Sometimes when we’re reading and we encounter a word we love... like a word that means way more than a word... we like to wet our thumb and smear it a little to make it blurry and bigger. That way it’s just better and... more accurate. And we don’t wanna make a huge thing of this writing here because it could get w a y t o o long...but have you noticed it seems like almost all the paradigms so many of us have been playing along with are falling apart? Language just feels fascist lately (didn’t Barthes say something like that?) It’s not surprising then that it seems like every interesting essay we’ve read in the last 18 months was written by a trans person. So grateful for that. I’ve heard it both ways... is a show at co. (company projects) in Minneapolis. But we’re sick of what “a show” means so, we’re using that word but, our behavior around it is different and we’re hoping that by asking more of it we’ll end up somewhere new. The title of the show is an attempt to evoke this expanded set of meanings that have always been there (unless, for some reason, you’re someone who has a habit of pretending those meanings aren’t there.) And accordingly, we see this show as a living set of ideas and thus they–like everyone else–seem to have good days and bad days. A lot of the same themes that have run through our work are there too... art history as a material, appropriation but more as an extension of another work, or a repeating, not as any sort of challenge. We love some of Douglas Huebler’s sculpture based work from the late 60s and there’s that somewhat famous remark he made when he decided to transition toward conceptual art... “’The world is full of objects, more or less interesting; I do not wish to add any more...” But what is an object in-between or something that’s neither here nor there... but fuck, there it is again, that sense of the binary. So what about a ‘bothness’ it’s here and there. When there was an inquiry from a collector about buying a birdseed Judd chair we decided we wanted this bothness again. We want to sell our work but we want to sidestep the same way we’ve always thought about that in the past. Basically, we want to talk about love more. That’s really what we want. So–in the spirit of art history as a material and an extension–we’re using the “Certificate of Authenticity” that Felix Gonzalez-Torres used with his work and adjusting the language just a little bit. And we’re adding some very difficult to describe ‘active time’ to the agreement that builds in the possibility for us to talk about love more. The great thing about those Certificates he used? Most legal scholars believe they’re probably not legally enforceable and that’s ... that’s what we’re talking about. Something that functions well as one thing even though a lotta people would say it’s not that.