here is the event and my presentation for the
*Presentation on 3rd CEI Venice*
The 'Third CEI Venice Forum for Contemporary Art Curators - Continental
Breakfast. Outposts 2007', organised by the Trieste Contemporanea
Committee, will *June 7th and 8th*, at the *Palazzo Zorzi *(Castello
4930), seat of the UNESCO Office in Venice-Regional Bureau for Science
and Culture in Europe (BRESCE)
Last years we are witnessing the appearance of bureaucratic global
cultural policies and the appearance of "creative industry" which are
defocusing, in large, our attention to the original "accident" of art.
These incomprehensible and banal approaches are actually giving a
perspective of globalization process on the art itself, as a political,
economical and market field, treating the phenomena we used to call art
as inherent to the history, groups and therefore being reduced onto pure
social epiphenomena. Besides this, actually being Marxist definition
used by market, reminding more than on any on programs of Socialist
Realism, may have some of a operative truth, they are actually having an
error of defining society in terms of groups that are consisting of same
or similar individuals. Furthermore, they are generalizing in terms
of "majority." This definition is in complete contradiction to the art,
and I intend to show -- to the public.
*Do the current overall rules of creative innovation for competitive
advantage influence the evaluating criteria of art in force?*
As advertising becomes stronger managing to sell even "what I will not
name," competing with original art's mediums, the chance of recognition
of art, as a primarily individual and isolated event (as; act,
accident), it has become hard to recognize art and to actually isolate
its phenomena outside of mess of what competes for its definition. This
would mean to distinguish "what is engineered" at arts place and "art
itself" for what methods and techniques visual studies appear
insufficient, not even speaking on the old discipline art history. What
misses is the ontological picture, rather then epistemological, that
would define art in terms of the single event, rather than analyze its
visual layout and message or define it in terms of style.
That would be hard, but one thing is clear to professionals in the
field, I assume: what fights to be defined as art is - surely not that.
Or, to be closer to disciplines; what resembles on art -- is not art. It
is a copy and in the world of copies there are also copies of art. So
the hardest choice on curators today would be to find not originality
but individuality, as originality can be industrial, it seems.
*Is it useful to consider exhibitions in terms of their contribution to
research and to understanding social transformation?*
This has become more and more important
Emphasizing the individual
creation and perception, by which I also mean -- researching needs of
public not as a mass but the space or event connected group of
individuals, the research undertaken by curators previous to the
exhibition is to find all possible individual perspectives and
approaches to individual art piece and make its, lets use that terrible
word "consumption" easier.
Namely, giga exhibitions and festivals are "user unfriendly" layouts for
art. They treat the public as the background of the show at its best.
Except for the resizing for the use of individuals, not a mass -
curators should be able to find and define channels and open them up,
for different individuals, even if it is not the standpoint of a
curator, even at the cost of inner contradiction
*What is the responsible (and reliable) role played by the curator in
the era of virtual-media and market saturation?*
One is sure - both virtual media and market are dealing with copies.
Moreover, what comes with so called "virtual media" that in the newer
age of the net emphasized moreover "what is linked" is that actual
individual phenomena are staying disconnected.
We are facing the situation in which some possibly original art can be
lost behind those super-sponsored, mega-announce and extremely linked
layouts. The role of a curator would therefore be to dig behind the
surface or interface that economy and politics but especially
advertising are offering as art. This would mean firstly to clearly
distinguish art from its ontological copy as; art would appear as
something that can be approached in plurality of ways, while copies
would stand for one, usually designed by the market or political way.
*Will good information on contemporary art philosophy offer suitable
instruments for a better understanding of the individual in an extended
and mediating field of relationships?*
Yes, all but all the possible approaches should be offered in a simple
way and moreover discussions and roundtable should be opened as once
triggered the dynamics made by art will continue by itself as the goal
of curators should be to find individuals in the public to address the
individualism of art.
*Are there any exhibitions that supply, at least on a general level,
supplementary tools for the formation of the individual?*
I have curated a project, for which I am originally invited to this
meeting, named Women at the crossroad of ideologies. The program was
fully orientated to a public, including the possibility to download the
program and a reader being produced.
It was consisting of many of "entrances" for different kind of public
all addressing the same issue women's rights, so there were exhibitions,
concerts, public lectures of scientists, talks with artists, round table
discussions, but also a small library opened. An especial interest has
been given to "advertising" of the project, this one being done by an
artist Andreja Kulunc(ic', whose interactive installation in public
space has given results of anonymous voters and street passengers none
could neglect, demonstratively giving quite alarming results of the
discrimination. At the same time public was constantly invited to
interact, to help producing a reader. Given the opportunity to show they
are not "a public" but individuals they have attempted to clear up their
The most interesting interaction was done on "questions and answers"
part of the lecture and roundtable program, but also one may note
individualism has shown up in official publishing -- writing in newspaper
and new way of publishing -- blogs. I actually give a lot of hope to the
new blog phenomena that it would show up individualism and particular
view even in the most ownership censored mass society. I hope that new
public -- the one that can read about artworks, download preview movies,
but also say something about it (and the matter of curators is to listen
those historically silent voices, too), will manage to break through the
universe of adds and engineered market of art simulation.
One may give different statistics of the show, like presenting 70
presenters from 20 countries, 400 people for the opening, 300 for a
lecture, 200 people a day on the exhibition, which indeed are truth, but
I would like to say more of my public.
Rarely someone in the public knew each other before, they were rarely
communicating to each other. Mostly they were women, which was
predictable, but there were men there too, and they were brave which
after they were admitted made them proud and loud. Older women were more
able to express themselves, still younger had more vibrant voices and
they were active in publishing. Part of them wanted to educate further,
so they were following everything which was allowed by the program set
up always for 18 PM so an ordinary worker can arrive having own time
after the working day. Some of them were ashamed, probably thinking they
would be not fit there. But what was emphasized every day is -- they are
all more than welcome. Some mothers and daughters appeared together but
at the end only daughter would stay, probably to get rid of the first
sense of being lost in the group, After emancipating a public was really
consisting of individual voices; some decided to read own poem to a
small group, some have stolen the mic from presenters, having own small
talk-shows. Some were SMS-ing during round tables and these messages you
may find in the book were great. Some copied Breda Beban's video with a
mobile phone so the video doesn't run away, thought it was forbidden.
But this effect says a lots, really a lots on art. A week latter I got
the phone-call a music number from her video is a radio hit, two Gipsy
music parties were organized
Some unknown people told me they want to
go to Venice to see it again. Maybe they would be there
and I started
to be curious whom they are, one of them repairing motorcycles and it
was his first encounter with the video art.
This would underline my thesis -- the public of art - is not a group.
Post n www.anarchiva.blogspot.com
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]