The Anartist, who is the character I invented–and who wears a black balaclava–is a sort of daemonic avatar who attracts me into the event of radical urban interventions. The Anartist creates critical play-grounds that disturb the organization of capitalist space-time implemented in the reproduction of habits, perceptions, gestures, actions, feelings, subjectivities, "institutions" etc. The Anartist engenders an untimely and unspacely event which, from a starting critique, opens the urban situation to an “infinite contestation”. The Anartist, who is also an artistic remodulation of an antagonist Black Bloc aesthetic and subjectivity, is already a performative “graphic novel character". This does not mean that a "character" does not have authentic political potential. It is not a grotesque parody, even if it also has humoristic features, but an intensification of a political mask; it is a bifurcation that regenerates the subversive force of the original “simulacrum” (there are no original essences). Furthermore, “fiction", as both Deleuze and Rancière would agree, is charged with subversive potential (Rancière, 2011). It allows a "de-actualization" of the subjectivity that is free from social conditioning and can reinvent itself. In other words fiction shatters the perceptible orders that anticipates the cognitive ground where people draw concepts, definitions and powers. The inclusion of fiction in my interventions creates an indefinite ambiguity between art, literature, theater, politics, graphic novel, which, as Sylvain Lazarus would put it, gives life to a “purely subjective” and “intimate” politics that has nothing to do with an “exterior object” (Lazarus, 2015). Furthermore, such a strategy increases the “dissensus” and “displacement” of the pre-defined “partition of the sensorium” as Rancière would add (Rancière, 2002). However, if we look beyond theory of politics and theory of art, which I have talked about at length in my dissertation and some other articles, it is desire and contingent heterogeneity that move any practice. As everybody knows theory and action, art and politics, and writing and experience cannot clearly overlap and this is also good news; otherwise nothing new that exceeds theory or writing could be created. There is something in action that escapes "signification"; it is an excessive “being there” in the midst of an Event and a fuzzy practice. Everything cannot be explained…The open cannot be closed, the continuum cannot be fully grasped by the discrete. Knowledge of doing and making is tacit (Johannessen, 1990). It subtracts itself to the power of language and the reproduction of epistemic “Power-Knowledge” (Foucault, 1980). An art practice like the one I do is also more radical than a practice of making directed to the useful such as the one of the artisan or designer. A political art practice is like advancing in the non-normative heterogeneous. It is also more complex than usual art practices coded in a system of references built by legitimate institutions and bureaucracies of art.

Flee and find a new medium: a media theory at the End of History.

I am not a recognised mainstream artist who is granted by money, notoriety and institutions. I also do not recognize the authority of the art system grounded on institutions financed by capitalism that promotes an art of propaganda for the 1%. Because of my condition of “minority” and "solitude", my interventions must always rise from the limiting power-relations in which I am always confined, stratified, and asymmetrically territorialized. “Flee and find your weapon” as Gilles Deleuze puts it. We could say that all history of art is to find new media (or new weapons) of expression to flee the code of the old media that become soon stratifying apparata of power-relations once they are institutionalized. A new medium invented out of the immediate needs is an uncoded “war machine”, a “smooth space”, a “tunnel” to escape (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987). A new medium is a new fold of contemporary art that allows a new unfolding of expression, language, style. Some years ago I wrote a book that I published by myself, entitled “The becoming-wolf of Contemporary Art. Contemporary Art as a war machine”. In this self-published book I described the becoming of contemporary art as a resonating multiplicity of flights and captures. Each new line of flight escapes from the over-coding of an old medium and constitutes a new uncoded medium of expression that deterritorialises the old one. Then a deterritorialization is always a re-territorialization and re-coding of old media in an active rhizome of media; as also McLuhan would put it in different words (McLuhan, 1969). The media plane of becoming is in continuous metamorphosis with the proliferation of new media, new praxis, new styles and unpredictable re-codings that charge the field of possibilities with new "throw of dice". This relation between medium and expression is necessary because it is not possible to have an appearance without medium and each new medium is also an aesthetic "prosthetic extension" (McLuhan, 1969) of a potential new subjectivity and its new world. The medium channels the super-intense field of metamorphosis that can be felt by an artist at the level of an immanent, obscure feeling before it is expressed as a new "being" into a medium. The "new being" is an event of discontinuity in a super-continuum. The artist is procreative because it extracts a newborn being from the super-intense; in this sense the artist is a "becoming-woman". Intensities emerge as phenomena through a medium and its code of expression that captures and gives body to a molecular becomings of the super-intense. However, when a medium is too stratified, striated or saturated by power-relations and power-codes the intensities are obstructed and too slow for emerging as hot new from the super-intense. In this condition of “stratification” the super-intense field must find a new medium through a new art praxis to emerge as a force of metamorphosis. The medium is part of a complex plane of metamorphosis always changing. The artist, who is the “intense other” implicated in the "rhizome" and also a “messenger of the metamorphosis”, feels this pressure for a new medium of expression. Whatever comes out as “new” is under the spell of an immediate urge for a “new weapon”. The artist feels this violent necessity and this explains the anarchic proliferation of new media, new styles and new languages that transgress but also echoes the old media, styles and languages. Indeed, the field of metamorphosis is a field of echoes and resonances. The media-field is a crossover in becoming that bifurcates and returns on itself with new unpredictable potentialities. Difference and Repetition (Deleuze, 1995) is the cybernetic drive of becoming. The media rhizome is a "molarity" that re-doubles the super-intense (molecular) rhizome. Media “differentiate” and differen(c)iate” dividing in coded “apparata of capture” and “war machines” forming a new code in their disruptive appearing. This series of entangled "flights and captures" is repeated in the dynamic phases of each emerging medium. Because of its emerging molarity each new medium allows a "slowing down" of the fleeting intensities from the obscure super-intense field but, simultaneously, also allows the "acceleration" of new emerging expressions that makes the old ones inactive forces. In my opinion this dynamic becoming of "territorialization(s)", "deterritorialization(s)" and "reterritorialization(s)" of new media, new practices and new expressions is threaten by the emerging of a totalitarian techno-capitalist system that over-codes all other media of appearances. This totalitarian form of techno-capitalism turns every new appearance into a commodity. Even art practices and research become modulated disciplines of a system of recognition that tracks and enslaves everything that exists and puts it to its efficient service. Late Capitalism is a super-medium of capture that threatens to obstruct the access to the super-intense forever and to block in a cage the anarchist essence of nature and the real. Already Baudrillard (1981), following the pessimism of Debord and the late Kojeve was describing a commodified life at the End of History as a play of "simulations" in a homogeneous globalization. My solitary practice, framed in a commodified network of humans, information and non-human objects, is situated in the attempt to allow the becoming of art history to become again in a context of impossibility at the End of History and at the End of the World. In this sense my practice is not only Deleuzian but also a contradictory anti-Hegelian Hegelianism. For me an artist who does not know how to situate his practice in the History of Art and the History in large sense makes only "cheap art". This is my criterion of evaluation for an art practice. It is true that art is contingent heterogeneous practice but it must be supported even by a visionary theoretical spirit as Benedetto Croce would put it. An artist must have a strategy and tactics in front of its historical condition. It must be at the height of History. This total and almost divinatory vision seems to contradict what I have just written on the obscure and urgent need "to find a new weapon". This parallax and paradoxical tension is typical of art expression and art research. You cannot separate neatly planes of deep animal expressive need with sublime planes that incarnate the Spirit of History. Art is less and more than human at the same time. These two unstable and parallax planes must be sutured by creative writing in Art Research. Writing must zig-zagging between the "mole" of practice and the "owl" of the theoretical "seer" that, with an heretic interpretation of Hegel, I can say are both "becoming-animals".

In the contingent becoming of my praxis I happened to meet the visual artist Arja Reiman, who has elaborated my “public actions” in a "graphic novel style". From this collaboration has started the idea to make a light and cheap clandestine journal by printing an A2 and folding it into 4 pages. The clandestine journal presented in this article is still a possible prototype. It contains graphic novel images and also a short art research essay related to the experience of an intervention. It will be distributed by the Anartist in the public spaces as a performance-intervention. In this way, even the distribution of the journal that contains the graphic novel story will duplicate and resonate with the intervention narrated in the journal. I hope this hypermedia intervention-strategy will make my art and ideas better known to a large audience that does not yet know them. It also will provide a new medium and perception of being in the world. The graphic novel journal can become a story with two posters to hang on the wall. This variability of the use, that is ingrained in the idea of an origami-medium, is related to enfolding and unfolding possibilities. I have applied to get a grant for this project but if I should not succeed I can make a very limited number zero at my expenses and include a bank account number for a "mobile digital payment" at the end of the graphic novel intervention. It could be a small-investment experiment to generate fundraising to finance the journal without grants. The grant system is part of a disciplinary matrix of subjugation so much as galleries and museums. They are part of a normative system of reference to subjugate the artist in a bourgeois idea of art; which is not very compatible with the ethico-aesthetic trajectory of my "art of subjectivity" that is born as an immanent alternative. As everybody knows the system of "grants" cannot be neutral and in large part it is a tool of the process of cultural governance of the pool of Davos' corporations. "The Great Reseat" is not a conspiracy theory but I see it working in the financing of university research and the agenda of consensus it promotes. For art to hope to regain the lost autonomy and become a site of cultural resistance we should find an alternative also to the medium of financing; not only to the medium of publishing. Otherwise creativity is channeled in the direction that suits the Corporations . In order to get a grant you must follow Davos' guidelines and their imperative “order-words” that limit the dominion of expression to civilized “social skills”. You must write what they ask you to write if you want to get a result from your investment of time and energy. For example you must be “inclusive” but if you are "inclusive" or "included" the other does not exist anymore. The “other” is "other" because it cannot be included. It cannot be easy to relate with the other, it must be a non-relational relation (a parallax). Blanchot, influenced by Lacan, has written that the "other" is like "death", you never meet it but it is the source of every impossible disaster-creativity (Blanchot, 1980). This "void other" is also near to oriental philosophy and its "void of potentiality" but also to the "vacuum field" in fundamental physics. The "inclusive ideology" is part of a process of biopolitical subsumption into the incubator of the Davos Corporation. They have generated an institutional neo-language that reminds Orwell's Big Brother and produces a domesticated society without "will of power" that recalls the "Truman Show".

Hyperrealistic dystopia and graphic novel.

This graphic novel dimension can add a new polysemic element of resonance in my attempt to erase the separation between life and art into an oscillatory multiplicity in becoming: a "supple line of flight in variation" (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987). Apparently this move looks like an escape from real life towards the artifice of art but actually it intensifies the dystopia of my “critical playgrounds”; it adds intensity and chiaroscuro. In this "mock-up" on Ruukku I have still not decided the style of layout because I do not want to make it "cool" that is the required normative of the metropolitan "youngster hypster" with an emoticon face. I have just thrown the images randomly. I wish to generate an intensified esthetic flow that resists everyday life into the context of everyday life. I wish to resist to subsumption in the "cool", I know it is an impossible task; for now I just trust the "aleatory" style. Showing an immanent dystopia in the everyday is a weapon against a realized capitalist utopia. This derealization in the graphic novel allows me to actually show a virtuality of action and thinking that is separated from commodified life which, having become zoe-political, can no longer be considered individuated life but "bare life" in a "concentration camp”, as Agamben would put it (Agamben, 1998). Furthermore, Capitalist commodification and their apparatuses, that are everywhere, produces the appearance of depressive zombie spaces and zombie subjectivities of which the myriads of movies and digital TV series about zombies could be a symptom. But hyperreality is also full of capitalist vampires, ghosts, drones, holograms, mutants, morphing faces and cyborgs captured in a totalizing medium. And this turbo-capitalist situation of full commodification already brings with it an immanent “graphic novel” atmosphere. We breathe the "toxic gas" of a graphic novel delirium in a panoptical metaverse. Today, “graphic novel” is a form of hyperrealism because we live in a reality where the imaginary has collapsed into an Apocalyptic real, the ephemeral into the tragic of the End of the World, the utopian in the dystopian, the Cyberspace in the everyday space. These themes have been intensely explored by (Debord, 1994), Baudrillard (Baudrillard, 1981), Eco (Eco, 1990), Jameson (Jameson, 1991) , Fisher (Fisher, 2009) and many other thinkers in the past but they still affect our times with even more radical intensity.

Black Magic rites of possession.

For what concerns my example of "graphic novel clandestine press” I will show images elaborated by my last critical playground the “Court, of Human Rights.” Here the Court is a “tennis court” where two policemen play sadistically with a weak subject (a puppet with a tennis-ball head)…The puppet can represent a stranger, a soul, an exiled, an unnamable stranger…but also a voodoo puppet …) The text of the clandestine newspaper will be short, in a way academic, but with the lyric style of the art manifesto. Otherwise it loses the feature of artworks and does not fit with the “graphic novel” style. One must find a mediating language that is proper to the scope of a new medium and its use. The intervention “The Court, of Human Rights” is conceived, produced, installed and performed by the artists Gian Luigi Biagini and John Dunn but photographed and elaborated by the artist Arja Reiman. The “graphic novel clandestine press” is an idea by Gian Luigi Biagini but the Anartist assemblage, that is a singular but pluralist assemblage, is to start a becoming and enfolding encounters as potentialities. The subject of the doing becomes a desiring super-jective Event that acquires its animistic power into an “objectile” (Deleuze, 1992) in becoming. Each of my installation-performance is like the emerging of a temple for an inhuman divine-demonic presence. I need to detach a flow from the block of an inert everyday life to unleash the magic power of becoming. I need to generate an animistic flow with its own life that attracts and enfolds other participants to produce a collective sacred catalysis. I need to prepare the “clearing” (Heidegger, 1998) to host the immanentization of a “mysterious anima” that wants to manifest. It’s a rite of possession.