themes (that were employed in the last Venice Biennale) has become the main large
popular culture event and produced as such. Topics of victims were being used as in
Storr’s concept, are in a sense influencing the formation of a society and the public
which is completely different. So the text which I wrote after the Biennial was
entitled “War profiteers in art”. It was distributed by Nettime, media theory list on
the Internet, existing since 1994, I think. And the second list that was releasing it
was Yasmin by Leonardo, e-Magazine by MIT Press online.
On both places, it has produced huge debates for the reason that I was stating; that,
after ten years the problem of showing victims or trying to enforce the syndrome of
guilt of the public - which was unfortunately the effect of Storr’s exhibition on the
concept of Venice Biennale - is producing collateral victims in the public. This is in a
sense of making them suffering of the post traumatic syndrome. It was not
elaborated basically in terms of treating the public, but as these huge biennials are
also having cultural effects, they are treating groups of people inside in a subtle way.
Actually they cannot avoid producing an impact and that impact, because of
hugeness of the manifestation, is far bigger than a personal impact. It is becoming a
social impact.
This showing of works - as shown in the Arsenale - could produce it. It was on the
edge which I could see from the reactions of the public, raging from anger from
certain people, especially arriving from areas like Bosnia and places which have
been recently in war. The problem of the works was that the authors of the works
were not originally from these places so that they could report on the war situation.
So the displacement of the authorship and the topic was actually producing artists in
terms of “war tourism”.
42 SESSION 1 / 1. OTURUM / ANA PERAICA
baz› yazarlar›n Auschwitz olarak da okuyabilececurrency1i bir tema park› . Eylemci mant›k
aç›s›ndan (son Venedik Bienali’nde kullan›lan) baz› konular, ana ve büyük popüler
kültür olaylar›ndan biri haline geliyor ve böyle üretiliyorlar. Storr’un kavram›nda
kullan›lan kurban konular›, bir bak›ma bir toplumun ve tümüyle farkl› olan bir halk›n
oluflumunu etkiliyorlar. Dolay›s›yla, bienalden sonra yazd›currency1›m metnin bafll›currency1›
“Sanatta savafltan kazanç sacurrency1layanlar” idi. Internette san›r›m 1994’den beri mevcut
olan Nettime Medya teori listesi taraf›ndan yay›ld›. Metni yay›nlayan ikinci liste ise,
Leonardo’nun Yasmin’iydi, MIT Press online’›n e-Magazin’i.
Her iki yay›n da, büyük tart›flmalara neden oldu, bunun da nedeni, daha önce de söz
etticurrency1im gibi; on y›l sonra, kurbanlar› göstermek sorunu ya da ne yaz›k ki Storr’un
Venedik Bienali’nin kavram›na bacurrency1l› olarak sergisinin halk›n suçluluk sendromunu
zorlama etkisi. Bu bir anlamda, halk›n post travmatik sendromdan ac› çekmesini
sacurrency1layarak, onlara ikincil kurbanlar üretti. Bu, halk› temelden ele alarak
ayr›nt›land›r›lmad›. Ancak, bu büyük bienallerin ayn› zamanda kültürel etkileri
olducurrency1una göre, içerideki insan gruplar›n› incelikli bir flekilde iflliyorlar. Asl›nda bir
etki yaratmaktan kaç›nam›yorlar ve bu etki de, gösterinin büyüklücurrency1ü nedeniyle,
kiflisel bir etkiden çok daha öte oluyor. Adeta bir sosyal etki haline geliyor.
Arsenale’de sergilenen ifller, bunu üretebiliyordu ve s›n›rdayd›, bunu halk›n
tepkilerinden, baz› kiflilerin özellikle Bosna gibi yak›n zamanda savafl geçirmifl
bölgelerden gelen kiflilerin kabaran öfkesinden görebiliyordum. ‹fllerdeki sorun, bu
ifller için seçilen yarat›c›lar›n, aslen savafl durumu hakk›nda rapor verebilecek
yerlerden olmamas›yd›. Dolay›s›yla, kaynacurrency1›n ve konunun yer decurrency1iflimi, asl›nda
“savafl turizmi” bacurrency1lam›nda sanatç›lar üretiyordu.
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119