In 1990s a new period started in which nation-states were in decline and a new trans-national political and economical structure began to emerge. After the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the USSR, while the European Union progressed towards a single currency, cities that sliced the world horizontally evolved into new world centres. The tension between the centre and the periphery started to reconstruct the world beginning from the horizontal line. The transformation of cities was most apparent in the processes of gentrification and normalisation. New investments in old, marginalised neighbourhoods steered towards a new urban planning approach. And architects, the core determining agents of this process, recreated the buildings of the cities.
Towards the end of the 2000s, with the acceleration provided by the non-institutional movements of the 1990s and together with the progress towards the project of becoming contemporary, certain significant moves in contemporary art were taking shape. As cities bearing new energies, the centre-cities started becoming more and more attractive for the ‘normalisation/gentrification’ processes. The codes of culture and art were transformed in unison with the dynamism of the city to produce a new dynamic. In the period that I have defined as the “period of Megalopolises”1 , in the beginning of the 1990s, a new endeavour started to emerge in which the trans-national capital was slowly constructing the hierarchies of the centre and periphery relations through cities rather than states.
It could be stated that together with globalisation, postmodernism, the questioning of the hierarchy between high art and low art, the popularisation of the Third World art, the increasing numbers and variety of the grand biennials of the world in a period of megalopolises has led to the increasing visibility of artists ‘born in or with family and cultural roots in the Third World’ due to the shift of the centre and periphery relations from countries to cities and the increasing significance of global-cities. In the period also defined as the “post migration condition”, it was apparent that artists of the “Third World” were no longer making traditional art to reflect the local culture of their country, but rather pursuing a double-sided critical strategy in which instead of opposing the West, they were utilising matching technologies and ways of thinking to produce alternative strategies. Artists living in the West, working and producing work in two languages and in two countries started to become more interesting. The western market has only now started to recognise the value of such artists artistically and economically. It is now possible to observe an increasing number of artists present in the current art scene with two languages and two cultures; either the third generation, born in western cities, or those studying and staying long enough in western centres to become a part of the two cultures; who could therefore have a critical perception of both sides. This sensibility is a new formation different from the earlier anti-western, Third World nationalism and traditionalism. These artists have started producing work outside the boundaries of traditional left wing discourse and nationalist bearings. This deconstructive method with a double-sided critical approach is spilling outside the clear-cut boundaries of home and abroad, while seeking a pragmatic route to narrow down the borders through expansion. The post-colonial discourse that has been the determining paradigm of western art in the last 20 years had especially been instrumental in facilitating the emergence of the artists of the horizon in western European art exhibitions and art market both.
On the other hand, in conjunction with the fields of philosophy and sociology engaging theoreticians and occupying a significant role in the trans-disciplinary position of contemporary art, and with the increasing importance of cultural studies in the 1990s, alongside studies pointing at the general tendency of the system to develop in a culture weighed direction, the art sphere is now as much influential as the political and economical domains. It could even be argued that it is much more prominent. As the studies of Loic Wacquant and Luc Boltanski, starting off from and referring to Weber, on “The New Spirit of Capitalism” illustrate; the late capitalist system flourishes and develops virtually by mimicking the art field. Due to the expansion of capitalism in all directions, as revealed in Negri and Hardt’s Empire 2, capitalism has to renew itself, within its integrated geography, for it no longer has a place or land to expand to at times of crises.
Urbi, which is the regeneration movements in economy-politics and cultural formations that would be functioning in the centre of urban economy, had not even considered the virtual actions that would lead to its emergence. On the other hand when we term the process becoming-world we would be able to face a concept that would at least slightly part from the global 3. When we see that being from the world or being a world citizen actually means to be able to look beyond the borders of national boundaries and national culture, we would then be able to realise that the process of becoming-world functions differently from globalisation which deals mainly with the capital movements of the world. What is the difference between the meanings of becoming-world and globalisation? This would connect us with the concepts of resistance and culture that separate worldwide from the global. The artistic and cultural efforts and ways of thinking should be considered separately from the prestige aiming tendency of the capital, even if these actions are sponsored by global companies, because the most important difference lies in the reason behind the actions. Why do we not associate art with calculation? Why do the investment groups consider financial gain and not art when they fund the culture and the art fields? Why are the “Public Relations Companies” and “Advertising Agencies” concerned about the prestigious and symbolic values and not art itself when they are acting as the mediators and financial organisers between art and the capital? 4 To ask these questions from within the field implies a certain understanding of the differences in the environment. The question “Who thinks about what and when?” would be instrumental in understanding the difference between becoming-world and globalisation. So much so that what is being deliberated on and what is being actually done will become significant in the process of the practice. When artists and curators work without considering what sort of practice would suit the capital best, they are actually not serving the global capital, however producing an exhibition or an artwork by considering the rules of the capital and that alone would limit the artistic and intellectual processes involved in making an exhibition which would in turn reduce the effect of the work. Hence, a worldwide culture or art practice differs from the global movements of capital and its frame of mind. In his work dealing with the concept of Becoming-World Jean-Luc Nancy points at the similarity between art and the worldwide: According to him “a world is never an objective or an exterior unit of order. A world is never in front of me, or the world in front of me is not my world. But a totally different world”. 5 As this excerpt would illustrate, my world is the world that I live in; the world in front of me is nothing but another world. “When I am in art the world of art resides in me and the world of art becomes my world”; but the world of art and culture perceived by the capital is not the world of art; it is the world of the capital in front of the world of art. This is globalisation. In fact according to Nancy, “I might not even be able to know that this world is a world”. Although here Nancy is mentioning the arts that he is familiar with, I prefer to reside on the difference of the capital and the art world. 6 So, whether the world that I am a part of is the art world or the financial world illustrates the difference between becoming-world and globalisation. If we were to steer alongside Nancy, we would be feeling a “resonance” in the world we are in. “A world is a space where a certain tonality resonates”. 7 And doesn’t this resonance determine the uniqueness of that world which belongs to us. What is unique is the world that we are in and that we feel the effects of. And thus, it is not global but “worldwide”. 8 Considering their difference, another phenomenon must be emphasized: Which leads us towards another question derived from the one put forth earlier. Even if the aesthetical has entered our capitalistic everyday lives and had distanced the artist from the 19th century notion of the “beautiful”, art still has a basic concern about humanity, we are faced with a situation just like the one confronted by the scientist.9 And if the artist or the scientist is concerned about their income or their trivial egos while making art or science, they would be venturing away from the essence of art and science. At the end of the day, a world functions on the order of a work of art. On that note, becoming-world is not globalisation.
A figurative distinction could be made as such: The term becoming-world refers to the youth protesting against the G 8’s in Geneva defined as “No Global” by Antonio Negri, in a single word a “multitude”/multitudo. 10 Reacting against the economical gain inclined global system of law to be able to sustain worldwide justice. Standing against an “Americanised” and “Disneyland-like” system of legal culture, inclusive of copyrights issues like the AMI, they feel more inclined towards the “Copyleft” system. That is, instead of protecting the rights and doing this by pouring money, allowing the rights to be freely transferred onto other users to enable scientific inventions especially in computer software. This also feeds a thread of friendliness that could be called hospitality. This is a system of worldwide hospitality and offering following the footsteps of Levinas and Derrida. 11 Therefore it also supports and proposes organising against issues of nationalism and racism. All these lines of action against the capital, the law, the culture, the privatised and personalised media, and the petty top-ten 12 society of the global world, have a critical view on the globalised world, emerging out of the concept of becoming-world.
A world becomes a world when it is lived in; however it is a known fact that the postmodern capital is deterritorialized. It has lost its country and land; yet we could not proceed further without asking the question, “will art have a land or a country?”. It would not be wrong to have a look at the perception of the arts at the period of nation-states at this point. And a glimpse of the developments in the 19th century would complement this investigation. Let us take Hegel as an example. 13 In his lectures on Aesthetics Hegel places the arts in a certain hierarchy. This hierarchy of the three stages of symbolic, classical and romantic was leading towards a reading of the history of art through the history of philosophy. Here, Hegel is actually mentioning three different geographies: The first one is relating to Egyptian art, the second to Greek and Roman arts and the third to Northern European Christian art. It is due to this reason that 19th and 20th centuries several scholars and artists in various different locations have considered the arts in relation to national cultural characteristics. This would also apply to the materials used in art as well as the artists themselves. Only ten years ago, in certain spheres, there were people claiming that from painting one should understand paint on canvas and that this practice indicates the Mediterranean culture; however another argument contrary to this one stemming from installations or what we call contemporary art today was stating that “Northern Art” would be a better term for describing the mentioned activities. We should be thankful that such an incredible distinction no longer exists.
This world is the world of its inhabitant; the inhabitant thinks within this world: If the world is the world of art it would be possible to think within art, if it is the world of money and capital it would be possible to think within the wheels of money and capital. A world is a place; it is an intersection place of existing places. To settle means to dwell. The world being dwelt in is like the name given to a place where something is being thought about. And as such it would be possible to be either global or worldly. According to Nancy, “dwelling”, to dwell somewhere, is connected to the words ethos and etos of Greek origin. And according to these two similar words, it means to “stand under” all kinds of ethics. In a similar fashion, the Latin words habitare and habitus, derived from the root habere, embody the meanings such as to stand, to hold. It means to fill a certain place, to hold a place, to have a place, to have the right to use a place. 14 Therefore the world is an ethos or a habitus. 15
mounir fatmi resides within a critical consideration of this process outlined and explained here, and through his interest in the architecture of cities he looks at a world dominated by new technologies from a world that is vanishing, with an ironic gaze from the Arab world; on the one hand he works through his own cultural codes, towards the culture and art field of the West by utilising various materials, especially network materials (connections, lines-cables (the lines both as in Arabic calligraphy and in cable lines), figures, hadiths, ready-mades), and on the other hand puts together a critique of the chaotic investment world of architecture and city planning of our day with an aesthetical language, using new available materials, objects of technological cultural consumption. In the installation assembling various sizes of speakers looking like a playfully arranged modern or postmodern cityscape from a distance, their shadow cast on the wall presents the vision of a real city (Manhattan) waiting to be saved. On the other hand, there is the city and its humming in excessive decibels, the noise of the city (shouting, horns, alarms, together with the sounds of the night life creating the noise and cacophony of music) offering a basic clue about the life in megalopolises. As a result of this perception Save Manhattan will surely be read as an allusion to September 11th. Here we encounter the condition of the 21st century, the outside-of-the-West gazing at and empathising with the West. We witness the same attitude in mounir fatmi’s work with figures and hadiths; a North African, coming from Moroccan culture and critical of both the West and the East. The sharpness of the senses of beauty and goodness transport us into a Nietzschean mentality beyond “good and evil”. So much so that it is impossible not to feel the sorrow and the exhilaration in the critical view of this approach. In his work titled The Machinery the artist reminds us that we are living in a machinery world. In the video work, The Ghost, empty, transcendental, vertical spiralling, curved and discontinuous lines - arranged according to an immanent plan - creating invigorated and congested figures where the plan is generated. Thinking through figures: figure forming from the ghostlike through Islamic calligraphy. Ecran Noir is another work made by available materials (ready-made), this time VHS tapes assembled one next to the other; a thought provoking work, disguising the image yet showing the supporting transporter of the image. The work is also reminiscent of the bands of the cassettes in Sarkis’ work, however instead of the tapes carrying films or music, mounir fatmi installs the black box disguising the tapes themselves, as if urging the viewer to contemplation: the black box reveals nothing itself while holding the truth inside.
The installation on the architectural configuration of the city, titled Les Monuments, consists of an agglomeration of hard hats with the name of a different poststructuralist philosopher inscribed on each one: G. Deleuze, J. Derrida, J. Baudrillard etc. If we were to follow the footsteps of Marie Duparsi’s interpretation of mounir fatmi, written in 2009, we would be able to conclude that the ready-made hard hats are actually a construction of another kind. Just as ideas are part of a city being constructed passing through and beyond modern or postmodern thought; while ideas themselves are metaphorically an architectural construction; the helmets not only refer to the configuration of the city planning approach of the new postmodern megalopolises, they also evoke the inherent risks therein. It touches on the destructive side of the postmodern global cities, their disposition of tearing down all links with the past, as described in Ulrike Beck’s Risk Society. 16 While the helmets protect against the risks they also remind one of their existence. In la Pieta Michelangelo depicts the innocent, lamb like Jesus, who had sacrificed himself, in the arms of Mary, but the medium of mounir fatmi is the media of our times; of a world operating by cables, networks and communication: Jesus is in agony and pain, and the media is carrying disinformation to the inhabitants of the new urbs; the fact that every piece of information is transformed into a sensationalised news, only to be followed by the next sensation remains to be one of the most significant problems of our times. mounir fatmi moves towards a similarity in form, of course he utilises a well known, popular form, however only when we think of the overwhelming energy carried through the cables do we realise that this is not imitation but seizing power. Instead of inventing new forms he grasps the power within the available form, and uses it, displays it. As Klee said, “…not (to) reproduce the visible; rather … (to) make visible” is worthwhile: to construct the “logic of sensation” which makes the powers operating in the world of information and disinformation of the journalist and of cities visible. 17 .
The state of megalopolises today is evaluated by the biotic conditions through the socio-ecologic humanistic and urban perspectives defined as the Chicago school. The biotic elements and struggles in the politics of living spaces and settlement areas are being drawn towards another perspective with the normalised and gentrified anti-ecologic and bio-political expansions, and while nostalgic elements are preserved in certain neighbourhoods, modernist structures are being torn down in others to make way for new structures that would fit the neo-liberal economic rent policies of the day. The settlement analyses of the population migrating from Europe to America, the ‘new population groups’ according to Park from the Chicago school, are being replaced by a new trend developed through magazines of architecture and design and nourishing from artistic perspectives. The truth that lies behind the evaluation of an art work as an art document as much as a work of art is due to the amalgamation of art and life in the bio-political period. According to Boris Groys, the merging of ‘applied arts’ with city planning, design, architecture, advertisement and fashion, has led to the relocation of life in art. 18 Here migration and ethnic groups, despite their existence, are being considered as disconcerting factors in the city to be pushed and evicted as far out of the centre as possible. The ecological viewpoint considered as the “new environmental approach” by Park is being replaced by the ‘ecology of new materials’; megalopolises are being utilised as laboratories for architectural experiments, and the relationship of settlement and planning as a field is being “aestheticised” employing more baroque elements than functionalistic approaches. In the mean time, ‘humanist ecology’ is being replaced by a trans-human ecology. That is; life networks, contexts, animals and plants are being envisaged in new spaces and earth is being elevated towards the air. The fact that the rooftops of buildings are being utilised as areas for plants, animals and even as areas of transportation could be considered in correlation to the transformation of the ground level into an underground world in certain megalopolises. This would seem most fitting especially in Latin American megalopolises. It has been determined by city planners long ago that the centre and the periphery have been merging. On the other hand, the ‘trans-ecology’ of the economic city that separates productive areas and counter productive areas, aims to segregate the homeless, unemployed, sick (especially with AIDS) and disabled from the world of the productive and hardworking in American megalopolises. The new welfare distribution economy emerging out of the normative city perception wishes to spatially separate the work and residence areas while fusing them technologically.
We are progressing towards an era of ‘deurbanisation’ (urbanisation without cities) as perceived by Murray Bookchin, a period in which urban belts take over cities. The political new urbanisation model is expanding by the principle of demolish-and-build in various parts of the world especially outside the west. China has been a curiosity for artists as the most thrilling example of such madness. Economical rent policies that have become state policies organised by the permissions granted by municipalities play an important part in the reshaping of the megalopolises. In the crisis of a world of citizenship and democracy, ‘tax payers’ are exposed to economic policies founded on their taxes rather than having a say over them. The ‘citizens’ who have been rendered inactive, have become part of a world of indifference, looking only for ways of sustaining their lives while being contained in a policy of pacification. When the greed of the city manifests itself as a market, the demolish-and-build policies establish the main axis of the megalopolises, and preservation of the past materializes only at the surface, the simulation of the facades of buildings. The fact that the geography of the city is now a topography reshaped by governing powers, undermines the theoretical and practical implications of intellectual and urban approaches. Use value is being transformed into exchange value, in a period of real submission in the face of the trans-national fluidity of capital. The megalopolis character of a city, which is more and more organised like a company than a city, is evaluated by the competitive role it plays in becoming a world centre. In line with the postmodern approach where economical development is perceived as a cultural development, the city is being conceived as an ‘enterprise’. An ever growing ‘urban machine’ operating with tactics, strategies, flexibility in organisation models and processes that lead to the impoverishment of the local inhabitants.
The video works of mounir fatmi entitled “Architecture Now” offer documents of a world of parallel and competitive cities mentioned above. The mournful images of demolishment, the brightness or paleness of their colours show the fusion with the power of the demolishing machines and bulldozers. The hierarchical aesthetic realm in some of the images, beginning with the perception of shadow and darkness opening onto light, present the fact that trees and plants alike are exposed to the violence that is taking place: Animals, plants and human beings find their place under the category of living beings (anima). In the images showing the violence exerted upon concrete, the claw of the excavator could be perceived as the hand or the prosthesis of the fundamental element of the in-human machine, the capital. This hell raising activity has no solid reflection of a world that once existed behind the house and door numbers. The existing ‘state of place’ (etat des lieux) could be read as part of the pain felt Without Anesthesia. The dormitory towns (cite-dortoirs) built by the policies of the Welfare State once upon a time are no more than a nostalgia of a time long gone. Nothing more could be done than perceiving this gaze seeking the emptiness where ghosts meander. We dwell in the question of Jean-François Lyotard uttered when faced with postmodern times; “what is one to do but bear witness?”.
1 See: Ali Akay, Tekil Düşünce, 1991 Afa Publications, 3rd Edition, Bağlam Publications, 2002 and Konu-m-lar, Bağlam Publications, 1991.
2 The Turkish translation of this book (İmparatorluk) was published by Ayrıntı Publications in October 2001, initially having two print runs and subsequently having a pirate print available on the market alongside the third print run.
3 The works of Derrida and Jean-Luc Nancy would serve as examples for this phenomenon.
4 From this perspective we would not be falling far away from what Hegel stated about art, because in the 2nd chapter titled “The Empirical Theories of Art” Hegel expresses that the gaze of art differs from the practical greed of desire. Because gazing at the object, art contemplates on freedom, it frees freedom from the hegemony of desire. However, desire ruins the object by using it for its own good, by utilising it for an end. See. Hegel, Introduction a l’esthetique, (p.69). “Art deals with an individual existence”, writes Hegel. And according to our view, art deals with being, while refraining from the monetary and the egoist greed of the object. Actually, here, Hegel presents a new vista for modern psychoanalysis by stating that desire aims for an object; however according to Deleuze, desire does not have an object. Desire revolves inside clusters. When a woman desires a dress, the desire is not actually for the dress itself or for the “lack” of it; it is rather for a system of clusters revolving around it. It would only be possible to locate desire in a totality of an arrangement of being fashionable, attracting attention, gaining a position in the work environment, impressing her husband or her surroundings, making herself more valuable. When Hegel separates art and desire, he writes that art is interested in the surface of the object, with its image, its form, and that desire is interested in the object itself (with its empirical and natural expansion, its concrete materiality) (p.69). Art functions on the surface of the sensory. As an image the sensory finds itself elevated through art. Art seeks for the ideal of the object (the stone, the flower, the organic life) and not its immediate and pure materiality. According to Hegel, works of art are the sensory shadows of the beautiful.
5 Jean-Luc Nancy, La Création du Monde ou la mondialisation, Galilée, 2002, pp.34-35.
6 When Nancy emphasizes the fact that “Hittite” art does not belong to his world, while “Bach or Matisse” would be familiar to him, he remains limited in his perception of art. See: ibid., p.35.
8 Here becoming-world (worldwide) could be used as a substitute for the term formerly used; universal, because unlike the global, the worldwide necessitates a condition of being there, being contained in it while nevertheless resisting and evolving towards an ideal. When we pursue the approach of Gilles Deleuze, who initially asks what universal means, we would be improving our understanding of that which is worldwide. When the outdated, 19th century concept of the universal is established in its right place, the meaning of it will also be revitalized.
9 It is Yves Michaud who claims that art is no longer solid, that it is in a gaseous state, and he argues that when art left the problematic of the beautiful all other life forms have assumed an aesthetical perception and presentation. See: Yves Michaud, L’Art a l’Etat Gazeux, Essai sur le Triomphe de l’esthetique, Hachette Litteratures, Pluriel, Editions Stock, 2003.
10 For an exhibition about this concept See: Ali Akay, Democracy to Come Exhibition, Aksanat Culture Centre Gallery, September-October 2003. In this exhibition, Altan Çelem-Gamze Toksoy realised a photographical-anthropological investigation about “bachelor pads”, the dreary places where single young men who have migrated to Istanbul working in temporary jobs live. Zeliha Burtek, handwrote the text of Multitudo in a “light box”. Cem Gencer made a video about the homeless who spend the night on park benches at the park on Taksim square; Şener Özmen transformed himself into a crazy man in the work titled “Crazydemokrasi” (with Turkish flags adorning the funnel on his head); Susan Steinberg made a video asking the migrants and refugees in Europe and America “What are your thoughts about a better world?”. Seza Paker presented two videos from an earlier solo exhibition at Galerist, which was a grand installation. In these two videos Seza Paker transforms a documentary about the weapons and military equipment collectors in a bunker at Paris-Issy les Moulinaux, into art. In the two videos photographs were transformed into video and videos were transformed into photographs. In the video made from the photographs the bunker and the objects were portrayed. And the other video was an interview with a transvestite named Sophie. In this second video the Turkish version on the headphones was dubbed by Serra Yılmaz. From the interview it was understood that Sophie was a transvestite with a passion for military paraphernalia who worked as a diver in the pipelines to earn the money she was spending on these war equipments. After the interview and right before the exhibition she was drowned during a dive at the pipelines. This also made us a witness of an incident about the position of “temporary jobs” in social labour on fulfilling passions. Multitude is the name given to this crowd suppressed and outcast in the global world. They all live outside the system and constitute the outcasts. Here we are not really encountering the Marxist “class struggle”, but rather with a concept of multitude that Hobbes states, “should be cast out” in his book De Cive. This will also appear as the name of the “masses” that will be used by Spinoza in realising democracy. In their best-seller book The Empire (Exil, 2000), Negri and Hardt use the same term when mentioning the “revolutionary powers”. See also: Negri, Du Retour, Calman Levy, 2002. Negri perceives the “multitude movement” he calls “no global” as the moment politics becomes worldwide. They have become a real multitude he claims for the youth realising the “No global” movement. Negri, ibid., pp.103-105.
11 See: Jacques Derrida, Adieu a Emanuel Levinas, Galilée, 1997. E. Levinas, Totalité et Infini, p.232. A hospitality emerging out of a responsibility in face of the Other who has heard the commandment “Thou shall not kill”. It stands as a determining factor in the field of “Ethics”. It does not question whether the foreigner is an enemy or a friend. In that sense, it moves politics beyond the construction of “Carl Schmitt politics” based on friend and enemy (Schmitt was mentioning two types of war; polemos (natural enemies) and stasis (civil wars), that is the differentiation of the wars between the Greek and the Barbarians, and the civil wars amongst the Greeks in Plato). It would be therefore possible to separate politics from ethics in the traditional sense. And this does not in any way seem similar to a tribal ethics. What is at stake here now, is neither a civil war, nor violence or war between those with different natures or tribes. According to Levinas the responsibility towards the dead lies in the murder inherent in death. “We should think of all the murder there is in death; every death is a murder…”. Here the responsibility does not originate from the I, it rests with the other. This stands as a fundamental difference since (the sentence in Brothers Karamazov “We are all guilty of all and for all men before all, and I more than the others.”) Dostoyevsky. I (ego) as the conscious subject, with all my consciousness, am not liable for the responsible decision about the other, I could only reach my responsibility through the other.
12 For becoming top-ten society See: Ali Akay, Sanatın ve Sosyolojinin Ruh Hali, Bağlam publications, 2002. The concept of top-ten society deals with the cultural formations that have become like “Top 10” lists. Authors becoming best-sellers, creating artists through star systems and casting out all multitudes are part of this process.
13 Hegel, Introduction a l’esthetique Le beau, Champ/Flammarion, translated from German into French by: S. Jankelevich, 1979. Right at the beginning of the book Hegel points out that the book is about aesthetics, a science of the beautiful that has become unnatural, “artificial”, by leaving the natural, by excluding it, and therefore that the book is an introduction to philosophy. (natural beauty portrays the imperfect while aesthetical beauty portrays perfection). Hence, art also begins to denote the “Idea of the Absolute”. Perceiving these three attributes to be similar is interesting in terms of understanding the 19th century episteme; because it is precisely this problematic that Yves Michaud demonstrates that we have grown out of, the opposite of what Hegel’s suggests (s.9).
14 Jean-Luc Nancy, ibid., p.36.
15 Jean-Luc Nancy, ibid., p.36.
16 See: Ali Akay, Minör Politika, Bağlam publications, Istanbul, 2000.
17 This, of course, is a reference to the book of Gilles Deleuze, “Logique de la Sensation”.
18 Boris Groys, Art Power, MIT Press, 2008, p.55.