Transactions of Budapest
The Contemporary Art Museum of Ludwig is one of the most important contemporary art institutions in Budapest. On January 22 an exhibition of Nomeda and Gediminas Urbonas “Transaction” was opened in the project hall of this museum. During the opening ceremony a symposium was held, whereby Lithuanian and Hungarian theoriticians analysed social roles of women, their images in art and media, as well as issues of sexuality and identity in two post-soviet countries. The project was initiated by the curator of Ludwig museum Dora Hegyi. The exhibition was open until February 17.
Budapest is the city of bridges, better fit than any city in the world to host all sorts of transitional, joint “trans-” projects. The transition is encoded in the geography of the city itself: Buda and Pest are divided not only by the Danube, but also by their position being above sea level. Currently it hosts the whole two “transitive” contemporary art exhibitions, the names of which start with trans- : the Museum of Ludwig on the Buda hill hosts the “Transaction” of the Urbonai, while the exhibition centre Mucsarnok on the other side of the city hosts the exhibition curated by Rosos Martinez and Xabier Arakistain “Trans Sexual Express Budapest 2002”. It is symptomatic, that it is namely in this city where the Central European University is based (CEU), where, in the modern building countries from the Balkans and the Baltics, students from post-soviet Central Europe and lecturers from prestigious Western Universities meet. The opening of “Transaction” show was attended by a big number of Lithuanian people studying locally.
The structure of “Transaction” is based on a threefold communication model, which is composed of three roles: victim, persecutor and rescuer. In psychotherapy this way of analysis is used for re-writing of “life-scenario” shaped in the childhood. The Urbonai adapt this model to analyse the scenario of victim, characteristic of post-soviet era. For this purpose filmed interviews with intellectual Lithuanian women (mostly from academic and art sphere), archive of Lithuanian films (reflecting a role of woman in the family and in the society) and the commentaries of psychiatrists who analyse those scenarios are used. All three groups of the imagined “drama triangle” meet through screens of TV sets placed in one room. This is how the discussion field is broadened from consideration of crucial issues to the analysis of interaction between virtual spaces.
Moreover, “Transaction” is a project, developed in time and space, which at different points acquires a new theoretical layer and a visual embodiment. The project has already been shown in Rotterdam, Stuttgart, Athens, Barcelona and Stockholm. Lithuanian viewers could see it toward the end of 2000, at Contemporary Art Centre hosted exhibition “Innocent Life” (curators Erika Grigoravièienë and Lolita Jablonskienë).
A new addition to the exposition in Budapest is the wall covered with spots of the size of snowballs. At the first look it is associated with geometrical repetitions of minimalists, but having watched a few Lithuanian films and having read the interview of Þivilë Pipinytë different semantics of the spots appear. Beneath the mathematical surface there dwell stereotypes of innocent childhood, in Lithuanian films they are usually covered by a spotted dress. It is through the doors in the spotted wall that the viewer enters the project hall, as if symbolically shedding the outgrown clothes. And right there he confronts a huge screen with costumed psychiatrists, as if representing structures of knowledge-power. Next to them fragments of Lithuanian movies are being shown, watched by women from the other screen, while they ‘observed’ by an equally packed and neatly arranged film archive. The Urbonai may be easily called ‘maniacs of packing’ – every single detail of interior, furniture, computer font preserves the same style – such a functional and precise urban-design sets rigid quality requirements often bewildering the staff of the museum. Although exact drawings of the exposition, schemes and calculations for the museum were sent in advance, in order to reach the desired result the artists had to spend nights while preparing for the show.
One of the advantages of “Transaction” project – openness to the surrounding environment. This is not a collection of monologues, ending up in a chanting “Li-thu-a-nia”. Neither are these politically correct cultural exchanges, which often denote a change in place and without crawling out of one’s shell. In Hungary “Transaction” reminded of the game “three against three” – not in the sense of opposition, but in terms of polylogue. Alongside Lithuanian films there were a series of Hungarian films, the issues of “Stilius” magazines and “Transaction” catalogues on the shelves were supplemented by Hungarian books and periodicals, while the seminar participants (three from both countries) provided a vivid comparison of situations and drew historical parallels.
There was a scheme of overlapping boxes drawn on the wall which became a unique model of Budapest “Transaction” seminar. The presentations were also packed correspondingly: members were grouped by themes, seated on the cardboard boxes, the presentation time was limited to 15 minutes. On the computer screen each theoritician was also given a box with a necessary visual material – so that the viewers could observe not only the theme’s illustration, but also a running line of images: a visual commentary comprised of pictures, film fragments and magazine covers. During the seminar instead of using the role of disciplinary moderator, everyone relied on free circulation of thought – after giving their presentations, the participants would simply introduce the subsequent speaker.
The seminar was started by a linguist, Ms. Erzebet Barat, Lecturer of CEU Gender and Culture Department. She belongs to the wave of researchers of the nowadays popular oral history, and has collected the largest material of women presentations, reflecting value orientations of different generations. Based on women interviews and fragments of Lithuanian films shown, Barat compared social roles of Lithuanian and Hungarian women and private experience. According to the presenter, the only alternative for women born in the post-war period in the government-controlled public sphere seemed an imagined freedom of family life. Meanwhile, the middle-generation women do not mention home atmosphere as an ideal site for romantic love, they rather oppose it. Although Hungarian women of this generation often describe their personal life using negative terms, they also emphasize their love toward their husbands and that they do not have any problems. It is interesting to note, that while speaking about their career they easily notice restrictions of activity that women face and criticize bosses and male-dominated government authorities.
However, leaving this catch-22 situation is possible through starting a new love affair – so the old family relationship model is no longer valid, even though it does not meet new demands. Barat comes to a conclusion, as long as home is the only, be it a relative site of independence from government, women will strive to protect it. Nevertheless, Hungarian women of new generation do not link their future with love affair as the only possible chance to find a place within the society. But the conservative current politicians do not support such a lifestyle. The strive to reconstruct family values of the 50s, when a woman was forced to choose between a career and motherhood.
The thought of Barat was proceeded by the presentation of Dalia Marcinkevièienë about men and women in Soviet periodicals. It appeared, that the family relationship model promoted by the press encouraged spouses not to limit themselves to family, but seek friendship outside its boundaries. Women were proposed to arrange coffee meetings, to knit and discuss different issues with other women, men should speak about their matters in the masculine environment at restaurants, on fishing trips, etc. Sex is construed as egoism from the point of view of children, while efforts to pursue family happiness is mocked at and viewed as a sign of immaturity.
The presentation of Erika Grigoravièienë called “Media and Gender Order” was distinguished because of its visuality and multi-speech. Its English version was projected on the screen and the audience could hear a text read by a man’s voice. The presentation was shortly introduced by Erika, which first caused some confusion within the audience. But after they heard the English language, they all calmed down (interesting therapy impact) and gave in to the instinct of reading. The presenter played the role of a DJ as using a computer mouse she kept switching pictures of cars, women with bikini and elite couples. The images reproduced by mass media, especially when hearing rational and critical commentaries of fifteen-year-old girls, seemed stuck within a system catering for God knows whom (or simply ruminating itself). According to Grigoravièienë, “Mass media in Lithuania forms specific images of “reality”, while the bulk of the society perceive them as inevitable natural phenomena. However, gender order, hetero-sexualizing matrix and gender symbiosis (just like parenthood), in spite of all efforts to “naturalize” it, is not a natural phenomenon, but a cultural product, normative model. The gender order, just like sexual identity, defining the subject constitution remains only thanks to its constant quotation and repetition. Why does mass media in Lithuania is so persistent in attempting to reinforce and strengthen gender symbiosis model and traditional gender roles – it is difficult to say. It does not seem that the representatives of the “independent” mass media would act as subjects of power and try to consciously improve the demographic situation, try to preserve a traditional society, which is easier to control, etc. It is more likely, that the ‘free’ mass media, just like ‘free’ market is not only saturated with patriarchal ideology, but it has also become its material embodiment.”
The discussion shifted from theoretical considerations to an analysis of more concrete examples. In my presentation I analysed how woman’s images repeat and change (mother – fighter and beauty) shifting from static embodiment in sculpture to a dynamic development of character in Lithuanian films and “feminine scenarios” in TV shows. An art historian Eva Bicskei analysed women’s autobiographies and compared values appearing in them along with stories of woman participating in “Transaction” project. A live ongoing transaction among artists and women who spoke to them as well as psychiatrists, seminar participants was defined by her as an effort to create a cultural and social cooperation space in order to take up a new search for a national and sexual identity, just like an interactive effort to deconstruct a scenario of victim characteristic of post-soviet mentality.
The seminar was concluded by the sociologist Katalin Levai. She spoke about the history of privacy project. Most often we view the history through men’s eyes – these are stories about noble deeds of other men. There is no doubt, such an intentional selection cannot afford to embrace the diversity of social and cultural life – this is how a big part of history, not related with wars (especially a private sphere and everyday life of people) is put ‘outside’. This is why nowadays all over the world it is strived to regain voices of women. Having announced that there is an ongoing social survey and women life stories are collected, there were over 300 stories received. Such an involvement was of huge surprise even for the researcher. It appeared, that women in Hungary, speaking about their experiences did not create any specific manner of speech with a certain syntax and vocabulary, characteristic of women (for instance, such a speech manner is used by Japanese women to discuss their own matters). Hungarian women rather rely on personal strategies and do not trust the solidarity of women – the do not think, that through a joint action they could change their situation easier. Even women-politicians do not think that they could really influence a patriarchal order. Gender discourse has been totally put beyond publicity, women are again ascribed to the private sphere, traditional roles of women are promoted (wife, mother). Through a critical reflection on the current politics from the point of view of women, Katalin Levai made a sort of resume of the thoughts expressed by Erszebet Barat at the beginning of the symposium.
A multi-layer “Transactions” show really provides abundant material not only for art consumers, but also for cultural anthropologists, sociologists, historians. This neatly arranged project makes us think more actively about the supposed “ephemericity” of temporary art forms. The fact is that the project time is not only made of its concrete duration at one or another geographical point. Its time is the sum of previous and future project participants (those who watched the film, read the interview, wrote texts, held discussions, simply thought about it). Here it is better to speak about the fixation of a changing situation by using changing means, by creating a structure open for communication. Its model clearly reflects a transition from representational to discoursive public space, where representatives of different cultures, occupations, social layers can share their past without overshadowing each other and without claiming the only truth. Each new participant of the transaction can choose an aspect of the theme he/she is interested in and pursue an individual research. Meanwhile, if by any chance the Lithuanian film archive (which has taken pains to compile and convert to video format) after its journey returns to Lithuania and is made publicly available, for instance at the Gender Studies Centre, Vilnius University, the project “end” is difficult to forecast.
Laima Kreivyte
published at 7 DAYS OF ART No 5(507) [ in Lithaunian] / 2002 02 01