Texto Libreto

Leon Kossovitch

The eyes, discolored in this gray desert, drip. The seduction of women in opulent colors, flowers, fits well in Cabral’s environments; Hélio Cabral finds him at another time, the one of old heads, ambiguity of humor, because what flows is not painting, pictura, = fictura, eye’s captivating fiction. While the fable of medusa, Cabral’s simile, Hélio Cabral fluctuates between paragraphs 1 and 7.

In the engaging institution, the grids capture the look, the scopy. Established as a scopy of another scopy, remotely from the oratory’s institution, in which streams – voice, gesture, shadow, shadow – are captured in meeting and memory places, in the provision of enjoyable and energizing education, seductions of persuasion, the painting, not less than grading, captivates. Shattering this proto-grade building, its romantic splinters weld with subjectivity and what was more or less lovable scopy, is exacerbated and hurts like anxiety or sadness. With Hélio Cabral, the eye pullers are not scopic: discontinuous, run, work.

“Work”, not in the studio sense, as a procedure in which the scopes can outdo themselves, orthoscopic in their affections, but in the “dream work,” “mourning work,” work, finally, drive. Between paragraphs 1 and 7, the similarities and differences in Cabral’s production are clarified, and of the work on Hélio Cabral. In this exhibition, nothing is supervised: water, latex, enamel, urine, oil, broom, brush, fire, hand, paper, blinds, cloth, carpet, pigment, plaster, crap, crop, tile, they are not subject to screening. The elements have no status and, declassified, they are the added work. All fitting – being at hand, found – the procedure is dissolved: equivalent as inclusives, elements are not scopic, nor is, therefore, the support, unspecified as to shape, material, size, state. Being it all added, they do not operate in hierarchical distinctions in the elements, nor they elaborate conceptual distinctions of institution, such as those that discriminate against the medium. The arbitrariness that discriminates as passive surface is evident by the equivalence of the added elements. Valuing the color and to some extent, the matter, the passivity of the medium was deemed overcome; this, however, remained, as it is in opposition to the gesture, seen as very active, which support recedes, passive. In opposition, the medium is considered power and the rest, act: it is the implicit casual institution, in which design and implementation, efficiency and purpose differ. The Nº 5 window blind is old, which is not registered a waste of doves, a number of brushstrokes, mathema of humor and which clipping does not apply. Found with slurry paste, the shade still clings with dabs of paint, which adheres to the cut, repeated over the mathema, pictorially. The humor flows, as the additions are equivalent, flowing the significance for not prefixing with hierarchical elements; nothing stands out as passive or active, even the gesture, in the clumping agglutination. One turns off the opposition which supports the application, which scopically runs the painting of action, abolishing the casual – matter, form, efficiency, goal – the work, operating mixed meanings, is casual. In Hélio Cabral, the elements neutralize the action and passion, and all adhering to all, along with everything, or negativity, dissolving all, it does not loom Medusa, signs Fortune.

The scope, as a place of great observation, is produced with procedural grid, forecasting, purchasing, supervising. It constitutes the grid as a specified network in opposing pairs, gesture/support, figure/background, style/iconography, design/color, etc… And as a generic network of peers, active/passive, cause/effect, rule/subjectivity, soul/body, etc... Combining the two networks, the grid, at a time, extends itself; the drives compress themselves in a scopic look. One does not remove the grid by modifying some of the pairs: the refusal, for example, of the painting in which the thoughtful soul manages the executive body is nothing more than change of registration. The abstraction, in that convention, by the way, syntactically determines the action of the body, may be replaced by Expressionism, which refuses any rule in the name of the gesture; in such a proposal, nor the body is finally released, or subjectivity, finally uncovered: pulsing, the scope remains, with another record. Remember the expressionist body of the 50s, who goes out in anguish against the support, the passive form; such body is existentially subjective, but their graphs are horde, order. The more the soul is distressed, the more the surface is passive, said of registration, as the depository of outside energies, of the body, of the same soul. The casual opposition of the active – body subjected as an inscription – and passive – as patient support of distress – is no more than maintenance of scope, present in these pairs: modified in their direction, establishing another scopy, for example, the expressionist-abstract one.

Invested, the look is a partial drive. In a scopic institution, it is the partial look, not institutionally driven. The grid fixes boundaries, the ones of timing, also regulated in the proto-institution. But while this is all prescriptive in its extent, subjectively welded, not all stipulating, it hurts: suffering with the white – canvas, paper – of support, obsessed surface of inscription – painting, writing (grapho: paint = write); in the end, the melancholy, mirror that the registration is absent, lost of object almost always on an inaccessible time as Time. In Hélio Cabral’s dripping look, there is no time, so, neither beginning nor end. None of anguish waiting, white, of white, nothing, at the other end, the one from the exile of hand, of emptiness void of truth, melancholy, or, in the same transcendence, filled with another, no less empty, mania. It is not Time: cloudy is the reflection of the narcissistic scopy.

The anescopic drive works in Hélio Cabral, not at all strange to the feline opening, interested in meddling. However, “between” without interest – it does not intervene between being, by positivity, here, psyche and soma: “between” emptiness, drain, treiben: derive. The look as a drive is a is look of the border, not exactly an opening, because “between” is not a a third, as determined by the psyche and adds, to the extent that, before, it delimits hem. As psychischer Repräsentant, the drive is the legacy of the sum by the psyche, as it approaches the border, the legacy of the mandate in which it is not invested, it changes his shirt, and, not being nobody, it is a flashing discontinuity. The drive of the anescopic look, does not constitutes continuity, and limit-concept, it stops the causal bar and expressive actions of soul and body, implicit in expressionism. This makes the continuing and it is done: the expression of the soul by the body, and the body by the support, it enacts the law to all three uniformly; for her, the soul causes the body and this, causes the painting. Law, the continuity is expressivity, Sturm, without Drang, storm without pressure, great avatar of Romanticism. The drive is derived: it is the case, as “primary process,” nothing in the concept, the procedure, which, however, is investment libidinally, with the reduction of the flow, intermittency scopic. There are thus two perspectives, both instinctual, as there is Hélio Cabral and Cabral; while the scope of this flows through the grid as a viscous libido, with loss and pain not uncommon, “secondary process” means that it is not addressed, running, intermittent libido. In this sense, Hélio Cabral is closer to the concept of pure instinct than Cabral.

The not scopic drive breaks out in this or that moment, as if the un-blend of Cabral and Hélio Cabral had always been written. A set of paintings from 1990 singles out in the production of a dominant year: re-taken the heads of the early ‘70s and its aggressive mood, although it is also scopic, the set differs from the painting of seduction, emotionally. The first two works in this exhibition make explicit the remanence of the whole of 1990, which monsters and heads can not be severed from the humor-horror of both, smiling. However, not all stands as a reference and even less as the current paradigm, as this differs from the base, except in the mood. In the works of the exhibition, the set of 1990 is what’s unconsciously reassigned: supervenience, Nachträglichkeit; mnemonic memory traces – the look in the eyes – resituating – pulsing in different jobs, since the supervenience extends to the entire assemblage to taste, to the technique, to the paint, to the picture, etc...

Nº 1 and Nº 2 are paintings. It does not begin with the figure, as distinguished from previous work of humor: the figure befalls strokes, which aimed to nothing, broadcast appearances. Accordingly, it explains the supervenience of scopic elements, figures, whose relocation is detected in the anescopic scope, in appearances. Deactivating the scopy, there is no bestiary to classify the apparition: it is not a monster, that with mixed parts assuming recognized body parts in its constitution; the heads of humor, old or new, old or recent, the grimace befalls. Not molded, as diffuse in agile stains, the appearances are blurring, that in subsequently work, operates in all directions. The midway of the figure (figure = figure-image, imago, imitago = image, imitation, likeness, so scopes) and non-figure, the appearance does not cut against a background, it is absent. As for Nº 1, its rambling format, vaguely starry, appears as the destruction of existing a rectangular support; the cut explains the aggressiveness by which the support becomes generic. It stops to inscribable passivity, becoming the support element with other added elements, so it is, most of the time, a finding that does not undergo further elaboration, not scopically discriminated. Hélio Cabral then states the destruction of the rectangle: “out of the cage.” Forced to the grill, loosen the drives, which will destroy the scopic cage in all directions. Between Nº 3 and 7, the grid is broken up, as demonstrated by the divergence and impressive work. The release only extends itself pulsating, because there is no process between Nº 3 and Nº 7.

Out of the grid, the work does not promote the chaos: Hélio Cabral produces “anything” or “nothing”, manifesting the denial of work. In the “nothing”, the grid protests against what drops it, in denying the viscous libido which, dissolving it, unties it. And it shall be determined here, the concept of the drive: the aggregate, from Nº 3 to Nº 7 constitute themselves as objects of sexual drive, while they mean “mythology” to itself as a heuristic field. Meaning the death drive in its manifestation is, in relation to the work of Hélio Cabral, a working hypothesis. The viscous libido operates the rigid connection (Bindung), whose wisdom may result in redundancy and, in painting, continuous replacement of the grid. Investing in painting, this libido is not an active divergence, it jumps, flashes, and it reinvests into the connection. When, however, there is a shutdown (Entbindung), the wisdom is closed by the “evil” for what, in the drive, it is desobjectalization, divestitures, compulsive repetition. Metapsychology heuristically metaphors the field of slopes, here, life drive, death drive. In the libido dualism, life drives approaches to self and bounces on the grid, operating and investing objects, while the death disconnects objects and divests. Manifesting itself as one of growth, progress, summary, this destructiveness is rather self, then straight, trivially, aggressiveness, in which the object is divested. The death drive is the hypothesis of the sanity of anything, so something different.

Aggression, like other’s destruction, is the pure manifestation of death drive. In this sense, the paintings and clumps are destructive manifestations, in which seduction is disinvested and Hélio Cabral, disconnected from Cabral. Destructiveness is exposed in broom lacerations (Nº 4) and extirpation by fire (Nº 7). Negative agglutination, the works are not, as in the vanguard, interventions, premeditated aggression, so the grid. Fortuitous, the broom tears and amplifies the effects on the combustion of Nº 7, while the removal of large areas of carpet is not at all accidental, it is not enrollment of the soul, alternating with strokes, the combustion highlights the duplicity of the agglutination, a volatile adhesion, and that the fire scorched and which holes become nests of appearances: the alternation of emptiness and filling the soul while it bakes, in impasse in which the life drives, missing the end, and is neutralized by death. The Nº 6 is the death instinct, not as the destructiveness of agglutination, but as an impediment by repetition of order or signic lance; fluctuations in the brushstrokes and the splash of gypsum, comes something like a head, absent scopy: supervenience, it does not nullify the compulsion repetition, which does not drop the job. At Nº 3, agglutination of various densities, tiles were employed as a bridge, which launched the unifying color on the lava, pieces of the bridge that have become embedded in the lava were left, remnants of a nonexistent scopy. While Nº 5 offers shit, Nº 4 gives a good invisible urine. The aggressiveness of Nº 5 is an exhibitionist one, it is not that of Nº 4, signified by speech and further Hélio Cabral’s looks. Urinating on the green bottle, it promotes the cohesive zone, a gorgeous lime-green. On top of the lime-green circles, a destructive semiosis with little scopic traces of urinary zone, bordering it, this suggests two appearances. The two toast the memory of Brassens, for years portrayed by Cabral; is not at all impossible that it is taken for the kidneys, as does the binder. Ambiguous, a set can also be interpreted either as expressions of the binder hipocondria, either as his grief work. The two interpretations intersect: Hélio Cabral’s insistence on the death of Brassens by kidney disease.

The destructiveness of the work does not found, however, the empty empire (Entmischung) of the drives, the predominant death; it prevails a mixture (Mischung) with the life drive connecting and investing, as well as subjecting the shutdown, divestment and compulsion the repetition of another. The free energy of libido does not mean, therefore, divestment or compulsive repetition, since their counterparts operate in supervenience, the unifying factor of all papers, for Hélio Cabral and Cabral. It is not necessary to say that the assemblage, although far from the grid, is made as a mixture (desmesclapulsional ¬– no scheme). As examples, consider yourself the grief and humor, which also involve overcoming and unloading, respectively. As for the compulsion repetition, although there is progress, it is not proposing the prevalence of the nirvanic principle on the principle of consistency: between Nº 1 and 7 there is a tendency to zero inorganic. The death drive is not required for life, neither detangles the mix. Destructive, the death drive stops Cabral’s cage and decouples the painter from the binder.

The heteronomy means the difference in procedure and process, not insisting on the similarity of heteronyms, which means the survival of the technique to the work drive. Technical concepts are specific to the grid: support, scene, seduction, gesture, etc… The death drive disconnects them from each other in the process, in which they stay as mnemonic traces: some concepts are taken and divested, scene, seduction, although others are maintained, however disconnected. Functional and connected to the grid, the concepts are disjoint, thus isolating the assemblage. Detachment purifies them, showing them free of predicates that are in the grid. The death drive destroys the painting and assemblage, in this, it explains the elements and concepts. Suppose, then, that Cabral is visiting the exhibition, although reproves the inconsistency of the set, he does not deny praises to the technique that was put in evidence. For the assemblage, as pulsing as it is, gives off the look of procedural attachments, being a thin libido. Cabral is seen purified in Hélio Cabral, for his looks drip like identical to assemblage.

The eyes drip, drive, drift, Trieb, this concept constitutes an articulation of four subconcepts, source, target, object, pressure. Pressure, Drang, the drive means metonic. Trieb, in English, is drive, common root, as Trieb, treiben, Got.: dreiban; V. Ing: drifen V. Nor.: drifa. etc... From Latin, deriuo, is derived from riuus river, riba, etc... The duplicity of Trieb intercepts in the physicalism of reference, the theory of fluids, particularly hydro, recording here some coincidences: “pressure,” “stickiness,” “discharge.” The concepts of instinctual bathe, rather, in liquid theory. Drive, drift: agglutination and look are identical, both an investment drive. This identity is a difficult one, considering the effect of the grid, which captures the look, like a medusa: impossible or nearly out of its scopic cage.

But the look is identical to the assemblage at work, in which everything flows. Both are the continuous and discontinuous, in the accessions of life, death in detachments. By then, the look flows, floating, “floating eyes.” Drain, unframed and without colors, and an unlimited gray desert, nothing closes, nor rapids or backwaters, landscape image, and nothing stirs, or bottlenecks or strangled whirlwinds, hydromechanical image. Scopes. Discontinuous, a look through the picture, many colors, and the seductions, neutral, produce no affection, nothing being articulated. Floating, the look with the additions, and it agglutinates, and, dusky, it drips.