Charbel Ackermann

Intrayge Outtrayge

The proposal takes the form of a bureaucratic paper trail between the artist Charbel Ackermann and possibly other artists and the ICA exhibitions team. It is based on the following institutional model:

Artist -> in-tray -> intra institutional process ->out-tray -> artist (these processes can be looped and go through several iterations)

The project is based on the assumption that contemporary art is produced directly in touch with the institutions and tends to be transgressive since the institution gains from shock value. My proposal implies a closed loop between the institution and the artist, since “the privileged customer of the new transgressive art is no longer the merchant, nor the far sighted collector (as in the modern paradigm where artistic value resides within the work) but the institution itself” (Mario Perniola). The artist proposes to illustrate this through the production of proposals in the form of a letter correspondence with the I.C.A. team.

The idea is that the artist Charbel Ackermann or several other artists write regularly a fully formed letter (or email) to the ICA exhibitions team with a proposal for a show or activity at the ICA which should create some form of transgression or outrage (intrayge). The expectation is that the exhibitions team deals with the proposal and turns it around (outtrayge). The process could be made visible in several ways which are not mutually exclusive: I.D.E.A.London website posts letters, two trays bolted to the wall or sitting on a small piece of furniture somewhere in the ICA, or posting of the correspondence on a notice board at the ICA/Process Room). By simply making the correspondence visible to the public we are producing a true albeit formalised version of institutional activity of the production of contemporary art where the viewing public has been reduced to the role of a spectator of an essentially opaque game.

Again, this proposal is based on the idea that in the game of contemporary art (Natalie Heinich) artists and curators are transformed into functionaries of the art productive system (Gianni Vattimo). Given institutional necessities these bureaucrats pursue transgressive strategies.

In order to make the idea work, Charbel would attempt to produce viable proposals for outrages (but would obviously be open to share the workload with others). We would invite the Exhibitions team to respond by reacting to the proposals (comments on a copy of our letter, short e-mails, comments on a memo pad etc.) and to put these literally in the outtrayge we provide. The public could then look at these proposals and may well add their comments.