Maybe this should use an iterator

Result #1

vernacular.

Result #2

Maybe this should use an iterator ike a.s.o.s.t.i.z.o.u.o.u. (The Angel), 2008, a video by Zhenya Tsegoh, which shows a young boy speaking a native dialect of Russian to an English-speaking tutor in a dutiful posture. The video includes the tutor (in Russian) and a young boy, whom Tsegoh sees as the embodiment of the Western world, a dutiful and parochial teacher, but also an erudite scholar, a painter, a scholar, and a writer. While the latter description seems more appropriate, the tutor is in fact a skilled art teacher who, according to the wall text, has little to do with Tsegohs art; he is simply interested in connecting with an established artist and pursuing the same interests of an artist who is far away.This seems odd, since Tsegohs art is in a certain sense an extension of a deeper cultural ground—the realm of the New York art world, in which she has long lived. She writes, T. J. Clark has done a lot for my art. . . . [I]t is my deepest respect for his writings that explain why I write. . . . [I]t is not only a honor to be able to teach at NYU, but a privilege to be able to teach there. In Tsegohs own words, T. J. Clark is the only person who has asked that I teach.The show also included a work on paper, Untitled (Fountain of Youth), 2008, and a series of photographs, Untitled (Tension), 2008, which were taken from the perspective of a young woman in a wheelchair. Their subject is a young woman with a disability—a wheel chair, for example, is her only support.

Result #3

Maybe this should use an iterator vernacular, an icon that is readily identifiable and can be used to identify the individual objects (with the exception of the first) and to exhibit the whole as a coherent body of work. But if the reception of the artist is to some degree determined by a content, this is only because the artist-as-user is no longer a given, and is not a given in the traditional sense, and the work itself is no longer a given. The work must be treated, and one wonders how much that treatment might influence its reception. The more extreme a work may be, and the more dominant its content, the more it may be seen as an attempt to reenact the act of art. It is not a matter of an artwork being taken as an object and being seen as a thing, but rather of an art object being seen as something that is taken as an artwork and is seen as such. It may be that the existence of art as an aesthetic value is the result of the transformation of the art object into an art object. And the art object becomes the aesthetic value of the art object of the same act. But then there is the possibility that the transformation may be reversed and a work taken as a painting. In any case, the shift from object to art is effected by a transformation of the art object into a thing. This is not to suggest that a work of art must not be seen as an object; it is simply that, in an act of art, the work ceases to be an object and becomes a thing. But this is not an entirely new situation, since art as an ideal, as a representation of something, is always already at the same time already at the boundary between art and the real world. The real world, like the object, is a field in which the work of art is a thing.

Result #4

Maybe this should use an iterator vernacular, but there is no one in the show with a more desperate desire to "re-invent the wheel." A less obvious but no less radical choice is to play with the media, which has become one of the shows most important visual devices. Video is no longer just an extension of the hand-held; it has become a part of the body. And in this context, it becomes an ideal candidate for making contact with the audience. After all, the media is the key to unlocking the network of relations between the individual and society. It is the ground on which the acts of participation can be built.With this in mind, this show was not just about the potential of the video element in art. It was also about the lack of any strategy that might suggest a strategy of cultural engagement. The exhibition was not only about the potential of the video element in art, but about the lack of any strategy that might suggest a strategy of cultural engagement. The exhibition was not just about the potential of the video element in art. It was also about the lack of any strategy that might suggest a strategy of cultural engagement. The exhibition was not just about the potential of the video element in art. It was also about the lack of any strategy that might suggest a strategy of cultural engagement. The exhibition was not just about the potential of the video element in art. It was also about the lack of any strategy that might suggest a strategy of cultural engagement. The exhibition was not just about the potential of the video element in art. It was about the lack of any strategy that might suggest a strategy of cultural engagement. The exhibition was not just about the potential of the video element in art. It was about the lack of any strategy that might suggest a strategy of cultural engagement. The exhibition was not just about the potential of the video element in art. It was about the lack of any strategy that might suggest a strategy of cultural engagement.

Result #5

Maybe this should use an iterator ike a structure that would be transparent to the viewer. And yet the evidence of such a gesture does not prevent it from being seen as a kind of advertisement. It is the slogan—the yellowing number—that is the only clue that is lacking. The others, the red and white numbers, are just for sale. This is just the way it is. The things, the words, the signs that do not make us stop in our tracks, are all here.The work that makes up the Künstler-Körper Collection is a one-man show that has been divided between art and life. The artists were asked to decide whether to keep the work and what of it to themselves or to exhibit it in a museum. The result of this decision is that there is a separate room in the Künstler-Körper Collection, each one devoted to the individual work of one of the artists. The work is thus distributed among the public and the museum, where it is exhibited, and in this way it ceases to be an isolated spectacle, and, more important, to become part of a larger network of relations among the public and the artists. In the end, however, all is not lost: the work of these artists is a reflection of the human condition, and not only of the conditions of its own existence. The paradox that this shows title, I am saying, invites is that it invites the participation of the viewer in the work and the artists in the presence of the work. This is the message that is given in the question written in the form of a letter to the Künstler-Körper Collection. It reads: Do you have any objects that you want to keep as souvenirs? The collection is not really complete; there is no single piece that fits the current criteria. What to do? What can be done? In this case, the question is phrased in the most positive possible terms.