PERIFERIC - periferic 4 (2000)

Home

periferic 4 (2000)

Email PDF

Scris de Administrator | 06 Septembrie 2011

24-28 Mai 2000

Baia Turceasca Iasi, Palatul Culturii Iasi, Baia Publica Iasi, Centrul Cultural Francez Iasi, Teatrul National “Vasile Alecsandri” Iasi

Concept

BETWEEN CENTER AND PERIPHERY

Matei Bejenaru

Artist, curator of Periferic 4

1. The MCA, the Renaissance Society, the Center for Contemporary Photography, the Chicago Arts Institute, the Chicago Cultural Center, the Chicago Video Data Bank are the places in which you can meet contemporary art in Chicago. As for myself, an artist from the east of Europe, it was impressive to discover this density of places and events. While I was there, I found out during the discussions with artists and exhibition organizers that “the real center” of American contemporary art is divided between the East Coast (New York) and the West Coast (Los Angeles). The relation between center and periphery functions in America too, but within parameters altogether different from those I have estimated when I conceived the Periferic. But does this comparison really make any sense at all? I would say that it does, in the measure in which an understanding of the American context could help identify efficient strategies feasible in Romania as well. In what the American case is concerned, the issue consists in finding modalities through which certain local players (otherwise interesting artists) can become global players, all this taking place in the two centers mentioned above.

In what Romania is concerned, the main issue is the “cultural connection” to the civilized world of an isolated and poor post-communist society, facing a continuous identity crisis, insufficiently urbanized and with a non-competitive technology. The local and national specific features are related rather to the confrontation with the isolationist and conservative mentalities than to the effort to enter “the global trend” of the cultural artistic and managerial discourse. The interest in the Romanian contemporary artists is directly proportional with the interest in Romania as a whole. It seems even more difficult to accept the fact that the visibility of Romanian artists is influenced by the annual rate of inflation (as indicator of the economic performances), the level of outside investment, the quantity of IT (computers and software) in relation to the total number of inhabitants, the kilometers of highways built yearly, the number of phone stations, the quality of services, the annual number of foreign tourists visiting the country, the weight of the middle class in the Romanian society, the degree of local autonomy, the degree of corruption and of the separation of powers in the state. I made of course a subjective enumeration of objective indicators. Nevertheless, if their values will be closer to the European ones, the Romanian society will get a radiography that would resemble more those of modern countries, the international interest (not only cultural) will be higher, the number of opportunities will increase and, from our viewpoint, the medium time spent by international curators and managers in our country will no longer be reduced to the usual 24-48 hours of staying in Bucharest especially (Robert Fleck, one of the curators of the Manifesta 2 exhibition, said in an interview that in many of the periphery countries the artistic stage is extremely limited and everything takes place exclusively in the capital, where, in a coffee shop for instance, the artists meet all the time).

As a wrote with another occasion, I believe that the development of an infrastructure (institutions, galleries, publications, foundations, etc.) capable to promote contemporary art in Romania will be the natural result of the maturation (normalization) of the Romanian society and will lead both to the “synchronization” of the local artistic discourses with the international ones and to the efficient allocation of resources in a country that on medium term will remain poor. Like the institutions in Chicago I enumerated in the beginning, which are sponsored by private organizations and carry on their activities with money coming from their own funds or from those of different foundations, individuals and public financing projects, the important contemporary art events which took place in Romania during the passed years have been the result of private initiatives (foundations, organizations, etc.) 2, with the exception of the Board of Visual Arts within the Ministry of Culture which added a new dimension3 to the Romanian participation to the Biennial in Venice. Also, some art museums in Romania have “accepted” to house contemporary art exhibitions, without financial involvement or significant logistics.

As any change from a reference system to another supposes a transitory order in which the system’s state parameters experience uncontrollable oscillations of great amplitudes, the transition of the Romanian society from a certain economic and political order to another is a long and syncopated phenomenon, influenced by the initial reference level and by the way in which the process started (the cultural field is a delicate seismograph recording these changes). I believe that the second half of the ’90 has led to a maturation of the artistic and managerial discourses in the area of contemporary art and, if artists, curators and organizers will lucidly and coherently carry on their projects, we will be able to achieve also the “up-grade” concerning the international interest in the Romanian context.

2. Travelling by the TAROM Iasi-Bucharest flight one will be surprised to see that the plane first heads north to stop in Suceava. The principle of economic profitableness indicates us coldly that the number of passengers travelling by plane from Iasi to Bucharest is too small to assure a direct flight. But, we ask ourselves, who could be the potential passengers? Due to the high price of the ticket, they are, first of all, the businessmen, because we can not talk about a constant flux of foreign tourists. The absence of businessmen travelling to (from) Iasi makes me think that the local economic climate is not a favorable one either, which contributes essentially to the isolation of the city, isolation which affects also the cultural area. Where the economy is prosperous, the people are dynamic, they coordinate their actions following rational projects, they change and accept ideas which they do not always agree with, they circulate, cultivate the differences, build a civil society capable of protecting their interests, produce and consume symbolical (cultural) goods which reflect an open world based on freedom and individualism.

The isolation and the poor economic development of the city of Iasi influenced also the cultural environment, dominated by traditionalism and a damaging addiction to the past. The renewal to which we have been assisting during these last few years was not achieved within the monumental cultural institutions built up a century ago, but through the efforts of young intellectuals with European views who, although lacking economic or political power and not holding key positions in the system, have turned the cultural life in a more dynamic one and won the media confrontation with the conservatives. In this sense, the most important local daily newspaper (“Monitorul” – now with a national network) and the most prestigious cultural journal (“Timpul”) have housed in their pages the debates initiated by young writers and artists from Iasi.

The “Periferic” festival and the several exhibitions organized in Iasi during the past years have outlined a group of young visual artists interested in making and thinking contemporary art. Though their preoccupations may be different (from personal mythologies to social and political criticism), the thing that joins them is their desire to outrun the provincial prejudices of the space they live in, and they have understood that this is possible through organization. Under way of becoming legal, the “Vector” foundation has as major purposes to promote these artists from Iasi, to establish within the space of the Turkish Bath a contemporary art center and, of course, to assure the continuity of the Periferic. I believe that with these four editions the festival has served its political purpose of imposing contemporary art in a context with no tradition in the field; it remains for the manifestation to gain more quality and visibility in the future. Thus, the festival will have a good chance of becoming the “Periferic” Biennial, organized in the eastern extremity of the future united Europe.

The center of the city of Iasi was enriched lately with a new and modern building, resemblingin what the “look” and the dimensions are concerned with the complex “Sofitel-World Trade Center” in Bucharest. It will be the headquarters of an international business center and it willbe directly connected to the Iasi airport, which undergoes as well a modernization process meant to turn it into an international one.

Could this be a sign announcing the good times lying ahead of us?

Notes:

“Nous vivons une epoque formidable, le progres fait rage”, interview with Maria Lind and Robert Fleck, “d’Letzeburger Land”, Luxembourg, no. 26 / the 26th of July 1998.

An important part is played by the International Center for Contemporary Art in Bucharest (CIAC Bucharest– director Irina Cios), the Pro Helvetia Foundation in Bucharest (director Gabriela Tudor), and also by the initiatives of the artists who established their own foundations: the Contemporary Art Archive (AAC – directors Lia & Dan Perjovschi), the ARTeast Foundation in Tg. Mures (director Jozsef Bartha), the Transit Foundation in Cluj, the ETNA Foundation in Sf. Gheorghe (president Gusztav Uto), the FORMAT Foundation initiated by Alexandru Patatics in Timisoara. Mention must be also made of the three publications of contemporary art: Balkon in Cluj (director Timotei Nadasan), Artelier (editors: Magda Carneci, Ruxandra Balaci and Adela Vaetisi) and Arta (editor Adrian Guta).

The Board of Visual Arts within the Ministry of Culture has managed as a result of a competition of curator projects to organize within the Romanian Pavilion at the 1999 Biennial in Venice a contemporary art professional exhibition (curator: Judit Angel, artists: Dan Perjovschi and the Subreal Group, director DAV: Simona Tanasescu). We must mention that the change was initiated by the critic Adrian Guta during the 1997 edition of the Biennial, when he organized for the first time an exhibition of the young contemporary artists.

It is about the exhibitions and symposiums organized by the critic Liviana Dan at the Bruckental Museum in Sibiu, the individual and group exhibitions organized by the critic Ruxandra Balaci at the National Romanian Art Museum in Bucharest, the “ZONA” Festival organized by the critic Ileana Pintilie first at the Art Museum in Timisoara and then at the Hungarian Theatre, the exhibitions organized at the Tara Crisurilor Museum in Oradea (the IntermediART Biennial), the Art Museum in Cluj and the Palace of Culture in Iasi ( the Periferic Festival).

Concept

INTRE CENTRU SI PERIFERIE
Matei Bejenaru
Artist, curator Periferic 4

1.MCA, The Rennaissance Society, Center for Contemporary Photography, Chicago Arts Institute, Chicago Cultural Center, Chicago Video Data Bank sunt spatiile în care te poti întalni cu arta contemporana în Chicago si, pentru mine, un artist din estul Europei, a fost impresionant sa descopar aceasta densitate de locuri si evenimente. Pe parcurs, în discutii cu artisti si galeristi am aflat, însa, ca “adevaratul centru” al artei contemporane americane este împartit între coasta de est (New York) si cea de vest (Los Angeles). Raportul “centru(e) - periferie” functioneaza si în America însa în cu totul alti parametri decat cei pe care i-am luat în calcul cand am gandit Periferic-ul. Dar, de fapt, are vreun sens sa fac o asemenea comparatie? As spune ca da, în masura în care printr-o întelegere a contextului american s-ar putea identifica strategii eficiente ce ar putea fi aplicate în Romania. In cazul american, problema se pune în special pe modalitatile prin care anumiti jucatori locali (artisti de altfel interesanti) pot deveni jucatori globali, acest lucru realizandu-se în special în cele doua centre mentionate mai sus.

In cazul romanesc, este vorba de “racordarea culturala” la lumea civilizata contemporana a unei societati post-comuniste izolate si sarace, aflate în continua criza de identitate, insuficient urbanizate si tehnologizate. Particularitatile locale si nationale tin mai mult de confruntarea cu mentalitatile izolationiste si conservatoare decat de încercarea de a intra în “trend-ul globalist” al discursului artistic si managerial cultural. Interesul pentru artistii romani contemporani este direct proportional cu interesul pentru Romania. Pare mai greu de acceptat faptul ca vizibilitatea artistilor romani sa fie influentata de rata anuala a inflatiei (ca indicator al performantelor economice), nivelul investitiilor straine, cantitatea de IT (computere si soft) pe cap de locuitor, kilometrii de autostrazi construiti într-un an, numarul de posturi telefonice fixe si mobile, calitatea serviciilor, numarul anual de turisti straini ce viziteaza tara, ponderea clasei de mijloc în societate, gradul de autonomie locala, gradul de coruptie si al separatiei puterilor în stat. Desigur, am dat o enumerare subiectiva de indicatori obiectivi. Însa cu cat valorile lor vor fi mai apropiate de cele europene, cu atat societatea romaneasca va avea o radiografie mai apropiata de cea a unei tari moderne si interesul international (nu numai cultural) va fi mai ridicat, oportunitatile vor creste, iar din punctul nostru de vedere timpul mediu de sedere în tara al curatorilor si managerilor internationali nu va mai fi doar 24-48 de ore petrecute în special la Bucuresti (Robert Fleck, unul din curatorii expozitiei Manifesta 2, spunea într-un interviu1 ca în multe tari din periferie scena artistica este foarte limitata si totul se întampla doar în capitala unde intr-o cafenea, de exemplu, artistii se întalnesc tot timpul).

Asa cum am mai scris si cu o alta ocazie, cred ca dezvoltarea unei infrastructuri (institutii, galerii, publicatii, fundatii…) care sa promoveze arta contemporana în Romania va fi un rezultat firesc al maturizarii (normalizarii) societatii romanesti si va duce atat la “sincronizarea” discursurilor artistice locale cu cele internationale cat si la eficientizarea alocarii resurselor într-o tara care pe termen mediu va ramane saraca. Asemenea institutiilor din Chicago enumerate la început care sunt patronate de organizatii private si îsi desfasoara activitatile din fonduri proprii sau provenite de la fundatii, persoane particulare si proiecte publice de finantare, evenimentele importante de arta contemporana din ultimii ani din Romania au fost rezultatul unor initiative private (fundatii, organizatii…)2, exceptie facand Directia de arte vizuale din Ministerul Culturii care a dat o noua dimensiune3 participarii romanesti la Bienala de la Venetia. De asemenea, unele muzee4 de arta din Romania au “acceptat” în spatiile lor expozitii de arta contemporana, fara o implicare financiara sau logistica semnificativa.

Asa cum orice schimbare de la un sistem de referinta la altul presupune un regim tranzitoriu în care parametrii de stare ai sistemului au oscilatii de amplitudini mari si incontrolabile, la fel si tranzitia societatii romanesti de la un regim politic si economic catre un altul este un fenomen de durata si plin de sincope, influentat de nivelul de referinta initial si de felul în care s-a pornit procesul (domeniul cultural este un fin seismograf al acestor transformari). Cred ca a doua jumatate a anilor ’90 a dus la o maturizare a discursurilor artistice si manageriale5 din zona artei contemporane si, daca artistii, curatorii si organizatorii îsi vor continua cu luciditate si coerenta proiectele, vom realiza si “up-grade”-ul privind interesul international asupra contextului romanesc.

2. Folosind cursa TAROM Iasi-Bucuresti vei constata cu surprindere ca te îndrepti mai întai catre nord pentru a face o escala la Suceava. Principiul rentabilitatii economice ne spune cu raceala ca numarul pasagerilor care circula de la Iasi la Bucuresti cu avionul este prea mic pentru a se asigura cursa directa. Dar, de fapt, cine ar putea fi potentialii calatori? Datorita pretului ridicat al biletului, acestia sunt, în primul rand, oamenii de afaceri, caci de un flux constant de turisti straini nu poate fi vorba. Lipsa oamenilor de afaceri care calatoresc la (de la) Iasi, ma face sa cred ca si climatul economic local nu este unul favorabil, fapt care contribuie esential la izolarea Iasului, inclusiv pe taram cultural. Acolo unde economia prospera, oamenii sunt dinamici, îsi coordoneaza actiunile dupa proiecte rationale, schimba si accepta idei cu care nu totdeauna sunt de acord, circula, cultiva diferentele, îsi construiesc o societate civila care sa le apere interesele, produc si consuma bunuri simbolice (culturale) care reflecta o lume deschisa bazata pe libertate si individualism.

Izolarea si slaba dezvoltare economica a orasului Iasi au influentat si contextul cultural, dominat de traditionalism si paseism pagubos. Înnoirea la care asistam în ultimii ani nu s-a facut în cadrul monumentalelor institutii culturale construite acum un veac, ci prin tinerii intelectuali cu deschidere europeana, care, desi nu au putere economica sau politica si nu detin pozitii puternice în sistem, au dinamizat viata culturala si au castigat confruntarea mediatica cu conservatorii. În acest sens, cel mai important cotidian local (“Monitorul” - acum cu o retea nationala) si periodicul cultural cel mai prestigios (“Timpul”) au gazduit în paginile lor dezbaterile initiate de tinerii scriitori si artisti ieseni.

Festivalul “Periferic” si cele cateva expozitii organizate la Iasi în ultimii ani, au conturat un grup de tineri artisti vizuali care sunt interesati sa faca si sa gandeasca arta contemporana. Desi preocuparile lor sunt diferite (de la mitologiile personale, la critica sociala si politica), ceea ce îi uneste este dorinta de a depasi complexele provinciale ale spatiului în care traiesc si au înteles ca acest lucru se poate realiza prin organizare. Aflata în curs de legalizare, fundatia “Vector” are ca scopuri principale promovarea acestor artisti ieseni, fondarea în spatiul Baii Turcesti din Iasi a unui centru de arta contemporana si, desigur, asigurarea continuitatii Periferic-ului. Cred ca dupa patru editii festivalul si-a atins scopul politic de impunere a artei contemporane într-un context fara traditie în domeniu, ramanand ca pe viitor manifestarea sa castige mai mult în calitate si vizibilitate. In acest sens, poate se va transforma în Bienala “Periferic”, organizata la extremitatea estica a viitoarei Europe unite.
In ultimul timp, centrul orasului Iasi s-a îmbogatit cu o noua cladire moderna asemanatoare ca “look” si dimensiuni cu complexul “Sofitel-World Trade Center” Bucuresti. Ea va fi sediul unui centru international de afaceri si va fi legata direct de aeroportul Iasi, intrat si el într-un proces de modernizare pentru a deveni international.
Vremuri bune la orizont?…

Note:

“Nous vivons une epoque formidable, le progres fait rage”, interviu cu Maria Lind si Robert Fleck, “d’Letzeburger Land” Luxemburg, Nr.26 / 26 iunie 1998
Un rol important îl are Centrul International pentru Arta Contemporana Bucuresti (CIAC Bucuresti - director Irina Cios), Fundatia Pro Helvetia Bucuresti (director Gabriela Tudor), precum si initiativele artistilor care si-au constituit propriile fundatii: Arhiva de arta contemporana AAC (directori Lia & Dan Perjovschi), Fundatia ARTeast Tg. Mures (director Jozsef Bartha), Fundatia Tranzit Cluj, Fundatia ETNA Sf. Gheorghe (presedinte Gusztav Uto), fundatia FORMAT initiata de Alexandru Patatics la Timisoara. De asemenea trebuiesc remarcate si cele trei publicatii de arta contemporana: Balkon din Cluj (director Timotei Nadasan), Artelier (redactori: Magda Carneci, Ruxandra Balaci si Adela Vaetisi) si Arta (redactor Adrian Guta).
Directia de arte vizuale din Ministerul Culturii a reusit în urma unui concurs de proiecte curatoriale sa organizeze în Pavilionul romanesc la Bienala de la Venetia din 1999 o expozitie profesionista de arta contemporana ( curator: Judit Angel, artisti: Dan Perjovschi si grupul Subreal, director DAV: Simona Tanasescu). Trebuie mentionat ca începutul schimbarii a fost facut de criticul Adrian Guta la editia din 1997 a Bienalei cand a organizat pentru prima data o expozitie cu tineri artisti contemporani.
Este vorba de expozitiile si simpozioanele organizate de criticul Liviana Dan la Muzeul Bruckental la Sibiu, expozitiile personale si de grup organizate de criticul Ruxandra Balaci la Muzeul National de Arta a Romaniei Bucuresti, Festivalul “ZONA” organizat de criticul Ileana Pintilie mai întai la Muzeul de Arta Timisoara si mai apoi la Teatrul Maghiar, expozitiile organizate la Muzeul Tarii Crisurilor Oradea (Bienala IntermediART), Muzeul de Arta Cluj si Palatul Culturii Iasi (Festivalul Periferic).

Organizatori

Centrul International pentru Arta Contemporana Bucuresti

Co-organizers

Fundatia Elevetiana pentru cultura – Pro Helvetia
Ministerul Culturii Romania
Centrul Cultural Francez Iasi
Centrul Ceh Bucuresti
DNT Iasi
Complexul National Muzeal “Moldova” Iasi
Primaria Municipiului Iasi

Artisti

“Uscat-Umed”
Baia Turceasca Iasi
Curator: Matei Bejenaru

Artisti:

Agatha Zobrist & Theres Waeckerlin (CH)
Xavier Lopez Quintana (S)
Dan Acostioaei (RO)
Roddy Hunter (UK)
Helen McBride (UK)
Yuri Leiderman (RUS)
Lynn Hassan (USA)
Simona Tanasescu (RO)
Rostopasca Group (RO)
Karen Kipphoff (RO)
Frantisek Kowolowski (CZ)
Dana Dirvariu & Adina Tofan (RO)
Dan Jauca (RO)
Mihai Burlacu (RO)
Mircea Cantor (RO)
Lisa Jane Galloway (UK)
Dan Zbarcea (RO)
Mihai Voicu (RO)

“Cartografieri personale”
Palatul Culturii Iasi
Curator: Matei Bejenaru

Artisti:

Teodor Graur (RO)
Alexandru Patatics (RO)
Peter Hecker (HU)
Cristian Alexa (USA)
Calin Man (RO)
Gabor Gerhes (HU)
Dan Mihaltianu (RO)
Florin Grigoras (RO)

“Girls Show”
Artiste din Republica Ceha
Baia publica Iasi
Curator: Radek Vana (CZ)

Artiste
Veronika Bromova
Ivana Lomova
Iveta Ducakova
Milena Dopitova
Nathalie Prevot
Michaela Thelenova
Josefina Slezakova
Erika Bornova
Jitka Geringova

Sesiuni de performance
Centrul Cutural Francez Iasi

Artisti:
Julie Bacon (UK)
Bogdan Teodorescu (RO)
Gusztav Uto & Eva Vajda (RO)
Sebastian Branzei (RO)
Cosmin Paulescu (RO)
Bogdan Focseneanu & Dragos Alexandrescu (RO)
John Lamb (UK)
Felix Aftene (RO)
Cezar Lazarescu (RO)
Companie Denis Tricot (FR)
Anton Lederer & Margerethe Makovec (A)