Time For Alternatives
By Hou Hanru
In fact, the question of art institution's
relevance is becoming increasingly crucial and urgent today. In our age, art
equates art event. If the artwork is to be effectively presented, it needs to
be part of an art event. We are now living in the society of communication.
Spectacle is the form. The spectacle, or the event, is the very horizon and the
bottom line of "reality." To hold an event, the institution is an
indispensable physical condition. More importantly, it is also the ideological
foundation. What kind of institution should be created is now the crucial question.
This is because the institution is the central element in the power system, or mechanism,
that defines the notion and the boundary of art itself. "Where do you show
your work?" has become a more telling question than "What kind of work
do you make?"
The question of the global versus the local
is now the central issue in artistic and cultural debates. However, the global
and the local are not separate entities positioned to fight against each other.
Instead, they are two sides of the same coin. They are mutually binding and
stimulate each other, creating a continuously changing and increasingly open
world. There is no global without the local. The two are deeply interwoven and
from their merging new differences arise. In this process of producing new localities
the global is constantly being reformulated as a "summary" of the
multitude of singular new localities. No place in the world today is immune
from this turbulent movement. It makes our lives much more exciting, and of
course, challenging. Art and cultural activities are driving forces of this formidable
transformation, and they typically embody all the advantages and all the
problems of this global-local negotiation. Every event should result in the
production of new localities in the context of globalisation.[1] Cultural
differences and diversities are produced by positioning the event directly in
the local context. Discourse on cultural differences-especially those of
non-Westerners-and their equal right to exist in and influence the global scene
seems to be the commonly accepted new virtue. The production of new localities
in order to make them significant in the modern world, or to generate different
modernities, is the very root and aim of the actions of artists, from different
parts of the world, participating in the "global scene."
Further, it internally challenges and
alters the established definition and boundary of art itself because it tends
to be (1) multi-transdisciplinary, (2) multi-transcultural, and (3) a merging
of art and real life to generate new distinctions between private and public
spaces. This generates new paradigms of art language, which is by nature
immaterial, fluid, flexible, ephemeral, and constantly changing. These
paradigms echo the current geopolitical situation in which the Empire exists in
a virtual but real, fluid, and omnipresent network, in a shifting in-between
space that thrives on the hybridity and conflicts of cultures and
identities.[2] This should be capable of carrying out efficient strategies of
critique, resistance, and transgression against the hegemonic power of the
Empire. However, the mainstream "global art world," or the dominant
art institutions, still remain in the high-modernist tradition of the white
cube and post-minimalist, post-conceptualist forms. This
"transcendent" physicality constitutes a hegemonic ideology and
practice paradigm. This centralized power controls the definition, the
boundary, of contemporary art and propagates it across the world as if it were
the "universal truth," the only legitimated way, of
"global" art.
Against such a background, resistance to
this hegemony becomes necessary and urgent, especially in places where new
local identities are facing the pressure of globalising powers. This resistance
naturally generates and articulates new forms of action and organization
fundamentally different from those of the establishment. In fact, a great
number of initiatives already have been launched and promoted, and they
strongly emphasize the philosophy of "Do-It-Yourself." Indeed, DIY
communities and self-organizations are the main source of sustainability, the
main force in the revival and continued development of today's post-planning
cities. The creation and development of alternative art spaces is a perfect
example. Hakim Bey's Temporary Autonomous Zone (TAZ)[3] shifts constantly
between the existing centre and the periphery, creating a kind of
"emptiness" that subverts the established order. T.A.Z., according to
Hakim Bey, is "a certain kind of 'free enclave'" resisting to the
mainstream, State power structure. It's "an essay ('attempt'), a
suggestion, almost a poetic fancy" that encourages "Uprising",
or, "insurrection" against the State power. It's situated beyond all
kinds of established forms of organization and acts like uprising guerrilla.
"The TAZ is like an uprising which does not engage directly with the
State, a guerrilla operation which liberates an area (of land, of time, of
imagination) and then dissolves itself to re-form elsewhere/else when, before
the State can crush it." It's invisible, always shifting, "a
microcosm of that 'anarchist dream' of a free culture." "The TAZ is
an encampment of guerrilla ontologist: strike and run away." "The TAZ
has a temporary but actual location in time and a temporary but actual location
in space. But clearly it must also have 'location' in the Web." At the
end, "The TAZ is somewhere. It lies at the intersection of many forces, like
some pagan power - spot at the junction of mysterious ley-lines, visible to the
adept in seemingly unrelated bits of terrain, landscape, flows of air, water,
animals." It can bring about ultimate liberation "on the condition
that we already know ourselves as free beings."
This approach resonates with the current
global economic system, which is moving toward a new perspective that focuses
on productivity rather than the production of objects. Driven by the
development of new technologies, conventional modes of production and
consumption have been altered and substituted by new paradigms. In different locales
around the world, new autonomous zones of economic activities are being
established that resist and at the same time contribute to the globalisation of
dominant modes of production. These zones become an oppositional yet actively
participatory force against the domination of state and global economic
superpowers. Self-organizations such as international NGOs (Non-Governmental Organisations)
are now counterparts to the established bureaucratic order, in which
trans-national and global corporations push for the disintegration of national
and continental borders and for the dissolution of state sovereignty. Under the
imperial mantle of the new global economic-political power structure, the
immediate challenge is how to preserve freedom of speech, to encourage
critique, and to promote different modes of living and thinking.
Anti-globalisation movements incarnated by the protests in Seattle, Genoa and
currently in Johannesburg on the occasions of international conferences on
economic development, ecological crisis, AIDS and other globally urgent issues
are the most spectacular events of this kind of struggle while more
down-to-earth, everyday actions are being carried out by NGO's across the
world. These claims and struggles for economic and political transformation
have a direct cultural consequence: it reveals the necessity of searching for
and creating alternatives to the established cultural institution. This is
particularly obvious when the economic and social tensions become explosive.
Latin American countries have been suffering from regular economic and social
crises in the last decade due to the imposition of ultra-liberal policies by
the mainstream global economic institutions such as World Bank and
International Monetary Fund. The current collapse of Argentina's economy is the
most dramatic symptom of the crisis. Today, 60% of Argentineans are living
below the line of poverty. To survive, highly interestingly, they organise
themselves to develop a parallel and alternative economic exchange system, the
"Trueque" (barter). "Trueque Clubs" are being formed across
the country in which people are exchanging consumer goods and services with
tickets of "creditos" instead of the official currency that only very
few can have access to. This is becoming unexpectedly successful in terms of
social solidarity. As a resistance model it's no doubt an inspiring example for
us to think about economic, social and even cultural alternatives facing the
pressure of globalisation. Even more interesting and inspiring is that some
artists have already imagined and explored this alternative possibility in
their projects before the Argentina crisis in order to re-endow art with its
social engagement. The Colombian-Spanish group "Cambalache
Collective" (with "unfixed" members like Carolina Caycedo,
Adriana Garcia and Federico Guzman), in their "Museo de la Calle (the
Street Museum)", started from Bogota in 1998 and active in many different
cities in the world today, propose to the public to exchange their objects as
the centre of their "installation/performance". This promotes
"the idea of non-monetary exchange and barter as economic and cultural
activities parallel to the mainstream. It also allows us to question the nature
of social and human relationships in today's context dominated by money and
market."[4] The Danish artist Jens Haaning, for his exhibition in Friart,
Fribourg, Switzerland, last year, imported consumer goods from neighbouring
countries where the taxes were much lower than in Switzerland and sold them at
the original prices. The public can buy the same goods at a significantly lower
prices than the normal prices in Switzerland. This clearly defies the legal
system dictated by the monetary policy of the country. Equally concerned with
the question of economic inequality, the Thai artists Surasi Kusolwong has been
setting up markets of plastics goods imported from Thailand in European art institutions.
The public can buy these goods, "imported" as art objects, at the
"Minimal price" with great joy. In the meantime, questions of
cultural differences, economic inequalities, social solidarity and global-local
conflict, etc. are clearly brought up. These artists respond to the continuous
social crisis of political-economic struggles, bringing to the fore conflicts
between the concepts-strategies of immediacy/multiplicity and the stability of
established norms. They have proposed new solutions to the global-capitalist
problem. Similar to the above mentioned examples, at the 2002 Gwangju Biennale,
the Mexico City based artists run gallery and working group Kurimanzutto
realized a wonderful project that is extremely relevant to the non-western
economic and social context. Ironically calling their piece "Friendly
Capitalism", they set up a space with a blue carpet and a photocopy
machine inside the exhibition hall. They made photocopies of the official
Biennale catalogue and sold them to the public at a much lower price. By miming
the piracy of information products-something largely welcomed by the local
public as a means of access to information and new technologies-Kurimanzutto
hit upon a fundamental problem in the logic of capitalist systems of production
and communication. In fact, piracy and other alternative economic activities
are the most efficient, and very often, the only available means for people
from the non-West to access technological and economic progress
To explore the issues of economic exchange,
cultural difference and hybridity in contemporary art, one must first and
foremost consider the need to create alternative contexts, namely institutions,
for art activity. Asia-Pacific provides a dynamic example of this transition in
terms of integrating itself in the globalisation process and reinventing
different modernities. The unprecedented speed of modernization and
democratisation of society in this region has led to self-discovery and to a
search for autonomous modes of living, thinking, and expression that stand in
contrast to conservative and hegemonic political systems and social values.
There are enthusiastic and fervent demands to put contemporary art from this
region on the global map. This is achieved through two intimately linked
directives: the creation of new infrastructures and conditions inside the
region for the activities, and the exportation of these activities outside the
region, especially in renowned "international arenas" such as major
biennials and museums. This encourages the artists living in the region to
develop new strategies, the most significant tendency being the creation and propagation
of self-organized alternative spaces run by the art community.[5] Some individual
artists like Judy Freya Sibayan from Philippines and Tsuyoshi Ozawa have been
developing their "global networks" of nomad "institutions" such
as "Scapular Galleries" and "Nasubi Galleries" to provide
alternative spaces for the art world to manifest their imaginations and
creativities beyond the established system. Other artists, working in more
collective and communitarian manners, organise themselves together to set up self-organisations
and exhibition spaces, etc. These organizations are extremely diverse,
responding to the specific cultural, economic, and political conditions of
their own localities and identifying the very need to be different. This new
movement, from the very beginning, was born from the process of artists
engaging themselves in the creation of new urban spaces and life styles in
light of the impact of urban expansion-the most essential aspect of
Asia-Pacific's modernization. Almost all self-organized artists' groups and
spaces emerge in cities and evolve in their negotiations for particular
positions in the urban life. They are often physically small, flexible, and
continuously adapting to the conditions driven by urban development.
Alternative spaces such as IT Park (Taipei), Para-site (Hong Kong), Project 304
(Bangkok), Loft (Beijing), About Caf� (Bangkok), Big Sky Mind
(Manila), Plastic Kinetic Worms (Singapore), Loop (Seoul), Pool (Seoul), Cemeti
Art House (Jogyakarta), and Ruangruppa (Jakarta) are located in the historic
centers of their cities and effectively influence the surrounding communities.
Other groups such as Big Tail Elephants (Guangzhou), U-kabat (Bangkok), APA
(Kuala Lumpur), and Forum A (Seoul), being more "immaterial,"
practice urban-guerrilla strategies by occupying temporary spaces in their
cities. They all, however, share an
interest in new technologies and related cultural strategies as active
reactions to the demands of the epoch. Numerous alternative spaces and groups
have focused on such a direction. Videotage (Hong Kong) and Movelfund (Manila)
are influential bases for experimental video and film production and organizers
of multimedia festivals. Project 304 presents the biannual Bangkok Experimental
Film Festival. In the meantime, a new generation is actively forging the new
Asian youth culture and new forms of expression, which are deeply rooted in the
culture of consumption (advertising, etc.) yet highly critical of this
"raw reality." The complex, often contradictory, relations between
artists and their social conditions, especially the institutional infrastructure,
have led these artists to an understanding of the need to develop different
visions and methods of contemporary art creation. This further pushes them to promote
different ways of defining contemporary art.
.
For various reasons, ranging from personal
to economic, from social-political to strategic, these alternative spaces are
constantly appearing, evolving, and disappearing, and ultimately transform
themselves into different modes of practice. This is precisely the essence of
the new paradigm of "institution": always moving, flexible, changing,
and reinventing itself. These spaces have also formed a trans-regional network to
exchange their experiences and to reinforce their common power base. Meetings
and conferences among the various groups in Asian cities are regularly
organized. Information, experiences, and visions are published, exchanged, and
distributed. Many of these groups have also established wider, transcontinental
collaborations with artist-run organizations in Europe, North and South
America, and elsewhere. The Project 1 of 2002 Gwangju Biennale is perhaps the
most important summit for such networking so far[6]. It manifested the immense
potential power of this new paradigm of art infrastructures and action modes.
This new paradigm has been generated through the experiments of artists. In
turn, it is deeply informing and transforming both the notion of art and the
practices of artists. New languages and issues are hence created and
experimented with. This further influences the global scene. If there is an
irresistible drive to present truly global contemporary creations in
international events-beyond the traditional Western paradigm-the most crucial
shift that we should make is first to learn how to present such a paradigm
mutation. We need veritable new initiatives and alternatives. It's the time for
them.
29 August 2002
[1] See Arjun
Appadurai, "Modernity At Large, Cultural Dimensions of Globalisation",
University of Minnesota Press, 1996.
[2] See Michael
Hardt and Antonio Negri, "Empire" (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University
Press, 2000).
[3] See Hakim Bey
"T.A.Z, The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic
Terrorism", Autonomedia Anti-copyright, 1985,1911, May be freely pirated
& quoted - the author & publisher, however, would like to be informed
at: Autonomadia, P.O. Box 568, Williamsburgh Station, Brooklyn, NY 11211-0568.
(the book is available on the internet for free)
[4] See the press
release of Combablache Collective's exhibition in "Sous la terre, il y a
le ciel", curated by Evelyne Jouanno, Projektraum, Kunsthalle, Bern,
Switzerland, 2002.
[5] For
information about the current situation of alternative organizations of
contemporary art in the Asian-Pacific region, see Pause: Project 1 (Gwangju
Biennale, 2002), and Alternatives: Contemporary Art Spaces in Asia (Tokyo: The
Japan Foundation Asia Center, 2002), as well as the Web sites of the
organizations discussed herein.
[6] Co-curated by
Hou Hanru, Charles Esche and Sung Wang-Kuyng, the project intends to break away
from conventional biennales by emphasizing on alternative ideas, approaches,
languages and organisations in contemporary art and culture activities. 26 artist
run, alternative spaces from Asia, Europe and other parts of the world have
been invited to auto-curate their programs in the biennale while meetings among
them at a global scale have been realised for the first time.
Further Reading: Sharing a Sensibility: a Conversation with Hou Hanru
http://www.artpractical.com/feature/sharing_a_sensibility_a_conversation_with_hou_hanru/
