“The only possible relationship you can have to the structures you give yourself is to use them as a screen and, behind the screen, to do anything other than that which the economy allows. It means agreeing to this use, this distance.” In the style of an undercover video, an unrecognizable body speaks in front of a spotlight with a distorted voice. It is a kind of “dropout”, a politically ambitious artist – “played” by Ulf Aminde – who, as he says himself, could see no sense anymore in making any kind of relevant statement within the art industry and its institutions. Guerrilla actions with a “clandestine group”, which had the goal of breaking up the art world from within, were followed by the “strike” – this total refusal to make and exhibit art is initially perceived as a liberation. But the will to subvert existing structures and fundamentally change them remains: “The old and therefore each time repeated question of an emancipatory, political movement is: Is radicalism about the initiation of new institutions, or is it about changing the institutions from the inside?” One answer could be: “Education as a form of resistance against the institution of education” – a parasitic use of the educational institution in order to pursue other goals under its guise. With his performative film work, Aminde proposes a new positioning and marking: not outside the institution but also not as part of it, as a starting point for the search for radical reinvention. The film, whose title is borrowed from the study program “Body, Theory and Poetics of the Performative” at the Stuttgart State Academy of Art and Design (which the artist and professor accompanied in its beginning), is both a parody as well as a serious artist statement with deliberately autobiographical references. The “satire” arises from the awareness of the discrepancy between his own privileged position and the simultaneous desire to represent underprivileged positions. These and other contradictions are negotiated in the film, whereby the self-reflexive monolog on collaborative practice is always on the threshold of the comic – unlike in totalitarian regimes, political artists in this country do not (yet) have to act in the underground. Subversion and institutional criticism, as well as the yearning for the self-empowering design of social space, have long been marketable. Nevertheless, one believes the artist in his struggle for a positioning. The questions asked – for example about institutional as well as individual racism – are (again) urgently relevant today.