In the Group stare those who have come to see the work are invited to look at each other. The strangers are divided into two groups and separated. Each individual is given a partner to look at from the other group. They are informed that the exercise is not one of endurance and any time they wish to leave they are free to do so. If their partner leaves, they may refocus their gaze onto another person of their choice or they can also leave. The work continues until the last person left standing leaves the premises. In between both groups are video cameras that record the event, thereby exposing the participants to both a mechanical and human gaze. The video documentation is later exhibited.

Within these confines a subtle dynamic evolves. A performative moment is created from anticipation and expectation. The viewers (those who have come to see the performance) fulfil the role of performer. Detachment is impossible as they are the work and create the event.
It is a closed system that generates its own performative platform where the act of looking becomes a public performance. These individuals are both voyeur and subject (audience and performer) simultaneously. Slowly as the scenario develops it becomes evident that they are watching themselves just as much as one another.

REVIEW OF GROUP STARE PERFORMANCE / VIDEO IN BIELEFEL, GERMANY.
What is the theme of this work, which at first glance appears to be a simple, even banal film situation? Perhaps the theme can best be deduced by examining the questions that arise out of the situation. From what the images show, can one draw conclusions about the interaction of the participants, about their relationships and feelings to and for each other or to the situation of being filmed? Something fundamental depends upon the answer to this question; namely, which of the labels that we use to organize the realm of images can describe the images of Denis Beaubois? If reality appears to be an image in his images, then we are dealing with documentary images. If we insist that documentary images are illusions or create images; or that they are always primarily their own reality, are pure aesthetic objects, then we must decidedly investigate them, contextualize them within art history, fling ourselves into a possibly endless discussion in order to agree upon what these images mean.

Six people look at each other and are filmed while doing so. A media situation whose description not only sounds like the title of a film by Andy Warhol, but poses questions that a Warhol film might: who creates the images -- the unseen artist, the invisible camera, the six participants -- each of whom, at any given time during the proceedings, is different in his own way?

If Denis Beaubois's images had seven authors, then the images would be documents of seven ways of producing art. Then, in order to do them all justice, one would have to have a different concept of the invitations, exhibition signs, and, in part, of the idea about artist/authorship. And if the six visible participants are co-authors, are actively staging the images, then we must call them actors. How can we differentiate between what the inhabitants of moving pictures (actors) are and what they act?

This appears to me to be Denis Beaubois's method: he starts with the most simple of situations and then delves into the discourse and problems stringently defined by cultural and media history. These are problems that affect the most public of things -- our images of the world -- as well as the most private of things -- our images of ourselves and others. Beaubois examines the exaggerated discrepancy between Bildung (knowledge; or what we know) and Einbildung (illusion; or what we think we know). How do we differentiate between what we are and what we act?

In the stimulating conversations about his exhibition that I conducted with Denis Beaubois, we also discussed the question of whether he made art, or if one could also call it film? To quote a film shown recently on 3Sat about the video artist Bruce Naumann: "This is not a film about Hollywood. It's not about murder and manslaughter, but about the portrayal of internal violence: power, powerlessness, joy, frustration, love, hate, fear, death. For over thirty years, Bruce Naumann has dealt with these primary feelings in videos, drawings, sculptures, and installations. Instead of the pathos of Hollywood, he prefers the laconic honor of self-portrayal. Naumann makes art, not cinema."

Michael Girke
translated by Allison Plath-Moseley