Glad of your comments. The Poipoidrome is an extraordinary example of
conceptual-architecture. I've even thought it, in all its conceptual-ness,
as somewhere between imaginary, freemasonic architecture and a virtual
space similar to the online. There seems something something modernist
about the identification of the Dogon in the work that I think deserves
ethnological interpretation. It was fantastic that you had Joachim Pfeuffer
in Swansea teaching but yes, why not as a pedagogical space? Would seem
Have you seen Jean-Jacques Lebel's 'Hommage à Robert Filliou' at Artpool,
Budapest? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhuV1RRxoH0. Filliou and and
Pfeufer had constructed the Poipoidrome at the Young Artists' Club,
Budapest in 1976 (http://www.artpool.hu/Fluxus/Filliou/Poipoidrom4.html) Making
contact then with Filliou, György Galántai (whom I interviewed last year
for this research) collaborated with him on 'Telepathic Music' at same
place in 1979.
This contact with Galántai ultimately led to the reconstruction in 1998 of
the earlier structure. (
http://artpool.hu/Installation/documents/Lebel-w.html) and the curating of
an programme that saw Lebel and other artists such as Istvan Kántor (
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frftVJqgtzc) develop intervention in the
space. I think Istvan's 'Séance Filliou' is well worth watching.
Here is the online / offline divide once more though. If you watch the
Lebel interview to the end, you'll hear him talk in English about the
network 'without / before internet': a 'human network of and between
artists from all around the world'. Other terms Lebel uses: 'autonomous',
'indepenedent', 'critical', 'creative'. Also the Dogon seem replaced
somehow by the gyspy ensemble, which again I find interesting. Is this the
quality of 'independence', of 'autonomy' (presumably from discourses of the
state and/or other institutionalised power structures) that needs
protection from online instrumentalisation. Is the network better to exist
invisibly and evade recuperation? Is the visibility politics of dissent
within neoliberal democracy the wrong kind of participation and opposition?
On 5 February 2013 23:28, Barnaby Dicker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'd like to pick up on a couple of things Randall mentioned.
> For the (1,000,0)50th anniversary of Art's Birthday, following Filliou's
> dating, Art's Birthday, Wales (of which I am one of the organisers), was
> fortunate to have Joachim Pfeufer come to Swansea to discuss his work with
> Their principal project was the Poipoidrome - which is also 50 this year.
> The 'co-architects' describe the Poipoidrome as 'an artistic proposition
> for a centre for permanent creation.' At its centre is the Poipoiegg
> (mentioned in Randall's post).
> Joachim described how he introduced the idea of 'poipoi' to Robert, having
> himself heard about it from anthropologist Herman Hahn, whohimself had
> heard it from the Dogon tribe of Mali for whom it is a salutation marking
> an end or renewal of an exchange. Joachim and Robert visited the Dogon
> while an incarnation of the Poipoidrome was installed in the Pompidou in
> the late 70s. They wanted to discuss and show images of their project to
> the Dogon people. Apparently the Dogon described it as 'the house of good
> weather' or 'the house of weather luck'. Joachim mentioned that Robert
> often signed off his letters with 'weather luck', but that he only realised
> relatively recently that this was Robert's translation of the Dogon
> people's response to the Poipoidrome.
> The Poipoidrome very much embodies the principles of Filliou's 'eternal
> network of permanent creation,' being a place for interaction, discussion,
> reflection, displaying, storing, accessing and so on.
> I was very surprised when Joachim stated that he never used the
> Poipoidrome as a pedagogical excercise or model during his time as a
> teacher. For me, the Poipoidrome stood precisely as an alternative model of
> pedagogy. If I recall correctly, Joachim was/is hesitant about presenting
> it as something that can be taught. I appreciate and respect his concern,
> but still hold on to my view that the Poipoidrome embodies an important
> alternative site and approach to learning. Of additional interest, Joachim,
> mentioned how he considers their work to address political issues that have
> yet to emerge.
> Picking up on a thread from Ken: I certainly feel that the 'academy'
> provides a possible space for artforms that are not 'artworld' artforms
> (i.e. carry no market value). I say 'possible' because it's not about
> 'isolationist', 'pure' strategies that need totally avoid the artworld or
> market value. Rather, I am suggesting that the academy legitimates and
> provides a support - network - (I think someone else brought this topic up
> too. I forget who. apologies), to say nothing of alternative funding
> streams, for such practices. Thus, keeping such ideas/practices in play. It
> also allows many people to feel comfortable being minor artists, producing
> minor artworks (best perhaps if I claim to be speaking for myself here).
> Afterall, one of the key features of 'the network' is its inclusion of the
> 'little people' - too much superstar activity would sink the ship. No room
> for masterpieces. And presumably the budget (if there is one) should be
> spread appropriately, as opposed to disproportionately. It is dialogical,
> not monological.
> And on that note...
[log in to unmask]