Storkunstsolteddystatens dommedag* (The Armageddon of the Great Art Sun Teddy State)

On the webpage of Dramatikkens hus the following is written about Storkunstsolteddystatens dommedag* (The Armageddon of the Great Art Sun Teddy State):

"In 2008 the performance artist Julian Apostata Blaue founded an art state in the public room, specifically, in the square of Youngstorget in Oslo. The following years he named a government, a church and a faculty. Blaue provided these governmental institutions with dictatorial, nationalist and masculine features. Was this about real totalitarianism, bigotry and misogyny, or criticism of such tendencies in Norwegian society?

Blaue's previous production Storkunstsolteddystatsreligionens Bestialitetsteologiske Fakultetsgrunnlegging* (Great Art Sun Teddy State Religion’s Bestial Theological Faculty Foundation – GASTSRBTFF)met strong reactions in the media. He was reported to the police and his own experience was of being harassed, with his own words; "like a terrorist". This led to the production Storkunstsolteddystatens dommedag. Dramatikkens hus writes:

"In Dramatikkens hus Blaue will now be facing trial. He reflects openly over his terrorist past. Artists can often predict earthquakes in society and the work functions as a seismograph. The state of Blaue was, in reality, the sad nation reactionary terrorists dream about. The trial against Blaue develops into an ethically philosophically analysis of the ideological and biographical reasons for terrorism. When the judge decides Blaue's fate, the political judgment over the philosopher is passed, too."

After Blaue was questioned on which media outlets called him a terrorist, he expanded on the background for the production as follows, in a press release sent out via e-mail October 3:

"I understand this critical question and agree that the word "terrorist" post 22/7 must be used with care. The point is not that the media directly or explicitly harassed me like a terrorist. In Morgenbladet a journalist wrote about "terror effects" and to my knowledge this is the only time a term including the word "terror" has been used to characterise the performance at Black Box Teater.
I still find that it is reasonable to use the term in the description of Storkunstsolteddystatens Dommedag.

I have written a text of approximately hundred pages, analysing myself in light of 22/7. It makes the foundation for the performance at Dramatikkens hus. In the text I conclude that there are biographical and ideological similarities between ABB and me. I naturally distance from the culprit and his crimes in every way. I have personally regretted actions I made and thoughts I phrased during the Faculty Foundation in March 2010. But this is exactly why it is relevant to me, telling of my process of radicalisation. I think I can contribute understanding to why ABB (Anders Behring Breivik, the Oslo and Utøya terrorist) did what he did.

A human who doesn't feel like he is part of community and who defines as an "underdog" will develop opposition towards the ruling norms of society. Norway is an egalitarian welfare society with humanist values. The "underdog" will feel provoked to phrase the opposite of the official ideology, in other words, a politically incorrect ideology. This is what I phrased prior to the Black Box performance, and this is what ABB phrased in his manifesto.

Like philosophers such as A.J. Vetlesen I find that there is a connection between words and actions. When one legitimates unethical or criminal behaviour in writing there is only a logical next step to performing unethical or criminal actions. That was what happened with ABB. And that was what happened with me - in a whole other scale, of course; only the principle can be compared, not the actions as such.

On this background I will argue for absolute freedom of speech. I find that the worst of ideas must be phrased publically - so that they can be criticised morally, rationally and empirically. That was what happened to me, when the media reacted so strongly to the performance last year. That forced me to revaluate my theses. At first I desperately tried to defend myself. Eventually I began to feel guilty, which made me regret. The ideology unravelled and empathy came back.
In such public criticism there is, in other words, a real opportunity to reach wayward people and to have them revaluate their more or less sick ideas.

I hope it is clear to what point it is correct to say that my project has had terrorist aspects and that it is also clear that I renounce these aspects - particularly in light of 22/7. "

Sources:

Dramatikkens hus, dramatikkenshus.no, 22.09.2011, http://www.dramatikkenshus.no/pub/dramatikkenshus/Innhold/Kalender/?aid=1668&cid=768#dramatikkenshus

Press release from Dramatikkens hus, sent by e-mail 03.10.2011

*Not yet translated into English. The title within parentheses is the Norwegian title's literal meaning.