Wednesday, October 05, 2016






CONCEPT TEXT OF THE "CANCELLED" 5TH ÇANAKKALE BIENNIAL

The 5th International Çanakkale Biennial (24th September - 6th of November 2016) entitled:
with the distinguished participation of artists, art and culture institutions, art critics and curators, will focus on the homeland/heimat imaginations bound to 20th century nationalism and its tragic and problematic consequences being witnessed as constant global emigrations, refugees and exiles.
The source of inspiration for the 5th International Çanakkale Biennial is the philosopher, writer and journalist Villém Flusser, a refugee of WWII. His words about the concept of homeland/heimat, which were the motivation for the concept of the 5th International Çanakkale Biennial, penetrate into the innermost core of the migrant and refugee tragedy that confronts humankind in the 21st century: "Homeland is not an eternal value but rather a function of a specific technology; still, whoever loses it suffers. This is because we are attached to heimat by many bonds, most of which are hidden and not accessible to consciousness. Whenever these attachments tear or are torn asunder the individual experiences this painfully, almost as a surgical invasion of his most intimate person."1
What does homeland mean today in active politics? Many political parties with rightist national ideologies name themselves "Homeland Party" which implicates a dedication and commitment to homeland, places it in sacredness and exempts it of any criticism. The concept is commonly used as a unique, unchangeable identity and source, and supposed to have mostly positive connotations. Home sounds like a harmless concept when used by right-wing extremists to convince the people that they have a moderate discourse. However, a Foucauldian interpretation claims the opposite: "The home supports the operations of modern regimes of power, bio-power, procedures and technologies of self, regulating and determining the habits of the body. Thus habituating the connections between the body and the nation, they function as regulatory controls: a bio-politics that results in excommunication from the home and homeland. Home and Homeland are interlinked; the home is intimately tied to what Foucault calls the games of truth, relations of power and forms of relations to oneself and to others."2
The ongoing common judgement is that the individual cannot choose his/her homeland/heimat but is born to it and it is his/her fate. The ones who are not born in that homeland are foreigners, who cannot be accepted or forgiven when they claim any kind of affiliation. Evidently, this kind of socio-political formula is an explicit clash with neo-capitalist cosmopolitanism as well as with globalism, which, through rights of world citizenship as well as financial profits through human migration, allows and provokes people to live where they want. The rights to live in a chosen country or the wish to live rootlessly and the forced immigration or the refugee problem are two sides of these socio-political and economic arguments. In both cases, immigration is elaborated by right wing politics as challenging and precarious to the concept of homeland/heimat since the right to live rootlessly as a world citizen or forced immigration opens up a flexibility, elimination and dispersal in the concept of homeland /heimat. For right wing politics, this concept combines the basic assumptions of all radical and nationalist ideologies, according to which the individual is not free as a central, active subject, but submits to a supposedly closed, homogeneous community.
What is happening now on the shores and borders of Europe is almost prophesied in Foucault's Madness and Civilisation: "Confined on the ship, from which there is no escape, the madman is delivered to the river with its thousand arms, the sea with its thousand roads, to that great uncertainty external to everything. He is a prisoner in the midst of what is the freest, the openest of routes: bound fast at the infinite crossroads. He is the Passenger par excellence: that is, the prisoner of the passage. And the land he will come to is unknownas is, once he disembarks, the land from which he comes. He has his truth and his homeland only in that fruitless expanse between two countries that cannot belong to him."3
Based on this quotation, in his essay William Walters4 discusses migration, deportation and viapolitics following in Foucault's footsteps. In this poetic paragraph, Foucault mentions the Narrenschiff (the ship of fools, the ship full of mad men drifting into the harbours of European cities, their removal ordered by the authorities). Walters explains: What was the meaning of this practice of using ships to ferry away the mad men? Foucault insists it was more than a ‘general means of extradiction'; it was a highly symbolic act that had everything to do with the way madness was coming to haunt the imagination of the Renaissance.With the term viapolitics he indicates a migration policy-scape that is increasingly preoccupied with the routes and journeys taken by migrants crossing militarized and surveilled borders. Whole territories are now labelled ‘transit countries', and their governments are pressured to crack down on migrant routes. This hard-hearted determination, defined here as viapolitics, confronts the poetic expression of Foucault and the current tragedy of the refugees, precisely delineating the cold- blooded system, logistics, method, techniques and processes of the current condemnation to homelessness.
Now, witnessing the images of drifting and sinking boats in the Aegean and Mediterranean seas, we have to ask the question: What is the reason for today's immigration, deportation and that viapolitics?
Today it is difficult to live in a very complex and enigmatic region such as the Middle East, a region of ancient civilisations that made the World we live in. Throughout the centuries it was a realm of utmost creativity, thought and wisdom, while from the 19th century on it became a region transformed under imperialism and other radical ideologies, bearing all the welfare, but also the vices and burdens of 20th century politics and economy. Words can neither describe the magnificence of its nature and monuments nor define the disasters, interrupted lives and war as it exists in this region.

The majority of people living in the region were born into a modernized yet traditional society as programmed by colonisation and had to face one of the most ambitious utopias of 20th century, with the paradox, however, that their region was called "the Third World" or "the periphery" from that moment on, while the winds of liberalism, socialism, communism, militarism, internationalism, nationalism, fundamentalism, McDonaldism, multiculturalism swept over it. They ended up living in a post-peripheral globalism, dystopic and heterotopic. It was a century of constructing and deconstructing, making and remaking. This story, full of paradoxes, hopes, disappointments, fits with the stories of many individuals in this region. Now, our hearts cry with tears of blood for the millions of people who have had to leave their homelands and are now suffering such a great loss.
Many artists and art experts of various creative disciplines throughout the 20th century and in the 15 years of 21st century have lived or are living within this geopolitical, social context. Since post-modernism and within the prospects of globalization, they have tried to deconstruct the complex mechanism of peripheral modernism and reconstruct an art system based on free and independent creativity, on interactive exchange of thoughts and concepts and on collaborative projects with international fellow critics and curators. Fortunately, this process was supported by current discourses with their positive impact on the art theory of the late 80s and 90s.
From the mid 80s on, the outcome of the efforts of artists and people involved in art became relatively visible and sustainable in Istanbul, Bagdad, Damascus, Beirut, Amman, Baku, Tbilisi, Yerevan, cities which embody the end of century phenomenon such as dystopia/heterotopia and neo-topia, all to be an extremely fertile field for artistic creativity.
From mid-90s on, the interest of world-wide intellectuals, artists and art investors shifted to these cities, representing cosmopolitan environments rather than local national characterisitics. The question was how to use this opportunity to reconstruct interactive, interdisciplinary art events and art appreciations which can transcend the -isms of the 20th century and open a horizon to democracy. In fact, history was repeating itself. At the beginning of 19th century, Western Modernism took its inspirations from remote Africa, Asia, Asia Minor and the Middle East. Early modern painting and sculpture, as well as middle and late modernism, have been pregnant with formal and theoretical influences from the Non-West. It has happened again. There were two ways of nourishing Eurocentric ambitions: The intellectuals and artists and other creative individuals emigrated to Euro-centres and to the USA, or art experts of the West infiltrated the art scenes of the Non-West, selecting ideas, trends and models.
This might be a raw and negative description of what is happening for three decades under the aegis of global exchange. To our delight, it has another face. Because of the nature of globalization the people are inevitably connected and because of the ethics of globalization there is a kind of cultural correctness on the level of intellectual production.
On the other hand, globalization also created the consciousness of civil society, together with its infrastructure in the form of NGOs and civil initiatives acting as a membrane as well as a transmitter between the political and economic powers and society and individuals. Civil associations have made a difference in the art world since the beginning of 90s; they have prepared the networks for the individuals working in different fields of art and culture.

In order to resist a new colonisation of any sorts, the artists and art experts had to learn to utilize this tool for their benefits. However, pro-western policies with weak economies are effectively re-colonized. There is still a tension between the old infrastructures (polarized world structures) and the new. There is also a tension between old nationalism, new nationalism and transnationalism. Cultural and artistic exchange plays on this territory of multi-tensions. It is also paradoxical that the people have to keep one part of the memory alive - for the immigrant and the refugee it is the homeland/heimat - because there is no culture without memory, as Umberto Eco defined it in his video interview: Shared memories mean common identity. We cannot think of ourselves as Europeans if we are not able to restore an European identity. Parallel to individual memory is the library, the vegetal memory. If somebody loses his memory he becomes a plant. Hell has no meaning without memory.5
At the same time, people should persuasively question the part played by memory, which can poison their current and future plans. It is a very fragile path. At this point - dealing with memory, the homeland/heimat - we have to rely on the artists, who have been dealing with it according to a post-modernist process. For two decades we can observe in the works of artists all kinds of detailed research into their origins and collective memory, deciphering political, economic, social, cultural complexities related to ideological interventions, focusing on the very core of the relation between everyday life and art.
In Raoul Vaneigem's words: The history of our times calls to mind those Walt Disney characters who rush madly over the edge of a cliff without seeing it, so that the power of their imagination keeps them suspended in mid-air; but as soon as they look down and see where they are, they fall. Contemporary thought, like Bosustov's heroes, can no longer rest on its own delusions. What used to hold it up, today brings it down. It rushes full tilt in front of the reality that will crush it: the reality that is lived every day. Is this dawning lucidity essentially new? I don't think so. 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.6
Despite all the generalization, standardization and totalitarianism in the world, this twenty-four hours makes all the difference within the supremacy of the corporate economy and global politics. The blood-stained history of the last decades is the production of the political intervention into the homeland/heimat bound everyday activity of the people.
Artists are evidently aware of the significance of it, approaching these twenty-four hours in detail, itemising and particularising the facts with his/her inevitable sophistication and insouciance. 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 detail of the common life and the authority to cry out his/her message to the world from a homeland. The viewer makes the artist an accomplice.
However, in non-democratic or semi-democratic countries, contemporary art works are either considered a vital criticism of the status quo and state policy or not evaluated as metaphorical tools to empower democracies. One of the main reasons for this misrecognition is the lack of fundamental infrastructure of contemporary art to enable its influence on the visual thinking of the society. The other reason is that society is not ready to change its mind and behaviour by utilizing the post-modernist patterns, models and concepts.
And now we are exposed to realize the suffering, misery and death created by the forced or voluntary immigration through the oppressive and destructive political decisions in the world order that defines itself as globalization in the sense that it promises equality, human rights and the benefits of advanced science and technology. It is explained as the outcome of the neo- capitalist system even by the supporters of the system without any suggestion of a possible restoration. Even recognized by the supporters of the present system there are no immediate attempts to rectify it and they even refuse to draw the necessary conclusions.
The 5th International Çanakkale Biennial will be a perfect opportunity for us to face and challenge the global human movement with the universal language of contemporary art and thus have a civil commitment and positioning towards the ongoing tragedy. The Biennial will try to raise questions about the sustainability of ideas of national and ethnic identity in a world whose borders are becoming increasingly accidental and penetrable. It will try to open discussions on the traditional and post-modern societies which are now in flux, opposed by the global sweeping of networks and an excess of visual culture initiatives, despite their persistent traditional or modernist socio-political and economic infrastructures and epistemologies.
In inviting the artists, curators and institutions to observe, examine and interpret these themes, thesis and discourses, the Çanakkale Biennial may present a discourse which will advocate that even if the migrants/refugees are exposed to be changed by the society they migrated to, human history has revealed that they have challenged and transfused the host society with a new creativity and vision.
Beral Madra, January 2016
1. Vilém Flusser, The Freedom of the Migrant: Objections to Nationalism, University of Illinois ress, .
2. Eric Harper and Charity Njoki Mwaniki,
Foucault: On Home and Homelessness’, http://www.academia.edu/10313350/Foucault_ Home_and_Homeless_presentation_at_the_Critical_Space_Conference_London_. Accessed January 2016.
3. Michel Foucault, Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason, 1988, p. 11
4.
William Walters, ‘On the Road with Michel Foucault: Migration, Deportation and Viapolitics’, http://www.academia.edu/ 7344475/On_the_Road_with_Michel_Foucault_Deportation_Aviation_and_Viapolitics. Accessed January 2016.
5. Umberto Eco,
Sulla memoria. Una conversazione in tre parti, 15’. Capitolo 1. 6’ 5 ’’. Directed by Davide Ferrario. http://www.codiceitalia2015.com/en/exhibition/on-memory. Accessed January 2016.
6. Raoul Vaneigem
, ‘The Revolution of Everyday Life’, http://72.52.202.216/~fenderse/EVERYDAY.htm. Accessed January 2016. 

Wednesday, October 07, 2015

WWW.CULTURENOW ONLINE JOURNAL, GREECE, INTERVIEW BY STRATIS PANTAZIS


www.culturenow online journal interview
http://www.culturenow.gr/42066/beral-madra-oi-mikres-mpienale-ths-mesogeioy-apoteloyn-mono-


You are one of the first involved in the Istanbul Biennial. What is your experience? Were there any difficulties and how did you seek funding?
1987 and 1989 Biennale have been realized when Turkey was under the rule of the Military power; even if the so-called democratic government has opened the horizon to Liberal Economy. Biennale was a cultural manifestation of the business sector towards EU and Western Democracy. Even if the art works were not considered politically influential, the will and intention behind the Biennale was political and economic. İstanbul Biennale has preserved this quality until today; it is a private sector biennale. I gained my curatorial experience through these two biennale, at a time “curating” was not known in Turkey. As we have introduced the updated contemporary art production, the artists and the public was rewarded with an updated knowledge on international art. It was not so easy to convince the prominent artists from Europe to participate, as the state had a fascist image. At that time “sponsoring” was not a popular issue; however, the founders of the biennale foundation have contributed as well as the municipality and the state. There will be always difficulties in making İstanbul Biennale. Since 28 years neither the city nor the biennale foundation have created a serviceable art and culture space. There are only commercial fair complexes. In the first and second biennale we utilized the historical buildings, through which we hoped to attract the attention of the public (at that time very distances from contemporary art) and no doubt the curiosity of the international artists. Later many curators had to repeat this strategy; gradually İstanbul itself became the concept of biennale. The last biennale is another example of this habit!
 In your presentation at the symposium organised by the Thessaloniki Biennial, you mentioned that the Istanbul Biennial is currently the show case of Turkey’s business sector and VIP game. From your experience there has been pressure on curators regarding their choice of artists?
There is obviously no direct pressure on the foreign curators; however, the infrastructure and the logistics of the biennale guide the curator towards certain obligations. These obligations are formal rather than conceptual. Yet, we have to consider that at the moment Turkey has a very bad image in censorship, in particular on the press and the media. That means, dissident and uncanny works with heavy direct political content that reveal the anti-democratic status in Turkey will not be so welcome! This biennale may have this kind of pressure, as we have seen too many introvert, gentle, muted works and very esoteric implications to the ongoing political problems and unresolved ideological traumas.
Has it developed throughout the years and in what ways?
There were some censorship cases through the years; but one cannot say that there was a total censorship that stopped the production in a radical way, or only allowed decorative art works, which is the case in most Islamic dictatorships.
There is a website which registers all censorship cases: http://www.siyahbant.org
What role has the state played in the development of the Biennials in Turkey and the contemporary art?
We have to remember that the first biennale, funded by the state started in Ankara, under the title Europe-Asia Biennale, but terminated after the 4th version. Since the 90’s we, people active in İstanbul art and culture agenda, have written reports, organized forums in order to enlighten the political parties and governments about the contemporary cultural infrastructures and requirements of an international city like Istanbul. We defined the contemporary art industry in all details; I regret to say we did not achieve any positive result. The state culture policy is focused on culture tourism, on arts and crafts, on traditional and folkloric art. Even if they fund the biennale it is not sustainable.
Have the Biennials that take place in the country influenced the development of contemporary Turkish art? What has changed? 
The foreign curators, with their concepts, artists lists, networks  have stipulated global attention. There are memorable art works which should have been bought by the collectors, in particular by the ones who intended to  establish museums. To our regret this was not the case. After all these biennale Istanbul could have a large collection of artworks, mainly created for Istanbul, in Istanbul. The current collection museums are no doubt beneficial, but not as rewarding as they should be. What the biennale have implanted is the value of free expression, the democratic challenge of visual culture and a resistance to conservatism and fundamentalism. Currently the biennale is a castle of free thinking, creativity and democracy against the current that is dragging Turkey towards a neo-fascism.
Is contemporary art popular in Turkey at the moment?  Are collectors and museums from the country and abroad interested in it?
Contemporary art in Turkey became popular since the mid nineties; now it is almost a biennale for the VIP, fulfilling all the rituals of PR oriented events. It seems that some hundreds of VIP people are coming to the opening of Istanbul Biennale; yet it is never declared that these people are also buyers of artworks of the artists of Turkey!
Do you feel that there is common ground among the Biennials that take place in the Mediterranean? Do they have a strong presence in the international art scene?
This is the major problem! There is an unnecessary competition between the smaller biennale, which obviously cannot compete with Venice Biennale! Istanbul Biennale could undertake a responsibility and make a colloquium of small Med biennale, which would strengthen its position in the Med. However, we must consider that currently the Med region is in war and terror and economic depression, so that all these small biennale are only illuminations of resistance points!
Do you feel that the guest curator (outside the Mediterranean region) who is asked to organise for example the Biennial in Istanbul or elsewhere in the Mediterranean is able to grasp the socio-political situation and is it necessary for him/her to do so?
After many observations I am now convinced that whoever is invited to curate a biennale outside of EU- in particular in the Islam countries - should be very meticulous, attentive and devoted.  At large, there are still prejudices, orientalist leftovers and unnecessary smartness towards “the other” and Islam and East and South Mediterranean is still “the other”.  On the other hand each country has its own contemporary history, which is ignored, by the sophisticated levels of contemporary art world. The appointed curators should be well informed about the local state of affairs, histories, conflicts and political tensions. It is not expected that the appointed curator should react or challenge to the socio-political tensions and problems, but at the same time they are also not welcome to make touristic and decorative biennale.
Thessaloniki and Istanbul are two cities not very far from each other. Are there any differences between their Biennials?
Yes, there are differences. I will not compare Istanbul and Thessaloniki for their size and population; it is obvious that Istanbul is a mega city, Thessaloniki is a small city. Yet, Thessaloniki is a very organized city and has many exhibition venues with easy access. Thessaloniki Municipality is collaborating with the biennale organizers to facilitate their ventures. The content and strategy of the last tree Thessaloniki Biennale is civil-society friendly and has social responsibility; it has now a significant identity. The funding of Thessaloniki Biennale comes mostly from public resources. Istanbul Biennale is still seeking its identity; because it is a very complex dystopia city.
As an outsider and expert in the field, do you see any development in the Greek art scene?
We from Turkey admire the Greek artists, art experts, and institutions for their resistance and will to overcome the economic crisis. The Greek art scene had always a fundamental effect on the contemporary art in Europe, with its Modern and Post-modern aesthetics and with its traditional roots. I am very proud to say that in 1992 I had the opportunity to collaborate with Efi Strousa and make the first contemporary exhibition of Greek and Turkish artists in Istanbul. Later throughout the years I had had the opportunity to work in special projects with renowned Greek artists such as Dimitri Alithinos, Tsoklis, Kallipi Lemos, Danae Stratou and many others. In 2014 I have been invited by Art Athina to make a show of art works collected from collectors of Turkey and admired the will, enthusiasm and professionalism of the Greek art scene. The Greek art scene created a model for the East Mediterranean art scenes and it continues its quest for more relational and regional communication and collaboration.



















Wednesday, November 19, 2014


















Mayıs 2014-Atina Fuarı'nda TR Koleksiyoncuları sergisinde

FUARLARDAN SONRA TUFAN

İstanbul Art News’un Ekim Piyasa bölümünde bazı galerilerin kapanacağına/kapandığına ilişkin bir haber çıktı. Bu galeriler arasında herhangi bir basın açıklaması yapmamış olan Kuad Galeri’de vardı. İstanbul sanat ortamının kulaktan kulağa haberleşme sistemi bir şekilde işlemiş ve Kuad Galeri de bu haberde yer almıştı. Bu haberin doğru yanı da vardı; galeri bir durum değerlendirmesi yapıyordu. Yeni yöntemler keşfetmeye çalışarak galerilerin işlevinin tersine işleyen sanat piyasası yönlendirmelerini sollayarak devam etmeyi düşünüyor; ancak bunun gerçekleşip gerçekleşmeyeceğini zaman gösterecek.

Kuad Galeri’de  2012-2014 arasında Kesintisiz Avangard (Küratör: Branko Franceschi 24 ŞUbat - 28 NiSan 2012); Fluxus 50, Galerie Inge Baecker Koleksiyonu’ndan Fluxus’un 50. Yılı (10 Mayis - 30 Haziran 2012); John Cage (18 Temmuz - 5 Eylül 2012); Gerard Caris “ Beşgencilik” ( 19 Eylül - 27 Ekim Joseph Kosuth, “Uyanma” (22 Kasım 2012 - Mart 2012); Nikita Alexeev “Avrasya Şarkıları”
1(9 Nisan - 15 Haziran 2013) Marjinal Bir Devrim (10 Eylül - 10 Kasım 2013;  Küratörler: Max Presneill - Gül Çağın); Online 5 Kasım - 31 Aralık 2013); Mutsuz Hazır Nesne (Ocak - Şubat 2014); Duyumlanabilirliğin İmgeleri (11 Mart - 19 Ni̇San 2014); KopuşLar ve Kavuşmalar-Poloya-Türkiye 600.Yılı (2 Mayıs 2014
5 Haziran 2014);  Teknik Esrime (Ağustos – 13 Eylül 2014); Küçük Güzeldir (Eylül-Aralık 2014) sergileri gerçekleşti ve yaklaşık 150 sanatçının yapıtı sunuldu. Kuad Galeri, sanatçılarla ilişkilerde de anlaşmaların onların yararına yapılmasına özen gösterdi; olağan kurallar karşılıklı saygı ve anlayışla uyguladı; danışmanlığa önem verdi. Bu sergilerin içerik ve biçimlerine bakıldığında Kuad Galeri’nin nerdeyse kar amacı gütmeyen bir sanat mekanı gibi çalıştığı görülür. 2012-2013 yılında beklenen düzeyde olmasa da satışların yapıldığını söyleyebiliriz; ancak gözlemimize göre 2014 başından itibaren Türkiye’nin siyasal krizlerine ve seçim dönemine bağlı olarak satışlarda hızlı gerileme oldu.  Ne ki sanat yapıtları satışlarının ekonomik dalgalanmalardan etkilenmediği gibi yaygın bir kanı da var; küresel bağlamda en ağır ekonomik krizlerde bile sanat yapıtlarına yatırım sürdüğü izleniyor.

Türkiye’de durum böyle mi? Yanıt için yatırımı yapan kişi ve kurumların durumuna  bakmak gerekiyor.
Küresel sanat piyasasının rekabet araçlarından olan ve her yıl yayınlanan ”en önemliler” listelerinde 2014 yılının 200 en aktif Modern ve Çağdaş sanat koleksiyoncusunun adı arasında yalnız, bir Türkçe ad görülüyor.*
İdeolojik içerik, toplumsal sorumluluk ve eleştirel yaklaşım dışında yapıtların satılması gibi bir hedef de olduğuna göre bu listeler bulundukları ülkelerin kültür/sanat sanayilerinin düzeyine bağlı mesleği sürdürmek zorunda olan sanatçılar ve sanat uzmanların gündeminde de yer alıyor.

Türkiyeli Modern ve Çağdaş sanat alıcısının son beş yıldır gösterdiği performansa da bakılırsa bu listelerden birisine girebilmek için belirli koşulların yerine getirilmesi bekleniyor. VIP ve Tanıtım yöntemleriyle ve kuşkusuz genel ekonomi politikasının “büyüme düşleri”yle oldukça şişirilmiş bir sanat ortamı/piyasası ortamına sahip olduğumuzu varsayarsak, listelere girememiş bir koleksiyoncu grubuna sahip olduğumuz gerçeği bize durumun sunulandan başka olduğunu gösteriyor.  

200 koleksiyoncunun listede yer almasının nedeni, iş dünyasındaki başarıları değil, koleksiyonlardaki yapıtların niteliğidir. Yapıtların değerlendirme sürecinden, güç odağı oluşturan sanat ve kültür kurumlarının onayından geçmiş olması, sanatçılarının istikrarlı ve verimli bir üretim çizgisi olması gibi özellikler söz konusudur.

Türkiye’de koleksiyoncu adının yanına bir artı değer katmak için “koleksiyoncu” olmayı göze alıyor. Göze alıyor, çünkü genel olarak benimsediği geçmişe dönük koleksiyonculuk ne kadar güvenliyse , geleceğe dönük koleksiyonculuk sanat ve kültür üretimlerini destekleyen ve güdüleyen, etkinlikten çok yaratıcı insana yatırım yapan özel-kamusal kurum altyapılarına sahip olmadığımız için; kendisi çağdaş sanat konusunda her zaman yeterince bilgilenmediği için; sanatçının üretimi sürdürmesi için yeterince olanağı olmadığı için güvensizdir.
1980’lerde kurulan öncü galerilerin ve 1990’lardaki fuar girişimlerinin bu koleksiyonculuğun oluşumunda payı olduğunu biliyoruz; artısıyla eksisiyle bir koleksiyoncu profili oluşturdular. Bu profil uzun süre bir dizi sanatçının resminin elden ele dolaşması şeklindeydi ve koleksiyonlar böylece %80 Modernist resimden oluşuyor. Son yıllarda Post-modern resim, fotoğraf ve video alıcısı profili oluştu, ama bu  üretimin küçük bir yüzdesinin satışını karşılıyor.

Koleksiyoncular son dönemde yabancı sanat tacirlerine danışmayı ve fuarlardan alım yapmayı yeğliyor; sanatı “emtia” olarak gören büyük şirketlerle, bu şirketlerin istihdam ettiği uzman topluluğuyla işbirliği içinde kapalı devre oluşturarak sanat üretiminin kaderini belirleyici duruma geliyor.

İstanbul'da dar alanda birbiriyle kıyasıya rekabet içinde üç-dört fuar var. İlk ikisi uluslararası olma iddiası taşıyor. Bu iki fuar söz konusu 200 koleksiyoncu listesinden en azından bir kaçının ya da başka listelerden bir kaçının bu fuarlara geleceğini müjdeliyor. Fuarların içine sanat bilgisi ve sanat uzmanlığı içinde bir değerlendirme ortamı sağlamak amacıyla konferans, açık oturum gibi entelektüel etkinlikler yerleştirilerek koleksiyoncuların güveni kazanılıyor.

Türkiye’de dengeleyici işlevi olan kamusal kurumsal kültür ve sanat altyapısının yarattığı boşluğu sanat piyasası ile işbirliği yapan özel sektörün artısıyla eksisiyle doldurmaya talip olduğuna tanık oluyoruz. Bu sorumluluğun bilincinde olduklarını da var saymak zorundayız! Ancak bu koşullarda çağdaş sanatın savunduğu “bağımsızlık-özgürlük-muhalefet-eleştiri” gibi değerlerin uygulanmasının güçleştiğini söyleyebiliriz.
Koleksiyoncular fuarlara ve müzayedelere güveniyor. İş insanı olarak iş bildiklerini varsayıyoruz, ama 1980’lerden günümüze üretilen ideolojik-muhalif-eleştirel-ilişkisel yapıtları - ki özellikle bu yapıtlar Türkiye çağdaş sanat üretimini uluslararası üretime bağlıyor – neden satın al(a)madıklarını açıklamak zor oluyor. “200 önemli” listesine giremediklerinin nedeni de koleksiyonlarının “gelişim belleği” içermemesi olsa gerek.





Tuesday, August 26, 2014








BASIN BÜLTENİ
4. ULUSLARARASI ÇANAKKALE BİENALİ

“SAVAŞIN SONUNU YALNIZCA ÖLÜLER GÖRÜR” (PLATON)

27 Eylül-2 Kasım 2014

SANATÇILAR:
Gülçin Aksoy (İstanbul), Maja Bajevic (Paris–Saraybosna),
Nigol Bezjian (Beyrut), Bashir Borlakov (İstanbul),
Songül Boyraz (Viyana),
Harold De Bree (Lahey), Klaus vom Bruch (Berlin–Münih),
Ergin Çavuşoğlu (Londra–İstanbul), Ersan Deveci (İzmir),
Nezaket Ekici (Berlin–İstanbul), Reha Erdem (İstanbul),
Ayşe Erkmen (Berlin–İstanbul), Aladdin Garunov (Moskova),
Douglas Gordon (Londra), Murat Gök (Diyarbakır),
T. Melih Görgün (İstanbul),
Güven İncirlioğlu (İzmir), IRWIN (Ljubljana), Khaled Jarrar (Ramallah),
Grigor Khachatryan (Erivan), Anne Kodura (Berlin),
Sıtkı Kösemen (İstanbul), Raziye Kubat (İstanbul),
Radenko Milak (Belgrad), Jehane Noujaim (Boston),
Pınar Öğrenci (İstanbul), Ahmet Öktem (İstanbul),
Marilena Preda Sanc (Bükreş), Antonio Riello (Milan–Londra–Asiago),
Anri Sala (Paris), Hans Schabus (Viyana), Tunca Subaşı (İstanbul),
Erdal Sezer (Çanakkale), Panos Tsagaris (New York–Atina),
Astrid Walsh (Dublin), Viron Vert (Berlin–Istanbul),
Akram Zaatari (Beyrut)

KÜRATORYEL EKİP: 
Beral Madra (Genel Sanat Yönetmeni), Seyhan Boztepe (Genel Direktör),
Deniz Erbaş (CABININ Yönetici Küratörü)

Kavramsal çerçevesi 1.Dünya Savaşı’nın 100.yılı üstüne yapılandırılan ve
27 Eylül – 2 Kasım 2014 tarihleri arasında gerçekleştirilecek olan
4.Uluslararası Çanakkale Bienali’nin ana sergisine
Bosna Hersek, Slovenya, Rusya, Sırbistan, Romanya, Lübnan,  Filistin, Ermenistan, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri, İtalya, Yunanistan, İrlanda, İngiltere, Fransa, Almanya, Hollanda, Avusturya ve Türkiye’den
37 sanatçı katılıyor.

Bu basın bültenini hazırlar ve sunarken Filistin’den Somali’ye, Irak ve Suriye’den Orta Afrika’ya, yakın ve uzak coğrafyalarda süregiden savaş ve yıkım döngüsü bağlamında, bienalimizin 2500 yıl önce Platon tarafından dile getirilmiş başğının ne denli geçerli olduğunu büyük bir üzüntüyle izlemekteyiz.

Uluslararası Çanakkale Bienali, kurulduğu 2006 yılından bu yana Çanakkale’yi, Akdeniz havzası ile Avrupa ve Ortadoğu coğrafyalarının kesişim noktasında, çağdaş sanatın üretim, izlenme ve algılanması için uluslararası bir merkeze dönüştürmek; uluslararası sanatçıları ve sanat uzmanlarını davet ederek, kenti bu sanatçıların ve iletişim ağlarının gündemine yerleştirmek; kamusal alanlar, sanat ve kültür kurumları, üniversiteleri sanatçılarla işbirliğine davet ederek, karşılıklı etkileşim ve iletişim ortamı yaratmak; Çanakkale’yi küresel sanat ve kültür sanayi ve iletişim ağları içine konumlandırmak ilkelerini benimsiyor.

Bu ilkeler doğrultusunda 1914-2014 1.Dünya Savaşı’nın 100. yılının çeşitli vesilelerle hatırlandığı ülkelerde kapsadığı düşünce, yorum ve eleştiri alanı Çanakkale Bienali için elverişli bir kavramsal ortam oluşturmaktadır. 1. Dünya Savaşı’nın 100. yılında bu savaşa katılmış veya süreç ve sonuçlarından etkilenmiş bütün ülkelerde çeşitli etkinlikler planlanmakta ve hayata geçirilmektedir. Uluslararası Çanakkale Bienali, bu konuyu ele alarak kültürel ve sanatsal açıdan gündeme etkin bir biçimde katılmaktadır.

Bu yıl bienal, 20.yy başından bugüne en etkin düşünme ve eleştirme aracı olan görsel sanat ve kültür üretimleri aracılığıyla 1914’den günümüze değin sürmekte olan siyasal, toplumsal, kültürel olayları ve savaşların etkilerini yeniden değerlendirmeyi, irdelemeyi ve yorumlamayı amaçlıyor.  Dünya tarihinde bir dönüm noktası olan 1. Dünya Savaşı’nı, bu trajedinin önemli bir boyutunun yaşandığı Çanakkale’nin tarihsel, kültürel ve doğal özelliklerine de bağlamayı öneriyor.

Dolayısıyla, savaşa katılan ülkelerin Türkiye’deki temsilciliklerinin de doğal olarak bienale büyük ilgi gösterdiklerini belirtmeliyiz. Savaş ve yüzyılın, tarihsel Osmanlı coğrafyasından, bugünün siyasal haritasında kadar sürmekte olan etkilerinin yerel, ulusal ve uluslararası bağlamlarda yeniden-değerlendirileceği 4. Uluslararası Çanakkale Bienali, savaşa katılmış bütün ülkelerle etkin bir iletişim ve işbirliği ortamı, ortak bir çalışma ve üretim zemini oluşturmuştur.

Bienale, özellikle bugüne değin ürettikleri yapıtlarıyla Avrupa, Balkanlar, Kafkaslar ve Ortadoğu ekseninde küresel savaş ve barış süreçlerini, savaşların ve savaş sonrası gelişmelerin siyasal, ekonomik, toplumsal ve kültürel etkileriyle yol açtıkları değişimleri değerlendiren, irdeleyen ve yorumlayan sanatçılar davet edilmiştir. Sanatçıların duyarlılık ve öngörü içeren yapıtları, ülkelerinin özgün koşullarına odaklanırken küresel boyuttaki olgulara da değinmekte, böylece dünya tarihine ve günümüze dair görsel bir bellek, bir imge birikimi oluşturmaktadır. Bienalde sunulacak görsel imge birikiminin özellikle günümüzün genç kuşağı için önemli bir düşünsel-eleştirel temel sağlayacağını umut ediyoruz.

Doğtaş tarafından tahsis edilen kent merkezindeki üç katlı mobilya mağazası, 4. Uluslararası Çanakkale Bienali ana mekânı olarak işlev görecektir. Daha önceki bienallerde olduğu gibi Çanakkale’nin özgün yapı ve kamusal alanları ile Korfmann Kütüphanesi, Eski Ermeni Kilisesi, Mahal Sanat ve civarındaki eski depolar gibi özgün mekânlar da Bienal sergi ve etkinliklerine ev sahipliği yapacaktır. Bienale katılan sanatçıların uluslararası sergilerde gösterilmiş resim, fotoğraf, video ve yerleştirmeleri yanında, bienal için üretilmiş yeni çalışmaları da bu mekanlarda ziyaretçilerle buluşturulacaktır.

Çanakkale Belediyesi tarafından desteklenen Uluslararası Çanakkale Bienali’nin ayrılmaz bir parçası olan Bienal Genç, Bienal Çocuk ve Bienal Engelsiz programları ile bunlara eklemlenen “Bienaldeyiz” Kadın Girişimi, Bienalin bu yıl oluşturacağı görsel ve kavramsal çerçeveden hareketle çalışmalarına başlamıştır. Bu çalışmalar hem ana sergiyi besleyecek, hem de bienalin açık kalacağı 5 hafta süresince kentte farklı etkinlik ve çalışmalarla bienalin görsel ve düşünsel çıktılarını geniş kitlelerle buluşturacaktır.

4. Uluslararası Çanakkale Bienali’nin son haftasına gelindiğinde ise, 2004 yılında Berlin’de kurulan A SOUL FOR EUROPE (www.asoulforeurope.eu), AB ülkelerinden ve Türkiye’den önemli siyasetçi ve kültür uzmanlarının katılımıyla 25-27 Ekim 2014 tarihlerinde Çanakkale’de uluslararası bir forum gerçekleştirecektir.

Bienal kapsamında bir de özel proje yer almakta. “Shadow, Speak You Too [hester panim]” başğını taşıyan ve küratörlüğünü A.S. Bruckstein Çoruh / Taswir projects’in üstlendiği sergi, Joseph Semah’ın “Plasenta & Sonsuzluk” (1995) serisinden grafik baskılar ile Eva Beierheimer & Miriam Laussegger’in yerleştirmesinden oluşuyor.


BİENAL EKİBİ
Genel Sanat Yönetmeni: Beral Madra
Genel Direktör: Seyhan Boztepe
CABININ Yönetici Küratörü: Deniz Erbaş

Danışman:  İsmail Erten
Katalog Editörleri: Marko Stamenkovic, Çağla İlk
Asistan Küratör: Irene Panzani
Basın ve PR Direktörü:  Aynur Ganiler
Sergileme Sorumlusu: Kubilay Özmen
Koordinatörler: Deniz Erbaş, Didem Gürdoğan, Erdal Sezer, Erdinç Alnıak, Gözde Robin, Ismail Erten

Bienal Yönetim Merkezleri: CABININ ve MAHAL Sanat
Ayrıntılı bilgi için: info@canakkalebienali.com




PRESS RELEASE

4TH INTERNATIONAL ÇANAKKALE BIENNIAL

‘Only the dead have seen the end of war’ (Plato)

27 September-2 November 2014

ARTISTS
Gülçin Aksoy (Istanbul), Maja Bajevic (Paris–Sarajevo), Nigol Bezjian (Beirut),
Bashir Borlakov (Istanbul), Songül Boyraz (Wien), Harold De Bree (The Hague),
Klaus wom Bruch (Berlin–Munich), Ergin Çavuşoğlu (London–Istanbul),
Ersan Deveci (Izmir), Nezaket Ekici (Berlin–Istanbul), Reha Erdem (Istanbul),
Ayşe Erkmen (Berlin–İstanbul), Aladdin Garunov (Moscow),
Douglas Gordon (London), Murat Gök (Diyarbakır), T. Melih Görgün (Istanbul),
Güven İncirlioğlu (Izmir), IRWIN (Ljubljana), Khaled Jarrar (Ramallah),
Grigor Khachatryan (Yerevan), Anne Kodura (Berlin), Sıtkı Kösemen (Istanbul),
Raziye Kubat (Istanbul), Radenko Milak (Belgrade), Jehane Noujaim (Boston),
Pınar Öğrenci (Istanbul), Ahmet Öktem (Istanbul),
Marilena Preda Sanc (Bucharest), Antonio Riello (Milan–London–Asiago),
Anri Sala (Paris), Hans Schabus (Wien), Tunca Subaşı (Istanbul),
Erdal Sezer (Canakkale) Panos Tsagaris (New York–Athens), Astrid Walsh (Dublin),
Viron Vert (Berlin–Istanbul), Akram Zaatari (Beirut)



4th International Çanakkale Biennial has its conceptual framework structured upon ‘1914-1918-The Centenary of World War I’
is to be held on
27 September-November 2014
and welcomes
37 artists from Germany, Ireland, Austria, Russia, Romania, Lebanon, Italy, Armenia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Palestine, France, Slovenia, Serbia, Greece
to its main exhibition.

In the meanwhile, as the wars and slaughters occurring in a broad area stretching from Palestine, Iraq and Syria to Somali and Central Africa, we should also express our feelings of grief and sorrow for realizing once more the solid truth in the topic of our biennial today as recited by Plato 2500 years ago.

International Çanakkale Biennial, since its foundation in 2006, has been aiming various purposes: Firstly, to establish an international center, and hence, to transform the city of Çanakkale into a meeting point for production, observation and presentation of creations of contemporary art where Mediterranean, European and Middle-Eastern cultures intersect; secondly, by inviting numerous artists and experts, to locate the city into the international network of communications, arts and culture of global biennial community; and lastly, to provide an open platform for professionals, artists and institutions to exchange their practices and and share expertise in collaboration.

The arguments, interpretations and critics so far elaborated in considering the 100th year of 1st World War construct a favorably comprehensive conceptual framework for Çanakkale Biennial. In the centenary of 2014, numerous projects and events are being held in those countries, which have participated in or effected by the war. Çanakkale Biennial anticipates a broad and an effective participation in cultural and artistic topics of global communication. Perceiving artistic and cultural creations as the most effective means of reflection and criticism since the beginning of 20th century, Çanakkale Biennial this year, aims at revaluating, elaborating and elucidating the ongoing political, social and cultural events and the impacts of war thereupon since 1914.

Recognizing the fact that the city of Çanakkale, with its historical, cultural and natural context considerably effected by 1st World War and its outcomes, having played a considerable role at the turn of our century, the relevant countries through their diplomatic representatives and cultural centers have not spared the due consideration to the biennial.

The 4th International Çanakkale Biennial provides an open communication and a collaboration platform for the international community and enables a comprehensive revaluation of the impacts of 1st World War and the 20th century at local, national and international levels on today’s political configuration and the historical geography of the Ottoman Empire as well.

The biennial has invited those artists and experts who are mostly prominent with their specific works of art interpreting the consequences of war and peace cycles and the following political, economical, social and cultural consequences in Europe, the Balkans, the Caucasia and in the Middle-East. The sensitivity, anticipation and subtlety within their works are not only focused on the conditions in their own countries, but also on the effects on other countries and societies as well; thus, all together, they accomplish an accurate body of a common visual memory and a valuable accumulation of images. We believe the presentation of those works shall create a substantial and a stimulating effect on the intellectual capacity of the younger generations.

As for the facilities, the Doğtaş building in city center shall serve as the man location for the 4th International Çanakkale Biennial. As previously, the Biennial shall use the special buildings and venues of historical importance like Korfmann Library, old Armenian Church, Mahal Art Center and the storehouses in the vicinity.

Along with paintings, photographs and video works of the artists, which have previously taken place in international exhibitions, their recent works specific to Çanakkale Biennial will also be presented.

The 4th International Çanakkale Biennial is financially sponsored by the Municipality of Çanakkale and supported by the ongoing activities of related platforms such as Art Biennial of Children, Art Biennial of Youth, Unhindered Biennial, and the women’s initiative ‘We are in Biennial’. All these teams will not only be supporting the main exhibition of the Biennial, but also act as a mediator to communicate the messages to the public through various outdoor activities.

In the last week of the Biennial, A SOUL FOR EUROPE (www.asoulforeurope.eu), founded in 2004 in Berlin, having previously organized forums in Turkey, will coordinate an international forum with the participation of prominent politicians and experts from Turkey and EU countries in October 25-27, 2014.

General Art Director: Beral Madra
General Director/Founder: Seyhan Boztepe
CABININ Executive Director: Deniz Erbaş
Press/PR Director: Aynur Ganiler
Editors: Marko Stamenkovic, Çağla İlk
Asistant Curator: Irene Panzani
Exhibitions Management: Kubilay Özmen
Coordinators: Deniz Erbaş, Erdal Sezer, Erdinç Alnıak, Gözde Robin, Ismail Erten
Biennial Management Centers: CABININ&MAHAL Art Center