Sketch for a museum is a round of interviews to expand on the growing reference to colonial and post-colonial issues on the Portuguese art scene in recent years. The primary purpose is to stimulate dialogue between a series of artistic practices and initiatives that have claimed an appropriate forum for this discussion, highlighting an institutional void at a cultural and artistic level. For this second interview, Guilherme Vilhena Martins speaks to multidisciplinary artist Nástio Mosquito.

GVM: Besides your penchant for using different ways of expressing yourself, such as music, video, performance or photography, one of the key elements of your work is ambiguity. For instance, 3 Continents (Europe, America, Africa) (2010), a video installation in which you advertise the purchase of these three continents, or Respectable thief (2016), where you establish a relationship between the idea of appropriation and the building processes of identity and power. You seem to be more questioning than definitive in both cases. Can you talk a bit about this strategy?

NM: I honestly wonder whether it’s a strategy or a condition… I like people to find my work without having the privilege of either agreeing or disagreeing with what they are witnessing. I am committed to the potential of experiencing something that prompts us to reconsider how we relate to the ability, willingness and awareness involved in making a decision. The other thing is that my work is neither therapy nor proof of intelligence… I’m not worried about being understood, but about offering the possibility of living more intentionally… Does that make sense?

GVM: It really does. I actually recall listening to an interview with you about the performance O Que Minha Avó Me Deu, at MAAT in 2019, where you talked about the “celebration of contradiction”. On other occasions, I’ve also heard you say (TATE interview, 2012) that creating discomfort is the only way to envision a new perspective. How do you work this out during a performance? Is it a matter of narrative?

NM: I don’t know, perhaps it is a matter of an intention, intentions… Be it narratives, symbols, or cognitive stimuli. Many of the things I have done – in those interviews you have just referred to – my body, and everything it entails, was my main instrument. When that happens, a truth beyond the rational must be being explored… An “inner truth”. When “inner truths” are shared, they can harbour communicable energy… whether for good or evil.

GVM: It sounds like an interesting idea to consider the Kizomba Design Museum (KDM), a project you recently started with Kalaf Epalanga, and which already had a touring edition during the 35th São Paulo Biennial. Do you consider KDM to be an artistic effort? How did you reach the idea of starting to build a museum?

NM: With bold foundations and beliefs based on generational living? That is a sound question for my brother Epalanga…

GVM: (Laughs) Indeed, I think it would be perfectly appropriate for a future interview. But, speaking of that element of exchange and transmission that you were talking about just now… One of the KDM’s objectives is to “foster public dialogue and emphasise the influence that this culture has on different communities around the world”. How can a museum be a critical platform for discussion rather than a place for conservation?

NM: A critical platform for discussion… it sounds lovely. I feel it’s more a mishmash of meanings, purposes and authorities in our socio-political constructs. A critical discussion platform must be every family nucleus, every friend group, every classroom, every voluntary relational orgy… and, even then, only every so often. The museum is a place where you can celebrate – in time and space – humanity in its most diverse forms of physical expression. Meanings are volatile things and they should be treated as such. KDM is about archiving, displaying, celebrating, proposing experiences and building the capacities of a plural culture. We pursue goals and desires of the spirit and the flesh, always seeking to add sensory, spiritual and economic value.

GVM: Kalaf has already mentioned the possibility of having the Museum in a building in Lisbon’s suburbs. Would it be important to have the KDM in Lisbon? How do you see the future looking like?

NM: Even more significant than Lisbon is certainly Luanda – if we were to make emotional and, in this case, painfully far-sighted decisions – and also São Paulo, if we were to focus on sustainability and cultural consumer habits. Kalaf and I have complementary positions on Portuguese territory. I feel we agree on one thing: Lisbon does not need to be introduced, taught or otherwise made aware of the KIZOMBA culture. Its residents know and feel KIZOMBA on a daily basis… Would it be important to have KDM in Lisbon? If we, its citizens, are wise, this celebration is a must. Let me tell you about the present, as the future is a possibility that eludes me… The present is this “conversation”, and the collective responsibility we share “the three of us” at this very moment; UMBIGO, myself, and you, the reader. Right now we need the availability and capacity to build the structures we feel we deserve. Take ownership, programme, play it loud. Dance, celebrate, enrage the silence of fear and isolation, bring to mind and make official the path that lies from the gindungo to the piripiri.

GVM: Yes, it should be a mandatory celebration. From your perspective, what has been postponing this inevitability? Why has this act of justice and care been delayed?

NM: I don’t know… I believe that someone in your position enjoys a privileged perspective to help us set up invitations that wipe out the shortcomings we are all facing. What do you reckon is holding this up?

GVM: Certainly it’s a matter of wisdom, as you say, because wisdom encompasses a lot of things… I agree with you, I don’t think Lisbon needs to be introduced, explained or made aware of the KIZOMBA culture. As you point out, I also think it’s important to get rid of these structural or institutional deficiencies, because, when we talk about an institutional vacuum, we mean the favouring of some narrative – because there are institutions – over others. This leads me to another question: what is the importance of the stage? How does telling O Que Minha Avó Me Deu change in an institutional venue like MAAT, for instance?

NM: If I’m following your angle, can it be continually urgent to renew the diversity of human resources in national structures? In favour of new possible starting points, decisions and narrative circumstances? I’m not sure how to answer your question. About the changes… everything is always changing, even if I were to present O Que Minha Avó Me Deu twice in the same place, I only have “non-answers”… Let me tell you this: I like MAAT’s potential and original approach. The venue provides the conditions to present narratives to a wide range of audiences. As far as I’m concerned, this does not change the wholeness of my content, but it does theoretically provide the possibility of interacting with people who do not necessarily have the creative industries as a focus of their lives. For me, it was important to make my first “solo” contribution on Portuguese territory in a structure like HANGAR, run by my colleague Mónica de Miranda, for one.

GVM: Exactly. Indeed, structures like HANGAR. In the first interview in this series, Mónica stated that HANGAR has always been “a place of resistance, creation and intersection between different fields, but mainly the visual arts, whose mission is to unite multiple geographies, to create a space that catalyses experiences by connecting artists, researchers and other initiatives”. Is that what you felt?

NM: My feelings are for bar celebrations and the people who tangibly decide to put up with my self-indulgence. I respect Mónica. I respect HANGAR’s work. I don’t feel confused about the construction we have to nurture, towards meeting the communities we want to build… I just have and want to thank HANGAR for the partnership.

GVM: On the subject of the stage, I would like to touch again on the issue of ambiguity to round off. You were saying earlier that you like people to no longer find a perspective with which they have the privilege of agreeing or disagreeing when they encounter your work. I believe that’s an interesting idea for thinking about a museum, which seems like an interesting structure for addressing the questions we touched on. How do you negotiate ambiguity in a museum?

NM: The nature of structures that are legitimised by – and with – public funds sometimes makes the boundaries a bit confusing for me… I do not think there is any need to deal with ambiguity. I’m convinced that a museum, if it remains in tune with the contemporaneity of its cultural context and true to its purpose, should simply be a museum; like a three-dimensional mirror in the time dimension of its focus. Ambiguity, contradictions and discrimination will be unavoidable factors, since humans will be in charge. I feel that what we should be paying close attention to – and adequately available to contribute – is the skills and capacities of our leaders.