Singapore Biennale 2013 (SB 2013) entitled “If The World Changed” will not open until 26/10/2013. However, its new structure has come under scrutiny recently because it has shifted the trust once fully dedicated to a single artistic director to co-curatorship model. The board of curators were selected across Southeast Asia, among whom, Nguyen Nhu Huy and Tran Luong are Vietnamese representatives. This alternative approach does not only seek geographical differences but also diversity in the way of reading, interpreting and capturing the depth of reality. In other words, such structural shift aims to reduce bureaucracy and disconnection with reality, of which traditional model of biennale has been normally criticized. Independent curator Nguyen Nhu Huy is interviewed by Thể thao & Văn hóa Magazine on such topic.
From an artistic perspective, while Asia and Asia-Pacific has a number of different biennales and triennales, such as Asia Pacific Triennale in Australia, Yokohama Triennale (Japan), Gwuangju Biennale and Busan Biennale (Korea), Taipei Triennale (Taiwan) and Jakarta Biennale (Indonesia), Singapore Biennale is still a rare opportunity for Vietnamese artists to join an art event of world standard. Singapore has a close geo-political relation with ASEAN, thus, Singaporean and Vietnamese artistic practices have been having positive connection. Singaporean Art Museum was the first to hold a workshop on Vietnamese Art in the post-reform era. In addition, Singaporean Art Museum has published a collection of essays on modern and contemporary Vietnamese art. This publication is a rare source of reference to anyone who is interested in the formation and development of art in Vietnam.
The Biennale of individuals
- Besides the structural change in artistic direction, are there any other interesting points about SB2013 regarding its conceptual and epistemological perspective?
- Another difference in SB 2013 is that it no longer focuses on the national discourses, such as those of “Vietnamese art”, “Cambodian art” or “Singapore art”. On the contrary, an artist will participate in SB 2013 as an individual, telling his/her own story. This marks a significant shift from the approach of “traditional” biennale. In Venice Biennale, each nation is allocated to a specific exhibiting space, which normally makes national/ethnical voices higher than human/individual ones.
In my opinion, SB 2013 will be a closest event for Vietnamese artists to introduce their voices and stories to the world. It is such a good opportunity because SB 2013 itself has been structurally changed to work better In the former Singapore Biennales, the model of only one director might have some positive effects; for example, it could offer an overall conceptual orientation. However, such approach has an inherent disadvantage, of which the biennales and trieanales are normally criticized because a single director cannot capture the diversity of artistic developments in the world, or in the targeted region. In fact, the artistic director has to depend on a group of small board of invited curators, who, in turns, seek consultants among their networks to get to know suitable artists. This way of working, even with its full endeavor, is nevertheless overlooks many potential artists and stories, which are normally from the “marginal”.
- Why “marginal” then?
- Well, because these overlooked artists and stories are often out of the “radar” of the consultants. Besides, the consultants do not take any official responsibility apart from their supporting roles toward the curators, who are, in turn, work under the orientation of the artistic director. In fact, after the first biennale as a breakthrough in Southeast Asian art scene, Singapore Biennale had been less effective down the road and more criticized. The structural change of SB 2013 is a way to reduce bureaucracy and reality disconnection of the biennale model.
- As one of the co-curators, what do you plan to contribute to SB 2013?
- The best thing about this biennale is that it seeks to dissolve the traditional biennale model. There will be no longer a singular voice of one artistic director. In contrary, contentious voices from different curators are invited, leading to an “alternative” image of Southeast Asia from internal perspectives. Another good point is that it does not look at artists as “representatives” of their nations in the sense of fixed identity, i.e. it does not seek Vietnamese identity, Laos identity, Cambodian identity out of artistic practices. I should stress again that identity is one of the perspectives taken by a number of biennales. Such approach originated in Venice Biennale, where each nation would select one or several artists to exhibit their arts as parts of national identity within a specifically allocated space. Rather than repeating this approach, SB 2013 presents plural voices, which are temporary, context-dependent and complex. I believe this is a good approach that can potential dissolves the ideological and exotic singularity of the traditional approach.
Marginal Vietnam?
- As a person who has engaged with Vietnamese contemporary art for quite a long time, do you think that Vietnamese art is different now?
- Obviously, in compared with 10 years ago, Vietnamese contemporary art has achieved progression. As a result, more artists are joining the international art world. However, from a discursive perspective, I would say that we are still on the margin. It is not too difficult to observe that the major themes of Vietnamese contemporary art, at least in the Western eyes, still stick to either a discourse of war, or a sort of 1990s Chinese artistic models, such as Mao Pop, or cynical realism. I do not mean that such themes are inappropriate. Rather, I want to stress that they are not adequate, given the fact that there have been numerous different approaches of many other artists in Vietnam. These alternative approaches, however, are normally ignored. Many curators and art researchers coming from an outside world still prefer to look at Vietnamese contemporary art as an ideological battlefield, or an exotic place. In such imagination, the weapon, or the souvenirs are packaged as commodities that are similar to authentic cuisine, like Vietnamese “nem” (spring rolls) or “pho” (beef noddle soup)
Again, I do not mean that these interest are invalid in the situation of both Vietnam and many other places in the world. However, I criticize the reductionist approach in which artistic practices are lessened to only eye-catching themes. In other words, artists’ thinking and practices are polished just to fit certain types of containers – a process symbolically similar to packing fast-food. Contemporary art the practices of making cultural meanings should not be commercialized in such an easy manner. And contemporary artists as thinking and practicing agents among their networks of complex relations cannot be reduced to be such cheap labors of fast-food industry.
- In such a situation, would you confirm the marginality of Vietnamese contemporary art?
- Both yes and no. Vietnamese contemporary art has better participation (as far as I know, in the coming Asia Pacific Triennale in Australia, Vietnamese and Indonesian art are to have special introduction then). However, from an aspect of discursive participation, I would say that it is quite unlikely to say that we have already had what we need. Today, Vietnamese artists and artworks capable of moving beyond ideological or exotic frames are still marginal because their voices have no significant participation.
- Do you feel pessimistic for such situation?
- However, in my opinion, the marginal position can turn out to be quite interesting, if you look at it as something less institutionalized. While modern art was rather limited with specific effects in specific frames (geographical and aesthetical) as part of the whole colonization process, contemporary art is a global phenomenon geographically, aesthetically, economically and politically. In Seven Days In The Art World, Sarah Thornton has investigated such global art world to lay bare the key mechanisms of money and power that control the whole system. In such a world, all aspects of contemporary art, form art education to phenomenal biennales and triennales and especially art fairs are driven by the ultimate power of commerce. Anyone who remains naïve toward such power would be inevitably crushed. This whole process is what I call the institutionalization of contemporary art, where all things have their specifically designed positions under strict arrangement. An artist from such an institutionalized world would find it much more difficult to have any kind of utopian dreams. They must adapt to the system and fit into the given spectacles if they don’t want to be excluded.
Artists from peripheral positions, such as those from Vietnam, are different. In a less institutionalized region where the global institutionalizing process has been activated but not fully arrived, I believe that the artists have better breathing space. In such region, they have opportunities to be utopians. They preserve the right; also, they are still capable of not thinking about art as something of promotion purpose from supporting roles to leading characters in a play written by a small group. In other words, with them, art still has the capability not to be glamorous props in a stage, but a practical thing in real life.
I should stress here is that the local or “peripheral” artists should acknowledge their own situation/advantaged to create “alternative” art that is not to illustrate provided discourses or directions, but to contribute individual voices to our world. Such self-awareness is important.
Vietnam Biennale
- Do you think we should dream of a biennale in Vietnam?
- If speaking of biennale as a global practice of contemporary art, I would say it is daydreaming. Such dreaming manner is similar to the dream of Vietnamese football fans to have World Cup in Vietnam. I have seen the failure of such an effort under the name of “Saigon Biennale” in 2006. It is not because big artists do not want to go to Vietnam. Biennale is much more than that because it is an extremely complex practice with comprehensive synchronization. Even money, if you have a lot, is not a significant factor. For example, Beijing Biennale, a stage sponsored by Chinese government, despite its regularity, is considered rather weak. I believe that the dream to have our own biennale (that is to say if we actually dream that) will be too much naïve though.
From another perspective, critical discourse on biennale model is not new, which mostly targets its bureaucracy, identity division as well as commercial nature. Such criticism leads to different ways of organizing artistic practices that are not centralized to exhibitions but focusing more on working process as well as discursive collaboration among artists as to escape from global institutions. For example, the model of art residence or self-curated/self-organized events can largely replace the role of professionally paid curators. This is another reason for my opinion that we should not have a biennale in Vietnam anyway.
However, on the other hand, if we consider biennale as an institutionalized structure with awareness of its nature, we as peripheral artists can still take an advantage from it. In other words, by deconstructing its structure, artists can use biennale for their own need and practices. This idea is not new, as we already saw in Gwangju Biennale 2002 whose name is Pause. Alternative spaces from all over the world were invited to organize their exhibition in their own ways. Similarly, 4th Berlin Biennale in 2006 had opened up its exhibition space by organizing numerous exhibitions with life engaging activities. Under this approach, we can see that SB 2013 aims to dissolve the structure of traditional biennale, which is quite worth doing then. My very participation in the co-curator board actually tells something about such change. In fact, if SB 2013 follows the traditional model, such nomadic curator as myself is unlikely to appear.
Interviewer: Van Bay
English translation: Nguyen Thu Giang
Vietnamese original version of the interview here
English translation: Nguyen Thu Giang
Vietnamese original version of the interview here
by Jillur Rahman
Jillur Rahman is a Web designers. He enjoys to make blogger templates. He always try to make modern and 3D looking Templates. You can by his templates from Themeforest.
Follow him @ Twitter | Facebook | Google Plus
No Comment