
Kutlug Ataman’s “Paradise” and “Küba” is in Vancouver Art Gallery from Febuary 9th to May 19th. Both video installations present the stories of people who live in what might be seen as utopian communities. These two installations both argue that “a place is as diverse and contradictory as the many stories (myths as in “Paradise”) that have formed it.”
In Ataman’s work “Paradise”, twenty four residents represent a southern Californian community to talk about the place they called paradise, and in “Küba”, forty people were interviewed to talk bout their neighbourhood. Through these interviewers, the community and neighbourhood is presented on an individual basis. It is engaging that Ataman chose myths from these interviewers to conceptually weave up this Californian “paradise” (as called by the twenty four interviewers) and the Istanbul neighbourhood. However, the method of Ataman presenting an allegory “paradise” could be expended wider on a public basis so that the videos are more persuasive to the viewers.
“We all exist because of our stories, and if your stories are not told or preserved then your history does not exist anymore. You have official history, but your oral history, your myth, is very important”. Ataman argues that myths are as complex as the social and historical (linear) structures of a place and the myths of individuals within a space form the complex unofficial history of people. However, these interviews could not be claimed as representations of a space, because of the role-playing natures of these interviewers on the screen and these interviewers could had been chosen to act the interview. These personal myths portray plenty of events within the community, neither telling any exposure of the environment on people nor people’s reaction on the environment. These myths stand for the interviewers themselves. Therefore, these videos should not be the identity of a place.
Ataman states in the exhibition that “’documentary’ [of ‘Paradise’ and ‘Küba’] as it is claimed, doesn’t exist”. However, if the myths does not show any exposure or relationship of people or environment, using the word “Paradise” is redundant because Ataman may have ask questions that weren’t related to the idea of utopia or to the place they live at all to assemble this video installation. Though it has labelled that these two exhibitions are not about neighbourhood in Istanbul and the community in California, but about the complex structure under the environment, having a clear focus on exposures between people and spaces makes the title more meaningful and concise.
Though Ataman’s “Paradise” and “Küba” could be showing more on comparisons between the exposure of environment and people, his “Paradise” shows a degree that digital media, either unmanipulated or manipulated, function as authority to comment or mimic the reality we are in. All the interviewers in “Paradise” and the contents they had confessed may not be true, but they mimic the truth because they appeared on the screen and are showcased to the public, in which that the camera and T.V screen give them the authority to create a truth solely for themselves, but believed by the public.
Different from other contemporary digital video artists who utilize and manipulate the original footages with effects and time lapse to create surreal environments, Ataman’s “Paradise” with these twenty four residents’ interviews tries to create a space that’s imaginative but at the same time seems to exist. With similar concepts, digital video is not really about what viewer sees, but questioning about the physical reality that we are in, and the reality that exists in the recorded video.


<– I. NY T-shirt.