Distance up Close: the Asian Biennials

Distance up close – the Asian Biennials

Gregory Burke

It already feels something of a platitude to describe 2006 as the year of the Asian Biennials, preceding the ten year alignment, in 2007, of the European grand daddies in Venice, Kassel and Munster. In truth, at least as many biennials will be presented in Europe this year as in Asia. As I write for example the Berlin Biennial is drawing to a close, while a new biennial event has just been inaugurated in Prague, ironically titled Tina B, an acronym for “This Is Not Another Biennale”. That said, the Asian biennial events presented this year do represent a coalescence of energies in the Asian contemporary art world, centered in particular around the Biennales opening in September, being kicked off by new entrant The Singapore Biennale and then, a few days apart each, the Shanghai and Gwangju Biennials. The organizers have taken the initiative of closely staggering their openings and cross marketing the three events in art world capitals. Enthusiasts can take in all three events and their openings in a little over a week, in much the same way that the art world is expected to flock to Venice, Kassel and Munster in 2007.

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seems to be perceptions of geographic and, to some extent, cultural distance, perceptions that many argue are being superseded in the era of globalization.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

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

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

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

A pertinent comparison can be made between Singapore and its near neighbour Indonesia. The same mix of conflicting belief systems exists in Indonesia, but set against a very different political context. For a start, Singapore’s population at 4.5 million can be compared with Denmark. By comparison Indonesia’s population at well over 200 million well surpasses any comparison in Europe including Russia, and with Muslims making up 90% of the population; Indonesia is therefore the world’s largest Islamic nation. Given its size the support structures for contemporary art in Indonesia are nominal by comparison with Singapore. As well, if after three decades of dictatorship Indonesia appears to have recently developed into the largest democracy in South East Asia, political and religious tensions continue to run high with the potential to once again seriously limit artistic freedom. On that note it was very concerning to learn recently that Indonesia’s only international biennale C P Biennale will be discontinued following the protests of the Islamic Defender Front (FPI) over the inclusion of the work Pinkswing Park, by artists Agus Suwage and Davy Lingarr, in last year’s biennale. The artists remain under threat of conviction and prison sentences for publicly displaying what the FPI deemed to be pornographic pictures. On the surface the artists’ works speak an international language, yet their meanings are transformed by the local context.

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