Visual Arts Exhibition of La Biennale di Venezia
Fabio Cavallucci
In this moment
when discussing the 50th edition of the Visual Arts Exhibition of La Biennale
di Venezia, curated by Francesco Bonami, one cannot comment on much more than
the title: perfect. Dreams and Conflicts represents in an impeccable way the
dialect between these contrasting factors and a theme on which not only the art
world is debating, but the entire contemporary society. A society divided between
perennial aspirations and search for betterment and the conflicts determined
by the coming together of different cultures that are inevitably directly compared
within a global context.
A title thought-up
months ago, that has been weakened somewhat by the recently ended war and that
subsequently shifts the significance more towards a series of geographical areas
and the confrontation between particular cultures, when in fact its true force
lies within the vision it supplies in a global dimension. It is not only the
conflicting territorial or political areas, but also the diverse mentalities
that cross the world sideways in attempt to detain a power that will inevitably
be dispersed.
Bonami, in the
various presentations of the structure of the exhibition, still plays down somewhat
the power of the given title, preferring to underline the Venetian aspect: dreams
and conflicts were at the origins of the first Biennial founded by Selvatico
in 1895. It was precisely a dream that merged with the conflicts inherent in
presenting a project such as this, which sought to show the works of the then
current artists, in an antique city – a city that practically exists in a world
of its own. It was then a dream together with conflicts that allowed the aspirations
towards universality to coexist with the nationalism in the pavilions.
However, the Venetian
dimensions of Bonami’s presentation are also present in the retrieval of
the right amount of “local dimension” in this era of globalisation.
La Biennale di Venezia, being an exhibition, should have something to do with
its host city and it has to be able to characterise itself with respect to the
numerous Biennial organised throughout the world. And it is precisely with the
national pavilions that the Venice Biennial remains characteristic and differentiates
itself with respect to the other large manifestations of its kind.
Then there is a
subtitle that leaves us slightly more perplexed: La dittatura dello spettatore
(The Dictatorship of the Spectator). A title, nonetheless, comes after other
titles, an exhibition follows other exhibitions: Identità/Alterità
(Identity/Alterity), the centennial biennial by Jean Clair, Past Present Future
by Celant in 1997; d’APERTutto (a play on words between “everywhere”
and “everything open”) by Szeemann in 1999; and his last one entitled
La platea dell’umanità (Plateau of Humankind). In this way, at least
with regards to his direct predecessor, maybe Bonami wanted to use a subtitle
that not only takes into consideration this evolution but refers to the exhibition
dimensions. Szeemann introduced the feature of multiplicity, the invasion of
the vast spaces playing only with a light structuring, that leaves the space
dynamic and open: precisely as in d’APERTtutto or the Plateau of Humankind.
Szeemann’s
approach still remains curatorial: the single curator provides his or her own
point of view, in so much as it is an open perspective, even if contradictory.
Overturning Szeemann’s layout, Bonami is involving more curators, each of
whom will realise separate exhibitions, in some way autonomous, even though linked
by a common underlying context. From Hou Hanru to Catherine David, from the very
young Massimiliano Gioni for the new Italian pavilion to artists like Gabriel
Orozco and Rirkrit Tiravanija. Yet in addition to this curatorial fragmentation,
Bonami further
intends to upturn Szeemann’s approach, by granting the spectator the power
to choose and the freedom to move according to their own personal vision. The
Dictatorship (unfortunately using a term that is maybe too strong and that risks
being misconstrued) of the Spectator provides an alternative passage towards
the “democratisation” of the exhibition – towards alignment with the
principles at the basis of computer and Internet technology. From a “push”
to a “pull” direction that arrives from the passage of classic television,
where the spectator passively receives information (push), to that of the Internet
where the user is actively researching (pull). With the layout intended by Bonami,
at least now we will have the possibility in this Biennial of metaphorically
channel-hopping between the many channels. The problem, if any, lies in how the
user will be able to orientate himself in an exhibition such as this, that is
becoming increasingly larger and expansive, but needless to say we are now living
in an era of “portal-exhibitions” where all the “information”
is made available but unfortunately so few wish to navigate.
Translation by
Laura Jane Culpan
