LV   ENG
How near and how far is Belarus and its contemporary art?
Aušra Trakšelytė, Art Critic
The exhibition A Door Opens? Belarusian Art Today
18.11.2010.–09.01.2011. CAC Vilnius
 
It’s actually not so simple to discuss Belarus and its culture, even though Vilnius is separated from Minsk by a distance of less than 200 kilometres. At the invitation of the Lithuanian government, in 2005 the European Humanities University (EHU)1 was transferred to Vilnius, and is nowadays attended by more than one-and-a-half thousand Belarusian students. For this reason, there is now a more intensive exchange of art and closer academic contacts, but a more profound understanding of current developments in the cultural life of the neighbouring country is still lacking. For the most part, we learn news about Belarus from the media, rather than from what we’ve been told by acquaintances – and we ourselves have no new information to share, either. Belarusian cultural events are very rare in Lithuania. We may recall the cultural platform KultFlux2, which included the VILIYA – NERIS LIVE concerts by Belarusian music groups, held in the autumn of 2008. This series of concerts not only gave the public an opportunity to hear and become acquainted with contemporary music – mainly underground and experimental – from Belarus, but also enabled the musicians to meet a real audience. Thanks to this series of concerts, the students of EHU in Vilnius had a chance to hear and see bands that many of them didn’t even know existed. On the evenings when these concerts were held, the KultFlux platform became a small piece of Belarus. Moreover, for the first time I really appreciated how many young people from Belarus there are studying in Vilnius, and how important such events are to them.

The situation with exhibitions is not much better. In 2009 an exhibition of Belarusian art entitled Vilnia/Vilnius and Belarusian artists in the 20th century (curator: Tatsiana Bembel) was held at the Arka Gallery. At the ART VILNIUS’09 international contemporary art fair, attended by more than 100 galleries, contemporary art from Belarus was represented by two galleries (PODZEMKA and LASANDR-ART). Individual artists have taken part in exhibitions held by the Contemporary Art Centre: thus, Artur Klinau participated in the ‘Centre of Attraction’ (Traukos Centras) Baltic Triennial of International Art in 2002, and work by Igor Savchenko was shown at 24/7: Wilno – Nueva York (24 hours) in 2003. The exhibition A Door Opens? Belarusian Art Today is the first major Belarusian contemporary art exhibition in Lithuania, introducing about twenty artists and their work3. The curator Kęstutis Kuizinas considers that the project should set in motion discussion on the discourse of Belarusian contemporary art and its development.
 
Marina Naprushkina. Office for Anti-Propaganda. Installation. 2007. Publicity photo
 
However, according to visual culture and film researcher Almira Usmanova, professor at EHU, “there is actually nothing, just individual artists such as Klinau or Savchenko, who are known in some way or another. However, I’m afraid they’re completely isolated – they themselves have never joined the critical context, or international ‘networks’ where large conceptually ‘loaded’ joint projects are undertaken. There are also many other factors affecting Belarus: from the lack of foreign language knowledge to the inability to formulate one’s vision in conceptual terms. Yet such a problem does exist.4” Another of the curator’s aims – that of giving the Belarusians themselves an opportunity to examine the art of their own country as if from outside, sounds more realistic. However, so long as there is no clear vision in the local context, it is difficult to imagine such a vision in the neighbouring countries, too.

In formal terms, the exhibition itself displays all the approaches seen in international contemporary art exhibitions: installations in various media, objects, video, photography, etc. Perhaps there are not many differences in terms of technique and artistic form, but the themes of the works are connected, in one way or another, with issues of Belarusian identity, the strategies of national politics or the search for one’s place on the international art scene. For example the video The Book of Ezekiel (2009) by Lena Davidovich uses Old Testament text as a metaphor for the history of the Belarusian people. The series of photographs Dream Sun City by Artur Klinau shows Stalinist Minsk, as it was rebuilt after the Second World War and was meant to represent a Communist utopia (urban perfection). Minsk as a city, with its buildings, monuments and decorations of public space fulfilling the function of representing ideology and the ruling power, so familiar in the countries of Eastern Europe5, is also highlighted in the work Building (2002–2007) by Aleksander Komarov, the work Concrete: the Stuff of Memories (2009) by Igor Peshehonov and The Path of the Sun (2010) by Marina Naprushkina. These and other artists comment on / document place and its influence on identity, culture and so forth. However, the majority of works in the exhibition present a view on Belarusian government policy. In the political works, the artists seek to examine painful issues relating to the state, for example they look at the mass media and the ‘reality’ that they help to shape. The artist Alexander Korablev makes use of the most popular sources of information – press publications – in his collages. In the work Idiot’s Collection (1997–1999) the artist constructs contemporary history using press cuttings, placing celebrities from music, film and fashion, as well as text fragments, alongside politicians. The gradually disappearing text on thermal paper No News from Belarus (2010) by Alexander Komarov is printed using a fax machine. It is not only an eloquent message to the West, but also an accurate illustration of the present situation. The model of state administration is commented by Sergei Shabohin in his work A Clear Choice (2010): the visitors are offered the possibility of voting ‘for or against’ on various ‘socio-political’ issues by putting their voting slip into a transparent ballot box, which has two openings, ‘Yes’ and ‘No’, but only one compartment, where all the voting slips end up. The installation Anti-Propaganda Office (2007) by Marina Naprushkina tells of the propaganda disseminated in Belarus and the sheer quantity of it, presenting information that she herself has compiled.
 
Oleg Yushko. Full Linen Jacket. Digital photography. 2010. Publicity photo
Sergei Shabohin. A Clear Choise. Installation. 2010. Publicity photo
 
Also shown at the exhibition are several works analysing the relationship between art, the artist and authority. For example, in the series of photomontages And Nothing Was Left (2009) Sergej Shabohin ‘destroys’, ‘burns down’ and ‘closes’ those institutions in Minsk where contemporary art is occasionally shown, with the aim of drawing attention to the shortage of such spaces and expressing his dissatisfaction with this situation. In the video performance Five Lyrical Songs About Physics. Fifty Artists and Two Art Critics Sing to the Accompaniment of a Piano and Theremin (2009) Maxim Tyminky highlights not only the present condition of the art system, but also the perspectives of the Belarusian artistic community and the public on this issue.

Unfortunately, the majority of the artists whose work is political or comments on power structures attack the political situation in Belarus in an illustrative manner, applying irony as a pain-killing drug. There is a lack of critical artistic praxis, exploring contemporary existence and aimed at articulating and stimulating discussion. Of course, the more critical works are by artists living and working outside of Belarus. One third of the participating artists belong to this category. The situation of émigré Belarusian artists is illustrated by the drawings of Oxana Gourinovitch, which are actually called Artists and Designers I Know Who Have left Minsk and Artists and Designers I Know who Have Returned to Minsk.

The present migration of artists is connected not only with the political situation, but also with the economic conditions, the absence of an art market and other causes. Lithuanian artists, too, go abroad to study, develop, live and work. And there are many who stay abroad: Jonas Mekas, Žilvinas Kempinas, Svajonė Stanikienė, Paulius Stanikas, Nomeda Urbonienė, Gediminas Urbonas, Ignas Krunglevičius, Ray Bartkus and others. Perhaps, in contrast to the Belarusians, the Lithuanian artists maintain closer contacts while abroad: they continue to hold exhibitions in their own country and are even invited to represent their country at international exhibitions outside Lithuania.

Thus, in my view, this exhibition served to confirm what we already knew about this country, and it seems that there was no desire behind it to change entrenched stereotypical thinking. Although the present situation in the country is brought into focus in many works, addressing issues of politics, art and the state apparatus, the selection of artists according to the principle ‘loyal to the country means disloyal to art’, as well as the theme of the artist and emigration, the existence of all these issues was known already. There is an absence of more individual, social themes, works expressing an alternative self-confidence. For example, the concerts that took place in KultFlux did give at least an inkling of the existence of a musical subculture in Belarus. The question arises: does the selection, for the exhibition, of works that do not move beyond long-held stereotypes reflect the choice of the curator or of the artists themselves? We can only hope that the artists taking part in this exhibition will remain in the memory of the visitors to the exhibition and will at least in this way fill the yawning gaps in our knowledge of contemporary Belarusian art.

/Translator into English: Valdis Bērziņš/

1 The university, closed down in 2004, was regarded as the only higher education institution in Belarus that provided an education not dominated by ideology.
2 In 2008 a group of teams of artists, architects and art historians proposed that a new social space and dynamic cultural platform be established in the city of Vilnius, based on democratic principles. Right from the start, the main aim of the project was to diversify the cultural life of Vilnius, at the same time joining the long-continued discussion on a ‘reorientation’ of the city towards the river, and the appropriateness of the embankment as a location for cultural events. This cultural platform (a temporary structure on the riverbank) is oriented towards high quality, diverse (rather than mass) events encompassing various fields of culture, becoming each time a venue for meeting and productive cooperation.
3 The exhibition is dominated by artists of the middle generation, aged around forty. Very young artists, who have just completed their studies, are also represented, as are older artists, such as Vladimir Tsesler, who is about sixty.
4 ‘The neighbour and the other. A conversation on the academic and artistic contacts between Lithuanian and Belarusian culture’ in the newspaper 7 meno dienos, 15 December 2010 [www.7md.lt/lt/laisvoji_tribuna/kaimynas_ir_kitas.html]
5 The term refers to the art of the former ‘Eastern Bloc’ countries after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.
 
go back