Single channel video and sound 9 min 14 sec. 2011
What is the meaning of the death of the Messiah or the Savior who has just come? There is none. When the Savior dies, the hope for salvation through Him dies as well. In this case, as well as probably in any other case like that, the Messiah or the Savior has completely failed. Only humiliation and abasement followed. The religious miracle of the Savior originates from a total defeat.
He probably didn’t have divine omnipotence. Would have He died otherwise? A mistake… a disaster… Can we be sure?
Soon afterwards it turned out that the Savior died for the sins of the people. Suddenly the death of the person sent by God was no longer a disaster, a negation of everything; it was an indispensable element of the entire teaching and the entire road. And that road had to pass through Death, Resurrection, Ascension and Elevation to the Throne. The sacrifice (death) was meaningful….
The object displayed here is an attempt at separating religion from its economic utility. The stake is not to provide evidence for or against but to show the “absurd” figure of the subject.
Granting sacrifice status to the human being reduces them to their animal substance. Being a sacrifice, they are no better than an animal. The sacrifice becomes an animal, a despicable one, not worthy of compassion.
The DOG is based on the identity of a fake subject, which is PIG, and not on the identity of the sacrifice. When we read DOG backwards we get GOD.
I did that because DOG appears as a messenger in various mythologies and religions, but instead of the dog we see a pig. There is an idiom in my native language used when somebody does the dirt on someone, which translates literally into English: “to plant a pig”. I literally used this very expression here.
The barbarity of the situation is expressed in the categories of “human rights” (to atonement) while it’s about political and economic practice.
Identifying the human being as a sacrifice around the idea of goodness in any project becomes evil itself and a huge misunderstanding; we are relying on something nonexistent.
A fraud consists of concealing the fact that there is nothing to offer and there is no sacrifice.
If, in love, one gives what one doesn’t possess, in a crime of love, one steals from the beloved Other what the Other doesn’t possess. (S. Zizek) The falsehood of a sacrificial gesture.
The biggest scam of this undertaking is that it is considered and regularly planned. What we most need appears through a loss.
A false sacrifice to deceive another person by saying they are missing something.
Desecration alone is not enough, it’s only a gesture (a game), where responsibility is distributed.
One should reject the framework of ethics and the negative and sacrificial definition of man in the first place.
There can be no alibi in the form of the sacrifice status where the big league plays. It frees them from the responsibility and gives privileges.
It is not the stake of my work to keep the cultural industry alive. To provide new sophisticated entertainment.
One cannot set goals based on adopted rules and then look for means to achieve them.
When we watch the cynicism of the situation, the hideousness is closer to us.
That kind of approach requires more than just relying on it. It has to be verified by people’s reactions.
The commentary in this video clip is very important; there is its reproduction, but the one better than the original.
We have to get used to the hideousness, explain it, and make it ours, for us. Everyone wants changes, everyone wants a revolution, but instead we do everything to make it fail, because that’s more profitable for us.
It is not any reality, however understood, that is the real essence, but the glorification of a machine, which makes it possible to operate. A concept which evolves into abstraction. It’s not only about a machine, a concept in the narrow sense of a piece of art, but about the whole social machinery.
Here's the primary situation: object autonomy is taken away but there's no way to ignore it. The more so because it becomes a fetish. An object is necessary do that all these processes can take place.
We shift the entire burden of interpretation not only to the "appropriate" idea, i.e. to the purely conceptual solution which starts operating independently. The object, an initial thing for the concept at the beginning, loses not only its autonomy but also its meaning, becomes a fetish, a logo of an idea, having nothing in common with it. Only a fetish, a logo can help in building a new subject, which will reveal itself in the concept, being able to communicate new contents in a more intense manner. The emptiness between the object and the concept modifies our relationships, relations with various discourses and with the world. Taking the autonomy away allows the development of a concept idea, the problems of which can be solved outside art and that's what's most crucial. The more so because all the so called values and artistic problems are outside any scope of interest; only the extra-artistic ones significant.