The Negotiation between Eros and Thanatos: Art of 2010s
The subject matter of this document is an ultimate overview of creative processes that have taken place in Georgia since 2010. Themes that were addressed through ‘Extern’ (a project held within a scope of educational and research-oriented initiative of an art platform ‘Propaganda’) have turned out to be of an essential nature. Those included media, forms, terms, meanings that have emerged over the last decade, artistic chain, exhibition spaces, the role of an artistic institution, research methodologies, analysis and interpretation of visual arts, as well as respective innovative approaches.
The text, as a whole, covers certain processes of Georgian (and not only) contemporary art: notable projects that have been conducted throughout the latest decade, exhibitions and outlined tendencies of fragmentary discernment. All these synchronized well with the textual discourse of Georgian ultra-modern art that touched upon social, economic, political, ideological and individualistic contexts, successfully defining its features.
Contextualization of inter -and multidisciplinary practices regarding contemporary art, along with normative analysis and judgment – happen to be unfeasible. For that reason, traditional principles of research and reflection have to be questioned; As the discipline of artistic studies in Georgian educational sphere bases its viewpoint on such long-established experience. While new borders entail “unprecedented techniques of describing art and its history”.
Archival credibility plays crucial role in the studies of art history, which entitles scholars with the right to speak about the past. A contemporary Art Archive of ‘Propaganda’ served as a starting point for this piece of writing – “a site of recollection”, not only in a practical, but also in a metaphorical way.
In Georgian reality, the generation of post-memory could only be aware of things that its predecessors remembered, because no modern art museum or collection resided, which would be able to carry a load of corresponding particulars. Consequently, artists of the latest generation began to explore the historical narrative via archives and exhibitions. They desired intensely to construct their own personal reference and a frame of mind with respect to the history, that is - to reevaluate it.
Through Eurocentric lens, Georgian art tended to develop in leaps, usually depicting some new tendencies of modern art with no prerequisite as such. Since avantgarde phase, institutional critique had come a long way with three to four waves to overcome. However, it all resulted with Georgian art being on top of those. History repeated itself once again: just as avantgarde art managed to evolve and modify over time, a century later - unique, genuine, creative language was constructed. Georgian contemporary art gradually morphed into a complementary notion of post- or even post-postmodernism.
Pointing out how expired and bygone Georgian museum space appeared to be had never been a simple task, as there have been no vaults for contemporary art in the country. Storage space for art, other than archive - such as museum, had always been much needed; this would open up a portal of vast opportunities for research and analysis. Memory preservation has been and still is the key here. Otherwise, there would be no room for working on the history of visual art.
Painters, curators, artistic unions, no-institution groups took over Georgian art-scene. They used to multitask: curators used to work as artists, critics and sometimes they even founded their own art platforms. These shifts were interconnected with the wave of so-called “new institutionalism”, which aimed to discover alternative ways of functioning for such establishments.
Apartment exhibitions were held occasionally in the 80s. Those were primarily associated with freedom of expression and unconventional hidden flow beyond an official discourse. From contemporary worldview, private spaces were considered secured territories that existed someplace away, perceived as independent spatial objects. The major goal was still the same: to create an area for judgement and to proceed thinking beyond boundaries. Therefore, art deterritorialization was in progress (e.g. apartment-format exhibitions held throughout the last decade).
Galleries that cautiously emerged in Tbilisi started to chronicle ongoing processes of contemporary art; these spaces managed to accomplish narration not only via exhibition policies but also via essence. These galleries acted like nomads, constantly moving from one place to another, in search of something new. They never returned back home – they carried home around. From existential perspective, they were defined by movement and continuous variation.
Along with using Tbilisi-based galleries and art spaces/institutions (Silk Museum, Museum of Literature, Photography Museum, The Writers’ House etc.) to display certain works, a new tendency had popped up. It involved using “multi-connection-woven” non-exhibition spaces as a medium of display.
If postmodern humor and hidden cynicism are signs of author’s alienation and inner distancing, post-postmodernism can be characterized by overcoming it, which can easily be observed in Georgian modern art. It is usually followed by the ultimate revival of a subject/author, expression of an idea, reconstruction, “resuscitation of definitions” or even “the return of lost meanings”. Without excepting pluralist approach, involving comparative interpretation, rather than a free one, as author’s view is taken into consideration. Thus, it becomes a prerequisite for “understanding” and critique.
Considering author’s resuscitation, Georgian artists’ position regarding socio-political, gender-related and other sensitive issues becomes pointed out. This position surpasses the borders of irony and relativism. Towards the end of the decade, certain artworks emerged that addresses these themes and takes responsibility to create other dimensions (both, physical and virtual).
Ketevan (Keti) Shavgulidze, PhD Art History