S.R. Kucharski, Artist
Rotterdam/San Francisco
1. What external factors limit your autonomy the most?
Can you list some of the dependencies you encounter which you feel influences your daily life and work? Where and when do you feel these limitations the most? Can you describe occasions where you were able to go around these dependencies to achieve a desired goal that you were aiming for?
Money and a stable living/working environment often are the most limiting external factors for my autonomy. As an artist, one has to overcome these limits by reorganizing priorities, such as taking food/drink money and funding artwork/art projects, or living "off the grid" by squatting or receiving near free living situations. Having to swim opposite the modern consumer/capitalist current can breed creativity but also resentment–the psychological war between "haves and the have nots."
In order to circumnavigate limitations, one must believe–with near utmost resolve–in the activity over the result. Sometimes it is reward enough to be active as an artist and be known as such, but often more is desired (i.e. status, wealth, etc.)
My own art-related projects are initiated from a strong individual desire, but they always involve including others in a hopefully open dialogue. I work with the intention to control the dialogue, while secretly hoping everything will fluctuate out of my control for random, spontaneous moments.
2. Where is your autonomous zone?
In which areas/situations of your daily life do you have most a feeling there is the possibility for you to act autonomously? Is this feeling of autonomy connected to a physical (free)space? What factors or qualities characterize and make your autonomous zone possible?
My own perception of autonomy is most possible when I am also anonymous, and with anonymous I mean in the sense that you don’t have to prove anything, as in your identity or whether you "have permission" to be doing whatever it is you are doing (even if that means just standing on the street corner and just observing).
I don’t believe in free space, mentally or physically–everyone "pays to play" in many ways beyond monetarily. However, there is an important difference to whether you pay to achieve an autonomous zone or whether you charge others for an autonomous zone. Why it might seem like a counter-intuitive statement, I have to say that autonomous zones are always about control of a situation…which then wouldn’t be autonomous, would it?
Wikipedia "Autonomy_: It is an up to date problem how to organize human collectives with actual individual autonomy, especially if we consider the huge problem of free choice, free expression and free acting in the real realm of production, distribution and consume, that is, in economy.
3. The costs and benefits of working with a collective?
(How) Does working in a group offer a greater potential to struggle (develop strategies) with these dependencies? Where are the advantages and disadvantages of struggling against dependencies as a group? Where do you see that it is better to work as an individual than as a group?
I think this is a good place to bring up Anarchy. You see, anarchy as a movement is about people establishing their own rules and upholding those rules in common agreement–and when someone no longer agrees, it is the their position to enact a change within the entire group or simply leave and form a second, third, fourth, etc. anarchic group. Anarchy isn’t about smashing the state; it is exactly about forming an autonomous group, an autonomous zone. But, what anarchy is an action, not a thought–it is active…it is a living condition.
Humans are pack animals, yet they consistently think for themselves outside the pack. It is a dualistic perspective; it is a difficult perspective. Yet, I for one will say that it is always better to work with a group (i.e. with more than one) over individually. Why? Because with two or more, the rewards of any endeavor can be shared, contemplated and related…and therefore grow outwardly. Just ask yourself: is it better to have love with only yourself, or have love with another person?
4. The Taking of Responsibility in the Collective vs. Freedom of the Individual
Where do you experience tension fields, where potentials emerging between a (desired) basis democratic (self-) organisation of a group and the engaged individual taking on responsibility in the group to reach goals? In your opinion, how can Continuity, Engagement (betrokkenheid) and Responsibility be afforded or made possible in self-organized structures? Do hierarchies have a place in self-organisation?
There can only be one captain of a ship. But a great captain knows that he isn’t captain without the support of the entire crew…and that support is gained through respect. Essentially, all positions within a collective are part of the greater chain and it is strong links that give a chain its strength. You can use any metaphor you want, really, as long as the point is that goals must be established in any activity and all involved must play their part to realize the goal.
I believe that any fully functioning collective IS a group of free individuals. There has to be hierarchy, but with respect. I think most collectives fail because of lack of respect given to those that are on the opposite ends of the hierarchy. Wouldn’t it be nice if there were such as thing as a lateral hierarchy?
