In 2003, Nienke Vijlbrief and Rob van de Werdt founded P/////AKT, an initiative for contemporary art in Amsterdam. P/////AKT has a signalling function in the field of contemporary art and young talent. Every year, they organise six solo exhibitions within their main programming. In addition, P/////AKT presents an annual programme called P/////AKT POOL. For this, two artists are invited, both of whom graduated in the previous year. They each have the smaller upstairs space at their disposal for six months, where they create three successive exhibitions.
What need were you addressing when you set up P/////AKT? And how do you relate to the (visual arts) field?
P/////AKT was founded out of the need for 'space'. We both had other initiatives that were homeless at the time. Nienke ran De Parel, an art initiative here in Amsterdam, but they lost their location. I (Rob) had an art institution in Berlin that ceased to exist, but I had a group of artists who wanted to start something new. Then I met Nienke. She had found a new venue but didn't want to run it on her own. We sat down together and started thinking about what we thought was needed in Amsterdam and in the field in general: what is important, what are we missing, how do we set up a programme that adds value to what we already see within the visual arts, how can we best find a form for it? For artists, it is very important that they have the opportunity to develop their own way of experiencing, thinking and intentions. We call this generating space, time and resources. An artist must be free in his thinking and not be conditioned. He should not have to fit in somewhere or relate to the market. No, an artist should do his thing and if that then fits into the market, that is fine. Not the other way around.
As in previous years, you will present a series of solo presentations linked to an overarching theme. This year it is Extended Matter. How did you come up with this theme and can you explain what it entails?
We don't have a focus beforehand, but work with a longlist of artists who we follow. You have that gut feeling of here's something, you see artists doing certain things and focusing on certain things. That's interesting. We pick out artists, form a group and appoint a focus. This is then fleshed out by inviting writers and having people reflect on it. That umfeld is a kind of public programme to give things more context. Our role is to create a foothold through a focus, which is poetic enough to also allow for excursions. It's a certain line you can see between the artists, but the solo presentations remain in their own right.
Extended Matter refers to the attitude and mentality of the artist. The participating artists all have their own way of interpreting Extended Matter, but what they have in common is that they have slow working or processing processes and investigate behaviours of material in various forms. For Janina Frye, for instance, this is the object as an extension of the body. For Rein Dufait, it is much more focused on the material. The improper material or the inverted form. So what is the essence of making a sculpture? It's about a kind of materiality, about how people translate that into something else and how they want us to understand it. Johann Arens, for instance, comes up with an environment that creates a hospital situation. He uses objects that were originally used in such an environment, referring to the human body, but they are also waste pieces. Placing the objects in a new context creates a kind of alienation or a new reality. That is the most interesting thing for audiences, that you get different angles of a certain thought. That's the Extended Matter.
You already mentioned Janina Frye, Rein Dufait and Johann Arens, who you have programmed this year. On what grounds do you make your choices and what do you look for in artists?
We look for people who are very much their own person and who have a certain poetry in their work, so don't make work that is too literal. We find a poetic and philosophical attitude much more interesting than a purely aesthetic or committed approach. That is too flat. There has to be a kind of poetry in it, a basic idea and a clear need to produce work. The artist must know how to give shape to that philosophical and poetic foundation and thus be able to stimulate and evoke our imagination. That is what art is about. Besides a choice of poetic content, we look at whether someone can translate from their oeuvre into this space. We look at the cohesion within our programme and assess whether people can handle the space, because it is a substantial space. You can respond to the space with very few, simple and summary means and it can also be very large, but you have to progress from the thinking to where you arrive at a form, where you occupy the space. You have to be able to bend the space to your will. That is an important aspect in our selection.
You have just remodelled the space of P/////AKT POOL. How do the artists respond to this smaller space?
The space at P/////AKT POOL was a pretty frustrating place because the artists could not exhibit comfortably. The space pushed them in one direction and that was always a struggle. Thomas Swinkels, for example, was the second P/////AKT POOLER, he wanted to take out the walls and explore the space with cameras to see what was behind them, or break open a pillar. In fact, artists are always trying to break out. How to deal with such a small space is a very good challenge, it can sharpen artists.
We now have one artist, Emiel Zeno, who has been working in the newly expanded space. We had invited Emiel before we decided to extend the space. He immediately had lots of plans and wanted to take out the stairs, for example, but we wouldn't let him (because it's a fire escape). We could enlarge the space, though, which was great for him. And even then he changed it: he flipped the stair gate. The first four P/////AKT POOLERS, including Thomas Swinkels and Lisa Sudhibhasilp, have since said that the extension made them jealous. They would have liked it too. But you can also say, you were the pioneers! The expanded space also pampers the artists a bit. We give them a neat sweet space that they can easily manage. So the challenge is pretty much gone. But we do recommend starting downstairs and trying to connect through the stairs upstairs, introducing a trigger to challenge and invite people to take that step.
You invite young talent from the academies in the Netherlands for your programming. What is your opinion on the quality of recent graduates? Are there certain academies that stand out?
In the past - this may also have to do with our own development, but probably not exclusively - we used to have occasions when we would give someone straight from the academy a solo in the big room. We did that, for instance, with Saskia Noor van Imhoff, Maurits Koster and Daniel vom Keller, but that hardly ever happens now. Only once recently, with Tim Hollander. We had seen him at his final exams and felt he was more advanced, also in terms of content. Especially for such a large space, that is important. You see that at the academies there is a lot of experimentation in the first three years and then in the fourth year the final exam work has to be produced. In the third year, they have tried all sorts of things and in the fourth year, suddenly it is very serious. They start forcing themselves to come up with a final presentation. It should provide a nice and clear picture of who they are and what they do, but they often don't know that at all yet because six months ago they were making something completely different. The idea of ‘this is how I am going to present myself, this is how I am going to show myself to the outside world’ comes way too early. Anyway, that doesn't say so much about the quality of the academies as the time frame in which people have to form.
Almost every academy has one or two artists every year where there is something really special. Good people can come from any academy, but we do have higher expectations from some academies. Of course, those expectations don't always come true. We have had an artist from the HKU, Rietveld, AKI and now someone from the KABK is coming from The Hague. Interesting things also happen in Den Bosch and Breda. The AKI is sometimes weird and stubborn, so very weird people come from there and we like that because we need them the most. People who look at things differently and are not so conditioned into 'this is art and this is how it should be and this is how it fits in with what is happening'. No, they need to come up with new things. So that our seeing, thinking and experiencing is stretched. That's what it's all about in the end.
Which (internationally emerging) artists you have programmed in recent years should we keep an eye on?
All of them! That’s like asking 'which child do you like best'. Just a thought. Rein (Dufait) is going to make it, he has already been embraced by a gallery in Antwerp and if they guide him well he will do well. That's an original talent. What he does, even we are amazed by. So you should definitely keep an eye on that one. Wouter Venema is also under the care of Rianne Groen, but he really needs more big projects, which is good for him. Nicolás Lamas is also managing really well. He is doing quite well abroad. Actually, he is already finished talent, he is already through. Kasper Bosmans is also through. He really is a youngster, 25 or 26 years old, but he does things you don't see anyone else doing. And in a very good way, it’s very much from him, from his own world. People coincide with their work. If you get there, you can make it. Then there's Dan Walwin. There's something about that one too. He needs to break through; we don't understand why he hasn't. Maybe he is also a bit stubborn, or people find his work difficult. But it is an experience every time we see one of his installations: there is something about movement, water, alienation, a kind of distance but also being sucked into something, which is amazing when you look at a work of art. Dan is a really great example of where you want to say 'Guys, come on, go for Dan'! Anyway, there are many more like that. We also think Hedwig Houben is brilliant. We showed her work in 2011 and 2012. That was one of the best exhibitions. And she did an amazing performance with us. She is now also with Fons Welters. Femmy Otten and Bram De Jonghe should also receive more attention. Femmy will be fine. Hedwig will manage, but Bram De Jonghe is a poetic artist with surreal aspects in his work. That has a very fine alienating effect and is really special, there should be more of that.
Finally, what can we expect from you in the near future?
As far as we can say, we will continue to work with solo exhibitions in the near future. Although who knows, it may be that there is a very important reason to do a group exhibition, nothing is carved in stone. At the end of this year, there is one collaboration with a duo solo by two Lithuanian artists in collaboration with the Contemporary Art Centre (CAC) in Vilnius, with the idea that we will do a project there in 2019. We are still thinking about whether that will only be at the CAC or possibly at other places in the city, but we need to see if that is feasible both in terms of time and budget. We are rooting around a bit in the Baltics. We also have contact with Riga. We were on the jury of the Young Contemporary Art Prize in Lithuania, co-organised by the CAC. That allowed us to take a look at and talk to a lot of people there. But a collaboration needs a long run-up. It can take up to two years before anything happens. And we are presently working with Lisbon, where we have found a partner. We just can't mention the name yet because it hasn't been decided yet, but it feels really good. There’s a good click. Actually, we are hoping to make a first presentation there in 2019. But anyway, that's already two presentations abroad in 2019 in addition to six exhibitions here and then we’re really at our limit.
Published on 15 March 2018.
