Don’t be stupid, a projection on the floor Sept-Nov 2011, Magasin 3, Stockholms Konsthall

Don’t be stupid, 1997.

Screenings: SVT “Elbyl” Ch 1 / Art & Video in Europé Heure Exquise! Stockholm Art Fair. Swedish Television Ch1 / Osnabruck Videofestival. at Botkyrka Konsthall. Don ́t be stupid in the videocompilation ”Take two” (same tour as FRESH) at: the ICA, London / Videopositive-95, Liverpool / Chapter Arts Centre, Cardiff / Ikon Gallery Birmingham / Tate Gallery London / Ferens Art Gallery Hull / Open Hand Studios Reading / National Film Theatre in London / Ruskin SFA Oxford.

Don’t be stupid, a projection on the floor Sept-Nov 2011, Magasin 3, Stockholms Konsthall

Makt och maktlöshet – handling är igångsättande av kraft. Relationer består av både monolog och dialog, ibland kreativ dialog. ”Var inte dum, ägna inte kraften till annat än kreativ dialog” frestas man därför att säga, men i oförmågan, i läckaget av kraft, i handlingen som inte når fram, finns också det ofödda.

Verket Var inte dum är en reflektion över en politik som äger rum på offentlig men också privat nivå. Det avbildar ett rörelsemönster av de oförmögna eller de som inte kan hantera sin förmåga, sin makt. Att se det ofödda, det osynliga, är en förmåga som går att träna upp. Om man vill, envisas och… inte är dum.

Power and powerlessness – action is force. Relationships include both monologues and dialogues, and sometimes creative dialogue. “Don’t be stupid, your only power lies in creative dialogue”, one is tempted to say, but our abilities fail us, we almost never reach our objectives. And there is the invisible.

The work Don’t be stupid is a reflection of the political that takes place both in public and in private. It depicts movement patterns of those who cannot handle their power. To see the invisible: it is an ability we can acquire. But only if we want. Insist. Persist. Do not be stupid.

Cecilia Parsberg

The man in the performance says:

Woman kicks man’s ass. To me it would seem more natural with the roles turned around, a man punching a woman. Then I would sympathize with the woman. I would probably see the video as an image of women’s relation to men in general. I can easily sympathize with the woman when she’s the one wearing the boxing gloves. With the woman fighting it’s so obvious to me, as a man, how lonesome her struggle is. She doesn’t let the man in.

This is not the picture of a relationship, rather it reflects the fight of a single individual.
I’ve always believed that the relationship between man and woman in our society was the concern of both. Why does it seem so clear to me in this case, that it’s all about one individual woman struggling with herself. Is this the kind of one-sided struggle that patriarchy is built to hold and maintain?
The woman spends all her energy on her fight. What happens to the man – nothing? There is no room left for him. And in our society-where is the deliverance of women made passive by someone else’s fight. Men struggling, leaving no room for women. What happens to women-nothing? Should you implode or explode?
It’s a man’s world, in which both men and women live. But society is no relationship – it’s a one-sided struggle for survival and self-development – man against nature – men against women!