DISTANCE UP CLOSE: THE ASIAN BIENNIALS

It already is something of a platitude to describe 2006 as the year of the Asian biennials, preceding the once-in-a-decade alignment in 2007 of the European granddaddies- the Venice Biennale in Venice, Documenta in Kassel and Sculpture Projects Muenster in Muenster. In truth, at least as many biennials will be presented in Europe this year as in Asia. As I write, for example, the Berlin Biennial is drawing to a close while a new event has just been inaugurated in Prague, ironically titled Tina B, and acronym for “This Is Not Another Biennale.” That said, the Asian events this year represent a coalescence of energies in the Asian contemporary art world, centered around the biennials opening in September, kicking off on the 4th with a new entrant, the Singapore Biennale, and then, a few days apart, in Shanghai on September 5 and Gwangju on September 8. The organizers have staggered their openings and cross marketed the three events in art world capitals, enabling enthusiasts to take in all three events and their openings in a little over a week, much the same way the art world is expected to flock to Venice, Kassel and Muenster in 2007.

This strategy will undoubtedly succeed, propelled in part by the upsurge of international interest in contemporary art in Asia over the last decade. Nevertheless, having shifted from New Zealand to Toronto nine months ago, I am surprised that the triangulation of these art events in September does not burn brighter on the local contemporary art radar. Collectors and gallerists in eastern Canada seem to pay more attention to this year’s Havana and Sao Paulo biennials. A key factor seems to be perceptions of geographic and cultural distance, perceptions that, paradoxically, many argue are less applicable in the era of globalization. Ironically, North Americans think it is natural for me as a New Zealander to be connected to Asia, given New Zealand’s proximity to the Asian region. The reality is that it is a 12-hour flight from both Auckland and Los Angeles to Tokyo and it is as far to fly from Auckland to Delhi as it is to fly from Toronto to Shanghai. Perceptions of distance are culturally encoded.

Another oft repeated maxim, which may affect levels of North American interest in these Asian events, is the assertion that the world’s biennials have become homogenized and that their growth is less a response to, and more an outcome of, globalization. This may lead to apathy towards visiting biennials that are perceived to offer a cover-version of what can be seen closer to home. Of course the contemporary art world is far more internationalized that it was before and the art fairs and biennials are where this world actually touches down and meets. Not surprising then that an artist who is introduced to critical success at one biennial will be picked up for others. It does not, however, follow that as a result biennials have become de-localized. All biennials that I have experienced have grown out of a set of political, cultural and social factors that continue to form a backdrop to each successive edition. This is particularly true for Asia, and the Gwangju Biennale jumps immediately to mind, which I have vivid memories of visiting in 2002. One of its main exhibitions, involving only Korean artists, was housed in a military prison used to incarcerate innocent citizens during the period of military dictatorship from 1962 to 19877, and which is now a memorial to the 1980 Gwangju Uprising, when hundreds were killed by the military. This symbolic moment in the South Korean path to democracy is why the most important Korean biennial is sited in Gwangju rather than Seoul. The day I was there fighter jets continuously circled overhead; a chilling reminder that Korea is still heavily militarized and that thousands of American troops continue to be stationed there.

Equally important, many biennials are rooted in the context and discourse of local art production and artists’ desire for exchange. In Australia, artist exchange events provided a background for the formation of the Biennale of Sydney, and its first edition in 1973 involved artists drawn mainly from the Asia Pacific region. Although attention turned to Europe in subsequent editions, new, regionally-based events also appeared. An Australia- New Zealand exchange event, ANZART, started in Christchurch in 1981, and by the late 1980s moved to Perth under the new title ARX (Artists Regional Exchange), widening to include Southeast Asian countries such as Singapore and Indonesia. The ongoing development of this regional exchange and dialogue led in part to the inauguration of the Asia-Pacific Triennial (APT) shortly thereafter. By definition non-global , the APT followed the Asian Art Biennale Bangladesh in seeking to focus on regional Asian discourses not solely predicated on European influences and was the first major recurring international exhibition to include the South Pacific.

The area covered by the Asia Pacific region is vast; much larger than Europe, for example. It is therefore a testament to the significance of the APT that it has played an important role in the development of many artists’ careers in the region. Underlying this is the ongoing work of museums, such as the Govett-Brewster Art Gallery in New Zealand, with its Pacific Rim focus and, in particular, small art centers and alternative spaces. The energy represented by the artists and curators who support and run these projects and the dialogue they continue to initiate remains fundamental to the development of the larger international festivals. For example, it is significant that the curators for the first Singapore Biennale include Roger McDonald, deputy director of Arts Initiative Tokyo, and Eugene Tan, director of the Institute of Contemporary Arts Singapore. The team, headed by the Mori Art Museum’s Fumio Nanjo, has structured an exhibition around the issue of “Belief” and their approach is to site their exhibition within culturally diverse public and localized spaces in Singapore, such as a mosque, a Hindu temple and a Christian church. Not that presenting contemporary art in religious spaces is itself new. One only needs to think of Venice, which provides other interesting similarities with Singapore given that both are islands with strong mercantile histories. The key difference is the diversity of religious belief systems that seemingly coexist in harmony in Singapore.

A pertinent comparison can be made between Singapore and its near neighbor Indonesia. The same mix of divergent belief systems exists in Indonesia, but is set against a very different political context. For a start, Singapore’s population of four million is dwarfed by Indonesia’s at well over 200 million. Given its size, the support structures for contemporary art in Indonesia are nominal by comparison with Singapore. After three decades of dictatorship, Indonesia appears to be developing into the largest democracy in Southeast Asia, and with Muslims making up 90 percent of the population, it is also the world’s largest Islamic nation. But in this delicate mix, political and religious tensions continue to run high with the potential to seriously limit artistic freedom. On that note it was disconcerting to learn recently that Indonesia’s only international biennial, the CP Biennial, will be discontinued following protests by the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) over the inclusion of the work Pinkswing Park (2005) by artists Agus Suwage and Davy Linggar, in last year’s Biennale (see AAP 48). The artists remain under threat of conviction and prison sentences for publicly displaying what the FPI considered pornographic pictures. On the surface, the artists’ works speak an international language, yet their meanings are transformed by the local context.

The situation for contemporary artists and curators in Indonesia remains hopeful, thanks to their own energies in organizing collectively and contributing to pan-Asian initiatives. An important and rewarding feature for me at the 2004 Shanghai Biennial was attending the international meeting of autonomous cultural centers held at the gallery BizArt just prior to the opening. It was like a mini art fair for small art centers and alternative spaces, with each collective presenting its projects and publications in booths made of cardboard. Like others before it, the occasion provided an opportunity for like-minded organizations working at the grass-roots level to share information. Cemeti Art House from Yogyakarta participated, as did Mercer Union from Toronto. It is at this level where international artistic dialogue is incubated, focused around shared positions but set against each collective’s local context.


-Gregory Burke

Go back to features