|
|
ARTWORK
MAKES THE EVERYDAY LIFE OF THE VIEWER EASY
As
a hyper exhibition of artworks under the grandiose title of Dreams
and Conflicts: The Viewers Dictatorship, the 50th Venice Biennale
is fiercely decisive for the 70's and 80's protagonists and wide
open to the expectations of young generation artists, designers
and architects. By placing reknown/unknown, rich/poor,
optimist/pessimist, compasionate/cold-blooded artists from three
generations and different socio-political and economical backgrounds,
side by side, the curators of the Arsenale shows have broken the
rules of hierarchy within the international art-world and arranged
a confusing track for the viewer. However, the remains of the
old rules were still to be observed in the group exhibition in the
Italian Pavilion, where there is that conservative, subtle and balanced
transitions from one artist to the other.
The
everlasting modernist order of pavilions in the Giardini seek to
restore the damaged sense of equilibrium of the viewer. The conflict
between the new pursuit for modernist aesthetics and the post-modern,
contaminating everyday simulations furnished the biennale with a
chaotic structure, which could be exciting, if it was consciously
made. Evidently,
it is an almost impossible task to orchestrate more than 60 curators
(pavilions, arsenale, extra 50) to a more or less harmonious tune…
The viewer on the other side, coming to Venice for the opening days,
was not able to consume the event (8 exhibitions in the Arsenale,
30 pavilions in the Giardini, 20 pavilions in the city and the 50
Extra) in its entity.. In
Venice Biennale, due to its national representations, artists from
countries with obscure political and economic infrastructures have
to breathe side by side with artists from well-fare democratic countries
with omnipotent culture industries. A fact, which is
a challenge, when articulated in an intelligent manner, but also
requires a certain resistance from these artists. The
flagrant manifestations of artists from the Asian territories profoundly
reflected this urge for a better recognition, by elaborating the
content and form of their works more than substantive. Very annoying
were the performances and images of some of these artists, playing
the role of the colonised or saluting self-orientalisation by articulating
the traditional, folkloric and tourism elements, such as attractive
traditional garments, zen meditation and accentuation of Asian or
African identity. The lack of
critical thinking and anachronism of some of the artists from the
post-periphery is also evident in the artworks that are only dealing
with the material to create mystical reflections on nature and life
or exploiting it with decorative connotations. The number
of the video-works were reduced in favour of paintings, evidently
as a growing consensus between the curators and the art market.
No doubt selected with care, but once more, the videos were the
disputable in their form and content all over the biennale. The
border between the journalistic documentary, narration, caricaturist
commentary and conceptual work was blurred in many video-works and
installations. On
the other hand, this possibility of being on the same platform -
even if it is an illusion- makes the Venice Biennale the most sought
art place to be in. This
year even Iran, which is one of the most introvert countries in
the world, acquired a pavilion and realised its first participation
in the 21st century. Every year Venice is becoming more and more
vulnerable; the heath, the humidity, the excessive biennale crowds
induced the working conditions and the the infrastructure of the
city. Customs was blocked, transportations was slow, electricity
broke and after all the Venetians were in agony. Yet, they had to
yield to the difficulties, because of the enormous income the biennale
provides for the city every two year. The adventure of the participant
country, which has no pavilion in the Giardini, starts with searching
a space in the city, preferably on the main arteries of the labyrinth
to catch the attention of the international art experts and the
press. Available are palaces and churches with rents between 15000
to 60000euro for six months. The next step is to provide accommodation
for the artists and the exhibition crew, a choice between fairly
expensive hotel rooms and apartments. For
example for our group of five we had to pay around 6000 euro for
10 days of accommodation. The transport of the works, the production
and distribution of printed material, the production of works, the
installation costs in the exhibition space, the maintenance of the
exhibition etc. are exhausting the modest budgets of the countries
with obvious economic deficiencies. Yet, for many Venetian individuals
and groups, this burden has become a flourishing business. 12th
of June, when the biennale was opened to the press and media, the
exhibitions in the Arsenale were 40% unfinished. The crowd, some
among them barefoot and nearly all with fans in the hands, was streaming
from exhibition to exhibition in the Corderie, where the magnificent
space was divided to claustrophobic sections with white walls. It
is hard to understand, after all it has been discussed about the
transmission between the space and the art work, that curators and
artists can sacrifice the grandeur of a historical space to the
precarious existence of the artwork on white walls. Being
intrusive, I witnessed how hastily the experts and the journalists
were looking at the artworks; practically three or four days are
not enough to look at the 400 artists exhibiting in different venues
in Venice. So, the experts and the journalists have no possibility
to discover something by themselves but to follow the rules and
look at the artist already known and supported by well-established
galleries, dealers, art critics and curators. The ecstatic - not
to say hysteric - environment of the opening days is obviously an
outcome of the art system, born in the late modernism and became
a self-consuming grotesque in post-modernism. The
actors of modernism were the artists creating ideologies; today
the actors, favouring the system linked to the global kapitalism,
are manipulating the position of the artists according to the requirements
of the network. Within this network, the viewer is submissive, silent
and confused. Looking to the 8 exhibitions in the Arsenale, one
can see the scheme of the network. The artists of the exhibitions
who can never come side by side in the real life ( most of them
probably have never met each other) seek here equal recognition.
Have they ever discussed with each other the concept, installation
and relation of the works and the exhibition? Prominent
and protagonist artists of the recent past such as
Art&Language, Gilbert&George, John Baldessari, Anselm Kiefer, Michelangelo
Pistoletto, Roman Opalka and reknown architects such as Rem Koolhas,
Araki Isozata, Hasan Fathy have accepted to exhibit with
completely unknown names and newcomers in an environment where there
is no inner dialogue and coherence. Their "noble" modernist works
are put in collation with works that are articulating everday life
realities and trivilaties, that have got off the rails. Seems
to be an interesting turn in the history of contemporary art! Utopia
Station, at the furthest end of the Arsenale, is a mega-neo-fluxus
show and the tail of the Biennale, as the rigidity of the national
pavilions dissolve here into free debate and gain some political
vision. It also immediately reminded me Progetto Oreste Uno, a creative
initiative of a large group of artists of Italy coordinated by Cesare
Pietrouisti, Pino Boreste and many others during the 48th Venice
Biennale in the center of the Italian Pavilion. The fact
that, interdiciplinary debate, process demonstration, employment
of mass media technologies and strategies can reach larger and broader
public, created a new generation of artists with one foot on the
high art, the other on the mass media. Here, I will not write in
depth about the pavilions of USA (an overloaded and repeated imagery
of black identity), G.Britain (I have'nt seen such a decorative
pavilion before), France (steril and distanced), Germany (would
Kippenberger install this underground vent into the pavilion, when
he had seen the last global war?) Japan and Corea (always in favour
material and technology), as these will be reviewed extensively
in newspapers and artjournals extensively. The most striking event
in the biennale was the two "closed" pavilions. The pavilion of
Spain was sealed to acsesss by Santiago Sierra, with a crudely made
wall behind the main entrance and by two policeman (!) in attendance
at the back door, allowing only the viewers with the Spanish passport
to enter. As Spain is a member of EU, even the acsess of EU citizens
was restricted! This is an art work with effective political protest
on what is happening in EU and Spain concerning the emigration politics.
The closed Venezuela Pavilion is not an
art work, but an act of censor by the Misnitry of Culture of Venezuela.
One of the censored artists Pedro Morales insisted on coming to
Venice to protest (please refer to (www.pedromorales.com;
www.cityrooms.net; www.orinokia.com). In remarkable juxtaposition
as artwork and reality, these metaphorically and factually sealed
pavilions, do not only cast a doubt on the power of art, artwork
and the artist within the state apparatus of the democracies and
within the free forum of the biennale, but also on the role of the
viewer, who is inactively watching the ambiguity. It is difficult
to take a distance and annotate the works, I have seen in three
days. Bonami's intention to reflect a wide range and variety of
contemporary art production became an accomplishment, so that one
can neither track the statements of the curators of the international
exhibitions nor find a consensus between the pavilions . Within
the complexity of the biennale I could discriminate and categorize
some facts: -
There is a significant contradiction between the artworks of the
well-fare Europe and USA artists and the artists of the rest of
the world: The former are tranquil and latent and transformed
art into a stratagem (for example Bruno Gironcoli in the Austrian
Pavilion, Sylvie Eyberg and Valerie Mannaerts in the Belgian Pavilion,
Jean-Marc Bustamante in French Pavilion, Candida Höfer in German
Pavilion, Ruri in Iceland Pavilion, Little Warsaw in Hungarian Pavilion);
the are in emergency and crisis and use art as a force (for example
Sora Kim& Gimhongsok in The Zone of Urgencey, Ratomi Fani-Kayode
in The Faul Lines). The memory of contemporary art plays its game
too frequently... Since Jean Clairs Biennale genetic deformations
or the post-human representation has been totally consumed and almost
lost its excitement. Patricia Piccini's silicone creatures in the
Australian Pavilion, Maurizio Cattelan's robot Charlie, Charles
Ray's Female Figure and Berlinde de Bruyckere's "the black horse"
in "Delays and Revolution" (Bonami& Birnbaum) are being chased by
the phantoms of the works of the Chapman Brothers, Ron Mueck, Katherina
Sieverding (Rat King) and Kiki Smith. Or, David Hammons' bronz Budhas
may pray for safety (with safety pin on a string in between them),
but this has been done before many times by Nam June Paik (since
1974)…Haven't we seen enough cars/trucks before, for example Wim
Delvoye's Cement Truck, Soo-Ja Kim "Cities on the Move in the 48th
Biennale ? Alfredo Juan's stainless steel jeep and Damien Ortega's
decomposed VW, even with convincing concepts, look like surfeit
examples. - There
were two significant panel discussions during the biennale. The
second version of Venice Agendas, organised by Audio Arts, London,
Nuova Icona, Venice, Wimbledon School of Art, London, Cardiff School
of Art &Design (UWIC), in association with the comissioners of Wales
and Scotland, and supported by the British Council took place in
Metropole Hotel. To three breakfast sessions, dealing with the issues
and questions such as "Biennale in a new century", "The new and
recent presences at the Biennale", and "Is the Biennale 'a charming
anachronism' in danger of sinking?" prominent representatives of
various institutions and free lance curators were invited to contribute.
In fact, aside from the main pavilion, with the three of the new
presences, Scotland with the exhibition "Zenomap" in Palazzo Giustinian
Lolin, Wales exhibition in the ex-Birrerie in Giudecca and The Henry
Moore Foundation exhibition "Stopover" in the newly restored Convento
dei Santi Cosma and Damiano on the Giudecca, Great Britain was the
most ambitious participant of the Biennale. This extensive presence
reflects the apparent decentralisation and independence of regional
art production and management as well as a fruitful competition
between the institutions. The two Giudecca venues were the most
charming and suitable places among the places that can be acquired
in Venice. These exhibitions were strategically highlighted
with rich receptions and parties. This is another sign that the
sanctity of the pavilion politics are being critically exploited
by the new generation curators and artists. As to the question,
whether the Biennale is a sinking ship, one could say that it is
rather drifting than sinking. Drifting in the stormy global politics
and economy waters. Looking back to the Biennale of 80's and early
90's, when the milieu was still naïve, idealistic and romantic,
the last biennale tend to be shrewd, sarcastic, an market-oriented
with the sophisticated opening days visitor profile. However,
the Arsenale shows, among them particularly the Utopia Station,
with works of political content and statements may stir an argument
among the protagonist intellectuals of the world, the biennale in
its entirety seems to be powerless to resist the severe political
agenda of the world. After all, at a time when on the political
and economical level, new borders are being drawn between the regions,
religions and cultures the Biennale (and all other multicultural
exhibitions) aim to break the borders, at least in their concepts
and contents! This task requires an effective theoretical and practical
reciprocation and exchange from its components. Two grand scale
exhibitions are being held in Praque and Klosterneuburg to accentuate
this reality. Organized
by Giancarlo Politi and Helena Kontova, editors of Flash Art magazine,
together with Milan Knizak and Tomas Vlcek, directors of the National
Gallery in Prague, the inaugural edition of the Prague Biennale
aims to create a pluralistic vision of contemporary art. In this
new biennale the concepts we are very familiar with "peripheries
become the center," and "dissolution of the dichotomy between periphery
and center " are going to be articulated by a large group of curators.
The other more accentuated event is Blood & Honey- Future's in the
Balkans is curated by Harald Szeemann in Klosterneuburg. Sponsored
by The Essl Collection 73 artists from Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina,
Bulgaria, Kosovo, Croatia, Greece, Macedonia, Moldova, Romania,
Slovenia, Turkey and Serbia-Montenegro will exhibit their work on
an area of 3,500 m2. The significant aim of this exhibition has
been declared as "to awaken western sensitivity to the existence
of this cultural landscape". What I can deduct from these actions
is that the international contemporary art front is slowly approaching
Middlest and Near Asia! To the other forum, CEI (Central European
Initiative) www.ceinet.org organised by Trieste Contemporanea Committee
www.tscont.ts.it under the auspices of Italian Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, in collaboration with the Academy of Fine Arts of Venice
and supported by CEI, Regione Autonoma Friuli Venezia Giulia and
Beba Foundation, directors, experts and curators from Yugoslavia,
Poland, Lithuania, Moldova, Hungary, Ukraine, Czech Republic, Croatia,
Latvia, Slovenia, Romania, Russia, Macedonia, Turkey and Italy were
invited. The ongoing fragility in the infrastructure and networking
of the contemporary art institutions because of the economic and
political deficiencies and instabilities was the main topic of this
forum. After
plenary sessions and workshops a declaration was signed by the participants,
calling support from governments and international organisations
in the form of continuous structural and financial contributions,
stressing the autonomy and freedom of creativity from any type of
political pressure and instrumentalisation and accentuating the
necessity of exchange programs and partnership projects. It should
not be overlooked that the presence of CEI countries in the Biennale
after the wall, has immensely contributed to the totality as well
as to the regeneration of the picture of contemporary art production
in Europe. What should also not be overlooked in this years Biennale
were the projects and products of various work-shop for the improvement
of the urban and civil infrastructures of the city; a refreshing
attempt to activate the engagement of the local and international
viewer. The regeneration of the Archivio Storico delle Arti Contemporanee,
The Cord, the spatial connection of the exhibitions with a 200m
long steel cylinder created by a group of architects ( Archea Associati)
and The Artificial Reserve, a project coordinated by Cesare Pietroiusti
with the students of the Academy of Fine Arts of Venice were some
of these new presentations. I would like to go back to
my catalogue text and examine the viewer's position in this mega-show.
The ideologies of art maintain their function as being a part of
social life and the critical conscious of the society, and artists
face the situation in which patterns for orientation and action
of the past no longer work more than the society. They are the ones
who find new options and actions to provide answers for everyday
life conflicts and major emergencies. With Paul Vanguiem 's words
"Everyday life always produces the demand for a brighter light,
if only because of the need which everyone feels to walk in step
with the march of history. But there are more truths in twenty-four
hours of a man's life than in all the philosophies." Despite all
the generalization, standardization and totalizm in the world, this
twenty-four hours still makes all the difference within the supremacy
of the corporate economy and global politics. The
bloodstained pages of the last decade, 11th September and its savage
outcome is the production of everyday activity of the human being,
which paradoxically has imprisoned and poisoned his/her everyday
life. It is a perfect vicious circle! The artists, evidently aware
of the eminence of it, approaches these twenty-four hours in detail,
itemise and particularise the facts with his/her inevitable sophistication
and self-contempt; the magnitude of this task can be seen in the
images of desperation, emergency, clamour and transgression. The
viewer generously but cunningly gives the artist the right to intervene
into the minute details of the common life, and the authority to
cry out his message to the world from a headland, to make him an
accomplish...
beral
madra june 2003 on 50esima venice biennale
|
|