Olav Alexander
400ft, 16mm Film, Fourteen People 

2019

loop

in collaboration with Joao Villas, JP Garcia, Diego Rios, Gaby Hartel, Alex Gezhey, Nora Hartel, Clara Verdier, Margo van Rooyen, Adam Relihan, Emmie Ray, Qiang Li, John Atherton, Dafni Athanasopoulou, Eleni Athanasopoulou

Preserving an object that cannot be used for its purpose is quite common for archival or museum practices.

The first ever phonographic recording was made with ink. The sound was marked onto a sheet of paper by a vibrating needle; it was in some sense more of a visual representation of the sound than a phonograph recording, as it could not be reproduced. Wax cylinders embed the grooves visible to the eye in a physical transcription of the recording onto the wax surface. The sounds carved onto an object offer a productive metaphor for the traces events may leave, of their conservation and their transformation into something else.

From a technical point of view, phonographic recording is the most direct way to transfer a sound onto a ‘physical support’ and ensures that the sound is reproducible. This method to record sound has very few obstacles between the actual sound and its physical marking on the surface of the cylinder. The recording is the result of the needle scratching across the wax surface that aims to produce the fewest possible interferences and mediation between the situation and its material embodiment.

The big difference between analog and digital is that analog recording engraves the moment, while digital imitates it. Digital recording and digital reproduction is an imitation of an event that happened; the phonographic engraving is not an imitation because the analog recording, by precisely using that sound wave , impresses the event onto a surface and thus captures a moment with all the inaccuracies and errors of that specific moment. The digital – instead by imitating – removes everything that is considered error or inaccuracy. Phonograph recording is a momentum.

The sound that we hear on a wax cylinder has strong background noises that can be understood as signals that mark the metaphorical distance between the listener and the time-space where the recording was produced. These noises of the mechanical recording are both part of the event that was recorded and the moment of listening.

The physicality of the sound reproduced on the wax cylinder is also embodied in its tendency to disappear from the surface if listened to too many times. In fact, the quality and the survival of this object depends precisely on how much it is used: the more you replay it, the more it frays. In this sense, listening to the ephemeral material of the cylinder is an excellent metaphor for the moment that is moving away. The more you listen to it, the more that moment becomes vaguer and less decisive: disturbances, inaccuracies and noises take over. The digital instead idealizes an event in a ‘perfect’ form that does not change over time.

Phonographic recording signaled the first moment in history when humans were able to listen to an event whose present had already passed through exclusively technical mediation. This relationship and perception of sound events has shaped the sonic perception of the past: a scratched, disturbed sound. A phonographic recording, photograph or manuscript are objects that tend to ‘vanish’ over time and create distance between the listener-viewer and the source event.

Throughout European history and culture, archiving has been made equal to the possession of a physical object and the storage of that object somewhere (i.e. in a museum or state archive). This condition is characteristic of the West’s material approach to culture and knowledge that orders a physical proof of existence. Such an approach is diametrically opposed to that of so-called oral cultures, of those not based on written or material matter for transmitting and conserving knowledge. This epistemic divide is crucial for the re-thinking and re-imagining of archives. Should the immaterial and intangible be stored? How and where should it be embodied?

What else if not a wax cylinder?

Edi Danartono, Ollie George, Ekaterina Golovko

14.08.2021

Plants and People 

2016-present

1 plant/person 

Durational performance, Public, Grass and Text 

2019

6 hours/day, 10 days

in collaboration with Ingrid Kraus, Diego Rios, Anna Sari, Jermaine Brian, Rosalind Wilson, Songkun Wan, Kelvin Atmadibrata

Lygia Clarks seminal piece, Caminhando, 1964, enables two different outcomes, depending on the way the participant chooses to act. By following her instructions, he diversifies the piece and by not following her instructions he simply reproduces it.

Our subjectivity is not just ourselves. There is a part of our subjectivity that is affected by the forces of the world outside ourselves. This is the strange, the unknown. It escapes our cultural repertoire, not in a spiritual imaginative way, but the real effects of the environment on our body. Something that cannot be translated by our cultural repertoire. We are not used to activate this capacity. On the contrary, all our rituals and rules are against the possibility to activate this experience.

Why am I saying all this? It is the idea of the uncanny, that the strange and the familiar are inseparable, that we are always experiencing both. You cannot dissociate on with the other, but they exist in a paradox form. They exist together even though logically they cannot. How we deal with this tension in our subjectivity is what interests me. When desire directs us to follow the uncanny, what is created from this act will be bearer of this experience. If desire ignores this uncanny the result is generic. Reproduction instead of diversification. For me the most successful operation of western modern culture, is the anaesthesia to be affected by the world as a field of forces. The obstruction of the access to sensations.

“By desiring and acting in response to these forces one can reconfigure the colonial unconscious.”

Suely Rolnik


Só, Mais Um 

2019

Disposable Camera and Thirty-Six People

2016

36 photographs 

Fingerprints and Ink on Paper

2020 – present

30 × 42 cm 

Stereo Sound and Stand (Treaty of Tordesilhas)

2019

loop

Performance and Glass

2019

30min

in collaboration with Bo Yoon Won, Katarina Sylvan, Robin-Dimitrije Gosselin-Monasevic, Susie Olczac, Diego Valente

Guattari defines subjectivity: "All the conditions making it possible for individual and/or collective agencies to be in a position to emerge as sui-referential existencial Territory, adjacent to or in a relation of delimitation with an otherness that is itself subjective". Otherwise put, subjectivity can only be defined by the presence of a second subjectivity. It does not form a "territory" except on the basis of the other territories it comes across; as an evolving formation, it is modelled on the diference which forms it itself, on the principle of otherness. It is in this plural, polyphonic definition of subjectivity that we find the perspective tremor that Guattari inflicts on philosofical economy. Subjectivity he explains, cannot exist in an independent way, and in no case can it ground the existence of the subject. It only exists in the pairing mode: association with "human groups, socio-economic machines, informational machines". Involved here is decisive, dazzling intuition. If the force of Marx's impact, in his Thesis on Feuerbach, consisted in defining the crux of man as "the set of social relations", Guattari, for his part, defined subjectivity as the set of relations that are created between the individual and the vehicles of subjectivity he comes across, be they individual or collective, human or inhuman.

Relational Aesthetics

Nicolas Bourriaud

Performance and Radio

2017

dimensions variable 

Performance and Traffic Lights

2016

looped

in collaboration with Alex Athorn

And who will dare to militate in favor of unlimited freedom of movement, in favor of unlimited freedom? Do you mean: lawless? [...] The double blind concerns the fact that it would be necessary to deconstruct at the same time, theoretically and practically, a certain political ontotheology of sovereignty without calling into question a certain thought of freedom in the name of which this deconstruction is set to work. [...] The day when this double blind, when this implacable contradiction was lifted, [...] would be paradise.

The Beast and the Sovereign

J. Derrida

Digital Video, Beach Vendors and Sound

2017

6min26s

in collaboration with
Ingrid Kraus, Kayhan Lannes Ozmen, Rita Albano, Vicente Tigre, Luiza Amaral, Carlos Herique Gomes Salvador, Francisco Xavier do Carmo, Daniel de Jesus Pereira, Valdeci da C. M. Junior, Paulo Rogério Toledo Santos, Alexandre Bernardo da Silva

Concrete and Sand

2016

2 cubic meters 

Digital Video, Performance and Sea

2015

18min25s

Twenty-Four Photographs

2018

one day


Midday (Sol) 

2018

Water and Glass

2018

dimensions variable

The comments that I usually get when people are confronted with my work is that the participatory aspect is not always explicit. In a time of commodities, the work is seen as the object it becomes and not how it became that object. It is like judging an instrument without listening to its music. The relationship is not important, only what is left from it. This resistance has made me realize that it is working.

Last year we had elections in Brazil. The entire campaign was based on hate and polarization. One of the most culturally complex and socially traumatized countries of the world had its subjectivity completely taken away from its people and rendered by a fixed idea that had to represent them. Dialogue did not exist. Everyone was made separate, everyone was alone.

When there is no dialogue your thoughts become concrete.

This was a specially difficult time for me. This illusion that something is fixed bothered me in a very deep way. For my crit I showed a piece that attempted to address this topic. The work was then selected for a show in the Brazilian embassy in London. Here is a brief description: The work Water and Glass developed in reference to the early works of Cildo Meireles. Between 1970 and 19775, Meireles produced two of his most iconic pieces: Inserções em Circuitos Ideológicos: Coca-Cola and Eureka/Blindhotland. One, which expressed a specific attempt to pursue a democratic art practice and the other which dealt with concerns surrounding the difference between appearance and reality. Feeding on these concepts Pluralismo, Pluralism, attempts to embody both works in one. The bottles - this time found jars and glass pots - are filled with different quantities of water; however, they seem to be perfectly levelled with each other. Even though the objects are different they all play the exact same role in maintaining this balance. The ephemeral nature of water and the transformation that it has over time connects the work with its environment and representation becomes blurred with reality.

Here the participation of the viewer is deliberately subtle. It depends on his perception of time. All the people in the show where connected to the piece and had influence in the way it “evaporated” but the consciousness of their action depended on their awareness and acceptance of change through time.

“He who desires but acts not, breeds pestilence. Expect poison from the standing water.”

William Blake.

Plaster Statue and Medical Scale

2015

150 x 20 x 30 cm 

Bluetooth Speaker

2015

100√3 cm x 113.43 hertz

in collaboration with Alex Athorn 

Digital Photograph of Portable Museum Chairs

2015

64 x 90 cm (each)

Silver Gelatine Print of Lamp

2016

27.9 x 35.6 cm

Wall Clock and String

2014

40 x 60 cm 

Broom

2016

130 x 30 cm

Acrylic on Canvas

2016

150 x 180 cm

Drip and Bucket

2014

dimensions variable 

Rags and Pens

2018

dimensions vaiarble

Eighty Slides, Projector and Stand

2018

4.5 degrees/slide

Projection of Photograph and Chair

2015

dimensions variable 

Two Laptop Computers on Skype

2016

35 x 40 x 60

Overhead Projector

2012

dimension variable 

Flourescent Tube and Poliester Resin

2013

40 x 120 x 15 cm x 6000 hours

Flourescent Tube and Bubblewrap

2014

150 x 200 x 150 cm

Digital Photograph of Performance (Questões Estruturais)

2014

10 x 15 cm

Eucalyptus Logs and Gas Canisters

2016

100 x 350 x 350 cm

Whale Bones and Rebar

2013

115 x 240 x 60 cm

Performance and Wood Cage

2013

dimensions variable 

Rock, Pulley and Rope

2015

200 x 100 x 100 cm

Documentation of Student and Tutor Performance (Homage to Chris Burden)

2016

in collaboration with Naomi Dines

Video Documentation of Performance (Language)

2014

2m21s

in collaboration with Aigli Tsirogani

Concrete Block, Digital Video and Documentation

2014

15 x 10 x 10 cm

Silicon, Plaster and Fiberglass

2015

dimensions to scale 

Digital Video of Watercolor and Toilet (My Painting Is Shit)

2013

21s

Fan, Microphone and Amplifier

2012

50 x 90 x 50 cm

Note

2014

dimensions variable

“We have theatre inside. We can observe ourselves in action. We are at the same time actors and spectators.”

Augusto Boal

When we get together for a crit, we create a space with both memory and imagination. For me it is one of those beautiful moments in art practice. Its dynamics encourage action, awareness of your body in relation to others, and the ability of learning through living. There is an internal dialogue between being yourself and becoming others. And in this doing, the realization that you are a diversity of people.

Participation is the reason I chose to come to art school in the first place, and it is becoming in a way, essential in what drives my practice. In my understanding, the moment in time when participation is happening in its purest (possible) form inside the institutional structure, is during crits. Looking back one conversation particularly stands out to me; we were commenting on a students work, and this student was surprised by the interpretation of another. This, however, cannot be avoided, and as I mentioned before, should even be stimulated. Thinking about it, crits, by the way they are structured, have (or at least should have) this mentality. And that is why I appreciate them. It is a time for the group, the dialogue, regard to the other, it is not for one interpretation. There is clear understanding of this in the moment, for example, when you are commenting on other people’s work. There is a kind of learning that happens through making, through becoming the other, while discovering yourself. In a way the same happens when making art.

400ft, 16mm Film, Fourteen People 

2019

loop

in collaboration with Joao Villas, JP Garcia, Diego Rios, Gaby Hartel, Alex Gezhey, Nora Hartel, Clara Verdier, Margo van Rooyen, Adam Relihan, Emmie Ray, Qiang Li, John Atherton, Dafni Athanasopoulou, Eleni Athanasopoulou

Preserving an object that cannot be used for its purpose is quite common for archival or museum practices.

The first ever phonographic recording was made with ink. The sound was marked onto a sheet of paper by a vibrating needle; it was in some sense more of a visual representation of the sound than a phonograph recording, as it could not be reproduced. Wax cylinders embed the grooves visible to the eye in a physical transcription of the recording onto the wax surface. The sounds carved onto an object offer a productive metaphor for the traces events may leave, of their conservation and their transformation into something else.

From a technical point of view, phonographic recording is the most direct way to transfer a sound onto a ‘physical support’ and ensures that the sound is reproducible. This method to record sound has very few obstacles between the actual sound and its physical marking on the surface of the cylinder. The recording is the result of the needle scratching across the wax surface that aims to produce the fewest possible interferences and mediation between the situation and its material embodiment.

The big difference between analog and digital is that analog recording engraves the moment, while digital imitates it. Digital recording and digital reproduction is an imitation of an event that happened; the phonographic engraving is not an imitation because the analog recording, by precisely using that sound wave , impresses the event onto a surface and thus captures a moment with all the inaccuracies and errors of that specific moment. The digital – instead by imitating – removes everything that is considered error or inaccuracy. Phonograph recording is a momentum.

The sound that we hear on a wax cylinder has strong background noises that can be understood as signals that mark the metaphorical distance between the listener and the time-space where the recording was produced. These noises of the mechanical recording are both part of the event that was recorded and the moment of listening.

The physicality of the sound reproduced on the wax cylinder is also embodied in its tendency to disappear from the surface if listened to too many times. In fact, the quality and the survival of this object depends precisely on how much it is used: the more you replay it, the more it frays. In this sense, listening to the ephemeral material of the cylinder is an excellent metaphor for the moment that is moving away. The more you listen to it, the more that moment becomes vaguer and less decisive: disturbances, inaccuracies and noises take over. The digital instead idealizes an event in a ‘perfect’ form that does not change over time.

Phonographic recording signaled the first moment in history when humans were able to listen to an event whose present had already passed through exclusively technical mediation. This relationship and perception of sound events has shaped the sonic perception of the past: a scratched, disturbed sound. A phonographic recording, photograph or manuscript are objects that tend to ‘vanish’ over time and create distance between the listener-viewer and the source event.

Throughout European history and culture, archiving has been made equal to the possession of a physical object and the storage of that object somewhere (i.e. in a museum or state archive). This condition is characteristic of the West’s material approach to culture and knowledge that orders a physical proof of existence. Such an approach is diametrically opposed to that of so-called oral cultures, of those not based on written or material matter for transmitting and conserving knowledge. This epistemic divide is crucial for the re-thinking and re-imagining of archives. Should the immaterial and intangible be stored? How and where should it be embodied?

What else if not a wax cylinder?

Edi Danartono, Ollie George, Ekaterina Golovko

14.08.2021

Plants and People 

2016-present

1 plant/person 

Durational performance, Public, Grass and Text 

2019

6 hours/day, 10 days

in collaboration with Ingrid Kraus, Diego Rios, Anna Sari, Jermaine Brian, Rosalind Wilson, Songkun Wan, Kelvin Atmadibrata

Lygia Clarks seminal piece, Caminhando, 1964, enables two different outcomes, depending on the way the participant chooses to act. By following her instructions, he diversifies the piece and by not following her instructions he simply reproduces it.

Our subjectivity is not just ourselves. There is a part of our subjectivity that is affected by the forces of the world outside ourselves. This is the strange, the unknown. It escapes our cultural repertoire, not in a spiritual imaginative way, but the real effects of the environment on our body. Something that cannot be translated by our cultural repertoire. We are not used to activate this capacity. On the contrary, all our rituals and rules are against the possibility to activate this experience.

Why am I saying all this? It is the idea of the uncanny, that the strange and the familiar are inseparable, that we are always experiencing both. You cannot dissociate on with the other, but they exist in a paradox form. They exist together even though logically they cannot. How we deal with this tension in our subjectivity is what interests me. When desire directs us to follow the uncanny, what is created from this act will be bearer of this experience. If desire ignores this uncanny the result is generic. Reproduction instead of diversification. For me the most successful operation of western modern culture, is the anaesthesia to be affected by the world as a field of forces. The obstruction of the access to sensations.

“By desiring and acting in response to these forces one can reconfigure the colonial unconscious.”

Suely Rolnik


Só, Mais Um 

2019

Disposable Camera and Thirty-Six People

2016

36 photographs 

Fingerprints and Ink on Paper

2020 – present

30 × 42 cm 

Stereo Sound and Stand (Treaty of Tordesilhas)

2019

loop

Performance and Glass

2019

30min

in collaboration with Bo Yoon Won, Katarina Sylvan, Robin-Dimitrije Gosselin-Monasevic, Susie Olczac, Diego Valente

Guattari defines subjectivity: "All the conditions making it possible for individual and/or collective agencies to be in a position to emerge as sui-referential existencial Territory, adjacent to or in a relation of delimitation with an otherness that is itself subjective". Otherwise put, subjectivity can only be defined by the presence of a second subjectivity. It does not form a "territory" except on the basis of the other territories it comes across; as an evolving formation, it is modelled on the diference which forms it itself, on the principle of otherness. It is in this plural, polyphonic definition of subjectivity that we find the perspective tremor that Guattari inflicts on philosofical economy. Subjectivity he explains, cannot exist in an independent way, and in no case can it ground the existence of the subject. It only exists in the pairing mode: association with "human groups, socio-economic machines, informational machines". Involved here is decisive, dazzling intuition. If the force of Marx's impact, in his Thesis on Feuerbach, consisted in defining the crux of man as "the set of social relations", Guattari, for his part, defined subjectivity as the set of relations that are created between the individual and the vehicles of subjectivity he comes across, be they individual or collective, human or inhuman.

Relational Aesthetics

Nicolas Bourriaud

Performance and Radio

2017

dimensions variable 

Performance and Traffic Lights

2016

looped

in collaboration with Alex Athorn

And who will dare to militate in favor of unlimited freedom of movement, in favor of unlimited freedom? Do you mean: lawless? [...] The double blind concerns the fact that it would be necessary to deconstruct at the same time, theoretically and practically, a certain political ontotheology of sovereignty without calling into question a certain thought of freedom in the name of which this deconstruction is set to work. [...] The day when this double blind, when this implacable contradiction was lifted, [...] would be paradise.

The Beast and the Sovereign

J. Derrida

Digital Video, Beach Vendors and Sound

2017

6min26s

in collaboration with
Ingrid Kraus, Kayhan Lannes Ozmen, Rita Albano, Vicente Tigre, Luiza Amaral, Carlos Herique Gomes Salvador, Francisco Xavier do Carmo, Daniel de Jesus Pereira, Valdeci da C. M. Junior, Paulo Rogério Toledo Santos, Alexandre Bernardo da Silva

Concrete and Sand

2016

2 cubic meters 

Digital Video, Performance and Sea

2015

18min25s

Twenty-Four Photographs

2018

one day


Midday (Sol) 

2018

Water and Glass

2018

dimensions variable

The comments that I usually get when people are confronted with my work is that the participatory aspect is not always explicit. In a time of commodities, the work is seen as the object it becomes and not how it became that object. It is like judging an instrument without listening to its music. The relationship is not important, only what is left from it. This resistance has made me realize that it is working.

Last year we had elections in Brazil. The entire campaign was based on hate and polarization. One of the most culturally complex and socially traumatized countries of the world had its subjectivity completely taken away from its people and rendered by a fixed idea that had to represent them. Dialogue did not exist. Everyone was made separate, everyone was alone.

When there is no dialogue your thoughts become concrete.

This was a specially difficult time for me. This illusion that something is fixed bothered me in a very deep way. For my crit I showed a piece that attempted to address this topic. The work was then selected for a show in the Brazilian embassy in London. Here is a brief description: The work Water and Glass developed in reference to the early works of Cildo Meireles. Between 1970 and 19775, Meireles produced two of his most iconic pieces: Inserções em Circuitos Ideológicos: Coca-Cola and Eureka/Blindhotland. One, which expressed a specific attempt to pursue a democratic art practice and the other which dealt with concerns surrounding the difference between appearance and reality. Feeding on these concepts Pluralismo, Pluralism, attempts to embody both works in one. The bottles - this time found jars and glass pots - are filled with different quantities of water; however, they seem to be perfectly levelled with each other. Even though the objects are different they all play the exact same role in maintaining this balance. The ephemeral nature of water and the transformation that it has over time connects the work with its environment and representation becomes blurred with reality.

Here the participation of the viewer is deliberately subtle. It depends on his perception of time. All the people in the show where connected to the piece and had influence in the way it “evaporated” but the consciousness of their action depended on their awareness and acceptance of change through time.

“He who desires but acts not, breeds pestilence. Expect poison from the standing water.”

William Blake.

Plaster Statue and Medical Scale

2015

150 x 20 x 30 cm 

Bluetooth Speaker

2015

100√3 cm x 113.43 hertz

in collaboration with Alex Athorn 

Digital Photograph of Portable Museum Chairs

2015

64 x 90 cm (each)

Silver Gelatine Print of Lamp

2016

27.9 x 35.6 cm

Wall Clock and String

2014

40 x 60 cm 

Broom

2016

130 x 30 cm

Acrylic on Canvas

2016

150 x 180 cm

Drip and Bucket

2014

dimensions variable 

Rags and Pens

2018

dimensions vaiarble

Eighty Slides, Projector and Stand

2018

4.5 degrees/slide

Projection of Photograph and Chair

2015

dimensions variable 

Two Laptop Computers on Skype

2016

35 x 40 x 60

Overhead Projector

2012

dimension variable 

Flourescent Tube and Poliester Resin

2013

40 x 120 x 15 cm x 6000 hours

Flourescent Tube and Bubblewrap

2014

150 x 200 x 150 cm

Digital Photograph of Performance (Questões Estruturais)

2014

10 x 15 cm

Eucalyptus Logs and Gas Canisters

2016

100 x 350 x 350 cm

Whale Bones and Rebar

2013

115 x 240 x 60 cm

Performance and Wood Cage

2013

dimensions variable 

Rock, Pulley and Rope

2015

200 x 100 x 100 cm

Documentation of Student and Tutor Performance (Homage to Chris Burden)

2016

in collaboration with Naomi Dines

Video Documentation of Performance (Language)

2014

2m21s

in collaboration with Aigli Tsirogani

Concrete Block, Digital Video and Documentation

2014

15 x 10 x 10 cm

Silicon, Plaster and Fiberglass

2015

dimensions to scale 

Digital Video of Watercolor and Toilet (My Painting Is Shit)

2013

21s

Fan, Microphone and Amplifier

2012

50 x 90 x 50 cm

Note

2014

dimensions variable

“We have theatre inside. We can observe ourselves in action. We are at the same time actors and spectators.”

Augusto Boal

When we get together for a crit, we create a space with both memory and imagination. For me it is one of those beautiful moments in art practice. Its dynamics encourage action, awareness of your body in relation to others, and the ability of learning through living. There is an internal dialogue between being yourself and becoming others. And in this doing, the realization that you are a diversity of people.

Participation is the reason I chose to come to art school in the first place, and it is becoming in a way, essential in what drives my practice. In my understanding, the moment in time when participation is happening in its purest (possible) form inside the institutional structure, is during crits. Looking back one conversation particularly stands out to me; we were commenting on a students work, and this student was surprised by the interpretation of another. This, however, cannot be avoided, and as I mentioned before, should even be stimulated. Thinking about it, crits, by the way they are structured, have (or at least should have) this mentality. And that is why I appreciate them. It is a time for the group, the dialogue, regard to the other, it is not for one interpretation. There is clear understanding of this in the moment, for example, when you are commenting on other people’s work. There is a kind of learning that happens through making, through becoming the other, while discovering yourself. In a way the same happens when making art.

Rio de Janeiro, Brasil, 1985
lives and works in Rio de Janeiro

Researcher on the study of perception, in disciplines such as anthropology, philosophy, and physics, Olav explores, professedly, the possibility of reorganising the world in an effort to question pre-established understanding. His work, situated in time, inhabits hybrid fields. Using the concept of circularity and mutual transformation, it questions "intermediate spaces" ; and investigates the diverse relations between the subject and the object or between a thought and a word. By making use of the occasion, or inventing small contradictions in the everyday, the artist explores inconsistencies between the concept of something and the perception of something. In his pieces, subtle gestures, sometimes even banal, are capable of sowing sincere experiences and having a strong impact. They aim to help us appreciate reality and life with more intensity, individuality and consciousness.

CV

20172019

MA Sculpture - Royal College of Art, London, England

20132016

BA (Hons) Fine Arts - Central St. Martins, London, England

20122013

EAV Parque Lage, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

2016

Residencia São João, São José do Vale do Rio Preto, Brasil 

Group

2021

NN3, Myymälä2 Gallery, Helsinki, Finland

2019

a_space_is_a_space, Instagram

2019

Neo Norte 2, Exposed Arts Projects, London, England

2019

Contemporary Museum of Rootedness, Etnografisch Museum of Hackney, London, England

2019

SHOW, Royal College of Art, London, England

2019

Brexhibition, Dyson Gallery, London, England

2019

No One Has Ever Seen My Bathtub, Safehouse 1, London, England

2019

Cross My Heart, Edinburgh College of Art, Edinburgh, Scotland

2018

VIA Arts Prize, Embassy of Brasil, London, England

2018

Supercult, Hockney Gallery, London, England

2018

Videoarte Agora Videoarte, Galeria Gentil Carioca, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

2018

WIP, RCA Sculpture Building, London, England

2017

Natural Fictions, Cafuné, Berlin, Germany

2017

Casca, Galeria Carambola, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

2017

Piñateria, 3M Fundacion de Arte, Santa Marta, Colombia

2017

Efimera, Museo de Arte de La Universidad del Magdalena, Santa Marta, Colombia

2016

EAV, Parque Lage, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

2016

Conjunção, Wozen, Lisboa, Portugal

2016

No Meio do Caminho, Antiga Fabrica da Bhering, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

2016

Show One, Central Saint Martins, London, England

2015

Deslocado, P31 Hospital Julio de Matos, Lisboa, Portugal

2015

Performing the Unconscious, Freud Museum, London, England

2015

Metaphonica, Granary Square Building, London, England

2014

4.3 x 24 x 2.9, The Rag Factory, London, England

2014

Matilha, Galeria Graphos Brasil, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

2013

Poeira Arte Rio, Poeira, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

2013

Ocupação Shibatronics, Cidade das Artes, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

Solo

2013

Fuga, Galeria Fosco, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil 

Publications

2020

Propriocepção Quando o Ambiente Se Torna o Corpo

2019

Sculpture is Moonlight is Sculpture

2019

The Pluralist newspaper

2018

Cafuné n01

2014

Performing Olav

Curator/Visiting Tutor/Lecturer

20182019

Ruskin School of Art, Oxford, UCA, Farnham, Camberwell College of Art, London, England
Edinburgh College of Art, Edinburgh, Scotland

2017

Cafuné Project Space, Berlin, Germany

2017

3M Art Foundation, Santa Marta, Colombia

updated 2022

E studio@olavalexander.com

Rua do Senado 200, Centro, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

+55(21)38279482

@olav


Copyright

Public domain videos/audio/images can be viewed and shared with others as long as the authorship is credited and there is a link back to the website of the author. These files cannot be altered in any way or used for commercial purpose nor cannot be displayed or exhibited without the consent of the artist. © Olav Alexander

Privacy Policy

This privacy policy refers to the website olavalexander.com.

Having the privacy and protection of the personal data of all data subjects with whom it interacts as one of its fundamental pillars.

What Data We Process and Why:

The website does not collect any personal data from its visitors when accessing it.

An email for direct contact with the studio is available on the website. In the event that a visitor contacts us, the contact email will be stored in the inbox only for a period of 3 months, or until the conversations that may be being conducted between the visitor and the studio are closed.

Only the studio will have access to this email, during the period it is active.

Data Sharing:

The website is hosted on the Hostinger International Ltd. platform, which has advanced defense and information security mechanisms. To learn more about Hostinger's privacy policy, visit the link: https://www.hostinger.com/privacy-policy or https://www.hostinger.com.br/politica-de-privacy.

Comply with laws or protect rights and interests. We disclose your personal information if we determine that such action is reasonably necessary to comply with the law, protect our rights or those of others, or to prevent fraud or abuse. Specifically, we may disclose your personal information in response to lawful requests from public authorities, for example, to comply with national security or law enforcement requirements.

Just as we value the privacy of all data subjects we deal with, we require third-party service providers to be responsible for protecting data linked to the same data subjects.

Cookies:

Cookies are pieces of data stored by websites on a device. They improve visitor navigation by helping websites remember preferences and understand how each person uses a variety of features.

Our website is hosted on the Hostinger International Ltd platform. which has its own cookie policy, which can be found at the following links: https://www.hostinger.com.br/politica-de-cookies ; https://www.hostinger.com/cookie-policy.

Rights of Data Subjects:

When required by applicable law (and subject to any relevant exceptions provided by law), you may have the right to access, update, change or delete personal information.

You can access, update, change or delete personal information by contacting us via email (studio@olavalexander.com) to request the necessary changes. You can enforce your other rights by contacting us at the same email address. Please keep in mind that you may be required to verify your identity with respect to your requests.

Updates to this Privacy Policy

We will update this Privacy Policy periodically to reflect changes in technology, law, our business operations, or for any other reason we determine necessary or appropriate. When we make changes, we update the "Effective Date" at the top of the Privacy Policy and post it on our websites. When we make material changes or process personal information, we will notify you (for example, by posting a prominent notice of the changes on our websites before they take effect, or by sending you a notification directly).

We encourage you to periodically check the revision of this Privacy Policy for any changes since your last visit. This will help ensure that you better understand your relationship with us, including the ways in which we process your personal information.

Effective Date 05/01/2022

Artist Statement 
Só, Mais Um 

2019

Poetic Glue 

2018

Midday (Sol) 

2018

Dissertation 

2015