Instytut Historii Sztuki <Posen> [Hrsg.]: Artium Quaestiones (16.2005)

204

LUIZA NADER

27. 01. 73
(is being)
(what was being, it was being
what will be being, it will be being)
28. 01. 73
(is being)
(what was being, it was being
what will be being, it will be being)
29. 01. 73
(is being)
(what was being, it was being
what will be being, it will be being)
30. 01. 73
(is being)
(what roas being, it roas being
vohat will be being, it will be being)
31. 01. 73
(is being)
(what was being, it was being
rohat will be being, it roili be being)
1. 02. 73
(is being)
(rohat was being, it was being
what will be being, it will be being)
2. 02. 73
(is being)
(what was being, it was being
what will be being, it will be being)
3. 02. 73
(is being)
(what wo,s being, it was being
what will be being, it will be being)
4. 02. 73
(is being)
(rohat was being, it roas being
what will be being, it will be being)
5. 02. 73
(is being)
(what was being, it was being
what will be being, it roili be being)
G. 02. 73
(is being)
(what was being. it was being
what will be being, it will be being)
7. 02. 73
(is being)
(what roas being, it was being
what will be being, it will be being)

6. Jarosław Kozłowski, Grammar, 1973
sobie dni) i przekształcania (w skonstruowanych na zasadzie kombinato-
rycznej ćwiczeniach). Tej repetycyjności towarzyszy zarówno emocjonal-
ne wysuszenie, jak i ma ona w sobie coś z zabiegu terapeutycznego. Za-
bieg, któremu dzień w dzień poddaje autor zarówno„bycie”, jak i siebie