In January 2020 I collaborated with visual artist, Doctor of Arts Elina Saloranta on a presentation at a post-doc seminar organized by Tutke. We both had an artistic research practice of using letters as a medium and in this presentation we focused on writing letters. Each of the participants of the seminar received an envelope, containing an A4-sized letter we had prepared for them. In the letter we described each of our epistolary practices in few words and how we met. There was also an empty A4-page inside the envelope, and the letter invited the participants to use it to write a letter to someone who does not exist anymore: a deceased relative or theoretician, their own adolescent self or a dream that they had let go of. After the writing session they could read the letter aloud if they wished. Then there was a discussion.
In the collaboration with Elina I noticed how complex I tended to build my experiments: packed with references, rhythms, styles of writing, superimpositions. What we did with Elina was very simple and clear—the opposite of the previous draft with its 21 different chapters, 43 references points and spatial design.
T h e t e r m a n d t h e p h e n o m e n o n o f a u d i e n c e
The presentation was interesting in terms of participation. This kind of explicitly and openly active participation made me question whether it could be called an esitys/a beforemance at all, since it resembled a workshop. When seen in comparison to it, my previous practice clearly had avoided such activating setups and had attempted to secure audience members unobstructed access to an ownership of the resonant component and to the protective bubble enabling their passive disguise. Like Draft 12, this also seemed to point to a limit of esitystaide/beforemance art. A workshop as such does not count as an esitys/a beforemance since everyone is primarily an agent and an audience body is missing.