2. / 3. 2001 , Moderna Galerija Ljubljana (Museum
of Modern Art, Ljubljana)
5. / 6. 2001
Mateja Bučar, stage:
Vadim Fishkin, sound:Tomaľ
Grom (tovarna sploh)
Mateja Rebolj, Marinka Ribič, Suzanne Judson, Rosana Hribar.
is supported by: Ministry of Culture RS,European Codaco Fund, EU
, MO Ljubljana, OSI - Slovenia, KulturKontakt, Avstria
How far do the limits of the social
structure extend, and what is hidden beneath them? Under this interwoven
surface one can observe a movement that radically changes that surface.
This movement stretches the surface, and sometimes for a moment even cuts
through it, but then it calms down again. This interwoven surface is some
kind of symbolic structure determining the subject's space. On the outside,
the subject looks like nothing but a slight bump in the structure. But
if, on the one side, the structure functions as something which molds
the subject so that it grabs him and subordinates him, on the other side,
the structure opens up the space in which the subject will tear up the
structure and reveal it as lacking. The force that truly undermines the
structure is drive. Drive came into being as a result of the impact of
the structure on the body, but at the same time, drive is also something
that radically disrupts the structure. Drive is a place of the enjoyment
(jouissance) of the body. However, this enjoyment is not a passive, happy
moment, but enjoyment in pain, in constant movement, a fanatical cutting
through of the structure and then a return under it. Enjoyment which pushes
the subject to the point of self-destruction and repeated return. As a
continuously working force in the body, enjoyment also presents a point
of immortality of the body.
But does drive not remind us of mechanics?
At the beginning of the performance, the captured bodies pulsate in an
almost synchronous way, which gives the impression that these bodies together
form some kind of a big living mass. Drive is a force which functions
as something mechanical, as something not under the subject's control.
But if drive is a force independent of the subject's consciousness, it
is very much linked to the subject's unconsciousness.
Lacanian psychoanalysis likes to stress that
the unconscious is structured like language. But this is not a language
which hopes to incite a response from its interlocutors and thus establish
communication. The unconscious is a language which is unconcerned with
the response of the other and which also does not search for interpretation.
Lacan has thus linked the unconscious with what he calls llanguage (lalangue).
As Jean-Claude Milner says: “Llanguage is made of a bit of everything,
of what wallows in the gin-mills and of what we hear in the salons. On
each side we encounter a misunderstanding, since, with a little good-will,
it is possible to find a meaning in everything, at least an imaginary
one. Did he say 'dide' or 'Dieu'? Is this 'croate' or 'cravate'? ... The
llanguage is the storage, a collection of the traces which other 'subjects'
have left, i.e. that with the help of which, let's say, each subject inscribed
its desire into llanguage, since the speaking being has to have a signifier
to be able to desire; and desire in what? In its fantasies, i.e. again
Lacan's main point is that communication is not
the aim of llanguage and he thus makes the unconscious his prime example
of llanguage. Communication implies reference, which the unconscious lacks;
this is made clear by the fact that the effects of the unconscious disrupt
the whole body, as well as the soul. The unconscious bears witness to
a knowledge that escapes the speaking being. The subject can thus be said
to understand jokes, slips of the tongue and so on, not because of language
but because of llanguage.
Through the remainder what is spoken we find not
only something more than an individual speaker’s intention, but something
more than the sum of the speech acts of the members of a linguistic community.
Llanguage thus represents the return within language of the contradictions
and struggles that make up the social, the persistence within language
of past contradictions and struggles, and the anticipation of new ones.
»Media Medici« try to show this phenomena
of the excess of the structure in the form of dance. The movement of the
bodies which undermines the structure, changes it and shows its lacks
is llanguage – the reminder of language. This reminder took elements from
the Medici's to the contemporary media. In this reminder we have an enjoyment
at work which does not care about the frames of the structure and which
also does not want to provoke communication or deliver a message. Although
the enjoyment of the body constantly cuts through the borders of the structure,
at the end it always returns into itself and then emerges again as some
kind of »creatio ex nihilo«.
Throughout history, the Medici have been known for
their indulgence in various passionate activities which official morals
otherwise prohibited. The memory of the Medici is always linked to a perception
of their excessiveness – from big culinary orgies to an insatiable sexuality.
In this image of the enjoying Medici it looks as if they had access to
enjoyment not accessible to others. But as we know from psychoanalysis,
the subject always has a feeling that he is denied enjoyment when he has
the perception that others have too much of it.