic cultures. The enlightenment Chinese artists can gain from Günther Uecker also includes his keeping abreast with the times, revealing the spirit of experimen-tation and exploration based on the expansion of languages and methods in his own artistic creation, and expressing his life experience via various materials and ways. As for today’s Chinese con-temporary art, those artists at the edge of artistic thoughts and with unique personalities are the most valuable. It is undoubted that, with the prosperous development of Chinese contemporary art, the group artistic creation focusing on images and signals has ended. The simplistic artistic approach of borrowing or transferring visual images has become obsolete. Chinese artists tend to break the stable artistic mode of seeking similarities, rather, they start to focus on highly personal, original and dynamic

languages, or, advocate dynamics and differences in artistic languages. Instead of seeking a singular or absolute answer or standard, Chinese artistic practice has become an organic inte-gration of the artists, viewers, curators (or venues) and the environments (or phenomena), making artistic appreci-ation and creation more varied and dynamic. It is against such a background that Günther Uecker’s works begin to strike the chords on Chinese artists. Günther Uecker’s works are known for dynamic materials and con-tents. But these unique pieces reveal apparent orientation in terms of language and culture. For example, the most famous series of his, which are made of nails of various sizes and materials such as iron or wood, turn from an abstract 2D work into a concrete 3D one, based on the sound of striking nails, the light and shadow in the surroundings as well as the related life experience. “Only in this way that 2D works can be elevated to higher levels,” and the interaction between the viewers and the work based on the light and shadow in the environ-ment becomes an integral part of the appreciation of the work. And in his series made of wood in which he used electric saw to cut woods, and used fire to burn them so as to seek the image hidden inside the wood and understand their relations with humanity. By hiding and transforming the original material of wood by cutting and burning, the artist implies the resurrection of life just like the phoenix rising from flames and ashes. As a matter of fact, we have found the expansion from 2D to dynamic forms in the works of young artists such as Wang Guangle and Shang Yixin. And in the artistic creation of Shi Jinsong, Yang Xinguang and Xiao Bin, we can find how the artists develop their own self-experience facing the natural resources and environment. Although we’re not sure what specific influence Günther Uecker has exerted on Chinese young artists, we are sure that the fact that Günther Uecker came to China as well as his art is bound to impact on the art of China, just as the elabo-ration of ancient Chinese philosophy on “zero” – vitality engenders when everything becomes zero.

其中重要一员的Günther Uecker也就随之为中国艺术界所了解。在当时的中国艺术家眼 中，Günther Uecker和他所在的“零”群体具有令人倾慕的迷人特质，那就是在意识形态之外所建构起的“美丽新世界”——“追求一种理想性的，融合审美、道德和科技的新世界”。应于长期以来被禁锢的中国艺术创作历史，尤其是“文革”中在意识形态重压下扭曲变形的艺术个性，经过了改革开放之后的“反省”和“觉悟”，已经在80年代逐渐发展为艺术界的多元化诉求，摆脱意识形态的束缚、尊重个性独立的艺术创作同样成为了当时的迫切任务，而学习和效仿西方现当代艺术也成为了一时的主流。虽然当时的中国青年艺术家们通常也会为像Günther Uecker这样的西方艺术家所欢呼，但是此刻更吸引他们的还是西方现当代艺术群体本身，中国青年艺术家热衷于模仿像“零”群体这样的西方现当代艺术群体，去创建属于自己的艺术群体，提出自己的艺术主张和艺术宗旨，并且力图以差异性的表达和标新立异的创作形成自我的面目。于是在整个的80年代，形形色色的当代艺术群体在喧闹声中爆发，也在寂寞中凋零，这些都构成了中国当代艺术史的孕育过程和开端阶段。 通过回顾20世纪80年代，我们可以清晰地看到像Günther Uecker和德国“零”群体等西方现当代艺术在推动中国当代艺术发展中的历史意义。而同样是在20世纪80年代，Günther Uecker也建立起了自己与中国之间的个人关系。1984年Günther Uecker第一次来到中国，那次的他是乘坐火车穿越西伯利亚而到达了中国的首都北京的。Günther Uecker曾经这样写下了自己对于中国的初步印象：“在视觉和灵魂中被深深打动的是中国文字符号和写意性的书写方式，而陌生感所带来的刺激留下了灵魂深处的经验，抓住了我的内心，并重构起许多新的意象”。作为一位成功的艺术家，Günther Uecker总是试图通过自己的创作为当下文化思考提供更多的帮助，事实上80年代的“中国之行”体现的就是艺术家在思想深处超越地理的界限而展开的文化对话。在这样的过程中，Günther Uecker既体会到了“行经近东地区、西伯利亚、中国”的“文化游牧”状态，也感受到了因“文化迁徙”而产生的“我这个现实实体中所经历的文化冲突的复杂性”，也正是基于这样的认识，艺术家“能够在创作过程中超越疆界，以图像等艺术方式结合不同的媒材，表现语言和手段上的夸张性变化，充满了实验和探索的精神”。

Günther Uecker曾经说过，“艺术无法拯救人类，但通过艺术，我们可以相互对话。”如果说80年代的“中国之行”是艺术家“魂魄深处的个人经验”的话，那么1994年Günther Uecker的“再次造访”无疑“重温”并加深了自己的经验，最终促使自己去创作“致北京的信”。同年“致北京的信”在德国柏林新艺术家协会展出，但是时隔13年之后北京才收到了这封迟到的信件。2007年

归于零而勃勃生机赵力Günther Uecker,对于大多数喜欢美术的中国人而言，无疑是西方现代美术史中的重量级人物。这是因为早在20世纪80年代中国当代艺术潮流风起云涌之际，一些具有先锋意识的专业杂志和美术报纸就开始介绍德国“零”艺术群体以及他们的艺术主张、他们的艺术创作，而作为

Günther Uecker又一次踏上了中国的土地，这更像是一次东西方文化间的彼此互动，给人留下了深刻印象，因为2007年Günther Uecker的“再次造访”不再是一位寻常的“旅行者”，而是以艺术家的身份在中国美术馆和广东美术馆举办个人展览。中国美术馆被认为是在中国国内展览现当代艺术的最高殿堂，而广东美术馆历来重视国际文化间的交流互动，并以“三年展”的当代艺术展览品牌而享有盛誉。Günther Uecker的展览在这两个美术馆的先后推出，在客观上成为了新世纪以来中德文化交流史上的重要事件，也进一步引发了中国艺术界对Günther Uecker艺术创作的关注。

展览中最引人瞩目的作品是Günther Uecker的“致北京的信”。它由19件大幅画布组成，高高地悬挂在展厅之中，观众穿梭其中，犹如探寻一道又一道的奇异风景。艺术家明确指出这件作品的创作灵感即来自13年之前那次印象深刻的“中国之行”，而这些“涂抹和书写而成的图画”对应的也是Günther Uecker关于中国文化的亲身经验。Günther Uecker特别谈到了他将作品悬挂在展厅中的原因，“悬挂于钢丝上的布帛，被走道隔开，如同线订书籍，布满展厅，前前后后错落着，尽是透彻。这样的陈列是为了让展览像一本书一样，人可以在其中走动，观众先看到一个句子，再看到一段话，犹如你的思考过程，慢慢产生更多的想法。”而从实际情况来看，这些“无拘无束”、“悬浮空中”的书写性作品的确令中国的观赏者大吃一惊，而中国艺术家的观感则是“震撼”。 当时很多的中国艺术家饶有兴趣地观察到了Günther Uecker是如何在“致北京的信”中将文字视为符号进而通过描画、书写转化为“流动的图像”的，即便在80年代谷文达等一批中国当代艺术家已经做出了不少的尝试，但是其中的成功案例并不多见。事实是Günther Uecker对于艺术转化过程的思考，从来就没有停留于形式语言的探究层面，而是深入为文化性思考的宗旨。第一，Günther Uecker对于中国写意文字以及书写方式的认识来自于80年代“中国之行”的“灵魂深处的经验”，这是极富情感性的生命体验，“如此丰富，深深触动了我”；第二，这些认识同时也激发起了符号的“新的意象”，Günther Uecker认为这些符号承载着“一个国家的历史性变迁”和“对这个国家戏剧般发展的记忆”，所以“其上发展出了文化的新语境，由于带着中国与西方世界之间的互动经验，而激发了我们的灵感”；第三，Günther Uecker的创作借助“印象”和“感觉”，将符号转化为图像，从而实现文化间的理解和沟通，积极消除文化障碍和历史偏见，“图像是非文字的表达，表达了我们世界中不可言说的部分，因此尽

管词语和图像数千年以来被自身的限制所局限，却依旧构成理解的生命基底，构成文化之间缔结和平的协议”；第四，基于图像的理解和沟通，可以形成文化上的反思和自省，从而促进自我文化的更新和发展，“我希望中国的观众看到这些作品，对中国有一个自身的反思，呈现自己的认识。”

GüntherUecker展览在中国所引发的“反思”是非常深刻的，当然这样的“反思”又被嵌入在新世纪以来中国当代艺术创作的大背景之中。事实是随着全球化的发展，中国当代艺术如同当今的中国，也越来越融入了世界的舞台。虽然文化间的对话与交流已经成为了常态，但正如GüntherUecker 所提醒我们的那样，“阻碍和限制、偏见和伤害，阻滞了彼此的理解，使人难以感同身受。”为了挑战自身的极限，中国当代艺术乐于接受多元化的文化观点，关注日常生活中的意义与活动，拥抱科技时代的媒材创新，宽容面对文化层面的断裂、局限、矛盾与变迁，传达人文精神的普适关怀，但是如何在更大的国际性舞台上去和世界发生积极的对话呢？所以，面对GüntherUecker的“致北京的信”，中国当代艺术家看到了西方艺术家的真诚和有效的实践，由此也激励了中国当代艺术针对“当代艺术”的积极反思。

作为一种文化介入的思考方式，GüntherUecker的一生都在旅行、发现和新的创作实践中度过的。很多的西方评论者认为，和他艺术并行的就是GüntherUecker的文化旅行。70年代，GüntherUecker穿越非洲，创作出了关于非洲的作品系列。80年代除了那次“欧亚大旅行”之外，Günther Uecker还到美国去调查印第安人的历史，在日本创作树木雕塑系列。直至今日，他还每年出现在世界各地，选择适合的方式去创作自己的作品。正如他对“中国之行”的自述，“我在旅行的过程中，画了很多的速写，就像日记一样。我不清楚完成这个作品究竟花了多长时间，但整个创作活动是持续的，一个月或更多时间，我看着这些速写，想起了在中国发生的事情，然后写了这封信。”更多的中国当代艺术家似乎由此而认识到了文化思考的日常化和体验性的意义，而在中国青年一代的创作中我们也已经看到了跨越地理的界限，在多元文化影响环境之中，努力用艺术创作去重新定义自己和自己所处的时代生活。 Günther Uecker对于中国艺术家的启示，还在于他始终能够与时代精神的同步，以艺术创作在语言和手段上的扩张性变化来彰显实验和探索的精神，以不同的艺术媒材和展示方式去宣泄自己的生命体验。而对应于当下的中国当代艺术，始终处于思潮前沿又具有独立个性的艺术家无疑具有最珍贵的价值。毋庸置

疑的是，随着中国当代艺术的蓬勃发展，那些专注于图式化和符号化的群体创作已经告一段落，那些仅仅通过视觉图像的移用或转借做出简单化处理的流行诠释也早已成为过去。中国艺术家们开始倾向于打破求同的稳定模式，转而强调高度个人化、原创和多元的语言，或者说提倡创作语言的异质多重本质，即多元式的话语异质；强调艺术创作不追求单一的、绝对的答案或标准，将艺术家、欣赏者、策展人（或展场）以及环境（或现象）有机结合，使得艺术鉴赏与艺术创作同样变得异常多样。也正是在这样的背景下，Günther Uecker作品开始引起现在的中国艺术家的更多共鸣。 Günther Uecker的作品素以材料多元、内容多样而著称，但是这些的“标新立异”都有着明确的语言指向性和文化针对性。譬如，他最知名的“钉子”作品，是以大小不同的钉子来表现内容，这些钉子有些是特制的铁钉，也有些是非常大型的木钉，虽然最终呈现出来的是抽象性的作品，但是打钉时的声音以及那些的生命体验都沉浸于作品之中，而配合着周围的光影和环境，不仅将原本平面的作品变得立体而具象起来，“只有这样，平面的作品才能伸展到更高的位置”，而且利用这些光影形成与观赏者的观看相互动的韵律和波动，使得作品成为必须结合观赏者参与才能获得完整的呈现结构。又譬如，他的“木头”作品，利用粗硬的木头并经电锯切割，去寻找“蕴藏”其中的形象和理解与人类之间的共性。在创作中，Günther Uecker以电锯切割的粗暴撕裂痕迹来“隐去”和“变形”原有的木头形体，并以火焰烧灼的焦黑、触目惊心的裂缝和空洞来喻示“凤凰涅槃”式的生命再生。事实上，我们也在年轻艺术家像王光乐、尚一心等的作品中看到了将平面作品延伸而多样化的发展，在史今淞、杨心广、萧彬等的作品中，看到了艺术家是如何面对自然资源或者环境而生成自我的“自然经验”的。虽然我们尚且无法证实Günther Uecker对这些中国青年艺术家的具体影响，但是亦如中国古典哲学对于“零”的阐释——归于零而生机勃勃，正是在冥冥之中Günther Uecker来到了中国，也正是在冥冥之中Günther Uecker的艺术也注定会影响到中国。

Ory Dessau (*1979) lives and works in Tel Aviv and Berlin and is freelance curator and art critic

Günther Uecker: NailingI play a word association game with the name Günther Uecker, asking myself which kind of words, phrases, and images are identified with this name. The name Günther Uecker is a brand, a sustainable, art-historical brand, immediately associated with: the zeitgeist of the sixties; the cultural climate of post-war Germany; the artistic heritage of the ZERO movement and particularly of Otto Piene and Heinz Mack; the European avantgarde, led by Yves Klein and Piero Manzoni, the grid, the monochrome, the destruction of the pictorial plane, the nail; the materiality of light, the haptic quality of painting and vision, the urge to deconstruct the paint-erly gesture as a personal, uninterrupted bodily signature; the arrangement of topo graphic patterns according to sequences as a means to avoid subjec-tive composition; the mechanization of artistic production; the demonstration of temporality through repetitive, circular movement generated by electric motors; the emancipatory potential of techno-logy; the interactivity of kinetic sculpture; social sculpture and bodily actions. Within this, nails, both as a noun—a nail—and a verb—to nail—are the element, the material, and the activity to which Uecker’s work is most connected. In the late fifties, he began to nail crowded structures of nails into the surfaces of monochrome paintings, creating agitated topography and intermediate states of oscillation between two-dimensionality and three-dimensionality. Indifferent to issues of medium specificity, Uecker’s early nail reliefs are like preliminaries to Donald Judd’s characterization of “specific objects” as neither paintings nor sculptures, and to a certain extent they share some similarities with the ob-jects of the later American Minimalism. Throughout the sixties Uecker pursued his method of hammering further and further, inserting nails into pieces of furniture (as in, for example, Chair II (1963), Over-Nailed Table (1963), and Bedside Table (1963)); into communication devices (TV, 1963), and musical instruments (Piano, 1964). Uecker’s nail-studded objects are forms of contamination and estrangement and no longer resemble themselves, nor what they previously were. They appear dysfunctional and mutative, like a rash over the skin of the everyday world. Facing them, we become aware that the way we comprehend and use these ob-jects on a daily basis, or rather, the way we experience our world, is the result of historical, and therefore ideological, con-ditioning and indoctrination. Uecker’s

nailed objects are an iconoclast form of reevaluation whose critical standpoint towards modern culture can be paral-leled to Pop Art’s ambiguous engage-ment with mass cultural iconography. During the same period, Uecker also integrated nail fields into his kinetic works, one of which is Five Light Discs Cosmic Vision (1961–1981). Consid-ered a significant example of his ex-periments with light and movement, the work is an arrangement of five open cases containing five circular nailed canvases, upon which beams of electric illumination are projected. Four of the five canvases are in rotational motion generated by electrical motors: “two of them move almost imperceptibly, one has a red floor pedal that requires the observer to power the pulley, and one does not move at all but appears to do so because it is the only one in which the black nails are of different diameters and lengths”. Like planets in the solar system, the moving, disc-like canvases rotate at different speeds. The tension between the sublime content of the work (cosmic vision), and the mass-produced, de-subli-mated means of representation (nails, light bulbs, electric machinery), draws our attention from the effect to the cause –the poetic, sculptural qualities of the artistic manipulation of materials. For the contemporary art critic, an updated reading of Uecker’s applica-tions and topographies of nails may contradict to the artist statements he published throughout the years. Today, when counter-culture is part of culture, when negation reaffirms the existent as that which is being negated, when forms of emancipation are dictated by unifying systems, when future utopia is a nostalgic idea, and when avant-garde art provides global corporations their identities, the cultural dichotomies that Uecker presumed in order to conceal are no longer relevant. In this context, a new examination of the nails’ configurations, originally implemented as “structural elements”—as a monotonic, non-artistic activity—may find many of these configu-rations excessive and exaggerated, over-signified, almost campy. It may find Uecker’s act theatrical and stylistic, rather than structural and methodic. But the complexity of Uecker’s practice, its capability to generate and handle contradictory meanings and classifications, allows more and more interpretations. In a text about Uecker’s early work, critics Joan Boykoff Baron and Reuben M. Baron suggest an additional perspective. Freed from the vocabulary of the sixties, their analysis disconnects Uecker from ZERO, the movement that he joined in 1961, three years after Otto Piene and Heinz Mack organized first exhibitions under this title. According to the text, while Piene and Mack positioned themselves against the “subjectivity of the dominant aesthetic legacy of Abstract Expressionism”, Uecker performed a social irritation, a moral “reaction against the ‘zero hour’ in post-war Germany that allowed people to begin anew without coming to terms with their complicit role in the Holocaust”.

Following this line of thought, the writers define Uecker’s nails also as an “icon of suffering”. For them, his nail-based abstractions are not about pure sen-sory stimulations, or generally critical deformations. Their reading enables us to perceive Uecker’s nailed surfaces in relation to history, as a metonym of a consistent, underlying organizational violence where protection and aggres-sion, freedom and oppression, are some-times indistinguishable.

לע רתי םישרופמ םייוטיבכ בשחנ םעפש המכ ,הדימה ךא ,ידותמו ינוקאלכ ךפהנ ןמזה קחרממ תוילרטאית לש ןייפאמל.פמאקה ףס לעש לש תובכרומה ,תאז םע דחי רקוא לש הקיטקרפה תופסונ תויונשרפ תורשפאמ ביבס בוסנה טסקטב .תובר ירקבמ ,תמדקומה ותדובע ןוראב ןקיוב ןאו'ג תונמאה םיקפסמ ןוראב .מ ןבורו .השדח הביטקפסרפ היגולונימרטהמ םיררחושמ חותינה ,םיששה תונש לש לש רקוא ןיב קתנמ םהלש תצובק ןיבל וזה הפפוקתה ףרטצה הילאש ,ספא רחאל םייתנש ,1961ב הנייפ וטוא ידי לע המקוהש טסקטה תנעט .קאמ ץנייהו קאמו הנייפ דועבש איה ,םינש ןתואב םמצע וביצה לש תויביטקייבוסה" דגנכ תטלשה תיטתסאה המגמה םזינויסרפקאה לש שגדה רצי רקוא ,4"טשפומה עיצהלל ןיינע ךותמ רחא תעש' דגנ תירסומ הבוגת" ירחא לש הינמרגב 'ספאה םישנא הבש ,המחלמה ליחתהל םמצעל ושרה םע ודדומתהש ילב שדחמ ךלהמב עשפנה םדוקפת וקל ךשמהב .5"האושה םיבתוכה ,הזה הבשחמה אל םירמסמה תא םירידגמ אלא ילרוטקורטס טנמלאכ ,םרובע .6"לבס לש ןוקיא"כ םירמסמה תורוצת ינשוח יוריג ןניא תוטשפומה תויצמרופד ןניאו ,רוהט תיתרוקיב השיג תומלגמה םהלש האירקה .תיללכ תא סופתל תרשפאמ תוכורא םירמסמה תוינבת גוצייכ רקוא לש םינשה לש ךשמתמ ירוטסיה ןונגנמכ ,תינוגרא תומילא לש ,היצאודיוידניא-הד לש תכפוהה ,תיתרדס הטשפה ,רלפמסקאל ץוענ רמסמ לכ ,דוחייו תוהז רסח ףוגל .תימינונא הדיחיל

תא רמסמל רתנוגרקואואסד ירוא קחשמ קחשמ ינא רתנוג םשה םע תויצאיצוסא המ ימצע תא לאושו רקוא וליא ;יל רמוא הזה םשה אוה תונומתו םיחנומ ,םילמ רתנוג םשה .ותיא איבמ גתומ ,גתומ אוה רקוא ,ידמל ביצי יתונמא-תודלות חור :םע תידיימ רשקנש ןושארה יצחה לש הפוקתה םילקאה ,םיששה תונש לש ירחא לש הינמרגב יתוברתה ,הינשה םלועה תמחלמ לש תיתונמאה תשרומה וטוא לש טרפבו ספא תצובק ,קאמ ץנייהו הנייפ יפכ יפוריאה דרגנוואה ומכ תויומד ידי-לע בצועש ,ןיילק ביאו ינוצנמ ורייפ סרהה ,םורכונומה ,דירגה ,הנומתה רושימ לש לש תוירמוחה ,רמסמה לש תוישושימה ,רואה הטס'גה לש קוריפה ,רויצה המירזכו המיתחכ תירויצה ,תערפומ יתלבו תישיא רוצייה לש היציזינכמה לש ןוגראה ,יתונמאה לע תויפרוגופוט תוינבת תויטמתמ תורדס סיסב יעצמאכ שארמ תועובק היציזופמוקמ ענמיהל סחיה ,תיביטקייבוס לאיצנטופכ היגולונכטל תורשפאה ,יפוטוא רורחשל תועצמאב ןמז יכשמ גצייל ,בחרמב תיתרזח העונת לוסיפ לש תויביטקארטניאה יעוריאו יתרבח לוסיפ ,יטניק.גנינפה ,טנמלאה םה םירמסמ םתיאש ,תוליעפהו רמוחה ההוזמ רקוא לש הדובעה תונש ףוסב .לכמ רתוי ,לחה אוה םישימחה רידחהל ,שיטפ תועצמאב םירמסמ-תופופצ תוינבת םירויצ לש םיחטשמ ךותל ךכ בקעש ,םייטמרכונומ םייניב-יבצמל ושענ דממ-וד ןיב םילטלטימה םייניב-יבצמל ושענ דממ-וד ןיב םילטלטימה ידכ ךות .דממ-תלתל הרדגהמ תוקמחתה יטילבת ,החישק תילמוידמ לש םימדקומה םירמסמה הנכה תודובע ומכ םה רקוא דלנודש המל תויביטלוקפס 1963ב ארקי דא'ג ,1"םייפיצפס םיטקייבוא" םירויצ םניאש םיטקייבוא ,הז ןבומב .םילספ םניאו הקיזב םייוצמ םה םזילמינימ טקייבואל.יאקירמאה תא חתפל ךישמה רקוא ורידחהב,ולש שיטפה תוכמ ךותל םירמסמ לש תודש ,)1963 ,וו אסכ( םיטיהר ,היזיולט( תרושקת ירישכמ

,רתנספ( הניגנ ילכו ,)1963 ,הלא תודובעב .)1964 תוסכמ םירמסמה תורוצת לודיג ומכ םיטקייבואה תא השענ רומסמהו החירפ וא תכפוהה םוהיז לש הרוצל םירזל םיטקייבואה תא ינפל ויהש המל ,םמצעל תוילנויצקנופה .ורמסומש םירבוע םהו תדבוא םהלש ונתוארב .תוויע לש ךילהת ונב תררועתמ םתוא יתורירשה דממל תועדומה ןפואהש הדבועל ,םהלש םתוא םיספות ונא ובש רצות אוה ,םהב םישמתשמו ,תירוטסיה היינבה לש .תיגולואידיא ךכיפלו הדמעה ,הזה רשקהב תקיטקרפש תיתרוקיבה המיגדמ רקוא לש רומסמה םתואש םיטקייבואה יפלכ ,תרמסממ איה תרדוח איה םתועצמאבשו יתוברתה םלועה ךותל הליבקמ ,יביסרגא חרואב חישל םיוסמ ןבומב תורומתלו יתרוקיבה וררועתהש תויתוברתה טרא פופה תעפוה תובקעב .ב"הראבו הילגנאב םג רקוא הפוקת התואב תופופצ תוינבת בלשל לחה ויתודובע ךותל םירמסמ לש תחאש ,תויטניקה איה ןהבש תוטלובהמ ,רוא לש םיקסיד השימח .)1961( ימסוק ןויזיח שמחמ תבכרומ הדובעה ןכותבו תוחותפ ץע תובית םילוגע םידב השימח

םייניב-יבצמל ושענ דממ-וד ןיב םילטלטימה ידכ ךות .דממ-תלתל הרדגהמ תוקמחתה יטילבת ,החישק תילמוידמ לש םימדקומה םירמסמה הנכה תודובע ומכ םה רקוא דלנודש המל תויביטלוקפס 1963ב ארקי דא'ג ,1"םייפיצפס םיטקייבוא" םירויצ םניאש םיטקייבוא ,הז ןבומב .םילספ םניאו הקיזב םייוצמ םה םזילמינימ טקייבואל.יאקירמאה תא חתפל ךישמה רקוא ורידחהב,ולש שיטפה תוכמ ךותל םירמסמ לש תודש ,)1963 ,וו אסכ( םיטיהר ,היזיולט( תרושקת ירישכמ

,רתנספ( הניגנ ילכו ,)1963 ,הלא תודובעב .)1964 תוסכמ םירמסמה תורוצת לודיג ומכ םיטקייבואה תא השענ רומסמהו החירפ וא תכפוהה םוהיז לש הרוצל םירזל םיטקייבואה תא ינפל ויהש המל ,םמצעל תוילנויצקנופה .ורמסומש םירבוע םהו תדבוא םהלש ונתוארב .תוויע לש ךילהת ונב תררועתמ םתוא יתורירשה דממל תועדומה ןפואהש הדבועל ,םהלש םתוא םיספות ונא ובש רצות אוה ,םהב םישמתשמו ,תירוטסיה היינבה לש .תיגולואידיא ךכיפלו הדמעה ,הזה רשקהב תקיטקרפש תיתרוקיבה המיגדמ רקוא לש רומסמה םתואש םיטקייבואה יפלכ ,תרמסממ איה תרדוח איה םתועצמאבשו יתוברתה םלועה ךותל הליבקמ ,יביסרגא חרואב חישל םיוסמ ןבומב תורומתלו יתרוקיבה וררועתהש תויתוברתה טרא פופה תעפוה תובקעב .ב"הראבו הילגנאב םג רקוא הפוקת התואב תופופצ תוינבת בלשל לחה ויתודובע ךותל םירמסמ לש תחאש ,תויטניקה איה ןהבש תוטלובהמ ,רוא לש םיקסיד השימח .)1961( ימסוק ןויזיח שמחמ תבכרומ הדובעה ןכותבו תוחותפ ץע תובית םילוגע םידב השימח ןכותבו תוחותפ ץע תובית םילוגע םידב השימח םיראומה ,םירמסוממ .יתוכאלמ רוא לש תומולאב םיוצמ םידבהמ העברא תקפומה תיבוביס העונתב ,ילמשח עונמ תועצמאב חרואב םיענ םהמ םיינש" דחאו ,שחומ וניא טעמכש ,ללכב ענ וניא םהמ ובש העונתה תיילשאו אוהש הדבועה לשב תרצונ וכותלש םהיניבמ ידיחיה םירדחומ םירמסמה ומכ .2"םינוש םיקמועב ,שמשה תכרעמב םיבכוכ םילוגעה םידבהמ דחא לכ .הנוש תוריהמב בבותסמ בגשנה ןכותה ןיב חתמה ,)ימסוק ןויזיח( הדובעה לש גוצייה יעצמא ןיבל םיגציימה םייתיישעתה ,תורונ ,םירמסמ( ותוא בצעמ ,)םיילמשח םירישכמ יתלב האוושמכ הדובעה תא ,ימיימשה הבש ,הרותפ ,ינחורהו יעבטה ,ינגרואה ,ינכמה ,יצראה תא םיריממ ,ירמוחהו יתוכאלמה רזוחו ,םהב םירמומו .הלילח תרוקיב לש טבמה תדוקנמ ,תיוושכעה תונמאה לש םירמסמה תויפרגופוט ליבוהל תולולע רקוא תא תורתוסש תונקסמל .םינשה ךרואל ויתורהצה דגנה תוברתשכ ,םויה תוברתב קלח תחקול םייקה תלילששכ ,תימשרה המכ שדחמ ותוא תרשאמ רורחשה קפואשכ ,ללשנש תוכרעמ ידי לע חסונמ דיתעהש ,תוינאכד ןויער אוה היפוטואכ תונמאשכו ,יגלטסונ תעייסמ תידרגנווא רצייל םיילבולג םידיגאתל תוקולחה ,תימצע תוהז הקיטקרפהש תוימוטוכידה טקייבואכ הנמיס רקוא לש אל רבכ ,הלילשו לוטיבל הניחב ,ןכ לע רשא .תומייק תורוצת לש שדחמ ,רקוא לש םירמסמה לש רודיסכ ורדגוה רוקמבש םיטנמלא" תאצומ ,3"םיילרוטקרוטס ,תופדוע ייוטיבכ ןהמ תובר לע רתי םישרופמ םייוטיבכ בשחנ םעפש המכ ,הדימה

ןכותבו תוחותפ ץע תובית םילוגע םידב השימח םיראומה ,םירמסוממ .יתוכאלמ רוא לש תומולאב םיוצמ םידבהמ העברא תקפומה תיבוביס העונתב ,ילמשח עונמ תועצמאב חרואב םיענ םהמ םיינש" דחאו ,שחומ וניא טעמכש ,ללכב ענ וניא םהמ ובש העונתה תיילשאו אוהש הדבועה לשב תרצונ וכותלש םהיניבמ ידיחיה םירדחומ םירמסמה ומכ .2"םינוש םיקמועב ,שמשה תכרעמב םיבכוכ םילוגעה םידבהמ דחא לכ .הנוש תוריהמב בבותסמ בגשנה ןכותה ןיב חתמה ,)ימסוק ןויזיח( הדובעה לש גוצייה יעצמא ןיבל םיגציימה םייתיישעתה ,תורונ ,םירמסמ( ותוא בצעמ ,)םיילמשח םירישכמ יתלב האוושמכ הדובעה תא ,ימיימשה הבש ,הרותפ ,ינחורהו יעבטה ,ינגרואה ,ינכמה ,יצראה תא םיריממ ,ירמוחהו יתוכאלמה רזוחו ,םהב םירמומו .הלילח תרוקיב לש טבמה תדוקנמ ,תיוושכעה תונמאה לש םירמסמה תויפרגופוט ליבוהל תולולע רקוא תא תורתוסש תונקסמל .םינשה ךרואל ויתורהצה דגנה תוברתשכ ,םויה תוברתב קלח תחקול םייקה תלילששכ ,תימשרה המכ שדחמ ותוא תרשאמ רורחשה קפואשכ ,ללשנש תוכרעמ ידי לע חסונמ דיתעהש ,תוינאכד ןויער אוה היפוטואכ תונמאשכו ,יגלטסונ תעייסמ תידרגנווא רצייל םיילבולג םידיגאתל תוקולחה ,תימצע תוהז הקיטקרפהש תוימוטוכידה טקייבואכ הנמיס רקוא לש אל רבכ ,הלילשו לוטיבל הניחב ,ןכ לע רשא .תומייק תורוצת לש שדחמ ,רקוא לש םירמסמה לש רודיסכ ורדגוה רוקמבש םיטנמלא" תאצומ ,3"םיילרוטקרוטס ,תופדוע ייוטיבכ ןהמ תובר לע רתי םישרופמ םייוטיבכ בשחנ םעפש המכ ,הדימה לע רתי םישרופמ םייוטיבכ בשחנ םעפש המכ ,הדימה ךא ,ידותמו ינוקאלכ ךפהנ ןמזה קחרממ תוילרטאית לש ןייפאמל.פמאקה ףס לעש לש תובכרומה ,תאז םע דחי רקוא לש הקיטקרפה תופסונ תויונשרפ תורשפאמ ביבס בוסנה טסקטב .תובר ירקבמ ,תמדקומה ותדובע ןוראב ןקיוב ןאו'ג תונמאה םיקפסמ ןוראב .מ ןבורו .השדח הביטקפסרפ היגולונימרטהמ םיררחושמ חותינה ,םיששה תונש לש לש רקוא ןיב קתנמ םהלש תצובק ןיבל וזה הפפוקתה ףרטצה הילאש ,ספא רחאל םייתנש ,1961ב הנייפ וטוא ידי לע המקוהש טסקטה תנעט .קאמ ץנייהו קאמו הנייפ דועבש איה ,םינש ןתואב םמצע וביצה לש תויביטקייבוסה" דגנכ תטלשה תיטתסאה המגמה םזינויסרפקאה לש שגדה רצי רקוא ,4"טשפומה עיצהלל ןיינע ךותמ רחא תעש' דגנ תירסומ הבוגת" ירחא לש הינמרגב 'ספאה םישנא הבש ,המחלמה ליחתהל םמצעל ושרה םע ודדומתהש ילב שדחמ ךלהמב עשפנה םדוקפת וקל ךשמהב .5"האושה םיבתוכה ,הזה הבשחמה אל םירמסמה תא םירידגמ אלא ילרוטקורטס טנמלאכ ,םרובע .6"לבס לש ןוקיא"כ םירמסמה תורוצת ינשוח יוריג ןניא תוטשפומה תויצמרופד ןניאו ,רוהט תיתרוקיב השיג תומלגמה םהלש האירקה .תיללכ תא סופתל תרשפאמ תוכורא םירמסמה תוינבת גוצייכ רקוא לש םינשה לש ךשמתמ ירוטסיה ןונגנמכ ,תינוגרא תומילא לש ,היצאודיוידניא-הד לש תכפוהה ,תיתרדס הטשפה ,רלפמסקאל ץוענ רמסמ לכ ,דוחייו תוהז רסח ףוגל .תימינונא הדיחיל

Sarah Rifky (*1981) lives and works in Cairo, is a freelance art critic. She is founder of the CIRCA (Resource Center for Art) and of art initiative and exhibition space BEIRUT in Cairo

ABBR*. Reading Günther Uecker in ArabicZKR. I have never visited Günther Uecker’s studio. I imagine it is mono-chromatic. There are millions of nails and a few hammers. His paints, like his studio, are monochromatic. There is ash, charcoal and plenty of other material, stowed in a chaotic manner that makes sense to serious – and seriously orga-nized – people with kindred spirits. Uecker, for over fifty years, commits to a rhythmic action: He hammers nails into canvases, surfaces and objects. I conjure a mental sound of the artist at work. The act of making is metronomic. It is repetitive. It is of the body. It is outside of the realm of language yet it implies it. His act is devotional, as it is violent. Yet, isn’t the very act of naming a violent one? Uecker’s process as I think of it, is the formal manifestation of dhikr (rememberance of God). It is an invocation of form beyond language, and within that, there is a bodily memory of oneness.

SLF. The repetition, the act of remem-brance, or measured rhythmic recitation speak of a poetic form. Günther Uecker’s works – in the Arabic – would be best classified as poems. What is visible is the scaffolding of the poem. The con-tent, the embellishment, the things that words can do, are imagined. At times, they linger in his titles and interviews: e.g. I Heard the Grass, That Was Rubbing Itself in the Wind, Like Violins, Like Grasshoppers That Chirp (1991 / 2009). If you listen to a metronome for a significant amount of time, and then listen to a song that is out of rhythm with a resonating memory of the sound of the metronome, your mind will make up for the difference in time intervals and find its own pattern through the song. There are orders in chaos. A subjective sense of apophenia: how we see patterns and connections in random data, in arbitrary things. The world self-organizes, as we perceive.

ALK. I read Günther Uecker’s words in German and I translate them into English in my mind, “the artist is a seismographic body.” My mind underwent another re-location of meaning: The body of the artist knows things. The artist as a body is a medium. I think of the work of the Saudi Arabian artist Nasser Al Salem, Yatatawaloona Fil Bunyan (They Will Be Seen Competing In Constructing

Lofty Buildings, 2014), a concrete cast sculpture that spells out the words of the homonymous Islamic hadith a pro-phetic premonition that speaks of the Bedouins competing in raising taller buildings, as a sign of the world’s end and the nearing of the day of judgment. The sculpture takes on the calligraphic form of the very phrase it signifies, the letters and the form are compacted in meaning. I think of Günther Uecker’s slow and methodic hammering. I think of the hammer as the earliest known tool to man.

WRD. The works of Günther Uecker are about writing. If you do not believe, you will say they are works of Asemic writing. There is a memory I cannot discern of an ancient script; perhaps it is cuneiform. The works, individually act like encrypted energy forces, they are man-made. In their abstraction they function as logograms that point to something that exceeds language. Yet, there is nothing outside of the text. Uecker’s works can be read, they can also be felt. They create a rhythmic perception through their optical nature. The repetition of nailing down nails, nailing down nails, performs an incan-tation, or at least it evokes something that is not fully grounded in the finite here and now. Do you see things in other things? Do you hear things in other things? Hayy (pilgrimage).

ALH. Günther Uecker’s works encom-pass time, like poetry, like drawing. They are drawings. In their attitude, more than sculptures or paintings. There is a quality to them that is innate to drawings: They reveal the process of their own making and they radiate a sort of “sym-pathetic magic.” But let us not get into that. In his book Life Drawing, John Berger says, “A line drawn is important not for what it records so much as what it leads you to see… A drawing is an autobiographical record of one’s discovery of an event, seen, remem-bered, or imagined.” We went to Mecca. And there was drawing. And there is an artwork that resonates in drawing to Uecker’s practice at large: Magnetism (2008) by the Saudi Arabian artist Ahmed Mater. It starts with Magnetism, Prototype I (2008), an installation, performed, of iron filings surrounding a singular magnetic cube. The filings find their own order around the object that draws them. By the rule of physics, they organize themselves into a circle. Mater’s Magnetism includes a series of photographs Magnetism (Photograuve) I – IV (2012) that document the event of this orderly performance. The images, each in stark contrast of black on white, depict a singular black magnetic cube perfectly encircled by the miniscule iron scraps. The documentation of these ex-periments is closely bound to the signi-fied: the fifth pillar of Islam, the hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca. Millions of people performing the tawaf – the seven-fold circumambulation–invoking countless nail heads, around the kaaba. At least once in a lifetime, if one is able.

[* Editorial note: The abbre vi a-tions of words are a stylistic device by the author. In Arabic language acronyms are frequently used, here they have no specific meaning.]

>.C2I823ا ت]C2 اوìن. IP D'ى IP DN@m ؟ى'Yأ ء82`أ $= ء82`أ .$F ؟ى'Yأ ء82`أ $= ء82`أ

ق,DQ '1وأ '.-,> لS@2أ .ه ل ا $I .;?'3ا UP<و ،'s، 123[7&,3ا 1U' >Mأ 2D]2@8? .ت2<,?ر>CX,D2وأ ت D@2â8P 3 وأ,F2ت. DX21$ #eQ'D]2 `BP ت2<,?'3ا: DB[q SM 18e86 و 2[\2]-إ H[m >C]2 -,S2 >M "3اNX' 372اàe$" $= .2[8= ض,S,-2 p -aد 3BMو ن,+ ل,HO ،ة3X82ا ;?ر ب1.2 38Ns م,?'Jا 3aäا I@86أ" ،'+'#8>2 HN~4A #P I, أHj2 3اQ'HÇ ,I ;?'3ا ...H.Aؤر 3Éإ _'H ي|3ا ،نp-N2ا ة'3N~P ?8 ف2].1ا I^C2ذ" I@86,3ا وأ ،JN~46ا ،J'\86ا كIC2 ن12و .JB'>6ا 3É >B6إ دد'.S@P =C$ H كIC2 و .با|~-ا=$ k_با|~-ا ها J@21وأ 6?ر' )J5C2à8N86 )2008ا :2[4@~@#34eC23ا نN7,أ يدF@_ >2à'. جذ,@3Cا ،J5C2à8N86ا H6 >mا_^3او لوVا)2008(، D'18{ =C$، H.B,ن، >M }JX8Q6 #@B7ا _3X_Hا ةدا'#>5C2à8N$ اوF_. ةدا'^3ا D~_ DCN8O]2 3اa2ص F,3ا لB2\M ي|3ا H~|#]2. #O,ا-L 3اe8fH2ء، HCc@,ن D[@P >~@,S6 .'\اود $= ;[eN-أ J5C2à8N86 >M >2à' ?4N46 >Mا )ر,8=ا'+,J5C2à8N86 )=,Dا ر,3Eا

I - IV )+@87]2 2012( 3او.$ D,âÇ ،ر,3Eا .;JCcا ءادVا ا|[3 ث_3Xا=$ DC2&Ñ k23 خرó?,و د }JB7ا ر,DE ة_Fاو V#8Ñ، 1Pا ق,Q< د'JCeا د,?Vا $J5C2à8Nا#_&6 >M &^P #'ةدا F_H_H6 k58'ة. I|بر2~.3ا ه I$ D,â8Ç >.KF; >m اJ_3,1'3ا :لM 3اa2>u >M ،3Xòا Hj6'= ،مá?Kا ن12رأ JKHL >Mا .JB'>6ا 3É >B6إ 3Xòاو 76^? فا,3Qا - ن,=,HQ س3C2ا p HXEÉ د_S ءS2_.?ا - طا,`أ>M ا سوؤرJN2>8'، F,3ا لB7^6. ،'@37ا $= V&Pا S4É ة_Fاو ة'<.3t ?^8Kذ 3Éا عQ2.?ا اذإ

Thus know this, o seeker trueOne who ails, has sensed anew

Some Turks and Indians Though might speak the sameWhile fellow Turks are strangers but in name –The tongue of intimacy is set apartBeyond mere words, it’s being one at heart;By verbal and non-verbal intimationsOur hearts give thousands of interpretations

Ehsan Aghaei (*1979) lives and works in Tehran and is curator and Deputy Director of the Theran Museum of Contemporary Art (TMOCA)

In the name of God

I write about Günther Uecker. The artist whose exhibition in the Tehran Museum of Contemporary Arts became possible through the kind assistance of the Embas sy of the Federal Republic of Germany in Tehran and the collaboration of my dear Till Breckner and his estee-med colleagues in Breckner Gallery. I could write about Uecker and his status in today’s art, I could give an account of his influence on the ZERO movement and the post war art of Germany, I could discuss from the point of views of philos ophy of art or sociology of art, I could even write about his influence on econ omy of art in Germany, but I believe that on these subjects has been written about time after time again before me as it will be done in the future as well. I want to write about my personal feelings and perceptions of a human being named Günther Uecker. He is the clear example of a committed artist, who feels for the society and his humane look to world events – regard-less of his inclination towards a specific religion or ethics – has distinguished his works from those of other western artists, despite their common trait in the language of art. According to the divisions of the material world, Uecker has sprang forth from a territory known as the west, but his beliefs and con-cepts are rooted in the east, and like the ancient artists of this land, he pos-sesses perception and visionary power, and according to me significance in his works dominates the form in importance. Like a sympathetic companion, I sense his feelings, I have not seen him often, but it is as if I have known him for years.

Uecker is made of suffering. Pain in the gnostic world of my land, is the cure for the essence of human spirit and without pain the human spirit has no meaning. Pain exists in every element of the world and the universe, but humans have a greater awareness of it than anything else in the cosmos. All components of the universe function with this motivation and

.رآ $# $# يآ '1وأ '.-,+ ةءا'& 86#'37ا #23456 $= '1وأ '.-,> رزأ ;3 .ر ك ز>'?@A. 3BC$ أDE,ا,3أ ر-A 'JN2>8ا JKHL >Mا كH6. IC2دF2أ S@23A، >UPأ .قرJQ2ا 3O48P >Mاو>'?@A، أF2دH6 اV3,ا .ناJ'?; #A دا,Jا 3BU8' >Mاو ;X=و د2<ر CNO6 #Q'HO6< دا,< ،ى'VYاS[,3 86\اBC]2 D^_و >CQO86 V`a2ص – >Cc@L 3452H6 – +_HL و >.d3eL ورF82. V1U' >M Y@NL S2>2 H4.f3ا '1وأ م.B'را: HQ'ا قJN2>8' =$ 34ا,F2ت، =$ 'Xj.?أ .ءV`82او V?Qiا P@37ا .;?'Jا $= تا,Vkا H7@P '1وأ .ر'3Q2#m. >.Bا $HO2Sإ pإ 3456ا قQ2- جرP Y2@37ا .ه_#8 F2-$، SC8qور A HX218]2. =74A-أ 38uأ ،3tذ m<و .s&,3ا تاذ $==7P 3ا.N@86 =$ F_ اذDA &2?$؟ SC_>2 أ=B' =$ 1وأ ب,4?أ'، Hc]' #,x,1 حz-A أF_ 1|3ا }238?أ'. #P I, ل2[.#ا Y2جر -Q23456ا ق، كx@C]2 1|3t، IC2و ._N~3ا ة'1ا|3ا _F,.3رXj2.?ا

7P= و ،را'B.3ا .ف ل س ،سور_< عDe2SP #2HO2 ،رp?.|12اHXB$ >Cc,>6 `7'H6. أS@2ل M `z-]2< - 86#'237# - '1وأ '.-,> 3c2I' >C]2ا ._\DECq 1OE2 نأI, ?O2p3ا تOE8_ا .ةJX.,ى، H@BM $.3ا ءV`82او ،C@8Ç.3او34B4@2نأ ت D~N_I2 D^OÉ =$ D4^Ö ،نVF82ا 7Ñ# $= .ل3a82ا=$ >N@82أ تS@23A: ?@7s ،Hi'3ا $= eNA- ك'= ي|3ا ،}]37ا>UP 3اB@2ن، >UP 3ا~C23ا بد.$ Df&f7@.?ا اذإ .)2009( قs 3اÉ >CcÜ; اáHO23 ع,&s à,HP، â; عáHO2ا جرC86 Y2>أ 3Éإ 7s@.?ا>m ر12|.?ا k,ا تJCc;، HO,م عáHO2ا جرC86 Y2>أ 3Éإ 7s@.?ا>m ر12|.?ا k,ا تJCc;، HO,م SO4t D4O2\82 #.7,HÑ 3اe'ق =$ 3C@äا _~Hو 3f>C86ا تا'.3eا بر .V<C86ا لJC2?{ >M YKاDC2?Ç >2 =$ F2pت >M 3اe,xÉ.

18e86 :طD$ 3å?.NO2اذ ر,7` ت2-82# $= ت37K&2او طV-@2ا H6ؤرS[,ا $= ،86\اV>,3.7ا رNe86. HCc; اذ ;3723اDA، و -XM -.z>P.

'1وأ '.-,> ت2@14 أ'&أ .ق ل ع#2VJ2-86 ذ $= وIC$ أD'+@]2 3إÉ I, I8è6 ن3eC2ا ."á-~48fH6ا SO4$ ف'E-ا ".$=ا'>,<3N8fاJ7CÉ آY': +N_ 3اeC2ن H7'ف I8è.A و ن3eC2ا _N+ .ءV`82ا ن3eC2ا Xj' S@P.?أ .846?و 3N23;، >CX,D6ا '2k- يد,3N7ا>M ?^2\t إ?@C.86 >CNO6 HO'أ )نC82^3ا $= ن,3وH.Q2( ت2@14 2[8=>M 3اX_HÖ 3اC^,3ا ي['Hq SM ث_3C^,H6 D.Xا ةء,^3Cا )2014(DC2=u را $= و_^3اDe2أ عà,لا 2H6[- تM SK>2< هرJ^2-$ #2S.^2ا .ب3XN2ا م,H با'.&او ;3723ا ت3B4@2ا ف'Fأ JCX,D6 DzY_ `BPا3.B,HM ا ،ةر2^37اVF'او فJ~N; 1KI@2 HX2182ا نJ7CÉ اذDA. ق_I, Hو '1وأ '.-,+ '1|.?ا#@C]~86 و#^Që. أ=B' =$ اJQ'&6 1zةادأ لو S'=]2 3ا^['.

'1وأ '.-,> لS@2أ نإ .د ر و 2[-ا ل,O.? ،ق_DE ;3 اذإ .ت1.2#2 p ة'1اذ 2[# .86@?آ لB2`أ ةE'I2 >N.,F2^.?أ نأ Q8m.?أ>M -í D2رY$ &_H;. 12 2@#ر-s _D.~N ،لVS@2ا .H6رN@2< ت1.2#2#[BP ='1 يدz-]2 -Q23 قQ2&6 >[e'ة، =]$ >M kCm إ-N2ن. =$ D~'دI2 1z-]2 ز,<ر D[8' 3اÉ 3t، 38uذ m< .3456ا ةزو2~.< ت2@14 3Cí. H@BMا SM جرY2 ء$` 2[8= نأ Hj2أ H@BM و ،'1وأ لS@2أ ةءا'& $áHO2Sا ر,E.3ا I2. V-]2 Da4Çا'->M YKل à^87.]2 3ا^E'H6. à'ق >N2>8'، à'ق >N2>8' >.B'ر، ةرâ2ا V&Pا S4É وأ ،86&ر ذe2-ا

`8è2 p H'DBf #[BP 12>P =$ >.C2I823ا ت]C2 اوìن. IP D'ى IP DN@m ؟ى'Yأ ء82`أ $= ء82`أ

عáHO2ا جرC86 Y2>أ 3Éإ 7s@.?ا>m ر12|.?ا k,ا تJCc;، HO,م SO4t D4O2\82 #.7,HÑ 3اe'ق =$ 3C@äا _~Hو 3f>C86ا تا'.3eا بر .V<C86ا لJC2?{ >M YKاDC2?Ç >2 =$ F2pت >M 3اe,xÉ.

18e86 :طD$ 3å?.NO2اذ ر,7` ت2-82# $= ت37K&2او طV-@2ا H6ؤرS[,ا $= ،86\اV>,3.7ا رNe86. HCc; اذ ;3723اDA، و -XM -.z>P.

'1وأ '.-,> ت2@14 أ'&أ .ق ل ع#2VJ2-86 ذ $= وIC$ أD'+@]2 3إÉ I, I8è6 ن3eC2ا ."á-~48fH6ا SO4$ ف'E-ا ".$=ا'>,<3N8fاJ7CÉ آY': +N_ 3اeC2ن H7'ف I8è.A و ن3eC2ا _N+ .ءV`82ا ن3eC2ا Xj' S@P.?أ .846?و 3N23;، >CX,D6ا '2k- يد,3N7ا>M ?^2\t إ?@C.86 >CNO6 HO'أ )نC82^3ا $= ن,3وH.Q2( ت2@14 2[8=>M 3اX_HÖ 3اC^,3ا ي['Hq SM ث_3C^,H6 D.Xا ةء,^3Cا )2014(DC2=u را $= و_^3اDe2أ عà,لا 2H6[- تM SK>2< هرJ^2-$ #2S.^2ا .ب3XN2ا م,H با'.&او ;3723ا ت3B4@2ا ف'Fأ JCX,D6 DzY_ `BPا3.B,HM ا ،ةر2^37اVF'او فJ~N; 1KI@2 HX2182ا نJ7CÉ اذDA. ق_I, Hو '1وأ '.-,+ '1|.?ا#@C]~86 و#^Që. أ=B' =$ اJQ'&6 1zةادأ لو S'=]2 3ا^['.

'1وأ '.-,> لS@2أ نإ .د ر و 2[-ا ل,O.? ،ق_DE ;3 اذإ .ت1.2#2 p ة'1اذ 2[# .86@?آ لB2`أ ةE'I2 >N.,F2^.?أ نأ Q8m.?أ>M -í D2رY$ &_H;. 12 2@#ر-s _D.~N ،لVS@2ا .H6رN@2< ت1.2#2#[BP ='1 يدz-]2 -Q23 قQ2&6 >[e'ة، =]$ >M kCm إ-N2ن. =$ D~'دI2 1z-]2 ز,<ر D[8' 3اÉ 3t، 38uذ m< .3456ا ةزو2~.< ت2@14 3Cí. H@BMا SM جرY2 ء$` 2[8= نأ Hj2أ H@BM و ،'1وأ لS@2أ ةءا'& $áHO2Sا ر,E.3ا I2. V-]2 Da4Çا'->M YKل à^87.]2 3ا^E'H6. à'ق >N2>8'، à'ق >N2>8' >.B'ر، ةرâ2ا V&Pا S4É وأ ،86&ر ذe2-ا

`8è2 p H'DBf #[BP 12>P =$ >.C2I823ا ت]C2 اوìن. IP D'ى IP DN@m ؟ى'Yأ ء82`أ $= ء82`أ>.C2I823ا ت]C2 اوìن. IP D'ى IP DN@m ؟ى'Yأ ء82`أ $= ء82`أ .$F ؟ى'Yأ ء82`أ $= ء82`أ

ق,DQ '1وأ '.-,> لS@2أ .ه ل ا $I .;?'3ا UP<و ،'s، 123[7&,3ا 1U' >Mأ 2D]2@8? .ت2<,?ر>CX,D2وأ ت D@2â8P 3 وأ,F2ت. DX21$ #eQ'D]2 `BP ت2<,?'3ا: DB[q SM 18e86 و 2[\2]-إ H[m >C]2 -,S2 >M "3اNX' 372اàe$" $= .2[8= ض,S,-2 p -aد 3BMو ن,+ ل,HO ،ة3X82ا ;?ر ب1.2 38Ns م,?'Jا 3aäا I@86أ" ،'+'#8>2 HN~4A #P I, أHj2 3اQ'HÇ ,I ;?'3ا ...H.Aؤر 3Éإ _'H ي|3ا ،نp-N2ا ة'3N~P ?8 ف2].1ا I^C2ذ" I@86,3ا وأ ،JN~46ا ،J'\86ا كIC2 ن12و .JB'>6ا 3É >B6إ دد'.S@P =C$ H كIC2 و .با|~-ا=$ k_با|~-ا ها J@21وأ 6?ر' )J5C2à8N86 )2008ا :2[4@~@#34eC23ا نN7,أ يدF@_ >2à'. جذ,@3Cا ،J5C2à8N86ا H6 >mا_^3او لوVا)2008(، D'18{ =C$، H.B,ن، >M }JX8Q6 #@B7ا _3X_Hا ةدا'#>5C2à8N$ اوF_. ةدا'^3ا D~_ DCN8O]2 3اa2ص F,3ا لB2\M ي|3ا H~|#]2. #O,ا-L 3اe8fH2ء، HCc@,ن D[@P >~@,S6 .'\اود $= ;[eN-أ J5C2à8N86 >M >2à' ?4N46 >Mا )ر,8=ا'+,J5C2à8N86 )=,Dا ر,3Eا

I - IV )+@87]2 2012( 3او.$ D,âÇ ،ر,3Eا .;JCcا ءادVا ا|[3 ث_3Xا=$ DC2&Ñ k23 خرó?,و د }JB7ا ر,DE ة_Fاو V#8Ñ، 1Pا ق,Q< د'JCeا د,?Vا $J5C2à8Nا#_&6 >M &^P #'ةدا F_H_H6 k58'ة. I|بر2~.3ا ه I$ D,â8Ç >.KF; >m اJ_3,1'3ا :لM 3اa2>u >M ،3Xòا Hj6'= ،مá?Kا ن12رأ JKHL >Mا .JB'>6ا 3É >B6إ 3Xòاو 76^? فا,3Qا - ن,=,HQ س3C2ا p HXEÉ د_S ءS2_.?ا - طا,`أ>M ا سوؤرJN2>8'، F,3ا لB7^6. ،'@37ا $= V&Pا S4É ة_Fاو ة'<.3t ?^8Kذ 3Éا عQ2.?ا اذإ

Man who knows the pain Will learn about blessednessThe healing of the harmless is in the fire

Now listen to this reed-flute’s deep lamentAbout the heartache being apart has meant:“Since from the reed-bed they uprooted meMy song’s expressed each human’s agony,A breast which separation’s split in twoIs what I seek, to share this pain with you:When kept from their true origin, all yearnFor union on the day they can return”.

their efforts towards excellence are the sweet agony of yearning and a sense of incompleteness. Therefore, the pain is not suffering, but the cure.

The works of Uecker are manifestations of pain, which he has felt in his core and which has sprang forth in a critical mental process. Injuries – compounds underlines the signs of a suffering companion, who is like fire: hot faced, burning and wild, and who, at the time of creating the artwork, and attuned with existence rushes fearlessly forth beyond the frame and colour and even beyond fear and hope. I speak of human injury inflicted by human, and what pain could be greater than the one purpose-fully inflicted by another human being. Uecker blood-lets and heals consciously; he does not produce any manifesto; he merely shows us objects as they are, and this spectacle brings about aware-ness. Uecker is in tune with existence and by accepting the different visions of the existence and human lives; he is the harbinger of unity in the current world. A world built on love and belief, because it is the lack of these two components that has steered the world today towards pluralism and entails the human injury inflicted by human. The exhibition Man’s Inhumanity. 14 Pacified Implements describes modern man, who while being tyrannical and the instrument of oppres-sion, is the oppressed as well. Aware of this situation in today’s world and in harmony with the movement of unity in the existence and further by resorting to the instrument of art, Uecker still churns out his everlasting designs, which cause us to ponder and recall the strange tale told by a heartbroken Jalal al-Din Muhammad Mowlavi seven centuries ago.

Like a wise and vigilant sage Uecker stands next to a font to quench the thirst of weary passers-by and to guide the collective spirit of humanity regard-less of territory, race or even sex.

I believe that each individual has an exclusive mission in the material world, and that Uecker has completed this mission in the best manner possible.

May his morrow be shinier than today.

0G56 ار وا >? RBG5A:ن0PO$G کK1 و و%G، 0B@$ یانMUG<UG$ ن/o کK1 ود G@$ یا56ا U1)د د/t1>? b< نG$ز #!0P%C? 0 زاPO$G<? $L=1 56اfM1<Dj و fM1 ا(PG 5 وq+

*% 0Oنارا K1.PGن bMOلد ز د C""""""Aا/""""""N رد درد .6""""""5ا درد +""""""0ا 1""""""2واN""""1W""""G<? 5""""1ز>""""M) >"""")، رد>""""G1""""0/"""". ن .""""""""Gا ن<""""""""@Gدرد ?$ و 6""""""""5ا ن، .""""""""Gن ی P3"0 رد ،درد .VBG5"6"< ?$ نG@">ا G""<ا دراد د/"".و تGg""BG""2 و N""GC""A یاO"".ا نآ 3""$ تGg""BG""2 مK""PG زا MT""=1$ ،نG@"">ا

R"""V/0 و دراد ر"""P3 ا ی."""Oیا N"""GC"""A $"""3 نR"G 3")/"! و %">ا 3")/"! رد نآ ی هUMO">ا ،6"5ا k"^r ق/"R درد ؛لPG"2 ی/"5 3"$ ،درد (""")اBG$"""1"""$ ،6"""5ا ul"""> سG@"""[ا.56ا نG<رد ،M@6> درد56ا ش/GR% b$ 1;ا یدرد ار د1< 56ا Kpآ Nv.p یدرد ?$ درد 3"""2 یدرد ؛6"""5ا درد ?^"""Kq 1"""2وا رZ"""Gآ$"G K"PGار نآ شد/".و م J# 2"1رد و هد ("""w W"""1ا("""B% $"""x1<y 3"""$ ?[ور >"""B`3 ی z""""""""""L/5ر ر""""""""""M%ز« .6""""""""""5ا هb""""""""""A 0""""""""""G و !""M/<""%0""G« <""TGزا ن (""Gدرد یر>""B% دراد 2"3 o"/آ نK"p ه%">ز/"5 ،ور م1"; ،6"5ا رد Z""""1ا b""""^j مp 2""""3 $""""3 0""""BUG""""12""""5 و0"P@/(? $"G ."LGو 6"5ا ?="@0 ن $? >"""""tG$"""""G $"""""3 !"""""Mp >? K"""""G؛دز W"""""1ی/"""""5ا و MA"""""""$ زا K"""""""1اW"""""""1 ?=[ و ]""""""">ر و هد1"""""""! نG@""""""""">ا 6"""""""""[ا1""""""""".« زا (M%. 5"""""""""e"""""""""<اK""""""""/5""""""""{ ا<""""""""@Gو 6""""""""5ا »ن o""""""""3 یدرد $""""Mp ا 3""""2 ("""")ا زا<""""@Gن N""""G>""""%0 3"""">ا""""A G0"""""G<"""""3""""";آ 1"""""2وا .درازMG"""""$ ار د/"""""b ع/""""">W""""""""""`% >? 2""""""""""B% 10""""""""""< و""""""""""A >? <L""""""""""%؛ >""""G<MF@""""6 اراg""""3 <P? 2""""B%، *""""1W""""G نآ o"3 2"3 0@"6 3"$ ار >"G <"TG0د ?< ن"% ?< ?! رد ار ?G0"""""""";آ ن%"""""""")د (PM""""""""0 و /@P"""""0 ?="""""@0 نG ."""""LG"""""$ 1"""""2وا .دروآ توFG="< یG"0 شU1"> شG !"}("1"$ و 6"5ا$""""""""""3 .""""""""""LGز و ?=""""""""""@0 ن<""""""""""%;? $T""""""""""1، >""BGرد ت%""[و ید .""LG2 ن""B/<? 6""5ا. ا1")ز ؛نPG")ا و N"Tj ی MG(? $"1 !"G("3">د2"""""3 W"""""u%ود (""""")ا نا >"""""/C"""""F3 ا ی<"""""@G<? ت1~"2 ی/@"$ ار زو1"<ا نLG". 3"2 6"5اW""""""1ا >? b""""""/ا 6""""""[ا1"""""".« و %"""""">ا<""""""@Gن K""""""""""""""""""/5""""""""""""""""""{ ا<""""""""""""""""""@Gدراد ?! رد ار »ن. M/<"""%0"""G« ]"""QG("""6"""! و b"""A 0"""Gز ،راO"""$ا« لN"M) ]"G رد 3"2 6"5ا VG*"1"< نG@">ا

5""""=PU1، ا$""""O5 را""""=A 5 و""""=P%(""""%ه <""""MO رد VM6""�و ("")ا کرد G""$ 1""2وا .6""@0 نP@/ $""""""""G .""""""""1(""""""""G""""""""0 و ?>/B""""""""2 یMG"""""""">د رد VM6""�و ("")ا کرد G""$ 1""2وا .6""@0 نP@/ $""""""""G .""""""""1(""""""""G""""""""0 و ?>/B""""""""2 یMG"""""""">د یM1""; هL""1$ و ?=""@0 نLG"". رد ت%""[و ،%"">ز ?< up""> نB1، 0""PÄBG""0 راO""$ا زا<""u/R? >""G<""%;""G3""2 ر >""G او ]"">رد 3""$ ار 3""""""""""$ ار QG(""""""""""6 f""""""""""1(""""""""""r""""""""""[ ("""""""""")ا و دراد("""""Gد>"""""G3"""""2 دروآ ن ."""""vا لC"""""%(""""") >t"""""P% >"""""/C"""""/0 ی"""""F6 _"""""1ن !"""""Mp $"""""G 5"""""MB3 یا :56ا 5e) ;F=3 نآ زا %B<رد$TB/ زا <? o/ن ]QG(6 >? 2B%%0G RQG(6 >? 2B ?)ا%. زا%>ا ه%)a1$ اKG >1 نM@=G> زا%>ا ه%GCM> نز و د1< مFM1> زا

5MB3 b/0اA R1]3 R1]3 زا W1قاKG $U/(A R1ا درد حR=MGق +""""""""""*ا زا %"""""""""">G""""""""""< رود /""""""""""2 ?@2 1""""""""""0b/(p$Gزور %)/. ز;Gو ر*+ b/(p ،لد ه%"""">ز و هG"""";آ یM1""""! ن/PÄ""""0 1""""2وا 3"""""""""2 6"""""""""5ا هدG="""""""""@)ا ی1""""""""")د 1"""""""""5 1"""""""""$ و %""""""""">MGR"""""""""G>"""""""""G"""""""""$ ار b@"""""""""=3 نار{U"""""""""0ر5""M1اد1""; با<""% K""G W""1اK""1 ز1""5 زا>""M)، <"""""Çو دا ]=? ."""""B@M6 $"""""3 حور ."""""PV? $T1 0رBP/5 نGدز. ?=GC""5ر ?>G@"">ا 1""0 3""2 مروG""$ ("")ا 1""$>""Bt`1 $""F1د ("")ا رد د<""MGی >""G1""$ ید 3"""""$ ار GC"""""6"""""5ر (""""")ا 1"""""2وا و دراد شود<"""""t/ی R"""""G(@"""""=3 $"""""3 ا<"""""qG5ر م"""""G<"""""M%ه .56اW1اد(p KG$BGک K1 زو1<ا زا $Gد?)G_آ نG@[ا>L1>G1391 ه

رد VM6""�و ("")ا کرد G""$ 1""2وا .6""@0 نP@/ $""""""""G .""""""""1(""""""""G""""""""0 و ?>/B""""""""2 یMG"""""""">د یM1""; هL""1$ و ?=""@0 نLG"". رد ت%""[و ،%"">ز ?< up""> نB1، 0""PÄBG""0 راO""$ا زا<""u/R? >""G<""%;""G3""2 ر >""G او ]"">رد 3""$ ار 3""""""""""$ ار QG(""""""""""6 f""""""""""1(""""""""""r""""""""""[ ("""""""""")ا و دراد("""""Gد>"""""G3"""""2 دروآ ن ."""""vا لC"""""%(""""") >t"""""P% >"""""/C"""""/0 ی"""""F6 _"""""1ن !"""""Mp $"""""G 5"""""MB3 یا :56ا 5e) ;F=3 نآ زا %B<رد$TB/ زا <? o/ن ]QG(6 >? 2B%%0G RQG(6 >? 2B ?)ا%. زا%>ا ه%)a1$ اKG >1 نM@=G> زا%>ا ه%GCM> نز و د1< مFM1> زا

5MB3 b/0اA R1]3 R1]3 زا W1قاKG $U/(A R1ا درد حR=MGق +""""""""""*ا زا %"""""""""">G""""""""""< رود /""""""""""2 ?@2 1""""""""""0b/(p$Gزور %)/. ز;Gو ر*+ b/(p ،لد ه%"""">ز و هG"""";آ یM1""""! ن/PÄ""""0 1""""2وا 3"""""""""2 6"""""""""5ا هدG="""""""""@)ا ی1""""""""")د 1"""""""""5 1"""""""""$ و %""""""""">MGR"""""""""G>"""""""""G"""""""""$ ار b@"""""""""=3 نار{U"""""""""0ر5""M1اد1""; با<""% K""G W""1اK""1 ز1""5 زا>""M)، <"""""Çو دا ]=? ."""""B@M6 $"""""3 حور ."""""PV? $T1 0رBP/5 نGدز. ?=GC""5ر ?>G@"">ا 1""0 3""2 مروG""$ ("")ا 1""$>""Bt`1 $""F1د ("")ا رد د<""MGی >""G1""$ ید 3"""""$ ار GC"""""6"""""5ر (""""")ا 1"""""2وا و دراد شود<"""""t/ی R"""""G(@"""""=3 $"""""3 ا<"""""qG5ر م"""""G<"""""M%ه .56اW1اد(p KG$BGک K1 زو1<ا زا $Gد?)G_آ نG@[ا>L1>G1391 ه

Sara Alonso-Gómez (*1985) lives and works in Paris. She is a*freelance curator, art critic and member of Cuban Writers and Artists’ Union (UNEAC) and advisor for the Biennial of Havanna. As guest lecturer she was teaching as chair for art history at the Universities of Havana and New York, she also worked for Ludwig Foundation of Cuba and for the Service de Nouveaux Médias at Centre Pompidou in Paris

And old Cherokee told his grandson: “My son, there is a battle between two wolves inside us all. One is Evil. It is anger, jealousy, greed, resent-ment, inferiority, lies and ego. The other is Good. It is joy, peace, love, hope, humility, kindness, empathy and truth.”The boy thought about it, and asked: “Grandfather, which wolf wins?”The old man quietly replied: “The one you feed.”

Author unknown

Born and raised in East Germany, Günther Uecker (*1930) experienced the atrocities of the Second World War and the subsequent collapse of a country divided by the Cold War. His humanist worldview and his insistent questioning about humankind built a work that goes far beyond any idealiza-tion or psychologism; as a matter of fact, his entire work lays out the author’s very subjectivity interwoven with the traumas, the contradictions and the utopias of our time. His travels to different countries in Latin America, Africa and Asia allowed him to relate the troubled history of his country and of Western art to other cultures. In this sense his trip to Laos in 1973 was a turning point. Günther Uecker was then able to see at first-hand the disastrous consequences that Vietnam War has had on its neighbor, which was bombed without a warning or a declaration of war. Getting to know Lao people’s serenity – which stems perhaps from their Buddhist tradition –, a fundamental question emerged: How on earth can we depict this silenced but perennial spirit of resistance? The notion of traveling appears in Günther Uecker’s works not only from a philosophical but also from a formal point of view. Ever present graphic elements such as circular or spiral lines are significant metaphors of journeys and cyclic movements. Uecker clearly belongs to a generation imbued by existentialist thinking and inspired by authors such as Jean-Paul Sartre, Ernest Hemingway, William Faulkner or James Joyce. As such, he confronts the world he lives in without trying to escape its contradictions.

ا'& م$# "! +"*ا (")ا نا%"$ #"!/. +*ا یا ار درد ار 3""""""""""""""""""2 1""""""""""""""""""0 هد1""""""""""""""""""$ وا ،6""""""""""""""""""5ا/$ 56ا* .A@""""""""""""")/"""""""""""""> ?< »1"""""""""""""2وا 1=""""""""""""">/""""""""""""";« زا0"""B1>"""B%ه 3"""2 ی C"""DE 5"""FGآ ترJGرد ن KL"""1و نا K"""M+ $"""12"""B1 N"""O("""O 0 و"""PQGنار نQG"""<ا ،B1"""12"""$ یGC"""1"""; رد ش%R"""PBزرا$"1!"G(? <"PG("TUG0? $"GR"Q/رد وا زا ه ناVG*"""""1 KL"""""1"""""< یB10"""""G"""""0 ی هز/"""""< ردW10اA R%. >? K"/ا<"A رد$"Gو 1"2وا ی هر ."G("UGنآ ه زا A""">ا/"""K ?< ؛B/("""@A"""$ زو1"""<ا B1"""0 ردK""""""YZ""""""M1 0 و و1"""""")ز هو1""""""; رد وا""""""B1 آJGن ؛QG("6 2"BA"[ مود ?>LG". ]B". زا #"!>? K"""/ا<"""A د زا("""%;"""Gه W"""^@F3 0 ی"""B1 و ("""""""G ."""""""G>"""""""V3 R"""""""BG5? 0"""""""B1 $"""""""BUGو ؛مر ]=? >? K""""""""""""/زا نا K""""""""""""YZ""""""""""""M1 1""""""""""""$ ار وا C? $"1و ؛B/("@A"$ نJGآ رد B1"0 دG`="_ا و G"""""""0رG"""""""$ ("""""""< زا +a"""""""_ 3"""""""2 مروG"""""""$ (""""""")ا$"G0ر"G درا/"< (")ا رد <"/R"=3 R"%و ه $"Gز 0""""A <""""/R""""=3 b""""/0ا""""% R""""%. >? b""""/0ا""""A زا ار ما ?`Re کاردا و سG@"""""""""""""[ا .B/("""@A"""$ 1"""2وا 1=""">/"""; مG<? $"""3 <"""G@""">ا %"""""B1>"""""B% >=VL"""""0 زا زرG"""""$ یا P/<"""""3"""""> وا یا Gg""+ .""G>""V3@""< ی f""%f""3د 3""2 6""5ا یG"0دا%"bر 3"$ وا ?>G@">ا هUG"> و دراد."LG<? - W"Gع/"> 1"0 زا غر K"V^j b"Gk"1 – T? >"""""""""""Tel)اG ;"""""""""""1""""""""""") (M""""""""""")آ 3"""""""""""$ زا یرادر/""""""""f""""""""A $""""""""1bر ?^N ار شرZ""""""""Gآ نا%U1 0"""B1>"""B""")د LG<? 0"""B1 $"""G""". نG"""$زf""1$? >""=FG5 تو""Gb""=3 3""$ 1""2وا .6""5ا زا ،یدN"""GC"""A >"""G یG"""0 ی%B"""$ ز1"""< ها/"""; G>""""B% 5""""1""""> ?< بf""""1 ار نآ 3""""2 یرG"""")د یG"0روG"$ و تG"2اردا ?Cو 6"5ا هدروآ1"$ ن/"""""o ?=[ و دراد قR"""""1 رد T3""""")ر وا0"""B1>"""B%5 (""")ا (""")1""")د نا"""G>"""Gیاراد ،ن 2"""""""""""""TE و R"""""""""""""L/و 6"""""""""""""5ا د >"""""""""""""VBG رد ?< ا%PM6 !""""M""""0ا مW""""1 زا Mp""""$ شرZ""""Gآ2"""""""""""B%. o"""""""""""/0 ن"""""""""""P%C? 0"""""""""""P%در $"""""""""""G وا P=1"""""2 ار وا ،مراد ?)/@P"""""0 سG@"""""[ا لC? N""""""""qr 2""""""""3 ;""""""""/(""""""""G 5""""""""Gو ما ه%"""""""")د0G56 ار وا >? RBG5A:ن0PO$G کK1 و و%G، 0B@$ یا0G56 ار وا >? RBG5A:ن0PO$G کK1 و و%G، 0B@$ یانMUG<UG$ ن/o کK1 ود G@$ یا56ا U1)د د/t1>? b< نG$ز #!0P%C? 0 زاPO$G<? $L=1 56اfM1<Dj و fM1 ا(PG 5 وq+

*% 0Oنارا K1.PGن bMOلد ز د C""""""Aا/""""""N رد درد .6""""""5ا درد +""""""0ا 1""""""2واN""""1W""""G<? 5""""1ز>""""M) >"""")، رد>""""G1""""0/"""". ن .""""""""Gا ن<""""""""@Gدرد ?$ و 6""""""""5ا ن، .""""""""Gن ی P3"0 رد ،درد .VBG5"6"< ?$ نG@">ا G""<ا دراد د/"".و تGg""BG""2 و N""GC""A یاO"".ا نآ 3""$ تGg""BG""2 مK""PG زا MT""=1$ ،نG@"">ا

R"""V/0 و دراد ر"""P3 ا ی."""Oیا N"""GC"""A $"""3 نR"G 3")/"! و %">ا 3")/"! رد نآ ی هUMO">ا ،6"5ا k"^r ق/"R درد ؛لPG"2 ی/"5 3"$ ،درد (""")اBG$"""1"""$ ،6"""5ا ul"""> سG@"""[ا.56ا نG<رد ،M@6> درد56ا ش/GR% b$ 1;ا یدرد ار د1< 56ا Kpآ Nv.p یدرد ?$ درد 3"""2 یدرد ؛6"""5ا درد ?^"""Kq 1"""2وا رZ"""Gآ$"G K"PGار نآ شد/".و م J# 2"1رد و هد ("""w W"""1ا("""B% $"""x1<y 3"""$ ?[ور >"""B`3 ی z""""""""""L/5ر ر""""""""""M%ز« .6""""""""""5ا هb""""""""""A 0""""""""""G و !""M/<""%0""G« <""TGزا ن (""Gدرد یر>""B% دراد 2"3 o"/آ نK"p ه%">ز/"5 ،ور م1"; ،6"5ا رد Z""""1ا b""""^j مp 2""""3 $""""3 0""""BUG""""12""""5 و0"P@/(? $"G ."LGو 6"5ا ?="@0 ن $? >"""""tG$"""""G $"""""3 !"""""Mp >? K"""""G؛دز W"""""1ی/"""""5ا و MA"""""""$ زا K"""""""1اW"""""""1 ?=[ و ]""""""">ر و هد1"""""""! نG@""""""""">ا 6"""""""""[ا1""""""""".« زا (M%. 5"""""""""e"""""""""<اK""""""""/5""""""""{ ا<""""""""@Gو 6""""""""5ا »ن o""""""""3 یدرد $""""Mp ا 3""""2 ("""")ا زا<""""@Gن N""""G>""""%0 3"""">ا""""A G0"""""G<"""""3""""";آ 1"""""2وا .درازMG"""""$ ار د/"""""b ع/""""">W""""""""""`% >? 2""""""""""B% 10""""""""""< و""""""""""A >? <L""""""""""%؛ >""""G<MF@""""6 اراg""""3 <P? 2""""B%، *""""1W""""G نآ o"3 2"3 0@"6 3"$ ار >"G <"TG0د ?< ن"% ?< ?! رد ار ?G0"""""""";آ ن%"""""""")د (PM""""""""0 و /@P"""""0 ?="""""@0 نG ."""""LG"""""$ 1"""""2وا .دروآ توFG="< یG"0 شU1"> شG !"}("1"$ و 6"5ا$""""""""""3 .""""""""""LGز و ?=""""""""""@0 ن<""""""""""%;? $T""""""""""1، >""BGرد ت%""[و ید .""LG2 ن""B/<? 6""5ا. ا1")ز ؛نPG")ا و N"Tj ی MG(? $"1 !"G("3">د2"""""3 W"""""u%ود (""""")ا نا >"""""/C"""""F3 ا ی<"""""@G<? ت1~"2 ی/@"$ ار زو1"<ا نLG". 3"2 6"5اW""""""1ا >? b""""""/ا 6""""""[ا1"""""".« و %"""""">ا<""""""@Gن K""""""""""""""""""/5""""""""""""""""""{ ا<""""""""""""""""""@Gدراد ?! رد ار »ن. M/<"""%0"""G« ]"""QG("""6"""! و b"""A 0"""Gز ،راO"""$ا« لN"M) ]"G رد 3"2 6"5ا VG*"1"< نG@">ا

5""""=PU1، ا$""""O5 را""""=A 5 و""""=P%(""""%ه <""""MO رد VM6""�و ("")ا کرد G""$ 1""2وا .6""@0 نP@/ $""""""""G .""""""""1(""""""""G""""""""0 و ?>/B""""""""2 یMG"""""""">د

Y el viejo Cherokee le dijo a su nieto: “Hijo mío, dentro de todos nosotros tiene lugar una batalla entre dos lobos. Uno de ellos es el Mal: es la ira, los celos, la codicia, el resentimiento, la infer ioridad, las mentiras y el ego. El otro es el Bien: es la alegría, la paz, el amor, la esperanza, la humildad, la bondad, la empatía y la verdad.” El muchacho reflexi-onó y le preguntó: “¿Abuelo, qué lobo vence al final?” En voz baja el anciano respondió: “El que tú alimentes.”

Autor desconocido

Nacido y criado en Alemania del Este, Günther Uecker (*1930) vivió las atro-cidades de la Segunda Guerra Mundial y el posterior descalabro de un país escindido por la Guerra Fría. Su concepción humanista del mundo y sus permanen-tes interrogantes sobre el hombre y su entorno edifica-ron una obra que va más allá de cualquier idealización o psicologismo. De hecho, su trabajo se encuentra permea-do de una subjetividad entretejida por los traumas, las contradicciones y la utopía de nuestro tiempo. Sus viajes a diferentes países de América Latina, África y Asia le permitieron establecer relación entre la turbulenta historia de su país y su conocimiento del arte occidental con otras cultu-ras. En este sentido, su viaje a Laos en 1973 constituyó un punto de inflexión en su carrera. Günther Uecker fue capaz de ver de primera mano las nefastas conse-cuencias de la guerra de Vietnam en su vecino, el cual fue bombardeado sin previa advertencia, y mucho menos una declaración de guerra. Ante la serenidad del pueblo laosiano – derivada tal vez de su tradición budista –, emergió una pregunta fundamental: ¿Cómo representar ese acallado pero perenne espíritu de resistencia? La noción de viaje aparece en la obra de Günther Uecker no sólo desde un punto de vista filosófico sino también formal. La presencia de

According to some writers, the novel Ulysses expresses a metaphys-ical nihilism of sorts, where macrocosm and microcosm crash constantly while mankind culture ignites and turns to ashes like in a cosmic catastrophe. According to Umberto Eco Joyce sought to “provide the image of a world in which multiple events collide and are put together, referring and rejecting each other, in a sort of statistical distri-bution of subatomic events, letting the reader drawing multiple perspectives on the novel-universe.” Those very currents of significa-tion are also present in Günther Uecker’s artworks, along a fine thread woven between the world and the void, being and nothingness, life and death. In the relationship between different move-ments, a surreptitious line develops sinu-ously and returns to its starting point; in fact the circle could also be identified as a static form: It is after all a matter of imagination. Let us consider for example the way prehistoric men tried to explain the natural world and organize the chaos with colours and strokes, like the ones we admire in the Caves of Altamira in Cantabria, Lascaux in France, Clovis in New Mexico, Mitra and Yagul in Oaxaca, Punta del Este and Ambrosio in Cuba: It does not take long to realize that at the horizon of our perception some spiritual realities take shape, emerging from the naked energy emitted by human fingers. As a ZERO member, Günther Uecker felt the urge to react against the subjectivity dominating the art world at that time. Together with Heinz Mack and Otto Piene, they believed contemporary art had become incapable of providing a right answer to the disasters of the World War and the trauma of Germany’s complicit role in it. ZERO wished to make tabula rasa and start anew by concentrating on pure abstraction and working mostly with natural “materials” like light, fire, wind, movement, etc. in order to let art and nature merge and melt together. The new manifestation of the perception of the real, total denial of the classical depiction, experimentation between light and shadow, incision and transgression of the pictorial field: All these are essential elements in Günther Uecker’s artworks. Throughout his artistic career an new form of writing arose, no longer attached to means like graphite or light, brush or volume, but to both rational and violent gesture: The nail and stain ash came up to suggest a trace, or should we say: a wound? As an emotionally charged object, the nail became for Uecker the instrument through which to tell the story of his – and the world’s – trauma. The paradoxical meaning corresponded strongly to how he had learned to see the world and man’s place in it through his work: “Art is like the traces of wounds ploughed into the field.” The nail started symbolizing the paradox of “healing by hurting”, laden with all anthropological history. We can easily refer to several

examples of this. One of them is found in Christianity: The nail is one of the instruments of the Passion of Christ, used to crucify the Son of God. For Uecker, quite inspired by religion, a work of art carries the same metaphoric meaning and power as the wounds of Christ inflicted by nails. A wound not only makes us conscious about the suffering but also comforts because, at the same time, it awakens the empathic desire to heal. This image becomes prominent and goes even beyond the coalition of pain and healing, as in San Sebastien’s martyrdom. The martyr resists and heals the wounds in an act not only of sacrifice but also of cultural resistance. This paradox of the nail is also to be found in West Central Africa through the main element of the “nkondi” or nail fetish. “Nkondi” derives from the verb “konda”, meaning “to hunt”. The nails are here used to hunt down and eliminate evil and have the power to heal. The vil-lage’s “nganga”, or shaman, who infuses them with spiritual power, sculpts these fetishes in an often human or animal-shaped artefact. An offspring of this practice can be found in the Afro-Cuban syncretic religion “Palo Mayombe”. The central element of worship, also called “nganga”, is a vessel (“caldero”) inside which the most sacred objects and natural organic substances and minerals are deposited. Some of these elements are pierced with nails, such as the “warriors” figures, protectors of our way and the ancestors. All through his works of art Günther Uecker becomes a kind of Behique (Among Taíno West Indians, the Behique served as a priest and exercised consid-erable power over all individuals with the help of the goddess Atabey, because he not only acted as intermediary be-tween men and gods, but also as a healer), one who is hypersensitive to the universal energies floating and linking people and things. He sees connections and causes that are hidden for others and manages to transform them into his personal nail fields of energy. As a visionary, he sees how humanity is threatened by humanity, and let himself dive into the experiences of risk and conflict. As a consequence, the artwork becomes not the answer but the pathway to the answer.

elementos gráficos como la línea circular o en espiral deviene una alusión al desplazamiento y al movimiento cíclico. Perteneciente a una generación imbuida del pensamiento existencialis-ta, inspirada por autores como Jean Paul Sartre, Ernest Hemingway, William Faulkner o James Joyce, Uecker intenta explicarse el contexto en que vive, sin tratar de escapar a sus contradic-ciones. Según afirman algunos autores, la novela Ulises expresa un nihilis-mo metafísico, donde mac-rocosmos y micro cosmos se fundan en el vacío, mientras que la cultura de la humanidad se deflagra y se convierte en cenizas tal una catástrofe cósmica. Como expresara Umberto Eco, Joyce trató de “proporcionar la imagen de un mundo en el que acontecimientos múltiples colisionan y se componen, se remiten y rechazan los unos a los otros, en una especie de distribución estadística de los aconte-cimientos subatómicos, permitiendo al lector dibujar múltiples perspec-tivas sobre la novela-uni-verso.” Estas ideas irrumpen en la obra de Günther Uecker, por medio de una fina hebra hilvanada entre el mundo y el vacío, el ser y la nada, la vida y la muerte. A partir de la lógica de movimien-tos diferentes, una línea sinuosa y continua puede terminar en su punto de partida; de la misma manera es posible identificar el círculo como una forma estática: todo es al final una cuestión de imaginación. Considere-mos, por ejemplo, la forma en que los hombres prehistóricos trataron de explicarse el mundo natural y organizar el caos a través de los colores y los trazos – como se aprecia en las Cuevas de Altamira en Cantabria, Lascaux en Francia, Clovis en Nuevo México, Mitra y Yagul en Oaxaca, Punta del Este y Ambrosio en Cuba – ; en el horizonte de nuestra percepción divisamos progresivamen-te cómo algunas reali-dades espirituales toman forma, resultadas de la

energía emitida por los dedos humanos. Como miembro de ZERO, Günther Uecker sintió la necesidad de reaccionar contra la subjetividad que domina-ba el mundo del arte de la época. Junto a Heinz Mack y Otto Piene, estaba convencido de la incapaci-dad del arte contemporá-neo de proporcionar una respuesta consecuente ante los desastres de la Guerra Mundial y el trauma del papel cómplice de Alemania en dichos hechos. ZERO decidió hacer tabula rasa y empezar de nuevo, concentrándose en la abstracción pura y trabajando sobre todo con “materiales” naturales como la luz, el fuego, el viento, el movimiento, etc., con el fin de permitir la fusión entre el arte y la naturaleza. Manifestación novel de la percepción de lo real, negación total de la representación clásica, experimen tación entre la luz y la sombra, incisión y transgresión del campo pictórico: son todos elementos esenciales en la obra de Günther Uecker. A lo largo de su carrera artística, una forma inédita de escritura se impuso, no ya asociada al grafito o a la luz, al pincel o al volumen, sino la del gesto a la vez racional y vio lento: el clavo y la mancha aparecieron para sugerir más allá de la huella, una herida. Emocionalmente connotado, el clavo se convirtió para Uecker en el instrumento a través del cual contar la historia de su – y del mundo – trauma. La significación paradójica de su utilización le permitió aprehender las contradicci ones del hombre contempo ráneo y expresarlas en su obra: “El arte es como la huella de heridas aradas en el campo.” El clavo comenzó entonces a simbolizar la paradoja de la “sanación a través de la herida”, con toda la carga antropológi-ca subyacente. Numerosos ejemp-los se pueden citar que guarden relación con lo antes evocado. Uno de ellos se encuentra en el Cristianismo: el clavo es uno de los instrumentos

de la Pasión de Cristo, utilizado para crucificar al Hijo de Dios. Para Uecker, muy inspirado por la religión, la obra de arte porta igual significado y poder metafóricos que las heridas infligidas a Cristo con los clavos. Una herida no sólo nos hace consci-entes del sufrimiento; ella nos reconforta también al despertar simultáneamen-te el deseo empático de sanar. Esta imagen se hace aún más prominente en el martirio de San Sebastián, al transgredir la coalición entre dolor y curación: el mártir resiste y sana las heridas en un acto no sólo de sacrificio, sino además de resisten-cia cultural. La paradoja del clavo la encon tramos igualmente en el oeste de África central a través del elemento principal del “nkondi” o fetiche de clavos. El término “nkondi” se deriva del verbo “konda”, que significa “cazar”. Los clavos son aquí utilizados para cazar y eliminar el mal y tienen el poder de sanar. El “Ngan-ga” o chamán de la aldea, quien les infunde el poder espiritual, esculpe estos fetiches a menudo en formas antropomórficas y zoomórficas. Una derivación de esta práctica, tiene lugar en la religión sincrética af-rocubana “Palo Mayom-be”. El elemento central del culto, llamado también “nganga”, consiste en un caldero en cuyo interior se depositan los más sagra-dos objetos y sustancias orgánicas y minerales naturales. Algunos de estos elementos son atravesados con clavos, como las figuras de los “guerreros” protectores de nuestro camino y el de los ancestros. Al lo largo de su carrera, Günther Uecker ha fungido como una especie de Behique, 1 hipersensible a las ener-gías universales que emergen y vinculan a las personas y las cosas. Él ve las conexiones y las causas invisibles a los demás y logra transformar-las en su propia super ficie de clavos de energía. Como visio nario percibe la manera en la que la humanidad se amenaza a sí misma, para sumergirse

consecuentemente en experiencias de riesgo y conflicto. Finalmente la obra de arte emerge no ya como respuesta, sino como el camino hacia ella.

ColophonThis newspaper is published on the occasion of the exhibition Uecker

Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen, DüsseldorfK20 GrabbeplatzFebruary 07th to May 10th, 2015

Uecker ZeitungAusgabe 2015 – Ausgabe 11

EditorKunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen, Düsseldorf

ConceptMarion Ackermann, Stefanie Jansen

Editing and Copy-EditingStefanie Jansen, Gabriele Lauser, Maria Müller-Schareck, Florence Thurmes

Texts Ehsan Aghaei, Ory Dessau, Alexander Evangely, Sara Alonso Gómez, Zhao Li, Maria Morzuch, Sarah Rifky

Translation into GermanNikolaus G. Schneider

Translation into EnglishIshbell Flett (Marion Ackermann), Monika Fryszkowska (Maria Morzuch), Pan Lili und Zheng Ji Man (Zhao Li), Yoav Zohar (Ory Dessau), Mojtaba Ahmadkhan und Ruhangiz Kordi (Ehsan Aghaei), Benoît Standaert (Sara Alonso Gómez)

Thanks toNina Bingel, ifa; Afshin Derambaksh; Andrei Dureika; Diango Hernandez; Julian Heynen; Ali Skali Houssaini; Gu Huiru; Anna Lenz; Rohangiz Kordi; Monika Kumiega, Polnisches Institut Düsseldorf; Stefanie Peter, Goethe Institut Nowosibirsk; Leoni Spiekermann, Georg Strelkov

PublishingGabriele Lauser

Digital publishingAlissa Krusch, Arnika Fürgut

Graphic Design and TypesettingSimon Brenner, Sascha LobeL2M3 Kommunikationsdesign GmbH, Stuttgart

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated, reprodu-ced, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without the written permission of the publisher, except brief extracts by a reviewer for inclusion in critical articles or reviews.

© 2015 Stiftung Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen, Düsseldorf / Artists and authors

Uecker Zeitung

This digital publication is based on Uecker Zeitung 11/15. The printed Uecker newspaper in high quality will be released on occasion of the exhibition ((fett:)) Uecker. Free of charge with exhibition ticket.

Exhibition

CuratorsMarion Ackermann, Stefanie Jansen

Presentation of the historic documentsin the Kleehalle of K20Marion Ackermann, Stefanie Jansen, Ulrike Schmitt

Exhibition ManagerStefanie Jansen

Curatorial Assistance Nora Lukacs, Florence Thurmes

Registrar Johanna Wollny

Conservation and Museum TechnologyOtto Hubacek, Sven Kamp, Jessica Lunk, Nina Quabeck, Anne Skaliks, Andreas Volkmer

Exhibition Architecture ulrich zickler innenarchitektur + museumsgestaltung und Günther Uecker

Exhibition ConstructionBernd Schliephake, Jürgen Dreßler, Thomas Hoppe, Ingo Lanninger, Jens Meller, Oswin Schmidt, Bernd Strauchmann

CommunicationGerd Korinthenberg, Arnika Fürgut, Cornelia Heising, Alissa Krusch, Marita Rowlands

EducationAnnika Plank

Vorstand Dr. Marion Ackermann, Dr. Hagen W. Lippe-Weißenfeld

Stiftung Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-WestfalenGrabbeplatz 540213 Düsseldorf

K20 Grabbeplatz │K21 Ständehaus │F3 Schmela Hauswww.kunstsammlung.de

Unternehmenspartner: Medienpartner:Exclusive partner of this digital publication:

Gefördert vom Ministerium für Familie, Kinder, Jugend, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen