English version below
Objavljeno u publikaciji naučnog simpozija: “Uticaj Bauhausa na savremenu arhitekturu i kulturu Bosne i Hercegegovine”upriličenog od strane Nacionalnog komiteta ICOMOS u Bosni i Hercegovini
Bilo da se govori o tački u prostoru, arhitektonskom projektu vile Emerika Paskole u Banjoj Luci, akcentu u govoru izvedenom u predstavi „Veče muzike pokreta i narodne poezije“, boji u slici od Ismeta Mujezinovića, insinuaciji apstraktne geste u predstavi sintetičkog teatra Collegiuma Artisticuma „Zašto plače Ema?“, konceptu stambenog naselja „Ciglane“ ili bilo kojem drugom činjenju u prostoru postojeće datosti, stvaranje je promjena i vedno tvori kontrast u odnosu na datost. Pitanje vrednovanja stvaranja kao kontinuiranog procesa možda bi trebalo biti prvo pitanje na koje bi se morao naći odgovor kako bi govor o degradaciji stvorenog, u nas – ma tko mi bili – mogao dobiti oblik. Weimarski Državni Bauhaus i njegov stotinu godina star štih možda mogu poslužiti samo kao zvučna kulisa za buku koja u Bosni i Hercegovini – ni sam ne znam od kada tačno – dominira oblastima odgoja, zanata, umjetnosti i graditeljstva. Gdje i kako to suvremenici koji se, primjerice, danas šetkaju čikmama institucionalnih nadležnosti da spoznaju elemente vrednovanja intermedijalnosti autenticiteta stvaralaštva u nas – ma tko mi bili? U skladu sa čim stvarati novo, a ne degradirati stvoreno? Što je to što „bogatstvo različitosti kultura“ ovih prostora danas uistinu cijeni, sa čime se točno i kdo to, na koji način i zbog čega identificira i jagmi? Da li se radi o stvarnom bogatstvu, stvarnoj različitosti i na koncu o stvarnoj/im kulturi/ama ili je to sve čista fikcija?
Prije sto godina polaznici pretkursa „Državnog Bauhausa“ u Weimaru su od Johannesa Ittena učili provocirati utopiju, eksperimentirati sa oblikom, razumijevati funkcije, stvarati i vrednovati kontraste između – naprimjer – prirodnog i vještačkog, stvarnog i nestvarnog, oslobađajućeg i ograničavajućeg, stvorenog i naslijeđenog…
Photo by author
Kao polaznik takvog jednog pretkursa, studirajući na današnjem Bauhaus Univerzitetu u Weimaru prije nekih desetak godina, kroz glavu mi je prošla misao o tome kako bi bilo dobro enciklopedijski bilježiti sve kontraste funkcija koji se mogu uočiti i iz kojih se mogu interpretirati odnosi stvari uopće. Vjerovao sam da bi takva jedna enciklopedija mogla biti dobar alat. Mene su učili da što više kontrasta stvaralaštvo otvori, to nijanse stvorenog postaju življe, nakon čega nijanse same sebi stvaraju kvalitativne zakone ili pravila unutar kojih one prenose estetske informacije. Svijet je to – matematičan, a umjetnički – u kojem vlada stvarna sloboda ali u njenom najozbiljnijem, najnemilosrdnijem i najiscrpljujućem obliku. Savršen primjer harmonije kontrasta naslijeđenog i stvorenog unutar kojeg je – uzgred rečeno – nastao odnos majstora i šegrta je učenje poštivanja stvaranja i kreativnog integriranja različitosti kako bi kontrasti koje to stvaranje generira bili oslobađajući, a ne ograničavajući. Stvaranjem bilo kakve vrste kakofonije u spomenutom odnosu, koji je krajnje prosvjetiteljski, cufa se funkcija kontrasta naslijeđenog i stvorenog koji je daleko ukorjenjeniji u stvaralaštvu nego se to na prvi pogled čini. Taj kontrast nije toliko vezan za tradiciju, koliko za alate koji je stvaraju. Odsustvo tog kontinuiteta prenošenja funkcije koda stvaralačke vještine danas nije nikakva revolucija moderne, još je manje evolucija. Vjerujem da se to dogodilo stvaralaštvu u Bosni i Hercegovini. Kakofonija teorije disfunkcionalnosti je natjerala majstore da utihnu. Metaforički izraženo, zupčanik prosvjetiteljstva u vremenu se nije okrenuo, nije zaglavljen, nije slomljen, on je doslovno izvađen iz trajanja. Njegova uloga i poruke koje nosi su degradirane a o funkciji sata, vage ili kompasa koja bi – bauhausovski gledano – trebalo da njima samima određuje formu ili oblik mučno je i zastrašujuće misliti.
Sustavnom kultivacijom funkcija stvaralaštva – što je pedagoški posao majstora – stvara se stvaralaštvo kulture koja, osim što funkcionira, vremenom postaje dokument o egzistenciji sustava vrijednosti koje su omogućile funkcionalna dostignuća koja se – obično – u nesagledivoj perspektivi, antropološki, historijski, kulturološki i sociološki interpretiraju kao tekovine koje prenose estetske informacije stare hiljade godina. Kultura je univerzalni Gesamtkunswerk u najbauhausovskijem smislu a osnovni ugaonik tog Gesamtkunstwerka je odnos majstora i šegrta, odnos koji je oblikovan vještinama kao estetskim informacijama dostignuća nastalih unutar kontrasta između vještine stvaralaštva i nečeg čemu još nisam u stanju ni da dam ime. Na ovom mjestu dužan sam i malu napomenu, jedan od uvodničara simpozija „Uticaji Bauhausa na savremenu arhitekturu i kulturu Bosne i Hercegovine“, arhitekta Vedad Islambegović je u razgovoru nakon predavanja otvorio pitanje našeg značajno degradirajućeg razumijevanja složenice Gesamt-kunst werk kao „cjelokupno-umjetničko-djelo“. Razumijevanje pojma kao: „sveukupno-dostignuće-vještina“, pri čemu bi težište bilo stavljeno na same vještine kao dostignuća, možda bi dodatno osvijetlilo bauhausovsku dimenziju ovog pojma. Vrijeme u kojem živimo je vrijeme koje primjenom funkcija novih medija i tehnologija omogućava atomiziranje materije, fizikalizaciju kretnje i sintaksu binarnog izraza, sve kako bi se preciznije stvaralo novo, drugačije, kako bi nijanse bile življe, kako bi se bolje razumijevala funkcija stvaralaštva i kako bi se prepoznavale varijacije i odluke koje stvaraoci u procesu svoga rada donose i promišljaju.
Jedino tako moguće je, uistinu, vrednovati stvaralaštvo, stvaraoca ili stvarateljicu, njegov ili njen rad i razumijevati promjenu koju njihov rad nosi kao poruku. Jedino tako je moguće razumijevati esenciju odnosa unutar kontrasta i tragove koji se iz tih odnosa uklesavaju u Gesamtkunstwerk koda vremena. Funkcije zanata i dan-danas međuplanetarno evoluiraju, vještine se transformiraju i odbacuju, alati i jezici stvaralaštva se mijenjaju čime se kultura kao Gesamtkunstwerk sastavljen od funkcija dostignuća vještina stvaralaštva odljepljuje od papazjanije nacionalnih fikcija kojima nije moguće pronaći ni glavu ni rep. Teži se novom. Stvorene inovacije su danas intervirulentne, uz pomoć umjetne inteligencije generiraju same sebe, kao nijanse sa početka ovoga teksta a rezultat su stvaralaštva koja su nastajala u prostorima između kontrasta interdisciplinarnosti naizgled nespojivih razlika svake zamislive funkcije stvaralaštva, njenih dostignuća i estetskih poruka, baš onako kao što su to majstori Državnog Bauhausa iz Weimara prije 100 godina podučavali svoje šegrte.Bez funkcije sustava vrednovanja kodova intertekstualnosti, intermedialnosti i multidisciplinarnosti autenticiteta svih zamislivih funkcija stvaralaštva ne samo da se degradiraju tragovi kulture/a i brišu poruke stare hiljade godina nego stvaralaštvo sadašnjosti postaje privremeno a kultura/e se pretvara/ju u Gesamtkunstwerk za jednokratnu upotrebu. U jednom takvom sustavu vrijednosti moguće je očekivati doba nečega čemu još nisam u stanju ni da dam ime.
Sarajevo, 13.12.2019.
When the masters fall silent…
Published in the publication of the scientific symposium “The influence of the Bauhaus on contemporary architecture and culture of Bosnia and Herzegovina”
Whether one speaks about a point in the space, the architectural design of Emerik Paskola’s villa in Banjaluka, an accent in a speech delivered in the ‘’Evening of the Music of Movement and Folk Poetry’’ show, colour in a painting by Ismet Mujezinović, insinuation of an abstract gesture in the show of the Collegium Artisticum synthetic theatre, named ‘’Why Does Ema Cry?’’, about the concept of the Ciglane Housing Complex, or any other action in the space of the existing givenness, creation is a change and it visibly makes a contrast in reference to the givenness/given conditions. The question of the valuation of creation as a continuing process should be perhaps the first question which one has to find an answer to, so that a speech about the degradation of the created – in our milieu and whoever we are – could take shape. The Weimar State Bauhaus and its tinge which is hundred years old, maybe can serve as sound settings for the noise that – I do not know myself since when exactly – has been dominating the fields of education, crafts, art and architecture in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Where and how should the contemporaries who, for example, do walk in the deadlocks of institutional jurisdictions, realize the evaluating elements of intermediality of the creativity authenticity in our milieu – whoever we are? One should create the new and not degrade the created in accordance with what? What is the thing that really appreciates ‘’the wealth of cultural diversity’’ in these regions today, exactly with what and when, in what way and because of what does it identify and strive for? Is it a matter of a real wealth, real difference and finally, of real culture(s), or is it all pure fiction?
A hundred years ago in Weimar, ‘’State Bauhaus’’ pre-course takers learned from Johannes Itten to provoke utopia, to experiment with the shape, to understand functions, create and value contrasts between – for example – the natural and artificial, real and unreal, liberating and limiting, created and inherited…
Photo by author
As a taker of one such pre-course, while studying at present-day Bauhaus University in Weimar some ten years or so ago, I had a thought of how it would be good to note encyclopaedically all contrasts of functions that can be perceived and from which one can interpret relations between things in general. I believed that one such encyclopaedia could be a good tool. I have been taught that the more contrasts creativity opens, the more vivid nuances of the created become, after which the nuances create for themselves qualitative laws or rules inside of which they transfer aesthetic information. That world is a mathematical one and the artistic one as well – in which real freedom governs, but in its most serious, most merciless and the most exhausting form. A perfect example of the contrast harmony of the created and inherited, inside of which – by the way – a relation between the master and the apprentice arose, is learning to respect creation and creative integration of difference, in order for the contrasts (that are generated by this creation) to be liberating rather than limiting. By creating any kind of cacophony in the aforementioned relationship (which is extremely enlightening), the contrast function of the inherited and the created is being preserved (the contrast that is by far ingrained in the creativity, than it might look at first sight). That contrast is not as much linked to the tradition, as it is linked to the tools that create the tradition. The absence of that continuity that transmits the code function of the creative skill is not today any kind of the Modern Movement revolution, even less evolution. I believe that this is what happened to the creativity in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The cacophony of the disfunctionality theory pushed the masters to fall silent. Metaphorically expressed, the enlightenment cogwheel in time did not turn, is not stuck, is not broken, it is literally taken out of duration. Its role and the messages it conveys have been degraded, while the function of a clock, scales or a compass which should – from the Bauhaus point of view – determine the form or shape to themselves, is to nauseous and frightening to even think about.
With a systematic cultivation of the creativity functions – which is pedagogically speaking the master’s job – one makes cultural creativity which, besides the fact that it functions, becomes in time a document about the existence of the system of values which enabled functional achievements, which are, in their turn, usually interpreted as attainments carrying aesthetic information thousands of years old, and all of that in the immeasurable perspective, anthropologically, historically, culturogically and sociologically. The culture is a universal Gesamtkunswerk in the most Bauhaus-like sense, while the basic corner stone of that Gesamtkunswerk is a relation between a master and the apprentice, the relation which is shaped by skills as the aesthetic information of achievements, arisen inside of the contrasts between the creativity skill and something I am still not capable of giving name to. I need to give a small remark here – one of the keynote speakers of the symposium the ‘’Bauhaus Influences on the Contemporary Architecture and the Culture of Bosnia and Herzegovina’’, architect Vedad Islambegović opened a question in the conversation after the lecture, a question about our significantly degrading understanding of the compound word Gesamt-kunst-werk as ‘’complete-art-work’’.
The understanding of the notion as ‘’comprehensive-achievement-skill’’, while the emphasis would be laid on the very skills as achievements, may additionally shed light upon the Bauhaus dimension of this notion. The time we live in is the time which, by applying functions of the new media and technologies, enables the atomization of materia, fiscalization of the motion and syntaxis of the binary expression, all in order to create the new, the different in a more precise manner, in order for the nuances to be more vivid, in order to understand better their creativity function and to recognize variations and decisions which are made and deliberated by creators in the process of their work. It is the only possible way to really evaluate creativity, creator or woman creator, his or her work and to understand the change their work carries as a message. It is the only possible way to understand the essence of relations inside of the contrasts and traces, that are being hewn into the Gesamtkunstwerk of the code of time from those relations. Functions of the craft keep evolving interplanetarily even today, skills are being transformed or rejected, tools and languages of creativity are changing, by which culture as the Gesamtkunstwerk made of functions of creativity skills achievements detach from the mishmash of national fictions, that are impossible to decipher. One aspires at the new.
Created innovations are today intervirulent, they generate themselves with the help of the artificial intelligence, like the nuances mentioned at the beginning of this text. They are results of the creativity that used to come into being in the spaces between the interdisciplinarity contrasts of the seemingly irreconcilable differences of every imaginable creativity function, its achievements and aesthetic messages, exactly in the way as the State Bauhaus masters 100 years ago in Weimar did teach their apprentices. Without the function of the evaluation system of intertextuality, intermediality and multidisciplinarity codes of authenticity of all imaginable creativity functions, not only traces of culture(s) are being degraded and messages thousands of years old being erased, but it is creativity of the present that becomes temporary, and the culture(s) transforms itself/transform themselves into Gesamtkunstwerk for a one-time use. In such a system of values, it is possible to expect an era of something that I am not capable of even giving a name to.
Sarajevo, 13.12.2019
[~] 