So, I think you had enough, hopefully enough time to sort out the main questions for this incredible panel. And again, I don't want to sum up, but I just want to bring back some what was really just sort of staying in my mind and which was there all the time. So Anna, I think what was quite interesting that you talk about the resilience of the streets, so what will finally survive in all these turnovers. And Katja, I think what is still in my mind
is that you said culture eats technology for breakfast. So I think it's not street food, but there's some sort of overlap. I think what we learned, we learned a lot from Kilian, but I think what we really learned is that things will develop if you give the space. And I think, Thomas, if we are not already have been convinced that art is inclusive, I think this was the perfect thing that everybody sort of has to believe that it is like this. But I just want to hand over just first to the panel and ask you, did you figure out
in this sort of, I think we tried to actually light some problems which will pop up in the the next near future from completely different angles. Do you want to give any sort of comments on that, what you heard from your colleagues on the panels so far? Please. Will you start, Kilian? Thank you. Okay, let me try. Well, I think what is coming through somewhat is what makes me happy. And that's that we're seeing more and more sort of the self-initiative. initiative, you're not waiting that something happens and falls from the sky. It is more and more self-driven. And that's actually, in fact, what is the advantage of somewhat the 21st century, in
a way, that we have certain tools which help us to be decentralized, which help us to exchange and which help us to exchange resources in a different way, knowledge, know-how, ideas, being completely disruptive. So the positive thing is decentralization is actually happening and that's, I think, a big challenge for the big corporations, for the big governments who think that they're still in charge. They're not. We are in charge. Yeah. Okay. Well, what I loved about today is that obviously everybody was inspired by action. and that's something I really appreciate.
But being an Austrian and having grown up here and looking at the politics in this country in the last few years and it was the reason why I actually had to leave my research group that I had built here was an absolutely ability for non-action. No change and the absolute no movement of anything. So I'm really happy to hear that And I see at some points that we are moving, that there's people are changing and there's people who are willing to take decisions and are responsible for it. But I don't see it strongly enough. And this is something that I think Europe needs to get its act together very quickly on the local levels, on the national levels, on the EU levels.
The world is moving forward. There is many things, opportunities and dangers out there. and it will not only be possible by individual actions to change, as much as I fully support this, institutions will have to move with it, whether it's more on a local level, like the new age of the city-states, because nation-states have been an idea of the 19th century anyway, but the call for action I would support. However, outside this room in the last few days, I've been back for four or five days, I haven't seen it. So great to hear about it, but hopefully it works.
Let's see what happens after Sunday. I guess throughout the day, really, something that's been interesting me for a long time has been repeated, and that's this sort of power and innovation of the informal economy and informal settlements. And, you know, so I guess the question I have is sort of how does one intervene with that? I think that this model of printing the transport map is an interesting one of intervention within the informal to make the informal sort of work better.
So I think that's the question I have with the street food project. and I think is very much in all the presentations of, okay, the informal we know, I think, has a lot of creative solutions. What's a way of, or maybe we can go to Bani's phrase of how do we collaborate with the future, right, in this way of collaborating with those projects and experiments and innovations. Yeah, I was not here this morning, so I cannot really speak about what happened today, I'm sorry. Just about this afternoon, when there is a question of social inclusion, yes, I think art can take part, the artists should take part in this,
with doing artwork, that's what I try to do, because to me, doing artwork means using a tool, the tool art, the tool art to confront the world, the tool art to confront the reality I'm living in, and also the tool art in living in the time I'm living in. So that's what I try as an artist to contribute in this absolute belief in equality, in justice, in the truth and also in non-exclusion. Because we are pretty much on a time pressure.
Thomas has to leave half an hour so we're actually going to really close in half an hour so I immediately will hand over the mic to the audience for the questions. My name is Daniel Aschwanden. I have a question to you, Thomas. Seeing the structure of the Gramsci Monument, I think there is a multi-layered activity which includes all the people and offers them to be co-authors or to share this experience. Under the conditions of what is happening now, do you think you have to change your practice? Is it demanding for a change, an alteration or an extension of the strategies that you developed in your artworks up to now?
Or do you think by what you just mentioned, by you live the way you live and you try to produce artwork mirroring those qualities, that that's enough to give your share into those new challenges of dealing with a world that falls apart. The only thing I can... I mean, I would now, with this experience, like always I did when I make an experience in public space, I make a lot of errors. and I learn a lot. And that's what I like, by the way, doing art.
So this is a real experience. So one thing I would change, I mean not change for the Gramsci Monument, but next work in public space, I think, is, and perhaps this joins something I could listen this afternoon, I would not more do this strict programmation. I would change this. I would work in non-programmation. Because in the Gramsci monument, I made the daily events, the weekly events, and it was very clear which time what happened. But actually, I think it's not needed.
It's not needed when you're there on the ground, really. It's not more needed to have a watch and to look. So this is the thing I learned that I would change. That's the thing I would change. And I would change my character, which is often stubborn, you know, idiot, and only fixed on one objective. And a lot of people always criticize it, and they are right. But I don't know who does the work, who's the diversity instead of me. But, you know, so that I would like to change also. Thank you. Any other questions? I got a mic.
Yeah, I have a very open question to all of you. I think in the first panel, actually, we discussed about those kind of the invisibility of some problem that arose and that, like, large quantities of people are just not aware of it, like when we broke, I think in 2008, that 50% are living in cities or also others. And I was just wondering what your experiences are of working in a very specific field, how to connect to other people. And if you just share some thoughts on strategies and I don't know, maybe outlooks on the future, what would you hope for and what would you change? It seems that you should start. I believe very much into sort of incubators in a way.
I mean, you have a large number of people and there's always the agents of change in a way, of pushing things ahead. And I have discovered that in most communities or let's say people living together, they don't have to be communities yet, there are people who are more accessible and more connected and more sort of switched on. And this is what we used in the refugee work increasingly. And what I would love to work on, especially when we talk about sort of getting impulses into such larger crowds. There is somebody who is connected. There is somebody who has that smartphone. There is somebody who has already heard about open source.
There is always somebody who is a little bit ahead. and that is sort of what we need to sort of boost and support. We had a little bit of this discussion earlier and I think while we need specialists and engineers and people who really know one of their subjects very deeply, what we need a little bit in people too is this team model. You know one thing, like really, so you can talk about it and know it, but actually be spread and be able to talk about other things. Usually if people talk with me, they don't know, look, I'm a banker, but actually I'm also a researcher, but actually I'm also a curator,
and funny enough, us electronica just gave me a big sign that said artists. I took a picture and I was very proud of it. But many people, so people need to simplify when they talk to you, they need to put you in a certain box to be able to remember you. I think we need more people who push out of those boxes and then become the networkers or the switch down people that can relate to many things because we need translators who speak the language of many things who can do stuff but also don't get lost in a philosophical discussion whether we talk about austerity or inequality when we actually know kind of what we want to touch with this.
Or we need translators that bring the people together. Thanks. Yeah, I think it's kind of a good question, actually. I'm thinking about it from the point of view of this Shenzhen work. And, of course, if you're someone who's actually trying to make an electronic device and you come to Shenzhen, as many people in this global maker world do, they do try to interact with the Shenzhai world. But it's actually very, in some ways, you know, that activity in terms of actually getting connections with factories or actually producing with, in some ways, those connections can happen. But the language is so different.
So we've actually tried to kind of engineer these workshops where we brought together global makers with these sort of Shenzhen, people that are doing Shenzhen electronics, and they just could not speak to each other. They had no idea what each other was talking about. So even though they're involved, they're all interested in making IoT devices or whatever. So I think it is a good question. I don't really have an answer to it other than, I think part of our project is to try to think that through. Of course, you definitely need people that can translate between these worlds. And that's not an easy thing to find. To me, it's, I think, different.
Because my only legitimation is to go and to get in contact with people because I have a project. I have a mission. I have an idea. And this is the corner point, because everybody is happy to listen to you, perhaps for one minute or five, when you say, oh, I have an idea of a project, I would like to share it with you. It's on a one-to-one base, but to do so, I must first do the work, I mean, to be clear what I want, why I want, etc. And then a dialogue can start, or longer or less long. But what I, as an artist, what I learned, that everybody, and this is beautiful, I think,
everybody is open to speak about art, about philosophy. Everybody has a moment, a place somewhere in his brain, or in her heart, or whatever, for art or philosophy. And that's the point to start, for me, as an artist. because my competence is an artist, as an artist and to do my art, this is the only competence I have to bring with and have to take over. Thanks a lot. I have a question for Kilian and Thomas. Both your work is dealing with influencing levels of agency among people and also a shift in identity
or maybe a reinstating of an identity that was temporarily lost. And I work very closely with sociologists who sometimes demarcate cultures as being individualistic or collectivist, depending on how the identity is. And what was striking is incidents where in an otherwise collectivist culture, people were working with individual agency in trying to be entrepreneurial, et cetera. And in the case of New York, in the backdrop of a much more individualistic culture, people seem to be working in a more collectivist way. The question I have is, what is going on? What are the underlying phenomena that are going on
in the shift in agency and identity that you saw? What are some of the simple or complex things happening? Well, again, I'm convinced by what I saw in 25 years dealing with people totally stressed and having lost everything. I haven't seen anybody who would first put collectivity ahead of the rest. I mean, you will have some individuals who put themselves above. But the rest, I have always seen that complete urge and necessity to regain that me and myself,
to be able to really see myself as a human being. And then I can give. And in a way, what is what I think what is happening, even in a context like New York, is people have, more or less, with many exceptions, we know that, a place where they somehow can lock themselves in, and it's themselves, where there is some bit of themselves. And that gives us strength, even if they're poor, even if they don't have access to social services as they should. I mean, we agree. But still, they have something what makes them different, me from you, and so on and so forth. That is what is usually lost in these massive situations where people are stripped of everything up to the memories of their families.
By the way, again, I have discovered how important phones become because they become the carrier of the last bit of identity. Because that's where you have the photos of your family. I'm in contact with lots of refugees, Syrians. I mean, they have through WhatsApp absolutely retained or kept some of their identity. So again, I'm very much, I have changed my mind on this. I thought we all need to be more collective. Of course we need to, but in order to get there, it's me and myself first. It's like that. But also to accept that difference and also accept that some people, I know I'm not popular
when I say this, some people have more and some people have less. This is how society is somewhat structured. And if I try to put the active people down and try to put other people who are more passive only up, then I'm disturbing that sort of fabric. What's going on to me, there is a confrontation through art. Art is dialogue but also confrontation. It's the same with philosophy. And this is something new, this is something important. It means something overpasses me, overpasses me with my small project because it's about art. I need here two anecdotes. I'll show you the picture of Clyde. Clyde, he in the beginning, the first meeting he had, he listened to me and then he said,
what is the benefit for our community? And I told him, I don't work for the community, I'm working for art. And I mean, okay, it was, he understood immediately that I'm not here to try to seduce him. So, but I really project, you know, because I'm an artist, I'm speaking from my point of view. And why he understood it? Because he is the best social worker I never saw. They do fantastic work since so many years over there taking care on everybody and then he got in contact with something else, with art and within the people. Another example, art and philosophy. There was the daily lectures of Marcus.
It's an illustration, sorry, but, you know, how I can tell to say what is important. It's to bring another dimension, an overmeasure to it. And art and poetry and philosophy, I believe it, by the way, can give this, can give this. So, Marcus, with his daily lectures, who said God is dead, okay? Hardcore Nietzschean philosopher, Marcus Steinweg, God is dead. Okay, the people from the forest houses, they go to the church every Sunday to the Baptist church. So there was the discussion coming from the people. But Marcus, we go to church, we believe in God. Why say this and so on?
It was a beautiful discussion with a few people, a beautiful discussion. And Marcus explained to the people that he as a philosopher cannot accept a God or somebody who says how to think. and the people understood it completely, you know, completely, not thanks to Marcus, but thanks to, there was something else, philosophy, you know. So that, therefore, I mean, there are small examples, but I think, from my perspective, yes, art, poetry, philosophy can bring another measure and then this is going on, something, we are confronted with something you don't really measure. Hello, my name is Ruth Matthäus-Behr.
I just want to ask you, Thomas, a question. Isn't it then, after this conversation, that the artist claims truth? And if the artist claims truth, isn't he or she then maybe God? No. I'm not... First of all, no. Double no. No. No, no, and no because, no, but, you know, when I say I don't claim truth, I said truth is the term which art can deliver. An example, a painting of Mondrian is truth.
Because when Mondrian didn't make it, it would not happen. This is truth. This is truth, a picture of Mondrian. It's truth. It's not truth something. We are not doing journalism. We are not verifying facts. It's not about the truth. but to establish something which itself, as such, is truth. So, therefore, the double know. So, I am not interested in declaring something about truth, but I am interested in doing a work who touches moments, perhaps moments, of truth. But I am not an accountant of them either.
I just can hope or it's a kind of challenge that I should create the conditions that moments of truth could happen. So, I just want to ask a question a little bit away from art. It's about urban design concerning the fact that Anna Grinsman, you were speaking about the street life and to kind of bringing the idea of the street life to the future city. I'm asking the question like this street food is the only kind of concern that you've taken already into account to kind of make a connection between the street life and the future city. I'm asking this question on the basis of my dissertation I'm working on a market, Bazar and for me
like Bazar is and one of the aspects could be addresses like food and this kind of stuff but besides that it's for me, it's like a Facebook for the people from 500 years ago. They can have different faces, like political, social, economical, and they can kind of update themselves, speak about different stuff and discussion. So the thing is, I'm asking whether this idea of the street food is the only thing that was included to kind of make a merge between the traditional kind of street life to the future city, or is there any other aspect is already studied or research are going to be. Thank you. No, certainly street food is an example of something that is much broader.
And, you know, I'm interested in, as I say, street markets in particular and actually market culture and how do we conceive of markets differently from how we conceive of capitalism because as we've talked about and learnt today, as we sort of go forward in these sort of new urban formations, there's this whole kind of economy that arises and that is an enormous part of the global economy. And doesn't really, our analysis and our understanding of global capitalism isn't very adequate for understanding this market economy, by which I mean street markets
not stock markets and so I'm very interested and street food is just the one that captures us all instantly, right? It's very interesting because in Tehran Bazar we have some kind of carriages, they put the food on it during the time the launch break the people were working in different shops in the Bazar and they going to serve with these carriages and they are moving, it's kind of like movable, like serving food whatsoever, like catering. And it's also interesting for me because it's also kind of a movable agent that's kind of bringing people together and they ask for the price, how is the quality beside the restaurant and other places that people can have something
to eat. I mean, like there are different kind of, in my opinion, it's one of those aspects could be taken into account. And there are so many other things, particularly concerning the cases that I'm working on. It's in many different ways, like politics, like economy, like social co-presents and social interfaces. And this was a trigger for me, kind of impulse. Very interesting. I think that, just to say quickly about this issue about mobility, I think that one of the issues about the way that, again, economic and urban development is conceptualized is often this sort of movement from the informal to the formal as a movement of progress and what we see when we sort of look to that that that actually certainly in Shanghai is a
often violent process right that these people are and this is the question I had for Pedro these people are policed right they're policed out and they're in in Shanghai this is done by the cheng guan this this the municipal city officials who aren't exactly police but they're given the authority to seize people's goods and seize their carts and stuff like that. And so the mobility is actually part of the reason for the mobility is your customers, you can move around but it's also when the chengguan come you can run. So that's part of the reason for the mobility. Thank you. I just want to finish this panel
And I would just hand over to the speakers for a final statement. Just pretty brief. So, who wants to start? Well, most of you liked the idea of culture, it's technology for breakfast. I just want to make sure that it is understood that it could also be the other way around and that technology is culture for breakfast and that this is the work I'm doing in those, working between those two lines. Thanks. Thank you.
I had to think a bit. It's a long day. But again, I think what we are seeing with the whole current hype as well on people on the move, we need to realize that this is just the beginning. This is not to create panic, but increasingly we're seeing movements all over the world. We need a new world order to actually manage movements of people differently. In my opinion, we have to get away from the sort of categories of you are allowed to move, you're not allowed to move, you are an economic migrant, you are this, you are that. I think people are in need to move because the climate is changing,
because poverty is pushing, because wars are pushing, and because we want to move. That's also a right, I think. and so that I think requires a very bold move of all of us to actually change the way of how we look at people movements and how we support that and I'm quite confident that there are actually lots of crazy ways of supporting those movements out there which I'm discovering also with my current role here in Austria actually in trying to advise the government
Thank you. Okay, I don't think I have anything particularly profound to say other than I've been really honored to be part of such a fascinating panel and I think that all of us are fairly mobile
so that I hope that when people pass through Shanghai, they will, you know, stay connected. So I think this was a sort of perfect last word. So I think it's only up to me to actually say thank you. First of all, I would like to thank you, the audience, for actually staying with us the whole day. And really, I think it was somehow exhausting for everybody and I guess also for the audience. And of course I want to thank the university for really financing this symposium. I want to thank Anja Seipenbusch with her team,
Jasmine Vogel and Elisabeth Falkensteiner, for actually organizing the whole event. I think there's a lot of things we don't see, but we only will recognize if it's not working. So I think we didn't recognize it, so it was working perfectly. And I also want to thank Annalena for the helping hands from our studio and Christian and his team for all the technical support up here. I also especially want to thank Barbara for actually introducing and establishing the contact with Thomas. I think it was perfect to have him on the panel and thank you for that.
Last but not least, of course, I want to thank all of you, the speakers, for sharing your knowledge and your time coming here, taking really long, long journeys. I think we calculated it was more or less everybody was even. Sophie, which is more or less in Hamburg, but she took a lot of journeys around to come here so everybody was taking 10 hours of flight to come to Vienna to join the conference. So thank you, thank you very much and thank you for your contributions. I would also love to mention that this symposium will be featured in a book and I want to ask
you please, and I think it was pushed to say that, so please hand in your manuscripts as soon as possible. We still have some, so this is very unique. We never had things like this. But thank you, thank you very much for coming here. And I also thank all the people I maybe forgot to mention. So thank you for coming and stay connected. Stay connected. Thank you.