Adam Feldmeth Artist Non Talk: figuring at To the Lighthouse
Press release of Saturday, June 2, 2012:
Today at JB Jurve: Adam Feldmeth
“…not as a means to invert the internal rules but explore the denial of a ”lectern-down” style I’d like to structure the non-talk around the ‘Q&A portion’ that would often follow most any talk-talk.”
“With the talk removed, or rather with the second (Q&A) portion taking first position, the talking that will occur will be in direct relation to questions raised from whoever is present. With such openness from the start, the questions could be quite unexpected. I will try my utmost to consider them and respond. I’m not known to be an answerer of questions posed, but a questioner of questions posed. So less Q&A and more a Q&Q.”
“Simply put, I am tuning in to field and consider questions, whatever they might be.”
(quotes from email conversation with Adam Feldmeth)
COME ONE COME ALL
Adam’s talk was not recorded, it was live and while virtual in nature it was not intended to join all the other information that is archived on the Web.
I would almost say that Adam Feldmeth insisted on the primacy of experience over the possibility of wider distribution. As with any other work of art, your presence is required to appreciate or understand. But I get ahead of myself (or perhaps I drop precariously behind!) for what Adam does is not art – his inclusion of his curriculum vitae in the exhibition To the Lighthouse does not indicate an elevated status of that document, rather the document points outward to occasions when Adam Feldmeth approached – in an artist’s studio, in conversation, or in consideration of a work of art – art. (Yes, I intended that clumsy doubling: art – art. Spoken, it sound like seals or walruses, which is what we resemble when we try to explain away the ineffable and untouchable.)
Moving onward, I share with you a Facebook and email exchange btwn Adam Feldmeth and Geoff Tuck, as well as supplemental material which may be of interest to you.
Adam Feldmeth to Geoff Tuck 8:52 AM, June 4, 2012
thank for the opportunity of the non-talk. the questions were sufficiently challenging leading to a productive discussion.
i am grateful
Geoff Tuck to Adam Feldmeth 10:12 AM, June 4, 2012
I accept your gratitude and I return a bucketful to you. What an inspiring afternoon! Marcus and Mike and you pursued so interestingly what it is that art points to – for this is where I think we may be headed, your own reluctance to accept categorization begins to seem an honest insistence on experience over object. And shared experience at that! Yay. Or, to quote Mike, “Fuckin awesome.” More, and more again soon.
Yours in thought,
(Adam’s return) 12:47 PM
you’re making it sound religious
(Geoff to Adam) 1:01 PM
yeah, well. I’m still thinking about the conversation – i call that inspiration. for me it’s about real life not religion or real life as religion – and it’s related to finding art in cracks in the sidewalk. watch this, it may help you understand
btw photo of you at 4:34
mm, i was referring to the notes on the two facebook picture posts.
religion may be the ineffective word, however, i estimate a deep spirituality with the way you appreciate, which i mean positively. you mention zen in the film. you remark that marcus and michael can ‘testify’ and of a ‘communion’. these might be slips or they may be instances of you trying to describe a more thorough connection to the world through a faithfulness to it, rather than to a deity.
(walking on air, me back to Feldmeth) 1:26 PM
Oh my Adam. Thanks if I can get this into a post I will feel great. “a more thorough-connection with the world” is analogous to what I understand of your search, or inquiry. Honesty and precision.
Further to the above:
more Non Talk this Thursday with Daniel Lara