Without artworks there could be no art criticism, yet sometimes it feels as if the art is there for the art criticism to use as a spring board. When I write about art, why do I need to write at all? Can’t one create an artwork that requires no language? Can’t one make an artwork that (say) can only be seen by one person at a time, that cannot be photographed and that is ephemeral? Why, always the recourse to language?

I propose an art that is severely critical of the supposed faculty it has to provoke discussion and critique. I propose an artwork, or rather a practice which aims at negating the structure of discourse. I’ve nothing personally against speech or discourse; I simply want to see if the above is possible.


An artwork, a ‘meaning’ (set of meanings), a reader, a critic. A critic being a reader who lets his or her ideas be known.