How about the so-called 'education hub' on the BOS website - under a fortnight to go until closing and there is still nothing there
get with the program, guys. Biennale catalogues have always had images of past works by many artists, often not the actual works in the show, because that's just the nature of the beast - a biennale is a show for which artists often make new work, and if it isn't its not taking any risks. Maybe you want the catalogue to come out later than the opening so that it does have images from the show - maybe there will be another publication to come out which has images from the actual show, like the Asia Pacific Triennial does - maybe the Biennale people would have loved to have current images in the catalogue as much as you do but artists didn't cough them up in time...
+ why should not having an image to reproduce stop you reviewing the art that many of your readers have seen?
i think someone should let Raeda Saadeh know that she's somehow gotten her head stuck in a washing basket. thats if she hasnt realised. oh wait, its art.
Get a copy-editor
The catalogue for On Reason And Emotion came out about halfway through the run of the 04 Biennale and managed to feature works actually in show. Same with 02 and 00 catalogues. That's the program qart, not *another* publication.
I suspect the far flung stuff is to satisfy the politics of access and equity - particularly in the western suburbs - because otherwise, people might feel left out.
whatever happened to getting dressed up for a day out in the city?
i'm agree with qart. how can anyone possibly expect visual artists to supply some sort of image that indicates what they will be doing in an exhibition? its clearly beyond them.
I started my Biennale visit in Campbelltown and then went into the city (didn't take an hour and a half in the car! but maybe TAL is a good person who gets the train). I really like the multivenue thing.
The Sydney Writers Festival does events in Katoomba, Orange, Wollongong etc. Of course a day of events in Orange is not going to be the same kind of experience as a week of events on the wharf, but I don't think the experience of a festival (or Biennale) is about making sure one person can experience every single part of the event.
how about some critical feedback regarding curatorial practice in international art events? for me, starting with the title, zones of contact represents all that is weak and formulaic in such curatorial practice. there are far too many works that simply have overt signifiers of cultural difference loaded into them just waiting for curators like merryweather to come along and include them in an international art event. while cultural difference is inevitably one of the subtexts of biennales why not deal with it in a much more subtle way? for me much more is revealed by questioning what is specific about work made in different parts of the world when that work isn't shoving overt cultural difference down your throat till you start to choke on it.
Dear TAL
thanks for a lovely 'summing up' rprot of the washout formthe BOS - elegantly put.
The catalogue and PR material for the show(s) has been spectularly bad - The website is a perfect example of a smoke and mirrors content free flash exercise and getting information on artists, images, exhibitions and exhibition spaces has acutally been HAMPERED by a lot of the published information .
Despite this the work wihtin the red travelpass zone has been for the most part thrououghly enjoyable, stimulating and thought provoking.
Art exhibiotns being better than the PR .... what a weird zone of contact eh?
Lisa Kelly's essay is excellent. Really something for institutionally based lurkers to think about!
Be sure to hurry in for your vittoria coffee at the pier this saturday, the biennale marketing guy can't wait to meet some local artists.
Lisa kellys essay reads to me as a fairly predictable whinge about a
lack of Sydney Artists in the show, but its an international exhibition. There is absolutely no reason to have more Sydney Artists in the show than any other Artist - but there is certainly a reason to have excellent work by Australians in the show roughly on par with the others. Plenty of opportunity for parrallel local shows to take place at the same time. The biennale is an opportunity to see a lot of Art from elsewhere,and a slice of work from Australia - but a whinge about Sydney being the host city so therefore there needs to be more sydney artists involved, youve got to be kidding. Imagine if you turned up to Liverpool in England and the show was loaded with locals - itd be a pretty dissapointing joke wouldnt it.
enemy of the state - i think you're missing the point - which I took to be much more to do with the ways in which institutions mights address inclusivity as something more meaningful than a rhetorical gesture. I too, am less interested in the number of 'sydney' artists in the show, however I'd sure like to see a more substantial number of australian artists contextualised within, what is after all, australia's major international art event. I don't have a particular problem with the Australian artists in this BOS, I just don't get WHY.
This is the invisible bienalle, duh.
agree with dazed. kelly was talking about the number of Sydney artists in the context of the BOS's puported 'dialogue' with the Sydney and Australian art community. As she pointed out, one Sydney artist, forums where there was no time for questions, or talks where the people on the panel weren't involved [Kent, Foster, Tsoutas], little if any direct involvement except for indentured slave labour. who cares how many aussie artists, just don't claim you're being something you're not.
The biennale of Sydney has included a high number of Australian Artists over the years - where does consensus style inclusivity begin and end anyway ? What it should be based on is curatorial rigor. When it does that, it stops the biennale from merely becoming a showcase platform for a bunch of stars or predictable people on the rise, or people lucky enough to live in the host city - or those who are able to get the curators attention or be lobbied for on behalf of some important figure in the artworld. At least the seven where not as predictable as one might expect.
Though you might need all those contacts to get the guy to have a look in the first place, whats new. Perhaps I did miss the point a bit, of Lisas essay, but then again Lisa spells it out quite specifically in her essay as well - if you took the argument to a logical conclusion the biennale would be more like a broad ranging festival event rather than a seriously thought out exhibition. What happens if a curator comes up with an idea that hasnt had much attention by Artists in Australia thus far - should we still include lots of Australian Artists in the show anyway ? Wouldnt you just find the number of artists that where able to do something with the idea. The seventies was a different situation altogether - the eurocentric views of the people who had power at the time where completely different.The problem with this biennale is that its very academic which is something quite different to being conceptually on fire. There is some terrible work in this show and also some very good work, thats how it goes with any biennale.Zones of contact as a title is simply terrible. Luckily, by and large, the work holds up, ok. There is little of surprise or wonder in this show - seems ashame,and a lot that is pretty superfiscal - will appeal to cultural theorists looking for research browny points..but wheres the breakout eh. On the catalogue front - two catalogues, a before and after works well - Istanbul biennale7, Ego fugal is a good example of that.
you make some sense, enemy of the state. Better than the mirror-image of the cultural cringe that is artlife's complaint about not enough Australian artists. yawn. The biennial is international, one of the few times we can see such a huge range of art from other places. The perspecta used to be its complement, an opportunity to focus on the local, but the need for it is probably less than what it was, now there is so much more oz contemporary art being shown all the time.
What absolute bullshit. If we can't make a few demands for increased representation then what's left for us? Working in the coat check at the opening? Fuck that. Enemy, your argument is absurd - it's ok to curate whatever the director likes but it's not OK to curate an "academic" show that scores "browny points"? Pfft. Either you're for curatorial indpendence or you are against it but you can't have it both ways. And qart - what a joy to read your half arsed posts. Just when we thought we'd seen the last of Duckypoo and Varp and all the other right wing wankers, here's another! TAL didn't complain just observed the numbers. Didn't they say something about incipient parochilaism? But who cares, just read selectively as you will.
To repeat - we are Australian artists and we DEMAND increased inclusion. There is no prespecta, there is no bi-annual survey show anywhere, all there is are commercial spaces, ARIs and the odd art fair. Pull your head out of your arses and smell the daisies.
yes Bosco increased representation is fine but in a biennale ? I dont buy it. Why dont you start your own version of perspecta ?? or lobby the major galleries to do so (maybe you do that already)...anyway there are survey shows of australian art - the badly titled Contemporary Commonwealth is one. Bosco -it is ok for the curator to curate whatever they like and its also perfectly ok for the curator to curate a stiffy academic show - its fine for someone to remix a music track and its ok for them to make a mess of it.The power is with the curator, but it doesnt mean what she or he does cant be commented on critically...ultimately my argument was about curatorial rigor rather than some kind of weak democracy in this context. Its not particularly right wing to have an opposing viewpoint by the way. I dont think australian artists are under represented. If you look around abit they are all over the world doing great stuff and also there is a hell of a lot of activity going on here at home in all quarters.
I don't see why it's either/or. There are very few opportunities to see Australian artists contextualised within an international context and BTW Australian artists are as international as anyone else. It's the fact that their (limited) inclusion always seems so tokenistic that I take issue with.
And it would be really nice if local artists were given the opportunity to participate in other ways which are not just about the exhibition. Frankly, I don't care whether that's about forums, or barbeques.
Hospitality is good. In my experience, visiting artists love meeting local artists, and they like to hang out too. It's not rocket science.
i think Lisa Kelly's reference to the retoric of the Biennale could be followed up with a bit more in depth discussion. Did anyone else sit through Charles Merrywether's "interview" which is at the entrance to several biennale venues? his catch phrases include the "mobility of cultures", "prosperous cultural exchange" , and he expresses his desire to "cover as many regions as possible". he also goes on to suggestion a desire to engage with the many ethnic groups in sydney through the exhibition. While a lack of engagement with local artists seems to be one of the major failings of this retoric in living up to its own hype, their are undoubtedly other thistle's to be grasped in Merrywether's account of his curation. amongst those the kind of cultural imperialism implicit in curating artists from third world countries especially when they are so often depicted as clearly "other". Merrywether seems oblivious to the problematics of this situation and rather than seeing it as cultural imperialism instead reflects on how fortunate Australia is as a first world country in economic position to create a "Zone of contact". Curiously enough you could say that when colonising nations shipped indigenous people back to the mother land as "exhibits" they also created a zone of contact. Artists all over the world know about these ideas and make work that deals with these issues, (try this link as a most obvious example http://www.thing.net/~cocofusco/
...ameridians.html ) why didn't any of it end up in Merrywether's show?
Sure Dazed, they are as international as any one else.But Seven artists is a fairly decent number. I bet if there where seven YBA's in the show there would be a lot of comment about that or seven japanese (they have a much bigger population, so more artists to choose from, I would imagine and you wont see seven japanese any time soon. Or what about seven Kiwis, that would cause a storm wouldnt it. Sure, there is a case to have a slightly higher number of australian artists in the show because it is nice to see our work alongside international art, as you say, but I dont buy the intensity of the complaint with this show (its kind of a rather preset argument that had real validity in the 70's) and besides my criticism of Lisa's essay was how it was framed in terms of there being not enough Sydney Artists in the show which to my way of thinking is pretty whacky. Shouldnt the debate be centered on the work not the people.if there was a huge gender imbalance that would be different but an argument based on a geographical disparity from the host country ???? I vote for a biennale where all the artists names are left out. In fact maybe I should make a pitch for that idea one year.It would be hilarious and quite challenging for every body.
There is a big presumption going on here about Australian work and how it fits into these things.
Next time it will be different anyway. The next beinnale director has been to some of the ARI's already I am sure given her vastly different aproach to sussing out work compared to the last director it will be a very different show indeed.
Antony Gormley - one project where he should have made the darn things himself rather than get all warm and cuddly with a bunch of chinese poor people.
fulinato, a better direction for this dscussion by far.
fer god sake get a grip!
the biennale was great, an opportunity to see a lot of different work i wouldn't normally see down under. and not the usual international art stars it is to be congratulated on that point i think. and of course all the talk and intentions of mereweather seem deluded in the present but these things always set with time with greater unthought of meanings.
but talk about seeing the glass half full - i mean are people just complaining cause they didn't get to advance their own art career and have their work contextualized in an international show - is that all a biennale does? - is that all art can do? be a success at being art - and successful art is in biennales?
7 australian artists out of 85 is 8.5% - seeing rose nolan or ruark lewis's etc. work along side international artists didn't make it any more illuminating in my opinion than if i saw it in some commercial gallery solo show - then their inclusion in this bioptic 'inclusion' argument is only about career isn't it? - another line on their cv's - so what - am i jealous it is not a line on my cv - sure - but why should that stop me enjoying the art?
and there are some great works in the show - my fav's were the two israeli artists Ruti Sela and Maayan Mair's incredible transgressive video at pspace it was truely squirmful and compelling enough to stay and watch the whole thing - a read of Galia Yahav's essay about the work was also insightful. thankfully also their projection was well lit and i could find the seat and enjoy watching their documented dramas unfold without having to feel my way around a darkened room.
The russian artist Olga Chernysheva poetic observations at acp (with additional installation at agnsw) was gorgeous and mesmerizing using a simple hand held camera and piano soundtrack, providing a historically familiar yet disturbing feelings of contemporary russian life - and yes it was a pity one had to negotiate sharon lockharts skin deep studio portraits which filled over half the gallery to get to to the real gem tucked away in the back space.
the other work that really caught my attention and I wanted to spend time with was Daido Moriyama's giant black and white photographs lining the level 2 space at agnw - so many visual relationships so much to gel - so much to see - and certainly memorable and he knows how to make a visual impact with his scale and installation.
"The problem is that if you live in inner Sydney, or say somewhere else far far away from the outer West, the Biennale is asking you to drive for three hours [more by train or bus] for three videos, which doesn't seem much like good value and rather more like punishment. Either have the whole thing out there or offer free transport for punters".
What utter bullshit. What about the masses of our population who DON'T live in the eastern suburbs and have to travel as far to the 'main' venues. Take a look at the exclusivity of art and art functions in sydney and you'll see why us out in the western suburbs are cheering. Oh, but my condolensces that it's such a hike for you.
This is all so feeble I'm starting to think Sydney got the Biennale it deserved.
Why not ask the basic question, what use is the Sydney Biennale? Would it matter if it did not exist? I don't think so. You only need art from somewhere else if you are incapable of making your own, if you are just art consumers rather than art producers.
And yes, now is very different to the 70s, but that's no justification for doing nothing now. Back then many artists resented being told that we had it wrong, that we needed a Biennale to show us what real art was. It was a matter of pride to turn it on it's head and demand equal representation. But back then most artists were the equivalent to small stall holders selling their own home grown produce in a market place. Now artists are the equivalent to small farmers selling a commodity to large stores like Coles on terms dictated by Coles. Far too many artist now have no more ambition than to be content providers for the global art factory manufacturing art to Biennale specifications to be put out under the "Biennale" brand.
So what would we miss if it didn't exist? You only need other peoples art if you don't make your own art, you only need other people ideas if you don't have ideas of your own and you don't need to compare yourself to other artists because art is not a sport, there is no world champion artist. And although self-appointed critics might think it is parochial to value your interaction with your own community as equal to anything done anywhere else I think its only the gullible and the brainwashed who could go to Biennale after Biennale and still expect to see anything different. It's only exciting if you were born yesterday and haven't worked out the con...come in spinner?
Incidentally Charles Merewether was around and involved during the 1970s Biennale protests and the subsequent setting up of the Artworkers Union. (G'day Charles, long time no see!) But there is not much point criticising him, no matter who is the foreman in the sausage factory it will still only produce sausages. But one point should be made. The Zones of Contact theme implies hybrid art that shows the influences of different cultures rubbing up against each other. In fact the Biennale mostly demonstrates how biennale genre art can be produced anywhere.
On the other hand anyone who has had their eyes open knows that real hybrid art that mixes up traditions and genres is exactly the art that Ray Hughes has been actively seeking out all over the world since the early nineties, well before any of it has turned up in biennales. Miss the Biennale and you miss very little but if you've missed Ray's exhibitions from Africa, Asia and South America then you really have missed something. So, once again, why do we need a Biennale? What we need is a few more adventurous dealers and artists that are as ornery as Ray, more shows that aren't from the usual centres of empire, more imagination and courage and adventurousness, less passivity and less snivelling justifications of the status quo.
For Christ's sake, get up off your knees!
That's great JJ - the people of the western suburbs must be very thankful for those three video pieces and STILL they'd have to drive all the way to the MCA, the Pier and the AGNSW to see the rest of it. Tokenism rules.
Enemy, you're arguing for a biennale that includes Australian artists as the curatorial gambit demands, why have set numbers, or embarrasingly ask for a place at the master's table? The answer is because to not ask for greater inclusion and to see Australian art in the context of international peers is the same down on your knees we're not worthy attitude that relegates what we do here to last place. You claim that BOS's past have had "high" numbers of Australian participation. A quick tourt of past catalogues shows the numbers steadily dropping - from around 26 in 04 to 7 this year. At this rate the next BOS is going to be a showcase for interntaional art, no Australian artists thanks very much.
And hey Milliss - never thought I'd see the day when we agreed but it's good to see you arguing with some passion for a change. To the barricades!
Dear Ian,
After all this time on TAL, I feel I can all you Ian. I know you so well that I was two lines into your diatribe and I KNEW it was you. I scanned down to check - and sure enough...
So what was it you were saying about sausages/predictability etc?
And what the f*ck do you mean by saying, "You only need art from somewhere else if you are incapable of making your own, if you are just art consumers rather than art producers." Such outrageous arrogance. You sound like one of those dimwits who only read the (self help) books they write themselves! Or an isolationist...
With art from elsewhere, come artists from elsewhere. There is - or should be - an exchange of ideas, people talking, looking, and experiencing art - and not just artists.
Sure a biennale is not only the way to do it - and perhaps not even the preferred way, but I'm astounded at the simple-minded promotion of a commercial gallery in its stead. The last time I walked past ray hughes - he was showing some decorative watery colours from China. And there have been numerous artist run exchange projects and hybrid projects in Sydney and elsewhere since the mid 80s, that were way more interesting and political than promoting exotic objects from elsewhere for consumption by those who can afford it.
Get off your knees indeed! Such crap!
bosco you don't do your cause much good by spouting bulls*** figures. There were 8, yes 8, Australian artists in the O4 Biennale (one was a collaborative duo), not 4 times that many as you write. Just check out the Bos website where you can get the facts for yourself. Local artists shown range from 3 out of 48 artists in 1996 to 16 out of 37 (roughly) in 1973 and no, the trend is not consistent.
thank god for dazed...
Dear Dazed, or can I call you Duh
Yes, I do believe in self help as far as art is concerned because you can only make worthwhile art about your own life and your own society. You call it arrogance, I call it refusal to be patronised.
But as for "promoting exotic objects from elsewhere for consumption by those who can afford it".... sounds like Zones of Contact to me. Just keep drinking the Kool Aid.
Bosco, I'd hate to ruin our special relationship by agreeing with each other. Maybe just this once.
Dazed, I have no time for your so called "facts" when I'm in the middle of a rant.
That's ok bosco. I just wanted to add that I agree with enemy of the state about antony gormley, and fulanito on some of the things that might have been talked about given the curatorial rationale. Its an agreeable kind of day.
I also like to see what different curators bring to BOS because unlike Ian, I don't see them as identical. That would be like not seeing the trees for the wood... It will also be 'interesting' to observe the new regime given the "youthful energy or mara braye" as CEO. And before Ian gets up on his high horse again, let me stress that by interesting, I mean relatively so - not the only interesting thing in life - d'uh
Ian, the difference between you and me is that I like all art - good and bad. You think the biennale is a suasage factory the reality is that its not ever consistent enough to make a decent suasage. Ray Hughes is a pretty decent small goods producer one could easily argue if one was feeling hostile and disenchanted enough. You reckon the biennale industry ios a sausage factory - come to a university some time.
I cant spell sausage.
Drae Sguaege
I can't spell FuKciGn cNuT eihtre!!
Bosco you cnut!
Nobody calls me a rightwinger and walks away without at least a bit of a limp. I never really left you sad twisted twat. You've just prompted me to drop some of the alias so here I am, barrel chested, bow legged and stripped to the waist!
mano et mano!
BTW I agree with you whole heartedly on the BOS. You state your case well and perhaps one day we can choose curtains together.
Love to all.
faking it eh?
once or twice, maybe more....
In 25 minutes the Biennale closes . . .
Reading "BASKET CASE" I think
it quite pompous that TAL thinks BoS.06 - "should be considered a complete failure" becuase the publicists did not send TAL photographs of the Australian artists' works.
Then TAL points out that the pics in the catalogue don't add-up or correspond with what is viewed in the venues.
Then TAL taunts the artists by saying it had planned to "cover in depth" the local artists as it had in 2004. What a weird confession. It shows how offensive this blog has become. How can anyone take TAL seriously after making a threat like that.
Is this the symptomatic punishment serious artists have to endure in this country - STUMM - critical silence ???
It happened in the newspaper when John McDonald confessed he hadn't got the time to view videos in BoS(well it's his job), and I can't see the difference when TAL says it can't communicate to get some photographs - so it will not review the Australian art in the Biennale.
As though life were perfect . . . Fuck You!
We have a policy on this blog of only reviewing work where we can use an image of an artist's work to accompany a review or link to a web site that has an relevant image. We decided on this policy for a number of reasons, but mostly because not everyone has a chance to see work first hand. Therefore, our decision was to host the images ourselves.
In 2004 when we last reviewed the Biennale of Sydney, we hadn't yet sorted out image hosting for this blog so we relied completely on links to images on the BOS and other external sites. Unfortunately links eventually expire as external images were taken down or moved, sites were updated and so on.
In regards to BOS 2006, our comment about "complete failure" was directed at the people responsible for supplying images to ALL the media from the BOS PR wesbite. The images in question [those by Australian artists] were not available to anyone. Meanhwile, the BOS's public website - the one seen by the general public - was built in such a way that it did not allow for links to images by individual artists... Under those circumstances, what else could we do?
As we pointed out Ruark, ALL images from BOS came from one place and from one source, ie, the PR website. Our complaint was NOT directed at the artists. There were no threats, just a statement of what we could do.
As to your final and unflattering comparison between us and the Esteemed Critic, well, he *is* paid to go the BOS. We aren't.
TAL is a blog. deal with it Ruark!
this is ridiculous
i mean come on guys realy did you al think that even Merewhether wanted to take his time in choosing the artiots that he did, he wanted to wait till something came or inspired him. which to me is absolute nonsense. more research and developement of the biennali chould have ben conducted.
i was very disappointed with the biennali this year two years ago it was great this year sorry dont agree. it was boring, yes consistant throughout the institutional gallery of nsw but boring , i mean i ended up downstairs in the smaller solo show of form and space.
Ruark lewis work wasnt too bad i must admit his was quite interesting, it relating to all sorts of contact, and zones, read the catalogue it will tell you everything you need to know.
to me the biennali is becoming only of a mediated core full of rubbish. we go in the gallery for a masterpiece thing is guys, we wont ever get to see that anymore. as art has lost its structure its base, and determination. it is nothing but a globalised/mediated scam. which is a god dam shame. because i love art. but at the rate it is now all i can visualise is the poilitical and social issues which arouse the comtemporary art society of the now.
but then again how can ww classify the "now", as contemporary, as it is constantly evolving and changing..? can anybody answer me this?
Commenting by HaloScan
