In the dash to internationalism the national is trampled underfoot, argues Laura Gascoigne.
In November, Lund Humphries celebrated 75 years
of publishing books
a global art world. Hence the further questions raised by the Lund Humphries debate: “Is there an inherent, //-->
identifiable ‘Britishness’ in the art
EMAIL：baiwei5000@126.com
made in these islands today? Or
is
any notion of a culturally significant Britishness now redundant?”
In his autumn pep talk to participants in the 56th Venice Biennale, President Paolo Baratta recalled the reaction against national pavilionism in 1999 that prompted the creation of the International Exhibition “to offer the world a global sounding board”. The man in charge of this year’s sounding
board is Nigerian Okwui Enwezor and his exhibition, inclusively titled All the World’s Futures, will invite visitors to “read the Giardini with its
[sic] ramshackle assemblage of pavilions as the ultimate site of a disordered world, of national google_ad_client = "ca-pub-3967079123942817";
conflicts, as well as territorial and geopolitical explorations.”
In a disordered
world, blowing one’s national art trumpet is obviously out; the
QQ：99362012
polite thing to do is to tootle on the google_ad_height = 90;
trumpets of one’s fellow nations. And currently auditioning for the post of international trumpeter-in-chief is the director of our very own Tate Modern, which has been scrambling to diversify its collections in preparation for the post-pavilionist age. In
November 2012 a special report on Tate’s International Activities announced the formation over the previous decade of a series of Acquisitions Committees supporting “Tate’s global reach”. Between them, the North American (2001), Latin American (2002), Asia-Pacific (2007), Middle East and North Africa (2009) and African (2011) committees have added over 100 works to the collection.
Two more committees – South Asia and Russia & Eastern Europe – are in the pipeline.
It was Serota’s cultivation of a global powerbase, rather than his winning personality, that won him top spot in last year’s Power 100. “Tate Modern very aggressively internationalized quite quickly,” explained ArtReview’s editor Mark Rappolt. “It is not a national collection, it is an international collection that happens to be in London.” Like the British Museum, in other words, except that the nations from which the Tate is acquiring this stuff are unlikely to hire Mrs Clooney to get it back.
In our hyper-connected world, global art is a development as unavoidable as global terrorism. But
international brand… can only help to add to
域名交易方式：
London’s image in the world”. Hang on there, Lebedev. Tate & Lyle is an international brand. The Tate is, or was, a national art gallery. It is responsible to the nation
http://www.thejackdaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Tate_modern_artfromaroundtheworld-97x55.jpg 97w" sizes="(max-width: 2362px) 100vw, 2362px" />
