Spiros asked me to be the facilitator for the feedback session and the feedback session, I’m not sure if everyone has been in one but it proceeds by initially someone gives some observational description of the work and tries to give a full account of what’s present in the work or what they’ve experienced from the work but not a subjective experience. So this is more…it used to be called the objective part of the feedback session but now it’s called the observational because of issues of objectiveness. Lack of objectiveness. After we feel like we’ve given a full description of the work, then the feedback becomes more responsive and it becomes opened up to sort of a general discussion and we take it from there. So was everyone at the opening? Maybe out of the people who were at the opening they could give an observational feedback for the work because that is probably where the work began. So do you want to start Karen? Or Bianca? You can share it.

So for a start we’re locked out of the space, out of the space that we know to be Gertrude Street. We’re used to being able to access as we desire. For me there’s a number of levels of presence in this work. The first one in this actual setting is the Gertrude Street window that has been covered by a series of blinds that run from the top of the window to the absolute bottom which block the entire view of Gertrude Street front gallery. The blinds are white and they appear to be the blinds that you see in museums such as Ian Potter or MCA, those blinds that block a window view. And the experience that I’ve had of those is blinds that you can see through but in this situation they’re opaque. There are a series of chinks in the blinds but they aren’t chinks that are big enough for one to see through to what’s happening inside. And on the…so the work appears to be obscured and the window is given as it generally is for other exhibitions with its logo and details but dominating that on the other side is another vinyl edition which advertises a blog spot, an internet blog spot.

Before I go onto that, the door of Gertrude Street has been painted grey for this show and on it more informational devices such as a catalogue with a timetable printed, an image of an object which I assume is inside, which I know is inside, a text by the curator, acknowledgements of participation and acknowledgements of sponsorship. These levels of sponsorship are repeated in things such as a sticker for Midsumma Festival. So there’s levels of framing of this work such as this work is held under the umbrella of Midsumma 2006. So we’re also outside, we’re on the street. The space we’re occupying now is an actual space, a streetscape that’s cut with the comings and goings of pedestrians and flies and cars and rain. So the experience of this work is…and Spiro is documenting the process.

The experience of this work is of being shut out of this galley but this website and I’ve seen this website so I’m going to comment on that in the objective description. This website is another layer of interface for this work. So this current interface is one level, the block spot is another level of interface which is a block spot that Spiros has been updating every day or so not only leading up to the project but during the project which expands upon…gives a commentary on each of these events that are listed in the timetable. So it gives documented accounts of images, personal reflections, narrative and a critical kind of analysis. So the blog spot in total is a textural account of the project in a series of very dense details. And that blog spot discusses many issues, many theoretical issues together with queer politics, art, theory and also issues to do with local practice within the Melbourne community and beyond and is like a very dense referential matrix of relationships. And we standing here are implied in that…some of us are mentioned in that blog so we’re part of that description I think. So I think someone needs to take over…

Well the opening began down at Seventh Galley down the road as a launch for the Midsumma Festival which I was kind of unaware of at that moment when I was arriving that it was a collection of openings. Within a certain time a mass group kind of moved down Gertrude Street and Spiro was inside with the curator at that point or documenting outside a little bit. But we came across the unblinded window and inside we saw what had been in the window front for at least a week from my understanding which was a sculptural structure which is also the same structure which is printed in the catalogue which Bianca is kindly showing us. And it’s made of…I don’t know if it’s form ply or pine. It’s bolted together, screwed and bolted. Its interior is unknown. It kind of resembles and structural armature, housing, construction type aesthetic. It’s curious because there are obvious elements which are designed to I guess indicate either movement or internal kind of spaces, that’s the only way I can describe it. And the actual way it kind of stood on another level too indicated that you certainly had to be in the space to get a sense of perhaps its apparatus or its possibilities, it was very difficult to kind of really get a sense of what it was from the view outside of the window but a view which most people in January understand that Midsumma’s window display is just a window display.

There is a sense…and this space of Gertrude Street always operates under that kind of nice as well but it’s a gallery space but its depthness and expansiveness of the window tells it’s more of a viewing window display. The people that gathered around was kind of quite big, I don’t know maybe 80, probably about 80 people. What began to occur was Spiros and the curator started to dismantle the structure and the crowd was viewing on and with anticipation I guess as to what was to occur. And then there was a process whereby there was a dismantling of the structural sculpture pedestal object and through that process the blinds were timely pulled down after a period of documentation inside the space. Spiro was documenting as well the activities.

Before I expand on that, I was just thinking also this feedback session is folded into itself because we’ve been invited here by Spiro at this feedback session as straight people. So we were invited…Spiro sent an email out, everyone got that…

How do you know that?

Well he didn’t invite us as straight people but he sent out an email saying I’ve having two feedback sessions. One in the queer space…the thing is that you’re implied within the framework because he invited a series of people to either choose to be part of the feedback session inside and it’s been stated here and on the blog that you go inside if you identify as queer, bi-sexual, poly-sexual, pan-sexual, gay, whatever or in this section which is the straight section, OK? So I think that’s something to pick up later but the door…so we are framed by the invitation. And this is the first ever feedback session that has had two parts to it in the history of club’s feedback where there’s been two options for a feedback session, where the participants choose a specific session or maybe they choose it willing or by a certain problematic default. And there’s been some discussion of that between me and you. And the door is locked, we can’t get inside. There are real objects such as bags left in this vestibule which then begins to function as a specifically activated space.

Maybe someone could give another

Can I just ask quickly, do you know what the actual materials are of the structure from memory?

They’re pine scaffolding with painted MDF sections and these top sections come out and they are corners. Two corners that have beanbags in them and these are a whole series of seats, about 20 seats like stools that replicate the aesthetic of this and then these are three tables that unpack. And when Spiro and Jeff unpacked it they lined up one table there, one table in the middle, one table at the edge. They took these corners out and put them over there. And this section was a big square component with wheels that could be pushed around that had planks of black painted MDF wood. So there was this structure plus the beanbags plus a series of objects that have been constructed by Spiro and the collaborators that Spiro has been working with such as masks, cardboard masks.

Could you describe how you know that?

I know that through the blog, I know that through seeing it on the opening, I know that through discussing it with Spiro. I know that through a series of narratives, different narratives, but never actually…I’ve never actually seen that work and all these other objects in material…by being materially present. So it’s all about layers of representation.

When they are spread out that looked like furniture, it looked like something else.

Furniture-based components that were set out and then the blinds went down one by one.

It was quite fast, there wasn’t really a sense that you could really catch up the attention or what was going to be facilitated by or who or what the activities were. So there was a sense that as each blind was being pulled down the crowd was shifting like further down the window. So it was like a scramble and people were leaning on their sides to kind of get that last glimpse inside to try and catch it. Because I knew I was going to be excluded so the whole opening was about stages and exclusion through that movement.

I thought maybe another perspective on the blog might be useful seeing as that’s the richest form we get to engage with really. Or the most complex as those people outside the space. Does anyone want to comment on the blog, their experience of the blog?

An objective comment?

Well we can drift into response if you like.

OK. The blog as we noted that its entries are made almost daily. Its appearance is a black background with periodic photographs taken by numerous people. We know this through annotations or within the text itself. The text runs from the current date backwards. It functions as a sort of first person narrative but in that it also reveals different levels of the art work, levels like interactions with difference groups whether it be the rainbow network or skater. So it reveals different activities which we may not participate in but actually occur in the window space that is the Gertrude Street front gallery. I don’t want to say anything else, does someone want to continue from there?

No I thought that was good.

The blog demonstrates that there are levels of what you can see, what you can’t see, what you have seen, what you will see and what you won’t see depending on who you are! So there’s…it’s like a big layer cake.

OK, I think we’re in the responsive area.

Yeah, it’s like a creamy layer cake with jams and chocolates. It reminds me of…

It’s kind of like various levels of exclusion and inclusion and even though we can’t see, we have seen or have had the opportunity to see but it’s been within a specific timeframe. So under certain conditions and parameters I guess. And it’s interesting in relationship to an ethics of viewing because as…this is really responsive now but the kind of conventional experience of viewing is one of direct access where I come to the work, I can access the work, I can touch it if I want to and I can consume it directly on an appearance level and with this work there is that sense of a series of filtration processes. It questions kind of subjectivity in a sense like how I access this work. How do I go about accessing this work through a process of identification? So the instant thing that I think of in terms of art historical references is the Duchamp’s 1,000 miles of string in the first focus of surrealism exhibition where his entry into the show…you know that image where he went into the show and he strung up 1,000 miles of string and so the audience had no direct access to the work. But another kind of access was provided or another kind of experience was produced.

One of things that I’m aware of to start with this objective analysis is the effect of the blinds is that I’m more aware of the floor than I’ve ever been before which is the place where the whole body sits in a space but also that because of the optical effect of the blinds you become much more conscious of the reflective rather than the transparent nature of the window which normally its overriding effect is the transparency that you’re looking at through a white wall whereas here you’re conscious of your own reflection and the reflection of the street which doubles the sense of you being located in the world rather than in a gallery space within that. And that made me think a bit about the implicit double structure in relation to the body. That on the one hand you can’t bring your work here, you’re very aware of encountering it as you do…you have a sense of the body as you do when you traverse a city street in some way. It’s reflected back to you as you try to peer through the window. And even I would say something like the fact that you become quite aware of the floor means that you’re aware of the weight and what I would think of as being like a sculptural principle of where the sculpture reiterates your own relationship to gravity in some very subtle way. But you’re also aware of this alternative space which is mediated through text which is obviously very different to the way that you read your own image reflected but also which is text on a computer which is this sense of the way that your body when you’re encountering material on a computer, whether it’s images or text, but probably particularly in the case of text. So it feels like there’s an interesting two encounters with the body that the work has set up and part of what it interrogates is the relationship between those two encounters with ones own body. The body that somehow feels whole and is reiterated by the reflection in the mirror and then the counter of the body through holding the mouse and watching here which is somehow more dispersed and disintegrated.

Also the screens acting as a sense of white wall it’s almost being pushed to the edge of the space and I think that point that you brought up about the reflectiveness of the glass has some relationship to the way we see a white canvas or a white wall as a space that we’ll project into as artists. And yet it’s pushed right to the edges of this space. You’re sort of projecting onto it that obviously it’s a blind so there’s a sense that you could look through it but it does operate to me a bit like a white canvas or a white screen. It draws reference I guess to the white cube in that way. Just because it’s so much of a plain structure.

Picking up on your thing of the body dissolved, I find that an interesting metaphor for the object dissolved as well because this object that’s presented as a unit, as a whole, quite literally has been dispersed in that activity or that process of the unpacking of the object but the object in terms of the artwork as a total thing is also dispersed quite radically in many senses in terms of this physical unpacking, in terms of the blog, in terms of the dispersal of ideas throughout the blog, across a community and across a glut of people who have been working in here. In a sense, as a dispersed body or a dispersed object. I find that quite fascinating about the work in terms of…

…as a formless work. Something that’s essentially…I think any kind of cube structure even if it has layers or details within it, asserts itself in kind of a muscular way because of its relationship to minimalism I think. I see it because of its colour tone, black and its raw wood as well, it’s quite a muscular structure. I think the inherent potential within it that you see while you’re looking at it, looking through it and also I imagine although I didn’t see its dispersal, it breaks those formal languages down in regards to undo or unpick or uncover within that muscularity.

That’s interesting in relation to the blog because there’s an image of Tony Smith’s Die, the work Die, which is a solid block. So as a kind of a playful critique of that in terms of formal sculpture what you’re saying has a direct relevance to the intent of the artist in an art historical sense.

There’s a link between what you’re saying about experiencing the body as a while and having an experience that’s disjointed.

Dispersed.

Dispersed and maybe irreconcilable through the web interface and that’s the experience of the work as a whole. There is a wholeness in the work and an experience in the work that can never be brought together as a whole and because either we’re lacking knowledge of some experience or that it just becomes to excessive for us to grasp as a whole. And even though we have the narrative structure through the web, it’s an ongoing narrative structure that doesn’t suggest much of a final sort of conclusion or summing up. It’s like a series of events that don’t…the rhythm of the events don’t suggest that it’s climaxing or that it has a logical sequence that will feed back into itself or something. It seems like it seems to be dispersing the project instead of collecting the project in a way.

This sits as a very curious relationship to the project. To me this is incredibly fictive because of what you’re all saying.

Which bit?

The image of this as a whole and the image of that when the blinds were open for two weeks and that was present in the space. It sat dormant but on the edge of dispersal and I can never see it coming back to this form again. So this sits in this sort of…I can’t articulate it. It’s sort of a spectre. It’s saying something about itself but it never becomes that. I don’t know how to articular it. Well the work started like this but this does not represent what the project is. This is like a decoy, that’s what I’m looking for. It’s a decoy and it’s pretentious…it’s not pretentious it’s a pretense to something that it never becomes. It never becomes…contains an object.

Just pulled apart.

This is like a trick.

It’s a trick!

And that’s kind of nice because that’s kinds of what you do get with window browsing. You can’t ever get…it is all about fake materials and trickery and cheapness and facades.

Pinning the clothes up behind the model.

Yeah, you never see the actual whole…you can never get around it to examine it and the material relationships are always kind of…they’re there to entice and to have a sense of lure, to lure people into the space itself. But they’re never actually there to actually represent those materials either. So it fits with the fact that it does really not…it isn’t really what it is.

And it’s interesting that that existed when the window were up because it acted almost like a decoy to the kind of work that you might expect to see in this gallery. Not this specific gallery but in a gallery. An object finished, contained and accessible.

Also it kind of acts like a punctuation point I felt, like a pause or a period before something began. Like a space holder.

I don’t know if I agree. I think that when I first saw it I think that coming along looking at it, I think it does house that potential because you can sense that it can be taken apart. But I think it could also easily be assumed that that’s it and if that’s the moment that you caught that work in then that’s it. And I’m also not sure I agree as it being…having a take on window dressing either in the sense that window dressing is something of a...creates artifice and has a kind of allure that pulls you into it. It has a sparkle in my mind and I think the tonal qualities of the work, there’s a kind of almost drabness to the white, the black, the wood. When you go into IKEA and you go into certain sections where it’s just wood stuff being built together, it has a kind of alluring tempt of the fascination with packing and unpacking and putting things together. In terms of vibrancy and colour and relationships of desire that come into play in the window dressing and the whole dialogue around what is accessible and inaccessible through that language, I don’t think it really locks in in a strong way. It wouldn’t be my immediate take on it. I would see it more immediately having a relationship to minimalism than that. I guess that’s a difference of opinion.

Yeah, it’s not really a seductive…I don’t see it as a seductive sculptural object.

I do.

Do you?

It depends on how you…

I see it. It’s funny, it’s got humour in it for me, but it’s not seductive.

Like the connection to window dressing, I see it as the tool trolley that they bring in before they change the…they pull it in and they’re going to do something. The curtains come down on the space, they do their thing and then the curtains come up and there it is. We’re in a stage where the curtains are down but I also know that when the curtains come up, there’s probably not going to be anything there.

As a tool kit I think it works in that sense, yeah.

I think it also plays on the work that you see identified under the banner of relational aesthetics often uses ply and pine in the structures that they build in the museums. It’s like MCA last September they had a show called Situation Artists Collectives from Singapore, Berlin and Sydney. It was all ply. All the structures were ply. It’s cheap or…

No I think it’s very…an aesthetic of DYI and it links to IKEA and it links to that fetish of…

And blonde wood.

[End of 1A]

…Northern Europe whereas the relational notion was coined I guess. And trestle tables. That’s where…in the relation to fashion. That’s where it relates to the window or the fashionable in a humorous way.

What an artistic fashionable?

Yeah. Well how can you draw the…?

So you’re thinking more industrial design languages?

No, art languages.

Definitely.

It’s also the back of a canvass or backstage kind of thing as well. It’s like behind something.

[End of 1B]

…the fantastic piece of penthouse and pavement called plasteral wall mould and you could go behind and you saw…the structure was so hyper-fetishised with the clamps and the bracing and I think it has a really strong currency. I know it does in my work anyway. The idea of the structure that is exposed.

Why would you fetishise it?

Because it’s about…it’s about building and materiality and about wanting to hide that but to reveal it as much…the process and as much part of the work as the surface. Trying to expose that activity somehow but in doing that you do fetishise it I think.

It’s interesting.

So it cooks into that kind of hype around…the hype and the critique of the relational that’s in Melbourne at the moment I think.

There are three other relationships that I could actually think of in work and they’re actually not related to each other or to this conversation because I’m going to have to go and pick up [Luci] and open *, I’ll say them all now and then leave. The first is that that relationship that we were talking about before between the different senses of the body, sorry Kate, I think is also for me a relationship between two different ideas of a public sphere. One being the Victorian idea of a public’s view which is the street which is where rallies happen and posters and a certain idea of political action that we associated, that has its origins in a kind of 19th century or maybe even late 18th century idea of a public sphere. And then the second is the internet operating as a public sphere of sorts and to me there is a relationship between those two things. I don’t think that’s it’s straight forward in any case because obviously the two things elaborate one another in most forms of activism or cultural activity that the net in some way interacts with what goes on in the street and vice versa. It feels that the way that this is quite iconoclastic in a way. It refuses to show which is the opposite logic to a normal action in the street which should show in a very transparent and immediate way, whereas the other form of the public sphere, the net-based one, is enormously elaborate in the connections it draw out.

There’s something that’s interesting there about talking about the two natures of public sphere and also I guess something that I remember from being in East Timor during the Indonesian occupation and wanting to do a work on the street, pamphlet kind of work, and not being able to do it and realising that was a kind of incredible naivety to assume that the political sphere could exist in the public sphere in those conditions and that there are lots of forms of politics which don’t exist in that public sphere because they have to be clandestine or it’s more effective to be clandestine. For me that’s part of the reading of this work in relation to the place that gay politics can occupy in the 19th century Victorian public idea of what the political and public sphere is. I’ve already said the second thing but there’s some about iconiclising that’s quite interesting about the refusal of the image which has such a strong tradition and the reading of this window is to me quite an iconoclastic act of refusing…it reduces it to a strictly textural thing. So it’s this hyper-protestant idea of refusal of the image, sorry Kate, and not wanting to…having some suspicion about what an image yields in some sense.

And the third relationship, which again is that the main art reference that this made me think of was the FIU, the Free International University at the 77 documenter that Beuys did and the huge set of blackboard drawings that came out of that. Again there’s two parallel entities going at once. One is this language of action which occurs in real time with hundreds and hundreds of people collaborating in it and then as a parallel entity, there are these blackboards that emerge largely for him drawing and annotating but also other people writing things and that those… For me one of the things that that’s interesting about that work is that curious relationship between the language of action which just skates into time and slips away and can’t be recorded and then the residues which are left which is this very dense textural mass of objects and that they record a different sense of the body. In some ways as well as being literally documentary of what has taken place, in some sense they also are a different set of languages as well. I think that is going on here as well, that the net-based writing is in some sense documentary but it also sets up a separate language to the language of action which by its nature disappears into social interactions in a way that’s invisible.

But I suppose the interesting thing to me was that in the Beuys work the writing and the action are very transparently linked which again is this idea of a certain idea of political action in the public’s view that the action was taking place and he was there writing and so there was at least the illusion of the two being totally one thing, that the writing and the political action were all of one public sphere. Whereas here they’re actually very consciously pulled apart and the actions are actually largely invisible. It feels like there is a different content in the different relationship set up between those two. Apart from the material thing that the blackboard has a nostalgic thing, whereas a blog has a totally different…it has no materiality except if it’s printed. That felt like a significant relationship but also a deviation from the Beuys model. And now I have to go and pick up my daughter!

Thanks Tom for coming.

Sorry I had to leave.

I think that’s kind of nice picking up his daughter because she’s a part of his…she’s produced by him as a heterosexual man I’m assuming. In terms of this feedback session! That’s kind of a nice ending.



We haven’t expressively discussed the exclusion aspect of the work and the relationship that this has to the university queer room or the women’s room or the idea that in spaces…that there are spaces in the world that are set up to exclude some people either out of necessity or out of perceived necessity to privilege other people. Just what Tom was saying about the activity of this idea, the difference between activism as an active thing and the viewing not necessarily as being that active thing. Or it’s a different type of activity. And that with the Beuys work you’ve got to…you could view him producing the material and in this you can’t. And we kind of can view the material in this on the web but like you get to see the pictures of the paper stuff that’s being made and all that stuff but I get a sense of lack from the images because it’s quite obvious that the people in the space didn’t go there to look at the paper things, they went there to make them or they went there to wear them or they went there to do something that we’re not actually involved in. So I get a sense of watching…like having the advantage of watching what’s happening but only…it’s a removed watching. It’s watching an account of the residue or something, it’s…

It’s not watching as if you were standing here…

But even standing here watching in would be similar in a way because you’re not participating in the same sense. You’re not active, you’re passively engaged.

Yeah I suppose the writing goes with that because it’s always after the fact and it’s reported after the fact and summarising with it too. So after the moment. So we’re always after the moment through that blog.

Do you think that sets up…that inside that we can’t access as a site, that it’s the site of authenticity, the site where life is occurring and therefore what we’re experiencing is lacking or lesser, do you know…? It’s something to what you were saying before about…OK there’s all these parts to the blog and to the work and as a viewer you can never bring them together. There’s no place where you can bring it together as a whole.

That’s exciting about it.

I don’t think that’s a critique of it, I just think that as it positions you as a specific person. Do you think that anyone would have that feeling of wholeness, even if they were inside?

I found the blog so candid and revealing that I felt more included. Like it’s so honest and open that I sort of felt that I was getting more than I would normally.

In art work.

Yeah, because it’s so documented, the whole experience and process and the doubt is documented. I mean you don’t see the doubt normally, do you know what I mean? It’s invisible.

This is coming from…I don’t know where this is coming from. Just trying to find a way to say it but I think in the relationship between exclusion and inclusion I think there’s something about performing and in relationship to the institutional. Sometimes there’s a sense of being excluded from something that hasn’t…it’s such an authority, it’s so institutional, it’s so embedded in culture that the presumption of that authority is there and you know that you don’t have access to it.

Like the men’s club.

Something like that, yeah. It’s embedded and it carries a particular sort of gravity and weight. And sometimes I think, particularly within an art community, that exclusion and inclusion drops into relationships around performance. It’s about gesture, it’s about people acting out sometimes a particular sense of inclusion in an event or a scene and a feeling that you’re excluded from that or the knowledge that you’re excluded from that. I sort of wonder about how much…if I’m excluded then how much am I caring about that? Whether or not I care about that, how much has that got to do with a certain hype about what’s happening on the inside. And that hype connects, I guess, to that performative role. And I wonder…I don’t feel like there was a lot of hype really. My sense is that it wasn’t a hyped-type activity taking place that I didn’t have access to.

What do you mean by hyped exactly? Are you talking about the promotion or the advertising of the event?

Yeah or maybe it’s the wrong word. I think more in terms of a sense of being in, the in thing…often hype has associations to being in or inside something.

It’s like when you’re not in, it’s really not cool to want to be in.

Something like that.

I’m not explaining myself very well.

I think you are.

Because Spiro could have set that relationship up in a lot of different ways so do you feel like…

A good example of that is the hand job bit on the blog, how it’s not sort of…it doesn’t kind of happen and then this fake image of you because you’re too tired and it’s like it doesn’t kind of…that’s like deflated hype for me.

That’s great!

to the poster or post the event so that all the blog stuff are documents of something that happened and they’re not…this is going to come up. The only thing that this is going to come up is the time table on the door but it’s not particularly enticing, it’s sort of matter-of-fact in its diary entry style.

And I guess that’s kind of what I’m curious about. The way that Spiros has approached it. It hasn’t had that kind of…it’s not pink. It’s kind of…there’s subtle relationships going on and subtle gestures and activities. Maybe subtle is the wrong word but you know what I mean, it’s a matter-of-factness or things keep going on. Like what you were saying before, there’s a certain pace to it and a steadiness perhaps to it.

You kind of don’t get a stage where you go, oh I’d like to be involved in that and then you ask to be involved and then you’re denied. You don’t get that denial. Your denial is implicit from the start of the project. So it’s not like…

That’s what you were talking about before about actually understanding your position within institutional role.

Like coming to this whole project of Spiro’s, it’s like understanding explicitly what certain sexual sub-groups do within those activities but not being part of them but assuming or maybe flirting with being part of them at some stage with everyone’s lives, individuals lives. Knowing that there was that kind of sense that you do become involved. I felt incredibly included in the blog and felt that it was very welcoming and even though it’s a past event, it allowed me information otherwise I would not have probably had or because it’s a project it’s developed all those relationships itself. It’s asked you to kind of come along for the ride even though it’s asked you to come along for a ride in a way that’s exclusive to your sexual choices. I’ve kind of taken the subject completely off its margin but it’s the way the institutional has been set up and how Spiro’s kind of allowed us to understand our own position within that.

I think also there’s this kind of really nice thing that apart from being slightly upset that you presume that I was heterosexual…!

Wasn’t that the question asked?

No I didn’t know, I just turned up.

It did send you the initial one which actually set up a whole lot of stuff.



I think there is with any group or community or I guess “other”, there’s always a sense that no matter how liberal you might think you are, you always have a particular take that you bring to the party. It’s like going into get your take-away meal from the Indian take-away joint and you go oh isn’t the Indian man kind of cute or something. You make certain presumptions which defines your relationship to that situation and they can be kind of either quaint or you can maybe assume a certain camp. But you’re complicit in…

Does that come out of PC sort of stuff do you think?

I think so a bit.

I think we’re all sort of complicit in still taking a certain position or having a certain position even though we might think we don’t. You can’t help but do that. You’re always bringing that along with you one way or another.

And we all do that regardless of what group we belong to. The thing with PC is that it assumes that we can live together with our differences. That we can…it assumes that we can find a plane where we can all just be human, but we can’t and that’s what fascinating about being human, that you can’t experience or even understand the difference of anyone else, regardless of their sexuality, their racial differences.

I think the thing about PC is that it assumes you can frame without that being a destructive or violent act. That as long as you find the right word, the politically correct term, then you can frame a sub-group or a group without it being offensive. I think that’s more a…

But sometimes life is about being offensive. It’s about not always mediating everything. Getting it wrong a few times, saying a few nasty things.

Well this has all been in the blog, Spiros has apologised for things he’s said. He can’t have the hand job action, he’s too tired, it’s all in there!

But it’s like the thing with the PC, you’re bringing a framework to a situation and you’re imposing that on something. But when you let yourself fuck up, what you’re saying is that I’m going to put myself in the moment and I’m not going to take a rule with me, I’m going to expose myself to something that I can’t control and that’s where potentially you can fuck up. It’s about the encounter when you don’t know how to act.

It’s also like the kiddies in the school playground, they don’t know all this shit. They’re really cruel to each other, it all gets laid out on the table and there’s something very raw and vital about that. About the power relationships and the beauty and cruelty in it all and then you grow up and you get sort of…there’s a socialised thing that starts to go on and all of a sudden everything gets pulled into what’s appropriate and not appropriate in terms of behaviour. People’s intentions and people’s underlying agendas are much more masked than they were in the school playground because they don’t have the skills. Kids don’t have the skills yet to just…

To repress them.

Yeah. I don’t know whether that has a relationship to the work or not but I think it is kind of interesting.

I think talking about PC is too general for this project.



…it’s just too layered, it’s too complex I think to actually locate it within this.

I don’t think so.

I think it does create…it does what you said. It makes obvious these implicit structures like I’m heterosexual and I don’t identify as that. Most of the time I go around not identifying as that but this forces me to identify as that. The idea within PC or within framing of identity is where it does make that explicit. But there’s something about the way it frames it that I feel like it’s more a critique of a gay framing of heterosexuality than it is a critique or a heterosexual framing of gayness.

Say that again. It’s a critique of a gay framing of heterosexuality. Oh yeah.

It’s as critical of the gay banner sort of frame as set up by a gay community as it is of the heterosexual community setting up…

About being a gay artist.

And also as a heterosexual fact that all the fun activities are happening in there. Like it’s almost…

We can’t hear each other out here on the street.

…when Spiro’s log was talking about what normally constitutes gay art, the really brightly coloured kind of cock-eyed arse activity or lots of cum and you know just being much more in your face. When I was here with Bianca at the opening, Bianca was trying to her best efforts kind of educate…I can say educate without sounding condescending…but talk to the local crowd that were a bit pissed and kind of camped up…

I was so earnest.

There were a few passers-by.

What were you saying?

Well people were going “What is this? What is this work? Is this like the comedy festival or something?” No, this is an artist called Spiros and you can check out his blog and you can see what he’s doing and they’re going, ooh we’d better be quiet we’re offending his girlfriend! The whole event was kind of in opposition to I guess this PC discussion that we’re having in terms of what normally constitutes…and there was a whole thing on the blog too about gay artists behaving or their work behaving essentially with that in mind in terms of…I didn’t really get to…I haven’t thought about it quite clearly enough in terms of the article that you viewed that you didn’t get. There was an article that you were involved in the gay magazine that was mentioned on the blog that was kind of incorrectly accounted about.

The interview?

Yes.

With Christian was it?

Yeah.

Where he was like, I’m not a gay artist, that whole thing?

I think the point that you guys are actually touching is an interesting one. The fact that you had to explain to people what this kind of work might be about or give them pointers as entry points into the dialogue of the work setting up I find kind of interesting because maybe it’s really just not apparent. These issues about the sexuality or the sexual politic in the work. Maybe it’s not apparent to people who will just be walking past or seeing the blind.

No of course it’s not.

It’s operating on this kind of subtler level.



How much is it emulating just that thing with other artworks where it needs to be explained? A feeling that people need to be given entry points into it. Does it differ from that in more than one way?

It’s interesting though picking up from that in relationship to consumption and I’m just going to really side-track but I was at a conference last year and a guy from South Africa who was black was being very critical to indigenous artists of South Africa and world-wide saying to them, you let yourselves be sexualized. You let your blackness be something that’s sexualised, that gets consumed by the market etc etc. And he was being very critical about how one might identify with stereotypes of what it is to be black and I think the same applies in an extended sense. This is what you were talking about, the stereotype of gay art would be cock and cum and this saying no we’re not just going to offer it up to be consumed by whatever the capitalist hetro-normative society who wants to access everything and have their dibs in everything through consumption. Even if that’s about understanding and consuming the images of the world. How does that relate to what you were saying? It’s like that the site of resistance, of saying no…it’s like the women’s room. No you can’t come in and no we don’t give a fuck whether you think it’s right or not, no you can’t. That space that can’t be seen is that site of resistance that it can’t happen in the eyes of society.

That process starts with the Midsumma Festival which says only gay artists can…

It’s just like…not that I’m opposed to the gay festival at all but it’s kind of like well these are all artists in their own right, why do they have to come under the banner of their sexual preference. It’s an interesting thing. Gay pride and how it all came about and it’s got a very significant and important history but now in terms of our current circumstance, I just wonder how relevant it’s actually going to be as a site for I guess art practices of all sorts. I guess that’s where Spiro’s works really interesting in kind of challenging the whole kind of structure behind that and it’s offering a much more community based engagement with people. So it’s a forum for writers and people to discuss politics and issues surrounding their sexual politics with their art. I think that was such a gorgeous approach to the actual show, that it was actually a space that was still protected in a way.

It’s a really nice way of putting it.

It’s kind of like Spiro’s engaged with the place where the Midsumma Festival is still active. You could say that gay visibility is a Midsumma Festival. Maybe it doesn’t need the kind of support the gay artist because they’re underprivileged in our society or their marginalised in our society or their marginalised in our society. Maybe that’s not…maybe you don’t need that. Maybe the gay artist doesn’t need that sort of support in Australia.

That’s essentially patronising isn’t it?

Well it’s more that Spiro’s engaged with the aspect that he’s alive within the Midsumma night…sorry…

Midsumma nights Dream!

Within the Midsumma Festival he’s got…he’s engaged with the bit that is still relevant and it’s not necessarily the cock and cum art that is the relevant aspect. And also like in his blog about that sort of artwork, he was talking about how it’s kind of embarrassing. How there’s an aspect of embarrassment for doing like…I’m a gay artist but don’t identify me as a gay artist. But then he talks about the fact that he does that sort of work or he has done that sort of work. And so there’s this pull between the two. And this work is sort of like that too…

I like that.

Gertrude Street shuts down but it’s OK for Midsumma to have the front window as long as Gertrude Street doesn’t have anything to do with it.

It’s not part of the calendar.

And they won’t open it but you can have it. So it’s like this distancing from the cock and cum art. Like we’re embarrassed by it but we recognise that probably you should do it.

Because it’s PC.

Because it’s PC to offer it but it’s not PC to say that this is the contemporary art that we support.

Interesting.

It’s also like I remember talking to Spiro only a couple of weeks ago, the difficulties that he was even having with just obtaining the space and having it handed over to him in the correct understanding of how a normal gallery would be handing over a space. And even that in itself, because everyone was on holidays and even though…I don’t know whether I’m allowed to mention this…Midsumma do pay for that space over this period of time. I was just irate going you should be demanding better conditions and but even still it was interesting. And even knowing Jeff’s sexual politics as well, not really knowing but presuming, then that kind of added another layer for me that was kind of interesting.

He seems to be the main facilitator through the project.

Yeah but even I think there was…

…Spiro’s going to be able to start engaging in this conversation. Are we going to keep talking amongst ourselves for a little bit longer?

I just want to say…the institution is saying what you were saying, yes you are the gay artist but you’re not the artist. You’re the gay artist before the artist by making it difficult for him to access. Because he’s not getting the privileges that all other artists get when they work here and so it’s like institutional violence actually and homophobia. A sense of. Maybe not violently but it is systemic in that is that activity.

It could just be as simple as we need a holiday and this slot has just happened to come into this period.



It’s part of the calendar, this has been happening here for…

There’s a lack of trust in what is going to be presented here. There’s a distancing from…

The timing of it is always the same is it not? Doesn’t the…

But wouldn’t it be interesting. If Midsumma was on in March there is no way they would let him have the window.

It’s this time of year every year so therefore…

Don’t you think?

...it should be kind of very well organised.

Can I just say one thing? I think that cock and cum really works when it’s grossly literal.

When it’s what?

Really literal. Like when it just is…when it’s not trying to veil itself or talk about the tie or…and I think there’s that…when you get that cringe feeling about art, whether it’s gay art or art about desire, you always feel like cringing when you feel there is a veiling going on. Where sometimes when it’s so literal it tends to have a quality of suspension almost because it’s so bang in your face. I think it can work.

Is there an artist you can think of?

No I can’t think of an example, but it’s something I’ve thought about just in terms of that gross literalism or just in your face approach to art making which can be so simple and acute sometimes and it kind of reverberates beyond itself, its dialogue. It tends to spread outwards somehow. It’s really hard to nail it.

What was Spiro’s reference to…I think from my memory there was a term “cloaked” being used a couple of times in the text. Does anyone? No.

Cloaked? No I can’t remember that.

Can we ask questions to the facilitator?

Normally we sort of discuss what questions we want to frame to Spiro and then we put them to him. So maybe we should talk about that.

Can I just say one more thing? In discussion with Spiro and from the feedback letter, what it said and I said this to you the other day, the feedback letter said…and it’s publicized elsewhere I think on the blog for the feedback that there’s a blog inside and that’s for anyone who identifies as gay, bi, poly, whatever and then there’s the straight feedback. I don’t identify as straight but I felt that I couldn’t go in there because I would be a phony because I’m in a heterosexual relationship and then people would be going what the fuck are you doing here and I wouldn’t want to have to explain that. So I just think it’s interesting how it frames that as…it’s like what you were saying before, the notion that perhaps they’re having more fun in there.

Yeah, which you brought up. And I think there definitely is a sense that some of the activities that are happening inside are authentic and although our experience is authentic that the majority of what’s going on that you actually can experience physically is inside and we are excluded. So our experience is not as authentic as some other experiences that are available.

I know that frustration.

I remember replying, my reply was a little long, but I know it was a sentence. It wasn’t just a simple, OK if I have to. I’ll stand on the outside but I do feel a little inside as well as outside. It wasn’t even about tossing it up, it was about recent history. Recent history tells me that this is more appropriate for me to be standing on the outside and left it at that.

Unhappily standing on the outside.

Grudgingly.

I didn’t feel that way because of the blog, because the blog was so intimate and candid. There was so much information there.

But the blog came after the effect of the invitation didn’t it?

At the same time. Because you had the blog site on the invite and so I went into the blog and read it. It was already up and running.

But in terms of relationship to your own body and how you read work for me is sensual or physical engagement which is a level that I respond on strongly, I can’t have that right now. So I’m trying to talk about something I feel like is…

It’s in the photos though. I enjoyed those photos.

They were entirely different.

I reckon that experience of making work that we have is about a physical presence.

Well it’s relationships of scale too, you can’t get that from a two-dimensional image. You can get a sense of it but you don’t feel it and I think that…

I must say I’m comfortable on the outside of it.



It was more about the extensiveness of the blog itself and all of its different interplays and that’s what made me feel very much like gosh that’s a great way into something and it was so complex and layered and I’m going to spend much more time on it.

Outside of issues of sexuality, the blog as a device for artists I just find it so empowering. In the sense of writing. You know, ten years ago only writers would write about your work or curators. But now artists are writing about their own work and each other’s work because of blogs. Not just because of blogs but there is…

I’m talking about Melbourne though. I think in Melbourne there is much more of a sense at the moment of artists particularly engaging a lot more in writing and I think that that’s quite an explosive force in relationship to issues of representation and history because it’s not…it depends on how you approach text but I think it’s a really powerful force in terms of…do you know what I’m saying?

I think in terms of academics, how do you start to sight the blog. Can you sight the blog? And what relevance does it have in relationship? Or what authority does it carry in relationship to a review or an article by a known writer?

Should be trying and frame some interesting questions for Spiros?

How long have we been talking?

Maybe I should sing my responses.

Can we ask really dumb questions?

Yes dumb questions are fine.

I want to know why you chose white for your curtains, your screens.

Can we collate the questions? Any other questions?

I don’t know if it’s so much a question, but I’d like to hear you talk a little bit more about exclusion and your reasons for exclusion and why you think it’s significant and important in terms of the art work.

I’d like to hear…I’ve heard you talk about it before and for me it seems to have a truth in it or some sort of inevitability, but something about the way the work developed into becoming this exclusion. As a combination of the way Gertrude Street gives up it space as a space to view from the outside for Midsumma and the way the practice of Midsumma offering a space for gay art and it seems that those together made the space an exclusion and I’d like to hear you talk about that maybe.

Any more?

I’m going to deal with the white issue even though it could be a difficult question but in terms of the other ones it’s kind of easier. White because I notice while I was travelling that museums and galleries mostly in Northern Europe had a lot more windows and the way they had covered their windows was with a type of fabric that was opaque or maybe…you could kind of…they veiled their windows. A to protect the art work from direct sunlight and also they are usually not in customer-made buildings like white cubes. They could be in a castle but you know, some kind of old palace or something. But they also use that palace as it wasn’t for residential purposes but for art so they veiled the windows in some way. So I was looking at…this was kind of a gallery show so I just wanted to keep the convention of the architecture of the space.

You’ve done it with the door too because I see that grey as a sensible institutional

Well the grey is an undercoat colour so it’s just undercoat and I’ll go into the grey…

If you look at the two together…

It matches the darker grey. But it was a pink door and I just felt like…it was totally coincidental because Alexie wanted a pink door as almost a symbol of a new start for Gertrude Street or kind of a different phase or something.

Colour for new signage and stuff?

Well, he chose the pink, but he painted the door blue, a light blue in terms of his – so the door is a different issue to the corporate identity which is pink.

Ok.

Do you think that they would want to define their…

You made it neutral.

…their directorship with the * . I’d just like to say that I’m sorry.

This is me being very trivial.

I’m joking.

No, no, like – and also…

It does kind of – it starts to confirm or assume institutional languages and it adds that to the work. It’s an added value to the work in the sense that this is within a particular framework. It’s not trying to be – you know it’s almost confirming even more the sort of presumed institutional qualities in the gallery space.

The grey.

The grey and white.

Because I think it has particular bearing on the work.

Yeah, I miss – and I mean also this is the surface of, you know for most people really, even though people just blog and people * the interior and stuff, the vast majority of the audience in a way or you know both an audience that intends to come here and an audience that – an accidental audience – is on this you know this surface you know and I thought that the door was part of that surface.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And it was – and that the pink kind of was really loaded for the Midsumma Festival.

Yeah.

Like it’s bright glossy pink.

It also carries a kind of authority that you know in the way that the structure carries a kind of an authority.

The pink or the green?

The grey, the white and the structure and the tonal qualities in the structure and the fact that it’s you know a cube carries a particular authority that is load within the history of art making as well and it’s almost like there’s an attempt to get right inside that and be completely you know in that as well as you know the other agendas going on, the other tensions going on within the work and I find that really interesting.

Well someone yesterday said they were driving past and they didn’t know it was my work and they go, “Oh fuck another – another boysey sculpture kind of in the space.”

Yeah, that’s kind of I guess what I’m trying to get to.

And she’s going, “Fuck” and she kept on driving past it and stuff and this is from December 18th and so…

Yeah.

…and, yeah, it’s a decoy. It’s like you know – it’s – I was playing. It was kind of – it didn’t seem like a game I guess, but – I mean I use the word “play” a lot.

It gets pulled apart and gets messy.

But it’s like what we were talking about because we saw Antony and the Johnsons the other night and Antony – do you know him? Do you know him?

No.

Ok, so he identifies as transsexual.

Transgender.

Transgender.

Is this a music thing?

Yes, singer and you know sings about being a woman and a girl and all of that.

Oh, yeah I just know it from – yeah.

And he doesn’t look like a woman, like…

He’s got a voice.

And we were talking about how a lot of transgender people take hormones to grow tits and become woman in a way that kind of as an essential idea of what it is today to be a woman with breasts and whatever but how we were saying that we thought he was more radical because he’s saying, “No, I do identify with woman but I’m not going to look like a woman” and how that to me is like the cube. Like “I am gay” you are saying – like you are gay, but there’s this boysey decoy – I don’t know, I just see the connection.

And also…

It operates from both levels. It operates like as a minimalist sculpture and that’s why it works so well because it – then it is broken down and operates on an entirely different level. It’s not just a decoy because it is both.

Yes.

It exists as both at the same time.

It acknowledges content, context for art making as well. Like this is where we get our reading and art works through history.

Also it’s kind of straight acting.

Yeah.

Yeah, that’s it.

Which is where, yeah, yeah.

Yeah, you know like, yeah, again you know like I don’t want to look like up a straight up there, you know like for that particular mode of the project that was appropriate for it to be straight up.

You don’t want it to look like a straight artist, is that what you just said? Did you really just say that?

No, no, no, no, it doesn’t really…

So you feel like you’re wearing something? Like did you…

Wearing?

Well, is it – you know you talk about straight acting. Are you assuming…

As opposed to – because I think straight acting is an offensive term. Like it’s like, it’s not…

But it’s also a kind of practice.

It’s kind of going – but it’s used a lot within the gay community kind of thing and on like Gaydar and things when you’ve got – you know like “It’s a good thing – oh, you’re straight acting. Oh, cool, that’s hot” you know like…

Really?

[laugh]

It’s good that you’re not, you know, gay acting you know like.

Yeah.

So that would be bad and not hot, do you know what I mean?

Yeah.

So by almost wearing Tony Smith which is – that’s what I was thinking of, I was kind of wearing kind of the artistic guys in a way but it doesn’t look like anything like Tony Smith’s work in a way but that’s just for my own way I think about making it work but I was wearing Tony Smith’s artistic guise as a drag outfit.

I like that idea of wearing it, it’s great, like a costume.

But then pulling it apart, but then pulling it apart. So both stages are important, like the first part and the second part.

Yeah and then what you were saying, it’s not to set it up, it’s not to set it up with this is that and this is that as in this is straight and this is gay and they are opposed, it’s like they can both – they can exist together in complicated ways.

Mm. It can be that decoy and it can be not that decoy but still that decoy at the same time.

It was such a great moment when at the opening when you and Geoff opened the cube and this – all these cardboard objects are inside like these fruits like spilling forth. Do you remember that, like this pornotopia, like this [reenacted sound] it was so fantastic, like seeds [laugh].

[laugh]

Like a paw paw.

Yes, very much or a passion fruit [laugh].

[laugh] No, so exclusion it’s a big question in a way. Ok, I’ll – I guess this is relevant, Midsumma basically hires the space from Gertrude Street for the – from January, from you know really from January to Monday, right mid-January, and I knew that the – so there’s this thing in me – and I only found that out halfway through this process but I think it’s significant in that Midsumma in a way wants some kind of – you know a) wants a space, but also in a way – I’m being critical of maybe Midsumma in a way, not of Gertrude Street first, I mean I will get to Gertrude Street [laugh], but of – no, but everything is compromised as well. Like you know like the whole – like I’m compromised, everything’s kind of compromised. Like it’s no – there’s no black and white so when I’m kind of critiquing Midsumma and Gertrude Street I’m not going, “You know fuck that” like because why would I do – have the show, do you know what I mean? Like everything is not this kind of pure politic, you know like this integrity or this kind of you know like everything is not purely radical or something or purely transcretionary – you know like so…

No, I mean you’re working with it all. Beautiful green….

I’m very conscious that everything is compromised, do you know what I mean?

But maybe not compromised. To have a dialogue you have to be within something. To say, “No, I’m not going to participate” well, you’re not actually contributing.

Mm, but also like – so – yeah, so Midsumma kind of wants a space – you know they’re kind of reacting against that kind of that they’re not – that the visual arts working group don’t want the visual arts exhibitions that are part of Midsumma to only have one type of work that they feel like isn’t – you know that wouldn’t be usually shown here or wouldn’t be shown at other * spaces, that is maybe most of the show that is in St Kilda or something or – I don’t know, other spaces like cafes or something like that.

Mm.

So the visual arts working group was established maybe only like five/six years ago as a reaction to the kind of work that seemed to be dominating those festivals. Mardi Gras when through the same [laugh] – no, no, I’m just going…

[laugh]

[laugh] Oh, I know I hate listening to my voice, so it’s going to be really…

Mardi Gras what?

It’s going to be really traumatizing.

Mardi Gras has – did that 10 years ago so their kind of thing was – you know they had the same issue and like a part of the visual arts community go, “Hey we’ve got to establish our own visual arts working groups and actually create something kind of – a difference.” You know like a different type of art that is presented and really like the first show was about gay art which was curated by Robert Schubert and kind of acknowledge all of this.

Yep.

Like you know this exhibition is in contrast to the other community style arts.

Yep.

Mm.

You know that are in these festivals and we’re going to include you know like - we’re going to get Deans Kylie, Big Queer Theorist, and well you know Australian –and we’re going to get Andrew McQualter and John Meade and Scott Redford all kind of playing their kind of roles in kind of contemporary art like you know like in art and text or you know in series – you know like in so called in this – you know and so it started – you know – oh, I’m lost now. [laugh]

Exclusion.

Oh, yeah, so [laugh]

Why are we all here and not in ?

And so Midsumma hires this space is almost like a form of credibility or something.

What?

As a like – oh…

It’s a sign that they’re serious about it contemporary art.

That they’re serious about contemporary art.

Yeah, yeah.

In a way you know and – sorry?

Who made the decision that it wasn’t accessible for the people to actually walk inside the space for the Midsumma timetable?

Well, it’s…

Who was that person.

They are on holidays, right?

But Midsumma could have got staff in there.

Yeah, it sucks.

So…

Well, they hire out the back to Deans Art * . I don’t know what the relationship is with Deans Art, but Deans Art always occupies that space for school folios, you know like collating bla, bla, bla. So Deans’s, I would say hire it out and like any other institution, you know they probably pay a couple of grand probably and maybe for the space one grand, so that’s three grand and you know we all know that these institutions aren’t rolling in it so it’s an extra budget – you know they always have an exhibition break in January so – and I think maybe Midsumma – you know like so – you know I’ve given the kind of opportunistic…

Does Midsumma * or Gertrude Street?

Midsumma in a way but because Geoff’s role as curator – you know he’s on the visual arts committee but also you’ve got to talk to him. So he’s got his foot in both places.

He’s going to want you in there.

Sorry?

He’s probably made the decision to have you at Gertrude Street maybe?

Yeah, so I know in the past that other people have applied for this show but it’s specifically for the Midsumma show and there’s been a – there’s a discussion process that I’m not part of on the visual arts working group and I know that each year it’s alternating so next year it will be a female artist. So there is a pattern. So last year…

Got to be piecey.

So last year was Janet Birchall, this year was me and the year before that was John Meade and the year before that was – can’t remember, it was the same. Oh, Pearl, Pearl Gillies, so it’s alternating.

Mm.

Ok, exclusion, right [laugh]. So – and I was very wary of – I wanted to do something that was activity-based, but I also knew that I didn’t want to create a window display because I just felt like this was like an opportunity for Gertrude Street to – do you want to squat or sit down? Thank you for standing outside, it’s been really good.

[laugh]

What? Tell us why?



Have you got seats in there?

[laugh]

No, I would love…

Bean bags in there.

No,

Oh, yes.



Ok, so Gertrude Street has an exhibition break, right?

We know that.

Ok.

That’s not the context.

[laugh]

So why am I excluding?

I haven’t asked you, you can’t pick on me.

Well, you can’t go in there day because it’s closed – I mean there’s no staff there and I haven’t…



Yes but if we were allowed in there you wouldn’t have scheduled it today you would have scheduled it yesterday when there weren’t staff there.

Yeah, ok yeah.

So it’s not really the point.

Ok [laugh] well, I’m playing this game right, where I’m – a) it’s a queer room. So a queer room is a space that’s safe for queer people and I use the word “queer” in it’s broadest possible sense [laugh] to include gay, lesbian, inter-sex, transgender, in between, bi-sexual, you know and like if – and basically these rooms are about identification, self-identification. So if you feel like you can identify with one of these groups there’s no – I am not going to refuse entry. Saying that it’s totally compromised like in a way because the Gertrude Street staff are walking through the space constantly you know.

Yeah.

The artists down stairs you know and I thought I was going to be hard core about it at first you know and go, “No.” Like I was going to create a curtain across there you know, but the thing is you know like it was – I had 10 days, I just basically ran – I mean it should have been a priority in a way, but I didn’t prioritize it. I was prioritizing the activities.

The people who actually were allowed inside to do a range of activities, did they feel compromised?

Sorry?

Did they feel compromised, the fact that there was people or other people you know engaging or passing through the space? I mean did it bother them or was it just bothering you?

No, it was bothering me because usually during the activities the staff are quite respectful and would not walk through.

Yep.

I think it happened once at the start and I didn’t say anything but they felt like they were intruding.

Yeah.

So then they stopped walking through and yesterday Yolanda who had been walking through you know regularly, well you know every day to go to her office and her desk, whatever, asked me “Oh, can I have a look?” And I actually felt like you know like I actually felt really respected because a lot of the studio artists just didn’t ask. They just presumed that they could walk in and you know like – when I wasn’t there because you know I wasn’t in there, I wasn’t occupying the space all the time, for the whole time, so they presumed that they could walk through the space and just sit down and I ended up not being hard core about it. So in terms I was totally inconsistent you know in a way.

Is that because you were nervous or you didn’t really feel like you were being asked at that time or were you just tired or why didn’t you put a sign out or on the other side or…?

Yeah signage or dictating the terms.

What didn’t you just explain that was so – I mean surely people knew the background of the show or…

Yeah, it didn’t – I mean just in terms of the staff I just felt like – well the walk through was fine.

Yeah, no not that.

But the studio…

But the studio artists sitting in your space I mean that’s serious.

Yeah.

That’s like it should have been a criminal offence really.

Yeah.

I think the issue is not for you to police them but for them to perhaps be informing themselves about…

Well, the staff informed as to the activities you want the space

But the staff – yeah, yeah.

You could have made the staff could up and down the stairs.

Yeah. No, I could, yeah, yeah, I mean I had all these ideas about badges so they could walk through but they had to have a badge on or a registration device.

[laugh] GPS. Were you loose about that because you felt out of control about it do you think or like the queer rooms that you were using and stuff.

Sorry?

Like

No I wasn’t – I’m not.

You guys are really militant those ones that you’re using.

No they are quite militant and I guess I wasn’t do you know what I mean? So I – but I mean I’m not saying you know there were whole gangs in there. I’m just talking about maybe two or three people.

Yeah.

Two or three persons. One of them you know like the blinds had fallen down and I was using some of her equipment.

Yeah.

So…

But say that idea of – like them having to take those stairs rather than those is quite specific to different art space. It’s quite specific.

So that’s how that bit started that bit off but otherwise like you know some people knew, some people would come to the space, knew that they would be excluded up in some way. They would ring up the studio artist and actually visit down stairs. I wasn’t even there but that happened when I was – I was told about it. You know so someone was in the space without me being in there and actually knew that they were excluded and knew the context but actually came down stairs.

To have a look?

To have a look kind of thing. So…

Why there should have been a video monitoring it out of the *.

You know like I actually think….

lobbed in and I didn’t know.

Sorry?

I just lobbed in and went, “Oh, yeah, how are the * going?”

I kind of yeah…

I didn’t realize

No, no, no, I mean like – this is all my lack of control of that component of the…

No.

But in a way like I wasn’t on top of it so it’s my – and also because I was just basically running around – felt like I was running around the whole time trying to or anise the catering and the activities and the objects and the paper and the documentation and then running home and so it just felt like – yeah, I don’t know. And like Tom [laugh] Tom came in yesterday and knocked on the door and he understood, in a way, but then studio artists just came waltzed in. You know like – no, not studio artists, but studio artists assistants who were working upstairs, do you know what I mean? So – and guests of the gallery would continue walking through so in a way it wasn’t a queer room, it was just pretending to be a queer room in a way and it was being a – yeah, it was totally – yeah, I mean I want to admit that because I think it’s part of hey the blog to kind of admit the project – well, what I see as it’s leaks or something and I think that’s ok.

I don’t really have any knowledge, but to what extent are queer rooms policed and how often do you have a transgression like this anyway?

Well, I remember – well, this is a story from Melbourne Uni, but this happened, but the right wingers, and I’m not talking about, you know like the Liberal students – well, the Liberals don’t really have, they don’t work within the Student Union, but you know they exist at Melbourne Uni, but basically a crew of right wingers invaded the Women’s Room at Melbourne Uni and left a dead pig there.

Oh.

Oh.

Like during the time – yeah.

When?

This is when John was there, when John was a student at Melbourne Uni. So this is – like that happened and it was like meant to be a joke and you know the right wingers are just pigs and basically you know like – so things like that happen – you know and some…

It’s weird.

Yeah, and it’s quite violent. Words can’t even express how violent it is really and how…

But this wasn’t as violent act. I don’t see this as a violent act in the same sense.

No.

It’s more an act that “Well, other people are excluded but I’m privileged. I have a certain privilege so I’m allowed to access the area.”

Well, the person…

Well, maybe just that thoroughfare thing was not

Did they go in?

No.

But the person who came in, that was what you were talking about like the person who called someone up to let them get – let them in and show them around, they were sitting in the work and saying, “Oh…” – can I say this?

Don’t use the name.

I won’t use his name, but you know…

I don’t think you need to document it historically but what I’m suggesting is that it was more that they felt they – for some reason they were privileged enough to be able to access the work even though they knew that normal people weren’t. Like it’s not the same as…

Normal.

Normal [laugh].

… as taking over a space.

There were conditions with how you use Gertrude Street and then you set up more conditions and then people weren’t – people sort of ignored them more.

Yeah, I mean but that’s like – you know like…

That becomes part of the work.

Yeah.

It’s a fact that it happened in this particular form of engagement, it’s just as relevant as any other I think.

Yeah.

It’s a consequence of what’s set up and things just get kind of played out and happen.

Yeah.

That’s an interesting point.

Maybe it’s a relationship between the public in Gertrude Street isn’t it, that some of the public are more privileged in their relationship with Gertrude Street than others.

Yeah.

And others assume the privilege. “Well let’s just fuck it and come in.”

Yeah, well let the studio artists in, definitely.

Yeah.

Do you think if the studio artists…

You feel that when you belong to it.

Or a friend of a studio artist.

Yeah, yeah and it’s really different and it shifts when you move out.

Or you know or the just potential studio artist or an ex-studio artist.

Mm.

Exactly.

Back to the gutter.

Out here on the…

You were trying to control something that you know you couldn’t control and in the event of that these activities occurred which then highlight the premise of what you were trying to do .

And I guess it’s – I mean it’s about my personality also. I mean like there’s a – there was a – not at this biennale but at the last Venice Biennale I think one of the countries actually – Portugal maybe, or something, I don’t know, you actually had to show your Spanish passport.

Yeah.

Wow.

You had – and there was like a door person and they were obviously there for four months or whatever and…

You can’t access it .

Had a Spanish passport and like…

Almost like I would have maybe I would have – I mean ideally, because I’m not – you know I wouldn’t be a good door person, obviously I’m just letting you…

You don’t want a door bitch.

Yes, someone [laugh]

[laugh]

Someone to mind it to take it – that could have been, you know, take it out of my hands because I’m just you know like, but..

Put a different lock on the door.

Yeah.

They’ve kind of got like that at the opening anyway with the lady who was directing the arts programme. She kind of gave a talk after explaining how to access the work and at that moment she kind of appeared to me like she was the door bitch in a way.

But someone, I think John said to her, you could only go in if – she said there would be activities in there and you can arrange to go in there like through Spiro.

Oh, that’s right and then John said…

And John said, “But only if you’re gay” and she said…

No, only if you’re queer.

“But only if you’re queer” and she said, “Yes, but only if you’re queer” and she was just repeating it parrot like and then she said, “No, I didn’t say that.” Like as if that would be politically incorrect and not how Midsumma wanted to represent themselves as an exclusive group.

Oh.

Yep.

But you know, but most of the people – some of the people there were left thinking that that is the case you know.

And also discrimination. I mean I’m playing with these you know like queer room and women’s room and rooms and you know spaces, but discrimination actually happens and probably it – you know like really in terms of the – when the issue was heightened for me was with the youth group because that’s really where – I mean I’m really affected by that kind of exclusion and exclusion really happened and discrimination really happened in the playground for youth and in the high school and in the primary – well, you know like wherever, you know like that sexuality become emergent, it really is a real…

I mean your Dad’s a reoccurring theme at blog as well.

Mm.

Which is interesting.

Yeah, yeah, yeah and like coming out is of an issue and it’s like and it’s kind of we can romanticise it being at a distance and like being in Fitzroy and the inner city where things are much more kind of liberal and accepting, but you know go you know five kilometers or 10 kilometers each way you know like it’s a different…

Yeah, it’s much more violent.

It’s different and while spaces – there’s no door person at you know like at spaces saying “Only straight people allowed in here.” Social convention and social kind of – social conventions exclude you know so they’re not explicitly excluding but they’re you know like – I mean just as a gay man, you know like the way men just full stop, not gay or straight, take up space you know and sometimes I’m feeling that when the way they take up public space in pubs I feel like at some pubs the way to take men – you know and probably really myself you know take up space is kind of physically excludes people you know and - I mean that – exclusion happens on all these different levels and something that was said that was really interesting yesterday was one of – in feedback is like if I replaced – because there was all this kind of scattered books and photocopies from queer theory and gender theory or whatever, if I replaced that, those books and article photocopies with race, you know like a multicultural festival guide which I’ve got like all these Midsumma guides in there and a multicultural festival and like things on race theory or something like that, this show and with the white out and “without” is kind of like white out. It could be on race, do you know what I mean? Like this show – she was just saying that you know like – oh, no that doesn’t relate.

Yeah, it does.

But I found it – I felt it was an interesting comment. Um, exclusion. So I’ve talked about the inconsistency.

How did that go, how did the accession go or what was the main kind of dialogue that occurred out of that? Would you like to talk about that? Was that excluded as well?

No, no, no, that’s going to be blogged I mean but they were focusing on the activities and also the fact that this kind of reversal. Like, so there was a discussion about you know this is a reversal where we’re kind of excluded. I mean we talked about lots of things, it wasn’t the main you know thing, but just in relation to exclusion that you know anecdotes about exclusion in life and in the public sphere and how this is a reversal and how the window – the homos window dresser, that came up as a you know like a – and I love window dressing you know like I think it’s you know like as a form of culture I think it is a really interesting form and I really like art that plays with those conventions but I also think that you know I couldn’t not make a work where Gertrude Street is always open – Gertrude Street is always open and is not open for this one show.

Yeah.

Do you know what I mean and I felt like that was the frame that I had to work with.

Yeah.

I mean I could of – like but there’s lot of solutions. This is not – I mean I was saying – this is the only way I could do this, but working through the project I could have essentially with my $3000 hired someone to sit the space and have nothing in the space and actually have it open. Do you know what I mean?

And have…

I mean it just came to my mind then. Well, like [laugh]

Or hired a room, a hotel room and all the project is happening there and you still blog and you know?

Yes, so there’s lots of solutions to it so someone could have sat the space for three weeks and like it could have been open to the public and they could have gone, “Hey Deans’s art is behind there but you know…” I don’t know.

That is an entirely different work though isn’t it?

Oh, yeah, yeah.

Yeah it is.

But there’s lots – well, there’s probably lots of ways to deal with it but I couldn’t – like I felt like this was my way of working within that framework of Gertrude Street isn’t open for the Midsumma event. I’m making a show for Midsumma, not for Gertrude Street so that – so the conditions were Midsumma not open at Gertrude Street. So they were the three things that I had to work with and you know I got this show because I’m gay, so that kind of linked to creating a queer room.

You’re gay and you’re a serious artist.

Yes.

Gay, serious.

You’re a serious gay artist.

And you and so – but at the same time I wanted to make it quite clear that I’m filled with doubt and filled with – you know this is a leaky boat and I’m not, I’m not – you know like the three activists that I interviewed are – you know like they’re – they’re the people that – I mean they would have been actually great to be the door keeper because they’re – you know like [laugh].



Well, because they’re heart – you know like and really I was you know like quoting their world by you know, quoting a bit of their world by doing this room because I wasn’t involved with queer politics as a uni student.

You weren’t?

Not really, no and so I was quoting a bit of their world and what was I going to say about them? And they’re almost – they’re an influence but I kind of fucked with it like I didn’t – I bastardized it.

So the two contexts was like minimalism and then this world, they’re the two sort of contexts that you were working in.

You’re kind of wearing both of those guises.

Yeah, both of those.

What are the undies and what are the singlets?

[laugh]

Where are you Spiros?

[laugh]

I’m on the blog.

You’re everywhere.

See I’m everywhere. I mean I’m framing everything and at the same time as being you know like community focused. I mean it’s also framed very tightly by me [laugh] constantly.

I think that’s an interesting relationship. Like the myth of collaboration is that everyone’s together, working together successfully and transparently and I think it’s interesting where you can do both where it can have aspects of the collaborative but also of the individual framework.

Mm.

Yeah it’s like the decoy and the – it’s got them both.

It’s the grey areas make it interesting in this project and the bits that fuck up a bit or the apologies or run out of time. It’s all that stuff that’s really interesting.

But I’ve never had the sense that you were wearing a guise or a queer activist. Like your blog seems quite knowledgeable and I just assume that you – that knowledge was placed in a continual activity or engagement with queer politics.

Oh, I mean I was always…

In some ways.

Yeah, ok, no, no, I mean I’m not a new – you know like I haven’t…

You’re not pretending to the same extent as you were pretending to be a minimalist artist.

No, no. Well, yeah, ok, yeah that’s totally right because I do have – you know like I am kind of politically engaged. Like I’m not – I wouldn’t say my political engagement is focused on queer activism. It’s more – it’s broader and I guess…

It’s not only focused on queer politics.

No, yeah.

Yeah.

For this?

Yeah, oh for this particular project, yeah, yeah. So and I’ve had – you know and since I was you know quite young I was kind of interested in [Actup] you know but not as in the person who’s involved in Actup, but I mean it’s a different generation. You know friends of mine were in Actup and Actup was AIDS Coalition Towards Unleashing Power but you know it wasn’t only about AIDS activism. AIDS activism is kind of like – it was almost like a vehicle for, and kind of set up, kind of queer activism in a way because yeah it’s kind of set up AIDS as a urgent hot spot for queer activism. Do you know what I mean like there’s a…?

Yeah.

You know so I’ve always been interested in that so I wasn’t like just researching that for this project like it’s – so that in a way I’m not a – yeah…



Yeah and it was an opportunity for me to express myself [laugh] regarding these issues.

I’m just thinking like you know how you talk about exclusion and just an anecdote of someone I know who identifies strongly as a straight male and he – and I disagree with him – but and something that he said was that I think his frustration or exacerbation was – and he said, “I feel like it’s heterosexist rather than homo.” And I mean of course there are a thousand problems with that but I think as something that you were saying that perhaps he feels that this frames him as a heterosexual man, and he’s so used to the privilege of being a heterosexual man where he doesn’t get identified as that, so his access to space is quite smooth.

Yeah, and also…

Hysterical sometimes.

Yeah.

Like me growing up in Paddington I’ve been called a breeder. “You bloody breeder” walking down Oxford Street more than once.

Like Damien?

Yeah and then not got service in certain cafes because I’m not gay and stuff like that, but I mean so those things get inverted in different ways, but I always see it as a bit kind of hysterical and kind of – it just becomes absurd and crazy and the only thing you can do is kind of laugh at it and not take…

There’s violence, yeah there’s violence

But there is – but I think…

There are consequences of who you want to…

But the male gay community particularly is very – from my knowledge of it from where I’ve grown up is very self-empowered I think and maybe Melbourne is different, but in Sydney it feels very, very self-empowered and very vocal and very strong with the Mardi Gras and everything. You know it’s a strong lobbying group as well and I think when…

It’s population would be…

Sorry?

It’s population too.

Yeah, so I guess with that intensity.

Well, within those groups there’s you know like I mean discrimination happens on lots of different lines and within that I mean it’s probably the white gay males that are more privileged than say maybe the Indigenous gay male or the person from Indonesia that’s gay and male or the lesbian from – like from the Western suburbs who’s you know like – so there’s privilege within each community or something.

But also like the thing I got from – I really loved from that blog about Mark the activist, like the critique you were both making on a sort of guy – consumption that is rampant in a community that inhabits a Commercial Road, like this sort of hyper-consumptive lifestyle that you were both critiquing I think is another interesting sort of sub-level within all of that. It’s not just the gay community.

You mean disposable income community?

No, well people who are engaging like hyper-consumptive practices are regarded as actually engaging in a kind of perhaps something that I relate to in heterosexual terms as well, like as heterosexuals in terms of buying cars and houses and whatever, I don’t think heterosexuality is just about sexual preference, it’s about consumption and lifestyle. But that – maybe it’s not about heterosexuality as kind of capitalism. I don’t know. Is that making sense? So to me – is that making sense?

Um.

Are you talking about the role of consumption as being a process which excludes?

No, not which excludes but as a – like I think if you’re someone who – like you’re – I don’t know. I think I’m getting into grey areas, dodgy areas.

You’re talking about the use of like gay men consuming highly.



I’m talking about the reality of it.

Yeah.

Yeah, like as a human who is consuming that renders them to me on a similar plane as anyone else of any other sexual identification consuming on that same intensity. I think that relates strongly to something. I can’t explain it.

I mean the cultural kind of cliché which in some sense can be probably backed up with statistics is that you know like it is possible that very – I mean you’ve got to be a – basically – oh, no. It is possible for gay men, a gay male couple to have children but it’s like costs $150,000 at the moment to go and get a you know – adopt from overseas.

Yeah.

You know and it is possible but I mean – anyway, so couples you know like don’t have children so they’ve got a lot more expendable income to you know – so and it was interesting that the three activists all didn’t want to deal with just – I mean I gave them free reign on what kind of issue they wanted to deal with and all of them didn’t – you know like it wasn’t just discrimination per se but they were kind of all at the forefront of different issues you know. So one was immigration, one was pertuity rights and one industrial relations and yeah and so they’re kind of like their areas where there is like you institutional discrimination. You know you can’t – there’s no two ways about it and they weren’t going like – so it was kind of interesting that they were kind of anti the kind of dominant Commercial Road/Oxford Street you know type of empowerment. They were actually looking at the hot spots and I actually think that’s what – where it was kind of you know different and more interesting. But I don’t think – you know like this whole thing about today about you know about why we’re not in there is like you know like so for the ambiguous – you know like the discussion I actually feel like is part of the work and stuff and it’s going, “Oh, where do I fit in?” You know I can – I actually think that’s part of the work.

Yeah and I think for me I would be disappointed because for me the work would break down too much and the fact that I am excluded is a significant issue and it’s an ongoing issue and the fact that you – you shouldn’t be apologetic about it in any sense because it’s – but I do get the sense a little bit that you’re kind of like, “Sorry guys…” you know [laugh]

I apologetic because of the leaks.



You know like I wasn’t – do you know what I mean?

Yeah.

Because people have.

We need to wrap it up.

Do you know what I mean? So that’s why I’m apologetic in that I haven’t been consistent and you know if I had been consistent then you know this – you’d be like everyone.

But no one’s been let down by that.

No.

I mean that’s the whole thing to get people involved inside. We’re kind of upset that you know they were compromised or the committee was compromised, individually they were kind of harassed on any level. You didn’t expose anyone to any danger at all or you know any come, any…

Give yourself a break…

Yeah, but I mean I really did make – I actually really – yeah, Yolanda’s question of, “Can I have a look?” is really respectful and I actually really appreciated it. Like I just thought you’ve shown – you know you’re different everyone else that’s walked through you know like I think that’s yeah…

I think that’s all wrapped up in what you were saying sort of about Gertrude Street though in that it’s under the auspice of the institution and feeling that you are privileged, also what Scot was saying that there is a sense of privilege and it’s not the viewer that you’re talking about, it’s a particular group of people within the organisation that you’re showing, so actually it’s not – you can’t use it to describe the rest of the spectators that will see this work. It’s just within a specific group.

41:59.

Yeah.

It’s like the difference is the people inside Gertrude Street thinking that this issue about sexuality doesn’t affect normal – you know obviously how they relate to you or whatever, so it’s irrelevant or Yolanda saying, “This is an artwork.” So for me it was like people forgetting about the artwork and just seeing you.

Mm.

You know and that was the difference.

Yeah, yeah.

So I can sort of understand their casualness because it’s like…

Spiro wouldn’t mind sort of thing.

Mm.

It’s like your space seriously. They can’t shift how they see you whereas it’s very different to be involved in art work.

Maybe if they were going to some…

Maybe be bit more of an artist.

Sorry?

Next time you’ve got to be more of an artist. Start being mean.

Well if they had to move around it then that would change things.

Yeah. I had something else to say but I forgot it.

We’ve been going for two hours, so maybe it’s time to wrap it up.



Thanks everyone.

It’s such a great – I think it sets a high standard for 2006, in fact the whole decade.

On, no, right, no, no. [laugh]. Thank you very much. I’m going, “Oh, no, no, no oh, * again.”

What?

Oh, the role of Gertrude Street as a space where artists in you know like in an emergent or emerging artists space and for the last three Midsumma shows they’ve had artists that – you know Janet Burchall, John Meade can’t be quite described as emerging. Well, no I don’t think they can be. No, they’ve emerged.

Hatched.

[laugh] Yeah.

Can you emerge and then submerge?

[laugh]

What was that other question that was always meant to be about emerging?

I mean that’s never about emerging artists either.

Oh, yeah there’s age deadlines.

Yeah.

It’s a bit more vigilant.

What is it now?

Oh, ok.

All the * in the uni is so excluded.

Yeah, I know of course.

Yeah, exactly.

It’s crazy.

It’s emerging.

Yeah, it’s still open.

No, it’s already…

So in terms of – you know like I think they will have difficulty and I didn’t raise this yesterday with the working group, it didn’t come up, but - you know like I think it would be difficult because I was – you know I came back from overseas to do this show and stuff and I would have liked to have had like a year lead up or six month’s lead up or a longer lead up time as opposed to two months or something to the project and so I think they will have difficulty. You know like it’s different for John Meade or Janet Birchall to have a show where they – it’s a – you know like it’s a – and I’m not saying – oh, I guess I’m holding Gertrude Street up as an important space, but I think in some ways it is in my mind that I wanted – you know like there’s this thing in my head and I know I can critique it and I know there’s an issue, it’s a real – you know it’s an issue and it’s fucked but I wanted to pull out all the stops for this show or something, for a show that I was going to do here or something you know.

Because of the importance of Gertrude Street?

Oh as an emerging – you know like as a – you know like finishing your Honours or finishing your Masters or finishing – you know like there’s an emphasis on creating something.

Yeah, a big deal.

A bit work. Like if I had a show at * or something like that or you know like it’s all different conditions or something.

You would do that anyway because you’re always too ambitious, Spiro, so I don’t think you should be too harsh on yourself.

But I think it is a theme in the…

But I think – and so for next year when you know like maybe they can’t get a – you know like someone who can just feel – they say to Janet Birchall and John Meade, “Oh, I’m just going to put some…” you know like because I do lots of big work or big shows or something. They have opportunities, you know they have more opportunities than emerging artists or whatever so they’re going to have a difficulty in the next few choices with the Midsumma programme because I don’t know – you know.

I think it’s also really good to be aware of your limitations trying to do the big work and the big space and you know some works carry a certain authority, they enter a certain code of practice that sometimes leads out really interesting you know aspects of practice that are not sort of the grand theme or the big statement, you know. I mean it’s important in those spaces too to carry that freshness and that lucidity and that flexibility into the space as well.

Actually that’s why actually in a way, and this relates to – oh, because I actually read * Sedgwick and it was terminology of the closet and in terms of the closet actually has been traditionally a placed of reached creativity and like Oscar Wilde and Pruist and you know like they’re in the closet but actually within that closet they played with the closet and actually and being veiled and stuff and I actually felt that freedom in terms of not necessarily having to do a big thing but just doing a big thing but like I had the freedom of…

Mm.

Of doing it in there. So like you know like I did find a richness in a type of closet do you know what I mean?

Like…

It’s quite a – there’s quite a lot of personal work to do. It’s quite a different practice and a different approach and I think it’s a really valid and important one. You know just having that kind of – the nuance of things you know, the delicateness of things and it’s the slippages and the break downs and the – do you know what I mean? Stuff that’s not resolved as well as stuff that’s highly resolved or kind of sitting together in the world. There is a space for that, comfortable space for that.



Ok, maybe we should wrap it up at that.

I just want to say one thing. That’s the thing I really respond to in terms of it as an artwork as well that I love it that it hold so much of the practice. Like it’s not an artwork, it’s a framed practice for me and I rarely get to see that in my peer’s work. I mean you know as much as I love my peer’s work I rarely get to see that entire practice at once. I do over time when you know someone’s work over time, like I get the sense because I know your work over time and so I understand your practice – well, vaguely understand your practice and I love that and to me that – this is like this nugget of richness and so it’s like this chamber that holds a lot and I want to see more of that. I want to see more of that sort of practice more than I want to see work.

I think it has to be both for work and viewed as the work and as the practice because otherwise it changes the meaning too much for me just personally. I think that I want to view it as – this is actually the work. All of it is the work, that it’s not just in practice. Just have a problem with that.

So do you think maybe it’s a semantic thing like not calling it one or the other?

Yeah, it’s both.

Maybe it needs a new definition [laugh].

Well, maybe that’s what the work is doing that it’s actually pushing what it is to be a work and to be a practice.

I think that the blog Spiro was saying before he started, that the blog is going to – if he’s not going to take it down he’s at least going to stop blogging at a certain date once he’s finished, completed the project he’s set for himself and that makes what seemingly a practice a work, the fact that it is a conclusion time or an ending or something that yeah.

Yeah.

The whole blog was specific about this project as such.

It does sort of disperse into parenting relationships.

Yeah.

It comes back.

Yep, fine, yep, that’s right.

What could that new sort of type – new notion or name be for something because I think it’s a really…

I think “work” is fine, you could call it the “work” but you just have to acknowledge that the practice is the work as well in context.

Yeah.

Nothing is necessarily better than the other.

No.

It’s just knowing a different approach and style.

Yeah, it’s just – it is the work .

It’s not that it’s better or the other, but I do – I love this.

[laugh] And I also like just one object as well. For now I like this.

Talking about criticizing I mean I think it ties in with that as well as certain *.

Yeah, and my own bias, definitely. How can it not?

Do you think?

[laugh]

Could I just comment on one thing about…

What about special moments Bianca?

The relationship you made between yourself and the established artists presenting for Midsumma in Gertrude Street and it didn’t – it hadn’t occurred to me before you said that but the idea that Gertrude Street is closed for Midsumma was really only – is really of more importance for you because this is your first Gertrude Street show and so - is this a Gertrude Street show or is this a Midsumma show that happens to be at Gertrude Street and is this your first Gertrude – is this your first you know contemporary outing as a Gertrude Street artist?

As a real artist.

Or is this a fo-Gertrude Street show and at some future point you will have a Gertrude Street show or is this all you’re going to get?

Is this a foot in the door?

So this idea that this like – this is not or is a Gertrude Street show is important to you whereas it would be important to John Meade.

No.

And so this exclusion…

It’s interesting.

… like plays out in your work where it can’t really in John’s.

Yeah.

Yeah, I think that’s…

That’s what I was you know like getting at is this that…

And perhaps it – because it…

If I’d plonked something in there and inhabited the space every day and they were looking at my face very day I think it wouldn’t have been considered a Gertrude Street show in a way.

Right, but you occupied the space?

But you were determined to make it one.

Well, like I would be in there every day, they’ve seen me every single day. Do you know what I mean?

I’m committed to my practice.

Because * space. So I actually don’t know. Probably you know like…

You didn’t have a turn trip and go, “I can’t believe that you’ve just let yourself .”

Yeah.



So Tantrum, why would I…?

You could have gone, “I can’t believe Alexei that you just let yourself in through the front door. You know this is a closed room. I would really appreciate it if you went in through the other space.”

Yeah, but it…

[laugh]

Do you know what I mean? There is maybe that sense that you want to please as well at Gertrude Street.

Yeah.

You don’t want to get off side.

Yeah, no, there was…

It’s so complex isn’t it?

There was all – it was all there.

The interaction is also Midsumma.

You know Spiro likes to be nice and…

And nasty.

…you don’t want to be nasty.

No, I’ve got both, but I didn’t want to.

We all do.

Yeah I didn’t want to burden, you know. Ok that’s it.

That’s basically the whole logic of the activity, he won’t burn his bridges.

[laugh] Yeah. A nice polite little work. [laugh]

That was great.

Thank you.

Thanks Spiro.

Thank you.

Oh, my God.

It’s pretty full on.

Thank you. That’s like really generous.