E. by T.A.
E/Scrementificazione of the Thought
(Taken from The Bodies Artist)
They are more than ten years that I accumulate material on this stuff. I believe to have skipped few or nothing. It is my body to speak from what it is decided to come to head of these things, entirely you appear on the surface never yet entirely you regress never inside of me. Suspended. Waiting for resolution and you now edit. For what they are worth, for what they are. What are they? Inside language? Certain, of sure. Creative action? Certainly but it is a tautology. Are they expressed words? But to which need of my body you/they make reference? Is there a specific need of the body this sense or it is an optional? Need to make a precise statement. When I sleep I dream even if I don't remember him, if I eat then I digest and subsequently my body expels the cinders of that that have eaten, otherwise I am badly! Of accord? Also in the respiraton I inhale and then draught out of the bellows carbonic anidride. Chomsky has explained that to learn at least the first language we are formatted. We already have the incorporated drives. Is this so difficult to admit later that for how much it concerns the cerebral activity of the body we are programmed to expel how much we store in terms of information, experience and how much other? In all I say really in this whole conclusion it flutters, it is read among the lines, from Frye, to Vigotsky, from Proust (also when he wants to show everything the contrary) to arrive to Alfred Jarry when he affirms that the art is masturbation. In everybody however at the same time (alone Vigotsky would perhaps deserve a discourse to itself) he/she remains so in the air, implicit, to half air or as in the case of Jarry a provocation. What is it that prevents them to draw logics consequences from this truth that it seems to persecute them, that it is slipped in their discourses, that it is inserted? Not certain the intelligence of these characters. Do we have to continue but what is it that frightens? or does it disturb us only? Now this expulsion than do we store it happens in our body in way similar to the to eat, to breathe or a his I has treat peculiar? We say that it is similar as referable need to the body and that it is peculiar in how much every bodily need has its peculiarities and differences in comparison to the other needs inside every bodily equilibrium. We don't have a body, we are a body: Merleau-Ponty and we possess only knowingly a part of it limited anchor, I add. We are what we eat. I don't remember who has told him/it. Spinoza? Correct me if I am wrong. If I don't produce excrements after having eaten or drunk, old a certain period of tolerance of my body, cannot live. If I am as in apnea you/they can bear my bellows (briefer tolerance) I suffocate poisoned of carbonic anidride. If I accumulate information and experiences without ever withdrawing out one of it (period of great tolerance) risk an information shock. That's all, even if this type of consequences you/they could be described beginning from a threshold of less extreme lack. We see from this side. If I don't regularly produce excrements my body it will run into problems type renal intestinal and/or. If my respiraton is not perfect neither they will have to hear again the bellows and the heart, above all. If there is not equilibrium and recognition among possessed information, assumed and expelled information I will be with a lot of probability a person psychically disturbed and surely a person that doesn't participate in the creative product of the community, as to say speaks for your facts, as to say fills with verses the boundaries of this cell, as to say crowds of sketches the ravines of this cave, however at least it is not died. Established this let's penetrate a little more us. The quality of this expulsion of information and experiences. We know in the case of the feeding this is called dung, urine, excrement generally. In the case of the respiraton the quality of the expulsion is we have said carbonic anidride. In what interests us the quality of the expulsion that is produced by every body that it assumes information it is not able whether to be defined, both immaterial and material, art, better still art of the body. Body art. The whole reasoning makes to trespass inside this denomination, body art, art of the body, any demonstration of artistic expression, from the sketches rocky facts with the stone from the prehistoric ones, to Goya, to the Orlan. It is not escaped, art of the body, archaeology of the body, escrementificazione of the human thought, oggettuale, not oggettuale, to remove as the sculpture (the only one that maintains the characteristic of the native expulsion from the body), to put as the painting, always and only art of the body. To extend entirely the Machiavellian concept is political to the everything it is art, art of the body, out of the body there is no art, as there is not political. The art is an excrement of the human thought, a testimony of the body, of the body for a long time. Possible that nobody has ever thought that Peter Manzoni with his scatolettes of shit wanted to tell only us this and nothing of the pop one? Strange! Jonh Cage. I don't have anything to say and I tell it. Classical affirmation of a need to be expelled.