AF2 Commentary: Adriana Kobor on Collage, Visual Poetry, Fluxus and the Creative Process

 

Adriana Kobor (Italy)

Editor's note: Adriana Kobor is an artist, writer and contributor to the Asemic Front project. She wrote this response to a question I asked a group of asemic writers & visual poets: Where does collage end & visual poetry begin?

I do not like collage with words. I do not hate vispo without them. (That is the very lacunaeous interpretation of a "non-expert" observer.) 

I love poems without words, though, because they are the highest expression of feelings of life, after all. I would love James Joyce without meaning; but I do not love Scrabble, if not by kids. Where does my patience end? When will I really drop that poem-scarabeus on the canvas, finally? I am still in the pre-preparation process... drinking coffee. Regarding the fact that you are far, what would you think about a cozy chat without the distance? I am kidding. But the original idea of the thought is that it can be diminished into such tiny parts that it can compose itself in its opposites, still containing a black hole in the middle. Anything, that is considered art, loses its original purpose, some way. I do not want to be long and cheesy, but I go with the thought of Lowell (as soon as it is published, it is destroyed) and Cortazar ("What good is a writer if he can't destroy literature?") The thought is not about “elemental destruction” or "deconstruction.” For me, it is in the seasonal decay of the Fluxus, which builds and rebuilds and destroys it, after all. (I do not like to use the word Fluxus, because it is a cult, a way too symbolic one, so we could just constitute it with the fluctuating waves.) It is all brains and feeling. If one creates without feeling, it is absolute zero, but it is cute; if one creates without brains, it is cute trash; if one creates because s/he cannot do otherwise, it is a great deal of life of his/hers destroyed, altogether. So whatever you called it, let us stay with the nominal value and not the theory. Do not call it a thing; you will get even closer. I want to excuse myself for my indecent adagio, but I had this on my mind while reading your "words.” In cumulating fashion/passion: art exhibited should be watched from the opposite side of the wall (where it is hanging). This is the didactic I would use during an exhibition, or in a gallery; but everyone would hate me, not being able to use their natural quantum juxtaposition with the “subject.” Yes, I can detect my anxious word-flow, but I do not give a shit about the condescending psychology which would legitimately muddy my words, wanted to be written, so let us leave it like this: Let us leave it how it is. That is the beauty of it all. (I am not a writer and surely not self-promoting. I am for free expression, that I would always promote. If I were a collage, I would not give a shit what they would call me. I would just exist and be happy if people would get “some impressions.” I will not wash this comment off me for long, but I am not in the least ashamed having said it. Being offended for the essence of it, would remain the only thing which lasts. Closing question: Who the heck invented the word asemics and since when is it considered an art form? Same for Vispo. Same for collage. Same for anything which needed a name so people can talk about it. It is s not in the name, I suppose. It is the categorization which I personally hate, of course. But if one must, so be it. I will think further, in silence. The canvas is still “untouched” and “pure.” The coffee is getting cold in the meanwhile. I am still in a “poetic” distance from the reality I described, so far.

- Adriana Kobor

Adriana Kobor performs with visual poet Luc Fierens (Belgium)