Performance Art and
Illiberal Democracy
Marina Abramović’s The Cleaner in Belgrade
Branislav Jakovljević
我
D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d
F
r
哦
米
H
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
我
r
e
C
t
.
米
我
t
.
/
e
d
你
d
r
A
米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d
/
我
F
/
/
/
6
4
1
(
2
4
5
)
/
1
8
2
1
8
2
5
7
5
7
d
r
A
米
_
A
_
0
0
9
1
0
p
d
/
.
F
乙
y
G
你
e
s
t
t
哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3
数字 1. Serbian prime minister Ana Brnabić speaking at the opening of the passenger waiting area at
Nikola Tesla Airport, designed as part of the national “Serbia Creates” campaign. An Air Serbia plane dis-
plays its buzzwords: 相信, 设计, theatre, ideas, fun, 经验, 音乐, 天赋, film, tech, 艺术, 机会.
(Photo courtesy of TANJUG/RADE PRELIC)
Marina Abramović opened her first Belgrade solo exhibition in 44 years on 21 九月 2019
with a press conference scheduled at dawn (which that day was at 6:23 a.m.). There was an ex-
hibition preview held the previous night for invited guests only. Attendees included Serbian
prime minister Ana Brnabić, the United States ambassador in Belgrade Kyle Scott, and a num-
ber of luminaries from the world of politics, 文化, and public life. Reporting on these events,
Branislav Jakovljević is Professor in the Department of Theater and Performance Studies at Stanford
大学. His most recent book, Alienation Effects: Performance and Self-Management in Yugoslavia
1945–1991 (2016) won the Association for Theatre in Higher Education Outstanding Book Award for
2017 和 2016/17 Joe A. Callaway Award for the Best Book in Drama or Theatre from NYU.
bjakov@stanford.edu
182
TDR 64:1 (T245) 2020 https://doi.org/10.1162/dram_a_00910
©2020 New York University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Večernje novosti (Evening News), a tabloid-style daily close to the government, flashed the title:
“Marina Abramović: I Am a Serbian Artist” (Kralj 2019).1 Politika, the oldest daily newspaper
在国内, also progovernment, picked a more measured statement for its headline: “我
Returned to My Own Land.” The opposition daily Danas went for a fairly trashy title (“Marina
Was Late, to Everyone’s Delight”), but it also carried one of the artist’s most important state-
ments of the day: asked about her long absence from galleries and museums in her native
Belgrade, Abramović responded that she “was never invited until Prime Minister Brnabić saw
my exhibit in Oslo and invited me” (in Ćuk 2019). She was probably referring to the opening
of The Cleaner at the Moderna Museet in Stockholm in February 2017. 自那以后, the exhibit
toured to Denmark, 德国, 意大利, and Poland.2 The final destination of Abramović’s
“European retrospective” was seen as her homecoming and a closure of sorts (the headline in
the New York Times read: “Marina Abramovic Comes Home, and Comes Clean” [Dickson
2019]). With this exhibit, she also stepped straight into the minefield of Serbian politics.
By the time Čistač (The Cleaner) rolled into town, there were rumblings about its budget.
Some sources reported the cost was €1.8 million, and that the Serbian government paid
€600,000 for its Belgrade installment.3 In an interview she gave to Radio Free Europe, Dunja
Blažević, a trailblazing curator who in the early 1970s led the Student Cultural Center’s gallery
that gave a start to Abramović and other conceptual artists of her generation, assessed that the
cost of the exhibit equaled the annual budget of the Museum of Contemporary Art (Blažević
2019). Questions about the appropriateness of this splurge on a single exhibition in an impov-
erished country prompted sharp criticism from opposition politicians and the liberal intelli-
gentsia. Buka published a column by Marko Vidojković who openly questioned the Serbian
government’s decision to invest in the exhibit: “On the billboard for the exhibit, side by side
with MSU [Muzej savremene umetnosti, Museum of Contemporary Art], which blew its an-
nual budget on this spectacle, is perched [the logo of] the government of Serbia, the biggest
cleaner of your money in recent history” (Vidojković 2019). The title of the column, 其中
the last names of the president, prime minister, and artist were linked together (“Marina
Abramović Vučić Brnabić”), implied a (serial) marriage of convenience.
Serbia’s president, Aleksandar Vučić, whose Serbian Progressive Party (Srpska napredna
stranka, SNS) has been in power since 2012, shot to the top of political life in Serbia after
making one of the most remarkable transformations in the recent political history of this small
Balkan country. Throughout the wars of the 1990s, Vučić was a lieutenant to Vojislav Šešelj,
the leader of the virulently nationalistic Serbian Radical Party (Srpska radikalna stranka, SRS),
which sent its paramilitary units to the battlefields of Croatia and Bosnia, and some of its
members were implicated in some of the most gruesome war crimes. 在 2008, while his boss,
Šešelj, was on trial at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in the
Hague, Vučić broke off to start his own party, drawing with him a large number of SRS func-
tionaries and members. He marked his remarkable about-face by styling himself as a progres-
sive liberal, going as far as claiming the mantle of reformist prime minister Zoran Đinđić,
谁的 2003 assassination is still shrouded in mystery. One of Vučić’s boldest moves was in
1. All translations from Serbian, unless otherwise indicated, are my own.
2. The European tour of The Cleaner started at Moderna Museet in Stockholm, 瑞典 (18 Feb. 2017–21 May
2017); then moved to Louisiana Museum of Modern Art in Humblebeak, 丹麦 (17 June 2017–22 Oct.
2017); Bundeskunsthalle in Bonn, 德国 (20 Apr. 2018–12 Aug. 2018); Palazzo Strozzi in Florence, 意大利
(21 Sept. 2018–20 Jan. 2019); the Centre of Contemporary Art Znaki Czasu in Torun, 波兰 (8 三月. 2019–
八月. 11 2019); and the Museum of Contemporary Art in Belgrade, Serbia (21 Sept. 2019–20 Jan. 2020).
3. 在 14 一月 2020, a week before the exhibition closed, MSU acting director Slobodan Nakarada held a press
conference in which he presented (close to) final information about the exhibit: according to him, the cost of the
exhibit was €1.3 million, and the museum earned around €153,200 from ticket sales. He also noted that there
是 1,728 newspaper articles published about the exhibit, and that approximately 60,000 people saw the
exhibit.
我
D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d
F
r
哦
米
H
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
我
r
e
C
t
.
米
我
t
.
/
e
d
你
d
r
A
米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d
/
我
F
/
/
/
6
4
1
(
2
4
5
)
/
1
8
2
1
8
2
5
7
5
7
d
r
A
米
_
A
_
0
0
9
1
0
p
d
/
.
F
乙
y
G
你
e
s
t
t
哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3
183
2016, when he pulled Ana Brnabić, a young, openly gay business executive, out of obscurity,
inviting her to join the Serbian government first as the minister of public administration and
地方自治, and then a year later promoting her to the position of prime minister.
That made her the first openly lesbian head of government in Serbia’s history, and only the
second one in the world (after Iceland’s Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir). This move was supposed to
bolster the Vučić regime’s bifocal international policy. While Vučić and Minister of Foreign
Affairs Ivica Dačić (part of Milošević’s cadre from the 1990s) maintained close ties with
Vladimir Putin’s Russia, Prime Minister Brnabić faced westward towards the European Union,
which Serbia has been unsuccessfully trying to join for over a decade. Initially establishing her
public image on a double pillar of neoliberal economic policies and identity politics, 在 2018,
as the highest-ranking unelected politician in Serbia, she added culture to her portfolio by set-
ting up the Council for Creative Industries, an advisory body to which she attracted some of
most outspoken progressive voices, such as Biljana Srbljanović, who is by far the most interna-
tionally successful Serbian playwright, and Andrej Nosov, an artist and activist who was in-
volved in pioneering work on the politics of memory and transitional justice in the former
Yugoslavia. For all intents and purposes, by accepting Brnabić’s support, Abramović endorsed
her highly controversial political mission. If with her US retrospective The Artist is Present
Abramović, as she described it, attempted to take performance into the mainstream, 缺点-
clusion of its European counterpart seemed to take the whole thing even further (in Akers and
Dupre 2012).
Members of the liberal intelligentsia, who had refrained from criticizing the prime minis-
ter for obvious fear of being branded as homophobes, now finally had an opening to come out
strongly against her. (It’s worth remembering that Serbia is a country in which the first at-
tempt to hold a gay pride walk in 2001 ended with severe attacks and beatings of LGBT activ-
ists by ultra-nationalist groups, and that the first successful gay pride parade took place in
2010, only thanks to security so
strong that the police outnum-
bered participants.) The gloves
quickly came off. Quite taste-
lessly, Vidojković started his
column with a description of
his morning bathroom routine
as performance art. The direc-
tor of the Belgrade Symphony
(and former minister of culture
in Vučić’s government) Ivan
Tasovac responded with an ar-
ticle in the tabloid Kurir accus-
ing “Serbian intellectual
starlets” of “ignorance and
envy” (Tasovac 2019). 这
cartoonist Predrag Koraksić
“Corax,” a veteran of the
struggle against Milošević in
the 1990s, picked on
数字 2. A cartoon by Predrag Koraksić “Corax” from the daily
newspaper Danas referencing Abramovic’s video piece Confession.
The donkey is wearing a Serbian national cap, which in Corax’s
cartoons designates an ordinary Serb. (Courtesy of Predrag Koraksić)
Abramović’s 2010 Confession as a metaphor for the entire episode, responding to Tasovac that
“Marina and Vučić are staring at us as if we were donkeys” (in Živanović 2019). Belgrade
University professor emeritus Sreten Petrović, the author of a number books on aesthetics,
went as far as arguing that “performance [艺术] is not an aesthetic art.” Setting aside (or simply
not being aware of) the theoretical discourse generated by art historians and performance
scholars over the past four decades, Petrović spoke about the autonomy of the art object, 关于
184
我
D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d
F
r
哦
米
H
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
我
r
e
C
t
.
米
我
t
.
/
e
d
你
d
r
A
米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d
/
我
F
/
/
/
6
4
1
(
2
4
5
)
/
1
8
2
1
8
2
5
7
5
7
d
r
A
米
_
A
_
0
0
9
1
0
p
d
/
.
F
乙
y
G
你
e
s
t
t
哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3
the artist’s “struggle with content and its aesthetic transposition into form,” even deploying
categories such as “autochthonic Being,” “talent,” and “great European tradition” (Petrović
2019). What was striking about the entire debate was that the critics went so quickly from
questioning the prime minister’s spending decisions, to skepticism about the choice of the art-
是, to the disparagement of performance art itself.
Abramović seems to have an uncanny ability to bring performance to the forefront of pub-
lic discussion wherever she shows up. Belgrade was no exception. Performance seemed to be
on everyone’s lips in the fall of 2019. What the fight over The Cleaner revealed right from the
get-go was an impoverishment of discourse so extreme that the exhibition easily got lost in the
fray. 实际上, Belgrade’s installment of The Cleaner didn’t need external gimmicks—such the
choice of International Cleanup Day as its opening date—to set itself apart from other stops
on its European tour. The initial conceptualization and production of the show was done by
Lena Essling and Tine Colstrup, curators from Moderna Museet and the Louisiana Museum
of Modern Art, 分别 (and Susanne Kleine from Bundeskunsthalle, who joined this cura-
torial team at a later date). While Essling and Colstrup shared a general curatorial vision of the
retrospective, their colleagues in each host museum had enough room to make their own in-
terventions.
The curator of Belgrade’s The Cleaner, Dejan Sretenović, added to the exhibition several
pieces that were not seen in any of the other locations. There were two oil paintings
Abramović did as a student, which emerged only recently: Blue (1964) and The Portrait of
Granma Raduša (1969). If these early efforts can be seen as a curiosity that doesn’t have much
art historical value, the second addition is certainly an important contribution not only to the
retrospective, but to the history of performance art in the former Yugoslavia and beyond. 这是
an 8mm film converted to a two-channel video recording of Abramović’s Rhythm 2 (1974)
made in Zagreb’s Galerija moderne umjetnosti (Modern Art Gallery), now in possession of the
Muzej suvremene umjetnosti (Museum of Contemporary Art), also in Zagreb. What makes
this video recording of Rhythm 2 unique within the archive of early performance is the choice
to fix one camera on the performer, while using the other to film the audience. Sretenović
commented as he was giving me a tour of the exhibition that recording the audience in early
video and film documentation of performance is usually incidental, while here it is intentional.
I take this as yet another testimony of the level of sophistication of the artists, art historians,
and curators in Yugoslavia in the early 1970s. That impression is strongly reinforced in the
central part of the exhibit, consisting of video and photographic documentation of the solo
performances Abramović did in Yugoslavia and her early collaborations with Ulay (I was pleas-
antly surprised with a film recording of her landmark Rhythm 5 [1974], the one with a burning
星星, with which I was thus far familiar only from photographs and verbal descriptions).
最后, one of the particularly tall museum rooms held a display of Abramović’s long dress
from Entering the Other Side, which has not been exhibited since the 2005 premiere of Seven
Easy Pieces at the Guggenheim. Sretenović told me that Abramović wanted to add this work to
the exhibit because she was stimulated by the architecture of the museum. 的确, Belgrade’s
Museum of Contemporary Art is an inspiring, atypical, and challenging exhibition space.
The first institution of its kind in Eastern Europe, MSU opened in 1965 with the mission
to collect, exhibit, and promote Yugoslav modern art. The museum building, designed by ar-
chitects Ivan Antić and Ivanka Raspopović, is a modernist monument in its own right. 反而
of a series of discrete galleries, the architects envisioned this museum as a continuous upward-
flowing space. Its six large modules are distributed on four levels, connected with staircases
and large passages (Blagojević 2016:122). Instead of rigidly compartmentalizing the exhibit
into distinct periods, Sretenović and his team used the museum’s unique architecture to high-
我
D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d
F
r
哦
米
H
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
我
r
e
C
t
.
米
我
t
.
/
e
d
你
d
r
A
米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d
/
我
F
/
/
/
6
4
1
(
2
4
5
)
/
1
8
2
1
8
2
5
7
5
7
d
r
A
米
_
A
_
0
0
9
1
0
p
d
.
/
F
乙
y
G
你
e
s
t
t
哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3
185
数字 3. Installation view of video documentation of Abramović’s
performances Freeing the Voice, Freeing the Mind, and Freeing the Body
(1975). The Cleaner, September 2019–January 2020, Museum of
Contemporary Art, Belgrade. (Photo by Bojana Janjić)
light differences as much as
continuities, repetitions, 和
variations of distinct themes
within Abramović’s long ca-
reer. Overlaps and leaks be-
tween periods and individual
works came across strongly.
Actually, visitors began en-
gaging with the exhibit as
they approached the building
through a vast sculpture gar-
den surrounding the museum,
which resounded with bird
cries from the sound installa-
的, The Tree (originally pre-
sented in front of the Student
Cultural Center, or SKC, 在
1971), only to plunge into
sounds of rapid gun fire that
ricocheted around them as
they passed though the mu-
seum entrance—another
sound installation from 1971,
Sound Corridor. This aggres-
sive auditory aspect of
Abramović’s work extends
throughout the exhibit, 和
doesn’t cede even in sections
dedicated to quiet and medi-
tative projects, 例如
Nightsea Crossing (1982–1986)
and her most recent works
such as Counting the Rice
(2015) and Dream House
(2017). As if trying to remind
me of the tempestuous
sources of this search for tran-
quility, the artist’s voice from
the recording of Freeing the
记忆 (1975) echoes
through the exhibition spaces
and mixes with the voice of
the reperformer of the same
片; and the drumming from the video of Freeing the Body (1975) syncopates with the sound
of a live performance of the same piece, as well as the fleshy sounds of slaps from the video re-
cording of Abramović and Ulay’s Light/Dark (1977).
数字 4. Reperformance of Freeing the Mind (1975). The Cleaner,
September 2019–January 2020, Museum of Contemporary Art, Belgrade.
(Photo Bojana Janjić)
The absence of traditional discrete galleries within the museum required curators to make
radical decisions in presenting video documentation, such as setting up free-standing screens,
or arranging multiple projection surfaces into rectangular structures. These strategies create
immersive video environments that engage viewers more actively then when they encounter
these moving images projected on gallery walls, theatre-style. The spectators at MSU have
186
我
D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d
F
r
哦
米
H
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
我
r
e
C
t
.
米
我
t
.
/
e
d
你
d
r
A
米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d
/
我
F
/
/
/
6
4
1
(
2
4
5
)
/
1
8
2
1
8
2
5
7
5
7
d
r
A
米
_
A
_
0
0
9
1
0
p
d
/
.
F
乙
y
G
你
e
s
t
t
哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3
plenty of opportunities to engage with the exhibit in general, from the videos, to reperfor-
mances, to participatory installations. And beyond that, the museumgoers don’t need to be es-
pecially framed in order to join the display: in the open modular structure of this architectural
空间, the viewer cannot escape being viewed, and is always positioned as an integral part of
the museum experience. It seems as if the space aids Abramović in her attempts to engage “the
basic problem” of art exhibitions, which she has recognized as the “passive and voyeuristic re-
lationship of the public to the artist and the museum” (in Essling 2017:11). In her catalog es-
说, Essling suggests that the presentation of Abramović’s work needs to “open up the tradi-
tionally fixed position between artist, 观众, and institution” (11). Without even realizing
它, the fiercest critics of The Cleaner in Belgrade bought this idea wholesale, extending it to in-
clude political institutions (具体来说, the Serbian government) and even performance art,
Abramović’s art form of choice. What this exhibit requires instead is precisely the opposite: A
careful consideration to discern the political power, 该机构, the artist, the audience
(critics included), and the art form, and an even more attentive investigation of the ties that
bind these elements together, as well as the points of tension among them. 反而, the critics
of The Cleaner seemed completely oblivious to its artistic and curatorial achievements, 就像
its defenders were doing their best to ignore the bizarre political circumstances that made it
可能的.
As it approached its final destination, Abramović’s European retrospective developed an
unusually prominent internet presence. In the spring of 2019, “Waiting for the Artist,” an epi-
sode of the Documentary Now! mockumentary series on IFC, aired with Cate Blanchett in the
role of a performance art diva who returns to her native Budapest for a long-awaited career
survey (the choice of Viktor Orbán’s Hungary was apt, politically speaking; 仍然, the producers
had little idea of how illiberal a democracy can get). Promoting the exhibition, Abramović
didn’t refrain from self-ridicule: she sat with Serbian TV comedian Zoran Kesić (a local ver-
sion of Jon Stewart) on his popular TV show, not hesitating to make fun of her own work (24
minuta 2019). As the debate around The Cleaner intensified, parodies of Abramović’s perfor-
mances and public appearances multiplied online. 仍然, none of that could come even close to
the farce of thug neoliberalism in Serbia.
As I boarded the Air Serbia plane in New York for a nonstop flight to Belgrade, I couldn’t
help but notice a new design on an old Airbus 320: the back of the plane carried the inscription
“Serbia Creates,” which pointed to a list on the airplane’s back tail: “trust, 设计, theatre,
ideas, fun, 经验, 音乐, 天赋, film, tech, 艺术, opportunities.” (In the spirit of full disclo-
sure, I want to say that MSU curator Sretenović invited me to participate in a lecture series
about performance that accompanied the exhibit; in that same spirit, it may be important to
mention that I had already planned a research trip to Serbia, so my travel expenses did not
come from the museum budget.) Once in Belgrade, in the baggage claim area, I was greeted
with a wall-sized ad for the recently reopened National Museum (both this museum and MSU
were closed for over a decade for renovations; Vučić’s government boasted that they were the
ones who completed these marathon jobs). The writing on the plane and on the wall belonged
to the “Serbia Creates” campaign, part of Brnabić’s push for the development of creative in-
dustries in Serbia that would generate their own revenue instead of being entirely dependent
on government funding. The same logo was prominently placed at the opening of The Cleaner,
thus effectively folding Abramović’s show into this government campaign. Even if we set aside
the deep contradiction of a government that spends funds equal to the annual budget of one of
the country’s major public museums on a single exhibit while promoting the idea of unsubsi-
dized culture, one doesn’t need to look far to discover the deep irony of this influx of neoliber-
alism into Serbian society. Neoliberalism can be defined as the monetization of freedom(s),
and the whole idea of “creative industries” rests on the premise of a free exchange of goods
and ideas. A fierce supporter of Vučić, Brnabić does her best to ignore the deeply illiberal na-
ture of his regime, which is so pervasive that even I got to experience it during my brief visit.
我
D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d
F
r
哦
米
H
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
我
r
e
C
t
.
米
我
t
.
/
e
d
你
d
r
A
米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d
/
我
F
/
/
/
6
4
1
(
2
4
5
)
/
1
8
2
1
8
2
5
7
5
7
d
r
A
米
_
A
_
0
0
9
1
0
p
d
.
/
F
乙
y
G
你
e
s
t
t
哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3
187
A few days before I boarded that “Serbia Creates” aircraft, Politika daily approached me for
an interview during which I was asked to weigh in on The Cleaner. When I arrived in Belgrade
and got hold of a copy of the newspaper with my interview in it, I realized that the editors had
censored all of my references to specific politicians. 除其他事项外, I said that “the coali-
tion in power,” consisting of the converts from the radical nationalism of the 1990s and the
remnants of Milošević’s Serbian Socialist Party, “is trying to establish a complete hegemony
over Serbian society.”4 Further, I suggested that its goal is “to cover the entire ideological
光谱, from the darkest primitive nationalism” of the former members of Serbian Radical
Party, “to the managerial technocracy” of Belgrade’s deputy mayor Goran Vesić and the Min-
ister of Finance in Brnabić’s government Siniša Mali, “to the fake anti-fascism” of the Minister
of Foreign Affairs, Ivica Dačić. 霸权, understood in the Gramscian sense of domination
of one group and its ideas over all other groups and ideas in a society, “simply doesn’t leave
any room for alternative positions, which could provide some ground for a meaningful critique
of the government. In Serbia, culture has been the only area of public life that, at least symbol-
ically, kept that kind of hegemony at bay. With prime minister Brnabić, a total hegemony has
been set up in that area as well.” All of that was excised from the interview I had authorized for
出版物. 此外, the editors found it appropriate to tone down my reference to Donald
Trump: responding to the interviewer’s question about his political performances, I called him
a “rogue,” which the editors changed to the ultra-neutral “somebody” (Serbian nationalists
cheered his victory over Hillary Clinton, the wife of the president who led the NATO bomb-
ing campaign against Serbia in 1999). No one from Politika even attempted to contact me and
ask for my approval of these editorial changes before my interview was published, 这是
standard for most journalists in Serbia.
Astonished, I sent an email to the journalist who conducted the interview, 还有一些 20
minutes later her editor called me on the phone. When I asked her to publish a corrected ver-
sion of my interview and issue a public apology for infringing upon my freedom of speech, 她
apologized for not contacting me for approval, but not for censoring my statements. Speaking
over me, she tried to convince me that it was an act of heroism that she even published what
she did. She insisted that she retained “the essence” of my comments, and that what was ex-
purgated did not matter that much. It was one of the most nauseating conversations I’d had in
a very long time, and I accepted her private apology to end it. She kept trying to relativize the
whole thing: a few words here, a changed word there. 毕竟, 她说, when somebody
agrees to talk to Politika, that person should know the limits of what can be published in this
纸 (“Serbia creates trust”?). This routine expectation and acceptance of self-censorship
stopped me in my tracks. The very essence of illiberal democracy was contained in that off-
hand remark. In this kind of society, the government builds around itself a living shield made
of officials who consent to blackmail and humiliation in exchange for some level of job secu-
理性, and sometimes even professional advancement (“Serbia creates opportunities”?). 还有
more illiberal the government, the thicker the shield it needs to generate. The ultimate ten-
dency is to corrupt the entire society. Those in the outer echelons of this vast living barrier see
no concrete benefits of this corruption. The goal is to normalize it and to engender thought
patterns that make acceptable that which is otherwise unthinkable or morally repugnant. 这
Cleaner found itself in the midst of this kind of society, whose contradictions simply flooded
over the art, the artist, and the museum. The final irony of this whole affair is that perfor-
曼斯, which has been said to thematize more poignantly than any other art form the idea of a
Western decentered subject, has been summoned to provide an appearance of coherence to a
deeply conflicted patriarchal subject of illiberal democracy, exemplified in the Serbian prime
minister.
4. The original interview was done over email on 8–14 October 2019.
188
我
D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d
F
r
哦
米
H
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
我
r
e
C
t
.
米
我
t
.
/
e
d
你
d
r
A
米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d
/
我
F
/
/
/
6
4
1
(
2
4
5
)
/
1
8
2
1
8
2
5
7
5
7
d
r
A
米
_
A
_
0
0
9
1
0
p
d
/
.
F
乙
y
G
你
e
s
t
t
哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3
参考
24 minuta sa Zoranom Kesićem – Zvanični kanal (24 minuta). 2019. “Marina Abramovich Interview in ‘24
minutes’ Serbian Talk Show (ENGLISH SUBTITLES) | ep176deo05.” YouTube, 22 九月.
Accessed 10 十二月 2019. www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRxbtmCxvXI.
Akers, 马修, and Jeff Dupre, dirs. 2012. Marina Abramović: The Artist is Present. 芝加哥, 伊尔: 音乐
Box Films.
Blagojević, Ljiljana. 2016. “Kultura savremenosti i arhitektura Muzeja savremene umetnosti u Beogradu.”
In Prilozi za istoriju Muzeja savremene umetnosti, 编辑. Dejan Sretenović, 113–31. Belgrade: Muzej
savremene umetnosti.
Blažević, Dunja. 2019. “Izložba Marine Abramović košta koliko i budžet muzeja” [The Cost of Marina
Abramović’s equals the Museum’s Budget]. Radio Free Europe, 14 九月. Accessed 10 一月
2020. www.slobodnaevropa.org/a/intervju-dunja-blazevic/30164157.html.
Ćuk, Aleksandra. 2019. “Marina je kasnila i sve oduševila” [Marina Was Late, To Everyone’s Delight”].
Danas, 23 九月. Accessed 10 一月 2020. www.danas.rs/kultura/marina-je-kasnila-i-sve-
odusevila/.
Dickson, 安德鲁. 2019. “Marina Abramovic Comes Home, and Comes Clean.” New York Times, 25
九月. Accessed 10 十二月 2019. www.nytimes.com/2019/09/25/arts/design/marina-
abramovic-the-cleaner.html.
Dordević, Marija. 2019. “Otvorena izložba Marine Abramović u Beogradu: Došla sam na svoje tlo” [从
the Opening of Marina Abramović Exhibition: I Came to My Own Land]. Politika, 21 九月.
Accessed 10 一月 2020. www.politika.rs/sr/clanak/438269.
Essling, Lina. 2017. “The Cloud in the Room.” In Marina Abramović: The Cleaner, 编辑. Lena Essling, 8–17.
柏林: Hatje Cantz.
Kralj, Miljana. 2019. “Marina Abramović: Ja sam Srpska umetnica” [Marina Abramović: I am a Serbian
Artist]. Večernje novosti, 21 九月. Accessed 10 一月 2020.
www.novosti.rs/vesti/kultura.71.html:819755-Marina-Abramovic-Ja-sam-srpska-umetnica-
FOTOVIDEO.
Petrović, Sreten. 2019. “Zašto performans nije estetska umetnost?” Danas, 13 十月. Accessed 10
十二月 2019. www.danas.rs/nedelja/zasto-performans-nije-estetska-umetnost.
Tasovac, Ivan. 2019. “E, opozicijo moja, međ šljivama…” Kurir, 30 九月. Accessed 10 十二月
2019. www.kurir.rs/licni-stav/3330513/.
Vidojković, Marko. 2019. “Marina Abramović Vučić Brnabić.” Buka, 18 九月. Accessed 10
十二月 2019. www.6yka.com/novosti/marko-vidojkovic-marina-abramovic-vucic-brnabic.
Živanović, Katarina. 2019. “Koraks: I Marina i Vučić nas gledaju kao magarce.” Danas, 1 十月.
Accessed 10 十二月 2019. www.danas.rs/drustvo/koraks-i-marina-i-vucic-nas-gledaju-kao-
magarce.
我
D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d
F
r
哦
米
H
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
我
r
e
C
t
.
米
我
t
.
/
e
d
你
d
r
A
米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d
/
我
F
/
/
/
6
4
1
(
2
4
5
)
/
1
8
2
1
8
2
5
7
5
7
d
r
A
米
_
A
_
0
0
9
1
0
p
d
/
.
F
乙
y
G
你
e
s
t
t
哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3
189
