Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 56

Art|Basel|Conversations Transcripts Art|Basel|Miami Beach 69|Dec|07

CONTENTS

005 | Foreword Cay Sophie Rabinowitz 006 | Acknowledgements Conversations | 011 | Premiere | Marina Abramovic Moderator | Hans Ulrich Obrist 039 | Art Collections | Collectors as Producers Maja Hoffmann Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo Jos Noe Suro Moderator | Richard Flood 059 | Public/Private | The Museum of the Future in India Savita Apte Suman Gopinath Shilpa Gupta Ranjit Hoskote Peter Nagy Anupam Poddar Sandhini Poddar Rakhi Sarkar Moderators | Hans Ulrich Obrist Julia Peyton-Jones 091 | Women in Art | Revolution or Evolution? Marina Abramovic VALIE EXPORT Susan Hiller Catherine Morris Moderator | Peter Aspden 115 | Critics Circle | Criticizing Art Criticism Liam Gillick Dave Hickey Holger Liebs Raphael Rubinstein Adrian Searle Elisa Turner Moderator | Daniel Birnbaum

004 | ABC | Imprint

ABC | Foreword | Cay Sophie Rabinowitz | 005

WELCOME TO ART BASEL CONVERSATIONS


Dear art lovers, The eighth edition of Art Basel Conversations took place last December during Art Basel Miami Beach. In this book you will find complete transcripts of the five panels presented from December 5 to December 9, 2007. Some of the worlds most distinguished artists, critics and art collectors participated. Enabling exchange amongst key artworld figures is one of the crucial values of Art Basel Conversations, together with offering a fresh look at topics relevant to creating, exhibiting, and collecting art. Providing continuity, we frequently return to the topics that we started discussing in the previous Art Basel Conversations, in order to reveal the different ideas and perspectives existing in this field. The Premiere event of our Art Basel Miami Beach 2007 series of conversations honoured one on the worlds most celebrated artists: Marina Abramovic . The Art Collections panel focused on the new role of the collector as producer, and to what extent todays collectors influence and contribute to the practice of art-making. Collectors who joined us for this panel included Maja Hoffmann (Zrich and New York), Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo (Turin), and Jos Noe Suro (Guadalajara). We were delighted to have Richard Flood, Chief Curator of the New Museum, moderate this panel. Our on-going Future of the Museum series continued in Miami, as we took a closer look at India, and explored the role of the museum within this rapidly developing art scene. The panel moderated by Julia Peyton-Jones and Hans Ulrich Obrist, both from the Serpentine Gallery, London brought together key artists, gallery owners, curators, critics and collectors, such as Savita Apte, Suman Gopinath, Shilpa Gupta, Ranjit Hoskote. Peter Nagy, Anupam Poddar, Sandhini Poddar, and Rakhi Sarkar. Women in art is an ongoing theme both for the market and institutions. The debate in Miami Beach brought together artists such as VALIE EXPORT, Marina Abramovic , Susan Hiller and Catherine Morris, in a panel moderated by Peter Aspden, arts writer for the Financial Times. Discussing how the crucial role of the art critic today is challenged by artworld economics, our Art Basel Conversations panel included artist and critic Liam Gillick, alongside critics Dave Hickey, Holger Liebs, Raphael Rubinstein, Adrian Searle, and Elisa Turner, in a fiery discussion hosted by Daniel Birnbaum, the art writer, critic, rector of the Stdelschule Art Academy and director of Portikus, Frankfurt. Last years program was developed, by the Art Basel Conversations board members: Samuel Keller, Hans Ulrich Obrist, Richard Flood, Isabela Mora, Peter Vetsch and Maria Finders. I wish to thank all of my colleagues and those who supported them for their valuable contributions and their dedication to this series. Cay Sophie Rabinowitz, Artistic Director

Art Basel Conversations | MCH Messe Basel AG, CH - 4005 Basel Phone +41/58-200 20 20, Fax +41/58 - 206 26 86 info@ArtBasel.com, www.ArtBasel.com Art Basel Conversations Publication | All liability is declined for incorrect, incomplete, or missing entries. Concept | Samuel Keller Maria Finders Editorial Board | Maria Finders Peter Vetsch Concept Advisory, Design, Layout, and Typesetting | Mller + Hess: Beat Mller, Wendelin Hess, Sonja Knoblauch Transcripts | Nick Forte, Maria Finders Production | Ines Weber, Christine Mller (Hatje Cantz Publishers) Print | Dr. Cantzsche Druckerei, Ostfildern-Ruit Publisher | Art Basel and Hatje Cantz Publishers Printed in Germany Copyright Art Basel All rights reserved: no part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photocopy, or any other means, without written permission by the publisher.

006 | ABC | Acknowledgements

COORDINATION

Curator ABC, Art Basel Miami Beach | Maria Finders F-Paris Advisory Board ABC | Samuel Keller CH-Basel Richard Flood USA-New York Isabela Mora ES-Madrid Hans Ulrich Obrist UK-London Peter Vetsch CH-Zurich The Art Basel Conversations board meets four times each year to make sure that the Conversations remain topical and exceptional. Without the efforts of this board, the Conversations would not take place.

ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere | 011 Art Basel Conversations | Wednesday, December 5, 2007 | 10 11.30 h | Art Guest Lounge, Miami Beach Convention Center

TRANSCRIPT | PREMIERE SPEAKERS | MARINA ABRAMOVIC Moderator | HANS ULRICH OBRIST

012 | ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere


Marina Abramovic Artist; New York, USA Marina Abramovic , born in 1946 in Bel grade, Yugoslavia, is one of the seminal artists of our time. During the early 1970s, while attending the Academy of Fine Arts in Belgrade, Abramovic pioneered the use of performance as a visual art form. The body has always been both her subject and medium. Exploring the physical and mental limits of her being, she has withstood pain, exhaustion, and danger in the quest for emotional and spiritual transformation. Abramovic s concern with creating works that ritualize the simple actions of everyday life like lying, sitting, dreaming, and thinking; in effect the manifestation of a unique mental state. As a vital member of the generation of pioneering performance artists that includes Bruce Nauman, Vito Acconci, and Chris Burden, Abramovic created some of the most historic early performance pieces and is the only one still making important durational works. From 1975 until 1988, Abramovic and the German artist Ulay performed together, dealing with relations of duality. After separating in 1988, Abramovic returned to solo performances in 1989. Abramovic has presented her work with performances, sound, photography, video, sculpture, and Transitory Objects for Human and Non Human Use in solo exhibitions at major institutions in the U.S. and Europe. Her work has also been included in many large-scale international exhibitions including the Venice Biennale (1976 and 1997; awarded the Global Lion for Best Artist in 1997 for Balkan Baroque, video installation/performance piece) and Documenta VI, VII and IX, Kassel, Germany (1977, 1982 and 1992). In 1995, Abramovic s exhibition Objects Perfor mance Video Sound traveled to the Museum of Modern Art, Oxford, the Irish Museum of Modern Art, Dublin, and the Fruitmarket Gallery, Edinburgh. In 1998, the exhibition Artist Body Public Body toured extensively including stops at Kunstmuseum and Grosse Halle, Bern and La Galleria, Valencia. In 2000, a large solo show was held at the Kunstverein in Hannover. In 2002, she participated in the Berlin-Moscow exhibition, which opened at the Martin-Gropius-Bau in Berlin and finished its tour in 2004 at the State Historical Museum, Moscow. In 2004, Abramovic exhibited at the Whit ney Biennale in New York and had a significant solo show, The Star, at the Maruame Museum of Contemporary Art and the Kumamoto Museum of Contemporary Art, Japan. In 2005, Abramovic presented Balkan Erotic Epic at the Pirelli Foundation in Milan, Italy and at Sean Kelly Gallery, New York. That same year, she held a series of performances called Seven Easy Pieces at the Guggenheim Museum in New York. Upcoming exhibitions include a major retrospective at the Kunst und Ausstellunghalle der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Bonn. Hans Ulrich Obrist Co-Director, Exhibitions & Programs and Director of International Projects, Serpentine Gallery; London, UK Hans Ulrich Obrist was born in Zurich in May 1968. He joined the Serpentine Gallery as Co-director of Exhibitions and Programmes and Director of International Projects in April 2006. Prior to this he was Curator of the Muse dArt Moderne de la Ville de Paris since 2000, as well as curator of museum in progress, Vienna, from 19932000. He has curated over 160 exhibitions internationally since 1991, including do it, Take Me, Im Yours (Serpentine Gallery), Cities on the Move, Live/Life, Nuit Blanche, 1st Berlin Biennale, Manifesta 1, and more recently Uncertain States of America, 1st and 2nd Moscow Biennial, and 2nd Guangzhou Triennial (Canton China). Among other projects for Fall 2007, Hans Ulrich Obrist will co-curate the Lyon Biennale. He curated the Everstill exhibition at the Lorca Foundation, Granada in 2008. He has been the founding Chairman of the Art Basel Conversations Board since 2002. Obrist was awarded the Von Alen New York Prize Senior Fellowship for 2007 2008.

ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere | 013 Welcome | Maria Finders Ladies and gentlemen, please have your seats. Today we would like to welcome Hans Ulrich Obrist and Marina Abramovic, who are great friends. They have been working and talking together for many, many years. We are very honored to have them here today to start off Art Basel Conversations Miami 2007. Hans, Marina, please. Welcome | Marina Abramovic Good evening, good morning actually. Unfortunately at the same time is a press conference next door, so the people who are here really love us, otherwise they would not be here, so thank you for coming. When we started this idea of an interview, Hans sent me an e-mail saying that he would like to have any possible interview I have ever made in my life, and I thought it was impossible. It was so much work for him, and, anyway, hes traveling all the time. So, I sent him this set of instructions, which Id like to read to you. Instructions: Number one: dont be prepared. Number two: be shaved, showered, sleep enough, and be fresh minded. Number three: concentrate on the present moment you, me, and the audience. Number four: the miracle is going to happen. Number five: too much knowledge is an obstacle. Number six: lets try to be the real transmitters. Number seven: before talk, pee, wash the hands, and close the last button on the fresh, white, ironed shirt, which he didnt do. Okay, so we can start, thank you.

014 | ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere Introduction | Hans Ulrich Obrist Hello, good morning. Im very excited to continue here these conversations with Marina, which actually started about ten years ago in a fast train in Japan. We interviewed the composer and friend of John Cage, Ichiyanagi, and continued then in Kitakyushu to Bridge the Gap with a long conversation about art and science with the mathematician Gregory Chaitin. It really is, what Blanchot would call an infinite conversation. This is a very special event as last year we inaugurated the Conversations with John Baldessari, and this year with Marina Abramovic. The idea is that there is always an artist actually participating in the Conversations, at the very, very beginning, with a longer conversation about the work. We felt with Marina it could be interesting to do a superdense conversation over the next one and a half hours, and somehow, that means that we maybe could begin with the beginning of this long journey. I basically wanted to continue where we started in Japan, when I was asking you about your beginning and you told me that you had never doubted what you were going to be. To quote you, there wasnt one second of doubt; Ive never even considered other professions. I had my first exhibition when I was twelve years old. It was like nothing else. Could you tell me about the beginnings? In conversations | Marina Abramovic Moderator | Hans Ulrich Obrist Marina Abramovic: Id like the audience to imag ine that they are in the fast Japanese train again because its going to be from the beginning until now; which means sixty-one years in one and a half hours. That is a really fast trip. I always thought that it is very important to come from a very difficult family. The more fucked up your family is the better artist you become, because you have enough material to work with in your life. I didnt have the easy childhood. Mother and father were both partisans from the Second World War. When I was born they immediately left me with the grandmother because they were busy with their careers. I would just see them every second or third Sunday, bringing some strange toys, and then they would leave. I didnt have much connection with them and I was always with my grandmother. My grandmother was great because she was a complete religious fanatic, and against communism completely. She would go to the church every day and I would go with her to the church. I was six years old then and I was thinking, if I will drink all the water where you put your hands to cross yourself this is holy water in the church that I get holy myself. That was the first thing I remember. Putting little boxes to get high enough to drink the water and getting really sick with real serious diarrhea. Then when my brother was born, it was the first time I came back home. I was six years old. I remember that he was such a big and fat baby. I tried to actually bath him and I took this big baby into the bath full of water and he just went plop, and my father and mother came and really beat me up. I then developed some kind of sadness because he was so important and I was so unimportant. So I developed something called haemorrhagia. It was the disease. I would bleed for almost no reason, and my blood would never stop. If my tooth fell out, sometimes it was two months of bleeding until they really could stop it. They put me in the hospital and they thought that it is hemophilia. I was in the hospital for one year. It was a great time, because everybody was so nice to me and everybody thought I would die. They where bringing me presents and it was wonderful, you know. Then they found out that it was actually not hemophilia, and I was not happy again. My mother was a very, very powerful and controlling woman and she never really gave me any privacy. When I was twelve I collected some threehundred brown shoe polishes. In Yugoslavia brown shoe polish is terrible; its a very bad quality and smells terrible. I smeared it over the wall and windows of my room. When my mother came in again to control what Im doing she screamed because it was even impossible to breathe and she ran out. Then I was really, really happy because now I had achieved my privacy. So I think this was one of the first actions, you could say installations, I made.

ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere | 015 first lesson. This is something that really marked my career as a performance artist later. I didnt know how important it was at that time. He brought with him lots of boxes of different things, and he brought me to this little room, which was my studio and he showed me how to paint. He cut the canvas, put it on the floor, threw some glue and then some cement, a little bit of plaster and yellow pigment and some green pigment and some black pigment. Then over all of this he put gasoline. He took a match and threw it. The whole thing literally exploded. He looked at me and said: this is sunset, and left. That was really incredible, when you are fourteen years old and youre looking at this miracle. Then I waited for some weeks until the whole thing dried, I took it and put it on the wall and went to my parents for holiday. I came back as the sun was hitting directly to this sunset. Actually everythings melted down into just one pile of dust and dirt on the floor. It was gone. Later on I was thinking so much about Yves Klein and about the sentence when he said: My paintings are but the ashes of my art. I understood that the process is so important, more then the result actually. The performance is all about the process and later on, this became the media of my expression.

Hans Ulrich Obrist: Then there was also painting. Once you told me that you were painting skies and there were two kinds of memorable incidents related to painting. All of a sudden you looked at the sky and there were these airplanes passing by and I think that changed everything. Then there was a sort of a painting performance with your Hans Ulrich Obrist: I spoke with Claude Parent father even before that. There are rumors about about his collaboration as architect with Yves this first happening. Klein. He talked a lot about science. For you, science entered very early on. Youre brother became Marina Abramovic: Thats the funny story, which a scientist. There was also Tesla, the scientist who is told many times. I will try to recall it. When I was was somehow very important for you early on. something like fourteen, I wanted to make oil pain- Could you talk a little bit about the beginnings tings, because before I was just making water col- with science and the links to Tesla. ors and oil painting was something very serious. I asked my father to buy oil paint but he was an Marina Abramovic: Nikola Tesla was one of the old soldier and he didnt know anything about really true geniuses our country had. He came painting. from a small village, which maybe just thirty years So he called his friend, a soldier who in the mean- ago got electricity. At that time his mother was time went to Paris and became an abstract painter already an inventor. She invented an automatic and formalist. He helped me to come with my potato peeler and an automatic broom, just in that father to buy all the material and he gave me the very simple village kind of situation.

016 | ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere He went to Vienna to study and then to America. He was actually working with Edison, just to give you a little bit of background about Tesla. He was supposed to get a Noble prize for his inventions together with Edison. But he was so incredibly disgusted with Edison that he actually refused the Noble prize. This was the first refusal that I know in history, so Edison got one but Tesla refused to share his part of the prize with him. But hes the one who invented the remote control that you use every day. He was the one who was interested in wireless electricity and so on. We still have a museum in Yugoslavia on Tesla and there was just the hundredth year of his birth. My whole family was somehow involved with Tesla. The wife of my brother was the director of the museum until two years ago, until she died. My brother became an expert on Teslas inventions. I think there is still a lot on Tesla we dont know. Theres still so much material which is actually in the hands of the Pentagon. One of the most incredible experiments was the idea of creating a magnetic field around an object, where objects literally can disappear in front of you and appear somewhere else. These kinds of experiments are still pure secrets. He also was interested in the idea that energy can be usedcompletely free, without any kind of expenses, directly from the earth, which will solve so many problems we are facing today. But apart from that Tesla had this kind of mystic part, which is very interesting for me. If you read his biography, he was always saying that his experiments came like a mirage, or a three-dimensional image to him. The only thing he had to do was to copy this image onto paper. He didnt even need to try them because they always worked. It is almost a mystical idea of transmitting cosmic knowledge directly into invention. Another interesting thing about him: when he was thirty-five, he castrated himself because he didnt want that any sexual energy would distract him from his work. He was completely convinced that it would actually be an obstacle. The only love he had, it is also described in his biography, was one female pigeon, which was very strange. But lets talk about that another time. Hans Ulrich Obrist: Tesla was actually the reason for my only ever catastrophic interview, when we went to see Stanisaw Lem who wrote Solaris and many other wonderful books. I mentioned Tesla to him, and he said, as a science fiction writer, he has a Tesla allergy and he started to shake really, really strongly and the interview was kind of over. One of the things I thought would be interesting in terms of Tesla is this whole idea of public experiments. He did these incredibly spectacular moments when experiments actually became public. You have just done this extraordinary performance a few weeks ago in October in London at the Serpentine Gallery, which was a public experiment as part of a science marathon which I cocurated with Olafur Eliasson. At that time I was wondering if maybe these very public scientific experiments of Tesla, almost science performances, were somehow important for you. Marina Abramovic: I remember that very famous picture of him, sitting in the front of the electric cage, which is charged with something like thirtyfive thousands volts of energy, and hes just reading a book, or holding a lamp without a wire in his hand and electricity all around him. Thirty-five thousand volts are going through his body and the charge is actually lighting the bulb, he became the transmitter himself. This experiment Ive actually done myself for one performance, a video installation called Count on us, which I filmed in the Tesla museum. Electricity goes through you, but you are not affected at all. This was the experiment. He actually created a tower in Long Island where he wanted to send electrical impulses out of our galaxy to find out if theres life beyond. What is interesting with Tesla, and I think there is power in this, is that now there is such a huge movement about the idea of connecting spirituality and science, but I think he was the first one who started this kind of thinking. Before, for the scientist, if there is no proof of something existing, it just didnt exist. You have to have the physical proof. Tesla was not like that. Tesla believed that things exist and then youll find the proof or not, later on. If you think about Francesco Varela, who worked very closely with his holiness Dalai Lama and with the monks who have the capacity to sit naked in the Himalaya at minus twenty-five degrees Celsius and create the heat in the body at will, by visualizing the fireplace in the plexus and literally not having any feeling of cold. With the Dalai Lamas permission he recorded the brain impulses, heart beats and all scientific research to see what really is happening. He got some very interesting results. So now scientists and spiritualists start working together, which, in Teslas time, was impossible. Hans Ulrich Obrist: We spoke about Tesla and Varela, two heroes of yours in science. I was wondering who the artist were, who were somehow important for your way into art. Who were your heroes? Marina Abramovic You know, its really very : interesting. I never had a hero artist, because I always liked to go to the source. An artist is always somebody who is inspired by somebody else. Why should you be inspired by an artist, who was inspired by somebody else? I always like to be inspired by something else. The most interesting things for me at that time where Aborigines, the Tibetan culture and anything to do with some kind of limits of the mental and physical body, and science. So this is really my inspiration, anthropology too, but not any artist. I respect a few people who where very important in my life. One was John Cage, but not to be inspired by him, but more hearing him as a voice I could respect. I really was more inspired by other things, nature; directly inspired by nature, like from a waterfall. Hans Ulrich Obrist: Before you mentioned Tito.

ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere | 017 Marina Abramovic: Oh, Tito, yes of course. I was born in the time of Tito in Yugoslavia. It was really wonderful because my mother and father actually lied about my birthday for a long time until I understood that my birthday was not the twenty-ninth of November but was the thirtieth. Why did they say the twenty-ninth? Because on twenty-ninth the republic of Yugoslavia was born and if youre born on the twenty-ninth, you could go to Tito, and Tito gave you candies and they made a photograph with you. I was the only child who never went to Tito and I never got the candies. I never understood what was wrong with me, Ive been always good. Then finally I understood that my birthday actually was not the twentyninth, but it was the thirtieth. Tito was an image of stability for us. I always liked this kind of dandy look, like Lee Marvin and Sophie Loren and Gina Lollobrigida. He would watch the cowboy movies on one side, and on another side be a very hardcore communist. He was the one who somehow kept Stalin from invading Yugoslavia, and Yugoslavia was a more free socialist country than anywhere else. It was the first country with the sex magazines. We published books, which where actually forbidden everywhere else in the Russian part of the Eastern bloc. The Bulgarian writers who came to Belgrade and read these forbidden books, memorized them and went back to Bulgaria to tell the people about these books because they could not take them with them. It is quite an interesting thing how knowledge can go into memory and narration. Hans Ulrich Obrist: A few months ago I went to Belgrade and met some of your artist friends Todosijevic, of the late sixties early seventies, and the mysterious performance artist who always runs away. He escaped also our meeting as he escapes any meeting. It was very fascinating because I found lots of pamphlets and things from the early seventies of you, being a very, very important protagonist of that Belgrade art world at that moment.

018 | ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere I thought it could be interesting if you tell us a little bit about the context. You were part of a group with five other artists. At the same time you often mention the very obscure group show called Drangularium, which seems to be really a key. It would be great if you could tell us a little bit about these years because these are little known aspects of your work. Marina Abramovic: Just to tell you a little back ground. At that time I really wanted to be a communist. First I was a Pioneer; we had these little red handkerchiefs around the neck. That was very important. In my need to be a communist I became not only just a communist, but something like the party secretary of my academy, which was a big function at that time. Then I remember, this is sixty-eight we are talking about, there were demonstrations everywhere. In Yugoslavia we had demonstration barricades at all the universities. We where asking for thirteen points that comrade Tito should give to us. Like better food, the multi-party system, free press, all this kind of stuff. Also, to give us a cultural center where students can act and do their things; have a cinema, theatre, and so on. We where very, very strong on these points and we were waiting for Titos speech to see if hed accepted. And if he doesnt accept, we would go on until the end. We were ready to die for these ideas, at least I was ready. Then there was the moment when the Tito was supposed to give the speech. It was three oclock in the afternoon on that certain day. I went to the central parties committee in the morning, to find out how we were going to behave and what we were going to do if he didnt accept all the thirteen points. And I arrive in this party committee and everybody was preparing for the big feast, like a big party for the evening. I said: what are you doing? They said: oh, we are making a party. But what do you mean, youre making party, we dont even know what Tito is going to say? And they looked at me as if I was the most nave and stupid person one could possibly imagine. They said, whatever hes saying anyway, its over, thats it. I really could not believe it. I went back to my university and that really was true. Tito, three oclock, accepted three unimportant points and all the other ones he didnt even mention. But one point was to accept the student cultural center, which we got. All the rest was not accepted and there was a big party. I just took my communist membership and threw it into the fire and I never turned back. For me, this was the end. I knew there was no actual choice; it was all a big farce. But this cultural center was extremely important for my development. This was actually the house of the secret police, where they would come to every Sunday and play chess; women would meet and gossip there. It was a beautiful, big building and we got it as our center. The director of the center became Dunja Blazevic, she was actually the daughter of the Chairmen of the Executive Council of Croatia. So she had the coverage and the political background that helped us do whatever we wanted to do. The first show had nothing to do with traditional art, and this is how everything started. It was called Drangularium, which is what we say for little things. They asked twenty artists to bring objects, which are not art but were something that inspired them to make art. So one guy brought the door of his studio, because he said that every time he opened the door of the studio, it was like entering into some other space, and that this was inspiring to him. Another artist brought his girlfriend. He said, this is something that I really inspires me. We always make love, then I make art. So, she was sitting there. Then another artist brought the very old blanket with holes and said, before I do anything I always go to my studio, sleep with this blanket and after that I make the work. Another one brought an old radio and we went to the radio station, and we listened to the radio during the opening of the show. I just brought little peanuts and that I nailed to the wall and I called them Cloud and the Shadow. I was painting clouds until that time, so this was actually what I was looking for as a form. This was the first time that we actually got free from the traditional way of looking at art. The group was formed called Young Seventies, and we were six of us. I was the only woman with five guys. We worked there in the cultural center, which became our center for everything. We would wake up in the morning, go there, and experiment and do our things. Most of them did objects and sound works. I was doing performances at that time. This was the beginning. Hans Ulrich Obrist: You referred to these performances in previous conversations we have had as the Forbidden Performances. It was at that time that you first left Yugoslavia. You went to Edinburgh and there you did the first non forbidden performance. Could you talk a little bit about that and maybe give us some examples about what these Forbidden Performances were?

ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere | 019 Then I had some other performances, which I could not realize. I wanted to have twelve airplanes, which just fly in the sky and make huge drawings. So I went to the military base and asked them for the twelve jets. They called my father and said, your daughter is completely crazy, get her out of here. Do you know how much twelve jets will cost to make a drawing for her? Every idea I had, if it was with space, time, fire, water, whatever, was actually restricted and I could not do them at that time. Hans Ulrich Obrist: And what happened then with the first non-forbidden performances. Basically, this was at the Edinburgh Festival, and its also the moment when you met Beuys for the first time and Marina Abramovic: Viennese Actionism, Gnter Brus, Hermann Nitsch ...

Hans Ulrich Obrist: Also there was the Destruction in Art Symposium in London, lead by Gustav Metzger. There were, in the sixties and seventies, these performance festivals, which were incredibly important as gathering points and also first Marina Abramovic In the cultural center we meetings between artists. : could do anything. But it was so restricted because we were like our own public, so there was Marina Abramovic: But that trip to Edinburgh was no public. It was not something that mattered in completely by chance because Richard Demarco a larger social context. Belgrade was completely came to Belgrade at that time to look for interestabout socialist art. So I could not do anything out- ing artists doing experiments and non-traditional doors. One of the things I liked to do was to put art. Since he came from official channels, he was sound on the main bridge with big speakers, with taken to official studios of the artists in Yugoslavia the sound of the bridge falling down. So you are who represented the country. That was completeon the bridge and visually the bridge is there with ly boring and not interesting. He could not find the sound of crashing down. Of course I could not anybody he wanted to invite. get the permission because they immediately told I remember sitting in a bar and he was leaving me that with the sound the vibrations could re- the next morning. It was very late and he was ally make the bridge to fall down. So that was for- already just about to go back to his hotel. He was bidden. Then I tried to make it on a building. It asking around, is there nobody we can see, somewas an installation for only a few minutes because thing else? And there was somebody secretly tellevery person who lived in the house ran out, they ing: yeah, there is this strange little group around thought there was a bombing. That was the kind the cultural center. So we got a call in the night, like of disaster that happened. around ten in the evening to come and meet him.

020 | ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere We met him and we showed him what we were doing and he said: I invite you all, all six of us. He went back to Edinburgh and wrote an official letter to the Yugoslavian government to invite us, and they completely refused. They said these people are not representing our country in any way. That was a no. Then he wrote us personally and asked if we could find some way to get cheap flights to come to Edinburgh, that he would help us to stay there and make the work. We actually found cheap flights and went there. This was the first time I made an official performance, called Rhythm 10. There I met Joseph Beuys, who made another performance of six hours, and met Hermann Nitsch, Valie Export, Gnter Brus and all the rest. The most incredible thing was that we didnt want to go back. We had to find some kind of job. And I remember I spoke a very bad English at that time. I got a job to be the post woman. They gave me this horrible uniform, it was a little short and tight, and I was delivering letters but didnt know the addresses in Edinburgh. At three in the morning I was looking for addresses with the battery lamp and delivering letters. Then one day I was so fed up because it was such a hard job for me, that I decided that every letter, which was typed with a typewriter is either really bad news or bills, and I threw them away, I didnt deliver them. I only delivered the ones written by hand, because they must be emotional, must be love letters, so nice. That went on for about two weeks. They could not prove anything but they asked me to return the uniform; it was end of the job. Hans Ulrich Obrist: That also opened a whole chapter of performances. One of your most extreme moments in this regard, was the Rhythm performances, particularly The Star, which was probably your most dangerous piece. Can you talk a little bit about this? Marina Abramovic: Just to go back to these things. The first time I met Hermann Nitsch and Gnter Brus they were both totally drunk in Edinburgh. Late at night, Gnter Brus, to point to Herman Nitsch, took a fork and just stabbed him in the head. I was like, wow! Then they just continued like nothing happened. Anyway, it was a wild time I have to say. Rhythm 5 was the performance. We had April meetings in the cultural center. April because we got to the center in sixty-eight in April, and every April we made some kind of festival and invited different people. About seventy-three or four, seventy-three probably, we also invited Joseph Beuys. I remember when Joseph Beuys arrived it was the first time ever that he didnt wear a hat. He actually was the German soldier fought there during the war, and with respect of coming back to Yugoslavia he didnt wear the hat. I just want to tell this little story about Joseph Beuys. He came and made this performance of six hours and made six blackboards with his writings and explaining the whole structure of society. With him came something like ten collectors wanting to buy these boards immediately because they were so special, made in Belgrade and so on. But at that evening after the performance we had a dinner and he said that he would donate all the six boards to the cultural center. Everybody got kind of angry that they came for nothing. And the next morning we came to the cultural center and the cleaning lady had just cleaned the boards because there was nobody protecting the work. It was like millions just gone, we could have rebuilt the whole center. But because this socialist cleaning lady was not paid so well she didnt clean them that well, and there were still parts left. But that was useless. These were just those days. In one of those April meeting festivals I decided to make this piece Rhythm 5. I built an enormous five-point star from wood and wood chips, and soaked it in one hundred liters of petrol. Inside was an empty space and I made a ritual with cutting all my hair and burned it in the star, as well as my fingernails and toenails. Then I was supposed to lay down in the star and stay there until the star would have been completely burned and what would be left would be the form of my body. Joseph Beuys came with his wife and two children and he said to me: you dont know, fire is dangerous, just dont do it, dont do it. I was just proud, both my parents were heroic commanders and of course I would do it. So I did the whole piece and as I lit the star I didnt realize that the fire took all the oxygen. I lost consciousness, but I was lying there and the public didnt notice that there was something wrong. Except a doctor who was in the audience and saw that pieces of the fire were falling on my naked legs and I didnt react, so he understood that I was unconscious. They took me out and in a way, saved my life. Then I was furious, for the first time I realized that there is a limit to the body, and whatever ideas you have, there is a physical limit in their execution. I was very interested how I could push these physical limits and make performances with or without consciousness, but the performances will still continue, because I decided beforehand that it has to go this way. Hans Ulrich Obrist: What happened then, it went from five to two? Marina Abramovic: Then I made another experi ment where I almost lost my life. And another experiment, where the curator almost lost his job, so I always was losing something. He was a young curator at a museum in Zagreb in Croatia who invited me for this piece. I wanted to see how I could experiment with I am a very anti-drug person, so this was the only time I experimented with drugs. I wanted to see in front of an audience how my mind is there and absent at the same time. I had a very simple set up, a little table with a glass of water. I took pills and told the public that I will take the first pill, which I had never taken before. This was a pill, which was mostly given to catatonic patients in mental hospitals when they take a certain position that does

ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere | 021 not change, the catatonic state. This pill actually reacts on muscles, and provokes spastic movements, so that you have to change position. I took this first pill being very clear. I only could not control the movements of my body. It was almost like getting small epileptic attacks, and my body was moving in every possible way. This took about ten minutes. Then I waited calmly for a few minutes and then I took the second pill. This pill was given to violent patients to calm them down. With the second pill I was sitting there, first a little bit shivering and then just looking into the public with a very stupid smile for about six hours, and absolutely not being aware that I was there anyway. It was interesting to see how you can be there and not there at the same time and experiment with that. That was the only one time and the curator almost lost his job. Hans Ulrich Obrist: Talking about experiments, here today we are performing an experiment in freezing because its getting colder and colder, which is interesting because exactly one year ago we sat here with John Baldessari and it was also freezing. C is for collaboration as this is kind of an A to Z, because we want to be quite encyclopedic, and I wanted to ask you about collaboration. Early on you were in this artist group in Belgrade and then you left Belgrade. It wasnt an idea of a group, but of a collaboration that you started with Ulay. So could you talk about C for collaboration and particularly how this collaboration with Ulay started? Marina Abramovic: Before I left Belgrade I wanted to make my own retrospective and never made it. This is another unrealized performance. But I wanted to see how I could make my own retrospective. I wanted to invite a hypnotist who would come on the stage and ask any member of the public to perform one of my performances under hypnosis, because nobody in a normal state of mind would do what Im doing. Under hypnosis its easy. Anyway, the person would come on the stage and they

022 | ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere would choose the performance and he would actually hypnotize him and do the performance. I would just sit in the public and see all my performances done under hypnosis by somebody else. This was the idea of my own retrospective, enjoying myself watching other people doing it. But in the end it didnt happen. I made three performances before I left Yugoslavia. Freeing the Voice, where I screamed until I lost my voice. For Freeing the Memory, I was given words to remember until I could not remember anything anymore, and for Freeing the Body, I moved my body for about six hours and just fell down until I couldnt move anymore. It was an idea of purification, and I was free to go somewhere else now. Then I wanted to work with another artist, because somehow there was almost nowhere to go. I was pushing so many limits. The next would be like, I dont know, I didnt want to kill myself but it could have happened. So I saw a really big chance to work with another person. When I met Ulay it was very strange, because he played the male and female role at the same time. When I met him, half of his face was unshaved and short hair, and half of the face was totally made up and with long hair. He was a male and a female at the same time and he was walking like this on the street and acting like that. When we started working together I became the female and he became the male. It somehow became balanced and the relation lasted for about twelve years of collaboration. I think the only people who managed to stay in a collaboration until now for so long are Gilbert and George. A collaboration cant stay for a long time, it has to finish somehow, and that one finished too. Hans Ulrich Obrist: The idea of a collaboration of two is interesting, two being company and three being a crowd. But what about this whole idea of the Living Sculpture of Gilbert and George? Marina Abramovic: It is interesting, the Stedelijk Museum was actually one of the first museums in the world that showed Gilbert and George, the Living Sculpture, at that time. It was very early; it was in late sixty-eight or about sixty-nine. Hans Ulrich Obrist: The famous one on the stairway of the Stedelijk Marina Abramovic: Yes, but the interesting thing is that they found a formula where they can co-exist together and work. There is so much irony and so much flexibility and humor, and I think they survived with humor for that long. Hans Ulrich Obrist: This brings us to the late seventies, the time of your ongoing collaboration with Ulay, something you mentioned a lot in our Japan interviews, many artists towards the late seventies started to stop working with processes and it all became more an art world about objects. Particularly in the context of an art fair, were going to talk about that much later when we will talk about the present and your work now. I think its very interesting that you did not do that move in the late seventies. Marina Abramovic: Can you imagine this art fair if it was only performances? What would you sell? This is impossible. It would be catastrophic. This is the most interesting thing about performances. It has never been really accepted as the same form of art like video, or photography, or whatever. Before it was experimental and now it became just a normal part of the deal. But a performance is never like that. Many people think performances are about entertaining, like a dancer or stand-up comedian. It is like: oh, come for the opening and do a little performance. Thats the tragedy of the performance. I spent all my life trying to prove something else, but with performances you have no goods to sell. You can have something afterwards, make an installation or have objects or photographs from the performance. But the process has really something to do with the memory of the viewer who came and saw the thing. Then the viewer can give his experience by talking to somebody else. Thats how a performance really survives, in a narrative way, from word of mouth, because there is no other way. It is the most interesting form of art because its so fresh every time, and changes the forms. It is like phoenix, it always gets burned and reborn from its own ashes. Performance in the seventies was so important after conceptual art, which by then it was impossible. But at the same time the seventies were horrible. There were so many bad performances done. I was even ashamed to say that I was a performance artist. Everybody thought that everything you do is a performance. There was no limit. You know? That was really, really bad. Then all the bad performance artists became bad painters in the eighties. It was so good. If you see the subjects of the images in the early eighties, it was almost like painted performances. In the eighties everybody had goods to sell. And then at the end of the eighties, the performers actually appear in nightclubs in London, New York, with people like Leigh Bowery. It was very interesting that the nightclub became the space where performances could happen again. After that there was Aids and all the notion of dying and the temporality of the body and so on. The performance started to happen mostly in the artists studio in front of a video camera. With that comes the problem that every performance was just three seconds to two minutes, and just these video loops. I was sick and tired of all the video loops and the slow motion, but it was the big deal. Everything was slow motion and small loops. This was interesting because actually the performance artist did not have his experience. Its another thing if you do something for seven hours and then you film it, and then you show three minutes of that, because the performance lasts seven hours and your own experience is there. If you do something for one and a half minutes your experience is only one and a half minutes, but technically you can make it endless by looping. It is actually the technology which loops,

ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere | 023 and you are deprived from your own experience. That was interesting. Then came another movement, which for me is still the most interesting, and this is sound, which also includes everything to do with noise music that came from Japan, and later on. I think the noise in sound has a big potential. Think about the hierarchy of art. I always thought that music and sound are the highest, because they are the most immaterial, and after that is performance and then everything else. Hans Ulrich Obrist: This takes us back to the beginning and our very first meeting when we met with Ichiyanagi and talked about sound scapes. A few weeks ago I spoke with Doris Lessing, and Doris Lessing said shes very worried about the current situation in terms of the survival of civilization. She thinks that we should think about how things could travel differently, other then through objects. Which is very interesting, and she thinks that the long-term transmission might not happen via objects, it might happen via something else. And its interesting that in seventy-nine when everybody started to make objects you did not move to objects, but you did make a change. You somehow stopped a certain type of performance. In a very interesting interview with Kaplan you said that you felt that the physical part had somehow been explored, or maybe even exhausted at that point, but that a huge mental area had not been touched. Could you talk a little bit about this? Because it seems a big change happened in your work in the late seventies and early eighties. Marina Abramovic: For me this phenomenon is really interesting. In the seventies there were so many artists, myself, but also Acconci, Oppenheim, and Chris Burden and VALIE EXPORT. Everybody was busy with the physical part and physical limits of the body. Then after seventies many artists stopped performing and started making objects or being busy with architecture. Architecture became big thing. Somehow it is the kind of public sculpture where the viewer can take some

024 | ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere kind of active part, and the performer was removed from the picture. I was talking to many performance artists at that time and asked why. Some of them said that it is too exhausting being constantly present in front of an audience. That you can do it when you are young, but you cant do it later because it is so demanding. The seclusion of the studio is so much more comforting in a way, and presenting out to the public just this kind of architectural pieces. of the mental state, and what happens if the body doesnt move. In our culture we always have to do something. We always have to be active, but what happens if you are not? One of the great Tibetan experiments is when they say that you will wake up in the morning full of energy, and what do you do next? You run out of the house, you make phone calls, you shop, you do things, you come home exhausted and then you feel terrible. But when you wake up in the morning you have all this energy, and you just sit down on a chair and do nothing Hans Ulrich Obrist: From a physical part it went and you see what happens. The energy doesnt go into a more mental part and that you also went to outwards, it goes inwards, and it elevates the spirthe desert, it was the beginning of these long jour- it in a certain way. All those mental experiments neys we were trying to do in the performances derived from the experiences in the desert. Marina Abramovic: The physical part was like you go and explore, but what about the mental? Ulay Hans Ulrich Obrist: This incredible mental jourand I really went to desert. The desert was the most neys and your whole collaboration with Ulay culinteresting area because it contained the least minated in eighty-eight. Youve talked a lot about possible information. It is real emptiness. We this work, which has been discussed thoroughly, went to the Thar desert, we went to the Sahara and but I thought its interesting now to revisit it again, Gobi desert, and then we ended up living in the because its a very different moment and to go to great Australian desert with the aborigines for one China now has become something much more frequent. But that was almost twenty years ago. year. This was really important because the only thing Could you talk a little bit about this long prepared that surrounds one in the desert is the heat. It was Great Wall Walk. It started in eighty-five and it was enormously hot. We are talking about one hun- really a marathon. dred degrees during the day. You have this wall of heat and you cant even move from here to that Marina Abramovic: Its a long story, but I want to chair, your heart would just beat. So you have to sit tell two funny stories about the Great Wall. It was and do nothing. I think sitting and doing nothing such a big drama and there are books and you can is where everything starts. When the physical body read about it. It took eight years because China was stops moving and the mental body takes over and not open, there were the thirteen provinces comsomething else starts to happen. Thats why after pletely forbidden to foreigners. We got to do this being in the Australian desert we made our per- walk under such amazing circumstances. formance with the title Nightsea Crossing. We The first three years we were writing to the would not move, and actually tried to be as static Chinese government if we could walk the Chinese as possible. Wall. The Chinese government was answering But it is not about just to be as static as possible with wonderful letters, one more friendly then with the body, but even to try not to blink, to abso- another, but things did not move anywhere. lutely not move, then the mind can take its pace. At that time we lived in Amsterdam and we There is this wonderful text by Franz Kafka, who brought the letters to a friend of ours who was said, if you sit and do nothing, the entire world having some economic relation with China and comes to you. It was about this kind of experience asked him what we were doing wrong. What is going on with these letters? He looked at the letters and he started laughing. He said, you know, in the Chinese language, there are seventeen ways to say no and for the past three years they are telling you no but in different ways. They look so friendly but you didnt understand at all, it was no, no, no, no. The only way you could get the permission to walk the Chinese Wall through all the provinces when China was closed, was to go through the government channels. Then we asked the Dutch minister of culture to help us and there were very interesting circumstances at that time. Here is Gijs van Tuyl, director of the Stedelijk Museum now, who knows the whole story. At that time the Dutch government was building a submarine or had the contract to build a submarine for Taiwan and the Chinese were so angry that the ambassador just left Holland. But because the Dutch had lots of economic interests and were building a Phillips factory or whatever in China, this was a disaster. They broke the contract with Taiwan because they were losing lots of money, and the Chinese ambassador didnt come back. Then we asked the minister of culture to help us to walk on the Chinese Wall. From their side, they saw it as an opportunity to re-establish cultural relations first and then the economic ones. Saying: oh this is a peace march, its great, two artists, European, one walks from one side, another from the other side, they meet in the middle, a great thing. They really started negotiating. And we were getting very close to this whole thing. We are talking about eight years of negotiation. Finally, after these eight years, the Chinese said yes. And then, as we were supposed to walk the Chinese Wall, it was postponed for another year and we didnt know why. Because the Chinese never got the idea that anybody walks the Chinese Wall. They took a guy from the post office and gave him the task to walk the entire Chinese wall, so that they could actually say, we are Chinese and already walked the wall. Now two Europeans can come to walk the Wall themselves, and we can meet the Chinese who is the first man who walked the Chinese Wall.

ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere | 025 Finally, after one more year, we came to meet the first man who walked the Chinese Wall, and we were allowed to walk that Wall. But again the whole project was postponed for another three months and we didnt know why. They asked us for 250,000 dollars for soft drinks and security, something like this. My task was to walk from the Yellow Sea to the middle, and I had a translator with me on the trip. The translator was absolutely angry and was terrible to me and hardly talked. I didnt know why and what was happening. This guy was twentyeight and he was the official Chinese translator. He actually was in America with one of these political delegations of China and he was completely fascinated about break-dance. Back in China and he made completely illegal Xeroxes of a little book on American break-dance. For that he was punished and they sent him to me to walk the Chinese Wall. He arrived in a grey suit with a tie and black, elegant city walking shoes to walk the Chinese wall. Within three days he was sick, because he was completely unprepared. He could not deal with it because he was used to limousines and flying around. This trip took a long time and I always wanted to be in front, because apart from the translator, I had seven army soldiers behind me. They always wanted to walk in front. I really didnt train as much as they did, and I always tried to be the first. My translator was always the last. After about three months, I asked him: why are you always the last? Then he looked at me with a kind of pity in the eyes and he said, you know, in China we have the saying that weak birds fly first. And I said, oh god, then I should be the last. The weak birds fly first. Hans Ulrich Obrist: Soon after the Great Wall, after many years of collaborative practice, your solo practice starts. It was a journey to Brazil, which opened it all up, you mentioned something called How to Die. Thats not realized, or is it? Marina Abramovic: No, unrealized. The unreal ized projects are always the great ones. You didnt

026 | ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere make any mistakes yet. The Chinese Wall was actually the end of the collaboration with Ulay, we didnt work together after that. I could not go back to performance right away because everything was always done together for such a long period of time. Walking the Chinese Wall was the only performance where the public was not there, it was absent. It was about the mental idea that we were there. In that sense I wanted to give the experience back to the public. How could they see what it was like to walk on the wall? I realized that every time I was walking on different territories, sometimes it was quartz stone, sometimes it was stones that have iron, or copper, or crystal inside. It was always a different feeling and I collected legends from the different areas, relating to the kinds of materials the wall was made of. Then I figured out that the materials are really important and I went to Brazil to get the different minerals and to make these transitory objects, which are actually there for the public to trigger the experience a performer could have. It is not just enough that Im experiencing doing a performance in front of you and you are just passing as witness. If you really want to have your own experience, the only thing that matters is to really perform yourself. Therefore I created simple objects. The first objects I made were pillows, just simple pillows from rose quartz or clear quartz or small quartz. It will be put on the wall in three positions: head, heart, and sex. When you come to the space you just see the public facing the wall and you dont even see the piece. They stay there until they feel the energy transmitting. The material which was used at the time was very important. Or I would make shoes out of amethyst, which were enormously heavy, seventy kilos each. You cant walk with them but the structure was always there for the public. Close your eyes, go with naked feet inside the shoes, stay there and make a mental departure. Dont move physically, but move mentally. Every single transitory object had its instructions, so that the public will pass this threshold of just being a voyeur to that of being the experimenter. That was the whole story about transitory objects. Apart from that I wanted to do a completely crazy project in Brazil which didnt succeed because, as always, the money was the problem. I went to this place called Sierra Pelada. You know Salgado the famous photographer; he made these incredible photographs of the goldmines, the goldmines where people die every single day. This popular movie, Indiana Jones, was supposed to be made in that area. They just killed one of the cameramen. I arrived about three weeks later. I rented a small plane and arrived there with three boxes of Coca Cola as a present for the people. Everybody told me that if I go there I will be raped and killed, and it was like the end of the world. But I went there because of the thought to do this project. The project was called How to Die. Just to tell a little bit about the project: in every opera there is a woman dying in the end. Carmen, Butterfly, Traviata, she always dies for love, for sacrifice, for her country, for whatever reason, but she dies for something. I thought I would like to play in these mines, three minutes, just the endings, the dying scenes in different operas. But at the same time I would film the real death in the real mines and then mix it. Three minutes of opera and then three minutes of real death, three minutes opera, and then three minutes death. Only the title would be How to Die. Because when we are going to an opera or going to see a movie and somebody dies in that movie, we are touched and we cry, its something very aesthetic. It is staged so well that it really moves our emotions. But then we come home and watch TV and we look at the real death in whatever horror war we have in the world, we just immediately click to another program. Its not that this particular death reality doesnt touch us, but its not something that we want to participate in or see. We like the staged death. The whole idea of that project was to go into a real place, where real people are dying and mix it with opera. First of all when I went there they could not believe that a lone woman came there to give Coca Cola to them. I sat there and I talked to these people. The situation was absolutely surreal. There were people who didnt have fingers on the hands and they replaced them with gold prosthetics. There was one man who had all his fingers replaced by gold. If you wanted to buy water, you paid with gold nuggets. Every thing was gold. And the people were just in totally rotten pieces of cloths. They didnt have the money, but the obsession and the fever about gold was so much higher, and they could not leave the place anymore. Some of them had Italian origins and songs. There was this big megaphone sound to warn against imminent danger, when they were crawling in this mud because it was dangerous when they were digging for gold there, thats where they die most of the time. I told them to use these speakers to play La Traviata. They even knew it. I already had the guy I could cast for Othello, with all the gold teeth. They totally got emotional. They almost started crying from the kind of memory of their own countries and so on. They were really ready to help me to play this whole thing there, but then it was too complicated to organize in that time, the support, the money ... Hans Ulrich Obrist: That was unrealized. I was wondering if you had any other unrealized projects you could tell us about. Projects which were too big to be realized, too small to be realized, censored projects, self censored projects? Marina Abramovic: Yes, I do have unrealized proj ects, but I dont think that I will not realize these projects one day. Sometimes I can be very stubborn. The project takes five years, eight years, Im now working with another project in Laos, its now only been two years. But the project Seven Easy Pieces, which I had done in the Guggenheim Museum, took me twelve years to get the permission. Finally the director Tom Krens said yes. First it was too risky for him to let me do this project,

ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere | 027 but in the end it was okay. I dont care about time. I think it is very important to have an obsession about things. If you really want to do something, time doesnt matter. You have to do it no matter what. But sometimes the project is not realized, not because of financial reasons; sometimes you are just not fanatic enough about it. That means its not good enough and it just falls down by itself. Hans Ulrich Obrist: Another yet unrealized project is a retrospective, and I thought it could be an interesting transition if you tell us a little bit about this unrealized retrospective. Not only is this interview a kind of retrospective way of doing an interview, we are going to do another interview tomorrow here in the Art Lobby, which should be more related to other topics. At the same time, many of your recent works have something to do with the retrospective element, if you think about Biography, The Performing Body and many others. Marina Abramovic: You mean the one I am going to do at the MoMA? Hans Ulrich Obrist: Yes, curated by Klaus Biesenbach. Marina Abramovic: In 2010 there will be this large retrospective at the MoMA. I am really interested in how to approach this. Because I cannot stand seeing a retrospective of performance artists, with the bad videos and the little photographs from the seventies, they look so sad. They look really old, just something that doesnt really move you. I am thinking how you can do a real retrospective of performances. It is such a big task and so difficult. The title of the piece, of that retrospective, is going to be Artist is Present. And the retrospective is like any other retrospective, it is for three months and the museum is open from ten to six and every Friday from ten to eleven in the evening. My idea is to perform there for three months, you cant have less. The artist is present, so I want to see if this can

028 | ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere work, that you are really living there. All my work is about being alive and being directly with the audience, and to have this direct transmission with energy. I want to be there before the museum opens; I will be there when the museum closes, I will go home and come the next day and perform three months. Hans Ulrich Obrist: And that retrospective element has popped up already before you did the Performing Body, which was somehow a retrospective performance situation and then also your Biography, which was a more staged retrospective, one could say. Marina Abramovic: As a performance artist the theatre is something you hate the most. Theatre is like a black box and something unreal and you are playing somebody else and it is not about performance. After the walk on the Chinese Wall, I was at the most miserable point of my life. It was a deep depression. I dont go to psychoanalysis, because I dont believe in this American idea of psychoanalysis. I think you always can use it as a material and do something creative. I took all my depression and dealt with it. I went to the theatre and staged my own life in the form of the theatre piece and in that way, by playing my own life, created a distance to my own life. In making that kind of distance I started dealing with the pain in different way. This is how the piece called The Biography was born. Starting in eighty-nine and every four or five years Im making different versions of my own life. I love it so much, because sometimes you like some people, you put them in your life, but then you dont like them anymore, you take them out. You can mix whatever you want because you are alive, you are an artist, and you are free, and you can do anything you want with your life. When you die, then you get movies like Jackson Pollock that you cant do anything about. Maybe he would hate it, but you know, it is a vision from somebody else, but not your own. I decided that my own life staged as a theatre piece, is going to go on, even if I have Alzheimer, or Im in wheelchair, whatever my physical condition will be, getting old, forgetting things, I will still stage that biography. The first Biography was staged by Charles Atlas. Then I asked different directors to stage Biography, the last one, three years ago, was staged by Michelle Alp. In that Biography, we had twenty-five actors who were my performance students and played me in different parts of my life. Then I had the son of Ulay, who played his father at the time when he was at the exact same age. It was a kind of mix of reality and fiction at the same time. This Biography is going to be ready for the retrospective at MoMA. It is going to be staged with Robert Wilson, and again there will be another version. Every time it will be another version of the retrospective, your own retrospective. Hans Ulrich Obrist: It leads us to the question of curating and curating is something that has played an important role for you. You curated a project in Dublin at the end of the nineties, where you invited artists to do performances. I think it is a very important moment right now to talk about curating in your work. Because on your birthday a few days ago, on the thirteenth of November, you announced that the Abramovic Foun dation is going to open. A gigantic building where you will actually not only do your own work, but also curate certain works. Could you talk a little bit about this curatorial dimension of your work and obviously, Im most curious to hear more about the Abramovic Foundation. Marina Abramovic: The first time I started curat ing was by invitation from the director of the Dublin Museum in Ireland. He asked me to curate a performance, just one performance event. I was very touched by his trust and I went and curated a project with twenty-five international artists. The catalog was not an ordinary catalog. Instead of people having their pages in the catalog they would have five minutes in the video. So the catalog became the video, and each artist had five minutes to say what he wants to say, live, with sound and visual material. After this I taught a lot performance, but when I stopped teaching, I formed something called IPG. The Independent Performance Group was consisting of forty different artists from twentytwo different countries who studied with me. I just dismissed IPG at the first of December because I found that it was limited. The whole system has to go larger. I always loved this, you have the Rockefeller Center, you have the Lincoln Center, then you have Abramovic Foundation, that sounds good to me [laughs]. At the Hudson River, upstate New York, I found this incredible theatre, built in thirty-two, even Martha Graham performed there in her time. Then it was turned into a cinema, after the cinema it became an indoor tennis court, and after that it became just a kind of storage, some kind of junk, second hand shop, nothing was really there. On my birthday I got that place. I got the key and announced that this is the beginning of the Abramovic Foundation. Because you know, performance in this country, means always somehow dance or stand up comedy or a talk show, but there is no attention to the long durational work, the kind of hardcore long durational work. There is not so much of that stuff here like we have in Europe, as even dance and theatre has that kind - you have Jan Fabre and Tina Bausch and so on. There is no such tradition here (in the US) as we have. I feel almost some kind of duty to engage for this type of performance to survive. So I would like to have the center, which would have workshops, a public library, where curators, like yourself, will come and curate the strangest events or operate laboratories. Basically I would like to have something like Andy Warhols Factory, but without drugs. Hans Ulrich Obrist: Another aspect of curating is important and has also to do with the way how performance can survive. It is your Seven Easy Pieces, it is also a book, which is here. The book is

ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere | 029 documenting the project you did at the Guggenheim, where you asked artists for the permission for redoing a piece. That obviously has a lot to do with the idea of how art can travel, exactly what Doris Lessing pointed out. We think about all the ways art can travel into the future, maybe not via objects but in a different way. You mentioned that you see it almost as a duty to find ways with instructions that these works can be performed again in the future. You are quoting Albert Camus, who once said, the the only person who doesnt have any right to solitude is an artist. This is your idea as duty for the future. Can you talk a little bit about the Seven Easy Pieces, the idea how you wanted these works to travel into the future and how you work with instructions and the redoing of performances? Marina Abramovic: Seven Easy Pieces has so many layers and reasons why it was made. In the beginning I was really angry, but now its changed into something else. I was angry about so many young artists just repeating the seventies works, and actually appropriating them like their own work, without even reflecting on the history. I was angry about curators who are writing about these young artists as a new, fresh work, without even relating to the history again. Then I was angry about the theatre people or the dance people or the fashion people, who will take, without any context, the images of the seventies, not my own, just everybody elses from this period, recycling them and turning them into something else. It was never really clear where these ideas came from; there was never an honesty about it. So I wanted to make an example of this, thats how Seven Easy Pieces was born. To make an example of how you can re-perform somebody elses piece, but also by asking the artist for permission, or the institution which represents the artist in case the artist is dead, by paying for the rights to re-perform. Then you need to understand the material, and do your own performance if you want, the same like you would do whatever, any kinds of

030 | ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere things like a piece of music, or a piece you want to have in a book. It was just never done with performance and it is a wide territory. I chose pieces of art I never saw myself, but I respected them very much in the seventies, like VALIE EXPORTS Genital Panic, Vito Acconcis Seed Bed, Gina Panes The Conditioning, Bruce Naumans Body Pressure and so on, and asked for permissions, went through the infrastructure and got material. It was like archeology. You become an archeologist, getting material and reconstructing how it was at that time and performing the works. The only new thing I added to this piece is the notion of time. Some pieces were thirty minutes, some pieces one hour and five minutes. Each of them I performed equally for seven hours in the Guggenheim from five to midnight, this was the time. And then we made this book, Seven Easy Pieces. You know there is one thing called Five Easy Pieces, but Seven Easy Pieces I liked because it is just metaphor for showing something very difficult. This became a kind of instruction, a kind of example of how it can be done. Its not that I continue to redo these pieces, I just did it once and thats about it. something may deeply change and appear in you, and this is important to me. Thats why discipline is incredible, its essential, no matter what, do it. And then you see what happens with that experience. Hans Ulrich Obrist: Tomorrow we are going to talk about the future, and for today, I have a few last questions which are more general. Dan Graham always says that when we do interviews with artists, it is really important to know what kind of music they are listening to. I was wondering what kind of music you are listening to? Marina Abramovic: Okay, two things, I like the John Cage silence, which means no music at all and lately I am crazy about Antony and the Johnsons. Hans Ulrich Obrist: You are working with Antony, no? Marina Abramovic: Yes. I would like to adopt him actually, but he already has parents. thought it might be good that I look at James Liptons Inside the Actors Studio. And James Lipton ends his interviews always with a few questions from Bernard Pivot, so I wanted to ask you the famous Bernard Pivot questionaire. Marina, what is your favorite word?

ABC | ABMB07 | Premiere | 031 Hans Ulrich Obrist: What profession, other then yours, would you not like to have? Marina Abramovic: Politician.

Hans Ulrich Obrist: If heaven exists, what would you like to hear God say when you arrive? Its the Marina Abramovic: You dont believe it, but its question which Al Pacino answered with: rehears love. al at three. Hans Ulrich Obrist: What is your least favorite Marina Abramovic I would like to ask God to : word? come back again but to be Sequoia and not to move at all, just a tree. Marina Abramovic: Hate. Hans Ulrich Obrist: What turns you on? Marina Abramovic: Good sex. Hans Ulrich Obrist: What turns you off? Marina Abramovic: Bad sex. Hans Ulrich Obrist: What sound or what noise do you love? Marina Abramovic: A waterfall. Hans Ulrich Obrist: What sound or what noise do you hate? Marina Abramovic: Dripping water in bad hotels and air conditioning. Hans Ulrich Obrist: The moment we all waited for? Marina Abramovic The one I am still waiting : for. Hans Ulrich Obrist: What profession, other then yours would you like to have? Marina Abramovic: No other profession, just this one.

Hans Ulrich Obrist: What is your favorite film or Hans Ulrich Obrist: The book starts with a text of your favorite films? yours with quite clear instructions, so there are rules to follow. Marina Abramovic: I feel him as though he is my grandfather, or like somebody who is part of my Marina Abramovic: I love rules. I absolutely love family since the first time I saw his films, and it is rules. When I was born, as I said, my mother al- still like that. It is the Georgian filmmaker called ways set rules, she always gave instructions about Sergei Parajanov, and the film is Color of Pomewhat I have to do, how many French words I have granates. to learn, how many times I have to wash my hands, even you got rules before this talk. Everything is Hans Ulrich Obrist: Whats your favorite piece of about rules, because we are very disciplined and art? I asked Damien Hirst some weeks ago and he it is so important because our mind is so crazy. said, Bruce Nauman, The True Artist Helps The Its very easy to do something that you like. It is World By Revealing Mystic Truths. I am very curious very difficult to do something that you dont like. to know what is your favorite piece of art? And if you always do things you like, you dont change. There is nothing. You always fall in the Marina Abramovic: Not made yet. same patterns, making the same mistakes. But if you really do something you dont know, youre Hans Ulrich Obrist: A few last questions, Mathew afraid of, there is a big interesting possibility that Barney sent me a DVD the other day, because he

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Collections | 039 Art Basel Conversations | Thursday, December 6, 2007 | 10 11.30 h | Art Guest Lounge, Miami Beach Convention Center

TRANSCRIPT | ART COLLECTIONS COLLECTORS AS PRODUCERS


In what way can collectors support artists in the production of art works? What is the fascination of being involved in artistic production? How do collectors contribute and influence the practice of art-making? How is your involvement in production affecting your collecting? What responsibilities do private collections have towards artists and museums?

SPEAKERS | MAJA HOFFMANN PATRIZIA SANDRETTO RE REBAUDENGO JOS NOE SURO Moderator | RICHARD FLOOD

040 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Collections


Maja Hoffmann Collector; Zurich, Switzerland; New York City, NY, USA Maja Hoffmann is a contemporary art collector and a supporter and producer of a diverse range of projects, which include art, publications, films, and environmental initiatives. She is the founder of the Luma Foundation (2004) whose aim is to launch and produce cultural and art projects worldwide. In Switzerland, Maja is currently the President of the Zurich Kunsthalle, as well as a member of the Commission of the Basel Kunsthalle, a member of the Programme Committee of the Zurich Kunsthaus, and the Vice President of the Board of the Emmanuel-Hoffmann Stiftung, a foundation collecting contemporary art, based at Schaulager in Basel. In the south of France, Maja has been involved with the management and the programming of the Rencontres dArles, an annual international photo festival, for which she currently serves as the Treasurer of the Board. Maja is also active in several New York-based art organizations, as a Board member of two distinguished institutions the New Museum of Contemporary Art and the Bard College Center for Curatorial Studies at Annandale-on-Hudson in upstate New York. As an Associate of the Dakota Group, Ltd. Maja has been co-producing independent documentary films, most recently the critically acclaimed Paper Dolls and Sketches of Frank Gehry. In the Camargue, Maja and her partner Stanley Buchthal are involved in organic farming and cattle breeding. There, they are co-owners of Frances pioneer organic company (Bongran) which produces mainly cereals, and the founders of an organic restaurant La Chassagnette. Further, Maja is President of TAKH, the association whose goal it is to re-introduce the Przewalski horses to Mongolia; member of the Board of the MAVA Foundation for the Protection of Nature in Switzerland; and the Vice-president of the Board of the Foundations Tour du Valat and Sansouires to study, halt and reverse the loss of wetlands in the Mediterranean, Camargue. Majas family founded Roche Holding (formerly Hoffmann La Roche), a pharmaceutical company in Switzerland. She shares her time between Basel and Zurich, New York, and the Camargue with her partner Stanley and their two children, Lucas (11) and Marina (9). Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo Collector, Sandretto Re Rebaudengo Foundation; Turin, Italy I started to collect and to become an avid reader of art catalogues and books, visiting galleries and museums and, most of all, I started to get to know the artists, to go to their studios and to establish an authentic relationship with many of them something that could certainly never have happened had I been interested in ancient art or art from the first half of the last century. I have traveled a road with many of these artists, seen them grow and become established. My choice to concentrate on contemporary art was totally spontaneous, natural. My passion is to collect works of art that capture the present and anticipate the future. It is exciting and challenging to select artists and works of art that are part of todays culture and society and that will then go on to find their place in history. Another function of mine, apart from collecting, is to commission and participate in the production of new works, promoting young artists and permitting them to develop ambitious projects. Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo is married and has two children. After graduating in business studies and economics, she first started collecting contemporary art in the early nineties. What started as a hobby rapidly became a full time career when she founded the Fondazione Sandretto Re Rebaudengo in 1995, of which she is President. The Fondazione Sandretto Re Rebaudengo set up its first gallery at the Palazzo Re Rebaudengo in Guarene in 1997 and officially opened its current headquarters, a centre for contemporary art in Turin, in September 2002. The Turin space is a flexible structure that can put together exhibitions quickly and efficiently to respond to todays trends. A range of activities and events (films, talks, music, theatre and dance) are organised parallel to all the main exhibitions, whereby audiences can enjoy, interact and gain greater understanding of the centre and of contemporary art. Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo is an extremely active patron of the arts. She is a Member of the International Council and Friends of Contemporary Drawing of MoMA in New York, the International Council of the Tate Gallery in London and supporting member of the Friends of the Castello di Rivoli Museo di Arte Contemporanea in Italy. Among the other Italian honours and awards for her work in the art world, she also received the Mont Blanc Arts Patronage Award for her dedication to contemporary art in 2003. Jos Noe Suro Collector; Guadalajara, Mexico For more than 14 years Jos Noe Suro has conformed a solid collection of contemporary art, and has supported artistic projects through his family business specialized in ceramics. Since 1993 he initiated a project that consists of inviting artists to work and produce pieces in different materials like ceramic, blown glass, wood, fiberglass, latex and resin. Throughout the years more than 60 Mexican and international artists have developed their projects, such as Yutaka Sone, Marcel Dzama, Fiona Banner, Jorge Pardo, Jason Rhoades, Jim Lambie, Liam Gillick, Eduardo Sarabia, Miguel Calderon, Thomas Glassford, Eric Wesley, Phillipe Parreno, John Baldessai, James Turrell, Liz Craft, and Joep van Lieshout amongst others. He has also collaborated in other projects with the Dia Center for the Arts, Vienna Secesion and galleries like David Zwirner, Casey Kaplan, 1301PE, and Neugerriemschneider.

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Collections | 041


Richard Flood Chief Curator, New Museum of Contemporary Art; New York City, NY, USA Richard Flood was appointed Chief Curator of the New Museum of Contemporary Art in September 2005 where he oversees all programming at the museum in conjunction with the Director. Richard came to the New Museum from the Walker Art Center, where he was the Chief Curator for nine years and subsequently the Deputy Director and Chief Curator for two years. At the Walker, he organized a number of well-received exhibitions including Brilliant!: New Art from London, Zero to Infinity: Arte Povera 1962-1972, Robert Gober: Sculpture + Drawing, and the works of Sigmar Polke, among others. Richard previously served as the Director of Barbara Gladstone Galler, Curator at P.S.1, and the post of Managing Editor of Artforum Magazine.

042 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Collections Welcome | Maria Finders Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the second day of Art Basel Conversations. The topic continues our series on collecting. This time we are looking at the collectors role as producer of art and experience. We are very lucky to have Richard Flood from the brand new New Museum as our host with us today. Richard, please take it away. Introduction | Richard Flood Welcome and thank you all for coming. First I will introduce the panelists. To my left Maja Hoffman, a contemporary art collector, supporter and producer of a diverse range of projects, which include art, publications, films, and environmental initiatives. She is the founder of the Luma Foundation whose aim is to launch and produce cultural and art projects worldwide. In Switzerland, Maja is currently the President of the Zurich Kunsthalle, as well as a member of the Commission of the Basel Kunsthalle, a member of the Programme Committee of the Zurich Kunsthaus, and the Vice President of the Board of the Emmanuel-Hoffmann Stiftung, a foundation collecting contemporary art, based at Schaulager in Basel. In the south of France, Maja has been involved with the management and the programming of the Rencontres dArles, an annual international photo festival, for which she currently serves as the Treasurer of the Board. Maja is also active in several New Yorkbased art organizations, as a Board member of two distinguished institutions the New Museum of Contemporary Art and the Bard College Center for Curatorial Studies at Annandale-on-Hudson in upstate New York. As an Associate of the Dakota Group, Ltd. Maja has been co-producing independent documentary films, which include the critically acclaimed Paper Dolls and Sketches of Frank Gehry. In the Camargue, Maja and her partner Stanley Buchthal are involved in organic farming and cattle breeding. There, they are co-owners of Frances pioneer organic company which produces mainly cereals, and the founders of an organic restaurant La Chassagnette. Further, she is President of TAKH, the association whose goal it is to re-introduce the Przewalski horses to Mongolia; Member of the Board of the MAVA Foundation for the protection of Nature in Switzerland; and the Vice-president of the Board of the Foundations Tour du Valat and Sansouires to study, halt and reverse the loss of wetlands in the Mediterranean, Camargue. Majas family founded Roche Holding, a pharmaceutical company in Switzerland. She shares her time between Basel and Zurich, New York, and the Camargue with her partner Stanley and their two children, Lucas and Marina. To Majas left is Jos Noe Suro. For more then fourteen years Jos Noe has constituted a solid collection of contemporary art, and has supported artist projects through his family business specialized in ceramics. Since 1993 he initiated a project that consists of inviting artists to work and produce pieces in different materials like ceramic, blown glass, wood, fiberglass, latex and resin. Throughout the years more than 60 Mexican and international artists have developed their projects, such as Yutaka Sone, Marcel Dzama, Fiona Banner, Jorge Pardo, Jason Rhoades, Jim Lambie, Liam Gillick, Eduardo Sarabia, Miguel Calderon, Thomas Glassford, Eric Wesley, Phillipe Parreno, John Baldessari, James Turrell, Liz Craft, and Joep van Lieshout amongst others. He has also collaborated in other projects with the Dia Center for the Arts, Vienna Secesion and galleries like David Zwirner, Casey Kaplan, 1301PE, and Nuegerriemschneider. To Joss left, Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo from Torino, mother of two children, after graduating in business studies and economics, she first started collecting contemporary art in the early nineties. What started as a hobby rapidly became a full time career when she founded the Fondazione Sandretto Re Rebaudengo in 1995, of which she is President. The Fondazione Sandretto Re Rebaudengo set up its first gallery at the Palazzo Re Rebaudengo in Guarene in 1997 and officially opened its current headquarters, a centre for contemporary art in Turin, in September 2002. The Turin space is a flexible structure that can put together exhibitions quickly and efficiently to respond to todays trends. A range of activities and events (films, talks, music, theatre and dance) are organised parallel to all the main exhibitions, whereby audiences can enjoy, interact and gain greater understanding of the centre and of contemporary art.

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Collections | 043 Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo is an extremely active patron of the arts. She is a Member of the International Council and Friends of Contemporary Drawing of MoMA in New York, the International Council of the Tate Gallery in London and supporting member of the Friends of the Castello di Rivoli Museo di Arte Contemporanea in Italy. Among the other Italian honours and awards for her work in the art world, she also received the Mont Blanc Arts Patronage Award for her dedication to contemporary art in 2003. We are talking about production and art production today. I imagine that the first art production was probably commissioned by Adam when he asked God for a companion and ended up with Eve, and thus sprang all of us, if you hone to that tradition. It is something that continued through the years, from classical antiquity forward, there has always been art-patronage and there have always been commissions. Primarily they have come from the government, from religion, but there have always been incredible private patrons who have brought beauty into the world. I think all of these people have chosen to side with beauty, have chosen to side with working for the greater good, and have put their initiatives behind incredible projects, which well talk about now. We will start with Maja and her presentation.

044 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Collections In Conversations | Maja Hoffmann Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo Jos Noe Suro Moderator | Richard Flood Maja Hoffmann: I am honored to speak about the topic of the collector as a producer. Hearing the two words juxtaposed in this way has triggered my curiosity because on one side, I am a collector of contemporary art, and on the other side Stanley Buchthal, my partner, and I have been executive, and co-producing movies together, mostly documentaries about art during the last few years. We are going to have a movie about Lou Reeds Berlin, which we executive produced, with Julian Schnabel as director shown here. On the other side, Im the president of the Kunsthalle Zurich, with a fantastic team led by Beatrix Ruf and Im a happy member of the Board of the New Museum, which opened two weeks ago. Lately I been really very busy with these two institutions, but Im not going to talk about this today. I just would like to focus on the transformation that has started to occur inside me in the last years, from a contemporary art collector to an art producer. I thought it might be interesting to find out why we think that with times changing, producing is more rewarding, in terms of content and in terms of impact, then collecting. But first I would like to go back one step into my history. Its a family history. Why did you become a collector? Some people become collectors because they really feel the need and it comes out of nowhere. In my case, its coming from a family tradition. I was called when I was twenty, to be part of the Emanuel Hoffmann Foundation, which was founded by my grandmother Maja Hoffmann-Stehlin, later Maja Sacher, in 1933. It was established in order to continue the commitment to contemporary art, which she and my grandfather, who died young, had begun. Maja Sacher was pursuing three main objectives with her foundation; the collecting, the conservation, and the mediation of forward-looking art. Thats what I feel is important. It was forward-looking art at the time when it was started, and the collection was then given to the Kunstmuseum Basel as a permanent loan in 1941. In 1980, Maja Sacher initiated the construction of the first museum of contemporary art in Switzerland, which is known today as the Museum fr Gegenwartskunst in Basel. The Emanuel Hoffmann Foundation is now led by the third generation of the founders family, under the expert presidency of Maja Oeri, my cousin. The foundation has now reached an age of reason. The initial spirit underwent changes and, by the factor of being in its third generation, it is now more oriented towards collecting high-quality young or midcareer artists rather then focusing mainly on emerging talents. You might know that the works in the collection are stored in the optimum climactic conditions in the Schaulager in Basel in such a way that they are still available for conservation, teaching and research purposes. It provides a safe home for the collection, both in terms of the building and the high conservation standards, as well as for the future because a lot of space is available for many years to come. This is something Im very proud to be a part of and I think this is an achievement. But it leaves me with the question of what comes next? I am now looking for a way of continuing to translate this passion for innovative art in the spirit of my grandmothers legacy. So, some fundamental things have to be considered. First of all, with the Internet, the boundaries between likeminded people, countries, and corporations are disappearing, or at least they should be disappearing! Secondly, I think there is no need to own art but to share, mediate, and engage in a dialogue and debate. Thirdly, there are many new materials and media, and art is not only objects like it used to be or something to be kept in a room. Rooms are boundaries too. These shifting contexts affect both the production and the presentation of works. How do you deal with all this new information? Its really my profound belief that we need artists, collectors, gallerists, and curators to all work on producing art together. The emphasis is more on collaboration than on ownership. So, this is why I started the Luma Foundation in 2004, to try to pursue these goals. The Luma Foundation is based on my credo that more then ever, in our time of globalization, relations and interactions should occur between art and culture, human rights, environment and education and research. The purpose of the Luma Foundation is to facilitate, encourage and produce interdisciplinary projects that go beyond boundaries and beyond disciplines; that make things happen across these different realms. We are currently working on a long-term project on the campus of Bard College, with Tom Eccles and the Center for Curatorial Studies. The project is a permanent installation by Olafur Eliasson, titled The Parliament of Reality. In Arles, before the Luma Foundation existed, I got involved in helping to re-launch an international festival of photography. I consider that a form of production too. We created awards for emerging photographers or younger photographers (expanding this category to include artists working with photography among other forms). Together with the director Franois Hbel, we are only selecting the nominating committee, and they in turn are freely selecting the photographers. Luma will continue this commitment and in a further step try to create a permanent center to host the festival, among other activities of the foundation. We recently produced one project I really liked very much at the Palais de Tokyo, Paris, in 2007. More or less three years ago, Marc-Olivier Wahler, its director, who at the time was still the director of the Swiss Institute in NY, came to see me. Then I was visiting the space and I thought we should look for a project to do together. At the same time Ugo Rondinone, a Swiss artist based in New York, and I also had frequent discussions, so everything happened very organically. The two friends had come up with a project, and the mere fact that I was around made it possible for them to take time to work towards an ambitious and somehow different show, The Third Mind, which opened in Paris and got a lot of good critical acclaim. Also, coming back to movies, with the Luma Foundation we co-produced Zidane; A 21st Century Portrait, by Douglas Gordon and Philippe Parreno. Around

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Collections | 045 the same time, there was also the building up of a friendship with Doug Aitken while he was shooting Sleepwalkers for MoMA in NY, which resulted in the foundation buying the piece, and hopefully represented the start of further collaborations with Doug. These are some of the examples of the types of projects a collector/producer can do, or help happen. In Arles, we do not want to create a museum instead we would like to create a space for study, for education, for exchange, and I believe its going to be really important to have post doc people, working mostly with image, moving image or film to come in as residents. We are really trying to create a new space where you could do research about image and all these fast moving things, where you can reflect and discuss it, and where production will be enabled, but not mandatory. These are just the first steps we have been thinking about. A master plan for the revival of an abandoned railway plant presented by Luma and the Gehry Partners will be more or less ready for June and we will prepare a show about it at the time of the Festival, to see how the public will react to the proposed ideas. We are ready to launch this project over several years to come. I think its going to take most of my energy in the future. Thats it for me, sorry if it was a little long. Richard Flood: Its commensurate with the work thats being done. Maja Hoffmann: Yes, I just tried to give you an image about how many different projects can come into ... Richard Flood: one life. Jos Noe Suro. Jos Noe Suro: I just want to thank you and apologize for my English. When I was invited I was thinking about how I started this. I cannot remember exactly how but I know that an artist called me and asked: can you help me to do something? I think it was Jorge Pardo and this was some fourteen years ago.

046 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Collections It has always been an idea to invite artists to work and produce in Mexico, and not only in ceramic art. We have the ceramics factory, but there are workshops and people with a lot of skills integrated into the project now. We work with different media, like blown glass, wood, ceramics, bronze and fiberglass. It is more open now. As all the workshops were not very busy, they started to discover a new way to make some money. They now work with artists and it has also been helping them to develop better quality and better design. What I mainly do is I invite artists that I like. When the artists come we talk a lot and I try to give them solutions on form and media, and try to tell them how to realize their projects and how to work with the material they are interested in. This is the part of my job that I like the most; meeting these interesting people and doing these sometimes really crazy projects in the factory. A very important piece for us is one we made with Jorge, and it opened up a lot of doors for us and helped us to work with many other artists. I am now trying to push people in Guadalajara to produce public works for the city. This is the first time we are doing this. The pieces are now in the city and we hope that this project can be completed and expanded with more people in Guadalajara. Richard Flood: Excellent, thank you. Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo is next up with her presentation please. I should also mention that Patrizia was also one of the co-producers on the amazing Zidane film. Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo: I would like to thank the organizers of Art Basel and Richard Flood for inviting me to take part in this conversation. I started collecting in the early nineties, drawn to contemporary art by my passion to learn about artists around my own age. After years of seeing contemporary Italian art only in foreign museums I started to collect. I had a memorable visit with some artist students in London. It opened my eyes and triggered my love for contemporary art; it really became my passion, my work, my life. I started to build up my collection and follow the careers of young, emerging artists from Italy and abroad. In the beginning, I organized my collection into themes that particularly interested me. There were female artists, British art, art from Los Angeles, Italian artists and photography. But now, in recent years, as a collector, my interests have extended, just as my collection has, and today the collection does not have any specific structure and is no longer categorized by nationality or in ways or means of expression. It is more a basis for a dialogue about contemporary art. I believe that all collections represent the person who established them. Mine reflects who I am and my aim is not to buy names but to acquire precise works that are significant for the development of contemporary art. For me, it is important to create a relationship with an artist, and to understand the development of their work. From the first moment I started collecting, I never intended to keep my collected works in storage or hang them in my home. I had precise objectives that are still the same today. In 1994 I organized the first exhibition of my collection in a factory just outside Torino, presenting the early work of some of the young British artists of that period, like Damien Hirst, Julian Opie, Tony Cragg, and Douglas Gordon. But my desire to support artists and to share the work with others, and the lack of institutions in Italy, led me to set up the Fondazione Sandretto Re Rebaudengo in 1995. The Fondazione is a non-profit institution with three exhibition spaces. The first, and my original space, is a family palazzo in the country just outside Torino. Every year we invite three young curators from different countries to spend three months in Italy visiting galleries and artists studios across the country, and then curating their own show. The second space we have is in Torino, and this is our main gallery now. Now we have a third space, its a new space. The three aims of my foundation are, first of all, to support artists by helping them to produce and show new works. The second is to bring an evergrowing public closer to contemporary art and the third is to create relations, collaborations, and exchange with other cultural institution. For example we organize a big event, the Torino Trienniale, together with all our museums like the Galleria Civica dArte Moderna and the Castello di Rivoli and we invite seventy artists from all over the world. So its a way to work together for institutions and artist from around the world. I would like to make it clear, that my collection and my foundation are two separate entities. My collection is on permanent loan to the foundation but we dont show only my collection. The real aim of my foundation is funding the production of new works. The first way is when artist, curators or galleries approach me, or my assistant director Fransesco Bonami with a project and with their ideas and if we like them, then we will fund the production. We did that for example in 1999 when Doug Aitken approached me for funding for his video installation work Electric Earth, which was presented at the Venice Biennale. In the same year, we funded another project that was presented at the Venice Biennale, which went on to win the Golden Lion Award. We co-produced the Zidane film by Douglas Gordon and Philippe Parreno. In 2006 we partially funded the production of a video installation by Steve McQueen, which was presented in the last edition of the Venice Biennale. This is one way, and the other way we are involved in production is we invite the artist to produce new works for our exhibition program. When we were building the new space for the Fondazione in Torino, we invited Lina Bertucci to develop a project for the local community. As the new space is in a former industrial area Torino is known for its car-industry Lina came to us expecting to find factory workers living in that area. Of course she did not find any, because there are no more workers living in that area, quite the opposite. Torino has changed a lot, and is no longer an industrial city like it was years ago. So, her project changed and it became a study of the new inhabitants. This exhibition was very important

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Collections | 047 because it made the locals immediately feel connected with the space and won their on-going support for our activity. Every year the Fondazione works around a concept. For example, two years ago we explored female artists, last year we focused on the Orient; China, Japan, and Korea. This year our concept is the environment. And when we decide the concept and the theme of the year, the whole program follows that. In this way we produced, for example, different works of artists from China, from Korea, from Japan. Every year, we invite artists to present their projects and then a jury chooses the winner who receives funds to realize the project, and we dedicate exhibitions to young Italian artists. For these exhibitions we produce all the works too. The third way is commissioning projects for the collection. I have just two examples of works, that were produced for the collection and for my home. One is Patrick Tuttofuocos site-specific neon installation for the ceilings above the swimming pool. Then, we also try to collaborate with the city of Torino to produce public art projects. I would like to finish by saying that when we invite an artist to work with us it never means that we interfere with the creative process. We choose an artist and then we really step back and we leave him or her completely free to make their work. We think that this is very important. Thank you. Richard Flood: Each of you seem determined that you are going to make a very serious difference in the place that you occupy and have all mentioned particular civic commitments, and I would like to know about more about them. This is where going to from a private collector to a philanthropist and visionary producer makes all the difference. Jos Noe Suro: In Guadalajara theres really no market, there is no museum for contemporary art. There are four or five collectors now, and what I try to do is to encourage people to collect. I try to help them when I can. The other thing that Ive been working on lately is to start to collect in a very modest way with these people. For example, one

048 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Collections of them is a developer, they do housing and new communities in Guadalajara, and I say: lets invite artists, lets put some nice pieces on the streets where the people can enjoy them. This makes a difference. Its helping them incredibly to sell the land and the houses faster then the others, so they noted that its something that is profitable for them. They get very good reviews and people are going to see the pieces. Thats what Ive been trying to make; that the artists who come to work with me, leave something in Guadalajara, not just in my collection or in another collection, but something for the people, for the public. energy, a good synergy, and we work all together and this I think is really important. Obviously it is not always so easy because the situation in Italy is not so easy in general; we dont have public museums of contemporary art in Italy. It is very important to have foundations and other structures that can really help. The collectors are almost a little bit shy and they dont want to be involved. And collectors are always a little bit afraid to show their collection, so its not easy. the committee, they are not involved. This could be because there are no fiscal advantages in donating works. The only impact that a collector can have is by lending works. That has been very important. In Milano there is Fondazione Prada, the Fondazione Trussardi, and in Torino the Fondazione Merz, my foundation, and we really flank the public authority and we dont use our spaces to show the collections, but we use our spaces to cover the duty of museums by creating a product and producing exhibitions. The entrepreneur, private industry are not involved, but the collectors are. They work together with the public, with the government, with the city, and with the region. But when I see whats happening in America, I really understand that we are late in Italy. We have a lot of things to do in comparison with what happens here.

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Collections | 049 Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo: Education is very important for us. We have an educational department and we work with children and welcomes schools every day. A good number of children visit the exhibitions and then they have workshops. And it is important to involve adults. We organize lessons about contemporary art and we have specific courses and moments for adults. But it is very important to start with the children. We co-fund our education program with a bank which has made this one of its priorities. Now we have also started to work with students from fourteen to nineteen, but its really, really hard. They dont really like to visit museums. Richard Flood: Without education in the arts there is a limited future in many ways. If you are interested in the future and in the positive growth of children, look to your art organizations, look to your private foundations, and find out whos really doing the job. The smallest gesture can make an enormous difference with a lot of these projects. Artists have many ideas, they change all the time; they mutate. How do you adjudicate between the pleasure of what you anticipate and the reality of what happens?

Richard Flood: It takes an enormous amount of personal dedication. Im imagining that the regional governments are not jumping on board Richard Flood: How is it with Arles, Maja? and saying, we really want to work with you here and we really want to raise the level of idealism in Maja Hoffmann: Luma only started three years the community. Hows it going in France? ago, but Arles is going in the same direction. We are doing a master plan, which is integrating Maja Hoffmann: Well, some days are better than different actors and partners and the area we are others. There is still a very long way to go. What we working on is going to have permanent or semi- try to do with this master plan is to take the lead in permanent installations and sculptures and we terms of ideas. When we know, for instance, that are building a public garden. At the same time we Arles has a festival for photography, a national are attracting the international public and we school for photography, and a big publisher, we really expect or hope that this is going to lead to are trying to think what could be in the bigger fruitful encounters, and is going to make a differ- picture. At the same time, we know that the mayor ence. Weve already had a lot of responses and it might promise the land to another supermarket. has become a public discussion. Its a long way, So we then really try to organize everybody, try to but if you let this grow organically and people, both get people to talk about what each partner needs. local and international, can be part of the space And once everybody is happy, we then actually do our program following what the others have been its terrific. I feel thrilled by this. choosing first, and we integrate that into the projRichard Flood: Patrizia, how is it with Torino, ect without forgetting our own beliefs and goals. which is a much more aggressively competitive So, this is a long way, but as I said, I think we have city in terms of the arts? strong chances to succeed. In France, you have the region, you have the local, and then you have the Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo: Torino has national government. So, of course this makes a changed a lot. Last year we had the Winter Olympic lot of people to speak with. Games and so the city has really changed, even the mentality. The Fiat production was very important Richard Flood: You have the government of Italy. before. Now industry is less important and we You have the region Piemont. You have the city of have to think about tourism and culture and obvi- Torino. ously art. In a certain way Torino is lucky because we have the museums and many private founda- Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo: In Italy at tions. What is also important is Torino has a good museums the collectors are not on the board or

Jos Noe Suro: In Mexico it is even worse. Just to give you an example, theres a small museum and a very good friend of mine is the director. After paying the salaries, his budget for the year is two thousand dollars. In Guadalajara all cultural project have to be funded privately. We dont have a museum. Theres no collection of art. The last artist to be collected was Orozco. It is the responsibility for people who are involved in art, like myself and a few others in the city, to push and do Jos Noe Suro: Sometimes artists ask for almost impossible things to be done and we always try to things that can make a little difference. meet these requests. We never say no at the beginRichard Flood: It is really important to understand ning. Sometimes we can do it, sometimes we cant. that once you decide to take that extra step, that it For me the most interesting part of being involved is not just simply the force of personality and the in art is the process, the discussion with the artist. force of will; you need to have the skills of a politi- It is much more important than the piece at the cian, and of a lobbyist and you really have to learn end. It is the thing that I remember and enjoy the how to set a path for your own creation of an au- most. Sometimes it is a very, very long process. For tonomous state in the middle of the bureaucracy example, I am working now with James Turrell and that is denying that you actually exist in many we have been working on that project for about cases. One more question: How do you view the three years. It has been incredible. What I try to do role of education within your projects? is to show solutions. Sometimes I know the materials better than they do, and it sometimes involves Maja Hoffmann: I think it is the central part. I a group effort with my staff. Im always thinking would like it to become the central part of my work. that the piece has to look like it is made by the I think it should be the central part of everybodys artists hand. I never try to influence or to modify work. Thats the way I see it. anything, I just try to do it how each artist wants.

050 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Collections Richard Flood: Maja, where does the pleasure in the act of creation come from when youre producing? Do you ever say: Im not writing another check? Maja Hoffmann: This can happen. Id rather like to speak about both aspects at the same time. Basically I think that its really wonderful to work with artists and be part of a creative process. I cannot imagine a better compliment than when an artist tells me that I could be an artist myself which is maybe what triggers it all. I think it is interesting to speak with the artists about money aspects too. You come to an understanding if you really say where you stand and what you feel and what the needs of the project are, money-wise. This way you can achieve something by trying to develop a deeper relationship within the production process. Its helping the project go further. Sometimes you come in at a later stage and you want to help a project to exist anyway, even if you were not there in the beginning. So, you just jump on the train and you can help it happen. Some of the projects you start from scratch are more reflecting what you have inside yourself. But it is the duty of a producer to be in the background. Im sure of that. Richard Flood: The economics are incredibly complex. Each project brings with it a very different set of understandings and expectations and it is always a juggling act. Have you ever started a project where you just had to pull the plug? recognize that its always the same film we are seeing somehow in this type of production. This is exactly the opposite of what I would like to do. I think the word independent is very important because the artist can be independent, and the producer can be independent, and then you can see whats coming out. You have to find these interactions. And yes sometimes it becomes too much. Richard Flood: Patrizia, where does your greatest pleasure lie as a producer? Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo: I like so much to be involved in the production of new work that it is affecting my way of collecting. To produce is a way to create, to put together the foundation and the collection. I prefer to produce works for my foundation, and for my collection, even if I have to say that to produce certain works is more expensive then to buy them. Richard Flood: We would like to encourage questions now, not statements if possible. Audience: You were talking about production, that you produce a lot of art works which travel, and you were talking about education. My question is, do you think that it is possible to educate the artists you are working with to better observe material properties? Do you indeed consider that part of the production process should also involve more education about better protecting the art work in view of its longevity and preservation? Jos Noe Soro: We try to make the work with the best material available and advise artists on how to best work with it; that is important. Of course some piece can be destroyed. We kept all the molds and everything, if something happened to a piece; we are able to redo it identically, with the artist. Maja Hoffmann: I think more than educating the artists, this would involve research into new materials. That is something interesting too.

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Collections | 051 Audience: As collectors and producers, do you feel that in the contemporary world there is a move away from nationalism with regards to your collections? I know you said you started collecting young British artists, and then you moved away from that. Do you feel that nationalism takes less of a role then it has in the past? Patrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo: I think its impossible to say. I started with themes and I was involved in these themes, but I understood that it was impossible to follow this direction. I understand that artists dont want to be categorized, or classified per group. They are artists, and what is very important, and I can only speak for Italian artists, for example, is to have the opportunity to go abroad and to be confronted with artists from other countries. Now the world is a global world. When I started in the beginning of the nineties, there were not so many Chinese, Korean, Indian artists. Last year was dedicated to the Orient and the discovery of fantastic artists from India, from Korea, but it is impossible to divide, or to categorize. The art world is a global world and what is important is the quality of the artist. Audience: One of the standard cultural paradigms in most authoritarian cultures is: dont rock the boat. But someone like Joyce Carol Oats has suggested that the artistic premise is to rock the boat. If you were going to rock our boats with your art, what would you offer to us? Richard Flood: I do not think they are trying to rock anybodys boat, but they are trying to make substantive contributions to the culture in which they are living. It is a different thing. Anybody who saw just a number of the projects the Zidane film rocked everybody because it was the most spectacular concept of making a biographical film, or the Doug Aitken project at MoMa, would know that in trying to continue throughout the world, it is going to rock a lot of peoples worlds. Thanks very much to all our speakers.

Jos Noe Suro: Yes, with some projects. You work and then there is nothing that you can do, so you have to stop it. The artists I collect are the kind of artists I would love to produce. That is something I am always thinking. I see their works and say, Id love to work with this artist, and Id love to invite him to work. It is one of the first parts, that I try to start a relationship with the artist. I buy a piece by him. I get a good relationship with the gallery and then I say, why dont we invite him to do something together? Some projects have been very difficult, and sometime you have to jump off, to save even the relationship with the artist. But its always interesting and you always learn. For my business it helped a lot because we do ceramics for hotels and casinos, and for architects and interior designers. We have learned to make custom items for our clients because of the experiences with the artist. And the people at the factory have a lot of fun, because they are not doing the same and there are these crazy Japanese guys working there and doing crazy things. They have something to disRichard Flood: Patrizia, what do you see as the cuss. Its been great and there is a very nice mood hardest part when a project suggests itself to in the factory. you? Richard Flood: Maja, when I hear the word proPatrizia Sandretto Re Rebaudengo: I have to say ducer, I inevitably think of Hollywood and these that every project is different obviously. Every time crazy, insane guys who came up with a whole new you have a new project it is a different adventure. invention of the word producer. But it is a very What is very important is to follow the artist in his mixed bag I would imagine. On the one hand, project, but always with a step back. The project is there is the pleasure of working with the artist, but always with the artist, but when we have to talk the minute you are working with the artist, you about economics, about the price, everything, we become the banker, the nurse, the mother, the work with the galleries. All the works we produce, psychiatrist. When does it all become too much? we pay for their production, but if we want to also acquire the work, we then pay for it. At least we ask Maja Hoffmann: I would say its case by case. The for a discount. But I have to say that its true that Hollywood system is going to back the movie in we pay because I think this is correct, this is a way priority versus the authors. There is a good chance to help. to end up with a product which is very flat. We all

ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private | 059 Art Basel Conversations | Friday, December 7, 2007 | 10 11.30 h | Art Guest Lounge, Miami Beach Convention Center

TRANSCRIPT | PUBLIC/PRIVATE THE MUSEUM OF THE FUTURE IN INDIA


What art institutions does India have and need? What are the challenges for producing, collecting, conserving, researching and exhibiting contemporary art in India? What are the roles of private collectors, galleries, auction houses and foundations? How is the art scene in India interacting with the international art world?

SPEAKERS | SAVITA APTE SUMAN GOPINATH SHILPA GUPTA RANJIT HOSKOTE PETER NAGY ANUPAM PODDAR SANDHINI PODDAR RAKHI SARKAR Moderators | HANS ULRICH OBRIST JULIA PEYTON-JONES

060 | ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private


Savita Apte Independent Curator and Art Historian; Mumbai, India Savita Apte is an independent art historian and commentator on Modern and Contemporary South Asian Art. She has been mentoring promising artists and guiding their development since 1991. In 1995 she joined Sothebys as consultant expert for Modern and Contemporary South Asian Art for their auctions in London and New York. She is on the advisory board of Sovereign Art Foundation and advises various institutions as well as select private collectors. She lectures at SOAS, Sothebys Institute and the British Museum. She is currently a PhD candidate at SOAS, University of London and is a founding partner of the creative consultancy, Asal and a director of the DIFC Gulf Art Fair. Suman Gopinath Curator Colab Art & Architecture; Bangalore, India Suman Gopinath is a curator and founder/director of Colab Art & Architecture based in Bangalore, India. Colab works with artists/architects, curators, institutions and aims to present contemporary Indian work, both visual and spatial, within the context of international practice. She curated Horn Please Narratives from Contemporary Indian Art ( with Bernhard Fibicher) at the Kunstmuseum Bern, Switzerland (2007 08); she was invited to participate in the Lyon Biennial, oos The History of a Decade that has not yet been named (2007); her essays have appeared most recently in Modern Painters, USA (2007) and Art Review, UK (2007). She was networking- curator from India for the Singapore Biennial, 2006. She curated Home and the World (a series of films); Retrospective as Artwork, City Park with Grant Watson for Project Art Centre, Dublin, Ireland (2002 05). Other collaborations: The Cork Artists Collective for the Festival of Cork, the European Capital of Culture, 2005; Room for Improvement (India, 2001); and Drawing Space, UK (2000 01). Her essays have appeared in the catalogue of the third Fukuoka Asian Art Triennale, Japan, (2004); Changing States, in IVA, UK (2004); Independent Practices, UK (2002). Shilpa Gupta Artist; Mumbai, India Shilpa Gupta was born in Mumbai, India in 1976 and between 1992 97, she studied sculpture at the Sir J.J. School of Fine Arts, Mumbai. Gupta creates artwork using interactive websites, video, video projections and public performances to probe and examine subversively such themes as consumer culture, media technology, exploitation of labour, militarism and human rights abuse. She has exhibited internationally and recent shows include the Sydney Biennale (2006), Liverpool Biennale (2006), Havana Biennial (2006), ICC Tokyo (2005) and Edge of Desire (New York, 2005), Fukuoka Asian Art Triennale (2005) and Media City Seoul Biennale (2004). Gupta has also worked on many online art projects including Blessed Bandwidth.net (2005), an on-line art project commissioned for Tate Online. She has received a number of awards including International Artist of the Year, South Asian Visual Artists Collective, Canada, Transmediale 2004 Award, Berlin and Sanskriti Prathisthan Award, New Delhi. In 2007, she has had solo shows at Sakshi Gallery in Mumbai and APJ in Delhi and participated in Lyon Biennale and shows at the ZKM, Karlsruhe, Chicago Cultural Center, MOCA Taipei, Daimler Chrysler Contemporary and Galerie Volker Diehl in Berlin, Marella Gallery in Milan amongst others. Her most recent works have been commissioned for the permanent collection at the Museum of Contemporary Art Val De Marne in France. She has initiated the Aar Paar a public art exchange project between India and Pakistan and the Video Art Road Show, screenings of video art on streets in Mumbai and Delhi. In 2005, she is cofacilitated Crossovers & Rewrites: Borders over Asia for the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil and currently has also initiated Making Art Public in which prints by artists, graphic novelists and photographers are being distributed in Timeout Mumbai. Ranjit Hoskote Poet, Art Critic, Cultural theorist, Independent Curator; Mumbai, India Ranjit Hoskote is a poet, cultural theorist and independent curator based in Bombay, India. He is the author of thirteen books. These include five studies on art and artists: Pilgrim, Exile, Sorcerer: The Painterly Evolution of Jehangir Sabavala (Bombay: Eminence, 1998), The Complicit Observer: The Art of Sudhir Patwardhan (Bombay: Sakshi/ Eminence, 2004), The Crucible of Painting (Bombay: National Gallery of Modern Art, 2005), Baiju Parthan: A Users Manual (Bombay: Afterimage, 2006), and The Dancer on the Horse: The Art of Iranna GR (London: Ashgate, 2007). Hoskote is also the author of five collections of poetry: Zones of Assault (Delhi: Rupa & Co., 1991), The Cartographers Apprentice (Bombay: Pundole Art Gallery, 2000), The Sleepwalkers Archive (Bombay: Single File, 2001) and Vanishing Acts: New & Selected Poems, 1985 2005 (Delhi: Penguin, 2006, and in German Verlag, 2006). Most recently, Hoskote co authored, with the German novelist and essayist Ilija Trojanow, Kampfabsage (Random House/ Blessing Verlag, 2007), a history of cultural confluence that maps Europes umbilical connections with the Arab-Turkish-Persian-Indian cultural continuum. Hoskote has also contributed to several anthologies on contemporary art and urban culture, including: Private Mythology: Contemporary Art from India, edited by Akira Tatehata (Japan Foundation Asia Center: Tokyo, 1998); www.anthology-of-art.org, a Netbased international anthology of texts and art-works by art theorists and artists (Jochen Gerz Foundation/ Braunschweig School of Art, 2001); LUrgence Permanente, edited by Jean Nouvel (Galerie Enrico Navarra-Galerie Patrick Seguin: Paris, 2002); and Kapital und Karma: Aktuelle Positionen indischer Kunst/ Capital and Karma: Recent Positions in Indian Art, edited by Gerald Matt, Angelika Fitz and Michael Woergoetter (Hatje Cantz Verlag: Vienna, 2002). Hoskote has curated fourteen exhibitions of Indian and Asian art, both in India and overseas.

ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private | 061


Peter Nagy Artist, Curator and Gallerist Nature Morte; New Delhi, India Peter Nagy is an American artist and curator who has been based in India since 1992. He is the director of Gallery Nature Morte in New Delhi and the curator for Bose Pacia Kolkata in Calcutta. His writings on Indian contemporary art have been published in a wide variety of books, catalogues and magazines, both within India and outside. Anupam and Lekha Poddar Collector; Delhi, India Anupam and Lekha Poddar have been actively involved with the development of Devi Garh a restored all suite boutique hotel within an 18th Century Fort Palace, located outside the city of Udaipur in Rajasthan. With an emphasis on detail and design, this Heritage Property has created a new image of Indian luxury for the 21st Century traveller. Closely engaged with the development and the training of the operational team he now heads the Business Development unit for Devi Garh in New Delhi. Currently in the process of setting up the not for profit Devi Art Foundation, the space will be an intrinsic part of the new corporate office. The Foundation is committed to providing a space for young artists experimenting with new ideas, and creating a collection that is representative of contemporary art from India and the sub-Continent. The exhibitions will be limited to three a year and will be on view for a substantial period to allow audiences time to engage with the works on display. For a comprehensive engagement and understanding, a series of lectures, talks, and artists interaction will be designed around each exhibition. This initiative aims to develop and foster dialogue and relationships between the artists, art critics, curators, collectors, gallerists, and larger audiences across the region.

062 | ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private


Sandhini Poddar Assistant Curator of Asian Art, Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum; New York City, NY, USA Sandhini Poddar joined the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in April 2007 as the institutions first Assistant Curator of Asian Art, part of the Museums Asian Art initiative. She is curating a commissioned project by Anish Kapoor for the Deutsche Guggenheim, Berlin (October 2008) and providing administrative support for Cai Guo-Qiang: I Want to Believe (February 2008) and American Art and the East (working title, February 2009). Prior to her current position, Ms. Poddar was Associate Curator at The Alkazi Collection of Photography, New York City. She is cocurator of the touring exhibition Figures of Thinking: Convergences in Contemporary Cultures (2005 2008) and published the accompanying catalogue with the University of Richmond Museums. Ms. Poddar graduated with a Masters in Visual Arts Administration from The Steinhardt School of Education, New York University (2003). She served as the Principal Research Assistant in the Indian & Southeast Asian Art Department, Sothebys (2001) and at the Asia Society and Museum for the exhibition Benares: The Luminous City (2002), where she also co-curated a smaller exhibition of 19th and 20th-century photographs. Prior to her move to New York City, Ms. Poddar trained as an art historian, and received Masters degrees in Indian and South East Asian Art History and Aesthetics from the University of Bombay, India. Rakhi Sarkar Curator and Director, CIMA Centre of International Modern Art; Calcutta, India Rakhi Sarkar was born on 22nd August 1947 in Uttar Pradesh, India. She attained her BSc (Hons) from Presidency College, Calcutta and for her postgraduate degree, she went to Port of Spain, Trinidad, where she studied International Relations. Rakhi has been the Chairperson of Citizen Action Forum under the auspices of Indian Chamber of Commerce, Calcutta, where she has planned and implemented several social projects. She then went on to set up Combat, an international substance abuse prevention cell, and coordinated forty voluntary groups and agencies working in the field. In 1993, Rakhi set up CIMA Centre of International Modern Art, where she is the curator and director. She has organized nearly one hundred exhibitions including major traveling exhibitions to London, Singapore and throughout India. She is involved actively in publishing books on art and promoting Indian art. In 2003, she started the Art & Heritage Foundation, and also assumed trusteeship over Kolkata Museum of Modern Art in association with the Government of West Bengal and the Government of India. This centre is slated to be one of the premier institutes of modern and contemporary art in Asia. Most recently, Rakhi has launched CIMA Design, to help craftsmen and artisans. Rakhi has traveled extensively throughout North America, Europe, Russia, Armenia, Latvia, Uzbekisthan, China, Australia and the Far East. She is married to media moghul Aveek Sarkar and they have two daughters. Hans Ulrich Obrist Co-Director, Exhibitions & Programs and Director of International Projects, Serpentine Gallery; London, UK Hans Ulrich Obrist was born in Zurich in May 1968. He joined the Serpentine Gallery as Co-director of Exhibitions and Programmes and Director of International Projects in April 2006. Prior to this he was Curator of the Muse dArt Moderne de la Ville de Paris since 2000, as well as curator of museum in progress, Vienna, from 1993 2000. He has curated over 150 exhibitions internationally since 1991, including do it, Take Me, Im Yours (Serpentine Gallery), Cities on the Move, Live/Life, Nuit Blanche, 1st Berlin Biennale, Manifesta 1, and more recently Uncertain States of America, 1st and 2nd Moscow Biennial, and 2nd Guangzhou Triennial (Canton China). Among other projects for Fall 2007, Hans Ulrich Obrist will co-curate the Lyon Biennale. He has been the founding Chairman of the Art Basel Conversations Board since 2002. Obrist was awarded the New York Prize Senior Fellowship for 2007 2008. Julia Peyton-Jones Director, Serpentine Gallery and CoDirector, Exhibitions and Programmes, Serpentine Gallery; London, UK Julia Peyton-Jones studied painting at the Royal College of Art, London, and worked as a practicing artist in London and a lecturer in fine art at Edinburgh College of Art. She moved to the Hayward Gallery in 1988 as curator of exhibitions. In 1991 she became Director of the Serpentine Gallery where she has been responsible for both commissioning and showcasing ground-breaking exhibition, architecture, education, and public programs. Her tenure at the Serpentine could be divided broadly into four chapters beginning with the exhibitions she has curated, including Robert Gober, Agnes Martin, Man Ray, and Jean-Michel Basquiat (in consultation with Richard D. Marshall), and the Exhibition Program she conceived and developed, including Richard Serra: Drawings (1992); Gordon Matta-Clark (1993); Some Went Mad, Some Ran Away (curated by Damien Hirst, 1994); Chris Ofili; and Louise Bourgeois: Recent Work (1998); Andreas Gursky: Photographs 19941998; William Kentridge; Bridget Riley: Paintings from the 1960s and 70s (1999); Felix Gonzalez-Torres; Brice Marden (2000); Rachel Whiteread; Dan Flavin; Doug Aitken (2001); Gilbert & George: The Dirty Words Pictures (2002); Cindy Sherman, John Currin (2003); Cy Twombly, Gabriel Orozco (2004); Andreas Slominski; Oliver Payne & Nick Relph (2005); Ellsworth Kelly and Thomas Demand (2006). During the second chapter of her Directorship, under the patronage of Diana, Princess of Wales, she oversaw the renovation of the Serpentine, from 1996 to 1998, which reopened with Piero Manzoni after a series of commissions in the Gallerys grounds by Richard Deacon, Anya Gallaccio, and Tadashi Kawamata. In 2000, the third significant development in her tenure resulted in her concept for the annual architecture commission, unique worldwide, which represents an opportunity for an internationally acclaimed architect to create a more experimental structure in the United Kingdom, where none of those invited has ever built before. Those selected previously are Zaha Hadid (2000), Daniel Libeskind with Arup (2001), Toyo Ito with Arup (2002), Oscar Niemeyer (2003),

ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private | 063


MVRDV (2004, unrealized), Alvaro Siza and Eduardo Souto de Moura with Cecil BalmondArup (2005), and Rem Koolhaas and Cecil Balmond, with Arup (2006). In the same year and the fourth term as Director, she invited Hans Ulrich Obrist to join the Serpentine Gallery as joint Co-Director of Exhibitions and Programs, and Director of International Projects, to realize their twelve-month research project for the Serpentine Gallery to devise programs globally over the next three years. China Power Station: Part 1, at Battersea Power Station, which she co-curated with Hans Ulrich Obrist and Gunnar Kvaran, Director, Astrup Fearnley Museum of Modern Art, Oslo, is the first to be realized in 2006. Visitor numbers have increased to 750,000 people per year. She serves on numerous committees and panels and was made an Honorary Fellow of the Royal College of Art (RCA) in 1997. In 2003 she was made both an Honorary Fellow of the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) and appointed an Officer of the British Empire (OBE). [www.serpentinegallery.org]

064 | ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private Welcome | Maria Finders Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the third day of Art Basel Conversations. We continue our series on the Future of the Museum, which Hans Ulrich Obrist started many years ago. This time were talking about the Future Museum in India. We have a wonderful panel that Hans will present. Julia Peyton-Jones will be co-moderating because we have a big group of amazing people with us today. Hans, please take it away. Introduction | Hans Ulrich Obrist Many thanks Maria. Julia and I are very happy to introduce this panel. Julia will start to tell you about the context of our current Indian research. I will then say a few words about the on-going panels and then we will hand over the microphone to our speakers. Introduction | Julia Peyton-Jones Thank you Hans Ulrich. I thought it would be interesting to start with the local before we go to the global. And by the local I mean the situation in London and Hans Ulrichs and my work together, which began a year and a half ago. What we began to deliberate with great earnestness was the role of the public institution. We began to explore what it means to work for public institutions not only in the UK, but also in China, in India, and the Middle East. This research began last year with an exhibition called China Power Station that happened at Battersea Power Station. It was part one of an ongoing project, and our commitment to explore the work, the culture of that region. Since that time, it has traveled to Oslo, where it is now at the Astrup Fearnley Museum of Modern Art and will go on to MUDAM in Luxemburg and travel there after. The idea of an ongoing exploration is very important. When we began to focus on the arts of India and the Middle East the idea was to begin these research projects in London, but also to make sure that we continually update them for the future and learn from the experience of doing so. Our investigations into the culture of India and our thirst of knowledge about the arts of that region is, of course, only just beginning and its a great privilege to be with you all today to learn from your great specialism, that will inform our research project so very much. It is a privilege to be on this panel and thank you to Art Basel for the invitation to co-host it with Hans Ulrich. It is going to give us unparalleled access to the subject and I would like to say how pleased we are to be working with the Astrup Fearnley Museum of Modern Art in Oslo, as a partner.

ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private | 065 Introduction | Hans Ulrich Obrist As Julia said, this project is a learning process, and it has been evolving over years. It is not a sprint, it is a marathon. It means that one works on these things not just for six months or a year, but for many years and it produces exhibition literature and a series of catalogues and publications. And these panels about the Future of the Museum have been a marathon too. We started to look at China and the thousand new museums being built there, three years ago. We continued with a panel here on the Future of the Museum in the U.S., then on the Future of the Museum in the Middle East. Last year in Miami we debated the Future of the Museum in Latin America. Beatrix Ruf and I moderated a discussion about the future of the museum in Europe, in Basel last June, and we are very excited that we can discuss, for a different point of reference, as the museum is still very much a consideration, the Museum of the Future in India. It is a great pleasure to introduce our first speaker, Savita Apte, who is an independent art historian and commentator on modern and contemporary South Asian art. She has been mentoring promising artists and guiding their development since 1991. In 1995 she joined Sothebys as a consultant expert for Modern and Contemporary South Asian Art for their auctions in London and New York. She is on the advisory board of Sovereign Art Foundation and advises various institutions as well as select private collectors. She lectures at SOAS, Sothebys Institute and the British Museum. She is currently a PhD candidate at SOAS, University of London and is a founding partner of the creative consultancy, Asal and a director of the DIFC Gulf Art Fair. Welcome Savita Apte. She was also instrumental in helping us to conceive this panel and in helping us to gather such a wonderful group of speakers, so many thanks for this.

066 | ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private In conversations | Savita Apte Suman Gopinath Shilpa Gupta Ranjit Hoskote Peter Nagy Anupam Poddar Sandhini Poddar Rakhi Sarkar Moderators | Hans Ulrich Obrist Julia Peyton-Jones Savita Apte: Thanks you Hans Ulrich. My role is to play devils advocate in this talk. The talk is entitled the Museum of the Future in India and Im going to begin by asking the question: do we really need a museum in India? Do we need museums in India, and if so, why do we need them? Historically, we have had museums in India that were established by the British. Hence things changed in 1857, and changed further in 1947 with the inception of the National Gallery of Modern Art. This came because local institutions were started the All India Fine Arts and Crafts Society, and the All India Association of Fine Artists. They instilled the notion of museology, or museums for contemporary or modern art at the time, and this notion was taken on-board by the socialists and Nehrus government. They believed that art should belong to the public and that we should have a museum. They set up the National Gallery of Modern Art, which housed some of the works that came back from a very, very prominent exhibition at the Royal Academy in Britain in 1946. That was the inception of one of the first museums of modern art in India. Thinking about a museum and what the point of a museum is, I went around in London to do a little bit of research. It struck me to see that what museums seem to do best, is to de-contextualize everything. I was looking at landscapes in the city and at objects that were sacred and very personal, and that had been secularized and made public. I was shown works from the colonial centers, which had been miraculously situated now in imperial metropolitan centers. Basically, all I saw was object after object that had been taken out of its original context and placed in a completely different context. Then I began to wonder what the purpose of the museum is. Is it purely to show the wealth and the power of the host city or metropolitan center? I couldnt find many museums outside metropolitan centers. Visitors seemed to waft in and out very quickly and someone mentioned a short attention span. It seemed to me as if it was no longer the artwork or the object that was important to these people, but it was the recontextualization of the art work. Instead of the creative process of the artist, or the artwork, it seemed to be the creative process of a curator or a mediator that gathered greater importance in the museum. I will come back to this question: do we really need the museum as it has been formulated in America and in Europe, or isnt it time to rethink the basic idea of the museum? India is at the forefront of technology. Perhaps one way forward for an Indian museum would be using technology to create virtual museums. In this way, we could have multi-faceted, multi-located museums. Certainly the museums in India dont have either the funds or even the possibilities of buying artworks that preceded the time that we want to explore, and to fit things into this contextual medium. And that got me thinking about the notion of time. We dont have a technological notion of time but much more a cyclical notion of time. How do you put a museum together when you cant go from one phase to the next as a clear statement? Instead of explaining things I am throwing up a lot questions, which I hope everyone will have fun answering. Julia Peyton-Jones: Thank you very much for this fascinating introduction and Im sure it will provide many points for discussion. Im very pleased to introduce Suman Gopinath, curator and founder-director of Colab Arts & Architecture, based in Bangalore. Colab works with artists and architects, curators, institutions, and aims to present contemporary Indian work, both visual and spatial within the context of international practice. Among other exhibitions, she has co-curated Horn Please, Narratives in Contemporary Indian Art at the Kunstmuseum Bern in Switzerland in 2007 and 2008. And shes invited to participate in the Lyon Biennial of Contemporary Art 00s The history of a decade that has not yet been named this year. Suman Gopinath: Thank you very much for inviting me to participate in this chapter of the Art Basel Conversations. Colab is based in Bangalore, and provides a platform for different kinds of activities like exhibitions, visiting curator programs, films, and talks. With our varied program we try to bring in an audience that otherwise might never walk into a gallery space. This image is a sound installation by Sheila Gowda, which was made for the World Information City exhibition at Colab. This exhibition explored the rapidly changing public spaces of the city and the ways in which these sites were transformed, revitalized, and reinterpreted. Economic liberalization and globalization has not merely transformed public spaces in India, but has changed the face of contemporary Indian art. The number of commercial galleries since the late nineties has risen phenomenally. Collectors both in India and abroad have increased exponentially. Auction houses offer contemporary Indian art and the art market has hit an all time high. But strangely enough, museums in India have been left largely untouched. Perhaps its not so strange after all if you look at public museums today within the larger dynamics of its public culture. Museums in India have had a very beleaguered and complex past and their histories have been very different to those of their European and American counterparts. The earliest museums like the Indian Museum Calcutta and the National Museum in New Delhi, where established at very critical historical junctures to represent and define Indias colonialist and nationalist legacies. But the museums in India today are in a bit of a crisis. The most important challenge facing museums today is the lack of resources in terms of funding,

ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private | 067 infrastructure, curators, cultural critics, and trained museum staff. Further, the bureaucratization of the museum combined with a lack of vision, and lack of expertise have resulted in collections of the past being neglected or not being re-examined over all these years. How do we define museums today and how do museums define themselves? That is a question that has never been asked. Collections are never updated. The selection process to enhance them is democratic rather than critical or aesthetic. The results are collections that do not reflect the important moments of contemporary Indian art in any way. The other problem is accessibility. How accessible are these collections to the public or to other institutions who want to show them in other places? I have been in close contact with museums over the past few years, because I wanted to borrow works of art for our exhibition in Bern. I visited the Bharat Bhavan in Bhopal in May this year, to try to borrow some work for our exhibition in Bern. The Bharat Bhavan has one of the most exceptional collections of paintings from the eighties, because of J. Swaminathans ambition for the museum. But now, several years later, after his death, this place is in a state of despair, racked by right wing politics. Of course, I didnt get the paintings. But most shocking besides the request form for the paintings that I wanted, they asked me to get a letter from an artist whos been dead for several years now. So I said that it would be a bit difficult getting this letter from him at this stage. But the museum staff was completely oblivious of the fact that he died many years ago. This I see as the biggest problem that a museum faces today - its growing insularity, its obsoleteness, its complete lack of connection or engagement with the world around. The real challenge today is to think of strategies to dismantle the old museum, and reinvent it, as a centre of living culture, art, research and education. This might also mean re-imaging the museum format, trying all different models. And I think this could work if the museum collaborated with a variety of people and institutions. For instance, it could collaborate with public and private

068 | ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private institutions to build up its financial reserves through endowments. It could collaborate with artists. Today, the museum in India is almost irrelevant to the contemporary art scene. In Bangalore we are getting a third branch of the National Gallery of Modern Art, but the local artists, architects, and others dont know what is happening and are clueless about its development. It is time that museums took stalk of the heterogeneity of art practices and use them as links between the museum and educational institutions. They could also be inspired by those who believe that art is not merely a part of the curriculum, but an integral part of life. Education, conservation and research, are three completely neglected areas of the museum practice. Museums could collaborate with other academic institutions in terms of getting critical and aesthetic advice on what to collect, how to display it, and their publications. There could also be collaboration between institutions, and with institutions outside India, to help bring in international exhibitions, which is rarely done except for heritage exhibitions. Though museums are rooted and permanent, they can reach out to a large audience through temporary shows. It could also involve a network of museums and galleries and organized festivals. This could be the first step: involving the elusive publicw with the museum program as museum attendance is a very big issue; the general public tend to shy away. What we need now is not a new musealization but a socialization of its radical possibilities, meaning to take the museum to the people and make it alive, rather then remaining as it has been for many years now a custodian of our ancient heritage and a dead monument. Thank you. Hans Ulrich Obrist: Thank you Suman Gopinath The very fascinating idea of bringing the museum to the people leads us directly to our next speaker, to Shilpa Gupta. She told me about a similar idea of opening the museum more to the streets when we prepared the panel. Shilpa Gupta, artist from Mumbai, studied sculpture, created then many artworks using interactive websites, video, new technology, projection, also public performances - addressing issues such as media technology, exportation of labor, militarism, human rights abuse, consumer culture. She has participated in many biennials, the Sydney Biennale 2006, also Liverpool Biennale 2006, Havana Biennal, Fukuoka Asian Art Triennial, and also the Media City Seoul Biennale. She has won numerous awards and has initiated curatorial projects as Aar-Paar, a public art exchange project between India and Pakistan and the Video Art Road Show, screenings of video art on streets in Mumbai and Delhi. It is an important point that we listen to artists and their vision of the museum at these panels on museums. Welcome Shilpa Gupta. Shilpa Gupta: Hi. I am an artist based in Mumbai. I work in installation, photography, interactivity and projections. I studied at the Sir J.J. School of Fine Arts in Mumbai, which was established in the 1850s by the British Bombay government. It is located in the southern tip of Mumbai, which has been the city center since those days, and where all the galleries either moved to, or where they bought large spaces. It remains the commercial hub where thousands of people commute to every day in jam-packed trains from surrounding towns. Late in the evening, they rush for a two-hour journey back home. Few ever visit galleries and the cultural experience is limited to weekend fun flicks at the local theatre, lots of TV, and to the daily rituals constructed within religious practices. Contemporary art functions in this paradox, and stands in the spotlight today with India, with its booming economy and large consumer base. In this context, to discuss the museum not of the present, but of the future in India, comes as an exciting possibility; to dream with freedom; with a contested present becoming the past and the future, and with thoughtful distance. Many questions come up regarding this imaginary museum; what is it? Why should it exist? For whom? How? And where? I would like to show you some initial ideas I am having on this. Why? To have a living memory of times which are always changing quickly. What? Works of art to hear and see deep emotions in small and independent ways of thinking and making. For whom? For people, and who we may think will define where and how to continue. Where? The best place to be is where most people live, which is often in the wide periphery and not in the small center where they work and even more so as artists seem to talk about peripheries anyway. Why must cultural institutions always be in the distant comfort of the center? Then comes the question of what. What is contemporary art and what is its very language? Even though brought via ships that sailed for over two hundred years, being nourished and cherished and becoming part of our history and our present, contemporary art in India still continues to operate in a class system, in very small groups of mostly English speaker and almost always in the mega city centers. How? I am inventing, open horizontal space that is impressive yet inviting, and not intimidating, and needs to be modern. The imaginary museum must not be just a dream. The very absence of a contemporary art museum today speaks of a certain tenuous relationship which the Indian state has with contemporary art. This is a common phenomenon in several non-western countries, which have been introduced to contemporary art coinciding with colonization. But our Chief Minister of Mumbai wants the city to be like Shanghai, as he has yet to hear about the true costs and true benefits that the Chinese government seems to be thinking about with having a hundred new museums in the country. The onus lies in the privately funded or supported museums, as well as to begin with the institutions which we all hear about soon, spearheaded by a great vision and great passion, by key individuals from the Indian art scene, most of which are in the room today. Of course, it is important to bear in mind that all these initiatives will have to be privately funded. It is a challenge to

ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private | 069 change the way contemporary art is practiced and consumed and especially now with the booming market. This also creates a very delicate situation which will require the balance of institutions being private and at the same time, non-profit and public. My work deals with space and how we live it and perceive it; it comes compressed with social, political implications, sometimes visible, more then often than not, camouflaged. The first work Im showing today is Blame, which is a walk-incabinet tucked in the very end of a corridor, bathed in red light. In the evening as it gets darker, the light inside intensifies, throwing an uncomfortable halo. Inside the piece, one is surrounded by shelves stacked with hundreds of bottles. The viewer is invited inside, within the framework of our function as a consumer, and in a way, to consume is to blame. The bottles, which contain simulated blood, say: blaming you makes me feel so good, so I blame you for what you cannot control, your religion, and your nationality. I want to blame you; it makes me feel so good. Blame opposed English and Urdu and was first made for a public art project, Aar-Paar, which had started in 2000 with Huma Mulji from Pakistan, and shown in the streets with the background of the Kargil War between India and Pakistan. In 2002 brutal killings in the name of religion and the rise of hate politics created the social and political climate that allowed the Gujarat genocide to take place. The work has been revisited in the form of a bottle and was shown in galleries as an outdoor booth. Up next [slide] is a series of game-like interactive video projections and large photos, six by eight feet, reminiscent of billboards, in which the model, me, is dressed up in camouflage gear selected from little fashion shops in Mumbai. A trend, which was booming while we watched the U.S., led War on Terror against Iraq. Was terror now cool and fashionable? The more the play continues, hands become guns, while an extra hand set appears from an invisible persona to cover our eyes while we shoot.

070 | ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private Mahatma Gandhis famous saying: see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, is re-interpreted today, and focused on instant salvation. It is simply convenient not to see, not to hear, and not to speak. [slide] The next is a series of works titled There is an Explosive in This. There is a table with objects that were confiscated at the Chattrapathi Shivaji International Airport in Mumbai. These are everyday objects - bottles, tubes, pharmaceuticals, left in a hurry by people going through the check in. A Sikh family, all covered in white, tightly stitched underclothes, reveals the irrational fear that lives inside us when considering that everything is stamped guilty unless proven otherwise. [slide] As a continuation of the series, one hundred bags were laid out in a flat in London, tightly stitched in covers, which seemed protective and useless at the same time. Screen-printed on these was: There is an Explosive in This. [slide] An Indian friend of mine, while visiting London, was given a ticket for taking a photograph of a street sign which said Love Lane, another one of the several hundreds of incidents in the rise of fear politics. [slide] With rapid globalization simultaneously we seem to have become increasingly suspicious, somewhat more then we need to be. Post Cold War global politics have been reconfigured along cultural lines, a new tool to play old games. [slide] Visitors to the show were invited to take there is no explosive in this-bags for a walk on the streets of London or while taking a tube ride back home. They were then sent e-mail questions about their experience, about wearing some art, some bits of truth. [slide] As it turned out, people felt that they were under extreme surveillance. [slide] The last image is a new piece, which says: dont worry; you too will be a star. This is based on reality shows. In a media saturated age; the viewers are becoming more and more fused with the media itself. [slide] And while making the work I was constantly reminded of the Jihadies who also desire to go to the heavens. This is an interactive video projection where, inside the projection, the viewer sees his shadow and the content of the video react to the shadow. [Video] Julie Peyton-Jones: Shilpa Gupta, thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to look at your work and to hear your thoughts on the imaginary museum. I would like to introduce Peter Nagy, who is an American artist and curator, whos been based in India since 1992. He is the director of Gallery Nature Morte in New Delhi, which is present here at the fair, and the curator for the Bose Pacia Kalkota in Calcutta. His writings on Indian contemporary art have been published in a wide variety of books, catalogues and magazines, both within Indian and outside. Peter Nagy: Id like to start by reacting to what Savita started saying at the beginning of this conversation: do we need museums in India? It is a very good point because I think its safe to generalize we have a landscape of failed museums across the country. These being both, colonial museums set up by the British and other colonial powers in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, and also modernist museums set up by the newly formed State of India after its independence in 1947. If we define the success of a museum in that it should serve its audience, taxpayers and the common people of India, as they are public institutions, they have failed miserably. The National Gallery of Modern Art in India does not have a curator on its staff. They have recently embarked an expansion program to enlarge the building by six times, that again has stalled for a lack of funds and for the lack of any sort of administrative vision. The example cited by Suman about when she went to Bharat Bhavan and was simply unable to access the collection and borrow the works for a major international exhibition is quite typical. Again, the museum has profoundly failing to serve its audience and the people of India. They are supposed to be representing the culture of India, and especially on an international scale. If the other job of the museum is to safeguard the collections, to properly take care for these things and to disseminate them, again, they have failed. Museums across the country contain works of art that are being damaged while they are in storage. One hears stories of directors literally selling some of the best pieces out the back door on to the black market. It is an alarming situation overall. Part of this has to do with a bigger picture that Ive been very interested in and started to articulate recently: I dont think modernism worked in India. It came in, it tried, there were some very interesting experiments, but all in all it was a disaster and didnt work. It created a lot of failed institutions and actually lot of bad art too. While we are seeing Indian art taking its rightful place on an international stage now, while we are looking across the borders of India that becomes more important to the entire world but because of post-modernism. India works within a post-modern context if we define post-modernism by an internally hybridized structure that accommodates contradiction and complexity within a unified whole, that is by nature what India was. Thomas McEvilley said in an article in Artforum many years ago: India in many ways was a postmodern culture before it was a modern culture. India is as large as Western Europe and the differences between Kashmir in the north and Kerala in the south are as vast as the differences between Finland and Sicily. These are profoundly different cultures, which have been unified after independence into an extremely successful secularized democracy. This is very appropriate, though why we have seen the failure of the colonial, modern and institutional museum in India is perhaps because it just doesnt work with the society. Perhaps we have an opportunity to create the new post-modern museum now that will flourish within the Indian context. I will tell you about my own personal experience. I have been living in Delhi since ninety-two and started the gallery in ninety-seven, but my initial access to the contemporary art world of India was as a writer, both as a critic and theorist, writing essays. I also wear a number of other hats and have worked within the private sector and the museum sector. I have worked with the Philadelphia Museum and the Swiss based NGO Art for the World

ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private | 071 to bring international exhibitions to India and to act as a liaison there. I was part of a curatorial team, which produced an exhibition in 2005 in Venice during the Biennial. It was an exhibition of six artists who made new site-specific works for the exhibition in Venice. There has never been an official participation from the Indian government in the Venice Biennial. We approached the Indian government very gingerly because we know that it is a delicate situation, a group of artists representing a country at a highly visible international platform such as the Biennial. We tiptoed our way into some meetings at the department of culture with documentation of what we wanted to present, being willing to accommodate their desires, their wishes, to be flexible. We were being respectful of how to go on with the project, since we were a consortium of private individuals, independent curators, and a residency project in northern California. We were met by the people at the department of culture with their first question: what is the Venice Biennial? That is not a good place to start. All we were simply asking for was a letter of acknowledgment of our project in order that it be seen as an official presentation of the Indian government, and that it could be listed within the context of the Venice Biennial as the official country pavilion. We were not asking for a single rupee of government money. We had already done most of the fundraising through private sources in the United States. We were met with nothing but inertia and apathy every step of the way. We had to define ourselves at the Venice Biennial properly as an official Collateral Event, so we could be within the larger umbrella organization and documented in the catalog and on the map. Ironically we discovered in 2006 a letter of agreement drawn up between the governments of Italy and India in 2004 for increased cultural collaboration between the two countries. Number one on the list of things that the Italian government was asking from the Indian government was official representation from India in the Venice Biennial. Unfortunately nobody ever told anyone in the department of culture.

072 | ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private We skip to 2006. Based on the project for 2005 we were invited to the gallery spaces of Fondazione Bevilacqua La Massa, which is not a very large gallery space, but right in the corner of Piazza San Marco, right across from Museo Correr. The administration there loved the project we did in 2005 so much, that they invited us to submit a curatorial proposal for another Indian project for that space. Our proposal was accepted, but they told us: we want this to be the official India pavilion, please get a letter from the Indian government. We went back to another three-month process of drawing up a letter, meeting with a number of people in a number of positions. You just cant get them to sign that letter and fax it. Again, it never happened and we lost that space. In the process of that, Robert Storr, Director of the Venice Biennial 2007, comes on a curatorial visit to India and announces that he has marked three large sections of the Arsenale proper, one to be the Turkish National Pavilion, one to be the Indian National Pavilion, and one to be the African Pavilion. As you probably know, the Turkish and the African did happen, and again absolutely nothing happened with the Indian. These stories just tell you a little bit about the conditions that we are dealing with in terms of public institutions, within India. They are liaising with the international art world, and being offered what amounts to some of the most extraordinarily and exceptional opportunities to highlight Indian art on world platforms and theyve simply just dropped the ball. Sorry to be such a bummer. But heres the future and Ill hand it over to Hans. Hans Ulrich Obrist: Many thanks Peter Nagy. It is a great pleasure to introduce our next speaker Anupam Poddar. It will be very interesting, following the description of the failure of the public circuit by Peter Nagy, to now listen to Anupam Poddars model of a private institution. Anupam Poddar has been actively involved in the development of Devi Garh, an all-suite boutique hotel within a restored eighteenth century palace, creating a new image of Indian luxury for the twenty first century. He is now head of the business development unit for Devi Garh in New Delhi. He currently is in the process of setting up the non-profit, Devi Art Foundation, a space which will open soon and which will make his extraordinary collection, which I had seen in very small parts in an exhibition Berlin earlier last year, accessible. Devi Art Foundation will also organize exhibitions; foster the dialogue and relationships between curators, collectors, galleries and larger audiences across the region. A big welcome to Anupam Poddar. Anupam Poddar: Thank you Hans Ulrich. What you have been hearing is absolutely true. The public museum does not work and does not really exist in India. Things are changing. People are curious. We want to take the work out to a larger audience and get more people involved. I am technically challenged, so I am not even going to attempt to do a museum on the web like Savita was suggesting, because I dont think I would be able to manage it. I like objects, but as Savita was saying too, in a different context. My mother started the collection -she is somewhere here in the audience- and it slowly grew. We moved into a house in Delhi and I started to buy specific works from a younger generation of artists, which matched my taste and my vision of what India is today. We had all seen the world in a different light, and coming back to India, we decided to do our work there. The transition from buying a few works for your house and defining yourself as a collector takes a while. It will still take my time to get used to the idea to go from a collection to an institution, trying to set up the Devi Art Foundation. We would like that more people from within India and from all over the world will be able to discover Indian contemporary art, and see how exciting it is. The collection is going to be housed within a corporate office, which is under construction. [slide] We are hoping to finish and open in March 2008, so it is really around the corner. The foundation is a non-profit space. It covers about 7500 square feet spread over three floors. It grew organically and the idea is fairly simple. We want to provide a space for artists to do experimental, cutting edge work, which might not necessarily fit into the gallery system. We want to provide the same platform for young critics and curators. One of the problems in India is that a generation of curators and critics needs to be developed. While artists have opportunities because of the economic growth, there is a lack of education when it comes to the infrastructure of art, such as curators and critics. That is something non-existent. Beyond the fact that we want to showcase Indian art, we want to expand the dialogue and take it further to the entire sub continent. We are trying to be overly ambitious and each show will have an outreach program, an education program, a lecture series, and a catalog. There will be three shows in a year and I am going to run you through the programming for the first couple of years. [slide] The first show is called Still Moving Image which will be stage photography and video from India. [slide] This is an image from Bhart Khers Hybrid Series to give you a flavor of the works that are not particularly conventional and that we have a lot of installations. [slide] Then we will show a contemporary group exhibition from Pakistan, curated by Rashid Rana in summer 2008. Pakistan is exciting, because a lot of young artists teach at the BNU (Beaconhouse National University, Lahore-Pakistan) and they are developing the next generation. [slide] Hamra Abbas is another artist from Pakistan, who lived in Berlin and is back in Pakistan now. He makes fun of the notion of museums and their exhibitions saying, Please do not touch, stay out, but enjoy the show. [slide] The famous Subodh Gupta will be in our third show, organized in collaboration with the Jawaharlal Nehru University, which is considered the premier institute for education in the arts and aesthetics in Delhi. We are working with the University on a semesterlong course, to bring the students closer to the collection. They will be able to curate a show from

ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private | 073 our collection at the Foundations space and at the University in a small gallery. It is a try to look at the last ten years of Indian art in a historical way. I will have been collecting for about ten years by then and it will be a good time to observe the evolutions and changes over that time period. [slide] This is an early work by Subodh Gupta, a hut made of cow-dung cakes. These cakes are used as fuel in villages across India. A large part of the collection and a large part of the art in India is folk and tribal art, but it is not shown in galleries because it is not taken seriously. We have been following it for a few years, and one of the shows is going to be on contemporary folk and tribal traditions across India. The last show we have planned so far is a look at the Diaspora in the entire region. We want to have a look at the shared concerns of what it means to be away from home in different countries, in an alien culture and still being associated with home in some way. These are the founding values and background ideas of the foundation. Thank you. Julia Peyton-Jones: Thank you very much for this extraordinary presentation. It is very exciting to have your view as a collector who is setting up an institution in a challenging climate in terms of publicly attended spaces. It is a great pleasure to introduce Sandhini Poddar, who joined the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in April this year. She is the institutions first Assistant Curator of Asian Art. She is curating a commissioned project by Anish Kapoor for the Deutsche Guggenheim in Berlin in October 2008, and providing administrative support for the Cai Guo-Qiang project, which will take place in February 2008, and American Art and in the East, the working title of a project for February 2009. Sandhini Poddar: Thank you for inviting me. This is a topic that is very close to my heart because I studied art history in India for eight years and I had to leave six years ago to study Arts Management in New York, because this program is not available in India. I have been very interested in curatorial

074 | ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private studies too, trying to understand the various disciplines I could learn about to take that experience back to India and work at the future imaginary museum of India. I will start by introducing the Asian art initiative at the Guggenheim, which is very new and started in 2006. As Senior Curator of Asian they hired Alexander Munroe, who had been at the Japan Society, and they brought me on board to bring in expertise from south Asia. The two of us are looking at a large region of Asia. We are looking at the main centers of art production in East Asia, Southeast Asia, South Asia and also Iran. I think this is very important, given its historical connection to South Asia, and the current issues, problems and interests in Islamic art and Islamic identity. We are part of a larger curatorial team, but we do not have our own Asian Art Department. What we are trying to do is to integrate the Asian Art programming within the larger infrastructure of the Guggenheim through exhibitions, public programs, bilingual education guides, gallery guides, visitor services, as well as catalogues and scholarship. I am going to show you a images of some upcoming exhibitions in 2008. We are preparing a retrospective of the Chinese artist Cai Guo-Qiang, which will start in New York, and then travel to the National Art Museum of China in Beijing and the Guggenheim Bilbao. Alexander Munroe is organizing a large historical exhibition for 2009 that looks at the development of American art from 1880 to about 1980. It will be a hundred year span of how American artists were influenced by their understanding or their imagination of Asia, and the impact of Asia on the development of modernism and post-war avant-garde contemporary art in America. A year ago I was asked for South Asian artists who could be included in the exhibition. I was interested, as it is a revisionist historical exhibition and not just about including big names of American art, but to include artists who might be under represented and under recognized. [slide] Krishna Reddy is an artist in his eighties now, who moved to New York in the sixties and was involved in the development and director of the Department of Graphics and Printmaking at New York University over the last thirty years. [slide] Another artist is Salima Hashmi, who is also in Anupam Poddars collection. She is now based in New York and had a studio there since 1975 and created these works in the nineteen- seventies that have never been seen in a museum context. Her work is very Indian in many ways and true to her own tradition, but she was very involved in the development of feminism and minimalism in America and in that context it works very well too. [slide] We are also commissioning a project by Anish Kapoor for 2008, which will start at the Deutsche Guggenheim. The work svayambh (2007) he recently showed at the Haus der Kunst in Munich. It is a piece of forty tons of wax that travel slowly across the length of the gallery. We started an Asian Art Counsel at the museum to help us to look at the state of modern and contemporary Asian art. Some of the topics we discussed at the council meeting, I thought would be of interest to you. What is the mission of Asian art curators in the age of globalization? Looking at Asian art in context, do we use a nation based, inter-Asia, or an international paradigm? I think this is a really important question. There is little conversation within Asia, we have always looked at the West as the reference point for our own sense of modernity and our own art practices. The Museum of the Future in India would need a sense of collaboration with its neighbors, looking at the shared history between China, Japan and India for example. There have been some individuals at the beginning of the twentieth century who created these conversations, but it was not institutionalized in any way or brought in as a curatorial subject. Does contemporary Islamic art exist? I think this is a very relevant question also in India, given the riots that happened in the early nineteen nineties as well as the Gujarat genocide in 2002. Hans Ulrich was asking us about the notion of censorship and how does that play into the Museum of the Future. This element is really important because we are a very successful secularized democracy. But it is changing, the right-wing and the fundamentalists have a voice now and the impact on contemporary art is very interesting. How are Asian art practices that draw from traditional techniques and cultural reference relevant to contemporary art? What are the alternative models and non-western paradigms for exhibiting Asian art? And how are canons made for collecting Asian art? I think given the new impetus and the economic boom in India where private collectors, auction houses and galleries control the market it is skewed towards commercialism now. What is left behind is the role of the museum, the role of the curator, the voice of the critic, and the importance of the artist. Whatever the Museum of the Future is, whether it exists in cyberspace or it is built, it needs to have the human resources to maintain it. The role of arts education, curatorial studies, and arts management has to be brought to India. We have interesting partnerships for management and information technology and I would like to see that applied to the visual arts. We need to create collaborations with institutions in Europe and in America that have these disciplines in place. Whether it is exhibition design, fundraising, conservation, archiving, all these subjects are extremely important. There is hardware and there is software and we need both in India. I would like to quote a wonderful anthropologist about this conundrum between the market and the art world that suffers because it cant keep up and cant compete. We dont have the same funds. We dont have the same possibilities. And he said, There is this tension that exists between the ethics of possibility, which is art, and the ethics of probability, which is the market, financial agents, and terrorism. The Museum of the Future in India would need to understand how the market works rather then being ignorant of it. Take into consideration its practices, its language of information, of power, of entertainment, when thinking about the programming of the

ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private | 075 museum. Its not something we can ignore anymore. [Applause] Hans Ulrich Obrist: Thank you Sandhini Poddar. Many questions we can address later on in the discussion. You mentioned pioneers such as Krishna Reddy and others, which is interesting as the current interest seems to be in younger contemporary Indian art, and it is important that their work can be seen in a measured way, and as part of a larger, historical context established by previous generations; as Eric Hobsbawm calls the necessary and urgent protest against forgetting. It is with great pleasure to introduce our next speaker, Rakhi Sarkar, Curator and Director of CIMA, the Centre of International Modern Art in Calcutta, India. Rakhi Sarkar was born in Uttar Pradesh and after degrees in Calcutta she went to Port of Spain Trinidad to study International Relations. She has been Chairperson of Citizen Action Forum, part of the Indian Chamber of Commerce, Calcutta, and has implemented many social projects. She then went on to set up Combat, an international substance abusive prevention cell, and has co-coordinated forty voluntary groups and agencies working in the field. In 1993, Rakhi set up CIMA Centre of International Modern Art, where she is the curator and director. In 2003, she started the Art & Heritage Foundation, and also assumed trusteeship over Kolkata Museum of Modern Art. In the context of this conversation a new and becoming institution for contemporary art in India too. Big welcome to Rakhi Sarkar Rakhi Sarkar: It is lovely being here in such a beautiful city. I am excited to talk to you about our next ambitious project. We need your blessings; we need your good wishes and also your participation. I will give you just some context of the art situation and the historical time frame we have in India. The vision of the future is often prompted by the kind of present we live in. In this process the past may prove an asset or a burden. It depends on how we perceive our past and what we chose to grow from it.

076 | ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private In India, the preservation of past has been assured through the process of memory and a long history of story-telling and the oral tradition. That was one reason you never found museums in India. We never felt the need for museums in India nor did we feel the need to preserve elements of the phenomenological world. It was not done and it is still not done in all our aspects of life. We do not preserve anything. It was only during the British period that the need of museums was an official matter, after the establishment of the archeological survey of India in the early nineteenth century. The first institution of its kind, the Indian Museum, was based in Calcutta, initially established in 1814 and fully installed by 1875, to essentially house and display works of antiquity. The British, throughout the eighteenth, and the nineteenth century, set up an agenda of systematically documenting the flora, fauna, human mythology, and topographical aspects of the Indian sub-continent. Especially for this purpose art schools were initially set up in Calcutta, Mumbai and Chennai in the mid nineteenth century. These institutions, built on the South Kensington model of London, instructed students in the methods of naturalistic painting and printing that were needed for documenting their surroundings. There was no emphasis what so ever on creative expression. The art institutions gradually evolved towards a more secular, creative curriculum towards the end of the nineteenth century and at the beginning of the twentieth century. Modernism in Indian visual art was initiated in the first decade of the twentieth century. At the turn of the nineteenth century, we find the emergence of Abanindranath Tagore, nephew of Rabindranath Tagore, who was Noble Laureate of Literature. Abanindranath played a pivotal role in shaping twentieth century Indian art. Abanindranath had his initial art training with a western artist. He grew up in the Tagore family, which was at the intellectual forefront of nineteenth century Bengal and one of the most affluent families. He was an extremely sensitive and a talented writer, besides being highly erudite. He needed something more profound and lasting to make his art meaningful and was systematically experimenting towards evolving a new idealistic vision. This was the first time that we encountered a twentieth century modernist concern, where thoughts, feelings, technique and form fused seamlessly to create a lasting visual rendering. The artistic underpinning of twentieth century modern art itself is essential. Abanindranath soon met Count Okakura, a renowned artist and cultural figure of the Japanese aristocracy in 1903 in Calcutta. Later, Okakura sent two Japanese artists, Yokoyama Taikan and Hishida Shunso to India and they worked in Abanindranaths studio in Calcutta. Abanindranath learned the need of sentiment in art from them, and also mastered the Japanese wash technique. With the arrival of these two artists Abanindranaths learning process reached completion. In 1905 he used all the techniques he had mastered to create the famous Bharat Mata, which virtually launched the Bengal School movement. Bharat Mata more or less coincided with the unpopular division of 1905 of Bengal, the region where Calcutta is situated. Artists of the time gradually turned away from the west and focused on pan-Asian and Indian concerns. The modernist movement which was initially sparked by nationalist sentiments, gradually evolved to subsequent socio-political and cultural concerns, culminating in a forceful modernist assertion between 1943 and 1947. The Calcutta Group emerged in 1943, formed as a direct consequence of the man-made famine in 1943 and Gandhis Quit India movement in 1942. The Mumbai based Progressive Artists Group emerged in 1947 following the independence of India. These movements were very much euro-centric in inspiration. In spite of nearly fifty years of botanist preoccupations, the country prior to independence in 1947 did not have a single museum of modern art. The National Gallery of Modern Art in Delhi was founded by Jawaharlal Nehru in 1954 in order to rejuvenate and fulfill the creative aspirations of free Indians. It took another forty years to get a second NGMA in Mumbai and the third center of NGMA has just about started in Bangalore. Sadly, Calcutta, which was the spearhead of Modernism in India, does not have a museum of modern art, even to this day. It was against this simmering inadequacy that the local government of West Bengal, of which Calcutta is the capital, undertook as a major project; the Calcutta Museum of Modern Art. The CaMoMA, is a museum that was essentially designed for the twenty first century; a century, which will experience a deepening of the global process, a greater equity of social distribution, and unraveling of new histories of culture. What are the issues of identity we are facing? Are we heading towards homogenization, or is it possible to provide the individual space within a wider, more expansive context? Should museums get involved in international biennials and triennials, to affect a degree of criticality and historical context? These are some of the concerns that museums will need to address in order to function and survive in the present century. How can we re-invent the function of a museum in this context? It is this redefinition of an otherwise localized, parochial, monoculture, mono-disciplinarian institution that has suddenly become imperative. Right from its inception the following ideas defined the CaMoMA; The museum will have to exist as an autonomous body with one time government help, but it has to exist by itself in order to be impartial and in order to get out of direct or indirect political maneuvering. The museum will exhibit objects of visual art ranging from the nineteenth century to present times. The institute will have to provide a significant platform for inter-cultural dialogue, to provide an adequate scope for multi-disciplinary interaction, to evolve as a center of knowledge, not only for India and Asia, but for the world. To provide scope, to discover, study and unravel the fascinating process of cultural overlapping.

ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private | 077 The institute is envisioned on a self-viable financial model to avoid curatorial compromise and act as a bridge between knowledge and communication. CaMoMA has been envisaged as a major cultural hub and its preoccupations and interests will engage the world. As such, four distinct divisions have been planned - National Galleries, the Academic Faculty, Far Eastern Galleries, and Western Galleries. Let us consider the first essential element, the National Galleries. This section will engage with the Indian National Arena and work hand in hand with about fifteen provincial museums based in and around Calcutta and all major national and private museums scattered around Indian. The academic division will play a pivotal role of a resource centre. This division will be required to interact with major academic institutions and faculties across the country and around the world, and run courses in art history, art management, conservation, restoration, authentication, and museology. This will also be an earning point for the museum. Research and training of personnel will be a major concern, high on its agenda. This will fulfill two essential purposes: it will provide the knowledge base of the museum and help to develop trained personal; something India lacks hopelessly at the present. The Far Eastern and the Western Galleries will form the next two important axis of the museum. Like with the National Galleries we hope to establish contacts with important museums of the east and west to formulate plans and programs on far eastern and western art respectively, on an ongoing basis. Initially, the museum will not have its own collection. Exhibitions will be curated and activities will be planned hand-in-hand with regional, national and private institutions. Many museums across Europe, Asia, and the Americas have significant Oriental collections which include Indian art from different periods. CaMoMA hopes to network and engage with these institutions on an on-going basis. Collections will

078 | ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private gradually be enriched by special endowments, long term loans, and donations. Local funding from the government of Bengal and the municipality of Calcutta and the central government of India, will cover all infrastructural costs, including the purchase of ten acres of land in Calcutta. Substantial endowments will be created from donations by the private sector to fund the minimal annual programs. The budgets is about one hundred fifty million U.S.$. CaMoMA has been designed to function as a modern business. There will be several earning points by way of hotels, shops, restaurants, auditoriums, amphitheatres and academy courses. The modules have been planned in association with McKenzie and Company. Let me clarify one thing, there will be absolutely no compromise on the aesthetics and the curatorial aspect. Everything will be done, more or less, with this in mind. Significant spaces have also been planned for multidisciplinary interactions, and this will form a very important part of the museums program. Thus, cinema, music, performing art, photography, design, architecture, will be featured regularly in the museum. Inter-cultural dialogue and civilization studies will also be fundamental parts of the curriculum. It is crucial that from the onset, the agenda of the museum is scrupulously established and the CaMoMA remains geared towards an expansive dialogue, which reaches out to the world. What can we derive from our ancient sub continental tradition, and will it prove to be more of an asset, than a burden? Perhaps the essence of a great civilization can be expressed, as it was so succinctly by one of Indias notable moderns: expansion is life and contraction is death he surmised. Let us engage in that expansive dialogue which will ultimately open all our doors and windows. Instead of limiting globalization to materialistic constrains of the twenty-first century; let us try to provide a bolder, and wider scope to the idea of a Museum of the Future. Hopefully, that is what CaMoMA will be all about. Thank you so much. Julia Peyton-Jones: Thank you very much for mapping out the context of the Indian museum and the history in terms of the re-invention of the museum for the twenty-first century. It is a great pleasure to introduce to this discussion some important points made by Ranjit Hoskote, who unfortunately cannot be here today. Instead he sent a paper for us to read, which Hans Ulrich and I will share. Ranjit is a poet, cultural theorist, and independent curator based in Bombay, India. He is the author of thirteen books. These include five studies on art and artist, Pilgrim, Exile, Sorcerer: The Painterly Evolution of Jehangir Sabavala, and the The Complicit Observer: The Art of Sudhir Patwardhan; The Crucible of Painting, as well as Baiju Parthan: A Users Manual and The Dancer on the Horse: The Art of Iranna GR. Hoscott has curated fourteen exhibitions of Indian and Asian art, both in India and overseas. His paper is entitled Preliminaries Towards a Manifesto, and was written especially for this discussion today. (Please see at the end of these transcripts) He speaks of the museum as a repository of cultural achievements and failures that has the un-enviable task of facing in three directions at the same time. It looks to the past, retrieving conceptual impulses as well as the residues of material culture. It must look, also, to the future, indicating directions that may be pursued and subjects that may be investigated. Hans Ulrich Obrist: Now the paper is a rather long text for which we thank Ranjit Hoskote very much. We made photocopies for all of you. I would propose that we start with the questions as we have only half an hour left. I would just like to read the conclusion of the text. It offers three broad proposals as underpinnings for the Museum of the Future in India. Ranjit says, that first the Museum of the Future must be interdisciplinary in the most exact sense. Second, he says, that the Museum of the Future should also be multi disciplinary in its interests, and third, last but not least, most crucially, the museum must be seen as a system of discursive occasions. These are the three main ideas of Ranjits paper. Julia and I will now ask a few questions and we will then open it to the floor for your questions. Julia will start. Julie Peyton-Jones: Savita, following your extremely impressive presentations I would like to ask you, what you think will be the future for Indian culture in all art forms, and particularly the visual arts. What particular challenges does India face in this respect? Savita Apte: I dont think the future really depends on whether we have a museum or not. The fact of having a museum or not is not relevant to the future of any of the arts in India. It hasnt been for centuries as Rakhi pointed out, we have a tradition of oral communication. We also have a tradition of ritualistic practice and its through that ritualistic practice that ideas and notions get passed down from generation to generation. In that respect, I dont think whether we have a museum or not is going to make any difference to the visual culture. However, I do think one of the biggest differences of the twenty-first century is the here and now of access, both to information as well as information technology from all over the world. This is something that weve never had an option for before, and maybe that will change the visual culture. Julia Peyton-Jones: Are there any other views? Peter Nagy: If we look at the realm of popular culture, rather then that of high culture, we can see that theres been waves of Indian culture moving out from India and becoming a great popular success, as it was in literature, for example, in the nineties. If you look at simple things like food, fashion and musical influences, I think that the popularity or the interest we are seeing in the visual arts is part of this continuum. India is a wonderfully elastic sponge, and the post-modern construction of India has existed for hundreds of

ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private | 079 years already. The acceptance of many different influences is inherent to the culture. If we think of something like Mogul art, which in many ways is the clich of an image of visual culture we have from India, it is in fact an extremely complicated and hybrid form of culture in its own right. While being in India in the nineties, Ive seen it open up. I caught the very tail end of the old India when there were still just two kinds of cars on the road and two public, very boring, government TV stations. Ive seen the explosion of media and of course that theres a lot of bemoaning of this. Now we have CNN and MTV and all those things, but at the same time, theres been a wonderful explosion of regional channels. Now you go through a hundred and twenty channels, and all the regions are represented with more then one channel within India. I recently read a quote by Francesco Clemente, who is, as you know, somebody whos been deeply involved in India since the late sixties. He has a very long relationship with India and he has seen the change. A lot of people were moaning and groaning about the change and about the loss of spirituality. Clemente actually said that it is even more interesting, because it is even more complicated now. You have all the complexities of India that were there already, and in some ways those are amplified, but you also have all this international influence coming in. Clemente says, theres a guru he goes to see in Bombay that hes been going to since the early eighties. In the early eighties youd go to see this guy, and it was a very predictable group of high caste Indians from different parts of the country coming to see this man for an audience. Now, he says, its like youre part of a Star Trek movie; theres a physicist from Switzerland, theres a teacher from Santa Fe, there are of course some Indians. He says, and I agree with him, that life in India is becoming increasingly complicated and increasingly exciting. Its been a volatile period, but it produces a lot of good culture. I think now things are just going to get better and better and more meaningful to the rest of the world.

080 | ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private Hans Ulrich Obrist: After that very optimistic view I thought it could be interesting to hear from you a little bit how a non-western museum in India could work, given the possibility of developing a different relationship to the object? Rakhi Sarkar: The ritualistic performance art is a genre which we see all the time, because we perform it all the time, but I think the world doesnt know about it. It takes about two months for the priest to create this gigantic idol of the goddess Durga. When goddess Durga is worshipped through a course of days and you can see the entire occasion and process evolve as a piece of art. It involves the artist, it involves a whole lot of other people, who partake in this occasion and it is grand performance art. This is something we normally would not have an occasion to see. Museums in India could house some of these performance arts that happen. Recently, the British Museum had the entire Puja. That is a form of art, which the world is not really seeing. I think a lot of that will happen in our museums and I think a lot will happen from the grass root. As you were saying Peter, the grass root level and talent of India is coming out, with all the media and with all this freedom. palimpsest, on multiplicity, on simultaneous happenings, so how do you represent the region? How do you represent artists from the region? How do you represent objects from the region? We have not preserved culture. This could be for whatever reason, whether it is because of our oral histories or just the malaise towards culture. Its something thats been denigrated in our hierarchy of appreciation of life in India. Because of that, objects in India have suffered and you had artists who had very little access to find materials. A lot of the objects from the fifties and the sixties have the paint flaking off the canvases. There are many issues in terms of the actual physical structure of the object; what remains at the end of the day and how you bring this into an international context. Thats a much more complex way of representing art from this region or artists who live in the Diaspora. To limit it to India I think would be a problem. At the moment, we have the task of being Asian art curators, and maybe after a while, we wont need that. Well just be curators at institutions abroad, but at the moment, its a way of trying to bring attention to this region of the world that a lot of people are interested in. But, how do you represent the material culture of a country in a western art museum? I think this is a subject thats really important to whatever this Museum of the Future is. it is also this global world that we live in, that makes people look at how they can help in different ways. Not everybody needs to do the same thing. It depends on your personal interest, if it is the art world, then you get involved in whatever aspect of that it might be, whether its dance or music or the visual arts. For the previous generation, it was about developing India or building a better and more secure life. And now that financially a lot of people do feel secure, it is about giving back to the society. Peter Nagy: To be fair, there was a tradition of corporate sponsorship for traditional art forms, like classical music, traditional dance. Also, remember, contemporary art is, by nature, intimidating. Those of us involved with it make it that way. We embrace that intimidation factor. We find that interesting, and intimidation is actually a vital aspect of it, but I think its reasonable to expect that this corporate sector is going to slowly come in. Anupam, you are a great example because you have been able to take yourself from the private into the public foundation and this came from your experience of seeing and studying institutions internationally. Anupam Poddar: Absolutely, there are things we learn from the west that we do apply to India. And there are also things which grow organically from within. So, it is a mix of the two. There are some things that one would like to learn, for example about how to run things professionally and not make the same mistakes again and again. Were learning and growing not just because of our foundation, but also because of CaMoMA. CaMoMA is going to be funded by corporate donations too. And its a huge step. Other people will have to step up too, and get more involved. I think once people see a few things happening within India, hopefully more and more people will get encouraged. Collectors that have these collections will give them to an institution which exists and is run by the government, if theyre not able to set up their own institution. For lack of funds or space

ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private | 081 or whatever it might be, what are the government run institutions going to do with the work? Its all going to sit there. Hans Ulrich Obrist: Im sure many of you have questions for our speakers, as often with conferences, the coffee breaks are essential. What I do suggest is that you can now individually ask all your questions to the speakers in a more informal way. I would like to thank all of you and Id like to thank our extraordinary speakers, thank you all very much.

Preliminaries towards a manifesto Statement for | The Museum of the Future in India (Art Basel Miami) Ranjit Hoskote I: The museum, as a repository of cultural achievements and failures, has the unenviable task of facing in three directions at the same time. It must look to the past, retrieving conceptual impulses as well as the residues of material culture. It must look, also, to the future, indicating directions that may be pursued and subjects that may be investigated. And perhaps most crucially, it must invite its visitors to share an orientation towards the complex present: an orientation that combines amplitude of context, generosity of understanding towards intention, criticality of response towards execution, empathy towards the human dramas at the core of history. What significance can a museum hold in a society like India, which is now schismatically divided by the allegiance of its constituent groups to different pasts, their investment in divergent futures? Since we are speaking here in the context of contemporary art, I must clarify that I do not view the museum of art as an institution situated in the imagined special autonomous zone of the art world. Rather, I see it as one of various kinds of institutions dedicated to the research, archiving

Hans Ulrich-Obrist: Thank you. Does anybody else want to comment on the idea of objects, nonobjects, and avatars? Julia Peyton-Jones: As well as focusing on attention, there is also the need for financial support. Sandhini Poddar: Its a difficult subject; we have Is there any history of donors supporting culture performance art in India and it is very much part in India? And also, are there benefits? Should of visual culture and I think the Museum of the people step forward to in this sense? Future would need to look at visual culture as such, rather then divisions between high and low, or Anupam Poddar: One of the things that are changcrafts and fine arts. But it is very easy to become ing because of the economic boom, is that there is exotic and we have to be careful. I had to present more money, and because there is more money, south Asia at the Guggenheim, it was something people are trying to use the money for a better that they asked me to do in the first six hours. Ive cause. While some of it will go to education, lets been thinking about it for the last nine months. say, part of it will come to the arts. There are no tax You could do a large survey exhibition, but Indias benefits. The government does not necessarily sense of time is not chronological. It is cyclical. It make it easy or help in any way to encourage philis multi-vocal. It is something thats based on the anthropic giving. But things are changing, I think

082 | ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private and display of cultural practices which may range from painting to warfare, design to science, digital culture to boat-building. To the extent that all cultural manifestations are subject to the pull of contestation and the push of redefinition, I believe that the museum is a living site of competing discourses not a mausoleum of superseded ideas and discarded afterthoughts. In such a situation, a future museum for contemporary art in India as it is currently imagined and hoped for by many participants in the Indian art world begins to take on the contours of an impossibility. It would be tragic if such a museum were to be merely an assemblage of art-works in themselves admittedly brilliant, idiosyncratic, edgy and volatile without the provision of a framing context or contexts, without, that is to say, any thought of reception beyond a small circle of initiates. In that case, it would partake of the same general failure of contemporary art in India as a cultural practice that retreats from a possible viewership instead of engaging with it. Especially that variety of contemporary art in India which claims to be interactive, provocative, and public in its address (with a few brave and honourable exceptions), yet unfolds in the safety of a gallery space or the protected environment of designated NGO activity. As utopians, we know that the future is the site of redemption where the lacunae and absences of the present could be filled with meaning; as practical people, however, we know, as Marx phrased it in his Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon, that men make history, but they do not make it just as they please, but under circumstances given over from the past the burden of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living. But if we are to wake up from the present, we must first recognise it as a nightmare, and gauge its true dimensions. The museum of the present in India suffers from a fundamental and terminal malaise, and we will get nowhere unless we examine this malaise in some detail. The mere displacement of public funding by private capital is not the solution; nor will the substitution of the apathetic official keeper by the passionate collector-turned-curator, by itself, do the trick. II: If we are to overcome the impossibility condition for the museum of the future in India, which I have just indicated, we might find it useful to consider the nature of presentation and reception that characterises the museum in India. And what do we learn from scrutinising the nightmare that is the typology of existing museums in India? That these museums are of four major kinds, situated at varying strata of unresponsiveness or incompetence, in a four-tier arrangement that amusingly reflects the now considerably modulated and mutated caste system (my facetiousness in this regard is an expression of anguish, rather than of disdain). At the top of this typology comes the house of wonders, the ajaib ghar: that treasury of impressive culture from past generations, which boasts of antiquities and curiosities. It was first conceived and mobilised as a node of the colonial paradigm of knowledge and power: even as empire extended horizontally in space, the museum secured for empire the inherited time of that captured space, marking it with periodisation and territorialisation. This legacy continues today, and the chronology of the ajaib ghar runs unbroken through two millennia of grand dynastic periods to the mid20th century (after which, at the stroke of the midnight hour, to invoke Nehrus phrase, the house of wonders stopped its clock and India stepped into modernity). Second in the hierarchy, therefore, comes the museum of modern art, infused with the Nehruvian vision of national modernity and its cultural equivalent, the artistic choices of what I have elsewhere designated as Indias national modernism, which claimed artistic autonomy but in fact (although few are prepared to say so bluntly) sailed close to official culture. There is only one institution that embodies this art: the National Gallery of Modern Art. And, in the absence of any alternative repository, it is the only museum-scale record of late colonial and postcolonial Indian art. Its accent is on the first three decades of the Republic, from the 1950s to the 1970s, and its mandate programmes it to be less than receptive to the experimentation, the unpredictability and the ungovernability of the contemporary (it was this realisation, even more than my anxiety about bureaucratic procedures and possible cooption into the official structure, which prompted me to decline the directorship of the Bombay branch of the National Gallery of Modern Art, offered to me earlier this year). Third in the hierarchy comes the museum devoted to a specialist discipline, which is often attached to an agency or institution that manages the discipline in question: thus, the museum of the crafts, or sciences, or aeronautics. With signal exceptions like the National Crafts Museum during the tenure of the anthropologist and art historian Jyotindra Jain, these are ossuaries, repositories that embalm their subjects in banality of representation and reflection. And in fourth position, at the bottom of the typology, are located the various small museums scattered across the country, and which are dedicated to the local history of occupations, neighborhoods or collectors. Typically, these do not extend beyond a nucleus collection that was set up decades ago, and remain in a time warp. All four of these existing levels of museum practice share four features (I proceed, as you see, in a strictly mathematical fashion). First, all four types of museum treat the museum object as a votive fetish (in theory and presentation, of course; their practical handling of their objects is often negligent or even brutal). Second, all of them refuse to bring their objects alive, and insist on the display being held at a distance, rather than encountered as a sustaining and transformative presence at a moment of crisis, in Walter Benjamins sense. Third, all exhibit a systemic inability to relate their practice to other cultural practices in urgent, immediate and productive ways. And fourth, all are marked by an explicit or tacit contempt for the visitors who provide their institutional raison

ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private | 083 detre; they make little provision, beyond the most inadequate educational and outreach programmes, for viewers who wish to understand the workings of culture, for the audience of citizens whose consciousness could be amplified and enriched in magical ways by the museum. Their attitude is precisely that of Sir Humphrey in the 1980s British television comedy, Yes Minister, a bureaucrat who preferred a hospital to remain unused instead of caring for patients, on the grounds that this would save wear and tear on the equipment. III: I would offer three broad proposals, as underpinnings for the museum of the future in India. First: the museum of the future must be interdisciplinary in the most exact sense. That is, it should not be a carnival of mutually incompatible languages of description (the state into which much interdisciplinary activity collapses), but rather, that it should permit its objects to be constituted within various conversations and reflected upon from diverse perspectives. For example, paintings from Indias period of national modernism could be presented to viewers, accompanied by with annotations from visual historians as well as observers from anthropology, literary culture and political economy. Or then, to offer another example, in terms of the history of design in 20thcentury India could relate as a fourfold narrative bringing together designers, historians of technology, cinema scholars, and environmental activists. Conceptual space must be made for rival accounts, and we must abandon the fetishisation of the museum object (and the reification of the discourse thought to be most appropriate or natural to it). The museum object should be presented as a mental experience: a pretext, aperture or clue that can prompt an expansion of consciousness, speaking both to sensuous delight and to intellectual pleasure. Second: that the museum of the future should also be multidisciplinary in its interests. It must open itself to the staging of varied histories distributed across the spectrum of cultural activity, inviting outside specialists when exploring areas

084 | ABC | ABMB07 | Public/Private beyond its internal expertise and holdings; the history of illuminated manuscripts, but also the history of machine tools, or the history of military and civil violence, the history of sculpture-installation, but also the history of interior decoration, and the history of television programming. Third, and for me, most crucially: the museum must be seen as a system of discursive occasions. To that extent, it could even be wholly evacuated of conventional material objects, functioning instead as an architecture of presences conveyed to visitors by monitor screens, projections, textual treatments and virtual-reality environments. Spectrality can sometimes stimulate the imagination and produce a magical immediacy of understanding that the act of viewing an object cannot. The original museum was the Musaion, the Temple of the Muses in the great Library of Alexandria: it was burned down by Christian zealots in the 4th century CE. It was a site of icons and relics that gained its significance from being surrounded by texts and conversations; it was animated by discourse, and that is why it survives as the name of a hope of self-renewal beyond objects and their destruction, seventeen centuries after it was burned down. This is a lesson that we in India would do well to internalise. (Bombay-Seoul, December 2007)

ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art | 091 Art Basel Conversations | Saturday, December 8, 2007 | 10 11.30 h | Art Guest Lounge, Miami Beach Convention Center

TRANSCRIPT | WOMEN IN ART REVOLUTION OR EVOLUTION?


How does being a woman affect your work? Is it right to attribute importance to gender in artistic practice? How are things for women in the art world now and what needs to change? What is the role of Feminism in art today?

SPEAKERS | MARINA ABRAMOVIC VALIE EXPORT SUSAN HILLER CATHERINE MORRIS Moderator | PETER ASPDEN

092 | ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art


Marina Abramovic Artist; New York, USA Marina Abramovic , born in 1946 in Bel grade, Yugoslavia, is one of the seminal artists of our time. During the early 1970s, while attending the Academy of Fine Arts in Belgrade, Abramovic pioneered the use of performance as a visual art form. The body has always been both her subject and medium. Exploring the physical and mental limits of her being, she has withstood pain, exhaustion, and danger in the quest for emotional and spiritual transformation. Abramovic s concern with creating works that ritualize the simple actions of everyday life like lying, sitting, dreaming, and thinking; in effect the manifestation of a unique mental state. As a vital member of the generation of pioneering performance artists that includes Bruce Nauman, Vito Acconci, and Chris Burden, Abramovic created some of the most historic early performance pieces and is the only one still making important durational works. From 1975 until 1988, Abramovic and the German artist Ulay performed together, dealing with relations of duality. After separating in 1988, Abramovic returned to solo performances in 1989. Abramovic has presented her work with performances, sound, photography, video, sculpture, and Transitory Objects for Human and Non Human Use in solo exhibitions at major institutions in the U.S. and Europe. Her work has also been included in many large-scale international exhibitions including the Venice Biennale (1976 and 1997; awarded the Global Lion for Best Artist in 1997 for Balkan Baroque, video installation/performance piece) and Documenta VI, VII and IX, Kassel, Germany (1977, 1982 and 1992). In 1995, Abramovic s exhibition Objects Perfor mance Video Sound traveled to the Museum of Modern Art, Oxford, the Irish Museum of Modern Art, Dublin, and the Fruitmarket Gallery, Edinburgh. In 1998, the exhibition Artist Body Public Body toured extensively including stops at Kunstmuseum and Grosse Halle, Bern and La Galleria, Valencia. In 2000, a large solo show was held at the Kunstverein in Hannover. In 2002, she participated in the Berlin-Moscow exhibition, which opened at the Martin-Gropius-Bau in Berlin and finished its tour in 2004 at the State Historical Museum, Moscow. In 2004, Abramovic exhibited at the Whit ney Biennale in New York and had a significant solo show, The Star, at the Maruame Museum of Contemporary Art and the Kumamoto Museum of Contemporary Art, Japan. In 2005, Abramovic presented Balkan Erotic Epic at the Pirelli Foundation in Milan, Italy and at Sean Kelly Gallery, New York. That same year, she held a series of performances called Seven Easy Pieces at the Guggenheim Museum in New York. Upcoming exhibitions include a major retrospective at the Kunst und Ausstellunghalle der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Bonn. VALIE EXPORT Media artist, performance artist, filmmaker; Vienna, Austria VALIE EXPORTs artistic work comprises: video environments, digital photography, installation, body performances, feature films, experimental films, documentaries, Expanded Cinema, conceptual photography, body-material interactions, Persona Performances, laser installations, objects, sculptures, texts on contemporary art history and Feminism. 2007: La Biennale di Venezia, 52nd International Art Exhibition, Venice, Italy; La Biennale di Venezia, Corderie dell Arsenale, VALIE EXPORT: the voice as performance, act and body ... turbulences of breath score the banks of my vocal chord ... (Performance);documenta 12, Kassel, Germany; NCCA National Centre for Contemporary Art, Moskau, Ekaterina Cultural Foundation, Mosow, Russia; 2nd Moscow Biennale of Contemporary Arts, Moscow, Russia; Charim Galerie, VALIE EXPORT, Vienna, Austria; Klemens Gasser & Tanja Grunert, VALIE EXPORT: Dead People Don't Scream, New York, USA Susan Hiller Artist; London, UK; Berlin, Germany With a distinguished career of more than 30 years, Susan Hiller has drawn upon sources as diverse as dreams, postcards, Punch & Judy shows, archives, horror movies, UFO sightings and narratives of near death experiences to make powerful and seductive works out of ephemeral, sometimes seemingly unimportant items, works that do not just illustrate or catalogue but instead involve the audience as witnesses to the lacunae and contradictions in our collective cultural life. Susan Hiller graduated from Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts in 1961 and went on to postgraduate study at Tulane University in New Orleans, with a National Science Foundation fellowship in anthropology. While conducting fieldwork in Mexico, Guatemala and Belize, she became uncomfortable with academic anthropologys adherence to scientific claims of objectivity and decided to become an artist. Hillers subsequent work has been recognized by midcareer retrospectives at Londons Institute of Contemporary Art (1986) and Tate Gallery, Liverpool (1996); major solo exhibitions and monographs; inclusion in significant international group exhibitions and collections; and by awards such as the Guggenheim fellowship (1998) and DAAD residency (2002). Her work is widely acknowledged to be an important influence on younger British artists. For additional information, please consult www.susanhiller.org

ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art | 093


Catherine Morris Writer, Curator; New York, USA Catherine Morris is New York based independent curator and Adjunct Curator of Contemporary Art at the Philbrook Museum of Art, Tulsa, Okalahoma. Focusing her independent work on alternative practices of the 1960s and 70s, Morriss projects include: Decoys, Complexes and Triggers: Feminism and Land Art in the 1970s, Sculpture Center, Long Island City, New York, 2008); 9 Evenings Reconsidered: Art, Theatre, and Engineering, 1966 (originating venue: MIT List Visual Arts Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts 2006); Gloria: Another Look At Feminist Art in the 1970s (originating venue: White Columns, New York, 2002, co-curated with Ingrid Schaffner); Fort Greene, Brooklyn, A Social and Architectural History of a Neighborhood (A:D/B Project Space, Brooklyn 2002); Food(originating venue: White Columns, New York, 1998) and Confrontations: The Guerrilla Art Action Group, 1969 1976(Printed Matter at DIA, New York 1997, co-curated with Steven Harvey). At the Philbrook Museum, Morris has worked on projects with Josiah McEleheny, Cameron Martin and Lucy Gunning. Morris is a 2004 recipient of a Penny McCall Foundation Grant for Independent Curating and Writing. Peter Aspden Arts Writer, Financial Times; London, UK Peter Aspden is the Financial Times arts writer, having previously been its arts editor for five years. He joined the paper in 1994, as deputy books and arts editor and a general feature writer on Weekend FT. He has written on numerous subjects, including travel, religion, politics, history, most art forms and sport: he covered the Olympic Games in Atlanta in 1996, and the World Cup in France in 1998. He was born in London in 1958, but spent much of his childhood in Greece, where his mother was born. He was educated at St Edmund Hall, Oxford, where he read Philosophy, Politics and Economics, before going into journalism. He joined the Times Higher Education Supplement in 1985, where he went on to become deputy editor. He has been writing the Revolver column, a weekly commentary on contemporary culture, since January 2004. The name of the column comes from a famous quote attributed to Hermann Goering Whenever I hear the word culture, I reach for my revolver as well as being the name of the greatest (Beatles) pop album of all time.

094 | ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art Welcome | Maria Finders We would like to welcome Marina Abramovic , Susan Hiller, Catherine Morris, and VALIE EXPORT with us today. We will have an interactive conversation with presentations and we will invite everybody on the floor to participate in the discussion in order to create something historic. Thank you very much. Introduction | Peter Aspden Thank you, Maria. Thank you all for coming. We met about three quarters of an hour ago for a coffee and had an extremely lively discussion next door. If the following discussion will be anything like that, Im sure well come away enlightened. I started thinking about this subject in terms of what it would have been like if we had this discussion thirty or forty years ago. I think, in many ways, it would have been a more straight-forward discussion. We would have probably addressed the theme differently, maybe with Linda Nochlins famous essay: Why have there been no great women artists? We would have addressed it as an art historical thesis. We would have had a look at why there have been centuries of neglect and why people have had to content themselves writing PHDs about Artemisia Gentileschi etcetera. We were in the middle of the first and most radical and powerful wave of Feminism and it would have been very easy to put the debate in those terms. The idea of Feminism in art is part of a broader political thing. As a consequence it is probably easier to talk about art when it is such a specific part of a broader political movement. Of course there is the counter argument that art is never at its best when it is part of a broad social and political movement, and many people did make that point at the time. We are now thirty, forty years ahead and the world is a more complicated and more multilayered place. There have been tremendous advances. But still one would have to make a very bold claim to say that the fights of Feminism are won, much less that they are over. But there are demonstrably more women in art there are more female artists, there are more femle curators, there are more women in galleries and museums, and even in great blockbuster shows. My office at the Financial Times is next to Tate Modern, there are two fantastic exhibitions at the moment: Louise Bourgeois wonderful retrospective and Doris Salcedos Shibboleth, the famous crack, which interferes with the fabric of the building for the first time. It is a fantastic work and I recommend anyone to see it. The idea of Feminism in art becomes a more subtle and complicated and difficult one. I just read a review of the exhibition WACK! Art and the Feminist Revolution at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles. The critic defined Feminism in art like this: Freedom to challenge, receive truths, to exchange passivity for activism, to find solidarity and diversity, to adopt ambiguity and ambivalence as social and aesthetic strategies. That clearly is a much more fluid and much more nebulous idea of Feminism in art. It does prompt the question: Does it make sense to talk about Feminism in art at all? Or, as Marina said: Is this a moribund discussion and is it about time we left it behind? The question: Is Feminism pass? is often raised. But it is also raised for important social movements like Marxism and Psychoanalysis and, most alarmingly of all it is raised for Evolution as well. One of the answers is to have a look at the work itself. To look at the work that is produced now. I am really delighted that we have three practicing artists here, who can talk about their work and about the extent to which it is informed, in any way, by the issue of gender or sexuality. Those, of course, are two different and distinct things. It may be that the answer to that is no, and that there is no point in talking about Feminism in that context and that the work should just stand on its own. It would be indeed almost offensive to put the baggage of Feminism on to this work at all. That is certainly a view. There is a kind of gentler Feminism at work. For example The Guerilla Girls are talking in their manifesto famously of: fighting discrimination with fact, humor and fake fur. That is one direction and another one is political in areas like the Middle East with a very active artistic scene and especially active women such as Shirin Neshat, Mona Hatoum and many more in that scene. They address political concerns, but if they were men, they would be called political artists. Because they are women and because the

ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art | 095 struggle of women in those countries is part of a broader struggle, their work tends to be called Feminist too. Is that a helpful label, or is it an irrelevant distraction? That is going to become a more and more important issue as non-western countries become culturally more important, as we already can see with India and China. That is a volley of questions and I hope we will get some answers. We agreed that VALIE EXPORT will talk first and show some slides.

096 | ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art In Conversations | Marina Abramovic VALIE EXPORT Susan Hiller Catherine Morris Moderator | Peter Aspden VALIE EXPORT: First of all, I wanted to thank you for the invitation. It is a pleasure and an honor to speak about my art and think about Feminism here today. I am mainly concerned with the examination and transformation of media realities and I am concerned with how reality can be represented in media. Further more I am concerned with the influences of media on the perception of reality and how, by changing the media, every subjects perception of reality can be altered. A very important term and expression is identity, as well as the expression Feminism and what Feminism means. Identity can mean many things: political, cultural, or gender identity. My work is concerned with a variety of different degrees of identity. The triangle of my work defines itself by the actual and real object, by the image of the object and by the apparatus that produces this image of the object. So there are different artistic strategies to achieve and explore identity from within different media. Information can be gathered from the web for instance, especially created software, designed and allowed to transform information then creates a whole range of specific artistic expressions and the transformation shows us the identity of the medium. Few images have changed as rapidly and as fundamentally as gender images in the last few years. The typical gender image in our culture follows the ordinary binary code: yes and no, man and women, good and bad, up and down, and so on. Especially feminist theory, as well as Marxism (which at the same time destroyed a lot) tried for a long time to disrupt the binary code of our society. The transformation of the binary gender code is closely linked to the transformations of media and their entire influence on the relation between the individual and society. Basically it is all about transformation. As I said before, the term identity is extremely important for me. When I was young it was my aim to achieve a non-identity and I tried extremely hard not to have an identity. Therefore it was an important step to change my name into a brand. I am going to show an excerpt of a video where I explore and refer to the origins of the voice. I do believe that the voice is the trace of the body in language. Initially the voice is not visible. Then the voice has a brief brush with physical reality as air passes through the epiglottis and the vocal chords and finally gets amplified through the hollows of your mouth. With our neural network we create psychological, cultural and social connections; we create our thinking, our psyche, and our consciousness. The sequence is voice, language, and then speech. I quote Judith Butler: one never speaks in ones own language, but we all speak with our own voice. I had a laryngoscope inserted through my nose, observing the actual moving of the vocal chords, which is not meant for our eyes, but here one can see the brief moment where the thought gets physically translated into voice and a part of the process is made visible. The reality of producing speech is real; however, it is the use of that special medium that makes it visible to us for the first time. That may be a media record of the voice for the archive of humanity, the voice as a metaphor; the voice as reality; the voice as identity, and a sign we can recognize. (Video by VALIE EXPORT Excerpt of larynx-glottis) Peter Aspden: Thank you. Our next speaker is Susan Hiller. Susan Hiller: First of all, I would like to thank the organizers for inviting me to be on this panel today. Miami is my hometown but I hardly ever come here, so this is extremely strange for me. But really strange is the retrospective nature of the questions that were addressing in the context of the other artists on the panel. Who, as you probably all know, have contributed so significantly to altering the situation between what was then and what is now. How we can discuss this topic at this moment seems to be problematic. VALIE EXPORTs performance, the video we just saw, goes back to one of the initial, critical issues in Feminism. In fact the starting point in Feminism in a sense is the voice, the speech, the utterance of the body, which is female. And because of its female-ness, it is constructed in a certain social way. The whole question of speech - who talks and who listens to whom when they talk and what they talk about, could be said to be one of the crucial issues. That formed all of us in the way we work. When VALIE EXPORT was giving her presentation, I was thinking of what Peter said when he was referring to the WACK! exhibition, which is currently touring. I think we all have early works, which show the struggle in that exhibition. Although some people feel as it has been resolved, in fact the search to find an appropriate way of saying things which previously have not been said, continues. I cant emphasis enough the invisibility of certain subject matters, of certain opinions, of certain points of view, the absolute invisibility of those things in culture is partially what we need to talk about if were talking about the relationship of Feminism to art practice. It seems to come in waves. The women artist of the sixties and seventies were certainly not the first women in the arts to address those points, but previous generations had been submerged and it appears to be a continuing process. When I think back to the agitations and debates of that period, it is actually remarkable that any of us survived as artists. Although art practices may be informed by rhetoric, by theory, and by intellectual debate, any artist who attempts to base their practice on theories of other people, is in fact not producing art in my view, but just an illustration, which is something quite different. We are all survivors of what was both, a challenging and a difficult starting point. VALIE EXPORT and a few other women were involved in an early exhibition of women artists, which was called Kunst mit Eigen-Sinn, which I think translates as Art Was Something Different,

ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art | 097 stubborn art. It was a very big international exhibition. It would be quite interesting for someone to compare that with the WACK! exhibition. I dont know if that has been done. It was a gathering of women artists from all over the world, and the debates were very passionate. I remember an early work of Marina from the same period, which dealt with prostitution. Role-exchange was a kind of ironic and yet deeply serious and disturbing comparison between the role of the artist and that of a prostitute. That sort of thing had never been visible in art before either. To try to talk about these things now seem to have a futility, because they have all become currency in the art world. These things have been taken up by younger artists, taken up by male artists, without any of the sense of disturbance or struggle that was necessary at the beginning, in order to do this kind of work. Many wonderfully talented women artists, whose careers may have started in the seventies, have simply disappeared, as it has always been the case with women artists. The reason they have disappeared may be because the struggle to continue has simply been too painful and too difficult in terms of personal cost. I want to talk about a little bit about what Peter mentioned; that the situation in the art world has changed. It has and it hasnt changed. Recently I have been invited to be in several exhibitions in which I am the only woman, so nothing has changed in that sense. It is ridiculous. We are back, in some ways, where we always were. Why is the category of women so difficult to handle? When there are a number of women in an exhibition, it usually comes about because someone says: Oh, there arent any women. We better put some women in! That is something that needs to be considered. It all comes back to a dualism, which I wouldnt construct exactly the way VALIE EXPORT did. Some of you might want to have a look at a paper by some anthropologists; Sherry Ortner being one of them. It was written in the seventies, and the

098 | ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art paper was called Is Male to Female as Nature is to Culture? Which implied that women are always tainted by nature, the body, menstruation, childbirth, etcetera, etcetera. In every cultural context it has a negative effect in terms of respecting the cultural productions of women, for instance ceramics. If ceramics are done by men, lets say in China and Japan, it is considered an art form. If it is done by women as, lets say in the southwest, Native American tradition here in this country, it is considered craft. This kind of thing has not changed at all. There is more that hasnt changed: it is the idea about something being done first. If a woman is the initiator of a practice, it is either ridiculous or bad art. If it is done later by a man, it is subversive or ironic. I dont want to be negative, because I think things have moved on tremendously, things have opened up in terms of the subject matter, in terms of the medium. There are a number of forms that women artists felt they absolutely had to adopt in order to make themselves heard and to make themselves visible. Like using video instead of film, using the body in performance in a particular way, or using the abject and the discarded and the second rate, like embroidery or bodily excruciations, or various other things that were done first by women. These have become common currency in the art world. It is true that things have changed, but I wonder whether the basic dilemma of how we are represented in culture has actually shifted that much. What positive things can I say here? On the basis of all this negativity I developed my art practice and so did the other artists on this panel. We decided to take negative internalizations and turn them into positive expressions. That is the most radical contribution that women in the arts have made. It is still a problem for young women artists to take their internalizations and turn them into art, rather then taking the cultural representations of themselves and turning that into art. These are two very different approaches to art practice. Difficulties and struggles are the only way to push yourself forward as an artist. If you really want to make work that is significant and substantial and hopefully long lasting, you have to follow your own inner voices. They may be full of ambiguity and contradiction, but may, in fact, lead you down a road which will enable you to continue in art. Peter Aspden: Thank you. Next is Catherine Morris who curates shows, which address many of the themes that we have talked about so far Catherine Morris: I am an independent curator, and I am also a curator for a museum in Oklahoma. I am based in New York and it is a pleasure to be here with this very distinguished panel. As an independent curator who has an interest in alternative practices of the sixties and seventies, I have found that most of the exhibitions I have curated and are of interest to me are usually in response to a historical moment that seems to respond to a current moment. For example, I did an exhibition on a group of artists from the late sixties called GAAG, Guerilla Art Action Group, that addressed a political content and was intended to have consequences beyond simply art making practices. Following that, I did an exhibition about the emergence of Soho, based on a restaurant called Food that was started by Gordon Matta-Clark and several other artists, a magazine called Avalanche and an alternative space called One Twelve Green Street. My interest in that exhibition was to try and point out the difference between the instigating factors that contributed to Soho in the early and mid seventies, opposed to the emergence of Chelsea, which was happening at that time and was very much a market driven occurrence, rather then an artist driven occurrence. Around that time, I began to have a series of conversations with my colleague Ingrid Schaffner. Ingrid and I grew up in the generation of post nineteen-seventies, but we are also at an age now with emerging artists a generation behind us. We found ourselves in a position very clearly defining ourselves as Feminist. It was not an issue and it was part of our educational process, so it seemed to us. Around 2001 or 2002 several things happened that made us step back and discuss our assumption that any woman born in the second half of the twentieth century would naturally call herself a Feminist. Specifically one article in the New York Times, that basically called a young woman artist from the exhibition Another Girl, Another Planet glamour puss. We had a problem with that, and a problem with this whole mystique that was coming up about these hot young women artists that didnt need to be Feminist. Coinciding with that was a panel discussion, which I must say up front I did not attend, which included Vanessa Beecroft. She famously announced that her mother had been a Feminist and a vegetarian and so she didnt need to do that. Ingrid and I decided that maybe it was a good idea to take a look at some Feminist works of art. We created a show at the alternative space, White Columns in New York. We called the show Gloria, another look at Feminist art of the nineteenseventies. The show addressed a lot of alternative media and hopefully presented to a younger generation the real vibrancy and importance and intellectual strength of this work. We found ourselves in an interesting position as curators. One of the first pieces on our checklist was the famous photograph of Linda Benglis from Artforum with a double-headed dildo. That image was published as an ad in Artforum in response to an earlier ad that had featured a picture of Robert Morris dressed in leather and chains and had been taken by Rosalyn Krauss. Linda Benglis is shown nude from the waist up, with glasses, slicked down and this dildo coming out. We included a lot of documentation in the exhibition, for instance a letter to the editor written by several editors from Artforum, including Rosalyn Krauss, Anette Michaelson, and Benjamin Buchloh, saying that they disavowed this image as anti-feminist. This was interesting for us as it complicates the issue and put Ingrid and me in a difficult position as we were responding to Vanessa Beecroft in same way. Are we disavowing the same thing as these illustrious intellectuals from the art world were, thirty years before us?

ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art | 099 I dont think we were. But it was an interesting and active position for a curator: to have an opportunity to be in a cultural, political, and social position having something thrown back at you. Immediately after Gloria, Loren Ross, who was then director of White Columns, and I curated another exhibition called Regarding Gloria, where we made an open call for emerging artists, people who had not shown before, to respond to Gloria. We got over six hundred submissions. We called ten or twelve artists for that exhibition. It was an interesting point in the context that Feminism was supposed to be outdated, unnecessary, and not embraced. It was wonderful to see the response to the call: would you like to respond to this work? Jerry Saltz wrote a piece in which he asked the MoMA about their current lack of representation of women, such as the Guerilla Girls, for example. He broke down in numbers the works by women, and the number of women in exhibitions. Of course it is an incredibly dismal record. I shouldnt say that, but I was surprised, and on another level there was always that feeling of: oh yeah, I guess thats not surprising. I am curious what it is like for an artist to walk around in these aisles in the context of this ultimate privileged and narcissistic environment of Art Basel Miami. Im wondering what people on this panel might think about the booth devoted to women artists at Gallery Lelong; is that a good thing or a bad thing and does it matter? Personally and as a curator I think that the idea of just doing a show of women artists is not very interesting. I have a show on post-minimalist women land art opening in May at the Sculpture Center in New York. The reason Im doing that show is because the WACK! exhibition will be opening at PS1 this spring. And I feel that women who did land art in the late sixties and early seventies are overlooked in that exhibition. To me this is a very interesting group of women. This media was utilized for the first time and there was some level of parody in the quality of the work, and in the

100 | ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art interactions between these artists. Thirty years later everybody in this audience could probably name several male land artists. The women who were part of that group have achieved some level of fame and recognition, but it is not at all equal to the men who started off at the same time. Having said that, I was wondering if Lelong would have put this exhibition up in their gallery in Chelsea saying: were doing a show of women artist. I would have snarled probably. Im wondering if that is helpful or not, if it is something that is worth doing, and if it is a gesture that does retain some level of significance and value for all of us, here in this highly commercial, highly market driven, socially elite context. Thank you. Peter Aspden: Thank you very much. Finally Marina Abramovic please. Marina Abramovic: I dont know if you are aware of this, but in front of you are three survivors. As Susan Hiller said, in the seventies there were so many female artists who completely disappeared, you dont even hear about them. But the good news is, there are lots of male artists who disappear too, and we dont hear about them either. We just met behind and Susan Hiller said: oh no, not again, Feminism, dont put us in another ghetto again. This is exactly my opinion too. VALIE EXPORT and Susan Hiller, who are great artists I have admired for a long time and that I am proud to be on this panel with, really are, including myself, survivors from that time. We are talking about thirty, forty years of hard work. I just asked Susan if she did have a child, and she said she had one. VALIE EXPORT, you dont have children? You have one? I dont even have a turtle. I dont have anything. I wanted to say, to be a mother and an artist is an almost impossible task. In the German magazine Kunst Forum appeared the title The Pigs of Today are the Ham of Tomorrow in the seventies. I am really loving it, Im just curating a show with the same title. I think thats how we feel, that were seventies pigs, now you become ham, it takes time. What is very important about my work is the relation to my mother. Being Yugoslavian and born in communists time, I didnt even hear the word Feminism. I didnt have any idea of what Feminism was. I left when I was twenty-nine, actually I escaped. My mother, who died in August, went to the police to look for me, because she never would have let me go out after ten in the evening since only bad women go out after ten. So I did all my performances in Belgrade before ten in the evening. I would like to entertain you with a few stories that marked my life and made me what I am. One of the first stories would be about my big nose. I was fourteen and I looked terrible. I had this enormous grown up nose on a childrens face. I had to wear orthopedic shoes because I had flat feet and my mother cut my hair so short that the nose came out even more. I was absolutely fascinated by Brigitte Bardot she was my sex idol. I had every kind of photograph of her in my pocket and I asked my mother if I could have an operation on my nose. Every time I would mention it, she would slap my face. She was always slapping me anyway. So I developed this perfect plan. On a Sunday morning when my whole family was out I went to my parents bedroom which had a big matrimonial bed with sharp edges. The idea was: I would spin around very, very fast and I would fall on exactly the edge of the bed to break my nose. Then they would bring me to the hospital, and of course I would have Brigitte Bardots photographs in my pocket, I would show them and it would be fixed in no time. The plan was good. I went to the bedroom, I spun around, I fell, I missed the thing completely and I cut myself in the middle of my face. My mother arrived, the photos all over the floor and she slapped my face again. This was the first story. The second story is about a washing machine. My mother was absolutely obsessed with washing and everybody always had to have clean hands. Guests even had to wear masks because they could have had bacteria. We were washing bananas with detergent because they came from Africa and could have bacteria too. It was all about bacteria and being washed and disciplined. My mother was a communist and she was a national hero. She even woke me up in the night when the blanket was not perfectly straight said: why are you so messy? while I was sleeping. The upbringing with so much discipline was unbelievable. By the way, she never kissed me because she said if shed kiss me she would spoil me. There was never any kind of intimacy. It was incredibly hard for me. So I had to survive all that. The washing machine story was a really interesting one. We were one of the first three or four families in Belgrade who got a washing machine from Switzerland. It was a big thing. But it was a simple machine with the two electric rubber rolls. The blanket and the sheets were electrically moved and pressed all the water out. My grandmother never believed in a washing machine. She would first wash everything in the washing machine and then by hand anyway. Now my mother and father had their careers as communists and my grandmother was always at home. I was around fifteen or sixteen, pretty grown up and the washing machine was the most interesting object in the bathroom, in the house actually. I used to sit in the bathroom and watch it moving; how these two rubber things were moving around, it was like my first meditation. I started playing, putting my hand in and out, in and out, in and out, at one point it got me in. It was incredibly, unbelievably painful, because if it can take all the water from the sheets, can you imagine what it does with your hand. I started screaming like hell. My grandmother, who was a very heavy woman, ran into the bathroom and didnt have any idea about technology, so she screamed. She didnt get the idea to unplug the machine because that was not in her mind. So that heavy woman ran down from the third floor to the street and screamed for help. This young guy came up to help. My hand was already half way up, and if it had continued it would have just torn me up. I screamed and screamed and screamed. The guy didnt unplug the electricity either. But with all his force you

ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art | 101 know, Montenegro people are very strong- he just pulled the two rubber things apart and got an incredible electric shock and lost consciousness. Again, my mother came home, saw the situation, and slapped me again, and so on. Basically through these experiences I developed this incredible need to be independent, to go as far away from home as I could go. There were few really important things for me: heroism was a big deal because both my parents were heroes. Spirituality was also important because it came from my grandmother. When I was just six years old, I went to church and I saw that everybody took holy water and crossed themselves. I made little steps, climbed up and drank all the holy water and just got diarrhea because it was dirty. But I thought I could be holy, that was a little mistake. Communism and orthodoxy, these completely opposite systems, were very present in my family, so were strong ideas of willpower and incredible discipline; you have to go on no matter what. I got where I am because of my background and my family. Im sure that Susan and VALIE EXPORT had other incredible experiences - thats why we are survivors. VALIE EXPORT just told me that she was with nuns in a cloister in her boarding school. No wonder her performances came out after that. I think that is an important thing. Thank you. Peter Aspden: Thank you. Four very, very different presentations. I am not sure if we can try and pull any threads together at all. Marina Abramovic: Dont. Peter Aspden: Yes, why should we try? Im going to open it straight out to the audience. We have a full house, which is fantastic, so lets take some questions. Audience: Marina, I know theres been a lot of theory about masochism and self inflicted pain in your art. I wanted to know how that politicizes your body, or how it expresses you as a woman specifically.

102 | ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art Marina Abramovic: First of all, I dont think I am a masochist. This is something that has been a kind of stamp on my life. Working with pain is a very interesting statement. VALIE EXPORT once said: If Im inflicting pain upon myself in order to liberate myself from the fear of pain, then pain is okay. I would like to use this statement to answer that question. Second, I dont see myself as a female artist. Im not a Feminist, and Im just an artist. Marina Abramovic: I travel a lot and in India I was bothered by everybody. Everybody tries to sell you something. In my desperation I went to a fundamentalist shop and bought a Burka, a really good one, long and with two veils. When I put it on, I had complete freedom. I could go wherever I wanted, nobody bothered me except when I came back to the hotel and I asked for the key and they didnt want to give it to me. I think we should go there and then do something and have our own experience there, because I think the best thing is to have your Audience: My question is about Susan Hillers own direct experience. You cant presume. comment on being one woman in an exhibition and about putting the introspective, intimate Audience: Hello, I am Ann Froman. I have been a space into art. I want to know if that intimate space sculptor for more than forty years and I mainly do of being a minority in certain public places ever women subjects. I think we should all be breast becomes joyful? friends to each other. And your voice should be heard all over the world because womens voices Susan Hiller: The whole issue for me was to take are very important. And I think, men dont sell as those kinds of things that could be considered well as women do. Through the ages, a womans negative and turn them into something very posi- body will always sell over a mans body. I think we tive. Theres also a tremendous privilege of being also have to realize that. And we also have to help double minded. Youre part of everybody, of course, each other as artists, but most people dont. I was a human being, and in another sense you have par- at a lecture in Massachusetts and all the top art ticularities. One of the particularities is gender. So dealers were there, and they were saying that they you have both an insider and an outsider perspec- were not going to let any women into their stables. tive at the same time. This is a great privilege, a I think thats disgusting and they should open up wonderful position for an artist to be in, because to so many great women artists. Im at the foundit gives you access to both languages. ries in different parts of our country all the time, and let me tell you, more art dealers should really Audience: A question to all. A lot of new museums look at women artists. Thank you. will be built this year; one of them is in Abu Dhabi. Abu Dhabi has a partnership with some of the most Peter Aspden: You are all talking very articulately important art institutions in the United States and about the sense of struggle. I wonder whether bein Europe. What do you think about the way they ing part of a radical movement in its prime gives treat women? How will it be possible to run a mu- you a sense of strength and solidarity? seum and have exhibitions in Abu Dhabi? Susan Hiller: There are many things being mudPeter Aspden: How about you, Catherine? dled up here, Peter, if youll forgive me saying this. I was certainly part of a radical movement as a Catherine Morris: I have no answer to that ques- Feminist and certainly VALIE EXPORT was also, tion. I have no idea. VALIE EXPORT, do you have and I dont think Marina was. But this isnt necessarily the same as being supportive of all the work an idea? thats done by women in the arts. That is a generVALIE EXPORT: Maybe Marina has an idea. alization thats extremely easy to make, but it isnt necessarily valid. Yes, there was a time when I did validate all works by women. I tried to encourage women. I tried to give special attention to women students and so on. But now, to be frank, at my age, Im only interested in what interests me. I dont have a lot of time left, you know? I dont want to waste my time. I think that forming groups and doing things with and for other people is extremely important, but it is not necessarily the right way for everyone to go. Catherine Morris: Your statement reminds me of a recent addition to the art world, the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art at the Brooklyn Museum. Im curious how this panel feels about that construction. I find it problematic and just wonder if that approach of just pulling things out (it is the home to Judy Chicagos The Dinner Party now, the ultimate representation of essentialist Feminist imagery) is a very retro approach which undermines itself. Marina Abramovic: This question is really com plex and deals with many things at the same time. My position is that I hate percentages. Art is not democratic and never was. It is all about good art and bad art. That is very important. I participated in female exhibitions with only five good artists and everybody else was really bad, and they were Feminist. If there were five woman and twenty men and these five women were great it would be better than this ghetto situation. When you are talking about helping each other, I absolutely agree. But every artist has to find the best way by him or herself. When you are at a certain age, at least in my case, I would like to help the young generation. Ive been teaching for more than twenty years, and then I stopped and formed the Independent Performance Group, and now I have my own foundation. The foundation is all about young performance artists who want to develop their pieces. They have access to workshops, a library, and deal with the type of work Im interested in, which is long durational performance. It is very strange in America. Performance means a little bit

ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art | 103 of dance, a little bit of talk show, and comedy. We dont talk about tough work and edgy, long durational performance work. I like to address this and I like to provide the opportunity to give all my experience to a younger generation. That task I took on myself. Audience: Im Maria Morberg, I work at Moderna Museet in Stockholm as the press officer. Marina Abramovic declared the panel as survivors, and someone else said that women artists have been around for eternal times. At Moderna Museet we are proud to have Abramovic in our collection. Susan Hiller showed with us just a while ago, and we recently exhibited a Mamma Andersson retrospective. The experimental film pioneer Gunvor Nelson is currently on view at the museum. Comprehensive exhibitions of Lee Bontecou and Zarina Bhimji are under planning. But when it comes to women artists, dead or alive, from the first half of the 20th century, the Moderna Museet collection part of our raison dtre its a disgrace from a gender perspective, as are most institutions. But we are doing something about it. In 2006 the director Lars Nittve outed Moderna Museet as a macho institution in a polemic article in Swedens major daily newspaper Dagens Nyheter. Routine preference given to male artists was the headline. He called for a one off grant of SEK 50 millions (=USD 8 millions) in order to acquire work from the early 1900s, exclusively by female artists. The government was the addressee for this claim, but interestingly, private donors have been the ones most alert to respond. Weve so far received cash donations and artworks from private donors or artists amounting to USD 4 millions (in a high taxation nation). The government has demonstrated their support so far with SEK 5 millions (= USD 800 000). The latest acquisition was of a Louise Bourgeois; Anna Kagan and Carolee Schneemann are other artists whose work we just bought. My point is, however redundant it might be; the motivation for this campaign The Second Museum of Our Wishes is purely artistic. We are changing the canon, and in a sense re-writing

104 | ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art history, but we are doing it to make the Moderna their archives. But if you sell early works, it sells Museet collection even better, not to run in the very expensive, because it is only an alibi that they best head count competition. didnt buy it at the time they should have, and they didnt make any exhibitions in that time. Audience: Specifically here at Art Basel Miami I am interested if any of you wanted to comment Audience: You brought up a very interesting idea about the extremely low price value of womens about women taking up devalued things and seework at galleries, auctions, etcetera. ing value in them. The first generation of Feminists made things available for all artists and thereSusan Hiller: One of the things we were supposed fore it wasnt just about women liberating women to talk about was gender in the art market. Al- and womens issues. But I think certain things though there are lots of women gaining increasing were made available for male artists and Im thinkrecognition in the art world, they are still not on ing of Charles LeDray, or Jim Hodges, or any numtop of the market in any way. We need to look for ber of other artists. I wonder if any of the panelists the source of that in deeper cultural, psychologi- would like to address this because this may be cal, and psychoanalytic terms, than just to general- another way of thinking about the success of what ize about it. It is a deep cultural question. One of women have contributed overall to the arts. the things is the fact that the history of recent art has been complicated, confused, misstated and Susan Hiller: This is very interesting and my point. so forth. We still dont have a real sense of what It is hard to articulate clearly on that the contribuwomen did, when and whether they were the first, tion by women artists is of immense cultural the best, the greatest, etcetera. We just dont have significance. It opened up not just many different a good picture of what happened in most areas of aspects of whats possible in art practice, but art in terms of film, video, and so on. beyond that into other cultural practices and this There have been a lot of misstatement and a lot has shifted values in a very broad sense. This has of special pleading of interest groups, from muse- not been recognized in terms of art history because ums and particular big collection who only bought it is not specific who did what first, but it was an men in the seventies, and now they dont want to incredible general contribution. Again, I think this revise evaluations of work at the time, or to lose is something that needs to be addressed and the market status of the works they acquired, so sorted out and made clearer. The whole notion of they cant allow women into that particular vision abject and bodily Of course we have the male of the seventies. This is despite the fact that many body in performance but it wasnt about abjection, women may have been out there doing really great except in very few instances about the representathings as well. It is a complicated issue, but if tion of certain aspects of the body and that wasnt womens prices are lower now, at least there are something that happened long before women women out there who have prices. Thats an ad- started doing it. I personally feel that if art history vance. is going to be revised in a major way, that this would have to be looked at, and as far as I know it VALIE EXPORT: Female art has a very short his- has never been done. tory and the collectors and the museums are not sure what they should buy. Should they buy media Orlan: The situation in Europe is probably differart? Should they buy paintings? Should they buy ent from America. In Europe it is maybe beautiful drawings? And that makes the prices go down. The to have a number of women in exhibitions. I hate only things they want are early works. We have a numbers, I hate percentages, and I am with Marina lot of early works and thats what they want for on that. Because this is only a caricature but maybe it is necessary, when you have one caricature after the other. We had many exhibitions in valuable institutions in Paris with absolutely no woman. If you had one, it is beautiful, two is exceptional, and three is a very Feminist exhibition. That is not normal. When I was teaching in art school I tried to assemble a jury composed only of woman. I saw only men in all the juries; sometimes one woman, but very rarely. My very good, intellectual, politically left friends told me it would be absolutely impossible. But I made it and it is absolutely beautiful. I would like to say to Marina: when an exhibition with women is bad, it is not the mistake of the artists but it is the mistake of the curator. It is not necessary to have an exhibition on women but on a complexity of themes and issues, and by chance you can also have one, two or three man in the show. It is not a good fashion to say: I am Feminist by now. I say that I am a Feminist, because it is a very big pressure on women. As a Feminist you are unfuckable and many other things, you have the yellow star on your back, it is crazy. Once you are named, for example anti-racist, you take that name for a long time and youll have people against you. But it is also the language; we have les droits de lhomme (Ed note: Human rights in French is literally mens rights) and not the human rights. But in France we have women femme too, but everybody speaks about Homme with a very big H. Do you understand? It is crazy, because it is even in the language.

ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art | 105 Lelong Gallery here at Art Basel Miami Beach has only women artists on show, and that made you uncomfortable? And I want to know about the fact that we have a National Museum of Women in the Arts in Washington D.C., the only museum in the world that displays art by women, twenty-five years old this year, how do you all feel about that? Catherine Morris: The exhibition at Lelong doesnt make me uncomfortable; it raises an interesting question about the usefulness of a curatorial choice to simply devote one space to gender without any other additional curatorial points of view. In itself it is not that interesting. If theres some reason for it, it can become useful. The reason here at this particular market place is simply to address the market issues that has been raised: to address why the prices of womens art are significantly different to the prices of mens art, who have equal careers on paper. In that case here it does make sense it has value. Audience: What about the National Museum of Women in the Arts?

Susan Hiller: Although Im American, I live in Europe and have lived in Europe for most of my life now. I only know the National Museum of Women in the Arts as a concept and for the fact that it is hosting the WACK! exhibition at the moment. I really dont understand or I have no way of knowing what its effect has been. And I dont even know whats in its collection or if they have enough money to buy a lot of work. We have a problem with Marina Abramovic: Orlan, youre totally right, Im a lot of public spaces without collections in Eng apologizing. If it is a bad female exhibition, it is the land. They dont buy anything. It is unfortunately true that if work isnt purchased into major insticurators mistake. tutions, it has no history in a certain sense. I dont Susan Hiller: Thats what I was going to say. It is know whether there is a collection, if so I ought to know more about it then I do. absolutely the curators fault if it is a bad show. VALIE EXPORT: It is always the curator. Audience: I hear a lot about history, effecting change, and being of the next generation. One idea Audience: This is mostly for Catherine, but if all would be for artists to have children and to teach of you want to answer it is fine. You mentioned the their sons and their daughters about the world. It

106 | ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art is time for that sort of creation to change things from the ground up. And then we wouldnt have to have these discussions because artist mothers will have taught their children well. Audience: When it comes to value and pricing of women work I know that in art forms such as music and movies, branding the artist and not just the product help to drive prices, to promote the product, and raise the individuals market value. I wanted to know if it would help to drive the market value of womens art not only by the product, but by creating a celebrity artist. Do you think that this would devalue you? And if not, would not only your work, but also your life and all intimate details be sold with your work, so that you can become a celebrity? Would this kind of marketing help? Peter Aspden: Are men better at branding themselves? And is it a desirable thing? Susan Hiller: I have a problem with this because Im not terribly interested in the commodification of art. Im from the seventies. We have been laughing on the panel about all that weve experienced and the fact that our old work is worth a lot of money now. Thats because it has, as someone said to me: Oh, a touch of age. And in fact, someone asked me recently, why certain photographs of mine didnt look old, because they wanted them to look old. I said: Well, because theyve been in a folder all these years, so they dont look old. One of the big changes the last question refers to, is the fact that women have increasingly become important in the decision making process in the filter system of art and what gets up and what doesnt. But Im afraid that many of those women are not what I would call Feminist. Theyre not interested in work by women artists for its deep characteristics and for its difference and for its contribution to a cultural debate. It doesnt make any difference if someone is a woman or a man. Of course wives have influence over husbands, just as husbands have influence over wives. I really dont like your question in that way. I think that if were talking about decision making processes in the art world, there are many more women curators now, women running foundations, important women building up major collections, etcetera. But on the whole, their decisions are not particularly gender cognizant. Audience: I studied art history in the eighties. I heard about womens art and women in history in the nineties. When I was in school it was not integrated. It needs to be integrated as part of the history of art, not as a movement that can be pass or retro Feminism. We are women. We are female artists. And we are Feminists. And we are still alive, so it has to be seen as something that is evolving, it is moving with time. Scholars of the new millennium can integrate that. We can be part of it, but we havent been webbed into the history of art. Peter Aspden: It is good to end with a carry on call. Im not going to attempt any kind of conclusion. It would be quite wrong for the token man in the room to have the last word anyway. Ill just say a very, very big thank you to our panel VALIE EXPORT, Catherine, Susan and Marina, and thanks for being a great audience.

ABC | ABMB07 | Women in Art | 107

Catherine Morris: We would need to have a dealer up here to address that question accurately. With women in land art there was also a drive, and a lot of women went down the road of non-profits. There was a trend of governmental support for visual arts and large-scale works in the seventies and that dried up in the Reagan years. I think the choice to follow public funding had an effect when the gallery system kicked in and had a major impact on developing brands, as we still see in the art world today. Audience: Is it possible to see Feminism as a parallel to art history rather then a movement? The Audience: As a male artist I feel that women have whole point of Feminism was to get us back into a powerful influence in the decision making. The the historical content, so I dont see it as a movesituation when a husband and wife run a gallery ment. I see it as a drive to keep us parallel to the for instance - women have that power of making historical aspect of art. the final decision whether to buy or not to buy. As an artist, I have experienced many times men tell- Catherine Morris: Rather then parallel I hope it ing me: okay, I have to consult my wife first before would be integrative. taking this picture back home. VALIE EXPORT: It was always integrated and it Peter Aspden: Is there a certain amount of drag- was very important to make women and female ging around going on at art fairs in your experi- artists visible and recognizable. This is integrated ence? in history, in social history and also in art history.

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics | 115 Art Basel Conversations | Sunday, December 9, 2007 | 10 11.30 h | Art Guest Lounge, Miami Beach Convention Center

TRANSCRIPT | ART CRITICS CRITICIZING ART CRITICISM


What is art criticism today and why is it relevant? How does art criticism interact with the art market? Is money the new art criticism? What are the risks and opportunities of globalisation and the internet for art criticism?

SPEAKERS | LIAM GILLICK DAVE HICKEY HOLGER LIEBS RAPHAEL RUBINSTEIN ADRIAN SEARLE ELISA TURNER Moderator | DANIEL BIRNBAUM

116 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics


Liam Gillick Artist, Critic; New York City, NY, USA Liam Gillick is an artist based in London and New York. Solo exhibitions include The Wood Way, Whitechapel Gallery, London, 2002; A short text on the possibility of creating an economy of equivalence, Palais de Tokyo, 2005; Selected group exhibitions include Singular Forms, Guggenheim Museum, 2004; 50th Venice Biennale, 2003 and documenta X, 1997. Liam Gillick has published a number of texts that function in parallel to his artwork including Literally No Place, Book Works, London, 2002; Five or Six, Lukas & Sternberg, New York, 1999; Discussion Island/ Big Conference Centre, Kunstverein Ludwigsburg, Ludwigsburg, and Orchard Gallery, Derry, 1997; Erasmus is Late, Book Works, London, 1995. Proxemics (Selected writing 1988 2006, JRP-Ringier) was published in 2007. In addition, Liam Gillick has contributed to many art magazines and journals including Parkett, Frieze, Art Monthly, October and Art Forum. Dave Hickey Critic; Las Vegas, Nevada, USA Dave Hickey is a free-lance writer of fiction and cultural criticism. He has served as owner-director of A Clean Well-Lighted Place gallery in Austin, Texas, as director of the Reese Palley Gallery in New York City, as Executive Editor of Art in America Magazine in New York City, and as Contributing Editor to The Texas Observer, The Village Voice, Art Issues, Parkett and Context. He has written for most major American cultural publications.. He has published a volume of short fiction called Prior Convictions, and his critical essays on art have been collected in two volumes; The Invisible Dragon: Four Essays on Beauty (1993), in its sixth printing, and Air Guitar: Essays on Art and Democracy (1998), now in its eighth printing. His most recent book, Stardumb (1999), is a collection of stories with drawings by artist John DeFazio. He has written numerous exhibition catalogue monographs on contemporary artists. He has two books in production at the University of Chicago Press: Connoisseur of Waves: More Essays on Art and Democracy (2007) and Feint of Heart: Essays on Individual Artists (two volumes) (2008) as well as a new edition of The Invisible Dragon that will be released in English and German. Hickey has lectured extensively at universities and institutions in the United States and abroad. He presently holds the position of Schaeffer Professor of Modern Letters at the University of Nevada Las Vegas. He is engaged in preparation for Coping with Paradise, an exhibition he is co-curating with Frank Gehry for the Los Angeles County Museum, Guggenheim Bilbao and other European venues. Holger Liebs Art Journalist and Editor, Sddeutsche Zeitung; Munich, Germany Born in 1966. Editor of the fine art pages of the Sddeutsche Zeitung since 2001. He studied art history, philosophy and politics in Cologne and Bochum. M.A. on the critical reception of Velzquez Las Meninas in 1995. From 1991 to 2001 he worked as a freelance art, pop and architecture critic, radio and television author (e.g. for Sddeutsche Zeitung, WDR, ARTE, ZEIT, Spiegel, tageszeitung, The Art Newspaper, Frieze, Texte zur Kunst, Architectural Digest). From 1997 to 1998 editor-in-chief of Deutsches Architektenblatt, from 1998 to 1999 lecturer in architectural theory at the University in Wuppertal. Recent publications: From Nike to MoMA. Brandbuilding and -processing in the theseum, in: Swiss Institute for Art Research; Art & branding. Principles interaction perspectives, Zurich 2006; Do not lean out of the window! Artists or revolutionaries? The Spur and the Situationist International, in: Jo-Anne Birnie Danzker, Pia Dornacher/ Villa Stuck: Gruppe Spur, Munich 2006. Raphael Rubinstein Editor and Author, Art in America; New York City, NY, USA Raphael Rubinstein is the author of a collection of poems, The Basement of the Cafe Rilke (1997), a book of autobiographical prose, Postcards from Alphaville (2000), and Polychrome Profusion: Selected Art Criticism 1990 2002 (2003), all published by Hard Press Editions. A new collection of poems, The Afterglow of Minor Pop Masterpieces, is forthcoming from Make Now Press. His poetry has appeared in many publications, including Grand Street, American Poetry Review, and The Oulipo Compendium. Other books include En Qute de Miracle: Cinquante pisodes extraits des annales de lart contemporain (Editions Greges, Montpellier, 2004), translated by Marcel Cohen, his own translation of Cohens In Search of a Lost Ladino: Letter to Antonio Saura (Ibis Editions, Jerusalem) and the recent anthology Critical Mess: Art Critics on the State of their Practice (Hard Press Editions). He is also the co-author of monographs on Norman Bluhm and Claude Viallat. He has been writing about contemporary art since 1986, mostly for Art in America, where was Senior Editor 1997 2007. He is also on the faculty of the MFA in Art Criticism and Writing at the School of Visual Arts, New York. In 2002, the French government presented him with the award of Chevalier dans lOrder des Arts et des Lettres. He was recently appointed Professor of Critical Studies at the University of Houston. He lives in New York City. Adrian Searle Art critic of The Guardian; London, UK Adrian Searle has been chief art critic of The Guardian since 1996. He also writes for El Mundo in Spain. He began writing art criticism for Artscribe in 1976, and contributes to frieze magazine. Searle has curated several exhibitions, most recently the first retrospective devoted to Brazilian sculptor Lucia Nogueira, currently at the Museu Serralves in Porto (Portugal). Searle has taught widely at art colleges in the UK and Europe, and has recently been appointed Visiting Professor at the Royal College of Art in London. Elisa Turner Art Critic, Miami Correspondent for ARTnews; Miami, Florida, USA Elisa Turner is an award-winning freelance art critic and writer based in Miami. Since the early 1980s she has written reviews, news stories, and features as the Miami correspondent for ARTnews. As the Miami Herald art critic, she regularly wrote many reviews, profiles and other stories for The Miami Herald from 1995 to 2007. International assignments for The Miami Herald included travel to Havana, Venice, and Basel. She has also written for Art + Auction, ArtReview, Whitewall, and the bilingual Latin American art magazine Arte Al Dia, based in Miami and Buenos Aires. Her extensive foreword detailing the recent history of the Miami art scene, from the early 1980s to 2006, appears in the book Miami Contemporary Artists by Paul Clemence and Julie Davidow (Shiffer Books, 2007), which was launched during Art Basel Miami Beach 2007. Her essay Chronicle on Miami 2005 2007 appears in the catalog for the internationally traveling exhibit Uncertain States of America: American Art in the 3rd Millenium published in 2005 by the Astrup Fearnley Museum of Modern Art in Oslo, Norway. Her online writing includes the columns Artcentric for www.artcircuits.com and the exhibit essay What Price Dreams Deferred? for www.dreamlandshow.info for the May 2008 exhibit at Jail Gallery in Los Angeles. She has served on the following panels: 3D: The Rodney Dangerfield of Photography for the National Stereoscopic Association held in Miami in 2006; Critics: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly for the Season of Sculpture, International Sculpture Symposium in Sarasota, Florida in 2006; and Conversations with Miami 2007, about press coverage for the visual arts, held in Miami at Locust Projects. At Art Basel Miami Beach 2007 she moderated an Art Salon panel on the book Miami Contemporary Artists. She has lectured at the University of Miami and at The New World School of the Arts in Miami. In New York, where she lived from 1979 to 1984, she worked in book publishing, and was Developmental Editor for the college division of Random House. She studied English literature and art history at DePauw University in Greencastle, Indiana, spending her junior year at the

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics | 117


University of Aberdeen in Scotland. In 1979 she received an MA in Comparative Literature from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, writing her masters thesis on the visual imagery in short fiction by James Joyce and Gustave Flaubert. She is a member of AICA, the International Association of Art Critics, United States Section, and ArtTable. Currently she is preparing for publication a collection of her art reviews and profiles of artists and art collectors. Daniel Birnbaum Critic and Rector of the Stdelschule Art Academy and Director of Portikus; Frankfurt am Main, Germany Daniel Birnbaum was born in Sweden in 1963. He is Rector of the Stdelschule Art Academy and Director of Portikus, both in Frankfurt am Main. He was formerly Director of IASPIS (International Artists Studio Program in Sweden), co-curator of 50th Venice Biennale (Italian Pavilion) and was co-curator of the first Moscow Biennale (2005). He has curated various solo exhibitions, including Philippe Parreno (2002), Gilbert & George (2002) and Louise Lawler (2003). In 2002 he curated a large project on the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin with works by Thomas Bayrle and Michel Majerus. He is currently a Board Member of the Manifesta Foundation, Amsterdam. As an art theorist and critic, he regularly contributes to magazines such as frieze, Parkett, and is contributing editor for Artforum.

118 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics Welcome | Maria Finders Welcome to a wonderful group of art critics, curators and artists. Daniel Birnbaum will be the moderator of this conversation with Liam Gillick, artist, Holger Liebs, critic from Germany, Dave Hickey, critic from America, Adrian Searle critic from the U.K., Raphael Rubenstein from America, and Elisa Turner, critic from Miami, America. Daniel please. Welcome | Daniel Birnbaum Thank you. There are many kinds of criticism and there are many ways and formats to write about art. Among the questions that can be asked: Where is art criticism today? What can art criticism do today? I think art has never been more popular, at least contemporary art. It has never been more visible, but is there still criticism around? So, what is the role of criticism today in this vast, market driven, art world of ours. I will just start to ask everyone to make a statement about their notion of criticism and the challenges of being a critical writer today? Liam, do you want to start? In Conversations | Liam Gillick Dave Hickey Holger Liebs Raphael Rubinstein Adrian Searle Elisa Turner Moderator | Daniel Birnbaum Liam Gillick: It reminds me of a situation when I was at a dinner in New York with patrons and someone next to me said, Could you explain contemporary art? I said, Good question. How long have you got? So I started and went on and on, finally I found myself alone in the room, talking about contemporary art. I am going to refuse to do that. I am not going to summarize or generalize about the potential of criticism now. I think it is like trying to generalize about the potential of art now. And I think I will pass on this. Daniel Birnbaum: Okay, Ill get back to you. Liam Gillick: For a real reason.

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics | 119 I replied, You go on waiting for your Neo Rauch, but Im going to talk to him next week about why the faces in his pictures all look the same. And he will answer me, and that is it what interests me. Im perfectly fine with it. I dont know if there is a need for an art critic of art fairs. In Germany we have a kind of public sphere, an agora with a cultural agenda. People still are interested in going to public institutions. We have six thousand five hundred museums in Germany which draw, collectively, over one hundred million visitors per year. That matches the figure of the whole season for the national soccer league. There is a need for communication in the media, for transmitting, transporting events and portraying artists. I am wondering, should we do art fair criticism? Is there something like art fair criticism? People are counting the sales figure or spoting celebrities, some writers go to parties and write that art fairs nowadays are only about parties, and thats so boring. But one could try to make transparent the structures of the art market and thats what I try to do.

Daniel Birnbaum: This teaches me that I should Daniel Birnbaum: Dave, you have seen the art be a little bit more specific in my questions. world develop over the past decades. Do you think that the role of the critic has changed a lot over Liam Gillick: No, I think its a very good question time? and a deeply serious question, but Im going to use my critical position to evade it temporarily and Dave Hickey: Well, my own practice is dead. I am pass it on to someone who has to think about this like one of those old night time disk jockeys, like in a functional and on a much more regular basis. Wolfman Jack or a sewing-machine repairman. I Then, I think I can come back to it. am a formalist. I am a connoisseur. I am interested in conflicts of interest and the general discourse Daniel Birnbaum: Holger writes for the biggest of people liking things. I write into the gap between German newspaper and he is one of the most arts market price and its cultural value as I pervisible writers in continental Europe. I guess ceive it. In all market places, price and value trend things havent changed that much, you write about toward equilibrium. I write about things that I art, you review and you say what you think about consider to be under priced compared to their what is going on and what you observe. How do you cultural value. I write about things that I consider to be over priced compared to their cultural value. see your role today? Or, rather, I would, if there were venues to do this Holger Liebs: I have been asked by a rich collector anymore, but Im too negative. from Munich recently, Whats it like for a poor guy like you, to write about all these rich people? Daniel Birnbaum: Adrian is even more negative.

120 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics Dave Hickey: I hope so. Terrible things spring up where you dont mow regularly. Its always been my job to mow, but they have taken away my mower. Now, I write for slick magazines. I write gallery catalogs for artists whose work I like. Catalogue essays, however, are not really criticism. Theyre like movie scores, background music for the show. You bring up the string section for the really important parts. I aspire to be a critic, but the opportunities are not thick on the ground. Daniel Birnbaum: The platforms where you could develop your writing have vanished? Dave Hickey: Completely. I date the end of my career as a critic to a moment to about ten years ago when Jack Bankowsky from ArtForum called and asked if I would like to write about a David Salle show. I said, Well, thats a blast from the past. Ill do it. Then Jack said, Do you want to do the pro or the con? In other words, they were not going to risk their advertising budget by having me unload on David Sensing this, I said, Ill take the pro. Then they got somebody else to write the con. Fair and balanced, just like Fox News. Thats the end of magazine criticism as a force in the market. Under optimum conditions, your editor supports the artist youre writing about. He also supports what you write about the artist, and this has an impact on the marketplace at large, because you, the critic, and your editor would rather be right than rich. I dont mind being right and rich, of course, but, given a choice, I would rather be right, because you can be right when youre dead. Daniel Birnbaum: Adrian, you write for one of the best known daily papers, the Guardian. Are things different today just because there is huge market? Does it matter if you write for a daily paper? Adrian Searle: It took a long time for newspapers to catch up with the fact that there was such a big market. I have noticed a big change, but whether that really has to do with the market in the last three or four years, Im not sure. What I am sure of is that theres more interest in celebrity artist profiling then there is in criticism. I was at an editorial meeting very recently and the arts editor said, so have all you critics got any bright ideas what we should be doing? And I said, well, you havent done a profile of Damien Hirst for at least three or four days. There is this constant obsession with the artist as celebrity, and this ever hungrier desire for a salacious or silly kind of writing. People were going to the Venice Biennial to write about the parties, rather then about the art. I prefer writing about the art. I refuse to write about money because I dont understand money and it is one of the reasons why I am not rich as well as being right, or even wrong. Like Daves conflict of interest, I would say, no conflict - no interest. I have written for art magazines for as long as Ive been writing -since the mid-seventies- as well for newspapers. The big thing about writing in a newspaper is you know you are writing for an audience that isnt necessarily very well versed, neither in contemporary art nor any kind of art. But you want them to read you anyway. You dont want to patronize people who know a great deal, but you also want to be accessible. I think its a skill and its difficult. Sometimes you want to change the register of the way you write, because the more you write you dont want to just do the same old thing. I keep thinking it would be lovely to give up criticism, but what is criticism? I am not sure what it is. I was with another critic who I think was originally asked to be on this panel. He said, Id like to go there, Adrian, because its all terrible now. Weve lost our authority. I said, What authority? Well, you know, the authority I had when I started writing, when I did your job at the Guardian. I thought, well, fuck you! I dont believe in this authority thing. I think were all just voices among voices and were trying to grapple with this really confused and opaque and complicated and fascinating thing, which is art, and what its like to be in front of it. Youve got to tell a story, and youve got to tell people what it was like to be there. Because they werent there, you were. Or if they were there, they werent standing where you were standing. Theres still a big role for criticism in terms of dealing with the world, and the things that other people do. And I always feel that if there were no critics, or at least people writing about art, wouldnt that be sad for the artist? That the work just disappears into some dumb guys collection and no one ever says anything? I mean, whats it for? Daniel Birnbaum: Whats the authority of Art in America today? Raphael Rubinstein: It is something that critics feel, that it is a good thing criticism has lost that sense of authority that it maybe had in the middle of the twentieth century. I have ten things I want to say, very quickly, and I will use some of Liams time, which he can take back. The first one is the relevance of top ten lists and Im sure a lot of the people in the audience realize how pervasive the idea of the top ten lists has become. It has replaced a lot of more serious, in-depth, critical thinking and it plays into the short attention span of the celebrity culture or prize culture that we live in now. Another thing that effected criticism is that over the last forty years, artists have taken over a lot of the functions that criticism used to have. With the rise of university trained artists, they became so articulate about their work and preempt what the critic might do. Im often in a situation where you come to write about an artists work and youre given on a platter the interpretation of the work. As a critic, I find that completely uninteresting. Adrian Searle: Then dont read it. Raphael Rubinstein: I try not to read it, but the fact that it exists is a problem. Another thing of course, people feel like the value judgment is something no one really has the right to make. But how can you be a critic without feeling the validity of your own judgment? Maybe, as Dave says, the

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics | 121 critic is a hold-over from another society, another social structure. I feel, sometimes, that critics arent even needed, the system runs so smoothly. It feels like being a war protestor in front of the White House; whatever you say, it is not going to have that much influence. This lack of influence and power can also be a source of strength. What critics need to do is try to turn around, to use that feeling of not having influence or power as a way to find new ways of writing criticism. Im not sure what those would be, but its true that there are no more platforms, or there are platforms with problems and newspaper criticism is under attack. There are issues about magazines that Dave raised, but there is also a lot more art, there are more publications, there are more magazines, there are blogs. There is space for criticism, but the question is, what kind of criticism is going to fill that space? One of the problems with art criticism, which has also been its strength, is that it is an orphaned practiced. Originally it was written by poets in the tradition of Baudelaire, and people who came to criticism because something didnt work out in their lives. This worked very well when there was sort of a real bohemia. There was a community that artists and critics, writers, poets, could share. That doesnt exist so much anymore. Criticism is just going to be practiced by under-employed art history professors. Adrian Searle: Oh God, wouldnt that be awful? Raphael Rubinstein: It would be awful. But I think if criticism is going to survive, it needs to have some sort of grounding. Adrian Searle: I disagree with this so, so strongly, all of it. I really do. It isnt a profession. One of the worst things about art now is that there are lots of artists who treat making art as a profession like any other, like being an accountant or something. Accountants, thats what critics could be if they were more academic, they would be number crunchers saying, its got all the right things so it

122 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics must be good art. I like the amateurism. The critic is just like anybody else, but you know more, youve been looking at the art for longer and youre there to witness whats going on and to comment on it. Thats not a profession. When you come out of the cinema, everybodys a critic. Raphael Rubinstein: But on the other hand, its extremely difficult for critics to how do critics survive? Adrian Searle: Corruption. Raphael Rubinstein: I think there has to a new model. What are the options now for critics? Find one of the few newspaper positions that really can support you, of which there are very few. You can teach. One of the things we know a few newspaper critics can have, and what every critic needs to have, is independence and the ability to say what you really think, to be that person who is just on the street and being honest. Im sure that everyone here has had to deal with the pressures, whether it is from an editor or a dealer or just the unspoken expectation of criticism. A lot of criticism is just written to smooth the entry of art into the market. It is sometimes indistinguishable and like public relation. show us, and so well just make our own spaces and invite people. A number of very well known private collectors started opening up these large warehouses that everyone knows about now. They were putting on shows based on their private collections. That was very new here. That had not been happening much. I was lucky that I got, at a time, enough space to write about all this in an interesting way. Like what Adrian was saying, when youre writing for a daily newspaper, youre not writing for people who all have art history backgrounds. Youre trying to make something that you see, that you are witnessing, interesting to as large an audience as you can. You want to make it accessible. It is a difficult thing to do, to be sophisticated and accessible at the same time. I found out that I seem to be pretty good at that. I came to writing about art from a literature background. I had studied, comparative literature, which trains you to look at culture in a broad spectrum. I taught freshmen composition and writing skills to students in high school and in college. One of the things I would write on my kids papers, over and over, was, say what you mean and mean what you say. That really helped me a lot when I started writing for a daily newspaper. When I mentioned something, I had to just explain it. Now we see this incredible explosion of galleries in the art fair and people think, that the Miami art scene just happened because of the fair. The fair was a big catalyst, but there were very exciting things happening here, particularly in the midnineties to the late nineties. Elisa Turner: Yes, its changed radically. I feel very lucky to have been here and been writing about some of the things that preceded what were seeing today.

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics | 123 career. You can influence sales but, who cares? I wrote for a newspaper myself for three or four years, where I had the mitigated pleasure of answering to a newspaper board most of whom also sat on local museum boards. This created a lot of Daniel Birnbaum: I want to come back to the role interesting energy. of the daily paper, because influence and power can mean so many different things. Maybe if you Adrian Searle: Especially when you come to ask write for the Guardian or Sddeutsche Zeitung for some more money. you dont influence the development, the market or the career of an artist, but you certainly have Dave Hickey: Writing for a newspaper, I found millions of readers. I think the two of you changed that people will read what they can. If its readable, the perception of the big shows this summer, for they will read about Nuclear Physics or Damien instance. Would you not agree? Holger, your Hirst. If you can write with any degree of lucidity review of Documenta meant something for the will read about anything. general discussion about what Documenta was. Daniel Birnbaum: Adrian, you said that your colHolger Liebs: Compared to the international league felt that he had lost power. But what would reviews I was rather moderate. But I think we criticism be if it was written from a position of should take care that this doesnt become a self power? Isnt that propaganda? flagellation panel. Adrian Searle: That would be fascist, wouldnt it? Daniel Birnbaum: I think that would be hypo- It would be like criticism in the Soviet Union critical. If you write for a big paper like the Sd- about towing the party line or something. I have deutsche, I think you have a certain power. a critic friend, who stopped being a critic, and I once asked him why he was a critic and he said, Holger Liebs: It means something to museum Well, two reasons, one, to see my name in print, curators and to artists what we write about them and the second, to get power. I found that an but I think it is a profession. alarming thing to say. But the last time I saw him he was sitting next to the Prime Minister of his Adrian Searle: Youve got to be professionally country. Theres a lesson there for all of us. responsible in your approach to things, but when Wheres this going? I dont know. you write, youve got to be as irresponsible as you want. Youve got to feel free when you write. Its a Daniel Birnbaum: I have the sense that criticism balancing act of a nexus of different influences. is related to a certain crisis, that criticism written from a position of power, is maybe not even critiDave Hickey: A critics power may be thus defined: cism. You have a lot of it unless you try to use it. If you try to use it for any kind of bad, stupid or inappropri- Adrian Searle: Right. ate purpose, you loose it. Daniel Birnbaum: Maybe this is a language problem. I meant influence. But there is an influence. Adrian Searle: This is obvious. Dave Hickey: You have a lot of power, but you cant Holger Liebs: There is always this one guy at an use it to enrich yourself or to improve your wifes opening who doesnt wear a Prada suit, and thats

Daniel Birnbaum: Elisa, you have been based in Miami for many years, writing for the Miami Herald and also for Art News. Things must have changed quite radically here, when this big fair landed. But on the other hand, you told me there have always been a lot of interesting things here and one shouldnt exaggerate the role of an art Daniel Birnbaum: But they werent visible interfair. nationally? No one knew about them. Elisa Turner: I was very lucky to be here at a particular time when things really started to percolate in the Miami art scene, particularly in the late nineties. There were a lot of artist run exhibition spaces. Artists were getting to the point where they were saying, the museums arent showing us, we cant get places in professional galleries to Elisa Turner: A few people knew about them. And people knew about the Rubel Collection and Marty Margulies. Daniel Birnbaum: But now everybody knows Miami is a place where lots of artists show, so the perception of Miami has changed quite radically.

124 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics the critic. You know you have to invite him, you cant avoid him, but you also cant control him, because he is the guy who delivers the content to the media. You need these people and we have to be aware of that. It is also a big responsibility. Raphael Rubinstein: One of the really important things that distinguish art criticism from other criticism and cultural criticism is that connection between the critic and the artist, and the dialogue. I dont think that film critics or theatre critics have this kind of practice of conversation and intimacy between critics and artists. What I learned about art and about art criticism mostly happened in artists studios. That is a strength and source of criticism and critical possibilities that I think is important not to lose. Maybe we need to rethink and find new ways of thinking about criticism; going back to that dialogue between shared values of artists and critics. Adrian Searle: Ive never reassured you in my life. Liam Gillick: Your position reassures me. Ill tell you why, because it doesnt effect very much what I do. This is a kind of tragedy. Daniel Birnbaum: What you do as an artist? Liam Gillick: It was a historical phenomenon. Im not saying I agree with it or I would claim to be one of them, but I am certainly interested in this phenomenon.

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics | 125 Daniel Birnbaum: The art world run by commercial thinking, what is wrong with that? What is it that goes missing, when we say, okay, it works anyway? It seems that there is a marginalization of any position that hints at the possibility of someHolger Liebs: The phenomena that artists started thing important happening outside of the art marto write their own text? ket. The machine runs perfectly smoothly and the works end up in the right collections and everyLiam Gillick: Not just that, but they wanted to stop thing is wonderful. What is it that goes missing? something. They wanted to claim the critical voice and make that notion of semi-autonomous Dave Hickey: Everything bright and new in the art critic irrelevant. When I first started showing in market comes from outside it. It comes from the the early nineties, the people that I came across steel mill, the decorator shop, the ad agency or the were nearly there, they nearly managed to do it. rag trade. The art world transforms the impact of We have to discuss this phenomenon beyond the these endeavors, because the underlying inferrather charming and self-effacing description of ence of most art criticism is that adventurous relationships that were having. I think the rela- people and institutions who acquire objects of tionships we are describing, dont accurately de- private delectation constitute an influential conscribe the situation, thats the problem. stituency of interest, so the works they acquire and their parameters of their taste, may have some Dave Hickey: All of these atmospherics have be- public consequence. So objects come with a social come a part of the market place. Im standing in a atmosphere. The critics unacknowledged job is friend of mines studio. He shows with Barbara to speculate on the public implications of a bunch Gladstone. The phone rings. Its Barbara, saying of rich Texas predators loving Morris Lewis, or a Hey listen, Ive just got these paintings. Whats bunch of rich New York predators obsessed with the rap on them? What she is, in fact, saying is. the Leipzig school. What were interested in, funGive me the whole critical muck-e-muck that damentally is teasing out the aura of public conprops up these objects so I can sell them. sequence that surrounds the vogue of certain As a critic, I really try to avoid all that explanatory works of art. The market runs perfectly well withcrap. I detest stories and I detest pictures, and if out this discourse of public consequence but the you hang out with artists too much, youre just longevity and influence of the art in question is gradually drawn to their self-mythologies, which considerably mitigated by its absence. Its not like are, in fact, creation narratives ... In flight from this theres a critical discourse on pornography to crypto-literature, I concern myself with whether enhance its shelf-life. an object survives or not, if it deserves to ... Everyone: There is. Liam Gillick: It still leaves a massive void that will be filled by other things. Because that in itself is Liam Gillick: We know that there is a critical an allegiance with a certain form of philosophy or discourse of pornography. This is not what critia certain form of criticism, which will still leave cism is about, it is not about trying to intervene between this theoretical, non-existent, strange us out of reach. It is an actual dereliction of critical duty to only relationship between certain types of objects and address whats going on now, how its being certain types of people. This is really not what the made, what it might mean, and what that might critical function is, I think. This is why actually, artists fought quite hard to reclaim this kind of lead to.

Liam Gillick: The critical community that surrounds me has developed another way of describing itself or describing what it does. You have the rise of the serious minded curatorial text. Now you get this kind of model where a lot of generating of meaning and critique about a work comes from the very people who are actually presenting the work in the first place. It is not as simple as talking about compromise or strategy. These are often genuinely complex and serious texts, but it creates circles or vortexes of ideas in the culture that are very hard to punctuate and get involved in. Do you Liam Gillick: Im going to claim my time back. It see what I mean? is very interesting and it all sounds very good. But I feel that we are not really addressing the point, Adrian Searle: Im not sure I understand what you in a way. Theres been some very smart things said, mean at all. but we have some fundamental problems. I think we have to look at some key problems about the Liam Gillick: Let me try and put it another way. position of the critic now, which are connected to The real issue about Documenta, for example, is recent history and they cannot be denied. One of not whether seven hundred and fifty thousand them is very important, the drive that reached an people went there, or whether the artist should apex in the post-1968 period; the claiming of the be better treated. But it has something to do with critical voice for the artist. This was an incredibly the fact that Documenta represents itself as a important historical moment that shattered and series of phenomena that have happened in reeviscerated and complicated critical positions. cent years. It is a kind of triangulation of things Now we have the second phenomenon, which that are out of sync with the dynamic of critical complicates things deeply for all of us. If we want art practices. It is very hard for you and not so to keep some of these critical values there is a need hard for me, because I can get involved in this for the genuine emergence of a bright, smart, kind of relativist flux. Its very hard for you to actucritical, community of people who have aban- ally talk about things beyond that kind of triandoned what we can call a traditional critical space. gulation. The ones that are not on this panel, the people who are of a certain generation who have decided to Dave Hickey: I think its poisonous for critics to evacuate from a precise critical position. What we have much to do with artists. Artists self-explananow find is reassurance. I feel really reassured tory texts were invented to compensate for a when I hear everyone talking here. decline of criticism.

126 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics area, because it was not addressing what the ques- man, the phantom, no one sees him, and hes just tion is. Artists do not make work under the terms writing reviews. that Dave is describing. Liam Gillick: Do you agree with that? Daniel Birnbaum: Dave, I always had the feeling that you have been an art dealer yourself. Some- Holger Liebs: I totally disagree, but it is this idea times you have written things where I have the of the isolated figure, the phantom. We obviously sense that you find the direct situation when you cant do that. We obviously have to recognize that show and sell art to be more honest then when there is an art market and the art market has influyou must deal with certain bureaucratic things ence on the art being shown. We have to describe that. We have to make it transparent because the going on in museums. art market is a not such a transparent market, Dave Hickey: Back to Liams remark: I dont care compared with others. what terms artists make art under, but I was a dealer for ten years, and I came to appreciate the Dave Hickey: An art market free of ruthless critiattitude of certain artists toward their work. Even cism can be an incredibly stupid place and subject today, when I go to Ed Ruschas studio, Ed comes to extreme distortions of price and value. The art over and stands next to me and we look together. world today is like what the financial worlds going I will say, Ed, whats this about? And he will say, to be when Rupert Murdoch takes over The Wall I dont know, Im seeing it for the first time Street Journal. Infelicitous. myself. By which he means that standing next to me, he is seeing the work for the first time as an Raphael Rubinstein: I think that Liams point orphan in the world where it acquires meaning about curators is really important, because curafrom outside. As Foucaultian, the author is neg- tors have taken over functions that critics had, ligible to me. I have friends who are artists. Their and something has structural changed. One of personalities, dreams and aspirations dont have the things that all critics deal with and have a hard much impact on what I write about their work. time dealing with is the quantity of art that can be seen and is being made. Its too much to process. Holger Liebs: I agree with that. I just think as a One critic cannot know everything that is going writer you have to be independent of what the on around the world. Its sort of what happened intention of the artist was. You have to notice it in the history of science in the eighteenth century, and you have to talk to him or her, but even curato- when the body of knowledge became so large, that rial texts are extremely overrated; a simulation of no scientist could encompass it. So, from the complexity. I just read it and think forget it. position of the critic, how can you make these large judgments about the importance, signifiLiam Gillick: Dont get me wrong, Im just describ- cance, or failure of a work if youre operating with ing this phenomenon, Im saying it still leaves limited information? space. Adrian Searle: But thats true of everybody in the Holger Liebs: I am just thinking about the inde- whole world. pendence of the critic and how he should get in contact with the artist. In the sixties artists have Raphael Rubinstein: It is less true of curators, bewritten lots of theories reclaiming their critical cause curators are much more mobile. They travel space. In Germany, theres a famous theatre crit- more then most critics. They just have more access ic, saying, The art critic has to be the invisible to seeing, going to every biennial.

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics | 127 Dave Hickey: Thats because theyre on the gov- Adrian Searle: Youre absolutely right, Liam, it doesnt feel good, it feels terrible. This kind of ernment dime. marginalization shows that most people who Raphael Rubinstein: They are. No one reads the work in newspapers dont really care about the art. texts they write. They do care about selling newspapers, and they care about filling newspapers. But the way in Dave Hickey: My general rule is that the boon- which art is now insinuated between consumer docks are always the boondocks. I dont care if in articles and the way the art review appears just New Orleans or Slovenia or northern China, its after that big double page spread on heres six still the fucking boondocks. There is nothing hap- exciting new things to stick up your bottom this pening up there. There arent any Frank Stellas at autumn feels like a dreadful trivialization. If you Montana State. think critics trivialize art, that the daily critics trivialize a lot of the arguments and the complexiAdrian Searle: Lucky Montana State, thats all I ties of art, and they make what is very three-dimencan say. sional one-dimensional just wait and see what that one dimensionality looks like after the subDaniel Birnbaum: A new kind of manager style of editors, who know absolutely nothing about the curator, advisor, collector, is also marginalizing subject of the article they are editing, are done the role of the more critical curators. If you are an with it. advisor for a big banks collection it is one of the most influential positions now. Liam Gillick: I havent met any interesting, smart, young person the last five years who has answered Liam Gillick: These are not separate strata. Its positively to the questions, Have you ever thought merely a more simple-minded version and less of writing for a newspaper? Im not meeting these transparent version of the same thing. As I get fur- people. They dont exist. This is combined with the ther and further away from the daily practice of digitalization and the displacement of cultural being commissioned to write critical writings, I criticism on to the internet and away from the acsee disturbing things. If you look on the websites tual newspaper. This might be the last conversaof most serious British newspapers, for example, tion we could be having about the mainstream you will not find the word art in the menu of the format. sections of the paper. For example, if you want to find a piece of art criticism thats been written in Dave Hickey: If the art world was the size of the The Independent, youve got to be able to know jazz world, which it was for many years, then we how to search for the writer or search for the sub- would be spared last nights lecture after the showject, because it does not appear as a topic or sub- ing of Lou Reeds Berlin. It was a bit like Miles topic within the menu. Davis coming out after a concert to explain what What I have noticed more and more is the in- hed done. It would be worth the shrinkage, if we creasing digitalization of cultural criticism with- could be liberated from this sort of intellectual in a mainstream sphere, which I find deeply dis- crowd control. turbing and not a good thing at all. The fact that newspapers want to shift their cultural criticism Elisa Turner: I also wanted to say something away from the printed paper, away from that dai- about digitalization of newspapers. It means that ly experience that were talking about, want to get you have to turn out copy very fast. I remember at it on the internet, means that you start to evacuate one point when I was covering the openings of the very tensions that makes it interesting. Art Basel, I would ask someone whatd he think

128 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics about the fair, stupid questions, but thats what you do when youre writing for a newspaper and covering an opening, this person said, Well, I just got here. I said, Say something intelligent in two words or less, and she looked at me and laughed. I said, Welcome to my world. With digitalization you have to think fast and turn out copy fast. Its hard when youre trying to think about a work of art that you think is important and you want to communicate to your readers whats important and why its interesting. Daniel Birnbaum: You dont think about who they are, but still it is an interesting issue to think about that the audience has shifted from being a little bit easier to define to being all over or nowhere? Dave Hickey: I write for Catherine Denueve, exclusively. Adrian Searle: I write for Liam Gillick. Daniel Birnbaum: You write for me. Greenberg, but they were not writing for the New York Times or even ArtForum or Frieze. There is a desire by a lot of people for another layer of critical space within the culture.

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics | 129 Adrian Searle: I think one of the big problems is that there is homogenization of writing. Thats terrible. Partly, that is what one is asked to write. I am pushed to write blurbs and Im just an awkward bastard and I wont do it. I think all newspaRaphael Rubinstein: I think the perception of per critics probably kick against barriers restrictcriticism, as a whole, is that it is just not pro- ing the way we have to write, because we have found. limited space and we want to make it fresh for ourselves. We dont want to write the same thing again Liam Gillick: The real problem here is not about and again and again. reflecting the debate about criticism because the absence is an editorial absence. It has to do with Daniel Birnbaum: One thing that may be worththe internet not quite turning out to be what while to think about is that the art world has people thought it might be. The first person in- changed so much and other cultural worlds have ternet phenomenon is constantly self referential, not really changed. The world of advanced poetry constantly linking and so on, and it is not a sub- is still very small. The jazz world is probably even stitute for the things people thought it might be smaller. Theatre has probably changed with big a substitute for. People who are doing certain festivals, but not in the way that the art world has. forms of poor internet stuff should be doing Links are created to luxury goods and to all of these something else. things, and thats why were talking about a certain kind of alienation. Raphael Rubinstein: The poetry world has blogs that are really important; they are the best criti- Elisa Turner: But we werent drawn to art because cism about poetry. The best writing about poetry we like fancy purses; we didnt think of art as a now, at least in the States is on blogs. This hasnt luxury good. happened in the visual arts. Daniel Birnbaum: Right. Now art is where there Dave Hickey: What has happened here, in the last are deluxe things and arts ultimate role is seen in series of art fairs, is the recession of curatorial terms of branding cities. Do you sometimes think power and the intervention of auction houses and about such things? auction prices into the everyday retail world. This is what is see.. As some well dressed gentlemen Dave Hickey: Branding cities, niche marketing, said to me It is the whole synergy of luxury goods. and identity politics are economically inseparable This came as a big surprise. The gentleman had a and equally malign. Ive spent my life in vain trying magazine that purports to help us to build a warm- to get that shit to go away. er relationship with our assets. I had to explain that my relationships with assets were always one- Daniel Birnbaum: That is, again, the notion that night-stands. Returning to the question, though, influence or power dont matter any more, and part of the problem with the internet is that is even if they are enforced, they have no impact. poses a daunting question: do you want to live in Theres a craving for contemporary art everywhere, a village, global or otherwise? Do you want to live classical museums want it, the Metropolitan and in a village where people go through your garbage? the Louvre want it, in fact everybody wants contemThats the world we live in and the global village porary art. There are new museums being built in has the same downside as living in rural Massa- rather undemocratic parts of the world and everybodys participating in that, and the art world just chusetts.

Adrian Searle: Well, no, Ive had to review big Holger Liebs: Yes, of course. No, but I write rather shows in less then twenty four hours ever since Ive for a German audience, which is of course very written for a newspaper. dense and very interested in the international art scene. I dont care so much about the audience, Elisa Turner: Right, but just these short little bites but the art world has changed. In Germany opera and the theatre are very strong. It still is a country of things happening. where most of the articles in the newspapers are Adrian Searle: I refuse to write those. I tell them focused on German culture. Thats different in the to go away, I wont write them. art world. Thats different with cinema, of course, but you have to fight. I want to ask Liam, where the Elisa Turner: Well, youre lucky you can do that. authority is now in the art world? Having the premise of a critical authority existing today, would it be Adrian Searle: I just refuse. the artist talking about the work, would it be the curators, or would it be the theorists? Dave Hickey: Never blurb. Liam Gillick: The great thing we havent discussed Daniel Birnbaum: Who do you write for today, is of course critical theory. You could say for artists when the art world is no longer just about New who read books, that contemporary philosophers York and Cologne. are the voice. What happens is that critical theory It has spread into fifty or a hundred cities with is a process of reflection upon the status and biennials and things? Wheres the audience? Is meaning of criticism, and how that evolves and that an interesting issue? Do you think about how you learn from the notion of criticism. The whom youre writing for? people, who did that in the most articulate ways, have been contemporary philosophers. Then they Adrian Searle: If I thought about all those people get asked to write about art. So you have a slightly being in the room while I was writing, I couldnt complicated situation where you have a Marxist write anything. You cant do it. French philosopher writing about the notion of cultural practice and the notion of artistic practice Daniel Birnbaum: But you write for a smart Lon- as a theory. You have this slightly strange situation don audience? where people become a kind of super critic, a super-brain beyond critique, which we might Adrian Searle: I get letters and e-mails back from think is kind of wrong. When we talk about these people who read me all over the world. older models of the critic, we talk about people like

130 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics moves in. Sometimes it is like a masquerade; that if theres no real progressive politics in a country, at least they can have an art fair or a biennial and things will look good anyhow. Has art become an index for undemocratic situations? Raphael Rubinstein: I would pose that in a different way. How can critics respond to that situation? What we need is the critic as satirist, like what Kraus did in Vienna. Some works in the fair about the art world are very satirical and I think that is something of a response. Sometimes you cant really engage the only way to respond to some phenomenon is through satire, not through straight forward, rational, aesthetically based critical discourse. But you really just have to take the piss out of it. mile off. Inherent in the quality of the work itself appears a reflection of the way people have been taught critical theory. The very originating processes are based on theory, often taught very badly by nervous people who dont necessarily understand what theyre talking about and this has to be considered. The art world is always a world that no one really considers oneself part of. It is a phantom construction that most serious minded people dont necessarily consider themselves belonging to. Dave Hickey: It is, irrevocably a discourse of value, however. There is a level at which quality in art is equated to the quantity of response solicited and the amount of money expended. There is always a fulcrum upon which desire becomes economics. sphere? And that has to do with the question of, what is the place and purpose of art. Should its place be in the public sphere or should it simply operate as a set of objects that are exchanged between very rich people? What do you really think the purpose of art is, and who should it be intended for? Daniel Birnbaum: Adrian, Holger, since you are visible in the public sphere, you are not just writing for some collectors, youre writing for huge audiences. Holger Liebs: The critics presence in public sphere is not an issue, at least not in Germany. We are in a very privileged situation, in terms of public museums and most of the things are seen publicly. As a writer, mostly you go to the public museum and write about things other people see, and you dont go to a rich collectors house. That is very comfortable, but it might only be the case in Germany. Adrian Searle: I dont think artists make art just for rich people. I think artists make art for themselves and, like critics, they probably have a very nebulous notion of what their audience is and it might end up by being very different from the one they imagine it is. I think that art deserves being written about and talked about and unpicked. Like anything else, if it exists in a vacuum, it will wither and die eventually, or it will just become this strange substitute for money thats swapped around from person to person. Audience: Weve heard a lot about art criticism for newspapers. But what is the distinction between writing art criticism for newspapers versus art criticism in journals and magazines?

ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics | 131 well read audience in an art magazine or a journal then you do in a newspaper. The opposite being, of course, that you also shouldnt under estimate your readership anywhere. Dave Hickey: I write for slick magazines mostly, lately, and their virtue is exquisite editors. They really will tell you if you screw up. This enables you to write really fast. It allows me to write, There were (zero, zero, zero) people at the party and someone else can find out how many people were there. High quality editing is not much available these days but when its absolutely there and its heaven. Holger Liebs: I would agree. I edit texts, its part of my work and I have to shorten them, and of course there are critics who tell me, well, you cant do that, because we get less money, but you have to do it, actually. Texts have must achieve a quality standard before they go to print. Audience: A question for both Liam and Dave, because I think you may have different perspectives on this. Historically, art has been visual, not verbal. But in the past twenty years, art tends to be more about language. Do you this might be detrimental to the visual aspect of producing work? Dave Hickey: I have always regarded art as a cure for language. The lines between the verbal and the visual are actually collapsing and coalescing. In a theoretical sense, the lines have blurred. Let me propose a simple distinction, visual art tends to be more intellectual than conceptual. In other words, when Im talking about Ed Ruscha or John Baldessari, Im talking about intellectual artists, not conceptual artists. Concepts are static, articulate propositions. Ruschas Brave Men Run in My Family neither meets or aspires to that standard, but its still something to think about.

Dave Hickey: It is a terrible fact that terrible ages Raphael Rubinstein: I think its out of hand befor art have often been great ages for criticism. cause critics are letting circumstances set their agendas too often. One of the reasons Greenberg Adrian Searle: I recently heard a critic say Its a was so great was not because of his ideas and his great time to be a critic, because theres so much prose style; it was because he was setting his own bad art out there. Thats terrible. Thats like say- agenda. Often as critics, we find our selves in the ing; I want to be a garbage collector. position of just responding to something. Thats one function of criticism, to respond to the big Elisa Turner: Dave was saying at breakfast, not to shows. But thats not the only option for a critic. review is a critical decision too, because if youre Another option is to go your own way and figure writing for a newspaper or magazine, you only have out what you think is interesting, whether or not so many choices and so much space. If you have a its being shown in major galleries and major mulimited amount of space, arent you going to spend seums, or even visible in art fairs. your space and energy on something you like, that you think is interesting, that you want to share with Adrian Searle: But editors wouldnt let you write other people? about it. Daniel Birnbaum: That means there will be no bad reviews? You need bad reviews. You have to at least try to cover all the important events and to say if its bad or good, thats your task. Thats the challenge. Liam Gillick: The primary theoretical component that artists were taught used to be art history but now it is theory, so young artists can see what you might call a standard critical position coming a Raphael Rubinstein: Obviously you cannot do that at major daily newspapers, but you have to find some other way if that is what you are interested in Audience: What I found interesting is that all of you have been skirting around whether you actually matter in the public sphere. There is certain indifference, so the real question seems to be what you as critics think your purpose is in the public

Adrian Searle: I used to think that writing for art journals gave one the freedom to not have to explain what an installation was, which in newspa- Liam Gillick: I would agree, but I would also add pers you used to when I first began. But actually that some of these phenomena are not about the its not true, you cant assume that you have a more way things are. They have to do with challenges to

132 | ABC | ABMB07 | Art Critics hierarchical systems and challenges to structures that were fought for by certain groups that then leak out into the broader culture. The phenomenon of wanting to find a voice, where do we still hear phrases like this? We hear it from people who dont have one. And there are still people in the culture who dont have a voice. Art too, alongside other things, has had moments where people have felt they wanted to reclaim their voice. This is the only way you can make art. This is the only correct art to be made. Now that doesnt necessarily reflect what art could be and I think, that while Im not on the same page as Dave about a lot of things, I think, to a certain extent, Im in agreement about his position on the intellectual and conceptual potential of art. Dave Hickey: This is just my anecdotal experience. People who teach theory, think its hard, but theory is easy. Practice is hard. Daniel Birnbaum: Thanks you all very much.

Art|Basel + e-flux = Art-Agenda


Art-Agenda is a collaboration between Art Basel, the world's leading art show of modern and contemporary art, and e-flux, the artworld's favorite announcement service. Art-Agenda is designed to provide timely information on current and upcoming exhibitions at international contemporary art galleries, selected from the participating galleries of Art Basel and Art Basel Miami Beach. Art-Agenda addresses the combined audience of Art Basel and e-flux nearly 40,000 curators, critics, art historians, consultants and collectors from all parts of the world. Our selective digest offers readers images, press texts and links to many of the most important exhibitions taking place in galleries today. All Art-Agenda announcements are permanently and publicly archived on the Art-Agenda website, creating a valuable and freely available research resource. Drawing on the extensive online experience of e-flux and the connoisseurship acquired over the 39-year history of Art Basel, Art-Agenda is an indispensable source of information for both art lovers and art professionals. Art-Agenda offers an unprecedented opportunity for participating galleries to reach the most dynamic art professionals and collectors worldwide. Art-Agenda limits the number of announcements it sends out, ensuring that news from clients using the service are sure to gain attention from the core of the artworld. Visit the Art-Agenda website: www.art-agenda.com

Art|39|Basel|48|6|08
The International Art Show Die Internationale Kunstmesse Art 39 Basel, MCH Messe Schweiz (Basel) AG, Messeplatz 10, CH-4058 Basel Fax +41/58-206 26 86, info@artbasel.com, www.artbasel.com

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi