Of the present of the body Conversation with Saa Asenti and Ana Vujanovi by Bojana Bauer

What to do with local specificity? Evacuate it from the work in order to smoothly communicate (or flirt) with global, meaning western, trends, from which it is excluded? Or, base your work on it, at the price of failure and exclusion? These questions resonate strongly through the projects that performance artist Saa Asenti has been developing in the past few years, in close collaboration with culturel and performance theorist Ana Vujanovi. But these are not the only questions. Asenti and Vujanovi worked on a large scope of ideas and formats under the umbrella of artistic research project Indigo Dance critically exploring what possibilities of action are there for the artist that navigates between the expectations of the western market and its capturing logic, between myths of local specificity and postsocialist fictions? Hence the arborescence of the project that goes beyond the stage productions and works through experiments, research, collaborations. But since plurality also became mot dordre for (western) contemporary art, this brings us back to the central issue of the project: who actually detains the position to set the parameters? And what does it mean to be contemporary? I saw Saa Asentis performance My private Biopolitics in 2008, at Centre National de la Danse, and since than had the opportunity to follow the work that him and Ana Vujanovi are developing. We recently talked, mainly through e-mail, about what is put at stake in his projects.

Bojana Let's start with the performance My private bio-politics. This work is concerned with the context and conditions in which it is made. It is radically self-reflexive, not only regarding the materials and ways of constructing (poetics) but particularly regarding the social, economic and political conditions in which it is produced and presented. As such it performs its contemporaneity, which would make it synchronized with the concerns of (west)european dance field. Yet Eastern Europe is both the context at stake and the subject matter of the work. Knowing that, what meaning did contemporaneity gain for you throughout this process? Saa: I would not say that this work is completely synchronized with concerns of (west)European dance field. It might look like that but only at the first glimpse. I would say that with this performance we tried to raise a specific question that we formulate as the RIGHT to contemporaneity. When you look at the majority of performance productions from western European context, you see that those works take contemporaneity for granted, as their given reality. It is their given starting ground if you like which is in a way understandable due to the infrastructure that provides the dance scene in the West. Contemporaneity understood as quality of being of present, in my view calls for urgent rethinking of ones actual artistic, political, social position. It is then about ones ability to act or to put out in public the request for change. I understand it through Walter Banjamins concept of tigers leap. Here, the present is a retroactive force that rereads and rewrites the past and breaks the continuum of history. It brings the request for different order and embeds its own time as a new past of the (possible) future. This position, the request for history to be

transformed, the re-orientatation of history towards the future, in other words, this responsibility of / in present is what interests me. Bojana Its interesting you talk about the right to contemporaneity. Its an ethical task, really. At the same time contemporaneity (as a synonym of post-modern, end of master narratives etc.) is often perceived and theorized as crisis, or impossibility to give image to the present. Through your artistic practice, what do you perceive as agency of this benjaminian arrest of automaton of history? Saa: I think it is about continuously finding ways to act. It is often about new configurations, groupings, collaborations and so on. More importantly I see it as an actual call for inscribing oneself, by breaking the regular operating flow of the system. This happens not only on the level of the content (of art) but also on the level of organization, modes of production, or procedures in work. Also, I would say that aiming at giving voice to what is kept silent is an important task. Its important to think about how do we create public for example and to act upon it. And speaking of voice, it is not just representation, it is also about the action that turns the margin into its own spokesman. Bojana I'm interested in the evolution of the piece, which went from the "Work in progress", to "Work in regress", which is a actually a radicalization of the principle of contextualisation. Perhaps you could elaborate on the concept of work in regress. Saa: Yes, in the first period the piece was a work-in-progress. We were constantly rethinking the piece and its position. We have realized after some time that performance started to exhaust its departing concept through the regular circulation within the contemporary dance system. Simply said, the performance was quite regularly invited by (western) theatres and festivals and it was touring within that system. So, we decided to change the conceptual frame of the work in relation to the system and to reverse the process to see what happens if within this regular circulation we say: the more invitations, the less performance as live event. We did this in order to keep the research character of our collaboration as central part of the project. We certainly did not want to lose it because of market demands. The work in regress also meant that we could create conditions to question and deepen the critical potential of this work. But most of all we wanted to continue with the exploration of the starting point of this work. It was crucial to always re-think the micro and macro conditions in which this work appears. Thats what we named work-in-regress. Concretely, in what we call now its second phase, the performance was gradually canceled through the process of regression. Every time I was invited to perform it I performed less and less of the live event, replacing its parts with the video documentation. Bojana Im curious then about the fact that the performance gradually closes into a text, into its own trace, or document, outside the materiality of your body. What is now the status of such an object? Saa: At the end there was no more performance as art work but just the video document. In my view however, this creates an opening for new (re)readings, or further problematisation of the work itself. Its conditions, relations, history, etc. Also, we are aware that this decision

might lead us to a trap. It might look like we are putting this document in a museum in which it will stay preserved. Thats why we have deliberately chosen the self-abolition of the work (as art object) in order to open a new phase in which it will produce new materials, new documents outside of the stage piece My private biopolitics. These new aspects and methods than would have the potential of intervention in the actual context, or contexts. I would say that the new status of it is to be a kind of generator for new private biopolitcs of other artists from other contexts but this is already a new phase of this work that we can explain after. Bojana The piece is essentially an autobiography of Sasa-performer, Sasa-dancer, Sasacultural worker.... it brings to paroxysm the idea of performance based on the specificity of the performer. This specificity lies in the personal narrative and the fact that it is always already political. But it might appear that the moving body, as opposed to the talking body is more of an example, or a quote. Is than the moving body limited to exemplifying? Ana: If I understand your question and its implications correctly I would say its not. The moving body is not considered as an example at all. Neither it is considered in opposition to the talking body. What is at stake here are different regimes of the body from the body as physical organism to social/political subject. The point is that the whole scope takes part in rendering us, human individuals (in our private lives as well as on the stage). There is no stepping out from the social field. Moreover, we are here particularly interested in the moving body usually seen (especially in dance field) as a universal and neutral medium as a biopolitical agency. It is constructed by social institutions, and at the same time it is the place of resistance, because the institutions (Low, regulative and normative dispositifs, bio-power) need our bodies to be confirmed as institutions. They are fucked up if we miss-understand and -answer their interpellations. Bojana: In this sense, the self-narrative that you use in the performance is at the core of biopower/bio-politics paradigm. In EU countries, life experience in some frameworks is translated into diplomas and both experience and diplomas are translated into potential profit. Its interesting since, in one interview I heard Saa saying that he doesnt quite present himself as dancer, due to, amongst other things, lack of formal training and diploma. Saa: Yes, and I must say that this amongst other things is actually crucial. I dont have any formal training or diploma in any field. It is not only the case with dance education. But it was my deliberate choice in the 90s when I was at the age of entering university. To study at Art Academy in Serbia at that time was out of the question for me because I found it of to be or not to be importance to resist social regime of that time in Serbia. By this I mean that being part of cultural or educational institution would not give you much options in the matter of acting in public or producing conflict or antagonism in public through different performance forms. I studied Agriculture but stopped before my graduation. Amonst other things are those different regimes of the body that Ana mentioned and in my case particularly: body in the war striped to bare life or refugee body or protest body or activist body or performing body and many othersbut those are not incarnated as narratives in my work. It doesnt interest me on that level because it would just foster the victimization process or marginalization. In Serbia to be recognized as a dancer you need to graduate at secondary ballet school. In the West you need to have something similar I guess or to have danced in certain dance productions, choreographies, to go for auditions, residencies, etc. Until a year ago I never

danced in anyones choreography (even that one was not in traditional way), never went for any auditions, did only one residence for my research, etc. So it is very hard for me to say that Im a dancer. But anyway there are so many dancers that need a job so they dont need me on top (its a joke). My body is not formed by dance but Im interested in the field since I have recognized in it a big potential for producing active thought about body, politics, surrounding context, art world, etc. I see it in some contemporary authors, choreographers, theoreticians, performers, etc. Ana: If we look at the title for example - My private bio-politics has several layers. First one is this oxymoron title. Politics is considered as something that is public and not private. But how I understand the things with bio-politics is that it is something that is always private and that is always enacted through an individual body. Second is that we made a shift from politics to bio-politics in the sense that it is not an abstract story about macro politics neither in the fields of dance nor culture, society, etc. but it is how individuals and individual bodies go through politics. Thats why performative aspect is the crucial for this work. It would not be the same if it would be only said or writtenAlso, what was important is the stress the difference between geo-politics and bio-politics. If you say geo-politics it still means that it is abstract and that you cannot change anything within global structure this but if you say biopolitics then it means that you are the one who is responsible for enacting this politics or breaking through this politics, changing it, etc. Bojana: Calling yourself cultural worker, seams to be a syntagm quite specific to Serbian contemporary scene, or portion of it. I dont think I heard this term in Western Europe. Artists still define themselves as generic artist, or more specifically according to discipline, market niche, current occupation and so on. Can it be that you are radicalizing something there, and that Western Europe is trailing? Sasa: Maybe synonym in Western Europe would be agent? And maybe in Western Europe dance or art community had gone much further in work / occupation differentiation? Whether it is a synonym or not I believe it depends on political position of one to act. Probably you havent heard it in the West because artist there usually only function in their market niche and discipline through current occupation, as you said, having their agents or being agents by themselves (for themselves which is a complex problem not only in the West anymore but now in transitional East, too). I believe that in those cases agen(t)cy ends up in marketability, which I find a pitty and not enough totally empty of original meaning of the word agent "one who acts" (agentem), in a way of agere "to set in motion" as force or substance which produces a phenomenon. This understanding of agens is what I believe can offer us, no matter if we are in West or East, but if we are not satisfied with current state of art scene (market), possibility to act differently meaning outside of already established relations within the niche or occupation and more towards public matters and relations of art, dance community, audienceor society. Im not sure that artist in general in this part of Europe are radicalizing something by calling themselves cultural workers. Probably it is also heritage from socialism. This is very important question to clarify terminology and explain local specificity that enables it. At the moment I feel that Im in the period of trying to work on it so I cant give you an elaboration on this but only some thoughts.

As artist and agent, in one hand, my interest goes towards understanding of convergence of poiesis and praxis through the history and position of artist regarding poiesis and praxis, its actual state in contemporary world, its potential to intervene and structure social relations, public and art; and in the other hand to understand my own experience on this scale in last 15 years of dealing with surrounding social-political context of art and activism in Serbia. Your question evoked a line from one song about labour: mi junaci rada svog This is very challenging for me to experience and understand in above mentioned context. Bojana Your reflection was developed also within a concrete research project called Tigers Leap into the Past. What are the characteristics of that process? Ana: It was an extremely interesting process for both of us. I would say it is an example of fruitful inter-disciplinary collaboration, because the inter-disciplinarity was what we brought into the project and tried to really get the most out of it. It was not some project proposed or requested by some cultural foundation and than faked by us, as it often happens. So, we started like this: we were both connected with EDA (East-Dance-Academy) platform and empowered by its intervening agenda in the dance field. Sasa is a dance worker from Serbia and he brought his concern of his own local dance history and also his criticality toward its usual perception; Im a theorist and cultural worker and I brought the methodology that shaped the political and theoretical (even epistemological I would say) dimension of the project and opened it for possible future usages, misusages etc. by the others (in the region, but also wider). A Tigers Leap into the Past functions now both as an archive and as an open-source methodology of researching history. We have made several interviews with the actors of the local dance scene in the 20th century who has addressed each other and thus directed the process of interviewing. This project together with the interviews is still ongoing. In strict methodological terms, we combined Benjamin and Foucault enacting Benjamins tigers leap to construct a rhizomatic and genealogic archive of the images, stories and memories of the scene. In political terms it is not about correcting the past, but is our intervention in the present as an investment into the (different) future. The one in which a multitude of voices will be heard, rendering a linear master univocal (hi)story not possible any more. Bojana You mentioned open-source methodology. This touches upon the question of knowledge production and sharing. You wrote on the question of the second hand knowledge, precisely in the face of the east-west, center-periphery knowledge streaming in Europe. But let's say that in dance, knowledge is by definition second hand. Despite the "authentic" bodies of big masters, and the tradition of transmission (training, learning choreography) through direct presence, paradoxically most of knowledge reaches most people in second, third, forth.... hand. Origins of movements, exercises, even choreographed movements are lost in time, mostly due to lack of writing. Then, working in dance and in the East Europe might seam like a double handicap, but it is also a privileged position for critical reflection. Based on your research so far, can you share your analysis of this double bind: second hand in space and second hand in time. Ana: I would be very short and clear here. That is exactly what it is about. There is no firsthand knowledge in its purity at all and furthermore, second hand knowledge is not a handicap.

Quite contrary, the concept reveals the social regulation of knowledge production and distribution. Performing arts (dance, lets say) are perfect example of this, as you indicated in the question. Therefore, there is one important point here. The valorization of the first- and second-hand knowledge in the art field for example only shows the social hierarchy of being privileged in having the access to the source. The fact is that there is no source that we can access directly. In Horkheimers words, both the source and our eyes are already determined by social conditions (they have historical character). Bojana So what methods of sharing are you putting into practice now? And can you elaborate on generating new private biopolitics? Saa: In the third phase of our research, we go far both from the original version of this performance as work-in-progress and from the later phase as work-in-regress. We shift from art work toward discursive platform that comprise My private biopolitcs performance, Tigers leap Into the Past lecture and Methodological games workshop. Ana: This open research platform is meant to be an artistic means, or a methodological tool, which we wish to share with contemporary dance and performance artists, who are willing to engage in reflection on their contexts and public work and who have something to say about structuration of global World of contemporary dance and performance. Saa: The games that we use to build up the discussion that aims at producing new possible private biopolitics are games developed and proposed within the Everybodys Toolbox project, initiated by Mette Ingvartsen and Alice Chauchat and then created and used by... anybody. You can find info about this web platform and each game on www.everybodys.org. We took the impersonation game and/or generique game. Then we use swapping the authorship game that is about unrealized or impossible project of the participants of the workshop. In Madrid this year, during the Impresentable festival we also used the methods and ideas from tigers leap to grasp the past of contemporary dance there. Basically we did interviews and than we made a map of the network of connections, teachers, dancers, choreographers and so on, as far in the past as the memory of the participants reached. Part of the workshop is also a discussion that we propose about each specific scene or context in which we are invited to think with participants about their conditions of work, conceptual framework, public reception of their work, etc. November 2009 This interview was comissioned by TEAM Network-Transdisciplinary European Art Magazines