Schizoproduction and Artistic Research

In my artistic research for my PhD at the Theatre Academy in the University of Arts, Helsinki, I have used the metamodel of schizoanalysis both in creating artistic works and in pedagogical contexts. Recently I have run extensive workshops around the topic “What is Real?” in the Theaterdiscounter in Berlin and MoKS artists’ centre in Mooste, Estonia, with the performance artist Karolina Kucia. Beside this, we both have been working with the Ueinzz theatre group from São Paulo, directed by the philosopher Peter Pál Pelbart and psychotherapist Ana Carmen, whose practice is focused on schizoanalysis in experimental theatre practice.

The basis for this presentation is the theoretical background of schizoanalysis and practical findings on how it functions as a dynamic tool in creating materials both for artistic production and for how one perceives subjectivity in relation to the group, milieu, social norms, or political bodies. Schizoanalysis is a tool for comprehending how “the real” is being constituted as lived territory through machinic modulation of the flux and in regard to virtual universes of reference. However, my intention is to contrast schizoanalysis as a “system of a systems,” or as the world in relation foreclosed real. These are two aspects that are intertwined in my artistic research: heterogenesis of subjectivity in contrast with the one, not as substance but as unforeseeable void—or, in other terms, the transcendental system of schizoanalysis with the radical immanence of the real.

Schizoanalysis functions as a dynamic tool for meta-modelling the world as being produced by “immanent capitalism.” In groups and individual practice, I’ve used schizoanalysis as a tool to trace processes as philosophy: how certain machinic conjunctions in relation with the flux produces a particular existential territory with the universal reference, how some machinic conjunctions may create new “lines of flight,” and why some others retract to habitual refrains of subjugation. However, in my research I have encountered troubles comprehending the real through the particular system of meta-modelisation. It may seem only to be a horizon, an exterior, or the virtual universal reference. What it does is both analyse and produce relations, exchanges, and conjunctions. The real is being assigned to the asignified territory of the unconscious.

Following the critique of these philosophical concepts by François Laruelle, my attempt is to contrast this philosophical form of thought with the proposition that subjectivity has only unilateral relation with the real. The world is being modelled by schizoanalysis propagating new forms of existential territories or retraction to ossified refrains. The world does not equate with the real, which is separated without separation. In the case of performance art, in this non-correlation with capitalism as philosophy, the foreclosure can be found in body. Not body as severalty, but as “one” body. A body is not only part of the assemblage but also foreclosed real. It is both machinic production and foreclosed indifference as the void. Still, it is only through the heterogenesis or modulation, where the comprehension of the philosophy of capitalism may be regarded as hallucination, that the world is not conflated with the real. Where the process of artistic practice is a process of stitching and ripping apart, probing for lines of flight to create consistency, the practice has only a non-relation with the foreclosed carnality of the body and the unprecedented real.

This presentation includes materials that published in the book Tero Nahua, Heresy and Provocation (Malmö: Förlaget 2015) to be presented at the Mad House event in Helsinki on 19 November 2015.