Contemporary Art’s Tug of War
The Ukrainian Ministry of Culture has held a press conference on the presentation of contemporary art Ukrainian at the 49th Venice Biennale next summer.
The question of Ukrainian representation at one of Europe’s most prestigious forums of contemporary art has been raised more than once during the ten years of Ukrainian independence. Unlike, for example, the Kassel Documenta, which invites artists itself, participation in the Venice festival is initiated by cultural ministries of countries willing to exhibit its art. Since up to now contemporary art in Ukraine had not been considered one of the strategic directions of official cultural policy, the coming Venice Biennale will be a first for Ukraine.
As Yuri Onukh, curator of Ukraine’s future exhibition, told journalists, this time Ukraine will present one special project. It will be only one because sometimes it makes sense to back one horse, because as a rule at combined exhibits none of the participants can be presented decently, and it will be special, because in order to be noticed Ukraine has to make a truly original, precisely tailored gesture without old-fashioned, hackneyed, derivative ideas. The curator promised to announce the artists’ name by the end of January.
For now on we have every chance to win renown in Venice as great originals. The issue of Ukraine’s national representation was clearly revived at the first meeting in Venice dedicated to the coming Biennale where representatives of the fifty countries taking part monotonously explained about the state of their preparations and named their project commissars and curators. Olha Mazayeva and Valentyn Rayevsky (New Creative Association) also presented a message from Les Taniuk, chairman of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Culture and Spiritual Values, at a press conference organized by Yuri Onukh, curator, and Yevhen Karas, commissar of Ukraine’s representation. Opponents upbraided Mr. Onukh for not being a Ukrainian citizen (he is a citizen of Canada and Poland), lack of professionalism, wish to soil his hands with Soros money, and suggested that he present his own project in Venice.
It is not only the scandal itself, which is obviously inevitable concerning such a delicate issue as a trip to the prestigious forum at state cost that makes one uneasy, but also the fact that in a strictly professional discussion both sides operate not only with arguments but also with powerful backing from government and parliament authorities, persons of profound respect but not professionals on issues of modern art. Of course, all this can be chalked up to growing pains since the techniques of how we should represent our contemporary art in Ukraine are in the formative stage. However, it is possible that because of this scandal involving powerful persons will lead to nobody going anywhere, and Venice will discuss not our creative projects but rather our curator’s troglodytic inability to an agreement.
