[MUSIC PLAYING]
-I want to thank you, Judy,
for doing my presentation.
I have nothing to add.
I want to say thank
you to Radcliffe.
It has been so far a
wonderful experience.
And it has been great to be
with all the other fellows
and understanding how we're all
helping in one way or another
to make everything better.
Today, I am going to experiment.
This is a new presentation.
Let's see how it goes.
It might be a little long.
Let's see.
Get ready.
So I want to start with a
quote by Jacques Ranciere where
he talks about aesthetics.
"Aesthetics doesn't
designate the discipline
dedicated to the study
of art or the beautiful.
It designates a regime
of experiences."
For a long time,
I've been interested
in the idea of aesthetics.
But maybe because my
English is not very good,
I realized one day that if you
change the H of "aesthetics,"
you have the word "ethics."
And then I started
thinking maybe I
should be doing aes-ethics
work instead of aesthetic work.
Then, of course, there
is a language situation.
And in Spanish,
it says estetica.
I realized they
are very similar.
So maybe if you take
the A out of it,
it's est-ethics, which
means, "it is ethics."
And this is exactly what I
would like my work as an artist
to be experimenting
with and researching.
Is there aesthetics
in the ethics?
And what does that mean?
John Cage, many, many,
many decades ago,
predicted that "Ethics is the
aesthetics of the future."
But really, my work as
an artist has always
been questioning,
what is art for.
I never take for granted
the function of art
and what it does for people.
So I want to start with
the reference, in 1917,
Marcel Duchamp did a piece
called "The Fountain"
where he presented a urinary
on a pedestal in a gallery.
It actually was a
competition for art.
And it was dismissed
as an offensive object.
But today, of course,
this is the objects
through which we can look at
reality in an augmented way.
So yes, after this piece,
of course, in some way,
we decided that art is
a way to look at reality
and a mental reality.
But actually, I think it
caused also a problem.
I think when it was first
started, it was great.
But now I think it has
caused a problem, which
is that from the 20th century
until today, the least
disputed artistic
strategy is just to remove
the use value of an object.
And therefore, that
becomes automatically art.
For me, this is
extremely dangerous
because it is, first of all,
very automatic, and secondly,
do not address a lot of
other issues that art can do
and other things art can do.
And of course, the one thing
I really like about this
is that art is gesture.
It's not only an object,
but it is a gesture.
And that's how I see art.
Also in 1917, there were, of
course, the Soviet revolution.
And with it, there was
exactly a different parameter
for understanding
art, which is art
that will be like a
kind of [INAUDIBLE] pop
or a propaganda tool
for the government.
But at the same time, it
created the possibility
to have a very
distinctive relationship
with the function of art.
One, while the urinary was
bringing the life inside
of the museum, for
example, the cinema
train that they had was bringing
art out into people's life.
I think this is a--
it kind of parallels
the binary situation
that happens very
often in the discussion
in the art world,
where people are
like no, no, no,
artists should be
looking at something.
Or art is a way by which you
just are aware of something,
you look at something.
But there is another group of
people, or another tendency,
where people want to use
art for something else.
Of course, what
happened in those
very heated discussions
is one group
told the other that
that kind of work
is not good because it's
too market oriented.
And the other group say
to the other group, yeah,
but yours is just propaganda.
So in a way, I am very
related to this discussion.
And this is part of
my recent research.
And also, I'm very related
with the ideas of utopia.
For me, as a Cuban artist
coming out of a revolution,
utopia is not something
that will never be achieved,
but is actually something
that you construct.
And of course, here we
have-- I want to show you
the context in which my
work has been influenced.
Here, he says "To fight for
something that is impossible
and to conquer it."
That's the kind of ideology
that I was growing up with.
Of course, later, you
realize it's all crap.
But in the moment, you're
young and listening too much.
And of course, one thing
that was very interesting
is that in that time in Cuba,
we were extremely related
in a very-- they
call it [SPANISH].
So we were very international
with the different causes.
And we even think, at
the time, that religion
is another tool for fight.
Of course, the
artists were supposed
to be the warriors for this
ideology and art a tool.
So politics in Cuba has been
always used as affect, as fear.
It's very important
the way we always
understand in Cuba,
politics through emotions.
But what I mean
to say in my work
is to see if we can
transform affect
into political effectiveness.
So I want to show you
different examples of my work.
And in between,
I'm going to show
you more than what
the work is about,
the overall methodology
of work that I've
been trying to create.
So I started in 1985 a
series of works called Homage
to Ana Mendieta.
And what I did was very basic.
I just reproduced all
the work of Ana Mendieta
when I learned that she
died and that we will never
meet in person.
So I decided to just do
exactly the same performances
for 10 years.
Of course, this bring
a lot of interest.
I discovered through this
piece a lot of things
that I actually after have
been continual investigation
in my work, which
is, for example,
the ideas of authorship.
The fact that a lot
of people are like,
but this is not your work.
It's somebody else's work.
So I was always claiming
that my work was a gesture
to try to rescue another artist
from their cultural memory
of a country where
actually people who left
were erased from the history.
So what happened is
that in the process,
I learned that even
when you try to do
something personal and an homage
in the context of Cuba, which
is highly politically
charged, the work will always
have a political implication.
So in a way, I was,
OK, I can escape it,
so let's get into it.
Another example of
things I'm interested in
is this piece where it's
called Destierro, Displacement.
And it is an Nkisi
Nkonde icon, African icon
that is used usually to
venerate by the people.
And also, you can use
it to ask for something.
And if you don't give the icon
what you promised in return,
they might go after
you and do some harm.
Here, I did the performance
on Fidel Castro's birthday,
by chance, in Cuba.
And of course, the work
was about this idea
of all the promises
that have been
made, all the social promises
that had not been accomplished.
What I learned through
doing this piece
and what I was trying
to do is, how can I do
art that speaks to everybody.
How can I do art, not only
because it's in the street
and outside the museum,
but has a language that can
be understood by most people?
Because the issues that
I'm talking about are
issues that concern everybody.
And in between these
people I want to talk to,
I also want to talk
to people in power.
I also want to talk
to politicians.
So something very weird happened
when I doing this performance.
Because it was Fidel Castro's
birthday, a lot of police
came to see what's going on.
Why are people spontaneously
having like a demonstration
style, following this person?
And a kid say, no, no,
this is an artwork.
And the police, who was
not trained probably
for such a situation,
thinks, OK, then it's fine.
Continue.
Proceed.
So I think that was a moment
of big realization for me
because they say, oh, so
if this is art, is this OK.
And I decided that I
want to work with that.
Therefore, after that, I
have used the context of art
and the privileges, let's
say, that art gives you,
to say things that in
another way, I cannot say,
almost asked, is art the
language of the citizens
in places where
they cannot speak?
But also, something happened.
I think I realized
that if I want
to talk to people
who are in power
positions like that police,
maybe the symbolic strategy
will not work anymore.
And then I decided I
wanted to change symbolism
for direct experience.
Another piece I did in '93
and '94 was a newspaper.
Of course, in Cuba, even today,
printed newspaper is forbidden.
It's illegal.
But of course, I'm
using art, right?
So I did the newspaper.
It didn't go that well.
But I had my first
interrogation by police.
But one thing I was
very interested at
is the fact that I was
trying to use the strategy
of hyper-realism to do art.
What I mean by that
is I wanted the work
not to be like a
newspaper, but look
like a newspaper,
circulated like a newspaper,
being experienced
as a newspaper.
So I really wanted the
distance between representation
and presentation to
be completely crashed.
So the other thing
I did is I realized
that if I want to talk to power
and if I want to talk to people
who make decision-making, I
will appropriate the resources
of power to do my work.
So from this moment on,
the materials of my work
would not be any more
like, oh, an icon
from-- some representation.
It will be a newspaper, a
school, a political speech,
and so on.
So I'm going to appropriate
the ways power talks
to do my own work.
And also, of course, I realized
that my work, in general,
is a test to propaganda.
What I do is I don't say, what
you're saying is not true.
My attitude, my performativity
is, I believe you completely.
And I'm going to behave as
if the propaganda was real.
And then, of course, you realize
that everything is not real.
And this is when
the work happens.
Another aspect of my
work is the performance.
I studied performance.
And this is a piece I did
where I get with a friend.
His name is Jota Castro.
No political work.
It was just a coincidence.
We got together.
And we decided to
sign a contract
where the first of
the two who died
will give the body to the
other to do a performance.
[LAUGHTER]
We don't want to
do the piece soon.
We're trying to--
But one thing happened
in this piece.
The first thing is I realized
that as a performance artist,
I didn't want to work anymore
with the limits of the body.
I didn't want to know
if I can be-- which
I did-- hanging for whatever
hours in the ceiling
or cutting myself and see
how much blood I can--
I was not interested in
that because the reason was,
not because it's not a
legitimate art practice,
because I realized in
the political context,
it is very easy
to people in power
to say, oh, that's her
psychological damage, whatever,
artwork she needs to do.
And I was like, no,
it's not about me.
It's about us.
So I realized that I needed
to get away from that
and start working the
limits of society.
And then, of
course, I say, OK, I
don't do performance
art anymore.
I don't want to belong
to that tradition.
I want to belong to
Arte de Conducta, which
is a name I came up with.
And it means art that
is using social behavior
as artistic material.
And of course,
another thing that
happened with this piece
that was very interesting
is that when we told people
about it, people were like,
but what is the art.
Is the art the idea
the artist had?
Is the art the actual
paper, like the document
that you have?
Or is the art not yet there?
And you're going to do it in
a few years when you died?
I never answered
those questions.
But I'm very
interested in the fact
that I want my projects to
be a moment in which people
don't take for granted their
artistic condition of it.
Why?
Because I think that way, people
can relate even more to it.
Another thing is that when you
start being a political artist,
there are a lot of
things that happen.
And one of them is
you realize you want
to look for sustainable change.
You don't want to just
complain and use art
to say things you can
read in the newspaper
or on the internet.
You want to use all
the tools that art
has to change something.
But you understand very quickly
that the changes you can
do as an artist is very small.
It can be mostly
like a small example
to maybe excite somebody
else do something else.
So I understood that
I needed to look
for ways by which that
change could be sustainable.
In this case, I
was invited to be
part of a group of
experts to do repertoire
on the field of cultural
rights for the first Artistic
Freedom of Expression and
Cultural Rights document that
was actually signed and
voted by the UN members.
That's another story, what
happened with those things
in the UN.
But at the moment,
I was very excited.
OK.
So in my work, I have
several guidelines.
One is that I work with
the political imaginary.
What I mean by
that is that I like
to work with what people
imagine places are.
For example, this is a piece I
did in Cuba in the year 2000.
The year 2000 was very
important because we were always
promised that by the year
2000, it'll be all perfect.
Everything will be perfect.
And we'll be in
Communism and so on.
And then the year 2000 arrives.
And we were like, uh-huh.
And then I did this piece,
which was completely dark-- this
is only for you to see
the elements-- Completely
dark with this sugarcane.
And then you enter.
And you see a little
video of Fidel
opening his military
vest to show
that he has no bullet-proof.
But for the piece, what
the piece was saying
is that the real vulnerable
people is not the person on TV.
It's the people who
are there taking
care of the person on TV.
So you had this naked Cuban
people who were passing,
the audience who was
passing through it.
Another thing I'm
interested in terms
of the strategy of my work
is I don't work with actors,
or I don't train people
to look like something.
I always work with people,
professional experience.
An example is this piece I did
with Bernardine Dohrn and Bill
Ayers, the members of
Weather Underground,
who actually now are
professors, legit professors,
of university.
And in this piece, I asked them.
It was at the very month, I
think, where Obama was elected.
And I said, what do we do
when the person you are
in the same ideas is elected?
No?
So you are not
opposition anymore.
And they start talking.
Right?
And they're very good speakers.
And then, of course, I had
planted-- like politicians do,
I had planted people
in the audience
to interrupt them all the time.
So what happened is
they couldn't speak.
There was no way they can speak.
I have to say, after
I did this piece,
I'm always afraid that somebody
will do that to me too.
[LAUGHTER]
But it's fine.
So I wanted to
create this situation
where you lose the
power that is given
in this position where you are.
Another example is the horses.
This is called
Tatlin's Whisper #5.
And what I did is talk
to the mounted police.
And I say, can you use the
crowd control technique
in the audience
of the exhibition?
What was very
interesting in this piece
was that-- one side
of it is that I wanted
to take things
that aren't on TV,
that you don't experience
yourself, and bring it
to real life.
So maybe next time you see it,
you will know how to react.
You have tested yourself
in certain situations.
The sadness of this is how
quickly people follow orders.
And I have to say that nobody
knew this was an art piece.
The artwork was not announced.
My name was not
anywhere in the museum.
So that just happened
that they just arrived.
And it was a surprise.
Another thing I work
with is political memory,
which you also would be
surprised how quickly it goes,
it fades.
So this is a piece
I did in Russia.
Of course, you could
see through a peephole.
Or you could enter.
You, always in my
work, have the option
to participate or just
miss it, let's say.
So what I did for this is I had
there were these photographers
in Revolution Square,
Red Square taking photos
of these very cute animals
dressed like people, not
to miss the irony of markets.
And what I did is I said,
come to the exhibition.
And we were going to take family
pictures with these animals.
So in a way, kind of
the way politicians
do is very spectacular.
So you see only what
they want you to see.
They give you the
photo right there.
And then this is
a family portrait.
What they discover
after the photo is given
is this is the photo of the
person who created the KGB.
So their family portrait
is taken with the KGB.
It was interesting
that a lot of people
did not know who
that person was.
They thought it was just
a random, heroic photo.
Only two people decided
not to have the photo taken
when they saw the image.
Also, because I'm a
Cuban artist and I
did a lot of my work
inside Cuba, but then
I started to be invited outside.
I had to rethink what
does it mean to do
the work in other contexts.
So I was invited to redo
this piece in Germany,
but differently.
The creators said, do the
same piece, but differently.
I said, whoa, how can I do
a piece about the perception
of a place?
So I decided to go and
work with the history.
Of course, when you say
Germany, back then-- now,
maybe it's refugees.
But back then, it was
about the Nazi history.
So I went back.
And I decided to
put a lot of lights.
So actually, you
don't see anything.
And there was the sound of
people marching and cocking
a gun.
What is interesting is if you
are in the right position,
you realize that
these are not sounds,
but these are actual people
with actual guns in the space.
And of course, it is a
metaphor of how power always
serves you better, that
you can observe them.
Then, of course, another
thing I do, or I hope to do,
is see if I can integrate
art into people's
everyday political life.
This is one of the
reasons I go so often
outside of art institutions.
This is a project I did in
Mexico during the election,
the last election.
And one thing was
interesting, the research,
that while every
election in Mexico
talks about immigration
issues, they
do not talk in terms of
the people they receive.
But they talk about the
Mexicans who are left,
who are here in
the United States.
And what we did
with this project
is to find the elements of
demand of these immigrants
who arrived to Mexico
and are treated
even worse than the Mexicans
are treated here, ironically.
And we wanted that to
appear for the first time
in the public debate
of the candidates.
So that means I was
talking nonstop, forever,
in every newspaper
and everything
because we were trying to
put the message across.
And of course, we did
a lot of research.
But for the first time
in the last debate,
not exactly how we
said, but very similar.
The candidate that was going
to lose because everybody knew
he was in the last--
said and talked
for the first time
in a Mexican election
about the situation of
immigrants in Mexico.
Some of the ways by which we
made this completely public
was also to rescue a tradition
in Mexico and Latin America
in general, which is los
voceros, the voice people,
meaning the people who
shout the news when
you buy the newspaper.
So we had 100 of them walking
the most important streets
of Mexico, next to
the palace of Congress
and the presidential
palace, to shout
the rights for immigrants.
But I think I wanted the
documentation of this piece
not to be a talk or a photo.
But I wanted to embed this
project in the actual system,
electoral system, in Mexico.
So what we did is
every six years
there is a little moment
where people can actually
propose a new party.
And we are number
45 in the list.
Unfortunately, art
institutions do not always
have the capacity to
continue these projects.
So I had to stop.
But at least we
arrived so far as that.
So as you can see,
a lot of my work
is a collective production,
is a collective construction.
So in a way, I cannot say
I'm an artist and claim sole
authorship of everything.
So I have come up with
this idea of initiator.
So basically, what
I do with my work
is I create
conditions for people
to behave socially
in different ways.
So I have to give half of
the credit to the audience.
In this case, I put the podium
like this one inside an art
institution and told people they
could say whatever they wanted
for one minute, of
course, without offending
anybody or calling to violence.
And it was kind of
a reconstruction
of the first speech
Fidel gave where
there was a big myth because
all these doves were in him.
And for 50 years,
people were like,
do you think that's
a sign of God,
or do you think
that was strained?
So I decided to
solve this solution
by training doves and having
that guy putting it on people.
But for me, it was
very interesting
because it was the
first time a lot
of that people could see
themselves in the leadership
position in Cuba.
But of course, I always
say I'm a political artist.
So if I'm an initiator, I
cannot call myself anything else
but political initiator.
Also, the work I do
is very different.
I mean, the impact
that you can have
on people in a 45-minute
performance in a museum
doesn't work sometimes when
you want to do other changes.
So I have come up with
two ways of working.
One is short-term projects,
the one that works for the art
exhibition demands, let's say,
and the long-term projects.
These projects can take from
a few months to 10 years.
And these are
projects that I want
to believe and want to test if
I can change something socially.
And therefore, you have to work
in the temporality of society,
not the temporality of the quick
people in the arts exhibition
having drinks.
So how do I do this?
I do Autocritica Instituciona.
For the socialists, this
might mean something
because we had self-criticism
in the meetings in Cuba.
So I wanted the
institution to do the same.
So institutions
of self-critique.
What it means is that
instead of me criticizing
what exists, what the
government has done
or an institution
has done, what I
do is I create my
own institution,
my own institution
with the ways I
hope I will like for it
to function in reality.
So this is kind of, again, a
way to also say that things are
possible because
at least in Cuba,
a lot of justification
is that you cannot do it.
OK, I'm a single
artist with no budget .
And I did it.
How can you, as a
government, cannot do it?
So it's a very clear
way to show them that.
It's a lot of trouble.
But it is worth it.
So in this case, I
created am art school,
an alternative art
school to study
political and
social performances
and to redirect the
conversation about what
is art for and for whom.
So we wanted to create work
for the people in a moment
where the Cuban government
was using the art
market to derail
the conversation
to social responsibility
for artists
and just acquire some money
and some houses and be quiet.
So I wanted to rescue
this conversation that
at the moment, looked
very [INAUDIBLE].
But we proceed, and we did it.
So this is some of the
works also of the students.
This is a machine for
the Fidel you want.
And I did all the
other pieces like,
for example, Immigrant
Movement International where
I wanted to talk about
the political condition
of immigrants, which is
the first condition that is
lost when you cross a border.
And this is the other thing.
All of these projects
look almost exactly
as the real projects.
I don't want to make
something weird.
I want to make something
that people feel comfortable
and make an easy entrance
to this process instead
of the being, oh, this art
and I don't understand it.
No, no, this is just
a store front for you.
And then once you enter,
let's have a conversation.
So in this case,
we did something
that looks very much like
a grassroots organization.
And I'm very proud of this.
We did the Migrant Manifesto.
And why I'm proud of this is
because for the first time,
I guess-- I don't know.
But we put together
people like Saskia Sassen,
like a reporter from the UN
on immigration with the mom
next door who has a sixth
grade education together
with this guy who is one of the
experts in the United States
about the economy of immigrants,
all of these people together.
And together, we generated
this Migrant Manifesto.
Of course, the pin.
We also created a pin.
So actually, during
this piece, we
realized that
every time you talk
about the law with immigration,
people get freaked out.
So I said, OK, let's
leave that aside.
And let's just respect
immigrants first.
So we did this campaign
that-- if you want one,
I can give you one.
And we actually did
international gatherings.
We also did postcards
for immigrants
to send their friends.
We did also
billboards for Europe
when we were invited
to festivals.
And a flag, we made a flag.
Here it is with the text.
But the flag is
just the drawing.
And of course, Immigrant
Movement International
is not only the work that
has been done in Queens.
But it is also every time we
are addressing immigrant issues
because it's happening the
same everywhere and forever.
Like after 15 years
working on this,
we have the same problems,
the same unanswered questions,
and the same racism
and discrimination
towards immigrants.
So I did this campaign, a
political campaign called
Dignity Has No Nationality.
It was a postcard.
So you sign the postcard.
And actually, it is project when
I asked Pope Francis to please
give Vatican City citizenship to
all immigrants in the world who
have no papers.
If somebody has
a contact, let me
know because I'm trying to
bring him all the postcards,
around 20,000.
Another thing I do is
what I said before,
behavior art or conduct art.
And the reason for that is
because in Spanish, "conducta"
means the behavior, but
it also means something
that travels from one place to
another, the conductor of one.
So I want art to
be that as well.
And this is an example of a
piece I did of behavior art
where I wanted to work with
the reaction of people.
In Colombia-- of course,
you say Colombia,
and you first think "drug."
Now, you think peace.
I'm glad my work is getting
dated for better reasons.
But in this case,
I came to Colombia.
And we did a very boring
panel with all the actors
of the Colombian
situation, like a family
of a missing person of the
[INAUDIBLE] leadership,
so a FARC person and
a paramilitary person.
And people were like,
this is so boring.
We know this.
What is this artist coming to
do this-- and then five minutes
or so into it, a person
with a tray of real cocaine
was passing through the
audience of the event.
Of course, that is behavior
art because what happened
after that was the peace.
So a big discussion, and yeah.
So another aspect of
my work is what I call
political-timing specificity.
It means that I'm not always
conscious of the place
and the people.
But also, what is the
political state of the place?
What are the actors?
What are the laws?
What are the discussion,
the political emotions
that we have at that moment?
And in this case, I did one
piece that is called Yo Tambien
Exijo, I Also Demand.
And for this piece--
this is not egocentric,
but I self-cited myself, quoted
myself with another piece.
So I took the piece
of the microphones
and I said, I'm
going to do it again.
But instead of the safety
of an art institution,
I'm going to do it in the
Revolution Square, which
is the place where
power has the power.
And of course, it
didn't very well at all.
Many things happened.
I was detained, interrogated,
and so on and so on.
But I think the
work was a success
because it showed the way
in which power operates.
It showed to everybody.
And I talked to
people in the left
and also people in
social justice groups.
And this is a very
hard conversation
when you talk about Cuba
because these people do not
want to see the new Cuba.
They're still thinking
about the Cuba
from the '70s who was
good to Angela Davies, who
was good to Angola.
This is not anymore the
Cuba you have today.
And it's very hard for me
to have this conversation.
So I'm very happy that
through this work,
I could have some of
that conversation.
Right now, I think
the excitement--
which I am in favor of
the relation of Cuba-Us.
And Obama was amazing
when he was there.
I always say that he
was not a president.
He talked to Cubans as
a community organizer.
And that was the most
beautiful thing to see there.
So what happened
with this piece is
in the midst of all of this
tension that lasted eight
months, I was extremely
satisfied that in a way,
government performed for me.
So after being so
many years trying
to talk to power, to have
a dialogue with them,
they finally talked back.
Unfortunately, the
way they talked back
was that during my
reading of Hannah Arendt's
The Origins of Totalitarianism
with the speakers to the street
so every Cuban could hear
it in Spanish, of course.
They sent a brigade of
jackhammers for the street
in front of my house.
They were already
fixing Old Havana.
But my house was far from where
it was supposed to happen.
And I even talked to a guy.
I said, this is no good.
This is not-- it's going to
be-- no, they are orders.
I say, OK, orders
have to be done.
So of course, I
think for me what
you see today is a
fracture of Cubans
hope for change, not for
institutional, economic change
or Americans going in
and traveling there,
but for their own personal
achievement of change.
But what I want to do is
I want to use art again
to try to see if we can
start a new dialogue.
I don't want to talk about
what happens in Cuba five,
10 years from now when all
the decisions are made,
where all the contracts are
made with the big corporations,
and nobody can change
anything for real.
Now, there is a moment
of a lot of instability.
So maybe one voice
of a person can
change a deal that's
going to be made
that would not help the Cubans.
So what I want to do is I
want to start an institute.
We are already working on the
Institute Artivism, Hannah
Arendt.
And what we based this is on
the fact that yes, in Cuba
in the '60s, we had
a literacy campaign
that I'm very proud of where
almost everybody in Cuba
learned how to write and read.
The problem is you cannot
read what you want.
And you cannot say
what you think.
So what I want
with the team-- we
are a group of people working.
And how can we bring a civic
rights literacy campaign
to Cuba so people learn not
only their rights, but how can
they defend that and they
identify when they are not
being respected.
Of course, very quickly
say, three of the elements--
we're going use a wish tank.
We want to see what people want.
We want to do think tanks, where
we bring people from hopefully
all over the place, experts to
meet with them the same way we
did with the
Immigrant Manifesto,
to bring ideas of
what in the world
have been done in
this same situations.
And hopefully, do tank
will be the way which
we're going to show this in the
street or to all the people.
It's very tough.
But we're going to do it.
So of course, as
you can see, by now
I'm trying to talk in my work
about what are the uses of art.
Can art be a tool?
Can art be a tool
for social change?
Can art be a tool
for empowerment?
And of course, we also
need to think, not only
what are the uses
of art, but what
are the uses of art institutions
today and rethink that.
My answer to that is
going back to the urinary.
And my proposal is there is time
to put Dechamp's urinal back
into the restroom and use it.
Thank you very much.
[APPLAUSE]
