👉wiki

👉Tate Article

Instructions: There are 72 objects on the table that one can use on me as desired.

Performance: I am the object. During this period I take full responsibility.

Duration: 6 hours (8pm–2am.) Studio Morra, Naples

  • Lmaydev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    276
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    As Abramović described it later: “What I learned was that … if you leave it up to the audience, they can kill you … I felt really violated: they cut up my clothes, stuck rose thorns in my stomach, one person aimed the gun at my head, and another took it away. It created an aggressive atmosphere. After exactly 6 hours, as planned, I stood up and started walking toward the audience. Everyone ran away, to escape an actual confrontation.”

    I swear so many people are actual psychopaths and just good at hiding it.

    • Shialac@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      121
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      A lot of people aren’t even good at hiding it, their traits are just seen as virtues in our modern capitalist society

    • prole
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      1 year ago

      “After exactly 6 hours, as planned, I stood up and started walking toward the audience. Everyone ran away, to escape an actual confrontation.”

      Sounds like the Internet in a nutshell

      • Lmaydev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah it seemed the audience divided into attackers and protectors.

        Genuinely a very interesting story.

        • -☆-@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it really proves the act as art to me. Feels like a definite statement, intentional or not

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What would you even do? If I saw this as an advertised event, I wouldn’t go. Neither participating or spectating sounds very interesting. Only psychopaths are going to show up.

      • DeejUnfazed@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This sums it up for me. An invitation can be open to everyone, but the activity they’re being invited to will determine what sort of people show up. When I read, “Come and do whatever you like to an unresisting human who will sit still for six hours,” I immediately turn away–not just because I’m not interested in “doing whatever I like” to a person, but because I don’t want to be in a room with the crowd of people that I imagine would want to do whatever they like to a person.

      • dylanTheDeveloper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The British have something similar at Buckingham palace. Theirs these guards that just stand around being motionless as possible which attracts people who want to do funny shit to them. They attempt funny shit and get arrested

      • CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        We already have systems in place to funnel ask the sociopaths into positions where they can be monitored by everyone. It’s called capitalism and politics.

      • Klear
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And do what? Being a psycho isn’t illegal in itself.

    • raptir@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      What the fuck. Like I’d throw some paint at her or draw something funny on her but my god.

      • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        ·
        1 year ago

        It was real and loaded. The actor was commited to any outcome including being murdered on stage.

        The audience first tested the waters and gradually escalated to more extreme forms of violence. When the violence started the audience factionalized into those who were committed to stopping her from being shot, arguing and shaming aggressors or physically stepping in.

        While I don’t know if I can condone the piece ethically it certainly says more about human nature than most art pieces.

          • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Weirdly I don’t know if I could class her as a “poor woman” ? She was the one who set up all the objects on the table which included ones that were potentially lethal and she specified the parameters of the piece and very specifically could have stopped the performance at any time by moving of her own volition and speaking. She went into it accepting her own murder as a potential outcome and was committed to carrying on regardless of what happened. It being an art peice would not have protected a participant from a murder charge while assult charges have to be made by the victim of the assault… So there was at least that.

            While she may not have been able to account for the long term psychological effects and may have had some initial optimism that people would not choose the darker options made available… I think terming her a “poor woman” might actually be dismissive of the actual volition and personal grit she had in the construction and performance of the piece? While it may have been ballsy to the point bordering madness dangerous stunt performances where athletes risk death for their audiences are a thing and those performers go in with the same expectation of potential fatality.

            • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Nah, blaming her is weaksauce. It’s not about the art show. It’s about the fact that people were hurting an innocent woman – and she is innocent regardless of her choices – and doing shit they’re not supposed to be doing regardless of what she says.

              The people who made the choice to hurt her should have been recorded and exposed so we know who to trust and who we can’t.

              The art show exposed a truth that humanity has to learn to accept if it’s to protect itself from evil.

              • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Not saying that I am blaming her. The people who hurt her were definitely not good people… Just saying that I feel weird about her being called “poor woman” - like it minimizes the guts of what she did.