What do we envisage this event is about and why are we holding it?
The answer to this question might be be simply that we hope in the next hour or so to continue
the process of reflection, of sharing ideas and imaginings around the recent activities and
preoccupations of the Post Collective. In fact it is an occasion to continue with you the
collective’s ongoing activity of thinking together, listening and the sharing of stories.
But there are also certain ways of mounting what is a public assembly and one that involves and
welcomes a quite intangible and unknown assemblage of ideas and imaginings shared in a
common cultural space. As a way of ensuring things proceed very openly and expansively I
suggest that we proceed lightly and inquisitively by holding all ideas and contributions provided
by everyone today in a way that involves both an enjoyable but also fully participatory
process/event of discussion and listening.
By lightly I do not mean inconsequentially but in a way allowing light to illuminate each idea from
as many perspectives as possible through a more exploratory and playful way.
The number of participants of the Post Collective has recently grown from 4 to 12 and this as we
found has brought a set of new challenges but also new opportunities in the way the collective
works and in terms of facilitating inclusive and effective meetings. An ongoing issue within the
collective has been the issue of speaking and listening at meetings. And in finding ways that
allows everyone to feel as they are able to contribute to the discussions and exchanges. The
inclusive and participatory quality of this meeting today is also of paramount importance and
therefore will a focus of the meeting itself as it proceeds. So please feel free to bring ideas and
suggestions for increasing the participation and openness of the meeting to the table at any time
today.
Another issue in regards to speaking/listening is in acknowledging that we conduct our meetings
in English and recognising how this influences the way the meetings unfold. English is
everyone’s, apart from one person, myself, second language. And it’s the language of the
colonialist and global north to boot. We always aim to introduce other languages if only in the
most exploratory and poetical ways into our meetings and our other activities and this also can
be part of the way we proceed today.
In this regard a good rule is that those who find speaking in public easy, or who tend to speak a
lot, should in discussions try to speak last after everyone else has spoken/ or everyone who
wants to speak has spoken. Even if this and especially if this involves periods of silence.
Allowing silence its place in our collective conversations seems increasingly important, as a
facilitator and opening for listening to whats unheard, to unheard voices and to better hear the
often unheard/unrecognised qualities of speech itself. From my experience, and from one who
tends to speak excessively, if I make a concentrated effort to not speak, to hold onto my
thoughts as long as possible then I find what I wanted to say is more or less said by others
eventually during the meeting. But today we invite you to share your ideas, experiences and
suggestions throughout the proceedings as you are now a participant in this collective process.
Perhaps a useful way of approaching collective conversations such as this is in seeing them as
places for generating a form contemplative activism. This is an activism based on the idea that
within the process of questioning and discussing issues such as inequalities and injustices of
the world we are changing how we think and speak with each other which is the basis to more
effective forms of direct action and protest.
What is the joy of experiencing a sense of collective subjectivity?
Sharing our vision, stories and imaginings is as important as engaging in action and achieving
material outcomes.
Four of us were part of the beginning of Post Collective in 2018 from ODC. Forming the
collective was a way of continuing and consolidating on what we experienced then in that
course at KASK . Qualities of diversity and solidarity arising out of the stories we shared back
then formed the common ground from which the collective sprung and has developed. Many
things seemed possible including art making, care and support for each other and beyond,
seeking employment for those unable to legally work, social activism and so on. In fact what is
termed social reproduction (explain) in all its different manifestations has played a pivotal part
in the collectives ongoing existence.
Can we have a collective language a collective way of employing language?
Adriano Cavarero sees a collective entity or plurality being that which stresses the importance of recognising singularity and uniqueness in relation to individual voices. In her book For more
than one Voice she radically rethinks politics through the role of voice and its uniqueness; a
politics that gives prominence to vocality.
Cavarero argues that prior to any communication of semantic content the voice first
communicates the uniqueness of the person who is vocalising: ‘the truth of the vocal […]
proclaims simply that every human being is a unique being, and is capable of manifesting this
uniqueness with the voice, calling and infecting the other, and enjoying this reciprocal
manifestation.
Vocal express is the communication of all communication. Because if we think of the language
of discourse as privileged form of communication what it does is above all communicate is the
uniqueness contained and expressed through the voice. She refers as example to the
communication between mother and child. Here communication does not happen in terms of
semantics it is not rational articulation/ logical speech but is vocal communication. Vocal
expression is very important form of communication because we learn from a mother tongue
that its not purely grammar, structure, a syntax, a logical system but also a wide vocal range
(see sound poety). Voice is Rhythm as every spoken language has a rhythm and every voice
has a rhythm and voice is about breathing and about life. For Cavarero voice is not simply vocal
expression through the throat it is also means acoustic reception between voice. It is both
emission and listening.
HOW do we conduct our conversations so listening has it proper and most effective place.
Notice the difference between listening and hearing and think of it in terms of listening
collectively to build a sense of togetherness. Attuning ourselves to others by being in the
collective process of listening, of sharing and of experiencing together. Do not overlook this side
of things.
Listening to voices includes listening to sound, the whole range of sounds that each voice
produces beyond and as part of producing meaning and communication.
WE ARE A COLLECTIVE/alliance. We are here together to build and maintain an autonomous
(safe) space for reflection, active listening, action and open exchange. We invite you to join is in
this spirit of togetherness (collectivity).
The word collective derives from Latin COLLIGERE to gather together. There are different types
of collectivity, toxic and nontoxic. What are the characteristics of these different types? The
small version as in the case of POCO and the larger version as in the broader society.
Remember the societal call for collective action during the pandemic. Did it go far enough as to
become global and as such providing equal levels of health care and economic support to the
global population. Now we face multiple crises globally, environmental, demographic, economic
that are only addressable on a collective level.
Being part of a collective involves making a contract/pact agreement between its members.
Whether this is formally stated or unstated is a question that resonates in terms of the contract
we are making now.
There are different types of collectives some fleeting and some long lasting. But for me being
connected to this collective offers a frame for a certain type of thinking that I would not have
access to otherwise. Something that is very hard if not impossible to have in an institution
setting. Being together on many levels and deciding what are the parameters for discussing
these questions are are all very simple but very important things.
A question that has preoccupied me since being part of POCO is in thinking and exploring how a
collective might be a poetic as well as a political/social entity. And as such bring about change
and experimentation in both poetical and social areas? A poetics of the uncontrollable involving
accidents and unpredictability seems implicit to the existence of any collective. Nuar Alsadir
writes “Political resistance, poetry, and self-revelation spring from the provocative, impish drive
to burst free from external constraints….”. A defining element of poetry is the trans-formative
feeling it creates in its recipient, a sense of being brought into contact with the essence of life.
The beauty of play, of joy of being with others, as Lacan said everyone is a poem “A poem that
is being written, even if it looks like a subject.”
Contradictions and uncontrollability are very much part of the daily workings of any healthy
collective.
Are we in a time of emergency? If so we through collective understanding and experiences and
insist that forms of radical refusal, rather than adaption and resignation are not only possible but
utterly necessary.
In our world collectivity is used in various negative and toxic ways. Often the collective mindset
generated by society is to deny or even oppose the possibilities of collectivity. There is a certain
extreme individualism where collectives have a tendency to deny the collective nature of human
life.
David Graeber and David Wengrow in the Dawn of Everything explain that we are all projects of
collective self creation so how is it that we came to be trapped in such tight conceptual shackles
that we can no longer even imagine the possibility of reinventing ourselves.
The construction of the self has always been a collective matter, a matter of interference and of
resistance, of the distribution competences and the division of tasks.
The notion of flourishing was something we started to explore recently; its about having a life in
which one can experience the pleasures one requires to flourish which include caring for others.
It means attaining a certain wisdom, collectively and individually, so as to sense a way of
flourishing, of achieving a sustainable and ongoing level of joy.
WE ARE POROUS. We aim to grow, connect and expand into the world on multiple fronts and
directions simultaneously.
Immediate and global/ micro and marco perspectives of this clause are interlinked and cannot
be separated. One question we posed is in asking if the word porous is the right word for what
we want to express and if not what might be another word or words?
Porous is a structural term implying something has many pores that allow air, water, other
elements to enter and exit.
Being porous within the collective and being porous as a collective in relation to the world at
large.
As I see it it the notion of porous leads to thinking if its implications also on a global level. For
countries and communities to be porous in the true sense of the word would mean the abolition
of borders and allowing universal freedom of movement.
The problem is that the global system of nation states is just taken for granted, as if countries
and the inequalities between them were natural and permanent. Sustaining the system of
borders means all nation states must represent as formally equal and sovereign and such a
conceit requires a deep historical amnesia about colonialism and ongoing conditions of
economic domination by certain countries over other countries. Why do we accept the world of
hugely unequal nation states. Is it not the fact that citizenship and borders do not protect
democracy and rights but in fact reproduce various forms of inequality, injustice and violence.
Borders Harm us All Abolish them! Borders today reproduce racial and colonial inequalities,
which explains why bordering practices are most intense at the borders between the developed
and underdeveloped world.
Like Angela Davis in her account of prisons, also immigration controls are obsolete and should
be abolished. Borders and prisons are both punitive systems for managing so-called
undesirable people, and both punish people through immobilisation and forced exile. In both
cases state violence is directed towards managing and restricting movement. Its about a
struggle over movement and the right to locomotion, to move freely over fences and out of
cages.
We must question the entire logic of a world order based on borders and refuse to accept a
world of grossly unequal nation states. Citizenship and orders do not protect democracy and
rights rather they reproduce various forms of inequality, injustice and violence on all sorts of
levels.Borders are not on the frontiers of countries but are evident everyday and everywhere
determining how people relate to each other and how they have access to employment,
healthcare, welfare support and much more.
Strangely borders promise to unite citizens through the exclusion of migrants but this is a hollow
promise. Rather borders become systems of surveillance and control over whole populations,
migrants and citizens both. This involves new forms of dis-entitlement and conditionality within
welfare, education, health services, first tried on migrants and then extended to others.
Abolition Feminism. One cannot exist without the other.
The abolition of borders requires a radical transformation of society and our relationship to one
and another allowing for a world in which everyone has freedom of movement and expression.
Immigration and borders produce racial distinctions and hierarchies and perpetrate colonial
inequalities and produce new forms of racial injustice such as refuge camps bordering the sea,
vast biometric databases and control upon us all.
We are Porous because we’re commoning Commoning as a cultural stratagy.
Instead of commons being considered in terms of a particular type of resource or goods but
rather as a social relation and as an activity then what we are doing here sits that bill.
Commons as a verb rather than noun of commoning rather than commons. It depends not on
private or public property but the way we relate to these objects or phenomenon. Commoning as
a process of sharing and of opening up some activity or set of objects/ being porous. Breaking
from the capitalist models of exchange and valuation. Pascal Gielen and Thijs Lijster define
cultural commoning as “Culture kept alive by people – by repetition, adaptation, actualisation,
interpretation and criticism- and therefore continuously in development.” and then point out that
culture necessarily consists in commoning practices and in reverse each form of commoning
has a cultural quality.
Practices of commoning always include an imaginary and intangible quality
through which we make sense of the world in a very unique and valuable way.
There is a lot of porosity that occurs through the combining of Post Collective with BNA-BBOT
and is a relationship that offers a special space for cultural commoning. This is the porosity that
arises between private and public spaces and within thresholds and the border between inside
and outside. Its about building and recognising and rich urban commons and place of openness,
incompleteness and porosity. And importantly uncontrolability. As Stavos Stavrides states a
space of commoning is not something an individual can create but something that has to
happen as a collective practice.
WE TAKE TIME
In The Uncontrollability of the World Hartmut Rosa describes how we are driven by the desire to
make the world controllable.
The process of being in a collective means allowing all sorts of forces and elements to play out
and allowing for a certain uncontrollability and unpredictability to be part of everything we do
together.
Institutional time is the time of money, power and ultimately a time of control.
A book that influenced me when we started to write the contract/paact last year was Laura
Raicovich Culture Strike Art Museums in the Age of Protest In it she explains how: art museums
and institutions claim to be neutral but in fact are not. It gives a really in depth account/ an
insiders account of how art museums and art institutions position themselves as progressive
and inclusive while in fact actually work hard at maintaining the status quo.
As far as time and working with institutions goes Raicovich writes: “From an institutional
perspective, I firmly believe that the single most important and impactful way to make changes
is to radically slow down.” Indicating that the pace of cultural production is simply too fast. She
continues: Do things better not faster. Slowing down allows time to make important decisions
and being able to engage with more people in the process making cultural spaces more
inclusive.
WE ARE NOT TOKENS
Being taken as tokens and shadow puppets is something we have been conscious off,
especially in terms of the collective’s involvement with art institutions and also artist. A big issue
has been in allowing a mutual exchange on the institutional level that is able to hold a variety of
voices and listen to them attentively. Institutions involved in participatory art projects such as this
one need to be attended to in terms of contraindications and obstacles in such spaces.
Token Story: a institutional conference on The Other where the collective was other-ed.
Fear of the other is an addiction to the same. There was a academic protocol and formula to the
presentations which we certainly and intentionally broke from. We started with sound poetry
which is a way of bringing attention to other side to vocal expression. We also spoke between
ourselves within the presentation deciding on what to speak about allowing for a certain
transparency and improvisation to the presentation. We in fact explored what Cavarero calls a
pluriphony, which is a plurality of different voices and singularities. Not a cacophony and not a
polyphony but something in between.
And most crucially and unexpectedly the scheduled round table at the end of the conference
was cancelled by the organisers at the last minute. This was to be an important part of our
planned contribution to the conference that was taken away as it was the place we would be
able to bring our ideas and thoughts into open dialogue with the other presenters and with the
audience.
We were criticised by the organisers for our unprofessional and under-prepared presentation.
For sure this was one of the experiences that made the contact/paact seem like a necessary
part of our involvement with institutions and other groups.
Contract or not contract.
A few years ago the collective had a residency in the Kunsthal Gent for the purpose of
developing and writing a manifesto, code of conduct/ or and a code of care. But we quickly hit
certain barriers and questions in doing this. One being in finding the right kind of language that
both reflects the collective and that does not follow the standardised language of such
documents. It was felt what ever we did needed to reflect the diverse voices, languagues and
experiences of those in the collective and those who join us in the future.
We decided to not write a manifesto but rather manifest our ideas and aspiration in action and in
other ways. Hence this contract/Paact
But the issue of language within terms of the contract/paact is something very important and
gives rise to lots of questions and issues. One is of translation and transmission, of mutating,
transmuting, ones language to fit into the language of authority and control in terms of contracts
and agreements.
ost of all in terms of the new phase in the life of the collective the writing of the contract/paact
provides an opportunity for rethinking and building upon why the collective came into existence
and what its main aims and aspirations should be.
The social contract and the immediate crises that the world faces might be a big issue that
motivates how a collective engages with institutions such as art schools and art museums etc.
Have we been demobilised by the weaponizing of the general Zeitgeist of despair and dystopian
thinking.