Peer) siete seessessesesss SETHE a3 e533Contemporary at bs become ode phenomenon cl for omit, There is 20 plat in comparing i to what weasel 1 know, beast dependant om te ese [Sf lobuinaon which we ae oly bepaning ro over and whov impact we oes _ariging ones! ‘A Global Art Forum Jn March 2007, the Dubai Art Fair, a subsidiary of Dubai's International Finarcial Gentre (DIFC), organized its frst Global Art Forum in which the term ‘global art’ simply was used synonymously with today’s con- temporary ar.? Some ofthe sections as was to be expected, addressed issues like Branding Cities through Culture and Building Future Art ities. One section, however, narrowed the spectrum by asking the blint questions: “How will contemporary art affect the Mid- dle Bas inthe next 10 years?” or: “How will Se ace the Middle East affect contemporary artin Pecoritg the next 10 years?” Some of the participants objected that the two questions were not commensurable, and that they treated art as ‘amater of planning, ‘The creation of art markets in the Middle East is an economic projec that will indeed affect contemporary art. Western auction houses are competing with one another inthe region. Sothe>y’shas opened a branch in Doh, Qatar, and Christie's has chosen Dubay and Abu Dhabi is where the Louvre will send parts ofits collec- tions. To this end, ithas commissioned a museum building by Tadao ‘Ando. Besides the brand-new museum of Islamic Artin Qatar, designed by IAL Pei —a museum of contemporary art isto open soon, Thus the Middle East will indeed affect the global art world, Art museums, though still an unfamiliar instirution inthe region, are an obvious choice, and therefore quite 2 number of new museums are already under con struction. In 2008, the Global Art Forum, this time with The Financial Timesas partner, stated bluntly that “artis a business."# The board of Cultural and Art Authority, on that occasion, explained their “agenda fora global art ciy.”3 Thus, the Gulf States provide a testcase for art's globalization as an economic project. Butt is quite another matter to ask how at will affect the Middle East, asthe first Global Art Forum did. Contemporary ar, with is erit- B bi. Phi ncneeeeeeeeeeennimeie,cal message and public visibility bears the potential of conflicts with ‘are control in censoring artists. China, after 1989, is an example of the price that has to be paid fora compromise berween government polities ee arc trade. Only the economic elite of private collectors and investors tan afford the risk to own art of whatever intention. The Gulf States may “pply more liberal principles than their Arab neighbors, but cheir exper “ence with today’s artis limited, if we leave aside Sharjah whose biennial ‘p vividly described by Jack Persekian, Artistic Director of the Sharjah “Biennial, in this volume (pp. 154-63). However, when looking to the artists’ part, whether they still live in the region or work abroad, we dis- Cover a new enthusiasm. Itis precisely the economic prospect, enhanced by the global perspective that opens unprecedented possibilities for them. Enrico Navarra, a Paris dealer, has even started a new distribution projet for them by publishing book editions for artists who “are devel- ‘ping a new vision of the Arab world,” as Jérome Sans, editor of the third volume in this series, writes.6 The whole endeavor depends on ‘whether artists will be given “independent spaces for looking and read ing?” that are a novelty nor only in art but concern social life in general. ‘The aim isto ereate conditions artists can work under, despite the pres- sure of the business world they live in. ‘The Global Contemporary “Twenty years after it firse manifestations, the time has come to discuss + the nature and purpose of global ar that emerged, lke a phoenix from ‘the ashes of modern art tthe end ofthe wentith century and opposed modernity’s cherished ideal of progress and hegemony. Contemporary art, aterm long used to designate the most recent art, assumed an enticely new meaning when art production, following the turn of world polities and world wade in 1989, expanded acros the lobe. The results ofthis unprecedented expansion challenged the continuity of any Euro- centric view of at. Global artis no longer synonymous with modern art. tis by definition contemporary, not just ina chronological but also, as wwe shall se, ina symbolic or even ideological sense. I is both rep- resented and distorted by an art mafKet whose strategies are not just economic mechanisms when crossing cultural borders, but strategies to channel art production in directions for which we stil lack sufficient, categories nporary Artas Global Ar‘emay be difficult for Western art criticism to accept the novelty (and ‘not just the new geographical reach) of global art tis, however, wishful thinking o keep it under Western guidance and within the precincts of familiar irstivtions. ‘Artona global scale does not imply an inherent aesthetic quality, ‘which could be identified as such, nor a global concept of what has to be regarded as art, Rather than representing a new context, it indicates the loss of context or focus, and includes its own contradiction by implying the counter movement of regionalism and tribalization, whether national, cultural o religious. It clearly difers from modernity whose self-appointed universalism was based on a hegemonial notion of art. In short, new ar today is global, much the same way the World Wide Web is global. The Internet is global inthe sense that itis used everywhere, but this does not mean that tis universal in content or message. Its an infraetrucwee whose techniques offers navigation system. The Internet promises fre access and thus allows for personal response tothe world of other wers. But free access is fiction, as the Internet is controlled for ‘economic and politcal reasons. Hence, some political regimes fel anced +0 controlit, precisely because their local problems are threatened by a free flow of information and opinion that goes with uncensored crea~ tivity. But contol is not only a political problem: itis also a concern of art criticism and aesthetics. Global art may be critical in political terms, but itis also ccitical in terms of art categories defined by inclusion or exclu- sion. Newart often blurs any kind of border between mainstream art, on the one side, and popular art on the other, and thus abolishes the old dualism between Western art and ethnographic practice by using indige- nous tradtions asa reference, as Justo Pastor Mellado has showa for Chile and Paraguay (pp. 302-15) Seen from a Western point of view, slobal art epresents a geopolitical or even geoaesthetic brand, as Joaquin Barriendos explains in his contribution to this volume (pp. 9§-r15). tis symbolic capital whose value changes from one place to the other, even if “Western revisionism tries to contro its currency with its own exchange sates, Diflerence, with the label ofa foreign culture, has become mar- “ketable and thus becomes an entrance ticket for newcomers on the art market ” aia amacaas iat ilWorld Art and its Colonial Heritoge Global art and world art are sometimes used synonymously. But world artis an old idea complementary to modernism, already developed in ‘André Malraux’s postwar book oa universal art without museum wall? because or although it was mostly to be found in Western museums. It continues to signify art from all ages, the heritage of mankind, In fact, it smade art from every possible provenance acceptable under the condition of excluding it from modern mainstream art—an old argument between art museums and ethnographic museums. Such significance is offically codified in international laws for the protection of art and monuments. ‘The School of World Art Studies located at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, a novelty inthe university realm, offers a clear example for the discussion of world art today. Its origin was the Sainsbury Collec- tion, which the university inherited and whose items from Africa and Oceania were collected as art, and juxtaposed with modern art, as was the custom in modern ar’ formalism and universal aesthetics (fig 1) It ‘was in line with this concept that John Onians, who taught atthe school, “a Belting «cited his magnificent Atlas of World Art, which reaches from the Stone [Age to the present day, a project also accompanied by a World Art Library.!9 A similar program at Leiden University is documented inthe volume World Art Studies whose contributors are both art erties and ethnographers, ie. groups which fora long time had belonged to differ- ent camps of thought and method.!t ‘The idea of world at, ina sense, is held together by an art concept that based on modernism’s universalism, and today looks somewhat odd, as it bridges a Western notion of art with a multiform, and often ethnie production to which the term ‘ar’is applied in an arbitrary manner. It was a paradigm of modernist aesthetics to regard every form or work that humanity created, as art. World art—a kind of aesthetic appropria- tion of objects as pure form’ or as proof of individual creativity on a #universal scale—is best described in André Malraux’s book on the ‘imag inary museum’! that is, in fact, museum in the mind and therefore epitomizes world at also a construct. World art never was the concern of ethnographers who dealt with local products in acultre-specific way and thus in most concrete terms. It may be admitted that labels such as ‘ethnic’ or ‘primitive’ are equally questionable but they are so for very — reasons. Sally Price brings the Western art appropriation to the in her book Primitive Art in Civilized Places, an acerbic account of, {henceraintes surounding ertfactand works far ‘World art, in the meantime, matters for identity polities in cultures that had no previous share in modernism, and therefore today insist on their own traditions and thei own narratives in defining visual produc- tion as cultural practice. World art also receives alot of atention due to 4 Beltthe growing pressure of repatriation claims from former colonies. Met: ropolitan museums of the West, often accused of being outposts of ! empire and colonialism, today have to rethink their arguments in order to defend heie collections. The British Museum is among them, and its director, Neil MacGregor, claimed his museum to be “not only 4 ‘museum of che world but also a museum for the world.” In this sense, he opened a blockbuster show on the Chinese Terracotta Army that attracted large erowds in 2007, thus ascertaining his claims not only to ‘own, but also to promote, world art fg. 2 ‘Avbookshop on Great Russell Street I came across a the time, unin tentionaly offered a telling case of the need for our distinction. The ‘owner ofthe shop presented books on world are and others on global art, though both were about art from China, side by side in the same window display. The catalogue ofthe British Museum exhibition across the street shared the window with a book on contemporary artists from (China that was dedicated to the new market presence of living Artists in China, and thus would not have made any sense twenty years ago (Gg 31. | In 1982, Jean-Louis Pradel published one of the lst books ofits kind withthe title World Are Trends for contemporary art nevertheless most of the 23 countries represented were Western.!© Today, however, world artis synonymous with the art heritage ofthe others, mesning art on universal scale, World are encompasses most cultures beyond the West whose heritage was preserved in empire type museums.”” In fact, world art for along time was primarily owned by Western museums, where i existed as an expatrated and contested treasure from colonial times. In order to protect their collections, directors of eighteen Western muse ‘ums recently signed a declaration in which they defended ther institu tions as universal museums that were created to serve the whole world and not single country or nation.* Universal museums, as an idea, are + legacy from moderaity’s claim to offer universal models. Globalism, on the other hand, is a response to universalism and serves to propagate the symbolic capital of difference on the market. Glohal art, in fact, differs profoundly from world art in tha itis always ereated as at to begin with, and chat it is synonymous with contemporary art practice, what: ever the art definitions may be in the individual ase “World Art History or Global Art History? ‘We encounter today a new debate about world at history which differs from world art studies, as it means a world wide competence of ahi tory as a Western discipline. This has been sketched out in David Sum- mers’ book in which world art history is part of the subtitle, and then critically discussed by James Elkins, editor of Is Art History Global?.? ‘Whereas Summers claims a universal competence of arthistory for every part of the world, Elkin insists on “local practices of arhistory” chat do sot follow a single model. In hs editorial Art History as a Global Disci- line, he develops “five arguments against the idea thatart history is, or ‘could become, single enterprise throughout the world "2° The question ‘of world wide competence of ar history is also taken up ina recent book ‘of David Carrier and a forthcoming book by Whitney Davis2! Global arthistory, in fat, cannot be understood as ahistory of global ar, as the lane only came into being rwenty years ago. The term, rather, implies the chim fora global extension of today's art history ta method and academic discipline. World art history cannot serveas synonym, asit isa history of world art and as such presents even a double problem: on the one hand the notion of world art, as an art concept with a question able universalism, and on the other hand the notior. of history that implies the even more questionable assumption that world ar, in its utter diversiry, allows for a common history in teres of art history ‘Whereas global ar, as contemporary artis loosing any tes to familiar art history (and, in fat, started the exodus from art history in the mod- emist sense), world art has not been a traditional subjec:of ar history in. the European tradition but was treated by ethnography and aesthetics. ‘Whether as global ar history or world art history, the debate is not one con content or subject matter. It rather reveals the claim (or the expecta- $ion) to make Western art history global, a claim that may be interpreted as liberal offer to newcomers or 28 a new version of empire and neo- colonialism. Art history, as I have suggested upon various occasions, was a local ‘game that worked only for Western art and only from the Renaissance ‘onwards. It was invented for studying art va history of form. Contem- porary artists in fact, deliberately left the master narrative of art history ‘whose claims chey rejected with their confession to post-history. The title of The End ofthe History of Art?,a book which I rewrote under the 4beading Are History after Modernism,2 refers vo an essay othe French artist Hervé Fischer, entitled The End of the History of Art23 Fischer supported the message of his essay by a performance which took place at the Centre Georges Pompidou, Pars, in 1979. On that cecasion, he declared that “the history of artas ended. The moment when I cut that cord was the last event in the history of at. The linear prolongation of this fallen Line was merely an ide illusion of thought.”2* ‘On the other hand, itis quite uncertain whether and how Western museums will represent at history in the future. The permanent exhibi- tion at Tate Modern replaces the narrative of at history with slternative ‘ways of looking at art,” as Frances Morris explains in Tate Modern: The Heandbook.® So-called “viewpoints” such as “Poetry and Dream” allow for “multiple readings” ofthe collection in order to respond to “an open and fluid sitvation.°2 Flow charts in the hallway, though, carry on ‘MoMA’ old genealogical tres ofthe thirties that however no longer hold for contemporary art (fig. 4. The Tate curators cannot be blamed for making obvious that which ar history has become. They invited itors to “fil in the blanks” and to write their own “viewpoints” on a postcard, Arthistory has been out of control ever since late modern art undermined the claims ofa linear history, as it was offered by the major- ity of museum exhibitions. iy 4 ov rt timeline 208 camury (bea) ot buddensg “6forts o globalize at history often borrow the current discourse of caltural theory where post-colonial debates of identity an¢ migration Gre prevalent. A conference held a the University of Binghamton as, arly a2 1989 critkized art history's dependence on the terminology of cltual theory. As Anthony King states in the introduction to the con- ference papers: “No contemporary question is more urgent than the peed to explore alternative ways of conceptualizing and analyzing issues ‘elated tothe ‘glotalization of culture; frequently perceived in popular {erms, as cultural homogenization on global sale."? The arthistorians at the conference responded to the gatekeepers of cultural theory and demanded a new debate that actually catches the significance in the change of the art world ‘But the criss ofthe master narrative does not help the former periph- cexy countries to reinvent an art history on their own orto replace it with something else. Art history, thus, has a different calendar ameng Chinese artists and collectors. Zhang Xiaogang's pieture, Birth ofthe People's Republic of China (1992) also alludes, tongue-in-cheek, to he birth of ‘Chinese contemporary art, an art without roots in the modernist tradi- tion. The bs movement was a “rebellion against the state ideology and ‘the instittional aparatus of at” including a “philosophica! discussion ‘on modernity” in more than eighty unofficial art groups.2® The climate ‘changed when the China/Avant-Garde exhibition at the National Art Gallery in China was closed permanently in February of 1989 using ‘bomb threats as an excuse2 In the following yeas, the acceptance of art shifted to the market and cut off the artists from political influence. I -was then that polical pop and cynical realism reached an international audience "The second pans of GAM’ platform in New Delhi in thefallof 2008 discussed the question How Global is Art History Todsy?. In the debates, the global competence of an implanted model of Western art history was denied in the case of India (pp. 20-4)2° The debates touched on several trajectories that today are controversial in Indis. Counter- narratives increasingly replace narratives of Western modernism with diferent concepts such as the return to national narativeso! Indian at ‘There was agreement among the participants that colonial history still “unduly dominates the cultural topics in India and guides the attention 10 long time experiences with foreign ar, while native traditions andaesthetics have litle space in today’s art history. The criss of art history based on colonial concepts favors the decision fora new varian: of visual studies which, following the model of Goldsmith College, London, ‘dominate curatorial education today, and as different paradign, replace art history with its transdisciplinary aims. The MoCA as @ Symbolic Site Global are production operates ina counter position wo art history, ast aims to reclaim equality without the former borders separating art from indigenous or popular production. It is inthis spirit that museums in other parts of the world represent diversity in appearance and content even in their permanent art collections. By implication, also Western art collections suddenly may look ‘local’ i a new and unwelcome sense. In order to create closer links with their local audiences, museums in a non- ‘Western context ar, in fact, tempted to follow a national or community line in their acquisition policies, and thus aim at being site-specific in terms of given cultural tradition. They have every reason for rethinking ther parin the promotion and choice of what they consider as art. They ray host international exhibitions, but recently biennials that have spreadall over the world, have taken over ther od role of exhibiting and organizing avant-garde art Museums of contemporary art are no longer built with the idea of exhibiting ar’s history, but make the claim to represent an expanding ‘world in the mirror of contemporary art. Their boom does not mean that chey continue the Wester idea of an art museum. Rather, they differ ‘more in what they consider to be art than they do in their architecture, which is more easily translatable from one place to another. After global- ization has decentralized the worl, the free trade ideology of the ‘new economy’ offers the rhetoric of ‘free art’ that no longer provides oblig- ing models, as itis free in every direction to the degree tha the market allows freedom. Accordingly, the label ‘Museum of Modern Are (MoMA) is being eplaced more and more by the brand name ‘Museum ‘of Contemporary Art’ (MoCA). The majority of MoCAs are situated in the US where the Los Angeles MoCA and the MassMoCA are the best known of their kind. But museums bearing this name are also to be found in Montreal, London, Lyon, Kagawa, and Shanghai, and there is even a National MoCA of Kores. The MoCA is by implication global, as a{celebrates contemporary production asan art without geographic bor- ders, nd without history in terms of Western modernism. The are mat- ket followed when Christe’ and Sotheby's in recent years introduced ‘contemporary’ and ‘postwar’ as new categories in their auction cata- logues that replaced ‘modern’ as the familiar trademark of Western art (Gg. 5} In Asia, art museums are being built at the same speed at which bien- nials were founded in the two preceding decades. Their boom is ‘unprecedented, but their destination is far from clear. In Japan, the trend favors “a certain typeof regional (prefectural) museum,” which lacks a collection and does rot employ a curator, but accommodates “group exhibitions organized by the local artists” themselves (pp. 316-27). ‘Masaaki Morishita calls them “empty muscums” that serve temporary ‘exhibitions like Kun:thallen as they are called in German. Museum, under such prerequisites, is «symbolic name for symbolic sites where Belting.even art of the future is expected to be shown. Museums are built like airports awaiting the arrival of international art. What looks like a con- tradiction between boom and criss (the boom of museum buildings and. the crisis of their meaning), infact reveals a different relation to new audiences that ate mostly unfamiliar with museum visits. Collectors. -with a market competence (a kind of VIP in the art world) do not need museums for themselves, or are building muscums on their ow: that however leave gap for local audiences with no art experience at all In addition to art collectors, local administrations fill the gap and. ‘introduce ambitions of their own in ‘developing’ art within an arban. frame, and in creating so-called cultural districts. Oscar Ho describes the “Hong Kong project of huge malls with art museums that are also. -expected to attract a mass audience. In Shanghai, the authorities are con- “structing one hundred new museums to be completed by 2010: "More ‘museums are being opened in Shanghai than Starbucks cafes."(p. 266) ‘But such museums “have little if anything in common with the cultural ‘experience ofthe zeneral public” they are meant to attract (p. 269-70)- In ° bi. 1. *ncnendiaesieeeemmer sadtheic search fora new audience, museums soon may be forced to give up the competition with collectors’ muscums, and to make a decision as to ‘phether to favor international tourism or to address local audience ‘vith an alternative to mainstream art such as visual culture or popular rroduction from their own environment. ‘After the breakdown of the Japanese economy around 1990, local governments started to revitalize city centers with museums as tool Since 1955, to hundred public museums have been built all over Japan. ‘Department stores began to open museums on their own grounds in order to attract clients with the exhibition of exceptional art works. The “Mori Art Museum in Tokyo isa corporate institution located on a few floors in skyscraper where it offers new models for combining business ‘with culture [plate 21°? In China, the museum boom has only begun recently, but wil surpass anything ever seen in the museum scene. The international success of contemporary Chinese artists has led museum “officials to discuss the construction of public institutions for ther repre~ ‘setation at home. ‘Along the same lines, Fan Di'An has announced the opening of anew -wing ofthe National Art Museum of China founded in 1958) with a location near the site ofthe Olympic Games. Ina recent interview, heregretted the lack of international art in Chinese collections and com- plained about the scant interest the general audience shows for visiting, ‘museums. In part, he says, the collectors are responsible since cllect- ing has become a business rather than an interest of the community. Chi- nese artists are usualy beter known abroad than at home where people joke that they “are not making art, they are making prices.” In the ‘meantime, single arists take action. Thus, in 2001, Cai Guo-Qiang started his series of mostly ephemeral MoCAs whose aim, ashe wrote, was “a rebellion agaist the current system of MoMAs and MoCAs that have become detached from the public.”®5 QMoCa, planned for his native town Quanzhou, sa collaborative project with Foster and Part- ners. The model was shown at the Guggenheim New York and atthe ‘National Art Museum of China in 2008 [fig 6] "Another projects the art museum ofthe ‘iconic painter’ Yue located in the Sichuan province near the Qingchen Mountains and designed by the Befjing- based Srudio Pei-Zhu, responsible for Digital Bejing With its space of about 10700 square meters, the museum will house the work of Yue Minjn when it opens in 2009. It will beone of, ten new museums onthe same sit, each dedicated tothe work of single Chinese artist—such 35 Zhang Xiaogang and Wang Guangyi. The pro- ject, developed by the local goverament of Dujingyan, realizes an idea of Lu Peng, professor atthe China Central Academy of Fine Artin Beijing “The new building, in the midst of nature, looks like a spaceship landing -with a cargo of one painter's art chat carries a global branding. Its shape, an oblong sphere with curvilinear walls is inspired by a river rock and, according wo the architects, aims to be both futuristic and very natural (6g. 7, plate 3}°7 ‘Modern Art in Retrospect “The success of modernization has favored the export of Western art to other parts ofthe world where the corresponding urge to join the ‘devel- ‘oped! countries prepared the ground. Modern was a ‘project’ that was shared and imitatec by new political and economic elites who in the postwar years hurried to catch up with the West after the US had served as a puide for joining formerly European modernism. The Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York, still a recent institution in the war yyeats and shortly thereafter, became a symbol for successful competition 2swith Europe in cultural respects. The building of Museums of Modern ‘Arcin Brazil (1948) in Japan (1951), and later in India, reveals a general rivalry with European leadership in the arts. But the real problem remained withthe definition of ‘what is art and what is not, for the con- tinuing hegemonial modernism still demanded the exclusion of artists ‘other than Westera (see below, pp. 55-7). The only alternative was an ‘excessive nationalism inthe representation of modern art in order to ‘counterbalance the colonial definition * ‘Modern art at che time was distinguished as ‘modern form’ in at, which could even mean ‘only form’ without any subject matter, when abstraction inthe 1950s was recognized asa universal style; ‘world lan- suage,’ to use the shetoric of those years.®* The difference of global art, given tis background, isall too obvious fori lacks any common idiom inerms of style and no longer insists on form asa primary or independ ent goal. Rather, at is distinguished by new proo’ of professionalism, such as comtemporary subject matter and a contemporary performance, usually a mixture of film, video, and documentary materials. Asa result, participation inthe art world does not require the cld entrance ticket of formal novelty and purity, as proof of advanced art. Is rather the con- science that matters, preferably understood as a critical analysis of today’s most debated (or neglected) issues. Originality, once expected fcom the arts’ self expression, has become a way to take position in contemporary issues. This also applies tothe claim ef identity other than Western that lives from an old resistance against modern hegemony. Inclusion and visibility are the new battle cries when artists from for- erly neglected cultures enter the stage. Self-performance, rather than self-expression in an art work, has. become a strategy for a new visibility with one’s own ethnicity (see below, 55-9). But performance needs a public stage, in other words, an art institution that in many countries has not yet been available. This necessity calls for the art museum even where the museum either lacks any history or suffers from the “wrong” history of colonialism. Current museum theory, which has become a favored academic subject, is of litle help in addressing this situation, because i is still Western game and also because it usually neplets case studies of today’s museum practice, especially in countries without a proper museum tradition. “Rethinking. the museum,” a slogan to be encountered in a vastnumber of publica 53tions, is usualy a topic for Wester societies where migration and multi- cultualism demand a visible museum presence. Bu the same discussion applies to the crisis of exhibiting art, as itwas practiced in high mod- ttnism. It has become a new problem of art museums where objects (works) are replaced by installations and evens ‘Will art museums retrace their historical role vo offer a context for ar, even where at takes new, unexpected roads? In modern times, art was uswally defined by an institutional framework. Art was what you saw in art museums, Its for this eason that museums often became the target of an institutional ertique, as artists ealled for a different kind of ‘museum. Museum was context or provided a context. But museums hhave lost thei former authority asa given context, and the art market does not offer an alternative context. The result isa dangerous and far reaching de-contextuslization of art to the degree that art works are being sold even in places where chey have no local meaning and cannot translate their message for new audiences, but serve the taste of collec- tors who anyway operate in their own world There remain te bienni- als, Though they create the dominant at discourse today, they cannot ‘offer a context beyond the event (infact, they lve from a traveling clien- tele). The loss of context leaves the museum again 2s 2 possible choice for re-contextualization, though with a new idea of what an art museum i to be. Seen in thislght, even muscums without a collection may become 4 context in places where art needs an institional presence, Bu instead of representing a nation’s or a city’s art easures, the idea of a forum ‘waits for non-Western art museums to discover thie new role. A forum offers a site forthe debate of whats community is ready to acceptor to reject as art. We often forget that art museums in the West, were ereated {com early on in order to shape or even toinventa proper art audience ‘This tsk today waits for them in many new places. But there is one other role to be considered here. Art museums, the past, were not just displaying art, but were narrating at history, or pre~ senting atin the mirror of its own history. An offical narative helped to situate each work of art in space snd time. Already arteitcs like Julius Meier Graefe or Herbert Read have propagated modern arts the spear- head of (Western) ars constant and linear progress? The term ‘avant- garde,’ with ies military overtones, makes the idiomatic nature ofthis master naratve clear‘? But history, inthe guise of art history, followedan argument of its own when it was defined both in terms of invention’ tod deconstruction” Creative invention inthe hands of envi artist, was the ‘never seen’ Deconstruction, on the other hand, liberated srt from the ‘to0 much seen’ In both cases, it was new art that counted But this argument suffered damage in the 1960s when the much lamented death ofthe avantgarde confirmed the loss of art's claims to go ahead on 2 preconceived path.ti The artists themselves broke with an {deal of history that had also provided a matrix of timeless values. One generation later, the problem of valuing art within the framework ofits istory increases with the globalization of at. - 2 3 3 ‘A Double Exclusion in Modern Art ‘The definition of modern art, however, was based on a double exclusion. First, the paradigm was reserved for Western art whose confines were to remain clean and protected. ‘Making ar’ was tantamount to ‘making ‘modern art." Arists unwilling or unable to follow this axiom did not fall under the category of art atall. Bur even those who were modern in th art but lived outside the West were not admitted to the ranks of offic art history; hence, today, the retrospective effort to retrace moder artin ‘other parts of the world, and thus to fil inthe blanks in written art his- tory. The discussion of ‘forgotten’ or ‘lost’ avantgardes currently serves the reconstruction of the history of modernism, bue they were not for- jgotten; they were rather dismissed in order to keep the picture of mod- exnism clea. Reseed Araeen has started to reclaim a share in the history ‘of modernism that fora long time was denied to artists with a different provenance.*? The Other Story, as Rasheed Araeen entitled an “exhibi- tion of Afro-Asizn artists in postwar Britain” at the Hayward Gallery in 1989, pointed to "the absence of non-European artists from the history ‘of modern art."® The recovery of neglected names was an appeal to rethink modernism. Their absence in away made the narrative of West- em modernism possible. The recovery of missing chapters in modernism was the reason for Araeen creating the periodical Third Text in 1987 Recently, Patrick Flores curated a traveling exhibition with an alterna- tive history of Asian art whereby Cubism was introduced as a symbol of moder style: Cubism’s appropriation was “complex and differed with time and region."*S When cubism was reused in order to tell the “visual narratives of myth and religion” in Asia, ie turned modernism against its s{contemporary at and collaborates “The works shown here are recent ad iniite a series of changing section ofthe galleries, vere created within the ls thity orks tell us about Ari's past a wel ‘They emphasise the continuing ofthe divers traditions represented galeries, but als suggest new Afia inthe twenty First ceneury immense impac.on the rest. ofthese artis, in thes very be described as Areas, but sometimes defy such labeling. tendon Brith Museum: Department of ihnogrephy, Alton Eston, all fenternporery Ar, 3007 Pheer Hans Bling ‘own purist and universalist claims. Exclusion also went with the polities ‘of Western art schools that mediated a canon of modern art by initiation in order to be accepted as professional artist. Thus, colonialism was a driving force in the spread of modern art though it often met with the accord of those who wanted to become modern. ‘Bur modern art also excluded ethnic artifacts that were looked at in the distorting mirror of colonialism. Ethnic craftsmen were thought of as living in atime outside history, much a the colonies were removed by [Hegel out of history that for him was a Western prerogative. The dual- ism of ‘at history’ and ‘ethnology,’ two old academic disciplines, was represented as well by two different, even opposite types of museums, ‘which testified against each other, and yet complemented one another like the two sides of the same coin, as isthe casein Paris with the Centre ‘Georges Pompidou and the Musée du Quai Branly. Primitvisim, the famous appropriation of ethnic art by Picasso and other modernist artists, was celebrated forthe las sme in William Rubin’s 1984 show at x6 hi. -24.: ncnenanenetiiamantaimeythe MoMA, New York, in the spirit of the old distinction of arc and eth- nic influence on art. In the meantime, the former dualism has lost any clear boundaries. Onthe one side, ethnographic museums have begun to collect or even to commission contemporary art in their collections in order to cover their cultural geography with living art, as Claude ‘Ardowin explains the situation in the British Museum (pp.190-235) [fig. 8], Are museums, on the other side, are expected to open their West- ern collections for today’s global art. The roles of ethnographers and art curators seem to be exchanged. The former inereasingly curate contem- porary art, and the latter are also studying art witha cultural geography that had been fora lng time the discussion of ethnography. At the same time, the difference between historians and anthropologists is shrinking, 4s the new fields ofsthno-history and historical anthropology prove clearly. Ethnography los its momentum when modernization trans- formed (or destroyed) the traditional societies of ther ‘feld work,’ and also interrupted or exhausted the continuity of ‘ethnic’ arts and crafts that nicely seemed to represent on the behalf of Western colonies. Post Ethnie and Neo-thnic Iisa resul of contemporary at's globalization chat non-Western artists ‘eject the label ‘ethnic’ and discover their ethnicity a a personal identity thats no longer encumbered by racial bias. At the same time, artists in the West reject the label ‘art history” as their frame of reference, which had reduced them to descendants ofa linear course of ‘art history.” The late modern discourse of ‘post-history’ may have been a catalyst for both partes to meet on common ground. Arthur Danto was one of the first to discover “the visual arts ina post-historical perspective.” “The Post-historical period," he writes, “means the end of a certain narrative, under the terms of which making art was understood as carrying fo ‘ward” art history. But “the master narrative of Wester ais losin ‘rip, and nothing has taken its place.” Likewise, I have repeatedly dis- cussed the crisis of art history (the ‘end of at history’) as an outmoded ‘model that sno longer appropriate for dealing with the art of our time-# ‘The notion ‘post-ethnic’ offers itself by analogy with the notion of post- historical. Much as their ethnic origin presents a problem for the one party, given place in history has become an unweleome burden forthe other. Artists are redefining their ethnicity a a personal role, and as a 7 <4 a <4 S Bekmigration experience, that leads to multiple identities in the sense that VS. Naipaul has described his own persona in his autobiographical novel The Enigma of Arrival, published in 1987.4 It is a post-ethnic position t perform as an ‘artist from Africa’ rather than to suffer the label ofan “African artist” Chéri Sarmba, the artist from Zaire offered pertinent example when he erested the post-thnic role in sel-portrat as professional artist for Jean-Hubert Martin's Paris exhibition Magi- ‘iens de latere, the fist event of global art in 1989 (plate 7]°°The self- portrait is more than that, as itis a painted program that defines his departure from Kinshasa to Pars as a symbolical change of roles, from the ethnicroleas African arts tothe global role wth an African ethnic- ity. The closed cage of his native environment opens up when the ar- plane brings him to international presence or visibility. He poses in the picture nce just with is likeness, bu with the performance of his artist Self, an old privilege of Westen artists. At the same time, he applies the visual language of popular media from his native Zaire to make his new claims Holland Cotter speaks of “a paradigm sift in contemporary art.” The Freestyle exhibition at the Stadio Museum in Haarlem used the label ‘postblack ar’ in the same sense that David A. Hollinger uses the term “post-ethaicity."5! The movement of multiculturalism in the 19908, 5, ‘Cotter states, has been followed by a liberation from ethnic identity chat defines ethnicity asa role rather than as a rule. The criss of history, on ‘the Wester side, opened the road for abolishing history's counterpart, the exotiism of the other. History, for along time, divided the world, but contemporaneity makes the claim of crossing this division. Also geography used to separate art, asa Western possession, from the ethnic, its counterpart in the colonies. Primitivism was a Western attitude that, even in its most idealistic formulation, was based on the cliché of the primitive or the primordial that had become a matter for ncstalgi in ‘moder tines. ‘Wheres old frontiers begin to waver, new ones are coming into sight. Neo-ethnic movements challenge ats globalization with a highly polit- 1 tribalism in countries like India where Hindu sects use ther for their nationalistic claims. The polemics against gloQal art (and i lifestyle connotations) are as obvious asthe revival of traditional aesthetics with religious connotations. A neo-Hiindu sect with about three thousend 38centers in every part of che world, opened a temple district at Akshar- dam, on the outskirs of New Delhi, in 2005 with the participation of seven thousend artists who created traditional sculptures in a revival style designating ‘true Indian art’'as.a timeless style. This neo-ethnic movement operats outside che art world, bt makes the double claim to represent art and 1 globalize Indian art’? New Media on the Eve of Global arr I appeacs, in retrospect, that globalization in art had several prerequi- sites among which, inthe first place, the electronic turn deserves our aitention. New media caused a revolution of what had been corsidered as art up to then, The reign of the White Cube, with its immaculate ‘exhibition concept, suffered damage when video and installation are invaded the ar space with the technologies of mass media that ircreased the presence of art, and crossed its borderline to everyday media experi- cence. Suddenly, art seemed to enter the realm of public commurication. But it transmited private statements that carried the voice of single artist oa single viewer. Arts new media were global ina way that paint ing or sculpeure had never been. They offered global tools befor artists: con global scale ot hold of them. The medium, to modify a famous def inition, carried global message as it removed not only geographical, but cultural distance beeween center and periphery. Film and TV, with their plain narratives made art democratic for the viewer. Art shared the ‘working tools or visual language with mass media but differed from them in its critical message. ‘Contemporary’ already was the electronic. performance. The step to global art was taken when artists introduced statements that were rooted in their world experience and culeurl back ground. The global uniformity of the new media was soon counterbal- anced by arv’s multiform messages that represented the global universe in local views. This usage explains why global at does not look the same everywhere. ‘Nam June Paik (1932-2006), the Korean bora father of Video Art,” “took the first steps around 1960 when he transferred his trainingin elec tronic music toclectronic artin Germany. Initially, he cunningly sub- ‘verted the mainstream TV programs and turned them into abstract ‘images that simulated art with TV technology. He soon also became a ‘forerunner of global art when he challenged the Western art scene with. 9 3the utopian vision of ar’s global communication via satellite TV. Thus, con New Years Eve of 1984 he staged “celestial duets” of artists “through electronic contact simultaneously in New York, Paris, Seoul, and Cologne.”* In Martin's Paris exhibition of 198, he participated with a drawing of a grid of empry TV frames that recalls his TV-project Bonjour, Mr. Orwell. The TV frames are set against a center where ter arbitrary images are circulating with the label Wrap Aronnd the World [plate 1] Pail, in a way, succeeded ina personal globalization when he performed ubiquity as an artist, bt he only could defend his artistic self by contrastingit with the noise and empriness ofthe global imagery of the mass media ‘The anthology Video Art from 1976, which was the frst ofits kind, represented the visions offered by the new technology in a eupherie spirit. Its aim, as we read, was to “create works of art that directly «acknowledged both complicity with and critica distance to popular cul- ture." The main attraction for the audience was the double impact of immediacy (lv: images) and intimacy (monitor), which seemed to elimi~ nate the distance usually felt in the face of art with an aura. Video insal- lations, in turs, created ‘immersive’ rooms where visitors forgot she ‘museum and enjoyed a kind of TV experience ina dark room with sound ‘and moving images. The democratization of art which Walter Benjansin ‘once expected from photography and film, was accomplished instead by technologics such as video. The new working tools were to change the ar scene forever. Artists who until then had been forced to attend an art school in the Western tradition, suddenly could work with low cost video cameras that became available around the globe. Pop Art and its Legacy Another prerequisite of ar’ globalization may have been the global suc- cess of Pop Art whose popular face contrasted withthe aristocratic, her- metic canvases of Abstract Expressionism. ‘Vernacular’ and mass media images that Clement Greenberg had banned from abstract art like an Old Testament prephet,*” now populated large-scale paintings that superficially resembled vulgar public advertisements. Reality had be- come tantamount to the reality of the media world and its clichés, and therefore Pop was misunderstood when it was frst perceived as ‘ritial’ in Europe. American Pop even repudiated arts a personal creation and 60ventured nto a playful competition with mass media. With ts atack on arts autonomy, Pop had been one among several competing art connie inthe Wes. Inthe new ar geography, by contrast it was welcomed seag éasy entrance cket or global arin joining Western art. Pop imagery, seemed t0 promise a shared mirror in which the world losked ae everywhere. Inthe meantime, the pendulum swings back when the Wen adores 2 Chinese Neo-Pop that surpasses anything ever seenin fing, Pop. This also applies to the Chinese recycling of Andy Warhol old Pop icon of Mao that inthe seventies had recycled Chine’ poled! one ‘In the meantime, Chinese Neo-Pop has eclipsed the prices of Wesson, arton the global market. In April 2007, Sotheby's sold nine Mao portraits of Zeag Fanzhi (©. 1964) ats Hong Kong branch, Inthe evening sale on October 1g, 2008, the London branch sold the complete set of Wathol' Nao anccy print (1972), Two weeks before, tthe evening sale of October sop inFlong Kong, Sotheby's offered major work by te same Zeng Faro arith the ile After Long March Andy Warbo arrived in Chine, roey ‘The work is regarded as Neo-Expressionist but the artist who el thc ideaof a Chinese contemporancity.” The Chines, it ominoce had not yet undergone “the capitalist spectacle out of which han ng ‘grown, Contemporary Art's Market History Cristi and Sotheby’s stared anew marketing srstegy when contem- Porary ars ditinet from mainsteam modern at, wes ies ceed in the seventies The boom of contemporary artreached «fst cline in November 1988, when private collections, nce just famous artes ‘chieved record prices*! In the post-war years, the marker wre ca ‘ruezling wit the predominance of old masters whose markee mors Matfer a long time unbroken even in the heyday of modernism aad ‘tv pops up when lke today, the contemporary markt unerpoesventured into a playful competition with mass media. With it attack on art’ autonomy, Pop had been one among several competing art currents inthe West In the new art geography, by contrast, it was weleomed as an easy entrance ticket for global art in joining Western art. Pop imagery seemed to promise a shared mirror in which the world looked “flat” ‘everywhere. In the meantime, che pendulum swings back when the West adores a Chinese Neo-Pop that surpasses anything ever seen in familiar Pop. This also applies to the Chinese recycling of Andy Warhol's old Pop ion of Mao thst in the seventies had seeycled China's politial icon, In the meantime, Chinese Neo-Pop has eclipsed the prices of Western ‘arc on the global market. In April 2007, Sotheby's sold nine Mao portraits of Zeng Fanzhi (1964) atts Hong Kong branch. In the evening sale on October 19, 42008, the London branch sold the complete set of Warhol's Mao screen print (1972). Two weeks before, atthe evening sale of October 4 2007 jn Hong Kong, Sotheby's offered a major work by the same Zeng Fanzh withthe tile Afier Long March Andy Warbol arrived in China, 2095. ‘The work is regarded as Neo-Expressionist but the artist who had painted the companion piece Chairman Mao with Usin the same year, chose Warhol's private visit to China in 1982 as his subject [plate 25) Warhol, sill largely unknown atthe time in China, travels with a'Shang- hhai Forever’ bicycle through China. The artist Ai Wei Wei has com. ‘mented 2s well on ths journey in the book Andy Warhol ~ China 1982.58 In the Sotheby's catalogue the event is regarded as “a founding moment forthe idea of a Chinese contemporancity.” The Chinese, it continues, hhad not yet undergone “the capitalist spectacle out of which his at has gon? Contemporary Art's Market History Cristie’ and Sotheby's started a new marketing strategy when contem= porary art, as distinct from mainstream modern art, was first auctioned inthe seventies © The boom of contemporary art reached 2 first climax in November 1988, when private collections, not just famous artists, achieved recerd prices In the post-war years, the market was sil struggling with the predominance of old masters whese market success as for long ime unbroken even inthe heyday of modernism and «ltways pops up when, like today, the comtemporary market undergoes a lobal Art temporary Artascrisis, Marlborough Fine Arts was the first to introduce marketing strategies in promoting recent art when it opened a New York galley in 1965. In the same yeas Sotheby's New York branch took over the distin~ guished auction house Parke Bernet where it not only changed the rues, but the character ofthe works for auction. Bu it was not until the spring of 1965, with the sale ofthe Dotremont Collection, that contemporary art was first auctioned on a large scale by Sotheby's? What may look like a longtime for seme is like a memory from yesterday in ahistorical erspective Phen the Yen cureny was upgraded in 198s, the Japanese drove the prices to an unprecedented level and, in their excitement, dismissed the rules and the rituals that had been agreed upon between the former insiders. The apogee of the Japanese art market ended as suddenly as it had begun, but it changed the game forever Icis precisely the fact that all are markets are cyclical that increases the appetite forthe game more than art does as an attraction in itself, and its not the permanence of art's quality but the newness of ar’s performance that gets attention. The ‘economic eycle, as Robert Brenner described it in his book The Boom and the Bubble finds a more spectacular stage inthe at trade. Around 1990, “the bubble chat burst was pricked by the sudden withdrawal of Japanese buying from the market.” Other recessions have followed. "The famous Damian Hirst sale in London, on September 1 and 16, 2008, where the artist bypassed his gallersts, began a few hours before the credit markets in New York started to collapse. It seems like a coinci- dence but it may notbe. As a matter of fact, the sale had been prepared ‘on a global scale with previews in other parts of the world also inchuding «show ina five star Fotel at New Delhi. Auction Houses ‘The event character of public auctions mobilizes outsiders, as does the seeming transparency that encourages newcomers without prior art ‘experience, Don Thompson complains about the investment valuc of the new trade where collectors, as he quotes the art dealer Mary Boone, “buy art like louterytickets."©7 And yet the new clientele makes it diffi- cult to judge thei interests with the former value system of art collect- ing, when ifestyle matters more than connoisseurship. Auction houses, with their new branches, have become the most important agent of the elobal turn. They today attract a clientele even from countries where art follectng has had no tradition at all. The secondary market, thus, changes contemporary art more profoundly than the primary market of falleres could ever expect. Today, the art market reaches a clientele from $8 countries, as compared with 38 in 2003, s Christie's announces * ‘A German newspaper took the new conditions for granted when, in the fall of 2008, ie wrote “the Chinese avant-garde is firmly established ‘but German artis still very strong,” or that “Phillips goes its own ways by throwing Russian arton the market." The new clients were encour- aged with the offer of guarantees, as they were not ready to take the ‘whole risk but feared the unpredictable mood of the art community. But the guarantees, in turn, contributed to the losses of Sotheby's and Christie's liquidity in the November 2008 sales. Infact, the guarantee practice, at the moment ofits failure, reveals a new feature of the art trade, as art no longer promises success on its own but rather, instead of individual quality, lke everything else depends on the general rules of the market. Tis not the presence but the difference ofthe art market that matters here. A new class of investors not only introduces new money but also a new taste, which makes the whole game unpredictable. The gap widens beewcen the small circle of global players who bid on auctions, and the general audience whose art experience depends on exhibitions. Collec- tors’ names that are of no interest toa museum audience, offer a better branding on the market than artists’ names whose value appears uncer- tain, Lately, Sotheby's and Christie's have started to indicate the impor- tance ofa former owner. Thus, one reads “Property ofa distinguished collector” or “Property of an important European collection.” It is remarkable tht the nationality of the former owner, rather than that of the arts, receives the most attention. The speed with which collections are resold, clearly proves that art collecting has become an investment and speculation issue The so-called Estella Collection, an arbitrary name for “the most {important collection of contemporary Chinese art,"7° was brought together for three investors by the Manhattan dealer Michael Goedhuis, who once formerly dealt with old Chinese and Persian arts and crafts, Shortly thereafter, the project took another direction, and Goodhuis exhibited 84 “museum quality masterworks” from the collection in his 6 Arcas Global Ar BalingHINA ONWARD ‘own name atthe Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, Denmack in spring 12007. The miuscuan produced the large size eataloguc Chins Onward -whose cover presented one of Zhang Xiaogang’s Bloodline series [fig. 19}?! When the exhibition reached the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, another Manhattan Dealer, William Acquavella, bought the collection off the museum wals in August 2007. Half a year later, thenew owner joined forces with Sotheby’s, which offered the first part ofthe collec- tion for sae inthe Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Center on ‘April , 2008 [fg 10}. After the collection had been shownin previews in Bejing, Shanghai, New York, Singapore, and Taipei, its first half fetched nearly cighteen million US-dollars. On that day, Sotheby's sold ‘works fora total f 51.77 million dollars; an unsurpassed record in Chi- nese contemporary art”? 6 us(HongKong. Api, Beortetond bathe’ Although ar’s complicity with the market is manifest, the exhibition practice of museums continues to simulate an immaculate picture of art's independence and creativity The ilusion that aris usta personal matter of creation and self-expression is protected by art collectors and nomadic curators who keep their economic experience a secretin the face of the general audience. In fact, the museum space leaves the audi- «nce unaware ofthe economic conditions behind the works in an exhibi- tion, The art trade seems to leave no trace on the surface ofthe works which you become o see. Some artists, however, tart to counteract this situal when they lift the veil from art's involvement with :he marker. “The problem is no longer that art works will end up as commodities, but that they will sare out as such,” as Thomas McEvilly wiote already in 1992.7 But today, some art museums begin to reveal ars economic ésbackstage, whose existence has been obscured by the labels beside the -works for a long time. The Whitney Museum show The Price of Every- thing from 2007 isa case ia point. “Taking its ttle from Oscar Wilde's definition of the cynic as 4 man who knows the price of everything but the value of nothing,” xs the introduction explains, “the exhibition explores how artists have responded to the distinction between price and value, orto the erasure ofthat distinction.” In pursuing this goal, the exhibition “deals directly withthe economic conditions of ars produc- tion, reception, and circulation." ‘One of the pieces in the exhibition, Elmgreen and Dragser's Prada ‘Marfa, 2005 [plate 13], features a display of the fall collection of Prada shoes and handbags, but seis the shop and locates iin the desert outside fof Donald Judd’s Marfa in Texas. The work “suggests thatthe dislocated art works can just as easly become sites of fashionable consumption for the growing field of are tourism and its itinerary of art fairs." The instal- lation-photo-edition of the two artists may be “interpreted as making the point chat commercialism has outpaced eny activity that doee not have market value." On the other hand, the work allows for the reading, that “a mock store with a sealed entrance dislocates not only the art work, but also the actual market place, the store, to an abandoned site. Rendering its commercial unction useless,” the site represents “a deso- late ruin of yesterday's fashion."7® Collectors’ ond Corporate Museums Collectors’ and corporate mscums have become a further prerequisite ‘ofthe global trade. They promete a persona ase as a new stendard for ‘hear experience of an urban o- national audience. In some places they lone contol the access to national or international art. Two examples {eve an opposite evaluation of modem vz. contemporary at. I Istan- bul the cree respective museums all private or corporate, have opened in the lst ten years. They prefeably present moder art but not neces- sarily international art, Isanbal Modern is one of them (pp. 236-55) “The museum is beutiful sased onthe Bosporus where itisaneigh- bor ofa nineteenth century mosque and thus mirrors the dualism in smodern Turkey [plate 4). It war founded by the Eczacibai family who Strictly guides the exhibition policy of the museum. The Pera Museum, ‘opened in June 2005, i controled by the Suna and inan Kias Founda- es Clltion. A third museum, the Santral Istanbul isin fact an energy museum, and does not start with an art collection of is own (plate 19) Thus, twenty years aftr the opening of che first Istanbul Biennial, contem porary art does not figure prominently in any of the existing museum collections. In an exhibition ofthe Santral Istanbul in the fal of 2007 and dedicated to the history of twentieth century Turkish art, a wal panel informed the visitor that “curators responsible for organizing interna tional exhibitions added Istanbul to theiritineraries, as artists registered success inthe international miliew. Using new image technologies and the resources offered by the new media,” some artists “placed the ‘museum, a8 also art history and the are curating, under their magnifying lass,” while others questioned “the inclusion of Turkey inthe global at network.” ‘The other example isto be found in India. Private collectors have an increased influence in countries where national or urban museums have led to promote living art. In New Delhi, the National Museum of Modern Art (1954), 2 response to India’s independence, no longer atracts an audience that anyway regerds museums asa colonial memory. Instead, the young generation flocks tothe Poddar Collection, compris- {ng more than two thousend works that include “commissions and folk art” The Devi Art Foundation whose collector, Anupam Podday, also act as director, is situated in Gurgaon, a global city bearly ten years old with golf precincts and shopping malls on the outskirts of New Delhi ‘The city isthe scene of Aravind Adige’ much debated novel The White Tiger about the new India. The collection addresses an emerging upper. ‘midale class with an offer of international lifestyle in art collecting. The ‘opening exhibition of contemporary Indian art, onan international level, attracted the visitors also with its domestic choice of subject matter. Itis 4uite symbolic that the museum was stil a construction site when it ‘opened its doors to the public in August 2008 (plates s, 6] In the eata- logue Still Moving Image, the collector explains his decision for ‘National Indian artists, who will soon be joined, however, by artists from the whole sub-continent.”® ‘We are sil thinking in Western categories of « public museum con- trolled by a body of experts in its acquisition policy. But the lack of any such control in other territories invests a private collector with lot of power in creating 2 local ar audience just by himself. 6 remporaty Artas Global Art aCollectors meanwhile form a kind of global body forthe development of a local ae market. Thus, one hundred collectors from allover the ‘world were invited to attend, in November 2008, the Gulf version of, French art fairs, the Art Paris, in Abu Dhabi that is supported by the authority for culture and heritage. Their tourist program incuded a visi. of the crown princes’ collection of some four hundred contemporiry art works from the Middle East, mostly acquired at the local art firs. ‘The gallerst, meanwhile, were appeased with the information thatthe focal museums under construction “will be buying art at a futare dae."”” ‘But public museums, if they can afford to bid at auctions ata are not always welcome on the market, since permanent collections stop the fee flow of thearttrde, Museums eannot be sold and resold. They can nly be opened or closed. Besides, museums are not built for accepting every- thing as art, unless they risk giving up the definition of art altogether Rather, they have to decide whether to go with the market orto councer- act the market. They do not sell but they have to explain, But explain ‘what, and to whom? The temporality of museums, 0 distinct fromthe flux of everyday time, was fora long time tantamount to the history of their collection or toa history that is manifested in their collection “Today, they must rethink ther mission when they are expected to repre~ sent the rapidly changing world in the mirror of single art works. Their fate is sill with their audience whose identity clsims have become the main concern in cultural tems. They need the presence of history, to be sure, of history that mater for a local eommunity or a nation. History, however, has to be represented or rediscovered, and sometimes rei ‘ented as itis threatened by a global wai of goods and ideas. Preliminary Conclusion “The changing art world no longer allows for globalization to be dis- :egarded, as a mere fashion or as a phantom. Yt, the term global at stil sneets with reluctance, although globalization isthe single most impor- ‘ant event in today’s art scene, even eclipsing the appearance of new rnedia arta generation ago. But global art carves an internal antagonism vith tas it strengthens resistance and turns identity claims against the free’ ux of media and markets in the age of “hypermoderity.”®° Mare Auge speaks “of the uter newness ofthe present situation." “The 6‘world’s inhabitants have at last become truly contemporaneous, and yet the world’s diversity is recomposed every moment. We must speak therefore of worlds in the plural, understanding that each of them com~ smunicates with the others.” The planetarization of information may have removed old borderlines, bu the same media make old and new contrasts even more visible. This antagonism also applies to art mus~ teums, which continue to be ‘site-specific’ no: only a8 architecture, but also by their audience. They are born as places for representing the local situation in the face of global art traffic. The global, for any audience, adopts a local significance. In cis respect, museums continue tobe sym- bolic sites and outposts ofa given culture or acommunity living ina for- ign culture. The task isto balance the sharing with the owning. The sharing may be global, bt the owning inevitably remains loca. Global at did not come overnight or as amere ‘accident’ but had a long incubation period whose results have only become visible now. Is history is intimately linked to the political and economic changes that sade arta symbol of global fee trade. To quote Julian Stallabras, “the global events of 1989 and after—the reunification of Germany, the frag- ‘mentation ofthe Soviet Union, the rise of global trade agreements, the consolidation of trading blocks, and the transformation of China into a partially capitalist economy—changed the character of the art world profoundly."® With the establishment ofa ‘new world order; “the art ‘world swiftly reconfigured itself. A rash of art events peppered the globe, while artists of many nations, ethnicities, and cultures long ‘ignored in the West were born to critical and sommercal succes.” The rise of multicultural art shows “exactly coincides with the end of the cold war." London and Paris, two cities with colonial history, saw the first shows of this kn in 1989. One of them was Jean Hubert Martin’s legendary exhibition Magiciens de la terre, which was both hailed as “the fist global exhibition of contemporary art” ard criticized asa false start in that it was tempted “to exoticize Third World artists."* Global art often escapes the arguments of art history, as it no longer follows a master narrative and contradicts modernity’ claim to be of to offer a universal model Is therefore noteworthy that two new books ‘on global ar have chosen another discussion ofthe present state of ar. Julian Stallabrass, whose title Art Incorporated is significant enough, ‘analyzes in one of his chapters the “New World Order” and in another 6 < jorary Artas Glakchapter the impact of our “Consuming Culture” on new art Charlotte Bydler, uses in her book the even more explicit ttle The Global Art World Inc® In fact, she analyzes two issues, which are not common in artcritcism, These ae institutional history on the one hand, and the dis- solution of a mainstream concept of art, on the other. Thus, these two books make it evident tht global art has continued art’s exodus from art history. 1 Basco Navara,“ the An Word. Nom” interview by Hen rans Debs, aie Botta (8 fn te Arab Wild. Now Made By. 3 vole, GaleseENevara, Pari oa ol p25 1 DIFC Gab Foam eal cline a: wore dubai om obar-forum (een Ferry 3,209). 5, atonia Carer, Mille Eas Sotheby's pichs Qua Actions to be hl fom 20," The ‘rt Newipaper, 296 (Novena) 203, a Propiam Brochure to The Globe Art Foram seef, p. svable online Inuqd/ewwardaiseldownlondtGAFsoot parce Pebriry 3,208). | 5 Thi {Jerome Sng Diary of Fast Moving Landi Fabre Bouse In eb Arab Wor [Now Ay, Galles, asus Colleton, Aries, Designers Fabion, Mei, Lisle € More, le, Glee & Nessa Pati soo vl p17 2 To 1 Herein fas Lelaborse onan argument of my eter ens “Contemporary Aran he ‘Mass in the Gb yin Peter Webel and Andres Boddnseg es), Contrary “Artand th Mase. Gia Precio Haj Cant, Onder, 207, 9p 16-3 Ie {he i volume of the pect GAD preceding the presen pablo. 9 CL Andres, Aen Wine Wall, Seker Warburg, Landon 196 (pub Tain Par 9 bering het Le made man) te Ch John Onins, “A New Geopraphy of Ar Masur” in: Wel, Buddesieg 2007, ‘pp. tushJohn Oras) Adar of World re Laarence King, Lon, 304 Thelater {book with contributors tht seks over she whol bisory of man pre produc 1 Ch Kity Ziman and Wied van Dae), Word Ar Sead: aploring Cocrpeand Apprater, Va, Area, 1a Ch are 9 15 Sil Price Primi Ari Ciiied Pe, Chicago Usiveriy Pres Chicago 18 4 Quoted in Bohing acer, 15 The Fr Emperor China Teac Amy, Bs Maram, Seeenbe 3,227 trough Apel 208 16 Jes-Lous Pade, World Art Teas HIN. Abas New Yoo 98. 17 Cl bois Spoon, "h Word of Meus: New Concept New Mods” Anti io Ribeiro (ed), The Stat of se World, Carnet PresuCiloute Galbenkin Foundation, Mancheseribon 996 pp. 90-123 9.96 18 Thi, pce 7 Wii. ne snnernias anieeeaaninaeneas iasp cng Se un: rye if Wt hr ™—r—— Ld eS ey wa Geb Dn sen ry ne ee eet ata va keira rita Le eee ahr —C sien ey ta sy eg nr aoe ee a ae tntieae cn arene ay, edn ety it hig ey ee pt Pe eo ridin tri Lad hp Se ee a ee eae ace ee See og eee creer rrr aa | ee en ae ene ee Sol erties igs a ere meat ks ee ee Do ne yeep ins Ca train _.- pec ee ee selege Nee peat eng et ee erinetee pera oat a 2 ae, Cacuo Qiang Wnt ele is. Cin ise a i i Me aaa we etmunton aes eet a ee T———— ae rd oa ee ee aerate 1p Ber Bae comme a Mer rn Mr Gl eee ee een enema elope aie a Se ee Sen eee arene ert ery te Fe pap reaper fie ore own fae smporary Artas Global Art Cont4 About Rees! Arend hi prod hid Tet founded in 17s Andres Buen ‘lew "Vial nthe As Worl The Vie of Rasheed Arsen in: Baden, Webel, 2007 pe. 0-65. 45 Raed Arsen The Other Story. Af Asn Ariss Postwar: Briain xi. a, Hay ‘werd Galery, Southbuak Gene, London, 18 The exibition wat shown sr Wolver Tampa Ar Gallery March ro hough Api 2, 195 Manceser Cry Art Galery and Cornrboase May through ne 1,199 4 Ades uct) Cable: Taure rv rexmance ev Asi eb JpanFoundeon, ‘Tokyo, soy Kungip Hyondse Mislgwan ed), Cub i Ai Undoanded Duley, ‘thier, Nason! Masa of Contemporary Art Kore, Seo, 20, The show toured fom Talo Seouland Sigipore 4s Ti {6 Willan Rain), Pik” in oth Coney Ar enki vole Mase of Mod- ‘em Ar, New York New York Gripe Sociy Book, Boston, 194 1 Arar Daa, Beyond the Bl Bo. Te Va rts in Psst Pepeto, Fac ‘Se Gio New York, 1995 p20 18 Hans Bling Das Ende de fsgebic?, Daher Kune, Mich 9s a0 thereried vse Art History fer Modern, Chicago University Pre, Chicago 299, pete 49 WS. Nupal, The Eine of Ava ANovelin Fie Secon Pegs Books Landon, 1987 52 Jnr bert Marin (el) Magisen dl te, exhib. x, Cote Georges Pomp, Paris Eons u Cente Pompidou, Pai, gp. 22. Seal the photograph inthe maga tine Comnasune des Ars, 43 ne 9p 6 where poses in oat ois sl pore, {nd he view of i pepany chon Kinsha 988 whee the auliene Socks othe Stein ordert share th exuen of ideparare to Fare Leche di muse atonal ‘Par moder 2 Sue) 989, Cove. 14 Holand Cote, "ART/ARCHITECTURE; Beyond Mukicukuralsm, Freedom?” in: The [New York Timely 2, 3001 aaa alae a hpsJfww.aytimes.com 2037/39 ‘aralarc-arcitectare-bey ond: mtelarale- feed hunlace-spon-teparnere erlinkterprod=peraln nctat February 13,10) Darl A Hollinge,Potrbie ‘America Beyond Malla, BasicBooks, New York, 996 42 Cf Jyosindrs nin India’s Poplar Care Lean Spaces end Fi Images Marc Publ ‘ans, New Delhi 007. Selo Suminaayan Alsherdhar: Making and Experience, {ats Albarn, New Di s07 with che slogan" Wreasaglen kare it brdare, ‘ale ae len” 0 the coves 55 Nam une Pd, esp Vr g6!-86, Won Gallery, Seoul 198, p. 6 Se Marta gn pp ate. 11 David Roun “The Personal Aude." a Schade and Beryol Kort el Video Art ‘An dntblogy, Haar Brace Jovnorch New Yor, 976 56 CE. Waler Benjamin, The Work of Ae sn the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Penguin Books London 108 7 CL. Clemeat Greeberg, “Avat-Garde and Kuch” in Priam Review, 6, 52939, 18 CL Chap Maks, Andy Warbol—Chine 19h The Photograph of Christopher Maes, ‘Ar Pabl Consort, Hong Kong, 2008 9 "Zeng Farah ins Moder Contemprar Aan Art evening ale, uct Sthby, Hong Kong Oaaber 4208 p98 60 CL Pea Watson, rom Mano Manhatan. The Rae ofthe Modern Art Marke, Huh ton Landa, 96p sf and. a8 Ole Veli, Talk Pris Sabi Meanings of ‘reson the Marke or Contemporary Peston Univers Pres, rinoon 2005 n6x Wane gp at 6 Tid p39 P9 6 bape, Rober Bene, Te Bom andthe Bubble he USin th World Economy, Vero, London, = 6 Saliba 2086 p23 ("Damien Het = Bertil Inside My Head Forres in Sotheby's Ar Market Review, September 1/6, 2008 available oie stewie comes prevmcke.besfel goku (cee Febraary 9,200) tad The Tomes Sepember 5, rot, 6 Dole Thompon, The f Miion Seid Shark: The Caio Economic of Contemporary ‘Artand Ancien Howes, Aaa, Londen, 22h, p 48 6 con Catalogs November 007, cringe 6 “Dic Herbraukonen it egenicer Kau bei Soke’ Chie’ und Phils de ‘Paria London” in: Panu Algemene Zeng, Occber& 207 rial in Geran, ‘znlatd ino Fog bythe aw 7: The Exell Collection, ac at, Sol’ HongKong, Apis 2008 9.4 71 Cara Vogl "aside Are Contemporary Chine Aron Sle in Hong Ko,” is The New York Times March 200 arable linea pl www ayes sor sl/r Seige atroehil epmesgtsnat (es Febru, 3009) 12 The Exel Colleson aa, Bowler 2. 75 Thomas MeEviley Art & Discontent: Tory the Milena, Kingston, New Yerk, 1998, paste 174 Manin Beuthen, "The Commerc Sica ofthe Exhibition pace” in Marin Brea thes (ed), Th Pie of Bveryting Perpetios om the Art Marke, xl cat, Whitney Maseam of Americas Ar, New Yor, Yale Univeity Pret, Nem Hare a00), pp. 96, 75 Bie 78 CL David Elie) Tine Preven, Tine Pas Highligh fom 0 Yor ofthe Intersil eanbal Bem exit, sal Nader, ean 07 177 Ch: Devi At Foundation, The Lethe nd Anupar Par Collen avibe online a pele deviroundatonoypagespPagelD=a acs ebay 15209) 2 Cle Declan Neh (ed) Sel Moving age ex ct, Devi At Foundation, Ovgion, veoh 79 Georgina Adam and Antoni Cavs, “Sle Slow a Gif Wi for Planned Museums to Buy The Are Newspaper 9, Decent 28.7 {to Mare Avg, Now-Lies, Introduction ne anthropli dela armoderité, ions x Sea Pas ig Marc Ang, An Anthpolg for Comeporencns Word Staford Univer Pre, Sta ford 1995.84. ag oa. 85 Sule seg prof 184 Connasance des Ars 198 49. ne 989.57. 43 Sellar aoe {6 Charlo Bydle, The Global Arsworl In: On the Gbaliation of Cnsemporry Ara Upp Ue Prep 3004 B “Belting « Contemporary Artas Global Art