Archive for September, 2011

Job Opportunity: Image Editor

Posted on: September 22nd, 2011 by Denhart von Harling

Stellenausschreibung

Bildredakteur/In für die 7. Berlin Biennale für zeitgenössische Kunst

 

Wir suchen eine Person, die die Bildredaktion für die Publikationen sowie für die Pressearbeit und den Internetauftritt der 7. Berlin Biennale übernimmt.

 

 

Aufgabenbereich

  • Bild- und Medienarchivierung
  • Anfrage, Aufarbeitung, Bearbeitung und Präsentation des Bild- und Medienmaterials für Drucksachen, Website und Presse
  • Betreuung der Dokumentation der Ausstellung und ihrer Veranstaltungen
  • Abklärung von Bild- und Medienrechten in diesem Zusammenhang

 

Erforderliche Kenntnisse und Fähigkeiten

  • Kenntnisse und Interesse an der zeitgenössischen Kunst- und Kulturszene mit einem besonderen Interesse an der Buch- und Katalogproduktion
  • gute Grundkenntnisse der Bild- und Medienbearbeitung (z.B. Photoshop, InDesign usf.)
  • sehr gute Computerkenntnisse (Microsoft Office insbesondere E-Mail-Programme, Word und Excel, div. Internetanwendungen)
  • Grundkenntnisse in HTML sind von Vorteil, ebenso Erfahrung mit Betreuung bzw. Erstellung von Websites
  • Grundkenntnisse im Bild- und Medienrecht sowie vers. Recherchequellen
  • Grundkenntnisse in Archivierungssystemen
  • sicheres Deutsch und Englisch in Wort und Schrift
  • Organisationstalent, Flexibilität, Selbstständigkeit, verantwortungsvolles Arbeiten, Belastbarkeit, Teamfähigkeit, Kommunikationsfreude

 

 

Beginn: ab 15. Oktober 2011, Laufzeit bis 30. Juni 2012

 

Der Zeitaufwand staffelt sich nach dem  Arbeitsaufwand gemäß dem Projektverlauf der 7. Berlin Biennale.

 

Gehalt: Honorar nach Vereinbarung

 

 

Bitte reichen Sie Ihre Bewerbung bis zum 30. September 2011 nur per E-Mail an Denhart v. Harling (presse@berlinbiennale.de) ein, begleitet von einem kurzen Lebenslauf und einem aussagekräftigen Anschreiben.

Support

Posted on: September 16th, 2011 by Denhart von Harling

Support

We thank all our partners who helped to realize the 7th Berlin Biennale:

Funding

 

The 7th Berlin Biennale for Contemporary Art is funded by the Kulturstiftung des Bundes (German Federal Cultural Foundation).

 

With the generous support of the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage of the Republic of Poland and the Adam Mickiewicz Institute.

 

With support from the Foundation for German-Polish Cooperation, Warsaw, and the Polish Institute Berlin.

 

 

 

 

Corporate Sponsoring

 

BMW AG, Munich

SUPPORT

Artis – Contemporary Israeli Art Fund, New York

 

 

Botschaft der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika, Berlin

 

British Council, Berlin

 

Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur (bm:ukk), Vienna

 

Centrum Beeldende Kunst Rotterdam

 

cine plus, Berlin

Diplomatische Mission Palästinas

ERSTE Stiftung, Vienna

 

 

Fonds BKVB, Amsterdam

 

Goethe-Institut e. V., Warsaw

Goethe-Institut e. V., Bucharest

 

Icelandic Art Center, Reykjavík

 

Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen e.V., Stuttgart

 

Land Tirol, Austria

 

Moleskine, Milan

 

Mondriaan Fund, Amsterdam

 

Rumänisches Kulturinstitut Berlin

Slovak Institute

Terramarine, Berlin

 

Tschechisches Zentrum, Berlin

Collegium Centrum Hungaricum (.CHB)

 

Stiftung Federkiel

Publications

Forget Fear and Act for Art are supported by Outset Contemporary Art Fund and calvert 22, London.

 

 

 

Cooperation and Collaboration

The Young Curators Workshop Curating in Times of Need is organized by the 7th Berlin Biennale in collaboration with Allianz Cultural Foundation, Berlin, BMW, Munich, and Goethe-Institut e. V ., Munich.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The First International Congress of the Jewish Renaissance Movement in Poland (JRMiP): AND EUROPE WILL BE STUNNED in Berlin by Yael Bartana is realized in collaboration with Hebbel am Ufer (HAU).

 

 

 

Krisis by Joseph Beuys Theater & Teatr.doc and illumiNation by Krétakör are realized in collaboration with Hebbel am Ufer (HAU) and with generous support from the Capital Cultural Fund, Berlin. Made possible through a cooperation with Theaterdiscounter, Berlin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anatomy Lessons by Christina Lammer is a cooperation with the Association of Neuroesthetics, Berlin.

The project is supported by the Austrian Federal Ministry for Education, Arts and Culture (bm:ukk), the Austrian Cultural Forum Berlin, the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), the Vienna Science and Technology Fund (WWTF) and is realized with the support of the Ernst Schering Foundation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The project Filtered by Eisenhüttenstadt is a collaboration with the Artists-in-Berlin-Program / daad and me Collectors Room Berlin / Olbricht Foundation. With kind support from Städtisches Museum Eisenhüttenstadt, Eisenhüttenstädter Gebäudewirtschaft GmbH (GeWi), and Stahlstiftung Eisenhüttenstadt.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Civil Initiative for the Memorial to the Sinti and Roma Murdered under the National Socialist Regime is organized in cooperation with the European Roma Cultural Foundation – ERCF and The Romani Elders. With kind support from

Collegium Hungaricum Berlin (.CHB).

Key of Return is a collaborative project with the International Academy of Art, Palestine in cooperation with Schlesische27, Internationales JugendKunst- und Kulturhaus, Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg. With kind support from the Goethe-Institut, Ramallah and the Palästinensische Gemeinde Deutschland (PGD) e. V.

 

 

 

The music-action by Krytyka Polityczna is supported by the City of Warsaw.

 

 

PM 2010 by Teresa Margolles is a co-production with Galerie Peter Kilchmann. With the kind support of DZ BANK Kunstsammlung.

 

 

Born in Berlin by Joanna Rajkowska is a co-production with the ŻAK | BRANICKA Foundation. Kindly supported by the Foundation for German-Polish Cooperation, Warsaw. Born in Berlin – A Letter to Rosa will be shown from April 27 – June 16, 2012 at ŻAK | BRANICKA.

The use of the Black Box is made possible through a cooperation with Akademie der Künste, Berlin (Academy of Arts, Berlin).

 

The use of Deutschlandhaus is a collaboration with Foundation Flight, Expulsion, Reconciliation.

 

The use of St. Elisabeth-Church is a collaboration with Kulturbüro SOPHIEN.

The Institute for Foreign Cultural Relations, Stuttgart / Rave-Foundation supports the 7th Berlin Biennale with a Rave Scholarship for Curators (Clara Ianni, Brasil).

 

 

Guided tours organized by art:berlin

 

Solidarity Actions

The actions of Centre for Contemporary Art (CCA) Ujazdowski Castle, Warsaw; HMKV Hartware MedienKunstVerein; Dortmund & multilateral academy, Dortmund; Kalmar konstmuseum, Kalmar; steirischer herbst, Graz; Istituto Svizzero di Roma, Rome; Museum of Modern Art in Warsaw are collaborations in solidarity with the 7th Berlin Biennale.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Media Partners

Camera Austria, Graz; Krytyka Polityczna, Warsaw; reboot.fm, Berlin; zitty, Berlin

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Special Thanks

Special thanks to the partners of the project Berlin-Birkenau by Łukasz Surowiec:

 

District Offices


Bezirksamt Charlottenburg-Wilmersdorf zu Berlin, Grünflächenamt

Bezirksamt Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg von Berlin, Fachbereich Grünflächen

Bezirksamt Lichtenberg von Berlin, Tiefbau- und Landschaftsplanungsamt

Bezirksamt Marzahn-Hellersdorf von Berlin, Fachbereich Grünflächen

Bezirksamt Reinickendorf von Berlin, Fachbereich Gartenbau

Bezirksamt Spandau von Berlin, Fachbereich Grünflächen

Bezirksamt Treptow-Köpenick von Berlin, Grünflächenamt

 

Schools and Universities in Berlin


Alexander-von-Humboldt Oberschule

August-Heyn-Gartenarbeitsschule-Neukölln

Berlin International School / Private Kant-Schule

Berlin Metropolitan School

Campus Charlottenburg – Universität der Künste und Technische Universität Berlin

Dathe-Gymnasium

Heinz-Berggruen-Gymasium

HTW Berlin

Paul-Löbe-Schule

Sophie-Scholl-Schule / Gesamtschule mit gymnasialer Oberstufe – Staatliche Europaschule Berlin

 

Further Partners

 

BLO-Ateliers, Berlin

Bürgerinitiative Pro Wuhlheide e. V .

Freiwilligeninitiative WikiWoods

Gartenarbeitsschule Ilse Demme, Charlottenburg

Gedenkstätte Bergen-Belsen – Stiftung niedersächsische Gedenkstätten

Staatskanzlei des Landes Niedersachsen beim Bund

YAAM , Berlin

Pact for Culture

Posted on: September 8th, 2011 by Denhart von Harling

Pact for Culture

between the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Poland represented by the Prime Minister of the Republic of Poland and the social side represented by the association Citizens of Culture.

 

Aware of the fact that culture should be a matter of special responsibility of citizens and the authorities, which has been enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, Article 6: “The Republic of Poland shall provide conditions for the people's equal access to the products of culture which are the source of the Nation's identity, continuity and development.” and Article 73: “The freedom of artistic creation and scientific research as well as dissemination of the fruits thereof, the freedom to teach and to enjoy the products of culture, shall be ensured to everyone.”

 

As well as in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 27: “(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits. (2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.”

 

the parties agree as follows:

 

I.

The future of Poland depends on free and creative citizens, who share a mutual understanding, and on effective actions in the public sphere. Poland needs a modern vision of development, accepted by its citizens, with clear aims and clear methods of realization. One of the greatest obstacles to the development of Poland is the lack of social capital, a low level of trust for state institutions, as well as the weakness of social communication, collaboration, and acting for the common good.

 

II.

The quality of life of citizens depends on the quality of the public sphere. The weakness of public debate and lack of respect for the rules of social coexistence lead to social and political crisis, which results in upsetting the nation’s balance. A balanced development is possible in those societies which respect the common good, social understanding and individual responsibility.

 

III.

Widespread participation in culture is one of the key agents of social and economic development. A modern state is responsible for supporting the development of culture, creating a just system of laws, and ensuring equal access to culture for all citizens, as well as contributing to the development of an adequate infrastructure and order in the cultural landscape.

 

IV.

The state of culture is directly related to the quality of life in the country. Modernization should be the aim of state politics, understood as building a joint and varied, coherent, open and safe society created jointly by conscious and active citizens.

 

V.

Culture is a common good. It creates an open space able to accommodate diverse thoughts, views, and civil attitudes. Culture makes it possible to understand the present and forge links between the past and the future. Cultural politics – in order to meet these requirements – should take into account social changes, growing mobility as well as the shifting means of participation in culture and the individualization of approaches.

 

VI.

Providing funds is the least that the state can do. Participation in culture and the creative activity of the citizens should be among priorities of state politics on both a nationwide and local level.

Its foundations rest on: modern educational and cultural programs, changes in the system of education and science, wide access to libraries, media libraries, and multifunctional culture centers, as well as high quality cultural institutions and public media. Economic indexes cannot serve as the sole criterion for investing in cultural goods and supporting participation in culture.

 

VII.

Identifying talents and creating adequate conditions for their development, as well as offering possibilities for artistic practice is an inalienable duty of the state and local governments.

 

VIII.

The state should pursue a coherent politics in respect of social organizations. The role of these organizations should serve as the basis for forging links with the administration, as well as adequate support of the former. On account of the above, the sides sign the Pact for Culture herein as a social agreement of an open character. The pact can be joined by every citizen, organization and institution.

 

Both parties accept the below Pact for Culture for execution on the day of signing. Now therefore this agreement witnesses that:

 

1.

The spending of public money is based on the principle of universal and equal access to culture.

 

2.

The state commits itself to raise public spending on culture at least to the level of 1 per cent of all budget spending starting from 2012. This spending does not include European and local funds.

 

3.

Carrying out public tasks, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity found in the constitution, the state and its institutions should give priority to supporting initiatives stemming from civil actions and statutory activity of cultural institutions.

 

4.

Ensuring equal access to public means, including designated subsidies and long-term programs pertaining to public tasks, to cultural institutions, social organizations, and private subjects operating in the field of culture.

 

5.

Developing a system which would make it possible to allocate 1 per cent of CIT tax to the support of cultural undertakings.

 

6.

The government commits itself to introducing educational solutions (including school and college curricula, and non-compulsory classes) put forward by social and academic circles, in order to develop language, media, and artistic competencies among the youth and children.

 

7.

Public institutions of culture enjoy an autonomy in respect to their program and act as the guarantors of artistic freedom.

Respecting the statutory duties of these institutions, as well as co-defining their mission and additional tasks, the government and local governments should provide adequate means for the realization of tasks in the field of culture.

While appointing new cultural institutions, the government and local governments should furnish them with funds which are not allocated at the expense of other public tasks and cultural programs realized by social organizations.

 

8.

The government shall introduce the necessary legal and organizational changes which will make it possible to finance culture from a variety of sources, including the state budget, that of the local governments, European Union funding, private means and public levies.

 

The above funding is to have a long-term character, which will increase the effectiveness of public spending.

 

The government shall provide legal means for the creation of the so-called civic (participatory) budgets in the financial plans of local governments where spending is decided by the citizens.

 

9.

The assessment of the realization of the planned social, cultural, and artistic aims should be based upon external control, including financial auditing and quality evaluation, the results of which should be made public. The costs of the audit and evaluation should be covered with subsidies provided for the given task.

 

10.

The public media, as the most efficient tool of civic education and shaping cultural competencies, call for an urgent passing of a media act which would ensure the proper realization of their mission. The draft provided by the Civic Committee for Public Media is to serve as the basis for the act.

 

11.

Another task that calls for urgent realization is the development of a program for the digitization of cultural heritage as well as a system allowing for its free use for educational, scientific and non-commercial means.

Works in the public domain will be made available free of charge, reserving the right to cover the costs incurred in the course of making them available.

 

12.

It is necessary to begin work on developing a copyrights act which would secure the rights of authors and users in the online domain.

The state shall provide the means for acquiring copyrights to works of exceptional importance and making them available in the public domain.

 

13.

It is necessary to develop and implement a long-term program for the benefit of readership and raising language competencies which serve as the basis for other cultural competencies.

 

14.

Effective from 2011, the government shall launch the long-term project “Kultura+”, which would make it possible to develop a modern infrastructure of libraries, media libraries, as well as centers for cultural and civic activity in the state’s administrative districts.

 

15.

The government shall implement a strategy for the development of the social capital, accepted in the course of social consultations, as well as to continue work on the provisions of the Pact for Culture under public supervision and in accordance with the transparency principle.

 

16.

The Prime Minister of the Republic of Poland shall appoint a Group for the Pact for Culture which will include representatives of the governmental administration, local governments, and the Citizens of Culture movement, which will develop methods of implementing the provisions of the Pact for Culture and including them in the state legal and administrative system.

 

17.

The spending of public funds resulting from the realization of the provisions of the Pact for Culture, as stated in Article 2 of the Pact, shall be accepted by the Steering Committee at the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage. The Steering Committee shall consist of representatives of the Citizens of Culture and social organizations (70%), as well as the representatives of the government and local governments (30%).

 

18.

Working schedule for the implementation of the Pact for Culture.

 

(1). Making the Pact for Culture available for consultation by the social representatives – December 11, 2010;

(2). End of social consultations – March 31, 2011;

(3). Introducing the Pact to the governmental side – April 15, 2011;

(4). The signing of the Pact – May 14, 2011;

(5). Launching of parliamentary work on the public media act – before May 31, 2011;

(6). Appointing the Group for the Pact for Culture at the Chancellery of the Prime Minister of Poland – May 31, 2011;

(7). Amending the long-run programs to accommodate the provisions of the Pact for Culture – June 30, 2011;

(8). Planning of spending on culture for the year 2012 – up to June 30, 2011;

(9). Appointing the Steering Committee at the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage – until November 30, 2011.

 

19.

(1). The above document has an open character.

(2). The Pact of Culture can therefore be joined by any social and cultural organization, institution of local government, or other party which accepts these provisions and acts for the benefit of culture.

(3). The open character of the Pact for Culture also means that it does not exhaust all actions and solutions for social participation in culture in the Republic of Poland.

 

Erik Göngrich

Posted on: September 7th, 2011 by Denhart von Harling

Erik Göngrich

Artist, Berlin

7-berlin-biennale-goengrich_comment

Copyright: Erik Göngrich, 2011

Zdravka Bajovic

Posted on: September 7th, 2011 by PraktikantIn

Zdravka Bajovic

Art historian, 7th Berlin Biennale, Berlin

 

Artist, Wake Up!

It is a mythos and a reality at the same time: Berlin vibrates with creativity. There are hordes of producers of art and culture from every continent in this city, and the numbers are increasing, as we read about and experience it. There does not seem to be any shortage of niches for the presentation of contemporary works, whether in the innumerable self-organized spaces and temporary projects or else in one of the some 430 commercial galleries. Many international artists are lured by the promise of the cultural metropolis Berlin, eventually find themselves in the muddle of German bureaucracy, and in the end, do not know how they can make use of the complex system.

 

More than a few artists work hermit-like in their studios and apartments, without exhibiting, in the hope of one day attracting a more public audience. Only few appear on the stage of visibility and recognition and through this achieve the material success that (sometimes) results from this, and for which every artist arguably yearns. Exhibitions in museums, institutions, art associations, and biennales—or managing to get into the hands of serious art collectors—will remain a dream for most. The economic reality is perhaps even tougher. Of the approximately 20,000 artists in the city, the situation is worst for freelance visual artists. There is a considerable group that does not even earn 700 Euro per month. 75 percent of freelance visual artists have less than 1,400 Euro per month.1 It is, therefore, no coincidence that there was open criticism of the exhibition policy of the ill-famed »Leistungsschau« (the title that was originally considered) that then came to be based in Berlin. Artists became marionettes of a politics of representation, the commitment to taking stock of the art production in Berlin was not honored, and the opportunity to show the polyphony of the art in this city was missed. There is no art in the exhibition that hurts. What remains?

 

(No) Business as usual? No! Artist, wake up!

 

There are good reasons to produce and to live in Berlin. The non-commercial niches that have been created have to be defended and expanded—the (art) space in itself in which we live and work is one that is political. The time has come to network more intensively again as producing actors, to bundle the artistic energy, and to seize central locations in the city that make the interests of many and not only of the few chosen ones visible. The time has come to become aware of the fact that artists have a right to state support. When 20 percent of the gross domestic product of the City of Berlin is obtained from culture,2 then Berlin on its part should also give something back to the artists and create and finance locations that benefit artists—platforms that function neither in a self-exploitative nor purely capital-oriented manner.

 

The strength of art lies in the fact that it can say in the name of art what seems essential to each artist. Art is one of the few spaces for experiments, critique, production of knowledge, education, aesthetic experience, and freedom of expression at the same time. And this space has to be defended.

 

1 Marco Mundelius, »Einkommen der Berliner Kreativbranche: Angestellte Künstler verdienen am besten,« in: Wochenbericht der DIW Berlin, No. 9 (2009), http://www.diw-berlin.de (accessed August 6, 2011).

 

2 See the current promotional brochure of the SPD faction: Lebenswerter. Liebenswerter. 2006–2011. Gute Jahre in Berlin. (More Livable. More Likable. 2006–2011. Good Years in Berlin.)

 

 

Source: P/Act for Art: Berlin Biennale Zeitung

Yvonne P. Doderer

Posted on: September 7th, 2011 by PraktikantIn

Yvonne P. Doderer

Office for Transdisciplinary Research and Cultural Production, Stuttgart

 

Art & Culture Uncut

In light of the current discussion surrounding art and culture politics, I recall the perhaps first demonstration of this kind in Germany, the »Art Parade« with nearly 2,000 participants that took place in the center of Stuttgart on November 19, 2009 and in which over ninety art and cultural institutions were involved. The catalyst for this demonstration were the planned cuts in the cultural budget of the state capital Stuttgart, which in particular affected the multifaceted scene comprising larger and smaller institutions such as the Württembergischer Kunstverein, the Oberwelt e. V., and the Künstlerhaus Stuttgart, whose budgets had, in addition, also not been increased for many years. The cuts in Stuttgart are only one example of the noticeably worsening situation in the municipal sponsorship of art and culture in many municipalities in Germany. Even if the situation differs to a great extent in the details,1 what remains clear is the fact that city governments believe that it is easiest to make cuts in budgets for art and culture. This also affects indirect cuts in the form of the sponsoring of pure »beacon projects,« which prevent existing structures from being supported in a sustainable manner. Budgets for art and culture in Germany are also under discussion on a national level.2 In the meantime, the situation in other countries such as Italy, Hungary, and the Netherlands, for example, has shown itself to be even more dramatic, since art and culture there have become the plaything of a nationalistic and right-wing conservative populism, and art is considered to be a »leftist hobby that no one needs« (Geert Wilders).3 Thus supposedly legitimized, drastic cuts that ultimately mean the end for many institutions such as the Jan van Eyck Academie in Maastricht4 are made. Even if the most recent cuts have meanwhile been revoked in Italy, when considered from a pan-European perspective, art and culture again and again become the plaything of political interests within the context of economization in society as a whole, whereby supposed financial crises resulting from increasingly worsening inequalities are also used to further advance neoliberal-oriented policies of cuts and privatization. In light of these developments, art and cultural producers have only one chance, namely to come to an comprehensive understanding with one other and to organize in solidarity in order to then take a forceful approach to the public and civil society. This, however, also means that artists and cultural producers have to become more clearly aware than up to now of the socio-political role of art and culture and become active. Herbert Marcuse already made reference to the fact that art and cultural production can choose: between »the beautiful« or becoming »a political factor.«5 Taking a position here is that much more urgently necessary not only in light of how one is effected oneself locally but also in light of the current global situation and developments—ultimately also because the art field is not only a space of possibilities but may also be one of the few spaces for productive critique that still remains.

 

1 See Bernd Wagner, »Nothaushalte und wachsende Kulturetats: Umfrage zur Situation der kommunalen Kulturfinanzierung,« in: Kulturpolitische Mitteilungen, No. 131, IV / 2010, pp. 29–33.

 

2 See http://www.tagesspiegel.de/kultur/widerstand-gegen-westerwelles-kulturpolitik/1973608.html (accessed July 28, 2011).

 

3 Simon van den Berg, »Mit dem Rücken zum Publikum?«, http://www.nachtkritik.de (accessed July 28, 2011).

 

4 See http://www.an-online.de/artikel/1730861 (accessed July 28, 2011).

 

5 Herbert Marcuse, »Art in the One-Dimensional Society,« in: Douglas Kellner (ed.), Herbert Marcuse: Art and Liberation (New York, 2007), pp. 122 ff.

 

 

Source: P/Act for Art: Berlin Biennale Zeitung

Wolfgang Kil

Posted on: September 7th, 2011 by PraktikantIn

Wolfgang Kil

Architecture critic and writer, Berlin

This city is becoming more alien to me from year to year, perhaps even from month to month, and I experience it there, where all the things that you write about are taking place at best only as a tourist. For this reason, I do not believe that I should express a substantive opinion on the cultural processes here. A mayor who is also the culture senator at the same time is not a dialogue partner who can be taken seriously in the discussions that are perhaps necessary here. One must wait and see whether a new senator will then be enthroned.

 

 

Source: P/Act for Art: Berlin Biennale Zeitung

Ute Weiss Leder

Posted on: September 7th, 2011 by PraktikantIn

Ute Weiss Leder

Artist, Berlin

In the present letter, many questions that you address to artists deal with the circumstances in institutions for cultural mediation and political committees, but fewer, however, with the everyday working lives of artists. The idea of an agreement, of a »social contract« for artists, is formulated. What obligations would arise for artists as a result of such a contract? Security or dependency?

Artists first and foremost require an income that makes living and artistic production possible for them. Whether the money comes from cooperation with galleries or through project funding, grants, side jobs, and private or social support is less important for the individual. What are important are good infrastructural conditions in the most varied areas of production. In order to maintain and develop them, artists need the support of cultural institutions and associations, and, of course, of cultural politicians. This was the basic idea behind the open letter »Haben und Brauchen,« which sought to stimulate dialogue with its demands.

And since artists, in my opinion, have no defined status in society, they, like everyone else, should have a say in determining and creating the conditions for responsible action, and demand them from politics when necessary.

Cultural institutions, naturally, need security in planning—there the state, the city, the district is called for. And, naturally, the individual artist is also situated within this system, which means that a basis for occupational security can only be guaranteed through reciprocal consultation between visual artists, representatives of institutions, and cultural politicians with a broad public attention. We see the consequences when as in the past years, a lack of urban development policy and austerity measures in the districts have allowed institutions in the area of culture to wither. This results in the concrete damage to the conditions for living and working as an artist, including the need for studios and social dependence.

In this connection, the question of an increased engagement of commercial galleries in the »non-profit« area is also not really relevant for artists. The task of galleries is first and foremost to develop their artists and in the courage to take up unknown positions and present them internationally, which, of course, involves networking in the »non-profit« area.

Cooperation is called for, but not the service of artists to institutions or the service of art to politics.

 

 

Source: P/Act for Art: Berlin Biennale Zeitung

Ute Müller-Tischler

Posted on: September 7th, 2011 by PraktikantIn

Ute Müller-Tischler

Director of the Art and Cultural Office, Berlin-Lichtenberg

It is not only the Berlin Biennale that has to invent itself anew time and again. The art institutions in Berlin will also have to reassess how they see themselves within the art scene and vis-à-vis the current production of art if they do not want to forfeit their claim to municipal representation and become irrelevant. No cultural institution of the State of Berlin has the mandate to create an identifiable openness for current and city-relevant trends in the arts. The construction of a Kunsthalle for contemporary art will not resolve itself as long as the mandates of state-owned cultural institutions can not be re-organized. Until then, the Berlinische Galerie, as a museum for contemporary art, could, however, use one of its exhibition halls for presenting current art.

 

 

Source: P/Act for Art: Berlin Biennale Zeitung

Ute Meta Bauer

Posted on: September 7th, 2011 by PraktikantIn

Ute Meta Bauer

Professor and curator, Cambridge / Berlin

If the first question relates to the cultural-political commitment of Germany and its funding framework, what should be noted is the fact that the federal states have sovereignty with regard to questions of art, culture, and education. If it refers to Berlin, I have too little information about the current state of affairs. The culture sector has long functioned internationally, and as a result, the interest in engagement on a local level is not overly pronounced in the case of those who often change locations. In the case of local cultural policy, nationality also plays a role with respect to the ability to reach agreements and the ability to assert oneself politically, which is contrary to transnational or anti-national approaches to critical cultural policy.

 

In Hamburg, where I studied, the »Arbeitskreis Bildende Kunst« (working group for visual art) was established in the 1980s. It consisted of alternating representatives of the various interest groups—artists, galleries, institutions, and also the art academy. The founding members included the artist Klaus Geldmacher and Uwe M. Schneede, the director of the Kunstverein at that time. The recommendations and decisions of the Arbeitskreis were implemented by the Hamburg Kulturbehörde (culture authority) and / or the Senate of the Hanseatic City of Hamburg. It was not merely a case of hot air. The Arbeitskreis established, for example, »Die Woche der bildenden Kunst der Freien und Hansestadt Hamburg« (WdbK—Week of Fine Art of the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg), which was directed and realized by a different group every year and thus provided the vehicle for an open, experimental format at least once a year. Every producer of culture and / or group could submit a proposal that was then evaluated and voted on by the Arbeitskreis Bildende Kunst. Our artists’ group »Stille Helden e. V.« was thus able to realize a three-day Kunstkongress ’88 (art congress) at the Kunst­verein Hamburg, in the theater of the Kunsthalle Hamburg, and at the »Forum« art fair, which was a new fair at that time. Provided with a budget of 100,000 DM, this was a platform for presenting positions outside of the established cultural scene. Dagegen-Dabei by Bettina Sewkow and Ulrich Dörrie was a project of the WdbK Hamburg in 1994 / 95, in which, for example, more than sixteen independent projects were presented and later documented in a reader.

 

The establishment of a collecting society for the protection of artists image rights (VG Bild-Kunst) and the establishment of the Künstlersozialkasse (artists’ social welfare fund) were also co-initiated. The alternating jury for the Arbeitsstipendium für bildende KünstlerInnen (work grant for visual artists) was also selected by the Arbeits­kreis. Such decisions were thus not exclusively the responsibility of the authorities but were above all realized by them. This serves as an example of a successful model for how it is possible to be involved dynamically on an ongoing basis on the local level as well as network politically on a national and international level.

 

If the local art scene can only »call for« or, in the best case, make recommendations, arguably only few will make the effort to provide »paid representatives of the people« such as the Mayor of Berlin with coaching in cultural issues free of charge.

 

 

Source: P/Act for Art: Berlin Biennale Zeitung

Shop
10th Berlin Biennale