Vor dem ruruHaus
I: What have you seen at the documenta, what stays in your mind?
W1: Well, let’s say that it is a very special edition. Because there is a lot to see, but also a lot to experience, and maybe you are not in the right place at the right time, you know, to participate in all the workshops. To see the action, actually. All of those workshops and all those community works that are present here. This is for me personally what I felt most sorry for what I missed. But in general what I really liked is exactly this aspect. That they give a lot of space to community idea. This is the shape that it can take, something that is open to other kinds of influences, and not just like a specific artwork. And the … of course there are so many of those specific artworks in other venues less central than here, that were also very interesting. There has been a lot, of course in the former swimming pool, Taring Padi, it’s a very dense example of how a communal work can become very strong and very contained, in a way. But at the same time open to different interpretations and visions.
I: You also have seen prior documenta. What is your overall impression of documenta?
W2: We came here a little bit prepared for what we want to see. As we were saying, yesterday we were really mirroring our personal practice, because we also have a project, that is questioning what is a community today, what are the possibilities of working together. So sure that was for us very important to see that all over the world there are already these practices. So, sure, we felt very comfortable with this approach. We also have to say that we love the way that the placement of more spectacular works not in the center. But the Fridericianum used more for this questioning, considering community work. We loved the part that the kids have such a big role. The time and the space that is dedicated to education and to the future. And the … what else? We have been really disappointed about all the critique. We have been reading this and that and then we just came here to see if it was really necessary to attack in that specific sense on such a narrow vision of a body of work of artists and collectives that really struggle around the world. And we didn’t think that that was really fair. Really, that was important. As I said we came a little bit prepared, but we have also been into the press from abroad, from Berlin, where we come from, too. So it was quiet important for us to see that our position was exactly the same. So we also love the sensibility for the community and existing reality of Kassel being involved, for instance in the Weserstraße, see the existing reality involved. Or the skate park community. We really see a great sensibility and a great work of networking, but like intimate networking, and [W1] was saying an important thing: That giving so much space to one individual artist – normally you invite so many artists, especially in the documenta, that at times you miss the body of work of an artist, and we really love that the space for the artists is separated. Also the choice of the locations has been really neat.
W1: It is also interesting, how it is not self-affirmative, the structure of this exhibition. It is one of the most interesting approaches. Because in a way that is the interesting part, because especially the time we are living in and also the place where they come from, the way that they came here, bringing an entire practice, an entire question, an entire process. They were very generous in opening it up.
W2: A big sense of solidarity, also.
W1: When you open up to a different audience, and you open up also with your fragility. Because in a way the process is still fragile. Because it’s a process and probably every process is fragile. And it is interesting that they were so brave not to come here with statements but to come here with questions and a lot of openness. That is a very interesting, especially for such a big …
W2: Especially in the art.
W1: … for such a big thing. And exactly as [W2] was saying, it was so narrow-minded to criticize such narrow aspects of practice, making no sense at all. We are really happy that it is like that. There is so much more to be happy about about this exhibition, and to be inspired by. The entire critique stays with “Who did it?” In the end, with time, it will come out, that it was not at all what they deserved and necessary to point out and forget about all the rest at the same time.
I: What else will you see today? Is this your last day?
W1: We have to see the Rondelle. And other than that we have seen basically everything. It was also not overwhelming, like [W2] was saying. Like giving enough space to specific artists or groups. There was giving a lot of bodies of work, of their practice.
W2: And we have to say that we love the work of the group of [unverständlich] probably a coincidence, but in many videos there has been this group of women singing. It was really like a nice recurring image, reminding us of the chorus in Greek theatre. With this kind of connecting element that was giving a lot of structure.