{"id":1833,"date":"2020-02-16T20:30:17","date_gmt":"2020-02-16T19:30:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/andreaswolf.net\/?post_type=nor-team&p=1833"},"modified":"2020-04-09T20:43:00","modified_gmt":"2020-04-09T18:43:00","slug":"menagerie-tiere-im-zoo-der-kunst","status":"publish","type":"nor-team","link":"https:\/\/andreaswolf.net\/en\/teamwork\/menagerie-tiere-im-zoo-der-kunst\/","title":{"rendered":"Menagerie \u2013 Animals In The Art Zoo"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n

Menagerie \u2013 Animals in the Art Zoo<\/h1>\n

Toolbox \u2013 Finnisch-Deutscher Projektraum, Koloniestra\u00dfe 120
\nin cooperation with Madeinwedding<\/a><\/p>\n

Exhibition April 29\u2014May 20, 2016<\/strong> 29. April bis 20. Mai 2016
\nCurated by Anna E. Wilkens and Andreas Wolf with support by Karen Koltermann<\/p>\n

The works in the exhibition deal with the most diverse relationships between animals, including human animals.<\/p>\n

Menagerie<\/h2>\n

Text: Anna E. Wilkens<\/em><\/p>\n

\u2018Menageries\u2019 \u2013 courtly collections of animals (16th to 18th century), similar to Cabinets of Curiosity, in which animals were \u2018displayed\u2019 for reasons of being \u2018exotic\u2019 \u2013 are precursors to the modern zoo. The zoo, developed in the 19th century, relies on taxonomies that stem from the 18th century. These taxonomies are part of the modern scientific paradigm: zoos belong to modernity; menageries are pre-modern.<\/p>\n

To the present day, the word \u2018menagerie\u2019 in German has undergone a shift of meaning, nowadays it signifies (in figurative use) a random and unsystematic collection of items or people. The example in the online edition of Duden, the German spelling authority for this usage is: \u2018a whole menagerie of artists was present\u2019. Ansammlung) <\/em>von K\u00fcnstlern war zugegen\u201c.<\/p>\n

The exhibition\u2019s title points to the process of assembling the works: between curatorial concept and serendipity, and it furthermore emphatically stresses historicity: different historical stages in occidental human discourse on animals, especially post-medieval.

<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Agency<\/em>Animal Turn<\/h4>\n

Reflection on prejudices and assumptions pertaining to one\u2019s own historical standpoint have increased considerably in contemporary (cultural studies) discourse on animals in the last four decades, and even more so since the beginning of the 21st century. Agency<\/em> f\u00e4hig, und in dieser haben verschiedenste Tiere die vielf\u00e4ltigsten Beziehungen zu Menschen. Oder: menschliche und andere Tiere interagieren miteinander.<\/p>\n

Im \u00fcberkommenen Weltbild war zun\u00e4chst \u201eder Mensch\u201c (im Singular, weil alle Exemplare als prinzipiell gleich gedacht wurden), dann hat \u201eer\u201c (auf jeden Fall ist der exemplarische Mensch m\u00e4nnlichen Geschlechts) Tiere domestiziert und sich die Welt untertan gemacht.<\/p>\n

Tentatively this can even be called a paradigm shift (according to Kuhn), a change in thought that goes beyond a turn; a turn being understood as a change of perspective in one academic discipline, while at the same time broadening the scope through working interdisciplinary. The Animal Turn is one in a whole menagerie of turns (linguistic, cultural, spatial, corporeal, emotional, material, iconic etc.). All of these share the common trait of liberating thought from the Cartesian epistemological paradigm that is based on dichotomies: res cogitans and res extensa, spirit and body, and based on this primary dichotomy there are culture and nature, human and animal, man and woman, and the analogously construed proximity of \u2018culture\/human\/male versus nature\/animal\/woman, which still hasn\u2019t been overcome completely\u2019 (Carola Sachse). in<\/em> der Menschwerdung, ohne die sie nicht oder ganz anders stattgefunden h\u00e4tte. Das Gleiche gilt f\u00fcr Hunde, die ohne ihre Kooperation mit Menschen nicht w\u00e4ren oder ganz anders w\u00e4ren.<\/p>\n

\u201cBeings do not preexist their relatings.\u201d (Donna Haraway)<\/p>\n

Plurality \u2013 Relationality
\n<\/strong>

Plurality \u2013 Relationality<\/h2>The new paradigm holds that entities, of any kind, \u2018do not pre-exist their relatings\u2019 (Donna Haraway). For example Hannah Arendt states that the world we inhabit is in the \u2018between\u2019, that which exists between people (for Arendt always people, not animals), and that humans always and from the beginning have existed in the plural, as more than one \u2013 contrary to German philosophical Idealism, according to which each and every subject is basically the same (all individuals \u2018function\u2019 in the same way and therefore don\u2019t exist in plurality, only in the plural).\n\nThe notion of world as plurality we find for example in Universal Pragmatism (Habermas), in Praxeology, Actor Network Theory and Relationalism. We are what we are in and through our relations with each other, animals included.\n

\n

Agency: Animals as Acting Entities<\/h2>\n\nHumans, in the course of emphasising relations as the cornerstone of all existence, recently began to acknowledge agency in beings formerly perceived as things or thing-like objects, not capable of acting. The possibility of perceiving animals as acting beings relies on a changed concept of action: action is no longer seen as being necessarily linked to intention, nor having an intention as prerequisite. Actions do not have to be conscious and purposeful to be called actions. So we can conceive of interactions as actions without these actions mandatorily being intentional. Animals are capable of agency and they have a whole lot of different relationships with humans (human animals). Or: humans and other animals interact.\n

\nIn the traditional world view, first there was man (definitely in the singular, one man, since all specimen are basically the same), than \u2018he\u2019 (the exemplary human is always male) domesticated animals and subdued the world.\n

\nContrary to this notion, the re-interpretation of historical relations between humans and other animals begins at the beginning of humanity; for example, dogs are no longer perceived as domesticated wolfs, but wolfs and early humans shaped alliances, cooperating in ways that were of fundamental importance for homo becoming human and wolf becoming dog. Without each other, they wouldn\u2019t be what they are or they wouldn\u2019t even be at all.\n

\nThe works in the exhibition-zoo are grouped according to those relations of humans and other animals that we can see in them. The assemblages of works are called \u201ccompounds\u201d, \u201cenclosures\u201d, \u201chouses\u201d etc., like in a zoo. There are of course more possible relations than are shown in the exhibition.<\/strong>

\nCompound of Friendship; Compound of Chance Encounters; Homage to a Species; Compound of Taxonomies; House of Relatives; Enclosure of Identification of Humans with Other Animals; Cage of Preparation; Enclosure of Humans Hunting other Animals; Compound of Animals as Shapes in Art; Dreamlike Encounters\/Suspension of Hierarchies between Humans and Other Animals.\nSome animals have left their compounds or are running around the zoo as strays or wild animals.
\nEin paar Tiere haben ihre Gehege verlassen oder laufen als Wildtiere im Zoo herum.<\/p>\n
\n

Artists<\/h4>\n

Aleksandar Jestrovi\u0107,\u00a0 Berlin (Malerei)
\nAlexander Horn, Mannheim (Malerei)
\nArchi Galentz, Berlin (Zeichnung)
\nBuffy Klama Berlin (Zeichnung)
\nCarolina Brack, Berlin (Cutout)
\nCatherine Bourdon, Berlin (Malerei)
\nChristof Zwiener, Berlin (Video)
\nDunja Hamdorf, Hamburg (Zeichnung)
\nEike Laeuen, Berlin (Fotografie)
\nErik Weiser, Leipzig (Skulptur)
\nHannah Dougherty, Berlin (Zeichnung)
\nHeikki L\u00e4nkinen, Finnland (Malerei)
\nHenrik Jacob, Berlin (Knete)
\nIlia Kitup, Berlin (Zeichnung)
\nIna Sangenstedt, Berlin (Skulptur)
\nMr. Ira Schneider, Berlin (Video, Fotografie)
\nJakob Roepke, Berlin (Malerei)
\nJohanna Lonka, Tampere FI (Installation)
\nJoseph Heeg, Mannheim (Malerei)
\nJovan Balov, Berlin (Zeichnung, Foto)
\nKaisu Koivisto, Helsinki (Skulptur)
\nKaren Koltermann, Berlin (Malerei, Video)
\nKatia Kelm Berlin, (Malerei, Installation)
\nKonstantin Voit, Mannheim (Malerei)
\nLaura K\u00e4rki, Helsinki (Skulptur)
\nLiisa Kanerva, Helsinki (Malerei)
\nMagdalena, \u00c5berg Helsinki (Malerei)
\nMika Karhu, Hyvink\u00e4\u00e4, FI (Zeichnung)
\nNina Lassila, Belgien\u2009\/ Berlin (Video)
\nOtgonbayar Ershuu, Berlin (Malerei)
\nReiner Maria Matysik, Berlin (Video, Aktion)
\nRicarda Wallh\u00e4user, Berlin (Collage)
\nSaana Inari, Berlin (Video)
\nSampsa Indr\u00e9n (Painting)
\nSanni Sepp\u00e4, Finnland (Zeichnung)
\nSennf Berlin, (Mixed Media)
\nSkadi Engeln, Berlin (Druckgrafik)
\nSusanne Schirdewahn, Berlin (Skulptur)
\nTanja Vetter, Mannheim (Malerei)
\nThe Ni\u00f1xs (Helena Hern\u00e1ndez &
\nRafael Koller), Berlin\/Luzern (Zeichnung)
\nTintin Patrone, Hamburg (Performance)
\nVeronika Witte, Berlin (Video)<\/p>\n

Photos from the opening<\/h3>\n