NIKOLAUS GANSTERER, KARIN HARRASSER
3303 Mal gesehen
Datum der Aufzeichnung: 17.04.2015
Ort: TQW / Studios
Im Rahmen von: ZUNGEN KÜNSTLERISCHER FORSCHUNG. Doppelredereihe mit Künstler_innen und Theoretiker_innen (Concept & Curating: Krassimira Kruschkova)
Owing to its ability to mediate between perception and reflection, drawing plays a constitutive role in the production and communication of knowledge. Often the genesis of ideas is directly connected with a graphic thought process. Not uncommonly, thoughts, theories, whole idea histories have their origin in rapid sketches and scribbles, in order to grasp an idea precisely at this moment, to get hold of it (and to make the form conveyable to oneself and others) – at the same time hardly any thesis dispenses with the forms of visual representation in the communication of its subject matter.
In the course of all-embracing digitalisation, what role do cultural techniques of notation and inscription play as underlying instruments of all artistic and scientific practice? Is dance conceivable as a recording system – as a pendulum movement between notation experiments and body diagrams?
In the debate around art/research the question of the non-formalisability of artistic knowledge, production and experience is the subject of discussion, like the question of sensuousness. But what exactly does non-formalisability and non-sensuousness, that is the characteristics that have been attributed to artistic and scientific cognitive methods, mean? A defensive attitude to verbalisation is frequently connected to the verdict of non-sensuousness, not so much a rejection of formulae, routines and codings. Precisely in dance, repeatability and the back and forth between sign systems and embodiments are extremely central. On the other hand, drawing, writing and reading are sensory-physical practices that do not merge in the processing of abstract drawing (systems).
In my contribution on the one hand I will attempt to highlight the extent to which research and artistic production are quite similar from a praxeological, cultural technical perspective. On the other hand there are historical conditions, primarily institutional differences, that express themselves in different consecration and evaluation criteria for one or the other. To frivolously skip this, in my opinion involves dangers – both for the arts as well as the sciences. Don’t mess with history!
Nikolaus Gansterer, born in 1974, lives and works in Vienna. He did his art degree at the Vienna University of Applied Art with Brigitte Kowanz, and a post-graduate course at the Jan van Eyck Academy in Maastricht, in the Netherlands. He is a founder member of the Institute for Transacoustic Research and the sound collective The Vegetable Orchestra. Since 2000 he has been involved in intensive international exhibition activity and performance practice. 2003 state scholarship from the Ministry for Science and Art. Since 2007 teaching at the University of Applied Art, Vienna. 2009 awarded the Culture Prize for Fine Art of the province of Lower Austria. In 2011 Nikolaus Gansterer published the extensive book project Drawing a Hypothesis (Springer Vienna/New York) on the ontology of visualisation forms and the development of diagrammatic perspectives in art and science. 2014–2017 key researcher for the FWF-sponsored artistic research project Choreo-graphic Figures: Deviations from the Line.
Karin Harrasser is professor of cultural studies at the Linz University of Art. After a degree in history and dissertation in German literature at the University of Vienna, she did her post-doctoral thesis at the Humbolt University, Berlin, on Prostheses: Figures of a Damaged Modernity. Alongside her academic activities, she has been involved in curatorial projects, e.g. NGBK Berlin, Kampnagel Hamburg and Tanzquartier Wien. She publishes the Zeitschrift für Kulturwissenschaften together with Elisabeth Timm. Most recent publication: Körper 2.0. Über die technische Erweiterbarkeit des Menschen, Bielefeld: Transcript 2013.