As biennale exhibitions has been expanded into all of the world since 1990s, these trends of blockbuster exhibitions have caused several problems. For instance, some major curators monopolized most global size exhibitions despite of a variety of cultural and historical backgrounds. Besides, due to a...
As biennale exhibitions has been expanded into all of the world since 1990s, these trends of blockbuster exhibitions have caused several problems. For instance, some major curators monopolized most global size exhibitions despite of a variety of cultural and historical backgrounds. Besides, due to a strong connection between these curators and their own artists, the young emerging artists' opportunities tend to be reduced as a result of the power game. In addition, major curators' power have influence on the exhibition style as well as on the theme itself. Some artists who did not involved that kind of huge scale exhibitions dispute that the direction of the exhibition is concentrating on the curator's interest instead of artists or viewers. Although these dissatisfactions could not portray correctly the process of organizing and managing system of a biennale exhibition, those biennale exhibitions held in recent have shown tautologic discourses without any passion and positive attitude direct to the exploitation of our society as a vanguard. In the process of comparing several kinds of biennale exhibitions, I could find that some artists who participated several biennale exhibitions at the same time did not present their creative vision, although the triumph of an exhibition was typically measured by the amount of visitors. Thus, the aim of this article is to prove that the biennale can show us new cultural discourse as well as progressive method of understanding our times. Is biennale producing the real 'global standard'? If biennale has done it, could this global standard present upto-date paradigm for the unique exhibition system? Is biennale providing an useful opportunity for the understanding and communicating of contemporary art through the recontextualization which is pronounced by the publicity of curator and organizing committee? How can we find the distinctive strategy from each biennale exhibition including Venice Biennale? Biennale, as a blockbuster exhibition, always requires a degree of hype, otherwise it would not be a special event and would not attract a big enough audience. It is the actual reason why major biennale exhibitions seem to be similar artistic events. Unfortunately, it seems that the excess of biennale exhibitions might bring about the lack of contents. In this case, the biennale syndrome would being a kind of the center of poverty, in spite of the visual splendor. After all, following the global standard may not be a matter of great importance now. What really matters is how each biennale exhibition which started under the different conditions can search their own identity.
As biennale exhibitions has been expanded into all of the world since 1990s, these trends of blockbuster exhibitions have caused several problems. For instance, some major curators monopolized most global size exhibitions despite of a variety of cultural and historical backgrounds. Besides, due to a strong connection between these curators and their own artists, the young emerging artists' opportunities tend to be reduced as a result of the power game. In addition, major curators' power have influence on the exhibition style as well as on the theme itself. Some artists who did not involved that kind of huge scale exhibitions dispute that the direction of the exhibition is concentrating on the curator's interest instead of artists or viewers. Although these dissatisfactions could not portray correctly the process of organizing and managing system of a biennale exhibition, those biennale exhibitions held in recent have shown tautologic discourses without any passion and positive attitude direct to the exploitation of our society as a vanguard. In the process of comparing several kinds of biennale exhibitions, I could find that some artists who participated several biennale exhibitions at the same time did not present their creative vision, although the triumph of an exhibition was typically measured by the amount of visitors. Thus, the aim of this article is to prove that the biennale can show us new cultural discourse as well as progressive method of understanding our times. Is biennale producing the real 'global standard'? If biennale has done it, could this global standard present upto-date paradigm for the unique exhibition system? Is biennale providing an useful opportunity for the understanding and communicating of contemporary art through the recontextualization which is pronounced by the publicity of curator and organizing committee? How can we find the distinctive strategy from each biennale exhibition including Venice Biennale? Biennale, as a blockbuster exhibition, always requires a degree of hype, otherwise it would not be a special event and would not attract a big enough audience. It is the actual reason why major biennale exhibitions seem to be similar artistic events. Unfortunately, it seems that the excess of biennale exhibitions might bring about the lack of contents. In this case, the biennale syndrome would being a kind of the center of poverty, in spite of the visual splendor. After all, following the global standard may not be a matter of great importance now. What really matters is how each biennale exhibition which started under the different conditions can search their own identity.
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
문제 정의
1980년 그가 제안했던 아페르토는 청년 작가를 위한 전시로서 장 클레르가 폐지할 때까지 젊고 실험적인 동시대 미술의 발표장으로서 그 역할을 담당했다. 그가 새삼 이탈리아어로 '열림을 의미하는 아페르토에 모든 사람들에게라는 말을 붙여 만들어낸 아페르튀토(Apertutto, APERTO over All)'는 몇 회에 걸쳐 격렬한 비난에 부딪치고 있던 베니스 비엔날레에 생기를 부여하고자 한다. 그러면서 제만은 102명의 작가를 참가시킨 1999 베니스 비엔날레에 100세를 앞두고 있던 루이즈 부르주아를 상징적으로 앞세웠다.
현재 세계 전역에서 크고 작은 규모의 비엔날레를 개최하고 있기 때문에 그 전체상을 파악하기는 힘들지만, 지금까지 알려진 국제적으로 유명한 비엔날레를 우선 꼽아 보자. 유럽에서 뒤늦게 통일 국가를 이룩한 이탈리아가 민족 의식을 높이기 위해 국왕 결혼기념일에 맞춰 1895년부터 관광도시 베니스에서 개최하기 시작한 베니스 비엔날레, 미국 현대미술의 후견인이었던 휘트니(G.
가설 설정
1)바울이야말로 네트워크 개념에 가장 부합하는 초기 기독교인이었던 것이다. 오늘날 비엔날레 큐레이터들 역시 정주를 거부하며 끊임없이 여행하고, 그 과정 중에 새로운 개념을 생산한다.
2. 차별화의 전략, 비엔날레는 전시를 재맥락화한다?
제안 방법
또한《되돌아온 부메랑》이라는 주제로 1991년 시드니 비엔날레를 감독했던 르네 블록(Rene Block)은 1992년 터키 출신의 큐레이터인 바시프 코르툰(Vasif Kortun)에 의해 국제 비엔날레로 성장한 제4회 . 이스탄불 비엔날레의 감독으로 선임된 후《역설적 세계에서 예술의 비전》을 주제로 한 전시를 기획했다. 물론 1995년 베니스 비엔날레의 총감독으로 이탈리아 출신의 인사가 아니라 프랑스 미술평론가이자 피카소미술관장인 장 클레르가 위촉되었음을 앞에서 이미 확인했었다.
이 흔적은 추상적인 드로잉 같기도 하고 비밀스럽게 작성된 글자 같기도 했다. 한편 큐레이터인 반츠는 데리다의『차연S Q密/勿zee)』에서 따온 '차연의 성장 원리란 문구를 큰글씨로 벽면에 적어놓았다. 이 전시를 방문한 사람들은 관객이자 독자이며 해체주의자인 데리다를 추적하며 이 '칠해진 문구가 시각적이면서 동시에 물리적인 것의 해체를 지향하고 있음을 간파할 수 있었다.
성능/효과
이러한 잘못된 관행은 결국 1982년에 열린 제12회 파리 청년 작가 비엔레의 커미셔너로 지정되었던 성완경 인하대 교수가 파리 비엔날레의 운영 정관에 따른 커미셔너의 역할을 무시한 채 한국미술협회의 국제분과위원회가 일방적으로 작가를 선정하고 통보하자 이의 부당성을 지적하며 커미셔너를 사퇴해 버리는 결과를 초래하기도 했다.6)더 구체적으로 살펴보면 파리 청년 작가 비엔날레의 운영방식은 베니스 비엔날레와 성격이 다른데 , 세계를 크게 네 개의 지 역으로 분류하고 각 지 역의 비엔날레 연락원 (프랑스어로 '코레스퐁당)이 추천한 자료를 대상으로 국제 커미셔너 회의를 통해 최종적으로 출품 작가를 선정하는 절차를 밟는 것이었다. 이런 과정은실험적이고 진취적인 의욕을 지닌 35세 이하의 젊은 작가를 발굴한다는 취지에 부응하는 합리적 방식이라고 볼 수 있는데, 우리나라의 경우 그 절차와 과정을 무시하거나 곡해해 버린 것이다.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.