1. In 1991 Manifesta sought to position itself as an alternative to other international biennials. What do you feel were the most effective strategies/approaches employed by Manifesta in this regard? Be specific and answer in a two paragraphs (use images if it helps).
2. In 2000 Moderna Museet curator Maria Lind organized the exhibition "What If: Art on the Verge of Architecture and Design." The project grew out of collaborative conversations between Lind, Liam Gillick and other contemporary artists. After group planning discussions many participating artists concluded, "... [architecture and design] were the visual and material factors channeling the social, political, and economic conditions that influence how we engage with and relate to one another and the world. Architecture and design were less urgent for them as disciplines and considered more as interpreters or filters and indices of social and cultural realities." Lind stated, "it was clear to me that the exhibition would be one where artists borrow from architecture and design not necessarily to discuss architecture and design but larger entities like history, desire, and ideology.
In two paragraphs discuss/interpret the most vital meanings and ideas (for you) that resulted from the "What If..." exhibition but also reflect on the way(s) you as an artist are impacted by or utilize ideas associated with architecture and design in your own work. Does your approach parallel the conclusions of the artists in "What If" - or do you have other ideas. Explain.
1. There were rapidly changing conditions in Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall, so Manifesta wanted to portray that in the way the European Biennial was put together. They were to use a nomadic and fluid framework of intersections based on locations. 13 cities have hosted at least once.
ReplyDeleteThis approach of including many cities through out Europe worked because they chose cities, not based on a strong infrastructure with lots of funding, but based on artistic areas that are breeding grounds for artistic development. Also what was effective was the collaboration with the communities on what issues were important to discuss.
2. These "spacial schemes' would have been interesting to enter into. Like a form of time-travel or teleporting, the atmospheric changes from one room to another would be quite an experience. I'm not sure I would have understood all the concepts that were trying to be conveyed, but the experience alone would be inspiring.
I like that the "What if" exhibition focused on communal areas. There were installations that used "graphic and product design to manifest social relations." They created an inviting atmosphere.
Manisfesta was initiated after the fall of the Berlin War in 1991 introduced to challenge the biennale institutions in terms different forms activities as part pushing art beyond the limit. It was meant to contribute the excessive ambitions of Europe about unity and also to bring change. Curators became so committed to search for emerging artist to help and there were numerous collaborations between artists and curators and that was very effective for their projects because the representatives familiarized with artists within various cities and did a thorough research through data collection and found information from different places. It also became educative through discussions of exhibitions and the topics of art and their exhibitions were informed by the voices of the general public.
ReplyDeleteWith activities such as exhibitions, seminar, workshop, and reading at the library, this notified people about the different kinds of artistic production in Europe. I think that this idea of Manifesta contributes to the notion of new institutionalism specifically highlighting at the latter part of the book that “historically, exhibition making has been closely related to strategies of discipline and Enlightenment ideals not as a contradiction or dialectic, but rather as a simultaneous move in the making of the new bourgeois subject of reason in Europe in the nineteenth century. Exhibition making marked not only a display but also a production of a public, a nation".
Gillick believes that architecture and design shape our social experience and I agree with him because this ideology reflects on my life experience in the sense that I grew up in a neighborhood where the buildings were so close that I easily got a friend with whom I could play football but later when my parents moved us all to settle in our permanent house, I couldn’t get any friend because there were large intervals between houses so they told me that I can only choose to befriend my books. About a decade and half,those two spaces have given me different experiences structured by architectural design. Gillick’s work points out to the fact that social relationship between human beings have changed over time.
“What if” portrayed the spectator’s expectation within the exhibition space in the museum and how architecture influences curators in their curatorial strategies and the idea that art and architecture are not separated. Of course, architecture has influenced some artists’ installation process for instance the work of Ibrahim Mahama and El Anatsui who sometimes allow their works to take architectural shapes. Daniel Burren and even Sol Lewit also make works inspired by the architectural design but I don’t think that these forms of work may strongly influence my current practice in anyway although with my previous exhibitions, the spaces used to change the intended installation process I planned in my studio. Architecture has impact on the way we even experience art in the contemporary context. Some contemporary artists are trying to make spectator through architectural ideologies as they perceive an artwork in the gallery space. I am looking forward see my future work this might influence my practice.
I also think refrigerators, ladders, and your use of space all strongly relate to architectural situations and your own autobiographical experiences with architecture or viewing architecture as a metaphor.
ReplyDelete