How does the testimony of a singular event influence our own projections and perceptions? How does the future of our projections becomes a question of obstinacy. How does the letting go finally question our predictions. How may things become a present in relation to our position of past and future.

​

May contain traces of.  examines the position of the actor and the witness of a given situation, observing the aphorism of Peter Sloterdijk:

"If one asks a modern subject: Where were you at moment of the crime? "

However, such is the cruelty of Sloterdijk, being present at the moment of the crime does not necessarily make us a witness, ready to witness the atrocities of the event, but rather makes us complicit and most often silent. According to him "Anyone touched by the consciousness of being present, beyond his inevitable quality of witness, is also integrated into this monstrosity by a form of complicity, which makes him a modern subject."

​

We seek to expose the difference between an audience as a witness and an audience as a spectator. The first depicts a public aware of its power of sharing, for which the capacity of transmission of experiences, memories of the narrative of the events it has lived, is an imperative at our age, when the experience decreases. Conversely, the audience as a spectator is the silent accomplice of the crime scene, the one who obeys and chooses not to express himself, lest what he says can be used against him in the courts of social conformity and aesthetic 'taste'.

​

https://www.les-subs.com/evenement/tadayoshi-kokegushi-ashley-wright-juin-17/​