Calcite Revolt is an initiative created to provide and research new models of interaction and collaboration between artists, curators and theorists. Critically regarding common structures and hierarchies, our aim is to develop productive, fluid and adventurous ways of contributing to each others development and practice.

 After a recent restructuring Calcite Revolt is now an organisation with members of varying disciplines. The main activity is an ongoing critical dialogue amongst members on their theoretical, curatorial or artistic work, as well as project-based collaborations with guest-speakers, artists, lecturers etc.

The first Calcite Revolt Bulletin is comprised of a selection of short, loose extracts from the CR Lounge. The lounge is the online forum which is available to members of CR to communicate with each other. Do contact us if you have questions or comments.

Some Comments on Calcite Revolt

“Calcite Revolt is an initiative created to provide and research new models of interaction and collaboration between artists, curators, theorists, etc. With a critical stance toward old-fashioned models and entrenched positions, our aim is to develop more productive, fluid and adventurous ways of collaborating. We feel that these new forms fit our zeitgeist and through this initiative we hope to add a meaningful contribution to current developments.” Excerpt from our founding text

“It is important to stress that Calcite Revolt is an experiment and that the structure of the organization is constantly changing in accordance to our findings.” Excerpt from our founding text

“The most important functions of CR, namely a support network, think-tank, knowledge and experience sharing platform etc., go well with a kind of tacit presence, a matrix which need not nescessarily be advertised.” Comment advisor 1 during the meeting of 8-9-2009

“I am still unsure what CR is exactly but I feel that this uncertainty, this undefinability may in fact be a strength, as this gives openness and is a way of avoiding predictable outcomes and ambitions.” Comment advisor 2 during the meeting of 8-9-2009

“Calcite has already become an instant and reliable access to support, critique, advice and knowledge”. Half-year assessment Rune

Some comments by members about themselves and each other

“My favourite anecdote is the one about Charlie Chaplin who took part in a Charlie Chaplin look-alike contest and came in third.” Blog Twan

“Tomorrow I will have a proclamation. This will be the end of a study in philosophy at the University of Brussels. I did this research to investigate “the connection between passion and loss of self-control, and the loss of self-control as an ability and a way of understanding” (title). The thesis is accompanied by Teorema (Pasolini), In the Heart of the Country (Coetzee) and Joe Speedboot (Wieringa).” Blog Maddy

“Thoughts on my work – I’d love comments!” Title of a blog by Rune  

“Several times this week I heard someone say about a way of working, that it was like ‘stammering’. I hesitate to repeat this phrase as I can’t for the life of me remember who said it and in what context, but I will say it anyway, because it perfectly describes how “Ustala” works for me: Someone is trying to tell me something, standing before me, looking away at times whilst she’s talking to me, hands moving. She can’t quite find the right words. She starts a sentence, interrupts herself and starts again. She repeats herself later on but rephrases slightly.

From the combination of words and gestures, something is slowly becoming apparent. Layers collect beside and on top of each other, stopping and starting, bit by bit, something is being made clear. From the parts there appears a whole which, in spite of, or perhaps because of the stammering, is strong and coherent.” Blog Philippine (on Ine’s work “Ustala”)

 Comments from those collaborating with Calcite Revolt

“After my first weeks at CR, I’m mostly preoccupied with trying to formulate my position as a writer within the group. There are no texts to be written, there is no clear cut project, no story to be developed with a beginning, a middle and an end. My natural creative processes are stuck, one could say. (…)

I’ve already told you about my preoccupation and fascination concerning the role and status of language within the context of visual arts. I will elaborate on this during our stay in the Belgian ‘woods’ (that’s how I imagine the place, perhaps I’m mistaken). I hope you can help me sharpen my thoughts about this ongoing project. And without realizing it, this process about reformulating and sharpening already started! I experienced the talks I had with the members so far as extremely fruitful. In the end it is you as well who gave me the possibility to ask the questions at all!

It feels a little bit awkward to open up my practice as a writer, to share my concerns in this way, as writing is such an individual preoccupation. And this ‘lonely’, never visible side of my work is something I absolutely adore. Who was it again (Gilles Deleuze?) who said “you write with the world”?”

Fri, 13/11/2009 – 18:05 — Ilse

“My proposal for working with you within Calcite Revolt was twofold. During studio visits I wanted to talk with you one to one, to reflect on your work and individual practices. Second – on a more abstract level and in a collective process – I wanted to initiate a discussion on the current position of artists, the content and meaning of the métier, by correlating your practices to recent theoretical publications and ongoing debates. I found it tempting to think of this group of artists – who explicitly want to reflect on their work and exercise (more) control over their professional affairs – as a potential think tank of experts.

During the workshop in June 2009 in Brussels we spent part of the day discussing the book by Dutch art historian and critic Camiel van Winkel The Myth of the Artist (my translation of De mythe van het kunstenaarschap). The aim was to approach contemporary artistic expertise starting from the ‘lived’ personal practices and experiences. We took Van Winkel’s historical models and traced elements of them in our positions. A central question was if contemporary practice could be described as another configuration of the same (old) ingredients. If not, how to denominate the additional or new aspects, qualities or even skills that are part of the ‘profession’ right now?”

Sat, 16/01/2010 – 11:33 – Mariska

 General Assembly in Argenteau

Hosted by Carolien in Argenteau, 28/29-11-2009

“Since this will take place at our house which is near Liege and it will take a little more time for especially the amsterdam/rotterdam members to come to I suggest it to be a weekend. We heat with woodstoves so warm night clothes are needed!”

Tue, 29/09/2009 – 13:58 — Carolien

“I would like to have in depth discussions about a few of the members work in the form of a group critique like we used to do at Piet Zwart. I can explain: someone presents work, the others discuss it. To avoid defensive reactions and short-cuts the one who presents is only listening (it’s like eavesdropping on visitors of your own exhibition). He or she offers topics or issues in the form of questions that are relevant to his/her work/ artistic research. These are related to the group via the moderator, who guides the discussion. From the participants of the discussion it is required that they invest, engage, talk about their readings of the work, their ideas. They are also vulnerable since they will be spontaneously and often intuitively formulating their reading and interpretation within the situation. It is, in that sense, pretty equal. The discussion could be around 1,5 hour per person.”

Wed, 21/10/2009 – 09:39 — Ine

(The program we agreed on went like this:  SATURDAY, 12.00 arrival at the house, lunch. 13.00 Discussion on the exhibition Divided Landscape. 14.00 Group crit in the format proposed and described by Ine: 18.00 break, drinks and fresh air. 19.00 Voebe shows us the rushes of the film she has just been shooting in Cuba. 20.00 dinner. SUNDAY, 9.00 breakfast. 10.00 Ilse gives an introduction to her proposed method of working with CR. 11.00 discussions on Calcite Revolt procedures, its function, position and possibilities. 13.00 lunch, a walk in the woods, etc, home.)

 The Reading Group

“I’d like to set up a reading-group, open for all of you who are interested to partake. I’ll put articles on the website every one to two weeks and I’ll organize a live session to discuss the material. Rune will make a special forum on the website where we can discuss on-line.

WEEK SPECIAL by Mariska: SIMON SHEIK

Please find enclosed this weeks special, the article The Artist as Public Intellectual by Simon Sheik, a bit older already (2004) but still suitable to start off with the reading group.”

Sat, 16/01/2010 – 11:33 — Mariska  

(From the ensueing discussion)

“Positioning, context-awareness and subsequent context-control or manipulation, and even creating context and, as Sheikh says, producing a public, have become equal to the creative and productive facets of an artist practice. Can it be said that this is true to such an extent that creativity and production are no longer a necessary component? Can one conceive of a convincing artistic practice which is preoccupied only with positioning and context?”

Tue, 19/01/2010 – 17:25 — Philippine

“(…) So, in order to escape the connotations of the market-driven public sphere, and, I suppose, the highly market driven art-world, the public intellectual must engage in the creation ‘counter-publics’ (or counter-public spheres). These counter-publics should not be seen as contra the public sphere, but existing ‘outside’ of this sphere, possibly in re-conquered or redefined ’space’ (e.g. the gay parks). The self-organization and self-institutionalization becomes a strategy to disengage from the experience-driven cultural industry, and a hallmark seems to be the desire to be boring. This seems logical given the anti-intellectual climate mentioned earlier; in the search for an experience or in the obtaining of knowledge more profound than what is offered by the market-driven cultural industry, one must seem boring (and elitist) to someone who is not able to distinguish the difference. It seems to me, that many of the counter-public structures simply revive models, which in the public sphere have grown too large, become market-driven or underfunded – their critique is of the surrounding structure that led to the decay of the model, not the original model itself (Copenhagen Free University is an example hereof, the original model being the university).”

Tue, 26/01/2010 – 16:08 — Rune

“(…) thank you very much for your sparkling responses to the article by Simon Sheikh! I enjoyed your thoughts.”

Thu, 18/02/2010 – 11:09 — Mariska

“According to Sheikh: ” Art matters, certainly, but art is not enough.” – I cannot accept that, but I fear I have to. Art in its present form certainly is not enough. And, yes, I’m sure there comes a point when the artist too must “take arms against a sea of trouble”, but until then, there must be a way for art to reclaim influence in the world. Perhaps the counter-publics and tactical self-institutions are the best way”.

Tue, 26/01/2010 – 16:08 — Rune

“ (…) Clearly the opinions differ here and therefore I’d like to introduce the essay The Emancipated Spectator by Jaques Rancière as this week’s special, as he positions the political potential of art right at the heart of the perception.”

Thu, 18/02/2010 – 11:09 — Mariska