Every specific situation is interesting if described through the appropriate scale of observation. It is the specificity that matters—observation must achieve the appropriate level of specificity. This is because specifically speaking, no situation is ever the same.
Every situation therefore serves as a model case (example) to see other situations analytically. The specific case is turned into a general model—general yet particular. The knowledge of a situation is situated knowledge.
An artwork is a deliberately composed situation which can be experienced as is or in reflection to other situations, composed or not. A critic’s job is often to provide the appropriate scale of observation to experience its specificity. This is what makes micro-history possible: focus on the everyday happenstances and the daydreams of some peasant’s life.
But because of this, it also becomes possible to simply consider the issue of observation as a matter of framing and see all situations as artworks (theatre, for instance). The gaze that turns the everyday world into a theater is the same gaze that turns the everyday world of the past into history—something worth narrating.
Both in performances as well as in writing, our works are all fabricated souvenirs of situations we happened to be in and the observations we made at any given point. We create models out of specific situations. In this sense, our works are all like Aevi’s books—or rather, Aevi’s books are the paradigm (example) of our works. They are quite literally situational pieces, deliberate framing of what happens within a carefully and/or forcefully composed situations, for purposes of immediate as well as later observation.
This is also to turn matters in life into a fable. A clear fabrication that can nonetheless be put into real use in other situations. It carries its meaning in the form of a lesson from another time and place.