INTERVIEW BY MARIA VASSILEVA
AUGUST 2018
- You together with Răzvan Ion curated the 2018 edition of the Bucharest Biennale (May 17 to July 8, 2018) under the working title/concept “Edit Your Future.” What added this experience to your very rich curatorial practice?
- You together with Răzvan Ion curated the 2018 edition of the Bucharest Biennale (May 17 to July 8, 2018) under the working title/concept “Edit Your Future.” What added this experience to your very rich curatorial practice?
First of all, I really appreciate your interest in Bucharest Biennale and your kind words about my practice. After being involved in biennale adventure since 1987 I think now, there are many aspects to be cleared about this biennale phenomenon in contemporary art. The International Biennale Association website documents hundreds of biennale all over the world. They are all registered under the name biennale, but very diverse in aim, content and form. Looking back to İstanbul Biennale, we can see that its aim was to show that Turkey is a democratic welfare country and to use contemporary art production as a tool to make the culture industry of Turkey visible. The local private sector celebrated this achievement as they have gained international recognition. No doubt, a number of artists have also benefitted from the fame of İstanbul Biennale. Today’s contemporary art scene is based on private sector investments, collectors, art-fair and gallery activities; but all this accumulation is now under the pressure of adverse socio-political and economic difficulties. While I was observing the dilemma of local art scene in 2016, and after I had to resign from 6thÇanakkale Biennale and the biennale was cancelled, Razvan Ion invited me to co-curating the Bucharest Biennale. Here, I will openly say that this invitation was very appreciated and not only an individual triumph towards the abusive power, which spoiled 6thÇanakkale Biennale, but also has proven that the international art scene is supporting its members against these kind of political obstructions and empowering their activities. It was also a great opportunity to convey my knowledge and experience towards Bucharest art scene. I was honoured to be able to contribute to Romania art scene, which has also a rich Ottoman heritage and which is a close neighbour to Turkey. I could contribute with my network, but Bucharest art scene contributed to my knowledge and experience with its amazing collective and collaborative initiative and energy. Bucharest Biennale is an independent initiative of a group of artists and art experts, based on the socio-political- cultural magazine Pavilion founded by Razvan İon and Eugen Radescou. Here, I saw a successful model of pure civil initiative, very similar to Sinopale, Çanakkale Biennale and Mardin Biennale in Turkey. The biennale was realized in three galleries: Mobius Gallery, MORA (Opportunities for Romanian Artists), Atelier (Contemporary Art Space) and was sponsored by Transilvania Bank and supported by Partners in Kind. The most challenging issue in this biennale was our concept and operation. We invited the artists to contribute one image which was printed as a 50 x 70 poster and presented to the public to take it and make their own catalogue. We, no doubt referred to Felix Gonzales Torres’s 1989 work; concerning the critical LGTB discourse in some EU countries, this was our approach to it. We really thank to the artists who generously contributed to the concept of the biennale.
I am now more convinced that in debating about the biennale we, in the art practice, should make our decisions according to their infrastructure, their relations to financial sources and to political powers, to their interaction with the local public.
Do you think the contacts between Turkey and neighbouring Balkan countries are active enough? In 2002 I invited you to curate a women show and you did it – Sheshow at ATA Center for contemporary art.
My collaboration and partnership with neighbouring countries started beginning of 1990 when Efi Strousa and me decided to make a group show with artists from Greece and Turkey; which we realized in 1992 under the title Sanat, Texhn in the former Painting and Sculpture Museum ib Dolmabahçe Serai. During the İstanbul Biennale in the 90’s, artists from Balkan countries were present with their very significant works. You mention our collaboration in 2002 and 2010, who decisive actions for communication and exchange. I wish we could continue in a more intensive way to realize projects. There was more hope in the 90’s and beginning 0f 2000 to establish a strong network between the South-East EU countries, Turkey and Middle-East; this hope was based on the EU cultural policy and funds which supported the ambition of EU culture industry to expand its power and influence towards East. This ambition of EU ended up with Guggenheim and Louvre in the Arab countries, where human rights are in their lowest level!
The institutions, together with curators and art experts were very enthusiastic to discover our art scenes. This excitement was gradually satisfied; and many artists, who had some fame during this episode settled down in the countries they chose.
Now, the scene is under the pressure of emigration crisis; the public of EU countries have distanced themselves from the discovery of the so-called desired unknown, which threatens their welfare. On the other hand since 2008 economic crisis, Neo-capitalist system in our region is not in favour of contemporary art production. Sponsorship, official funding is not so easy to acquire. Whatever is happening in production and action in our countries is mainly based on the individual desire and power and on the civil initiative.
Through your initiative we, three Bulgarian curators, worked on the international show Beyond Credit in 2010 in Istanbul. Do you think these private efforts are enough for the recognition of the cultures?
Well, this is the major problem in our region: lack of a sustainable networking between the institutions, civil society and individuals, which are currently irregular and dependent on individual efforts and self-devotion. Current local wars and economic shortfalls in the region remain obstacles to the continuation of cultural and artistic exchange. Unfortunately, artists and experts in the region are focused on the art market in Western EU countries rather than on their political agenda and public. This attraction to the market is being manipulated by private sector culture policies, by art market speculators, by collectors and art experts who collaborate with them; and not forgetting the auction companies that have placed their agents in local art scenes to canalize the flow of financial sources to their interest. Here, we should be also very careful in asking and getting the support of the governments for further exchange and collaboration. The support always depends on give-and-take; one has to find strategies to by-pass these kinds of demands.
Let’s go back to your home country. What is the situation with the art world and the art scene today there? How the big political changes affect them? - Do the artists react to the political changes and the new situation in the country (if is it new)?
Considering the geo-political turmoil in the region and the Islamist and neo-liberalist positioning of the official cultural policy of AKP government, we should re-question the success of İstanbul art scene. We have to face the truth concealed behind the manifestations of jubilation, behind the optimistic showcase.
Fortunately, contemporary artist, art experts producing artworks and art and culture actions and activities and the private institutions or individual initiatives are determinedly effective in fulfilling the cultural aims and intentions such as a clear and unbiased vision towards democratic transformation, freedom of expression and communication. They respect pluralism, human and gender rights, have responsibility on ecological problems, and believe in the development of public awareness. Galleries show these dissident works as much as they can; and artists try to exhibit in independent spaces too. All these principles and activities are currently struggling towards democratic processes and resisting the upcoming totalitarian regime. Visual artists with their aesthetically qualified, conceptually competent artworks are widely and strongly enriching the visual production and women artists are on the front of this production.
But, how the artist profit from their production or rather how they survive, is a crucial and leading question. Most of the artists work in the universities, in graphic design companies or open art studios for the public; with any luck a small number of artists have family support or private income. Private galleries occasionally employ curators; the museum or private sector art and culturequantity is not enough to meet the employment demands, besides they prefer to run their institution with low-wage.
We have to face that there is a paradoxal environment. Depending on private sector financial support and corporate institutional activities, the artists and art experts have to collaborate with these groups, even if their political ideologies are not in tune. However each case has its own dilemma or solution. When we are making this interview, we are waiting in suspense for the 24thJune elections. It will also be decisive for the art scene in Turkey; I cannot predict at the moment.
