Română (România)English (United Kingdom)
.

periferic 3 (1999)

PDF 

Written by Administrator | 06 September 2011

periferic 3 (1999)

14-16 May 1999

Turkish Bath of Iasi, Palace of Culture of Iasi, French Cultural Center in Iasi

 

Concept
Periferic 3
Matei Bejenaru, curator
Situated in the eastern edge of Romania, six hours from Bucharest and 25 minutes from the border of the Republic of Moldova (formerly part of the Soviet Union), without an international airport, and long avoided by western strategic investors, the city of Iasi leads an isolated existence as a geographic and economic peripheral zone, a fact which, among other things, has also affected the local cultural context which continues to be dominated by an academic traditionalism and an unproductive and retrogressive archaism.  Although Iasi can be a delightful place to live, despite the anachronisms, it is difficult to make contemporary art in a city which lacks the professional infrastructure to support it. In this respect, it may be highly significant that the opening of the Peripheral 3 Festival coincided with the inauguration of the first foreign bank in Iasi (the Turkish-Romanian Bank), a fact which leads to the conclusion that that the first stop in Romanian integration with Europe is through Turkey.
PERIPHERAL 3 was conceived as a manifestation which collected artistic attitudes about the relationship of the margins to the center.  The first two festivals, which took place at the French Cultural Center of Iasi, focused on performance as still being a peripheral form of expression in the Romanian context. This year part of the curatorial strategy concerned the location of new places for expositions.  Therefore, in addition to the inclusion of the by-now traditional performance sessions at the French Cultural Center, the organizers included in the network of exhibition spaces two new spaces: the alternative space of the Turkish Baths and the official space of the Art Museum of the Palace of Culture.  Further, the number of Romanian and foreign artists was increased and for the first time, student projects were also accepted.
The installations and interventions in the Turkish Baths, grouped in the exposition “Steam,” presented artists with two delimiting conditions: a limited budget for their work, on one hand, and a space of seductive and pictorial monumentality,on the other. The result was a site-specific exhibition in which the works, minimalistic in nature, were visually dominated by the space, a relationship which reversed itself in terms of ideas because conceptually, the space was subordinate to the work.  It is my belief that the Turkish Baths could become an alternative space for exhibitions and debates concerning contemporary art, a space managed by artists who, without strong financial support, would be able to assure residencies for Romanian and foreign artists.
The “Correspondences” exhibition in the Palace of Culture juxtaposed the artistic installations with the mentality and space of the Palace of Culture’s Art Museum.  Both the exhibition and the theoretical symposium organized for this occasion demonstrated that the process of redefining the relationship of the Art Museum to contemporary art is complex and long-lasting.  This redefinition presupposes a new way of thinking about the definition, collecting and exhibiting of contemporary art and the establishment of new departments which are seriously concerned with this work.
Upon the completion of PERIPHERAL 3, I can draw some conclusions.  For the first time, financial support from official cultural institutions (the Ministry of Culture and the Palace of Culture of Iasi) was united with the more usual sources of support for contemporary art (ICCA Bucharest, OSF Romania, Pro Helvetia, and CCF Iasi). The organizers of future PERIPHERAL festivals, lacking economic and political power and either existing outside of the system or having tenuous positions within the system, must develop an ingenious policy for mediation and fund-raising in order to assure the continuation of the festival. And second, the festival served as the means of pulling together young artists and intellectuals of the city, forming a necessary solidarity for the local cultural context.
If we were to try to assess the impact of the event beyond Romania, it would be of interest to determine whether the model CENTER–MARGIN (PERIPHERY), a model which generates many problems for the periphery, is the only possible model.  Perhaps, in the context of globalization and new ways of information-transfer, another and more dynamic model, with more centers and variable margins would be closer to the “zeitgeist” of the contemporary world.  In this case, the idea of CONNECTING peripheries (cultural, geographic, political, and economic) might become the conceptual basis of future PERIPHERAL festivals.
Contemporary art is an “art of the city”.
The prestige and urbanity of a city may come from a variety of conditions: its inhabitants, its culture, and qualities which are more prosaic, such as the quality of a river which crosses the city and the quality of drinking water for its inhabitants. The only river which crosses the city of Iasi is Bahlui – at present, a river which is lazy, muddy, and polluted. As a suggestive conclusion, I want to note that not too long ago, with local funds as well as funds from the European Union’s program PHARE, the city began working to improve the quality of its water.

Concept


Situated in the eastern edge of Romania, six hours from Bucharest and 25 minutes from the border of the Republic of Moldova (formerly part of the Soviet Union), without an international airport, and long avoided by western strategic investors, the city of Iasi leads an isolated existence as a geographic and economic peripheral zone, a fact which, among other things, has also affected the local cultural context which continues to be dominated by an academic traditionalism and an unproductive and retrogressive archaism.  Although Iasi can be a delightful place to live, despite the anachronisms, it is difficult to make contemporary art in a city which lacks the professional infrastructure to support it. In this respect, it may be highly significant that the opening of the Peripheral 3 Festival coincided with the inauguration of the first foreign bank in Iasi (the Turkish-Romanian Bank), a fact which leads to the conclusion that that the first stop in Romanian integration with Europe is through Turkey.

 

PERIPHERAL 3 was conceived as a manifestation which collected artistic attitudes about the relationship of the margins to the center.  The first two festivals, which took place at the French Cultural Center of Iasi, focused on performance as still being a peripheral form of expression in the Romanian context. This year part of the curatorial strategy concerned the location of new places for expositions.  Therefore, in addition to the inclusion of the by-now traditional performance sessions at the French Cultural Center, the organizers included in the network of exhibition spaces two new spaces: the alternative space of the Turkish Baths and the official space of the Art Museum of the Palace of Culture.  Further, the number of Romanian and foreign artists was increased and for the first time, student projects were also accepted.

The installations and interventions in the Turkish Baths, grouped in the exposition “Steam,” presented artists with two delimiting conditions: a limited budget for their work, on one hand, and a space of seductive and pictorial monumentality,on the other. The result was a site-specific exhibition in which the works, minimalistic in nature, were visually dominated by the space, a relationship which reversed itself in terms of ideas because conceptually, the space was subordinate to the work.  It is my belief that the Turkish Baths could become an alternative space for exhibitions and debates concerning contemporary art, a space managed by artists who, without strong financial support, would be able to assure residencies for Romanian and foreign artists.

The “Correspondences” exhibition in the Palace of Culture juxtaposed the artistic installations with the mentality and space of the Palace of Culture’s Art Museum.  Both the exhibition and the theoretical symposium organized for this occasion demonstrated that the process of redefining the relationship of the Art Museum to contemporary art is complex and long-lasting.  This redefinition presupposes a new way of thinking about the definition, collecting and exhibiting of contemporary art and the establishment of new departments which are seriously concerned with this work.

Upon the completion of PERIPHERAL 3, I can draw some conclusions.  For the first time, financial support from official cultural institutions (the Ministry of Culture and the Palace of Culture of Iasi) was united with the more usual sources of support for contemporary art (ICCA Bucharest, OSF Romania, Pro Helvetia, and CCF Iasi). The organizers of future PERIPHERAL festivals, lacking economic and political power and either existing outside of the system or having tenuous positions within the system, must develop an ingenious policy for mediation and fund-raising in order to assure the continuation of the festival. And second, the festival served as the means of pulling together young artists and intellectuals of the city, forming a necessary solidarity for the local cultural context.

 

If we were to try to assess the impact of the event beyond Romania, it would be of interest to determine whether the model CENTER–MARGIN (PERIPHERY), a model which generates many problems for the periphery, is the only possible model.  Perhaps, in the context of globalization and new ways of information-transfer, another and more dynamic model, with more centers and variable margins would be closer to the “zeitgeist” of the contemporary world.  In this case, the idea of CONNECTING peripheries (cultural, geographic, political, and economic) might become the conceptual basis of future PERIPHERAL festivals.

Contemporary art is an “art of the city”.   The prestige and urbanity of a city may come from a variety of conditions: its inhabitants, its culture, and qualities which are more prosaic, such as the quality of a river which crosses the city and the quality of drinking water for its inhabitants. The only river which crosses the city of Iasi is Bahlui – at present, a river which is lazy, muddy, and polluted. As a suggestive conclusion, I want to note that not too long ago, with local funds as well as funds from the European Union’s program PHARE, the city began working to improve the quality of its water.

 

Organizer

International Center for Contemporary Art Bucharest

 

Co-organizers

Open Society Foundation Romania

Arts Council of Switzerland Pro Helvetia – SDC

Ministry of Culture and Cults Romania

French Cultural Center Iasi

National Museum “Moldova” Iasi

 

Sponsors

RAJAC Iasi

KNAUF Romania

Avicenna Computers

Grup FGM SA Iasi

 

Curator:

Matei Bejenaru (RO)

Assistant Curator:
Dan Zbarcea (RO)

 

Artists

Tania Abadjieva (BG)
Felix Aftene (RO)
Cristian Alexa (USA)
Jozsef Bartha (RO)
Matei Bejenaru (RO)
Pavel Braila (MD)
Mircea Cantor (RO)
Ioan Godeanu (RO)
Teodor Graur (RO)
Vlad Horodinca (RO)
Dan Jauca & Mihai Burlacu (RO)
Karen Kipphoff (DE)
Cezar Lazarescu (RO)
Dan Mihaltianu (DE/RO)
Cosmin Paulescu (RO)
Lia Perjovschi (RO)
Dan Perjovschi (RO)
Hanelore Percec-Odangiu (RO)
Marilena Preda-Sanc (RO)
Mircea Stanescu (RO)
Gusztav Uto & Konya Reka (RO)
Mihai Voicu (RO)
Bogdan Teodorescu (RO)
Dan Zbarcea (RO)
Sergei Yakunin & Anna Sydorenko (UKR)

 

Theoretical Symposiums

“The Museum and the Contemporary Art”
Palace of Culture Iasi

 

Participants:

Liviana Dan (Art critic, RO)
Irina Cios (Director ICCA, RO)
Simona Tanasescu (Director DAV - Ministry of Culture, RO)
Adrian Guta (Art critic, RO)
Horea Avram (art critic, RO)
Dan Perjovschi (artist, RO)
Teodor Graur (artist, RO)
Dan Zbarcea (artist, RO)

 

“Over Frontiers”

French Cultural Center Iasi

 

Participants:

Dorota Krakowska (PL)
Matei Bejenaru (RO)
Dan Perjovschi (RO)