Sunday, February 20, 2011

Flashback Live In Gampaha


FLASH BACK
 01 - RANA BIME
 02 - BATH PATHA
 03 - HEMADEMA LEBUNA
 04 - DURA ETHA RATAKA
 05 - NIWADUWATA
 06 - ENGLISH SONG
 07 - ANTHIMA SATANE
 08 - RAMBARI
 09 - WASANTHA KALETA
 10 - TAMIL SONG

CHAMIKA SIRIMANNE
 11 - SANSARA SIHINAYE
 12 - LASSANA ATHTHATU
 13 - SAMAWELA MATA KIYANNA
 14 - HITHANNEPA ADARETA PATA

SENANAYAKA WERALIYADDA
 15 - PUNCHI DANGAKARIE
 16 - KEHERAL KADAGENA
 17 - ANE GATAWNE
 18 - MAL VIYANEN

SUNIL EDIRISINHE
 19 - DUWA NUMBA MAGE
 20 - LENCHINA MAGE
 21 - PARU PALAMEN
 22 - RA RA RA BOMBIYE
 
NIROSHA VIRAJINI
 23 - SINASENNA MATA
 24 - IGILENNA
 25 - RANGIRA MA
 26 - DUHULU MALAKA
 
AMAL PERERA
 27 - MAL PITA MAL
 28 - MASANASA
 29 - ADARE RAN
 30 - RAN MEEVITHA
 31 - SANDA MIDULATA ENAWA

RAVINDU SATHSARA
 32 - GIRI HEL MUDUNE

SHIHAN MIHIRANGA
 33 - ADA THANIYEN MA
 34 - MIHIRAVIYE
 35 - SULANGAK WELA
 36 - OYA RUWA DUTU VITA
 37 - LANDE MULAWEE





  • Download [137.01MB]

Flashback With Superstar


FLASHBACK
 01 - MAHA MUHUDA
 02 - METHWA
 03 - MEWELA PENEWE
 04 - NEWADUWATA MAMA
 05 - POKIRI
 06 - RANABIME WERUWO
 07 - WASANTHA KALETA
 08 - NONSTOP [SUPER STARS]

AMILA NADEESHANI
 09 - ADAM ENNA
 10 - MERE

SUPER STARS
 11 - DANGAKARE

MANJULA NIMANTHI
 12 - DEWEYAN PAMULA
 13 - SEETHALEN MAL

GAYANI MADUSHA
 14 - DIKKASADA PEMBAREE
 15 - SITHA BIDUNUDA

NADINI PREMADASA
 16 - DUWANNE
 17 - SAPU KUSUME

BUDDHIKA USHAN
 18 - EGILENNA HADANNEPA
 19 - EKMAN KOPAYA

SUPER STARS
 20 - MAHAMERAK

SURENDRA PERERA
 21 - MANARANJANA
 22 - PAYANNA SANDA
 23 - RASA HEGUM

MAHESHIKA LAKMALI
 24 - NADUKARAYEK
 25 - PEM SWARNA

GAMINI SUSIRIWARDENA
 26 - NELA AKASE
 27 - RATHU MENIKE

NALINDA RANASINHA
 28 - PINI WETUNADA
 29 - SANDUNI

FLASHBACK
 30 - PODIKALE MARADA





  • Download [139.58 MB]

Flashback Live In Kaduwela


BAND SONG
 01 - ANTHIMA SATANE
 02 - ENGLISH SONG
 03 - SHAHRUK KHAN
 04 - HITHAHIRI WATTANA
 05 - HINDI SONG
 06 - RATHU ROSA MALAK
 07 - PRUTHUGEESI KARAYA
 08 - ADA KALA BEELA
 09 - SURANGANEETA
 10 - PODI KALE
 11 - JOTHI NONSTOP

LATHA WALPOLA
 12 - NAMO MARIYANI
 13 - AMMALA DUKGANNE
 14 - HIMA RENU
 
GINGER
 15 - HINDI SONG
 15 - SUDU WALAKULE
 16 - MAL SARAGE

ASANKA PRIYAMANTHA
 17 - NUPURUDU OBADUTHU
 18 - SANDA ELIYA GALA
 19 - GOLU DHARUWEK
 
PRIYA SOORIYASENA
 20 - HERADA WIMAN
 21 - HIRUDA MUWAWEE
 22 - SANDA THARAKA
 23 - PETHUM PIREELA

NIHAL NELSON
 24 - KARUNA SUWANDA
 25 - KOTHTHU ROTI
 26 - KAWADI BAILA

SUBANI HARSHANI
 27 - NANATHOTEDI
 28 - SAPATHTHU MALA
 29 - LABA SINA
 30 - EKAMA EKA WARAK

CHANDANA LIYANARACHCHI
 31 - SITHIN ADINAWA
 32 - KAWI SEPADA
 33 - SAMAWENNA
 34 - RAN THARAKA

LAKSHMAN HILMI
 35 - WASDOS YANNATA
 36 - ENAKA ERAKA MA

SATHISH PERERA
 37 - ADARETA HADUWAK
 38 - ME PENI DE

ATHULA SRI GAMAGE
 39 - NIL NUWAN
 40 - ATHMAYEN
 
PODI LAMAYA
 41 - HITHE  HAIYA
 42 - E RATE MINISSU

BAND SONG
 43 - NONSTOP






Saturday, January 1, 2011

Four Propositions Concerning Art Blogging


My first proposition is: Blogging is about being stupid.
It is accepting that I do not know what I should know before starting to write. But wait! "Should know"? Let me rephrase that: blogging is accepting that there is no required knowledge to write. In part, it is accepting Beuys' affirmation that everyone is an artist. Everyone is an art-writer. Everyone is a potential member of the art milieu. And this everyone also means different aspects of me. Suddenly, the quickness of the form, it's simplicity, encourages me to move forward. To take risks. To dare write something I am not sure of. One could say this is the continuation of the beautiful tradition of Montaigne's Essays (which translates into Attempts). Yet here, the very way it is created and shared encourages the risk, encourages the attempting to see where the thoughts, the words, took me, take me, might take me. But that is just the first step. Because the consequences are quite far-going.

My second proposition is: Thanks to the internet, writing about art can become closer to making art.
The problem with writing is what is usually considered it's greatest advantage: it stays. Letters form words which form sentences which are a pest - they do not let go. So anything you write can and will be used against you, be it literally or metaphorically, by someone, or by yourself, reading what you wrote many years ago.
Writing, then, must become serious. You have to weigh your words. You become responsible. Meaning, what you write needs to pass the test of an imaginary future reading.
The internet may not seem different, because here things also stay (you can find all the internet publications from the past at archives.org). However, there is so much happening, and what you publish has so little apparent weight (you don't feel it, hold it in your hand, share it physically), that even the concept of a "virtual" world seems logical. And yet the beauty is that "virtual", here, is quite real. The letters still turn into meaning - and practically instantly, they turn into social meaning.
But maybe because of the lack of weight, as opposed to other circumstances, when writing the blog, I don't feel obliged to anything. My distance to what I write about can change. I can be a distant observer, and then suddenly move close, challenge the work, ask it questions, see where it takes my thinking. This limit of private/public allows me to think to myself, but in a way that creates a new type of space, a new type of relation. Am I still writing about the work, or am I writing myself into the work? After all, I have no obligation to be a critic. Because I define what the blog is, I do not need to correspond to any criteria - and so the writing can become more personal, more experiential - sharing the experience I am living. And, as my experience is often related to creating new works, the limit becomes blurred - the work I write "about" (or "from" or "out of") is working its way into the one I am (sometimes unconsciously) thinking about or preparing.

My third proposition is: The models of participation in art change because of the internet.
This new type of sharing has other consequences. As opposed to most art writing, it becomes difficult to define what exactly is my position in the (traditional) world of art. Am I reviewing, creating, alluding? It is up to the reader to define what role my text plays in his experience of the art/world.
But also on the scale of the art milieu, the situation becomes more fun.
Am I a big, important fish, or an insignificant lost fish? Reading the blog it is hard to say. And that is, because it really is hard to say. The art market tries to establish market rules - artists have values that either go up or down, and if the art businesspeople had it their way, art would really be an extension of the art market. But this model is greatly inadequate for art, and I am the proof. After a few years writing the blog, I had more and more people contact me. One of them was a curator at the Warsaw Centre for Contemporary Art. He wanted to link to me on the Centre's online (and sometimes offline) review called Obieg. Suddenly, people from the milieu now considered me as an insider. Several people asked me "How did you manage to convince them?". Apparently, they were not used to a model which goes beyond traditional, linear processes. Of course, these new models are far more complex, which can be quite exciting: I can participate in a review and be written about, my work can be the subject of my own analysis picked up by someone from another site, the blog could potentially be published in a paper edition, it becomes a sort of a one-man-show that keeps evolving. Galleries start considering the blog as a serious partner, they become interested in the person, other artists contact me, first as a publisher, then as a person, new unexpected projects come up... All this has been happening. And every time it does, it seems the definition of what I do shifts.

My fourth and last proposition is: Blogging about art can be an exercise in moving.
The great and crazy composer Cornelius Cardew once wrote: "Notation is a way of making people move. If you lack others, like aggression or persuasion. The notation should do it. This is the most rewarding aspect of work in a notation. Trouble is: just as you find your sounds are too alien, intended for a 'different culture', you make the same discovery about your beautiful notation: no one is willing to understand it. No one moves."
A similar thing happens with writing my art blog. This is one way of changing the conditions of living, or appreciating, art. When it works, you feel how it takes you elsewhere. "You" meaning me, but also you, the potential reader. And yet, every once in a while, you, no, I discover that the reading remains on a level I am not satisfied with. It becomes a reading of another text, and so, once again, I have written a different text to the one I was writing. This happens, of course, with every creation. However, the blog, the internet, has this wonderful capacity of allowing for the exercise to be constantly exercised. I go back, I rewrite, I answer myself. I enter dialogues. Exercise. Yes, that is what blogging is for me - an exercise in moving.

The above text first appeared (in a Russian translation) in the Korydor online magazine, as part of the Kyiv Offline project.
The picture is Seeing Got Us Here (A Bunch of Leaves), 2010, by Wojtek Ziemilski.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Melting ears (on Cory Arcangel's two works)

The one I liked was this:


while the one that goes further is this:


Both are fragments of works by Cory Arcangel.
The difference between them is significant. The first one is a joke - it is a repetition, a trick played on the idea of reproduction or universality.
The other one too. But the other one moves towards something else. It provides us with the doubt as to what it should be like. I don't know Schoenberg's op. 11, 3. I might have heard it, but I'm not sure how it sounds. Yet it certainly doesn't sound like these cats. Or does it? What is it about Schoenberg that makes him sound like Schoenberg? And why do we need him to sound like Schoenberg? (Why do we call artists people who interpret in the most faithful way? And no, this is not a rhetorical question. What is it about repetition that still makes it move us aesthetically? And no, any form of the answer "the difference within the repetition" will not satisfy me as long as I keep putting the same piece on my mp3 player and enjoy it beause it is the same, and still appreciate its freshness, not its "difference".) The thing, here, is not just about the cats, it isn't the old elephant-making-oil-paintings trick. It is rather about other possibilities of listening, of paying attention, of defining what you hear. Can we hear the Schoenberg in the original cat videos? Can we hear Bach in the original music versions? The Bach composition, in that sense, says too much - it states a clear correspondence between the original YouTube videos and Bach's work. The second says less: it says "it is out there, but it's hard to say where exactly, and why exactly we would stop there". (And does it while being damn funny). And that's when our ears melt and reconsolidate, they become other ears, and other, and other. We are forced to listen to what might be there, and not what we think is there.
So why do I like the first video more? Maybe because I still enjoy what is there a lot.
Or because I'm not a fan of Schoeberg.

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Ai WeiWei 2008

Ok, it's a bit of a jump from dropping the urn in 1995 to the Bird's Nest of the 2008 Olympics, but this will eventually fit together...
"We must bid farewell to autocracy. Whatever shape it takes, whatever justification it gives, authoritarian government always ends up trampling on equality, denying justice and stealing happiness and laughter from the people.

We should also leave behind discrimination, because it is narrow-minded and ignorant, denies contact and warmth; and corrodes mankind's belief that we can better ourselves. The only way to avoid misunderstanding, war and bloodshed is to defend freedom of expression and to communicate with sincerity, concern and good intentions.

The "Bird's Nest" National Stadium, which I helped to conceive, is designed to embody the Olympic spirit of "fair competition". It tells people that freedom is possible but needs fairness, courage and strength. Following the same principles, I will stay away from the opening ceremony, because I believe the freedom of choice is the basis of fair competition. It is the right I cherish most."

Why I'll stay away from the opening ceremony of the Olympics     

related