from
dmitry vilensky
Привет вот я тут написал в великолепной редакции Фомы историю как нашу работу выкинули с выставки в Румынии - писал сразу по англ так что русского варианта нет
вот она простая история
дв
I would like the following text toserve as a continuation of the discussion on the economy of thecontemporary art world and the place of art and creative labor in theworld of capital.
Let’s begin with a simple tale.
Once upon a time there was an artistwho was so naïve that he thought that artists, as workers, shouldreceive compensation for participation in shows and screenings of theirworks. Despite the disappointing experiences he’d had when he’d triedto press these issues in many projects, he thought it made sense to tryhis best and see what came of it, especially when his art works wereinvited to spaces marked by the obvious presence of capital (or whereone could presume its presence). When he made his modest requests, heusually received the answer that there was no money. Neither for artistfees, nor for travel, nor for production. Curators usually just askedhim and his colleagues to send copies of their films or print files oftheir works – they would do the rest. Most artists thus had littlechance to see the many beautiful, important shows that were made withtheir work and thus to grow professionally.
The artist was a member of acollective. This collective did not have a gallery, and most of thevideos they produced were self-financed (or underfinanced) with thevague hope that one day they might be able to raise money for a newproduction. To make matters worse, they worked under public license.
One day the artist received a politeletter from a nice curator whom he had never met. The curator waspleased to invite the artist to screen a video work at a show. Sheexplained how the video was crucial to the whole concept of the show.She even asked the artist to produce a new graphic piece that wouldwork in conjunction with the video.
The artist was thrilled to receive thisinvitation. He read the concept for the show and discovered that it wasfilled with important ideas and stirring expressions that he liked alot. The emancipatory aspect of modernity as an unfinishedproject… The question of the contemporary emancipatory potential ofrevolutionary ideas, of socialism and communism… The role of art in thetransformation of society. And so on.
He thought to himself that it wasterrific there were curators and venues that worried about the issuesdear to his heart. He read the name of the place where he had beeninvited to exhibit: Pavilion UniCreditin Bucharest. This particular space was renowned for supporting themost radical (even revolutionary) practices and some of the mostleftist and socially concerned international artists.
He recalled that this cutting-edgespace with its radical agenda was run by a guy he had once met; thisman had also invited him to a big biennale he was organizing. He alsorecalled that this fellow had complained his space was very poorlyfinanced because his country was the poorest in Europe. They had begunto argue about just this fact. The artist felt that since this fellow’sspace was named in honor of a big bank, it might make sense to pushthis bank for more solid support. Otherwise, when local institutionswere not treated as equal partners, and their hard work was poorlycompensated, you ended up with something that smacked of theneocolonial exploitation of resources and people, of local miseries andinequalities.There was nothing wrong with the bank’s sponsorshipitself, he thought, but there was something perverse about featuringthe bank’s name without securing enough funding to run a decent programand treat artists and contributors right.
кому интерсено читайте дальше здесь
http://chtodelat.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/pavilion-unicredit-an-artists-tale/
--
ВЛ
_______________________________________________ oberlist mailing list [email protected] http://idash.org/mailman/listinfo/oberlist
