bilje`nica

JADRANKA DAMJANOV

notebook

UMJETNOST AVANTURA

bil je`n ica

Slobodna {kola radioni~kog tipa za svestrano upoznavanje likovno-umjetni~kih djela u Centru za kulturu i obrazovanje “Zagreb”, istra`ivanje / obrazovanje

Po~ela i na~ela / Analiza umjetni~kog djela / Crte` / Slikarstvo / Kiparstvo / Grad i graditeljstvo / Umjetnost i povijest (Razvoj moderneosjetljivosti) / Umjetnost i duhovnost (Istra`ivanje zna~enja)

8 x 10 radionica

Workshop Free School for Manysided Introduction in Art Appreciation in the Centre for Culture and Education “Zagreb”,Exploration / Education

Origins and Principles / Analysis of the Work of Art / Drawing / Painting / Sculpture / The City and Architecture / Art andHistory (The Development of Modern Sensibility / Art and Spirituality (Exploration of Meaning)

8 x 10 workshops

ARTADVENTUREnotebook

Referees: GORDANA BOSANAC, MATKO ME{TROVI}

Design: DUBRAVKA RAKOCI

Photographs: DUBRAVKA JANDA, IVAN BOGAV~I}

Video camera: IVAN BOGAV~I}, VESNA MIHOLI}, PAOLA ORLI}, IVA PINTARI}, IVA CANKI

Video transmitting: VLADO PETEK

The Free school sign: IVA CANKI

Language advisers: ELISABETH HARRISON-PAJ, VESNA ZELI}

Drawings and typset by: MARIO PAVLOVI}, SINIŠA MIKULI} (Hermes izdava{tvo)

Published and printed by: HERMES IZDAVA{TVO, II Njivice 15, Zagreb

This book was published by courtesy of the Ministry of the Culture of the Republic of Croatia

Copyright © Jadranka Damjanov, ZAGREB, 1998.

Recenzenti: GORDANA BOSANAC, MATKO ME{TROVI}

Dizajn: DUBRAVKA RAKOCI

Fotografije: DUBRAVKA JANDA, IVAN BOGAV~I}

Video kamera: IVAN BOGAV~I}, VESNA MIHOLI}, PAOLA ORLI}, IVA PINTARI}, IVA CANKI

Preslika s videa: VLADO PETEK

Znak slobodne {kole: IVA CANKI

Lektura: ANTE VUJI~I}

Crte`i i kompjutorska priprema: MARIO PAVLOVI}, SINIŠA MIKULI} (HERMES IZDAVA{TVO)

Izdava~ i tisak: HERMES IZDAVA{TVO, II Njivice 15, Zagreb

Naklada: 500 primjeraka

Knjiga je objavljena dare`ljivo{}u Ministarstva kulture Republike Hrvatske

JADRANKA DAMJANOV

Ime i oblik su u Ostatku. Svijet je Ostatak.Indra i Agni su u ostatku.Univerzum je u Ostatku.

Nebo i Zemlja, Sve Postojanje je u Ostatku.Voda, ocean, mjesec i vjetar su u Ostatku

Atharva VedaXI 9.1-2

Name and form are in Residue.The world is the Residue.

Indra and Agni are in Residue.The Universe is in Residue.

Heaven and Earth, All Existence is in the Residue.The water, the ocean, the moon and the wind are in Residue

Atharva VedaXI 9.1-2

FOTO

:D

UBR

AVK

A J

AN

DA

K A Z A L O TT AA BB LL EE OO FF CC OO NN TT EE NN TT SS

UVOD

PO^ELA I NA^ELA

ANALIZA UMJETNI^KOG DJELA

CRTE@

SLIKARSTVO

KIPARSTVO

GRAD I GRADITELJSTVO

UMJETNOST I POVIJEST -

RAZVOJ MODERNE OSJETLJIVOSTI

UMJETNOST I DUHOVNOST -

ISTRA@IVANJE ZNA^ENJA

PROSLAVE

BIBLIOGRAFIJA

VIII

2

46

92

130

168

214

264

318

380

381

INTRODUCTION

ORIGINS AND PRINCIPLES

ANALYSIS OF THE WORK OF ART

DRAWING

PAINTING

SCULPTURE

CITY AND ARCHITECTURE

ART AND HISTORY -

THE DEVELOPMENT OF MODERN SENSIBILITY

ART AND SPIRITUALITY -

EXPLORATION OF MEANING

CELEBRATIONS

BIBLIOGRAPHY

RADIONICE / WORKSHOPS

II NN TT RR OO DD UU CC TT II OO NN

Here, in the very beginning, I would like to direct the readers’ attention to some questions which appear most often in

connection with visuality, art and education.

First, it is necessary to examine the concept of the universality of visuality. The great majority of mankind is able to see -

that is unquestionable. In the fifties James J. Gibson had already established that perception has two aspects or two levels:

a literal aspect and a schematic one. I think it is worthwhile quoting him: “The problem of how we perceive the visual

world can be divided into two problems to be considered separately, first, the perception of the substantial or spatial world

and, second, the perception of the world of useful and significant things to which we ordinarily attend. The first one is

a world of colours, textures, surfaces, edges, slopes, shapes, and interspaces. The second one is a more familiar world

with which we are usually concerned, a world of objects, places, people, signals, and written symbols. The latter changes

from time to time depending on what we are doing at the moment, whereas the former remains a more or less constant

background to our experience, and a sort of support for maintaining a posture and for moving about. The world of signifi-

cant things is too complex to be attended to completely and at one time, and our perception of it is selective. Certain fea-

tures stand out prominently, others are neglected. It is sometimes said that our perception is distorted and falsified by this

fact. This kind of perception can be called schematic, whereas the first kind can be called literal.”

To continue and radicalize this thought of Gibson’s, which, by the way, he does himself in his later works, we can conclude

that what everybody literally sees, or even more precisely, to what he/she literally reacts is the change of light. Naturally, not

direct light but ambiental: it is the light which reflects from different surfaces which are around us. If there is no change, in

a full flash or in total darkness, we of course cannot see any surface at all. But still people differ in what kind of information

they pick up from a light ray reflecting from surfaces and in what they can/want to become aware of; it means at what they

direct their attention, what they allow themselves to see literally or veil it, recognizing only the ordinary functions, meanings

and schemes. However, literal perception is the basis of every vision, for everyone, whether they like it or not. And now

a thought about the possibility of a universal need to cultivate the literal perception arises; it must be cultivated, it must be

conscious, because in spite of being a common and basic characteristic of all of us it occurs under the threshold of aware-

ness. In everyday life, in orientation, we are mostly satisfied with some isolated, particular meaning, with some isolated

applicability, with a crumb, with some poor waste from the universal meaning, with a scheme. Only artworks are able to

connect the universal sensory with the universal applicable / semantic; the greater they are the more so and more deeply,

and on the basis of some particular demand to realise the form which in spite of being particular has not lost its connection

U V O D

Ovdje, na samom po~etku, usmjerila bih pozornost na nekoliko pitanja koja se naj~e{}e pojavljuju u vezi s odnosom vizualnosti,

umjetnosti i odgoja.

Prvo je nu`no zadr`ati se na pojmu univerzalnost vizualnoga. Velika ve}ina ~ovje~anstva u stanju je vidjeti - to je nedvojbeno.

James J. Gibson ve} je pedesetih godina ustanovio da postoje dva aspekta ili dvije razine opa`aja: doslovni i shematski. Mislim

da nije na odmet citirati ga. “Problem kako opa`amo vizualni svijet mo`e se podijeliti u dva problema: prvo opa`aj temeljnog ili

prostornog svijeta i, drugo, opa`aj svijeta korisnih i signifikantnih stvari na koje obi~no usmjeravamo pozornost. Prvi je svijet

boja, tekstura, povr{ina, rubova, nagiba, likova i me|uprostora. Drugi nam je svijet bli`i, s njime smo naj~e{}e zaokupljeni, svijet

predmeta, mjesta, ljudi, signala i pisanih simbola. Taj potonji mijenja se s vremena na vrijeme, dok prvi ostaje vi{e-manje stalna

podloga za na{a iskustva i neke vrste potpore za dr`anje i kretanje. Svijet signifikantnih stvari je previ{e slo`en da bi se na njega

u cjelini i odjednom mogla usmjeriti pozornost i zato je opa`aj toga svijeta selektivan. Neke se zna~ajke jako isti~u, a druge se

zanemaruju. Ponekad se ka`e da je opa`aj zbog toga iskrivljen i krivotvoren. Ta se vrsta opa`aja mo`e nazvati shematskim, dok

se prva vrsta mo`e nazvati doslovnim.”

Nastavljaju}i i radikaliziraju}i tu Gibsonovu misao, {to uostalom i on sam ~ini u svojim kasnijim djelima, zaklju~ujemo da ono {to

svatko doslovno vidi, to jest jo{ to~nije, na {to doslovno reagira, jest promjena svjetlosti. Ne neposredne svjetlosti nego ambijen-

talne, one koja se odbija od razli~itih povr{ina koje nas okru`uju. Ako nema promjene, u punome bljesku ili u potpunome mraku,

naravno, ne vidimo nikakve povr{ine. Ipak, ljudi se razlikuju u tome koji podatak vade iz svjetlosnih zraka koje se odbijaju od

povr{ina i {to `ele/mogu osvijestiti, to jest u tome na {to usmjeravaju pozornost, dopu{taju li sebi da doslovno vide ili to zastiru

prepoznavaju}i uobi~ajene namjene, zna~enja, sheme. Ipak, doslovni je opa`aj temelj svakog vi|enja, u svih, htjeli to ili ne.

I sada se javlja misao o mogu}oj univerzalnoj potrebi da se kultivira doslovni opa`aj. Naime, on se mora kultivirati, mora se osvi-

jestiti, jer kolikogod je to op}a i temeljna osobina sviju nas odigrava se ispod praga svjesnosti.

U svakodnevnome `ivotu, u snala`enju naj~e{}e se svjesno zadovoljimo nekim izdvojenim, nekim partikularnim zna~enjem, nekom

izdvojenom uporabljivo{}u, nekom mrvicom, nekim oskudnim otpatkom od univerzalnog zna~enja, nekom shemom. Jedino su

umjetni~ka djela u stanju povezati univerzalno-osjetilno i univerzalno-uporabno/zna~enjsko, ukoliko su ve}a, utoliko vi{e i dublje i

na temelju nekog partikularnoga zahtjeva realizirati formu koja, iako je pojedina~na, nije izgubila vezu s univerzalnim.

Osvje{tavanje doslovnog opa`aja i arhetipskih zna~enja - umjetnost, upravo je zbog toga osjetilno samoodgajanje ~ovje~anstva i

svaki put novi, a u biti prastari poku{aj preobrazbe sebe.

XI

with the universal.Gaining awareness of literal perception and archetypal meanings that is art, is just because of that,

the sensory self-education of mankind and every time a new, but in its essence ancient attempt to transform oneself.

In this universal process an extraordinary place belongs to Modern art. Modern art, namely, in its most radical realisa-

tions has openly shown the literal aspect of perception existing in everyone. It has realized the most universal sensori-

ness and the most universal meaning. Only after the explicity of Modern art is it clear that the edge of “something”, in

reality of light (fullness) and “nothing” in reality, darkness (void) is realised/exteriorised and afterwards variated in an

endless multitude of lines, drawn, poured and or carved with different tools, in different materials, at a different time, in

different cultures, as an outline and as an independent line, which due to their unbroken connection with the source

(a point fallen from Heaven), can at any moment dissolve into that eternal and real continuum from where it has been

isolated/created by our activity or by our memory. But our gaze in an extreme functionalisation of an extremely alienat-

ed world transforms this enormous richness into a dead scheme forgetting its primordial creativity (the point fallen from

Heaven) and poor, naked and unhappy because unsatisfied, it runs towards a new attraction on the horizon. If both are

so, we must neither doubt the one if we know that history of art is, in spite of all the destruction, an enormous treasury

of mankind, nor the other, because every day we experience it, what could be and ought to be more basic in private

and institutional education than to cultivate, in other words nurture it, which means educate and make one aware of

man’s universal capability. Further questions arise logically. First, what kind of relation is there between man and

the environment which he creates for himself to educate himself en masse and in which way does he institutionalize it in

educational establishments again en masse?

It is necessary to instruct the readers how we look at the world. Our eyes move constantly, jumping or in tiny little dis-

placements, because without their movements we would not see anything. The eye movements are extremely quick, due

to which the whole exploratory dynamics takes place under the threshold of awareness in a time which is not the linear

time which we measure with a clock or construct with a sentence. To our unconscious gaze a few seconds is enough to

circulate around and to register what is in front of us. Another question is how much of this are we able to or willing to

become aware of. And now shall we try to answer our imaginative question about the relation of man and environment.

We must not deceive ourselves; mankind has been trying for quite a long time, in a very systematic way, to exterminate

the literal aspect of vision and to avoid the awareness of looking/vision. Man has especially in recent time, shamelessly

and rudely misused his own unconscious capability of the gaze dynamics to expose himself to all kinds of influences

which will remain unaware, and so utmostly exploit himself completely on a level very subtle, because it is unconscious.

As Uspensky quotes, even in ancient Russia among the painters of icons could be found those who drew the devil

under the figures of the Virgin with child painted according to strict patterns. Today we could say it is a widely spread

phenomenon. The new media enable an alteration of almost any visual, and of course, acoustic materials, and so

insertion of various contents. If the gaze is uncultivated and not used to gain awareness, which it is in the majority of

cases, these contents remain hidden from perception. It means that they are much more efficient at the unconscious

level. In a world in which everything is being sold “they either negotiate, or speculate / but they all exchange hope for

money; / some sell coal, others love, / and some a poem like this one”, as was written by Attila József quite a long

time ago. Naturally in the original, it is more intensive and memorable. The computer revolution which began towards

the end of this century already has such dimensions that the exploitation which occurs and can occur through it is all

pervading. So “art education” becomes as impossible as it is necessary for the survival of the species.

U tom univerzalnom procesu posve iznimno mjesto pripada modernoj umjetnosti. Moderna je umjetnost, naime, u svojim

najradikalnijim ostvarenjima nezastrto pokazala u svim ljudima nazo~an doslovni aspekt opa`aja. Ozbiljila je najuniverzalniju

osjetilnost i najuniverzalnije zna~enje. To da rub “ne~eg”, zapravo svjetlosti (punine) i “ni~ega”, zapravo tame (praznine) ost-

varen/ovanj{ten i potom ina~en u bezbrojnome mno{tvu linija vu~enih, sipanih, klesanih razli~itim sredstvima, razli~itim

materijalima, u razli~itim vremenima, u razli~itim kulturama, kao obris i kao samostalna linija koji se, zbog neprekinute veze s

izvori{tem (to~kom palom s neba), mogu opet svaki ~as rasto~iti u onaj vje~ni i zbiljski kontinuum odakle ih je na{a aktivnost

ili na{e sje}anje izdvojilo/stvorilo, jasno je tek nakon eksplicitnosti moderne. Ali na{ pogled u krajnjoj funkcionalizaciji jednog do

kraja otu|enog svijeta pretvara to golemo bogatstvo u mrtvu shemu zaboravljaju}i svoju po~etnu kreativnost (to~ku palu s

neba) i osiroma{en, ogoljen, nesretan, jer je nezadovoljen, juri prema nekoj novoj atrakciji na vidiku. Ako je oboje tako, a u prvo

ne treba sumnjati ako se pozna povijest umjetnosti kao, unato~ svim razaranjima, golema riznica ~ovje~anstva, a niti u drugo,

jer ga se svakodnevno do`ivljava, {to bi moglo i smjelo biti temeljnije u privatnom i institucionalnom odgoju/obrazovanju od

kultiviranja, dakle njegovanja, dakle odgajanja, dakle osvje{tavanja ~ovjekove univerzalne sposobnosti? Daljnja se pitanja

name}u posve logi~no. Prvo, kakav je odnos ~ovjeka i okoli{a koji sam sebi stvara da bi sebe odgojio en masse i kako ga institu-

cionalizira u odgojnim ustanovama opet en masse?

Nu`no je uputiti na to kako gledamo. Na{e se o~i neprestance kre}u, skokovito ili posve si}u{nim pomacima, jer bez njihovih

pokreta ni{ta ne bismo vidjeli. Pokreti o~iju se odigravaju izvanredno brzo, i zato se cijela ta istra`iva~ka dinamika zbiva ispod

praga svjesnosti u nekom vremenu koje nije linearno vrijeme {to ga mjerimo satom ili konstruiramo re~enicom. Na{em nesvjes-

nom pogledu posve je dovoljno nekoliko sekundi da optr~i, da registrira to {to je pred njim. Druga je stvar koliko smo od toga u

stanju ili koliko smo toga voljni osvijestiti. I tu }emo poku{ati odgovoriti na na{e imaginirano pitanje o odnosu ~ovjeka i okoli{a.

Ne treba se zavaravati, ~ovje~anstvo ve} dugo vrlo sustavno nastoji zastrti doslovni aspekt vi|enja i sprije~iti osvje{tenost gledan-

ja/ vi|enja. Naime, ~ovjek se, osobito u novije doba, bespo{tedno i bezo~no koristi vlastitom nesvjesnom sposobno{}u dinamike

pogleda da bi sebe izlo`io svakovrsnim utjecajima koji }e ostati neosvje{teni i tako u krajnjem sebe izrabljuje na razini vrlo suptil-

noj jer je nesvjesna.

Kako Uspenski navodi, ve} su se u staroj Rusiji me|u ikonopiscima na{li oni koji su ispod likova Bogorodice s djetetom slikanih

po strogom uzorku crtali |avla. Danas bismo mogli re}i da je to {iroko rasprostranjena

pojava. Novi mediji omogu}uju preuredbu svakog vizualnog (naravno i akusti~kog) materijala i tako umetanje razli~itih sadr`aja

koji }e opa`aju - u slu~aju osvje{tavanju nenaviklog i neodgojenog pogleda, a tih je najve}i broj - ostati skriveni, {to zna~i utoliko

djelotvorniji s nesvjesne razine. U svijetu u kojem se sve prodaje “ili se naga|aju, ili mudruju, / ali svi nadu promijene u novac; /

netko prodaje ugalj, netko ljubav, / a netko pjesmu poput ove.” kako je to ve} dosta davno napisao, naravno u originalu inten-

zivnije i upe~atljivije, Attila József. Informati~ka revolucija koja je zapo~ela krajem ovoga stolje}a ve} je sada takvih razmjera da

je eksploatacija koja se putem nje doga|a i mo`e doga|ati svepro`imaju}a. Tako “umjetni~ki odgoj” postaje koliko nemogu},

toliko neophodan za opstanak vrste.

I da vidimo kako onda izgleda odnos izme|u institucionaliziranog obrazovanja i umjetnosti, kada svi pokazatelji upu}uju na to

da se zastiranje univerzalne osjetilne razine vjerojatno smatra op}enito po`eljnim. Sigurno je da bi osvje{tenost u~inila ned-

jelotvornim to mo}no oru`je kojim se manipulira masama. “Svako dru{tvo ugradi u mlade nara{taje njemu po`eljne koli~ine glu-

posti”, a ta se po`eljnost, u na{emu vremenu, zbog djelotvornosti novih medija, mnogo vi{e nego ikada ranije, sastoji u tome da

se zatome potrebe za osvje{tavanjem opa`aja. Ako je ~ovjekovo umjetni~ko djelovanje, kako Béla Hamvas ka`e “zadnja mrvica

sakralnoga `ivota”, dakle pravog, intenzivnog i zbiljskog opa`anja/djelovanja onda je posve razumljivo da je umjetni~ki odgoj u

sukobu s institucionaliziranom shemom, {to je {kola par exellence manje-vi{e svuda, ali na posebice rigidan na~in u biv{im soci-

X

XIII

Let us see then what the relation between institutional education and art looks like, when all the evidence shows that

a veiling of the universal level is generally accepted as desirable. It is sure that awareness would make this powerful

weapon for manipulating the masses inactive. “Every society builds into the young generation as much nonsense as is

desirable”, and what is desirable, in our time because of the power of the new media is, much more than ever before, to

suppress the need of becoming aware of one’s own perception. If man’s artistic activity as Béla Hamvas says is: “the last

crumb of sacral life”, which means a right, a real, and intensive perception/action, then it is quite clear that art education

is in conflict with the institutional scheme, that the school is par exellence more or less anywhere, but in a specially rigid

way in the former socialist countries. A hierarchical structure of education inherited from the past, when, different from

today, it functioned in the context of the situation and existing establishment, has long since become meaningless. It

roughly looks like this: The class progresses without progress; The placement of the benches is meaningless - in the first

row do not sit the excellent pupils any more, nor do the pupils with bad marks sit in the back bench. There is neither

the pupils’ knowledge nor the teacher’s conviction behind the marks which then become worthless once again since they

are inadequate for transiton to higher education. The teacher transmits authority which does not exist, the mediator

between the teacher and the pupils is the book which is accepted unwillingly and with difficulty because it is outside

the competition of a large number of interesting mediators which even the teacher cannot resist.

Due to its essence art breaks this institutionalised scheme and because of that it was never desirable, not even in the hier-

archical system when it functioned. Today there is no other choice for it but to hide, to accept the reduced and fragment-

ed time, to accept an inferior role (entertainment, recreation) besides the “serious” subjects and to fight the constant

threat - we will throw you out of the curriculum, because you are not needed. Or: what is left is to perform, through

the individual and sporadic life engagement of extraordinary individuals, with new methods, with new approaches,

a silent revolution - its own subversion - thus educating for a different, newer, fuller and more conscious life, for which

there is basically, an often not even heard of, demand, especially, but not exclusively in the young.

And now let me be allowed to put my personal report on this level of observing. The question which could inspire

would be, what happens when solitary searchers try to unite and becoming furious want to share their experience with

others? To me it has happened twice, and now it is happening for the third time, to be a participant of such an under-

taking. The first attempt was at the end of the seventies when we gathered - Dubravka Janda, Marcel Ba~i} and I, - to

think out on the basis of our experiences something which would be valid for the whole of education in Croatia. This is

not the place to mention the hindrances, or the fact that after great and extraordinary persistence our work was

crowned with total rejection, but to mention what we tried and what cognition we arrived at. We tried to establish theo-

retically the possibility of distinguishing between the level of sensory languages and the level of corresponding arts,

and to base the education on playing like exercising languages and in the broadest connection with the art works.

I consider it suitable to quote the text from a pamphlet we wrote together with some other experts with similar ideas in

the fields of the verbal, kinaesthetic and auditive languages published in 1980. “Today it is clear that education can

become real education only if it enlarges and deepens the grasp of the world, if it opens the channels of creativity and

allows a break through of frustated energy in all directions, if it evaluates the possibilities which are general enough to

be common to all people and which are deep enough characteristics of man (his specific quality) that the realisation of

them would be effortless and enjoyable and at the same time the source of all activities of consciousness. Cultivating

all the senses in every man these generative possibilities are realized, the entire means of grasping and changing

XII

jalisti~kim zemljama. Jedna vremenom ve} davno posve obesmi{ljena hijerarhijska struktura obrazovanja koju smo naslijedili iz

prija{njih vremena, u kojima je za razliku od danas i funkcionirala, tako|er u slu`bi postoje}eg poretka, izgleda otprilike ovako:

razredno napredovanje bez napredovanja, razmje{taj klupa bez popratnog zna~enja (u prvoj klupi vi{e ne sjede izvrsni, a u zad-

njoj “magare}oj”, nedovoljni), ocjene iza kojih ne stoji u~enikovo znanje ni nastavnikovo uvjerenje i koje se jo{ jedanput

obezvre|uju kada nisu dostatne za prijelaz u sljede}i stupanj. U~itelj prenosi autoritet koji ne postoji, izme|u u~itelja i mno{tva

u~enika posrednik je knjiga, a ona se te{ko i nevoljko sri~e jer joj izvana konkurira golemo mno{tvo zanimljivijih posrednika koji-

ma ni u~itelj ne odoljeva.

Umjetnost po svojoj biti razbija tu institucionaliziranu shemu i zato nikada - ni u hijerarhijskome sustavu, kada je jo{

funkcionirao, nije bila po`eljna. Danas joj ne preostaje drugo nego da se pritaji, da pristane na oskudno i razmrvljeno vrijeme,

da pristane na podre|enu ulogu (zabavnu i rekreacijsku) pokraj “ozbiljnih” predmeta i da se bori sa stalnom prijetnjom -

sada }emo te izbaciti iz programa jer si nepotrebna. Ili joj

preostaje da pomo}u individualnog i sporadi~nog `ivotnog anga`mana iznimnih pojedinaca novim metodama, novim pris-

tupima izvodi svoju tihu revoluciju - svoju subverziju - odgajaju}i za jedan druk~iji, noviji, puniji i svjesniji `ivot, za ~im nar-

avno postoji posve temeljni, iako ~esto pre~ujeni zahtjev, osobito, ali ne samo, u mladih.

A sada neka mi bude dopu{teno u ovu razinu razmatranja umetnuti osobni izvje{taj. Pitanje koje bi me u tom smjeru moglo

potaknuti glasilo bi: {to se doga|a kada se osamljeni tragatelji poku{aju ujediniti i pomahnitali `ele podijeliti svoja isksutva s

ostalima? Meni se dogodilo da sam dva puta, a sada mi se doga|a i tre}i put, bila sudionikom takva podhvata. Prvi je poku{aj

bio krajem sedamdesetih godina kada smo se okupili Dubravka Janda, Marcel Ba~i} i ja, ne bi li na temelju svojih iskustava i

teoretskih istra`ivanja smislili ne{to {to bi moglo biti valjano za cijelo hrvatsko {kolstvo. Ovdje nije mjesto da spominjem splet

smicalica kojima je na{ rad, nakon velike i iznimne upornosti bio okrunjen potpunim odbacivanjem, nego to {to smo poku{ali i

do kojih smo spoznaja do{li. Poku{ali smo teoretski uspostaviti mogu}nost razlikovanja razine osjetilnih jezika i razine njima

odgovaraju}ih umjetnosti, te utemeljiti obrazovanje na igri, kao vje`banju jezika i to u najtje{njem dodiru s umjetni~kim djelima.

Smatram prikladnim citirati tekst iz pamfleta koji smo zajedni~ki napisali u suradnji s jo{ nekim stru~njacima koji su se zauzi-

mali za sli~ne ideje u podru~ju verbalnog, kinestetskog i auditivnog jezika, te objavili 1980. god.: “Danas je jasno da obrazovanje

mo`e postati adekvatnim, da mo`e postati uistinu obrazovanjem samo ako pro{iri i produbi zahva}anje svijeta, ako otvori kanale

kreativnosti i dopusti proboj zako~ene energije u svim smjerovima, ako dakle razvije mogu}nosti koje su dovoljno op}enite da bi

svim ljudima bile zajedni~ke i koje su dovoljno duboko svojstvene ~ovjeku (njegov specifikum) da bi njihovo realiziranje bilo nena-

porno i pru`alo u`itak, a da su istodobno izvori{te svih aktivnosti svijesti. Njegovanjem svih osjetila u svakog ~ovjeka realiziraju se

upravo te rodne mogu}nosti - sposobnosti: svekolika sredstva zahva}anja i mijenjanja svijeta - jezici, i to ne samo verbalni nego i

kinestetski, vizualni i auditivni. Bez jezika se, naime, ne mo`e misliti, a ~ovjek koji mo`e misliti na razli~itim jezicima (i okom i uhom

i cijelim tijelom) svestranije se snalazi u svijetu, uspje{nije komunicira i sposobniji je da mijenja (stvara). Samo na taj na~in dobiva

mogu}a svestranost ~ovjekova bi}a realne temelje svojeg ostvarenja.” Ne mogu odoljeti daljem citiranju misli za koje smo se tada

borili i za koje smo nailazili na tako malo razumijevanja u na{oj sredini, jer mi se jo{ uvijek ~ine akutno/ kroni~no aktualnima:

“Obrazovanje koje bi se temeljilo na razvijanju jezi~nih mogu}nosti-sposobnosti sasvim prirodno tra`i igru kao vje`bu koja, za raz-

liku od drila (prisilne represivne vje`be), osloba|a i razvija kreativne mogu}nosti. Drilom se djeca prisiljavaju da prihvate rezultate

stanovitih procesa za prosudbu kojih ne mogu biti kompetentna. Igra bi mogla biti najefikasnijom vje`bom integralnog odgoja i

obrazovanja jer je ona prvi manifestni oblik jedinstva svih jezika u djeteta. Igru mo`emo shvatiti kao kolijevku u kojoj se zibaju

(odgajaju, rastu i razvijaju) svi jezici, jer je u svojoj biti op}a sintaksa i op}a mjera. Igru mo`emo shvatiti i kao danu sposobnost

XV

the world - languages, and not only the verbal but also kinaesthetic, visual and auditive ones. Without language it is

impossible to think, and a man who is able to think in different languages (with his eyes, ears, the whole body), in

a manysided way, is able to orientate in the world, he communicates more efficiently and is more able to change

(create). Only in this way does the manysidedness of the human being obtain a basis to realise itself.” It is difficult not

to quote more of these thoughts for which we then fought and for which we received so little understanding in

Croatian society because it seems these thoughts are still acutely/chronically actual. “Education which would be based

on developing language possibilities/capabilities naturally asks for playing as an exercise, which differs from a drill

(a compelling repressive exercise), because it liberates and evolves creative possibilities. With a drill children are forced

to accept the results of certain processes for an evaluation of which they cannot be competent. Playing could be the

most efficient exercise of an integral education because it is the first manifestation of the unity of all languages in

a child. The play can be conceived as a cradle where all the languages are dangled (educated, growing and evolving),

because in its essence it is a general syntax and a general measure. We can conceive playing as a given capability of

energy articulation, and the sensory possibilities from which the languages originate as some sorts of filters through

which energy is articulated: by moving, listening, producing sounds, seeing, leaving traces. All the languages are ini-

tially in a syncratic unity, in the beginning they are all only shapes of the same PLAYING. Evolving through play, play-

ing does not separate them from their common syntax, and so they cannot lose their essential characteristics of a spa-

cial-temporarly measure-rhythm from which every joy originates. Such education is practising man’s basic possibilities,

and because of it, it is in its essence joy and delight.”

Everything we proposed at that time we evaluated, explained theoretically, argumented and set in different variations of

the proposed and rejected school curriculums from kindergarten to grammar schools.

The second attempt was ten years later, in 1988, when the names of Dubravka Janda and me gave the project the enig-

matic title PROJECT MOV, which is read M O V and reverse V O M (WE EDUCATE YOU, YOU EDUCATE ME in Croatian)

and this title became an emblem of the third undertaking the results of which are gathered in this book.

At the end of the eighties there was an attempt to shape an educational model (collaborators from all the fields were

included) which would be based on recognizing the common syntax in the happenings of the world, of man, art, science,

and education as exercising these syntactic rules at different levels. It was shown from the beginning that, it is not so diffi-

cult to unify the fields of study as to lead the people who represent them into thinking their professions holistically. I would

like to quote here from Structure in Art and Science by György Kepes, who was very stimulating for us in the first and but

also in the second undertaking. “Most persons who work in cultural and scientific fields recognize that the past century

and a half has brought a fragmentation of experience, an explosion of knowledge into many self-contained disciplines,

each with a wildly growing and increasingly private language. The accelerating spiral of knowledge, with its concomitant

centrifugal thrust, is driving us apart. Clearly, our sense of a cohesive world is endangered by a crisis in communication.

We are lost in a new scale of existence, with once-familiar relations uprooted, and habits and purposes displaced. We

need, therefore, to find new centripetal forces that can hold our common understanding together and realize for us

the spirit of our times. We now speak many different dialects, to be sure, but these are dialects of the same basic lan-

guage.” This common language was what we were trying to find, but the undertaking failed at the very beginning of

the preparations. Different from, for instance, the Waldorf schools or the MIU schools which have a common uniting

basis in advance at the beginning, we wanted to create it by ourselves - and for that we were not ready enough.

XIV

artikulacije energije, a osjetilne mogu}nosti iz kojih izviru jezici kao filtere kroz koje se energija artikulira: kretanjem, slu{anjem,

glasanjem, vi|enjem i ostavlja-

njem tragova. Svi su jezici po~etno u sinkreti~nom jedinstvu, svi su oni po~etno samo oblici jedne te iste IGRE. Razvijanje putem

igre, igranje, ne odvaja ih od njihove zajedni~ke sintakse, te tako ne mogu izgubiti svoje bitno svojstvo prostorno-vremenske mjere -

ritma iz kojega izvire svako zadovoljstvo. Takvo je obrazovanje prakticiranje osnovnih mogu}nosti ~ovjeka, stoga je u svojoj biti

radost i u`itak.”

Sve {to smo u to vrijeme predlagali teoretski smo razradili, objasnili, potkrijepili i smjestili u razli~ite varijante predlo`enih i odbi-

jenih {kolskih programa, od vrti}a do srednje {kole.

Drugi je poku{aj bio deset godina kasnije, godine 1988. Dubravka Janda i ja - zato je cijeli projekt polaze}i od na{ih prezimena

dobio zagonetni naziv: PROJEKT MOV, {to }e se mo}i pro~itati i kao MI ODGAJAMO VAS i obrnuto VI ODGAJATE MENE i

postati amblemom tre}eg podhvata ~iji su rezultati sakupljeni u ovoj knjizi.

Krajem osamdesetih bio je to poku{aj da se oblikuje jedan edukacijski model (bili su uklju~eni suradnici iz svih podru~ja) koji bi

se temeljio na prepoznavanju zajedni~ke sintakse doga|anja svijeta, ~ovjeka, umjetnosti, znanosti, te obrazovanja kao vje`banja

tih sintakti~kih pravila na raznim razinama. Pokazalo se ve} na po~etku, nije toliko te{ko objediniti podru~ja koliko navesti ljude

koji ih zastupaju da svoju struku misle holisti~ki. Rado bih ovdje citirala iz knjige Structure in Art and Science Györgya Kepesa,

koji nam je ve} u prvom, a i u drugom poduhvatu bio vrlo poticajan. “Ve}ina ljudi koji rade na kulturnom i znanstvenom polju

priznaje da je proteklo stolje}e i pol dovelo do fragmentacije iskustva, do rasprsnu}a znanja na mnoge discipline koje su same

sebi dovoljne, i od kojih svaka ima svoj jezik, koji divlje raste i postaje sve privatniji. Ubrzavaju}a spirala znanja s popratnim

centrifugalnim pritiskom udaljuje nas jedne od drugih. O~ito, na{ osje}aj kohezivnog svijeta ugro`en je krizom u komunikaciji.

Izgubljeni smo u novoj skali postojanja, neko} po-

znate relacije iskorijenjene su, a obi~aji i svrhe pomaknuti. Moramo stoga prona}i nove centripetalne sile, koje mogu zadr`ati na

okupu na{e zajedni~ko razumijevanje i o`ivotvoriti nam duh na{eg vremena. Danas, dodu{e, govorimo mnogo razli~itih dijaleka-

ta, ali to su dijalekti istog osnovnog jezika.” Taj smo zajedni~ki jezik poku{avali na}i, ali podhvat je propao na samom po~etku

pripreme. Za razliku od, na primjer, Waldorf {kola ili MIU {kola, koje taj zajedni~ki objedinjuju}i temelj ve} unaprijed

imaju/dobivaju/stje~u, mi smo ga sami htjeli stvoriti - za to nismo bili dovoljno spremni.

Tre}i podhvat vi{e nije teoretski model, nego konkretna vje`baonica. U sebi ujedinjuje istra`ivanje i edukaciju kao dva lica iste

djelatnosti. Mo`da se mo`e smatrati interakcijom na djelu. To {to sam prije pet godina, u jesen 1992., u Centru za kulturu i

obrazovanje Zagreb, zapo~ela kao slobodnu {kolu radioni~koga tipa, ve} sam sama smislila, ali je izvodim-radim sa studenti-

ma-pomaga~ima i postupno je predajem u ruke mla|ih, ova knjiga pokazuje da je mo`da i raspr{ujem me|u sve, koji su

spremni uloviti mrvicu i od nje napraviti ne{to vlastito. Temeljna je ideja/praksa: svako se po~elo, svako na~elo, svaka bitna

osobitost djela, svaka umjetni~ka pojava, u radionicama (ima ih 8 x 10) pretvara u doga|aj/vje`bu/igru, sve postaje vi{e osjetil-

no iskustvo prebacivanjem iz medija u medij. Uvijek je rije~ o individualnom anga`manu sudionika (razli~ite dobi, obrazovan-

ja) te studenata i mene, tako da bi sve zajedno bilo “otvoreno vanjskim utjecajima i vlastitim suptilnim unutarnjim fluktuacija-

ma”, {to su zna~ajke “dinami~kog sustava”.

Uspjeh na{ega prvog podhvata, izgledalo je tako, bio je onemogu}en odlukama vlasti, u drugom slu~aju vlastitom

nemogu}no{}u da uspostavimo zajedni~ki jezik me|u razli~itim podru~jima znanosti i umjetnosti, a uspjeh ovoga tre}eg podh-

XVII

The third undertaking is not a theoretical model any more but a concrete training ground. It unites exploration and education

as the two faces of the same activity. It might perhaps be considered as interaction in actuality. The idea of what I began five

years ago in the autumn of 1992 in the Centre for Culture and Education Zagreb as a Free school of a workshop type, I had

already conceived alone and then I worked together with students-helpers and gradually transmitted it into the hands of the

young, and this book shows that I want to spread it all around to all those who are willing to catch a crumb of it and make

something of their own from it. The basic idea/praxis is: all the origins, all the principles, all the essential characteristics of the

artwork, all the artistic phenommena in workshops (there are 8 x 10) are transformed into a happening/ exercise/playing,

everything becomes a polysensory experience by being thrown from medium to medium. It is the individual engagement of

each participant (different ages, different educational degrees) the students and me, the workshop leader, in order to “open up

to exterior influences and one’s own subtle interior fluctuations” which are characteristics of the “dynamic systems”.

The success of the first undertaking at least as it appeared, was thwarted by the decisions of the authorities, in the second

case by our own incapability at establishing a common language between the different fields of science and art. The success

of this third undertaking is always hanging by a thread - that is, the number of those who want, even in an effortless/

natural way, to become aware of their own perception, and thus to expand their lives is comparatively small. Fighting

every year for “participants” we witness that the way of art is in spite of the fact that its basis is common literal perception,

which is universal, in the reality, in its demand to gain awareness of that universal level, an elite way.

And finally, one more question: who really is an artist - doer?

In ahistorical societies, even in their decadent forms such as the European peasantry was in the last century, the mem-

bers of the community practiced collective skills in different medium and, entirely unaware, they learned the speech of

quality (pattern).

Let us now look at an opposite basic model, for example that of the city of Florence in the 15th century when it was clear-

ly defined: it is the botega and the masters who perform some work and it is the patron/client who orders, pays and par-

ticipates in the work with interest and with his whole individuality. The performer and the judge are not the same person.

The patron orders and judges and in this way becomes part of something that is performed by somebody else’s hands

and that will after payment become his own, the master’s as well as the common good. When Baxandall quotes that on

the one hand the Duke d’Este pays the master according to the area of the painted surface, or on the other hand that

Filippo Lippi guarantees his patron that he will do exactly what the patron wishes, then this data giving an insight into

the gap which has been created, and opened between the action (hands) which is materialised in the work by one indi-

vidual and looking, judging with the eyes, which is materialised as the price paid by another individual. In ahistorical

societies the pattern acted inside everybody, now it is transformed into a set of rules which has to be known by the hand,

but separated from it by the eyes of another person too.

In between there are examples from the great traditional historical cultures, when the patron is, in the first place the knower

of the holy text (measure), and with that knowledge he secures the quality in the performance of the hands of others, and as

the knowledge is secret and universal the accent in the performance itself will be neither on the personality nor on the public.

Nowadays, we either find the models of the past in a dissoluted, confused, chaotic form, which seem as if they were

joining or uniting. The number of people who do or want to do something with their hands is constantly rising as in

XVI

vata stalno visi o koncu - naime, broj onih koji `ele, makar i na nenaporan/prirodan na~in osvijestiti vlastiti opa`aj, i tako

pro{iriti, intenzivirati svoj `ivot, razmjerno je malen. Bore}i se svake godine za “sudionike”, osvjedo~ujemo se da je, kako god

bio u temeljima, u zajedni~kome doslovnom opa`aju univerzalan, put umjetnosti u zahtjevima osvje{tavanja te univerzalne

razine, zapravo je uvijek elitan.

A na kraju, jo{ jedno pitanje: tko je zapravo umjetnik-djelotvorac?

U apovijesnim dru{tvima, pa ~ak i u tako dekadentnim njihovim oblicima, kao {to je na primjer europsko selja{tvo jo{ u

pro{lome stolje}u, svaki je pripadnik zajednice prakticiranjem kolektivnih vje{tina u razli~itim medijima, posve neosvje{teno

nau~io govor kvalitete (uzorak).

Pogledajmo sada posve suprotan temeljni model, na primjer Firenzu 15. stolje}a, kada je posve jasno odre|eno: botega i majs-

tori su ti koji izvode odre|eni rad, a patron/klijent pak naru~uje i pla}a i sudjeluje u djelu svojim interesom i svom svojom indi-

vidualno{}u. Izvo|a~ i onaj koji prosu|uje nisu ista osoba. Patron naru~uje i prosu|uje, i tako postaje sastavni dio ne~ega {to

izvode ruke drugoga i {to }e nakon isplate postati njegovo, te majstorovo i op}e dobro. Kada Baxandall s jedne strane navodi

da jedan vojvoda d’Este pla}a majstora prema kvadraturi oslikane povr{ine, ili s druge, da Filippo Lippi jam~i svojem patronu

da }e napra-

viti to~no ono {to taj `eli, onda nam ti podaci daju uvid u razmak koji je nastao, koji se otvorio izme|u djelovanja (ruke) koje se

materijalizira u djelo po jednom individuumu i gledanja, vrednovanja o~ima, koje se materijalizira kao cijena koja se pla}a, po

drugom individuumu. U apovijesnim dru{tvima uzorak je iznutra djelovao u svakom, sada se pretvara u skup pravila koje

mora poznavati i ruka, ali i od nje, u drugom ~ovjeku, odvojeno oko.

Izme|u su primjeri iz velikih tradicionalnih povijesnih kultura, kada je patron u prvome redu znalac koji poznaje sveti tekst

(mjeru), i tim znanjem osigurava kvalitetu u izvedbi ruku drugih, i budu}i da je znanje tajno i univerzalno, ne}e niti u izvedbi

naglasak biti niti na osobnosti, a niti na javnosti.

U na{em se vremenu, s jedne strane, nailazi na modele pro{losti u rasto~enom, pobrkanom, kaoti~nom vidu, koji kao da se spa-

jaju, ujedinjuju; sve je ve}i broj ljudi koji danas ne{to radi i `eli raditi rukama kao u apovijesnim zajednicama, ali to ~ine bez

ikakva osiguranja kvalitete iznutra (uzorak je davno mrtav), i s druge pak strane, odnos patrona i izvo|a~a razmaknuo se do te

mjere, da se ne radi o osobnom odnosu. Patron naj~e{}e uop}e ne poznaje majstora, osim toga u biti ni{ta ne zna (ni sveti tekst,

ni pravila), a vrlo malo toga uistinu i vidi, i izme|u njega kao velikog ali slijepog oka i golemoga mno{tva {kolovanih i ne{kolo-

vanih proizvo|a~a ljepote (majstora?) stoji tr`i{te-sajam na koje se bacaju rukotvorine ne bi li netko u njima (patron?) ugledao

robu koja se mo`e prodati/kupiti.

U ~emu se onda mogu}nosti na{ega vremena, ako postoje? Nikako ne u tome spoju i dotrajalosti starih mo-

dela, nego mo`da u “otkrivanju”, “progledavanju” da se stvaranje - za razliku od djela ruku, dakle materijali-

ziranja, stvaranja u tradicionalnom smislu - doga|a i pukim osjetilima, naravno svim osjetilima, pa i rukama svih nas, neprestance.

Ograni~iv{i se opet u prvome redu na vizualnost, upu}ujemo na stvaranje pukim gledanjem i onda kad su nam o~i otvorene, pa ~ak

i onda kada su zatvorene (Rapid Eye Movements), pri sanjanju.

Sada slijedi ne{to {to mo`e izgledati dobrano utopijski, ali je ve} u zraku: sva gledanja svih ljudi zajedno ~ine unutarnju formu

(ja sam je u knjizi Pogled i slika u tragu talijanskih manirista nazvala Bo`jim znakom u nama), to je taj “dinami~ki sustav” na

koji sam ve} prije upozorila. “Dinami~ki sustav” cjelo}a je koja nadilazi sve razine i sve partikularne aspekte, ali je nazo~na u

XIX

the ahistorical communities, but they do it without any guarantee of quality from the inside (the pattern has been dead

for a long time), or the relationship between the patron and the performer is so distant that there is no personal rela-

tionship any more. The patron usually does not know the master, in fact he does not really know anything (neither

the holy text nor the rules) and he is able to see very little indeed, so between him as a large but blind eye and an enor-

mous number of educated and uneducated producers of beauty (masters?) there is the marketplace into which the arte-

facts are thrown, for anybody (the patron?) to spot the goods which could be sold/bought.

And if so, where are the possibilities nowadays, if they exist at all? Not in the joined or delapidated old models, but

maybe in “discovering” in “seeing through”, then differing from the work made by hand, it means, materialisations, cre-

ation in a traditional way - creation goes on with the senses, with all of them and with the hands too, of all of us all

the time. Reducing again our consideration to visuality in the first place, we give attention to the fact that creation is going

on with the gaze, not only when our eyes are open but also when they are closed (Rapid Eye Movement).

Utopia seems to some extent to follow, it is in the air: everyone’s sight makes an interior form (in the book “Eye

Movements and Pictures”, according to an Italian mannerist I called it “God’s sign in us”) it is that “dynamic system”

which was mentioned earlier. The “dynamic system” is a whole which overcomes all levels and all particular aspects

but is inside them. The linear mind of a schematically educated man rejects this possibility at once. However, the theo-

ry of the “dynamic system” in spite of that, looks more suited today for the description of the happening of the world

than the earlier paradigms. The “dynamic system” is sensitive and nonlinear and unpredictable in details because it is

open, either to external influences or to its own subtle internal fluctuations”. It is “holistic because everything influ-

ences, or potentially influences everything else, everything is in some sense constantly interacting with everything else”

as Briggs says. Atmospheric occurrences for instance and the sensory ones in man (art) as well as communication

occurences (education) are “dynamic systems”. The question is only what “strange attractor” acts and where it comes

from and who puts it into the system and onto which level, either into the atmosphere, or into the visual field, or into

the communication structure. Here perhaps common disciplines are not sufficient, and although all artwork, all tradi-

tional knowledge, all experience gained so far are necessary as criteria/ambiences, a wise man must whisper to us

what to put and where to put it.

The easiest way is to begin with what we do not want. For that purpose, I very often show the students a caricature of

a teacher asleep beside the film projector which stopped projecting the film a long time ago and the clever pupils, in

the meantime, discover the absolute plane (shadow).

Who do you identify yourselves with, the students are asked. They laugh and feel uneasy, but even so, thank God, it turns

out: they do not by any means identify with the teacher. It is necessary to demonstrate reciprocity as a precondition of

every true communication (communicatio,- onis; announcement, fulfillment, giving; communico, 1: to make common, to

make participant, divide, to confer; communes, -e: common, general, friendly, well intentioned; municus, -a, um: com-

mon; munis, -e: duty, connoisseur, who does his duty; munes, -eris: duty, task, office, kindness, gift, - according to

Ernout-Meillet: Dictionnaire etymologique de la langue latine) that is why the photograph shows a teacher and a pupil, in

reality two speakers who face each other. The position of the camera suggests the reciprocity in their relationship. It is

easy to recognise, but more difficult to define precisely what the reciprocity is. In discussion we reach together a primor-

XVIII

njima. Linearni um shematski obrazovana ~ovjeka odbija tu mogu}nost otprve. No, teorija “dinami~kog sustava” se unato~ tomu

danas ~ini adekvatnijom za opis doga|anja svijeta od ranijih paradigmi. “Dinami~ki sustav” je “osjetljiv, nelinearan i nepredvidiv

u detaljima radi toga {to je otvoren izvanjskim utjecajima te vlastitim suptilnim unutarnjim fluktuacijama.” On je “holisti~ki jer

sve u njemu utje~e ili potencijalno utje~e na drugo, jer sve me|udjeluje sa svim drugim”, kako ka`e Briggs.

I atmosferska doga|anja, naprimjer, i osjetilna u ~ovjeka (umjetnost) i komunikacijska (odgoj), dinami~ki su sustavi. Pitanje je

samo kakav “strange attractor” djeluje, i odakle i tko ga ume}e u sustav i na koju razinu, bilo u atmosferu, bilo u vidno polje,

bilo u komunikacijsku strukturu. Tu mo`da uobi~ajene discipline nisu dovoljne, iako su sva umjetni~ka djela, tradicionalna znan-

ja, sva dosad ste~ena iskustva neophodna kao krite-

riji/ambijenti, ipak mudrac nam mora {apnuti {to umetnuti i kamo.

Najjednostavnije je po~eti tako da ra{~istimo {to ne}emo. U tu svrhu ~esto pokazujem studentima karikaturu u~iteljice koja spava

kraj kinoprojektora, koji je ve} davno prestao vrtiti film i u~enika genijalaca koji pritom otkrivaju apsolutnu plohu (sjenu).

S kim se poistovje}ujete, pitam studente. U smijehu i nelagodi ipak se, hvala Bogu, ispostavlja: nikako ne s

u~iteljicom. Potrebno je predo~iti uzajamnost kao preduvjet svakog istinskog komuniciranja (communicatio, -onis: objavljivanje,

ispunjenje, davanje; communicco, 1: ~initi zajedni~kim, ~initi sudionikom, dijeliti, dogovarati;

communis, -e: zajedni~ko, op}enito, prijateljsko, dobronamjerno; municus, -a, um: zajedni~ko; munis, -e: du`nost, znalac, onaj koji

ispunjava du`nost; munus, -eris: du`nost, zadatak, slu`ba, ljubeznost, dar - prema Ernout-Meillet: Dictionnaire etymologique de la

langue latine), zato fotografija prikazuje u~itelja i u~enika, zapravo dva sugovornika koji se gledaju su~elice. Polo`aj kamere sugerira

uzajamnost u odnosima. Lako je prepoznati, te`e to~no odrediti u ~emu se sastoji uzajamnost. U razgovoru dolazimo do najiskonski-

je odredbe: “koliko daje{, toliko dobiva{“ ali i “kako sije{, tako `anje{“ i time se odnos otvara u sve razine, dobiva kozmi~ke razm-

jere.

Studentima je poznat reljef Luce della Robbije. Prikazuje dva u~enika s jedne i u~itelja s druge strane, izme|u njih, u blago

poreme}enoj zrcalnosti, stoji knjiga. [to }e nam knjiga? To, {to teoretski obrazla`emo i prakti~ki provodimo jest osvje{tavanje

onoga {to vidimo, svi i svaki ponaosob. [to }e nam onda posrednik? Ali, knjiga je posuda znanja poput ~ovjeka, sadr`i iskustva,

usmjerava na{u pozornost poput u~itelja, treba je samo znati odabrati, kao i u~itelja, i pokloniv{i se pred njom, kao pred u~itel-

jem, iz nje piti.

Rapolo`enje, naravno, bitno kvari Dorréova karikatura koja slijedi. Prikazuje seosku {kolu. Neugodno je aktualna iako je nastala u

pro{lom stolje}u. Kako svladati mno{tvo - pitanje se neumitno postavlja, iznova i iznova. Kada sustav izlazi iz okvira izuzetnih i

povla{tenih i kada treba valjati i u oskudici seoske/proleterske/dana{nje (“comprehensive”) {kole, pokazuje se nemo}nim: nema ni

u~itelja, nema ni u~enika, a i knjiga je samo dosadna i beskorisna stvar.

Ima li alternative? - pita jedna studentica. Brzo pokazujem karikaturu na kojoj dje~a~i} ra~unalu nudi jabuku.

Rasprava slijedi: simuliraju li mo`da uzajamnost? Nije li promjena posude uspje{no i posvema{nje sakrila u~itelja-~ovjeka, a ako

ga se ne pronalazi kako da se dogodi uzajamnost?

Vra}amo se u vremenu: crte` sada pokazuje Sokrata. Upravo razgovara s malim robom ne bi li mu osvijestio da ono {to on iako

ne zna da zna, zna. Klju~nim smo pitanjem opet na po~etku, gdje je znanje? U posudi ili u svijesti? Ako je u svijesti, zastiranje

XX

osobe u~itelja mo`da ne mora biti sudbonosno. Uzajamnost se mo`e pretvoriti u mre`u, u interakciju svjetskih razmjera. Ono {to

mi istra`ujemo “manufakturno”, strojem se, mo`da, mo`e br`e i u~inkovitije. Mo`da.

Ponekad se dogodi da studentima dam da slu{aju tekst iz djela B. Hamvasa Scientia Sacra snimljen na kazeti (“Indijanska pri~a”

emitirana na III. programu Hrvatskoga radija): “Svaki je ~in univerzalan, svaka je {ibica upaljena u ime cijelog ~ovje~anstva, za

cijelo ~ovje~anstvo … ako u zazidanoj spilji ~ovjeku sine ideja i sljede}i dan umre njegova ideja iza|e iz njegove glave, iz zazi-

dane spilje…”

Razgovor je te`ak. Poku{avam tuma~iti raspon na{ega vremena izme|u saznanja moderne fizike i obnove iskustva predaje - sve

je sa svime povezano! Umjetni~ko djelo, gdje je to tako|er tako, stoga je univerzum, ali u malom, jer ga je ~ovjek napravio, po

svojoj mjeri, dok ga univerzum, koji nije po njegovoj mjeri, nadilazi.

Kako vrijeme odmi~e takvi razgovori sve su te`i kao da se pribli`avanjem kraju stolje}a postaje sve manje suvremenim, sve je

ve}i raskorak izme|u elitnog dostignu}a bilo znanstvenog, bilo umjetni~kog, bilo duhovnog, i shematizirane svakodnevnice.

Svejedno, svaki put iznova poku{avamo - umjetni~ko djelo je kona~no put, ipak, svih studenata koji su ga odabrali, iako mo`da

nesvjesno.

Razjasnit }emo amblem na{e, slobodne {kole radioni~kog tipa za svestrano upoznavanje likovno-umjetni~kog djela.

To~ka je znak mirovanja, linija znak kretanja. To~ka ozna~ava po~etni trenutak istosti, ishodi{te, sve promatra~e i sva djela na uni-

verzalnoj razini, na razini iz koje izviru i djelo i proces promatranja i promatra~. Linija ozna~ava kretanje ~iji je rezultat ponovno

uspostavljeno jedinstvo, sada ve} osvije{teno, ne izvori{te nego utok.

Cijelo nastojanje oko drugog (djela, drugog promatra~a), u razradi kru`nice upu}uje na dvor. U na{oj je slobodnoj {koli prva

uloga u~itelja da dvori (den Hof machen, faire de cour, corteggiare, udvarolni, “biti svagda oko koga ili ga pratiti, slu`e}i,

pokazuju}i mu {tovanje”). Predajemo se u sebi, njegujemo u sebi ritualne pokrete - prilazimo ljudima, obilazimo ih, uspinjemo se

do njih (ne “spu{tamo se na njihovu razinu” kako to koji student na po~etku rada poku{ava formulirati).

Kada sam se, bilo je to u jesen 1958. godine, vra}ala sa svojih prvih satova u {koli, u VII. gimnaziji u Zagrebu, na kojima sam

u~enicima podijelila reprodukcije, tra`e}i da napi{u {to vide/misle/osje}aju, ne bi li ih, na taj na~in, bar malo upoznala, u

uzbu|enju, jo{ u tramvaju, na putu do ku}e, ~itaju}i, osjetila sam strahopo{to-

vanje, koje me otada nije napustilo: jesam li im ja dorasla, ho}u li se do njih dovinuti?

Neka ka`em: oni prvi bili su Dubravka Janda, Vlasta Kulier, Jasna Klarin, Zoran Baki}, Jasenka Mireni}, Karmen Ba{i}, Ante

Vuji~i}, Stanka Miheli} i jo{ mnogi, mnogi drugi, poslije otada, oko desetak tisu}a. S njima sam radila godi{njak “Umjetnost i

mi”, za kojeg je profesor Milan Prelog rekao da je ipak najbolje od svega {to sam radila. Njima sam posvetila i prvi ud`benik za

likovnu umjetnost u Hrvatskoj prije tridesetak godina:

“svojim biv{im u~enicima od kojih sam sve nau~ila”.

Sada studentima, budu}im u~iteljima, zastrtim ili otvorenim, ka`em: Vi ste obod kruga, vi prilazite, obilazite, uspinjete se, ali

XXI

dial definition: “you receive as much as you give” or “you reap as you sow” and so the whole relationship opens to all

levels and reaches cosmic proportions.

The relief of Luca della Robbia is well-known to the students. It presents two pupils on one side and a teacher on the other,

and between them in a mildly disturbed reflection, a book is placed. What do we need the book for? What is theoretically

explained and practically carried out is the gaining of an awareness of what everyone sees. What is the other mediator for?

But the book is a vessel of knowledge like man, it contains experience, it directs our attention like the teacher, we only ought

to know how to choose it as well as the teacher, giving it a deep bow, as well as to the teacher and then drink from it.

The mood is very much spoiled by Dorrè’s caricature which is demonstrated next. It presents a village school. It is

unpleasantly current although it was created in the 19th century. How to bring the multitude under control - the question

is put inexorably always anew. When the system has got out of the framework of the extraordinary and privileged and

when it has to be valid in the poverty of a village/proletarian/today’s (“comprehensive”) school it is feeble and weak:

there are no teachers, no pupils and the book is also only a boring and useless thing.

Does an alternative exist? - a student asks. Quickly I show them a caricature of a little boy offering an apple to a computer.

The discussion follows: perhaps they are simulating reciprocity? But if the change of the vessel has successfully and entirely

covered (hidden) the teacher/the man and if we cannot find him anymore how can the reciprocity occur?

We go back in time: the drawing now represents Socrates. He is just talking to a small slave to make him aware that he

knows what he does not know that he knows. With that key question we are at the start again: where is knowledge? In

the vessel or in consciousness? If it is in consciousness, covering the teacher’s person need not be fatal. The reciprocity

can be transformed into a web, into an interaction of global dimensions. What we explore “by manual work”, might be

done quicker and more effectively by machines. Might be.

Sometimes it can happen, I, let the students listen to 10-15 minutes of a text read onto a cassette, a part taken from

the Scientia Sacra by B. Hamvas (“The Indian Story” broadcast on the 3rd programme of Croatian Radio): “Every act is

universal, every match is lit in the name of the whole of mankind for the whole of mankind, if walled up in cave a man

gets an idea and the next day he dies, his idea leaves his head, out of the walled up cave...”

The discussion is difficult. I, try to explain the span of nowadays from the ideas of modern physics to the restoration of

the old tradition - everything that exists is interconnected. A work of art is a manmade Universum, because it was made

according to his own scale, while the Universum overcomes man.

With the passing of time such discussions become more and more difficult. It seems that approaching the end of this cen-

tury we become less contemporary and the gap between the elite achievements whether scientific or artistic or spiritual

and the schematic everyday life is larger.

Anyhow, we always try once again. Art is the way of all the students however, because they have chosen it, even though,

they might not be aware of it!

XXIII

We shall now explain the emblem of our free workshop school for a manysided introduction into art.

The point is a sign of rest, the line of movement. The point denotes the primal moment of sameness, the origin,

the start, all the observers and all the art works on a universal level, on the level which is the source of artwork

and the process of observation and the observer. The line denotes movement, the result of which is a unity re-

established, conscious, not a source, but a confluence.

The whole effort around the other (artwork, observer) in the articulation of the circle directs towards the court.

In our free school the primary role of the teacher is to hold court - “den Hof machen”, “faire de cour”,

“corteggiare”, “udvarolni” “to be always around somebody, to follow, to serve, to show respect”). We surrender

ourselves, we nurture the ritual gestures and movements, we approach people, circulating, ascending to them (we do

“not descend to their level” - as some students at the beginning tried to formulate).

It was in the autumn of 1958, when I was returning home from my first lectures at school, in the 7th Grammar School in

Zagreb. I had distributed to my pupils a set of reproductions, asking them to write anything they saw/thought/felt,

because I wanted to know them a bit better in this way. Excitedly, still on the tram, I was reading and I felt a great rever-

ence and I have not lost it since then: Am I up to them? Let me say: my first pupils were Dubravka Janda, Vlasta Kulier,

Jasna Klarin, Zoran Baki}, Jasenka Mireni}, Karmen Ba{i}, Ante Vuji~i}, Stanka Miheli} and many, many others, since

then around ten thousand more pupils. With them I edited the year-book “Art and us”, which Professor Milan Prelog said

was the best I had ever done. To them I dedicated the first art manual in Croatia thirty years ago: “to my former pupils

from whom I learned everything”.

Now to the students, to the future teachers covered or open I say: You are the circumference of the circle, you

approach, you circulate, you ascend, but you are also instructors (instruo, 3: to build in, to insert, to arrange, to estab-

lish, to prepare, to nourish, to sustain). You are the point in the centre, you are the seed which is put in / which is sus-

tained. All your experience, everything you have seen, you have become aware of, you insert, you sow. While holding

court, circulating, you are the circumference of the circle, when you sow you are its central point. If you really are able

to be both, to be the circumference and the centre constantly rotating (reciproco, 1: rotate, to move here and there)

changing the view points/stand points - some dizziness of course cannot be avoided - but the main thing is you open

yourself. You open yourself to alteration, to interaction, to PLAYING. The PLAYING is in alternation (reciprocities). WE

ARE EDUCATING YOU. YOU ARE EDUCATING ME (MOV (in Croatian)). The roles are alternating, we live the rhythm

consciously, we raise the rhythm onto a pedestal because according to the origin of the word hidden here is the

TRUTH, THE ORDER OF THE WORLD, ITS MEASURE. It is not accidental that it is followed by joy and satisfaction. Still,

there is something else as well, there is a secret, behind it, which is according to everything we represent here from

the beginning has also been proclaimed, but it may be only now that we become aware of it. Everything we do, the

whole holding court/sowing and circulating and inserting is nothing but a JOKE. What we seriously prepare and insert

carefully, is there from the beginning. We have said a thousand times, that literal perception is universal and when we

become aware of it, it is the form of artwork; what is now materialised everyone sees again. So we attend to ourselves.

We insert ourselves into ourselves and play with great joy and satisfaction but it does not really exist, we occupy our-

selves with a magic illusion.

XXII

vi ste i instruktori (instruo, 3: ugraditi, umetnuti, srediti, uspostavljati, pripremati, opskrbljivati, pridr`avati). Vi ste i to~ka u

sredini, vi ste to sjeme koje ugra|ujete/pridr`avate. Sva va{a iskustva, sve {to ste vidjeli, osvi-

jestili, ume}ete, zasa|ujete. Dok dvorite, obilazite, vi ste obod kruga, kada sadite, vi ste

sredi{nja to~ka. Ako odista uspijete biti i jedno i drugo, biti i obod i sredi{te neprestance se

obr}u}i (reciproco, 1: obrtati se, micati se ovamo-onamo) mijenjaju}i o~i{ta/stajali{ta - ne{to

vrtoglavice, naravno, nije isklju~eno - ali bitno je, vi se otvarate. Otvarate se prema izmjenji-

vanju, me|udjelovanju, prema IGRI. IGRA je u izmje-

njivanju (reciprocitas). MI ODGAJAMO VAS VI ODGAJATE MENE. Uloge se izmjenjuju, svjesno

se `ivi ritam, njega di`emo na pijedestal,jer shodno podrijetlu rije~i tu se skriva ISTINA,

POREDAK SVIJETA, NJEGOVA MJERA. Nije slu~ajno da ga prate radost i zadovoljstvo. Ipak,

jo{ to: iza svega postoji tajna koja shodno svemu {to zastupamo ve} od po~etka i ovdje je objavljena, ali mo`da je tek sada

postajemo svjesni. Sve {to radimo, cijela dvorba i sa|enje, obilazak i umetanje, nije drugo no velika [ALA. Ono {to ugra|ujemo

pomno priprem-

ljeno i ozbiljno, od po~etka je tamo. Rekli smo tisu}u puta, doslovni je opa`aj univerzalan i, kada se osvijesti, forma je umjet-

ni~kog djela, to {to je sada materijalizirano, ponovo opet svi vidimo. Tako dvorimo sebe, ugra|ujemo sebe u sebe i igra, koju s

velikom rado{}u i zadovoljstvom igramo, zapravo i ne postoji, bavimo se samo ~arobnim prividom.

Ovaj ~arobni privid mo`e biti na dvostruk na~in temeljem i okvirom nekom novom institucionaliziranom obrazovanju, takvom

koje, iako je institucionalizirano, u biti je i u pojavnosti slobodno po svojim metodama, o kojima je do sada bilo rije~i, ali i u sus-

tavu. Potrebno je samo prihvatiti: instruktor je uvijek onaj stariji, ali za{to bi trebao i morao biti jedan. Instruktori su svi koji su

jednu fazu osvje{tavanja pro{li, koji su u{li u avanturu. Posve konkretno: oni, koji su odre|enu radionicu pro{li, iskusili, nau~ili.

Radionice se tako mogu pretvoriti u sustav koji je prividno hijerarhijski, zato se lako institucionalizira, a u biti je interakcijski i

zato suvremen/-vje~an. Ako starije godi{te podu~ava - instruira mla|e, uzajamnost je osigurana u grupama, mno{tvo je svladano

samim sobom. Umjesto neuspjelog jednosredi{njeg sustava, interakcija svih sudionika, uvijek u stup-

njevanoj kompetentnosti, otvorenih primanju i davanju u cijelom sustavu.

Ova vas knjiga `eli uvesti u ~aroliju privida - nazvala sam je kona~no, nakon mnogo prijedloga, upravo radi toga: AVANTURA.

Struktura je sljede}a: pokazivanje klju~ne ideje u interakciji slike i teksta svake od 80 radionica; nakon toga sinopsis svake

radionice s odredbom namjere, opisom ambijenta i strukture doga|anja i tre}i dio: fotodokumentacija, snimci i legende kako je

izgledala praizvedba svake od radionica. Da bi ozbiljni avanturist imao maksimalne koristi, prila`e se popis literature; to su

knjige koje sam s najve}im po{tovanjem ~itala i na{la ih najpoticajnijima za pojedine teme kojima se bavimo.

XXV

This magic illusion can be double that is the basis and the frame for a new institutional education, which in spite of being

institutionalised in its essence and appearance is free not only in its methods discussed here but also free in its system.

What ought to be accepted is: the instructor is always older but not necessarily the only one. All those who have passed

a certain phase of gaining awareness and entered the adventure can be instructors. In this particular case: the ones who

passed through a certain workshop, experienced it and learned it. In that way the workshops can be transformed into

a system which is seemingly hierarchical due to which it is easy to institutionalise, but in its essence it is interactive and

therefore contemporary/eternal. If an older generation instructs a younger one reciprocity is secured in the groups,

the multitude is overcome by itself. Instead of an unsuccessful onecentric system, the interaction of all the participants is

achieved always in gradual competence, open to receive and give in the whole system.

This book introduces you to the magic illusion - after many suggestions I have given it the name ADVENTURE. The struc-

ture is as follows: presenting the key idea in an interaction of an image and a text of each of the 80 workshops; after

that the synopsis of each workshop with a definition of its intention, a description of the ambience and the structure of

the activity are given, the third part: photo documentation, the photographs and legends concerning the first perfor-

mance. In order to be more useful for a serious adventurer references are given ; these are the books which I have read

with the greatest respect and found them most inspirational for the particular themes we used.

XXIV