The self and anti-cool

Had my first visit to an art festival yesterday! Ms Daniela our Cyberarts instructor decided that it would be enriching to have a class excursion to the M1 Fringe Festival organized by The Necessary Stage, and sponsored by, well, the telecommunications company M1 (Ms Daniela said all these details have to be taken notice). It has always been known as the Fringe Festival, I thought having a commercial organization prefixing a creative event pretty much defiles the free spirit of art.

Regardless, I felt like a 6-year-old again. Can't remember if there was actually any class excursion during my schooling days. It is a pity that I can't recall any. But I shall not digress.

The theme of the Fringe Festival this year is Art and Disability. In spite of the supposedly more advanced, more accepting and matured community of this era we still see segregation of what we consider less perfect than what we are or have. The theme, I gather, probably seeks to redefine what disability is, and puts it in a different light that reflects it in all of us. Disability is after all, in the eye and mind of the observer. The works of the artists hope to reveal the alternative views that we can all adopt in our quest to understand and redefine the notion of disability.

Right...Just realized how that ties in to Jan Rothuizen's work, erm...

Rothuizen's installation at the Waterloo Gallery was the first work that we headed to once we arrived at the Singapore Art Museum. Entitled The Self Collector, it showcased six (if I get the numbers right) probing, at the same time rather humorous pieces. With regards to the intellectual and artistic depth I must say that I still have quite a long way to go. My classmates however have been offering some very enlightening explanations.

[[ I would hate to describe an artwork with solely words. so, more on Rothuizen once I get the pics from my classmate ]]

It wasn't in the initial plan but we were told that there was a performance art at a gallery not far from where we were. So those of us who have done our FAST diagrams on Rothuizen's work (it is still after all a class field trip, can't escape the assignments!) went ahead to the Queen Gallery. The performance art is indescribable. Literally, really, because I came out not understanding a thing. Still, STILL, it was my first ever performance art and it was just captivating!

When we were in the gallery we took our places on the stools right in the middle of the room. We didn't know how the performance was going to start, at least I didn't, not until I noticed that a man in gray suit was walking around with a bunch of roses. Slowly he moved, the tap-tapping of his soles gradually reduced our chatter to silence. A woman in blood-red dress then walked in. The man tried to present the roses to the woman, she refused. He kept trying, both hastened their pace until he finally caught her hand. A pause, then she took a look at the roses and reached out for them. The man walked away. She positioned the stalks vertically, then went to a corner pulled out a shear, stood in front of us and gave a rather intimidating snip with the blades.

About then I realised that this person was the artist. Tomoko Takahashi a.k.a anti-cool. Ah I thought she was pretty cool. After deflowering a couple expensive roses (considering the price of those stalks at this time around Valentine's) she put down her shears, picked the two fallen rose buds, stood up with a blank expression walked towards me, handed me a bud, then turned and handed Noel the other one.

And then she went on and killed all the remaining roses. I'll save the details. She went out after the roses scene, and came back wit a really, really huge ladder. Started to paint black the projected faces on the wall. Did some sit ups...I mean...did a LOT of sit ups. 105 altogether to be exact. And did it right on the bench in front of us. In her red dress. And black heels. Pretty hard not to find it amusing. Already, watching woman in dress and heels on the ladder with a tin of paint and brush was unusual, but then this...105 sit ups. And it wasn't an easy feat, I suspect for her too, she did pant and stopped now and then.

I was wondering what she was trying to put across by this "torture" to herself (with my level of fitness 105 sit ups IS torture to my eyes). When she passed 100 I thought she was never going to stop and that she was going to continue until all of us left the gallery. Pretty relieved she did. But then. She went to the corner. Pulled off the black garbage bag and revealed --

A treadmill.

Yes, she jogged on the treadmill. In a dress. On heels.

Strangely I can't remember how the performance ended. She left the gallery shortly after the treadmill scene, I can't remember what transpired before then. Must have been too shaken up by the idea of running on heels and imposing all that force to the back bone.

One of my classmates suggested that the first scene of the man and woman was a metaphor of contemporary match-making services. And how unhappy it has led the lady, because she then stemmed off the roses, and her giving me the rose may have been her way of wishing me (I suppose, a representation of participants in the match-making context) luck. The blackening of the faces may have symbolized the gradual loss of identity, and the sit-ups and treadmill were all the effort and torture girls impose on themselves.

I thought the whole performance was about the environment. About shattered hopes and forgotten human race, and the acts of redemption.

Anyhow, anti-cool, I believe, wanted to etch a picture of red dress, heels and treadmill on everyone's mind. She succeeded.

She was going to talk about her art (which is called Reset Button) at 7pm the same day. Didn't stay for it. I am still curious about her own interpretation of Reset Button. Will I ever find out?

Art. I knew it was deep. But until yesterday, I have never felt its depth.

---

M1 Singapore Fringe Festival