The Next Biennial Should be Curated by a Machine
And especially in the field of curating, as well as
in the visual arts and in literature, we continue the useless fight against the individual,
against genius, against the assertion of the creative individual.
The claim of the isolated
performance is obviously ridiculous and funny, but powerful institutions and influential
people still hold on to the artificial and pathetic construction of super-individual –
primarily for economic and social reasons. The mismatch between
The pluralistic credo of Rimbaud, Apollinaire, and Lautréamont: ‘Poetry must be
made by all and not by one’, an even more radical credo is added here: Our reality is
imagined, developed, fed, curated, and subsequently collectively hallucinated by all of
us, humans, animals, and machines and the new networked organisms that are us! This
form of existence can never find a hardened shape. This will not smoothly merge with
the materialism and static requirements of the art genre and establishment. In contrast
to that, in times when personality, innovation, and vibe are in demand, ‘The Next
Biennial Should be Curated by a Machine’ should definitely not be underestimated
Should synthetic curating feel and look like synthetic curating? Human editing, the
human hand, and thinking in curatorial and in epileptic fits (occasions, exhibition,
crises, sensations) convulsively try to insert the idea of the individual, the human, to
add a relatable touch to products, evenst, fits or processes. This longing awoke during
Enlightenment, it was implanted as ideology, but could never fulfill the promise of
independence, self-reliance and freedom. Based on fragile collective hallucinations, on
fairy tales of the individual as an absolute, on radical negations of the collective and
obsolete reflexes of faith, it failed miserably while causing widespread and sustainable
damage.
isitartdotco 