DOCUMENTO
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
mi
d
tu
a
r
t
/
/
metro
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
7
2
1
2
9
1
9
8
8
9
9
5
a
r
t
/
metro
_
a
_
0
0
2
1
2
pag
d
.
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
THE SENSES POINTING TOWARD
A NEW TRANSFORMATION1
hÉLiO Oiticica
The process of shifting the main aesthetic focus away from the so
called “visual” arts and the introduction, entonces, of the other senses,
should not be concentrated or looked at from a purely aestheticist point
of view; it is much more profound; it is a process which, in its ultimate
sense, relates and proposes a new unconditioned behavior[Alabama] possibil-
idad: the consciousness of behavior as a fundamental key to the evolu-
tion of the so-called art processes → the consciousness of a totality, de
the relation individual-world as a whole action, where the idea of value
is not only related to a specifi c “focus”: the aestheticist event taken
formerly as the “focus goal”: the confl icts tend to be absorbed into
behavior itself, away from the super intellectualist visual focus, también
submitted to that “focus-value” relation. The appeal to the senses,
which can be “multi-focal” concentration, becomes important as a way
1
Hélio Oiticica’s fi nal manuscript (ref: PHO 0486/69) is reproduced here with minimal
alterations. Grammar, punctuation, and spelling have been corrected and regularized
following ARTMargins’ house style (employing US English spelling conventions and
double-quotation marks as the standard). Occasional ellipses in the text have been com-
pleted with the relevant omitted terms in square brackets. Care has been taken, sin embargo,
to retain Oiticica’s distinctive, neologistic, and often rule-bending English prose style
(the original draft of which had been corrected by Guy Brett, a native English speaker, en
1969, as Oiticica notes at the end of the Document). Terms underlined for emphasis have
been left as is rather than set in italics. A series of individually commented terms (“sig-
nifi cative,” “objectal,” “unsuffi ciency," etc.) are retained throughout, despite their not
necessarily being current usage or strictly grammatically “correct.”
© césar and claudio oiticica, reprinted by permission of Projeto hélio oiticica.
doi:10.1162/artM_a_00212
129
toward this behavioral absorption: smell-sight-taste-hearing and touch
mingle and are what Merleau-Ponty once called the “body’s general
symbolics,” where all sense relations are established in a human con-
texto, as a “body” of significations and not a sum of significations
apprehended by specific channels: the apprehension and the action
cannot be isolated, and the analytical idea of the senses becomes a
metaphor too to express the complexity of human behavior. Pero, nosotros
emerge from purely rational, “objectal2 relations” of art-problems, de
established conditions for an “aesthetic action” so much developed
during so many years, into the idea of a whole human world, into the
trust in behavioral action as a creative force and not a “passive” or
“background” one: the dissolution of “art” into it is not also an “objec-
tal dissolution” but a forming of concentrated specific ideas, funda-
mental problem-creative ideas, into life manifestation as far as the
infinite area of human behavior is concerned, as a building up of
significations, symbolic bodies of relations, so rich in themselves
and reinformed then, by this now significative3 body, spread-growing
from its former sublimate position, into its former “background,"
which is the behavior[Alabama] world.
Of course past art always tried in a metaphorical way to create, y
did create, a new level of significative relations: a world in itself could
be felt and lived and proposed as a structure, a creative structure, oppo-
site the objectal world, as a “model” of synthetic truth, uncorrupted in
sí mismo. Often then, mostly I should say, the artist-creator would be the
actor-creator, the sublime generator of creative forces and the recipient
de ellos, he himself the poles of the structural significative world pro-
posed by his creations. The great differences in a new position would
be that, whereas the former links were metaphorical-structural totali-
ties imposed onto the behavioral world, the actual ones tend to grow
from it after a long process of dissolution of “living human acts” → the
destiny of human living acts meet themselves without intermediary
sublimatory efforts, transcendental conflicts or ideal goals.
As a stage in the evolution of these “living act processes” we can
point to the dissolution of old art forms, painting, sculpture, etc., en
the hybrid “object.” But all through the modern evolution of art the
2
3
In Oiticica’s use of the nonstandard term “objectal,” the suffix “-al” means “relating to; de
the kind of” an object, rather than object-like.
Oiticica employs the rare adjectival form “significative” here, meaning “being a symbol
or sign of something; having a meaning.”
2
:
7
s
norte
i
gramo
r
a
metro
t
r
a
130
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
mi
d
tu
a
r
t
/
/
metro
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
7
2
1
2
9
1
9
8
8
9
9
5
a
r
t
/
metro
_
a
_
0
0
2
1
2
pag
d
.
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
conflict between the idea of an “art-object” and an “anti-art” has been
moving toward an impasse. Anti-art, taken recently to dramatic forms,
to the “edge of experience,” now demands a definitive radicalization.
Many initiatives have stood still or gone back in relation to this
impasse: the urgency for a new field of consideration is felt—the
concentration on the process itself is a beginning of a new light that
gradually invades and creates those considerations: I call it, in my
experimental efforts, a crebehavior; it is not simply “creative behavior,"
although it can be, but something much more amplified; not an object-
creation through behavior, nor the transformation of living acts into
creative ones, which would be a simplist4 idea: in such a case the con-
ditions would only become distant Utopias, pero, if from inside condi-
tioned behavior, the elements start to grow as necessities, like germs
which burst from the center of the conflicts themselves, and inform
behavior in a new open way, completely at large with individual lived-
acts: the process which conducts and informs toward the center of
comportamiento[Alabama] conflict itself and opens into surprising transformations
→ not to be content with the effort to “attain a model” of life, but to
live in a continuous consciousness of such conflicts, which could be
the only way for such a transformation process to take place.
The appeal to the aid of the sensorial ensemble lives further on
than the objectal one: the consciousness of “body symbolics” as a total-
ity immediately “at hand” is something much more related to behavior
itself than to objectal relations; a richer relation which increases lived
possibilities-probabilities in the immediate consciousness of “body
totality” in action; when Lygia Clark, por ejemplo, proposes her experi-
ence of the “body nostalgia,” she is proposing, through simple senso-
rial acts, a possibility for a re-informed consciousness of the body as
something alive, as if discovered for the first time, thus proposing also
a new relation between self-knowledge and knowledge of others. Aquí
we can see the possibility of a process rather than an object-structure
imposing metaphorical relations; it could be a living sense discovery,
itself a process and not a process for a goal. The senses then, related
and acting toward body-symbolics, can be considered as an essential
means for the apprehension of this process. Behavior lies just within
él, and reformulates continuously those symbolics (as Merleau-Ponty
4
Oiticica’s use of the term “simplist idea” implies an idea from a person given to simplistic
explanations or theories, rather than a simplistic idea.
norte
oh
i
t
a
metro
r
oh
F
s
norte
a
r
t
w
mi
norte
a
d
r
a
w
oh
t
gramo
norte
i
t
norte
i
oh
PAG
s
mi
s
norte
mi
s
mi
h
t
|
a
C
i
C
i
t
i
oh
131
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
mi
d
tu
a
r
t
/
/
metro
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
7
2
1
2
9
1
9
8
8
9
9
5
a
r
t
/
metro
_
a
_
0
0
2
1
2
pag
d
.
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
muestra, behavior in this case is itself signification and does not look
for a specific one).
Once the “distances” between ideal aesthetic goals are abolished or
transformed into the crebehavior, into the continuous consciousness of
a living process, the conflicts tend to be solved or assume higher levels;
in my evolution I arrived at what I call creleisure. For me the classical
leisure-alienation conflict generating the alienated leisure idea as repre-
sented in the modern western world, would be attacked as a direct
consequence of this absorption of art-processes into life-processes.
Creleisure is the non-repressive leisure, opposed to diverted oppressive
leisure thinking: a new unconditioned way to battle oppressive system-
atic ways of life. Its practice, open-practice, is a way of taking hold of a
proceso, a sympathetic creative process, where sense-apprehension is
body-apprehension which generates behavior-action, in a total organic
proceso.
Lygia Clark’s and my own work, in our evolutions, have both these
points in common, and not only between themselves, but related also
to the avant-garde efforts which have characterized [el] Brazilian art-
scene in the last decade; stating with Mario Pedrosa’s universalist con-
stant influences, through Ferreira Gullar’s “Non-object Theory” (1959),
toward the idea of “probject” (Rogerio Duarte) (1968), Lygia Pape’s
recent fascinating experiments (I have [written a] special article on
her), from Neoconcrete Group activities (1959–60), through all public-
participation ones leading to the Tropicália synthesis recently—and in
this they differ from ideas such as “happenings” or “events” and char-
acterize Rio’s and S.Paulo’s movements in a total detached way. I am
not going here to make a complete relation of such experiments—they
are wide; the ideas diverse; I rather prefer to stick to my own experi-
ments and Lygia Clark’s latest ideas and achievements. We can have,
entonces, direct examples here and possible discussions.
As I was saying, the general efforts in these current ideas turn
on an important main idea: the permanent checking of the conflict
between the object, as it appears in various forms (work of art, usar-
object, etc.), and the subject-object relations: this conflict was known
since Gullar’s formulation of the “non-object” in 1959, durante el
Neoconcrete Group activities. The problem spotted then turned out to
be a very complex one and it still holds the main line of thought with
those artists. The relations with all the international movements are
obvious—and the differences also. The main great difference would
2
:
7
s
norte
i
gramo
r
a
metro
t
r
a
132
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
mi
d
tu
a
r
t
/
/
metro
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
7
2
1
2
9
1
9
8
8
9
9
5
a
r
t
/
metro
_
a
_
0
0
2
1
2
pag
d
.
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
be in the way this main subject-object conflict has been led toward a
dissolution of the idea of the art object into direct behavioral relations,
and the reversion of the former objectal relations: the former structural
art-forms which were meant to be total structures conditioning behav-
ior total-structures have dissolved themselves in those evolutions and
come to propose the reverse of that, which would be behavior set as a
total-structure, generating the elements which are not art total struc-
turas (open-open), but the flowing alive experience of human destiny.
This process is endless and no bid for a quick solution should be made.
It is a process within a process. What would really be formulated and
admitted is the unsufficiency5 of the art-object as such. The experience
of such a process can generate whatever communicating form it does,
but never the conciliating art-object hooked on to the former “distant”
objectal relation. If the communication is not directed into a behavioral
relation, it is old, however new [a] form it may have. A relation that
would point to a static ideal, a sublime model, is still the old transcen-
dental relation, endured throughout western art for a long time. El
same could be applied to the anti-art processes, mainly because they
can disguise under such an appearance an old attitude: no use having
“participation,” or “propositions,” if they do not relate to a complete
change of the objectal relation; the same with what could be called
“sensorial participation.”
Recientemente, a new demand and important decisions came to me:
in the experiences I propose, such as the practice of creleisure. El
impossibility of “exhibiting” objects as part of this idea, in galleries or
museums, has become evident: I have had a definite glimpse of that
with the Whitechapel experiment in February–April 1969, in London.
For me it was more an experiment than an exhibition (I proposed
things rather than displaying them). But all the evolution I presented
there leads into this condition: the impossibility of experiments in gal-
leries or museums—the outdoor ones could still hold depending on the
relations and reasons for them: I can mention some of the Exploding
Galaxy experiments in London, Ámsterdam, or Paris as aiming at
something analogous; in Rio, the Apocalypopotesis one in August
1968. The exhibition room refers always to an old idea of “displaying
5
Oiticica’s use of the term “unsufficiency” is not strictly grammatically correct, desde
nouns of Latin origin conventionally take the prefix “in-” in English. Sin embargo, in addi-
tion to its sense of “the absence of,” the prefix “un-” carries the sense of “the reverse of”
as well as “the absence of”—which “in-” lacks—and thus serves as an intensifier here.
norte
oh
i
t
a
metro
r
oh
F
s
norte
a
r
t
w
mi
norte
a
d
r
a
w
oh
t
gramo
norte
i
t
norte
i
oh
PAG
s
mi
s
norte
mi
s
mi
h
t
|
a
C
i
C
i
t
i
oh
133
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
mi
d
tu
a
r
t
/
/
metro
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
7
2
1
2
9
1
9
8
8
9
9
5
a
r
t
/
metro
_
a
_
0
0
2
1
2
pag
d
.
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
objects,” to an “object representation”; entonces, why insist on the old form
when a new experimental world demands, and with urgency, complete
new ways of communication. We are in the beginning of a new lan-
guage, a new world of experiences in communication and proposing a
complete revolution toward an individual-social uprising. The idea of
community-cells or of experimental communities came to me side by
side with that of wide-spread collectivities, such as the building of col-
lective sites or abiding places: in the first ones the creleisure private
group-cells would be evolved in a plan I have had in mind for a long
tiempo: the Barracão: after that the idea of environment would be in the
creation of real architectures and gardens, invented sites which could
have a new sense, away from “integrative” experiences, which for me
still have objectal connotations. The great collective groupal6 experi-
ments should be able to count on groupal abiding places, where expe-
riments would not be united to the idea of “experiment-show.” It should
rather concentrate as an internal-growing proposing experience: pro-
posing to propose, which could lead into fascinating ways; o, impor-
tant also, to build new possibilities of walking through sites (in my
work ideas about this came to me since 1960, mainly with the “nuclei”
and “penetrables” and projects for built environments—they suffered
great changes throughout these years; I propose much more a “living
open environment” than anything which could be an objectal one,
which could still hold on to the old formal ideas).
The internal communal experiences are more complex and
fascinating: the idea of developing expansive-groupal relation-
experimentos, can create expansive cells for future experiments; ellos
can be centers, small centers for sure, of closed condensed lived-
experiencias, where the demand for a new social relationship would
be essential; the conflict then would be and should be transformed
in a permanent dynamic: the creleisure nucleus absorbing and trans-
forming the bombardments of destructive behavior: this can only be
properly experimented when put entirely into practice.
Lygia Clark’s recent experiments have led her into fascinating
proposiciones, and she discovered that for sure her communication
has to be rather an introduction into a practice she calls cellular:
6
As with “objectal,” the suffix “-al” in “groupal” means “relating to; of the kind of” a group,
rather than group-like. It is also possibly a portmanteau construction fusing the sense of
“group” and “communal.”
2
:
7
s
norte
i
gramo
r
a
metro
t
r
a
134
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
mi
d
tu
a
r
t
/
/
metro
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
7
2
1
2
9
1
9
8
8
9
9
5
a
r
t
/
metro
_
a
_
0
0
2
1
2
pag
d
.
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
from person to person, a corpora; improvised dialogue which can
spread out into a whole chain creating a kind of biological ensemble or
what I would call a crepractice. The idea of creating such relations is
more than a simple participation as a manipulation of objects; hay
a search for what we could call a biological ritual, where the interper-
sonal relations would enrich each other and establish a really growing
communication on an open level. I say here open level because it does
not relate to an objectal, subject-object communication, but to an inter-
personal practice: the you and me contact, swift, brief as the act itself.
No corrupted, interested “profit” should be expected—the remarks of
“it’s nothing” or “what’s the point," etc., will pour out; the introduc-
tion as an initiation is necessary (I can say that since I introduced the
Parangolé capes, in early ’64, the ways and means of introduction were
much more primary and difficult: I decided that dance and rhythm
would be ideal for that, but it didn’t help much; now it appears to me
that the collective mind is much more ready to be introduced into prac-
tices than then—open practices, let’s say—so those ideas become liv-
ing aspirations on a collective scale, rather than lost details in a whole).
The elements used in all those experiments, based on a process,
are themselves part of it and not detached objects: they are orders in a
entero. In the Barracão I am planning, the elements will join, impro-
vised, and will grow in an oyster-process; Lygia Clark’s elements com-
municate in a chain-process, etc.. So, suddenly, the joy of “making
things” can be important, not as spurious gratuities to be consumed
by affluent society or oppressive “culture,” and they are not submitted
to the artist’s privilege in their make-up, but groupally or collectively
approached. They can be a direct building up of everyday life, a cell or
a seed for unrepressive living. All silly wittiness of “art innovations,” of
intellectual commerce, of the oppressive cultural game, are surpassed
and eliminated by this stronger reality: a hope and a new light can
shine through it; improvisation and creative processes turn out to
accomplish their destinies with a new powerful reason to exist.
hélio oiticica— london —June 18 –25 / 1969
revised and corrected nov– dec / 1969
Acknowledgments to Guy Brett, who helped in review and correction of the original text.
norte
oh
i
t
a
metro
r
oh
F
s
norte
a
r
t
w
mi
norte
a
d
r
a
w
oh
t
gramo
norte
i
t
norte
i
oh
PAG
s
mi
s
norte
mi
s
mi
h
t
|
a
C
i
C
i
t
i
oh
135
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
mi
d
tu
a
r
t
/
/
metro
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
7
2
1
2
9
1
9
8
8
9
9
5
a
r
t
/
metro
_
a
_
0
0
2
1
2
pag
d
.
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
