The essays that make up the bulk of this edition stem from the conference »Points of Connection«, held in October 2010 in Vienna, which was also the launch event for the project network »L’Internationale«. L’Internationale is a new transinstitutional organisation of five major European museums and artists’ archives, which aims to establish a long-term collaboration based on collective use of the institutions’ respective collections and archives. One of its main goals is to challenge common canons and master narratives in art history by investigating local-to-local comparisons. Rather than adopting the global hegemonic ambitions of powerful art institutions, L’Internationale proposes collaboration between museums, each with its specific collection focus and history, as a means of initiating transnational, plural cultural narratives. In the process the organisation aims to give greater visibility to the similarities between different collections and archives, and to highlight how such similarities serve as »Points of Connection« at which their interests, methodologies, and visions converge. L’Internationalenale also seeks to build a new, plural art historical narrative and to keep the processes that construct it transparent. The first conference focused equal attention on the object of research (avant-garde art from 1956 to 1986) and on research methodology and the sources used (particularly in the collections and archives).
The first thematic focus here is on avant-gardes from the decline of modernism to the rise of globalization. During this period (1956–1986), authoritarian regimes of different hues held sway throughout much of the world (inter alia in Spain, Portugal, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Eastern Europe). However these years were also characterized by belief in a new modern era in which advanced technologies would play an increasingly prominent role. It seemed the world would become better connected through new means of transport and new communication systems, whilst the media would acquire increasing power. This belief in a new era was found not just in the societies of the social-democratic or liberal West but also in the decolonizing South, the communist East, and the so-called block-free states of the Non-Aligned Movement. This period was defined by the Cold War, Fordism, state socialism, and decolonization. Despite marked political and economic distinctions, the world grew increasingly homogeneous as a consequence of globalisation.
The essays in this edition pose a series of questions about these issues. To what extent and in what ways can the different dictatorial, social-democratic, communist or liberal-democratic contexts in Europe, North and Latin America be compared? What were the similarities between the East and the West during this era, and what were the common themes of the political regimes that were opposed? To what extent did these topics mirror the processes of globalisation? Picking up on these issues in the contemporary context, the authors examine how shared global interests can be defined. What are the new points of connection between these spaces that could serve as points of departure for new subversive global actions? How can we stimulate the processes of decolonization of knowledge today through museum work and art?
These questions are intimately related to the process of re-examining avant-garde art practices between 1956 and 1986 and re-writing the canon. The art in question involves more than performative practices, new media, political activism, and visual poetry, as well as some other art practices with strong utopian visions. It also entails combining diverse spheres of knowledge, shedding light on new histories of art and on the realm of personal experiences from Eastern Europe, Latin America, Western Europe and North America, addressed in the essays here, each with their own particular emphasis. Is there a shared foundation underpinning the artistic movements that developed simultaneously in various corners of the world with varying designations? Did post-war avant-gardes constitute a reaction to disintegration or a caesura within modernism? In what ways is this caesura manifested in diverse cultural and political circumstances? In this context many artists’ archives are becoming as important a part of our cultural heritage as our collections. How can first-hand knowledge be transferred directly from the protagonists to museum archives and collections?
An enduring stereotype about non-Western art asserts that it merely copied Western aesthetic concepts, always with a time-lag. How can one reinterpret this widespread notion that the West functioned as a model or a mirror for non-Western post-war avant-garde practices? To a certain extent a common international language can be identified, although the terminologies used in post-war avant-garde practices differ. The main difference indubitably lies in the ways in which these practices communicated and functioned in their social contexts. Which communicative approaches were adopted in different settings and what were their different targets?
In this respect L’Internationale does not merely discuss how the art system and its alternative models operated in the period examined, but also seeks to identify new scope for institutional and international collaboration today. Representatives of institutions and independent experts involved in the contemporary and historical alternative art scenes consider and respond to the following questions. How did ideas and artworks circulate between and within Western and Eastern Europe, North and Latin America? How did artists in more isolated regions create networks, and what can we learn from them today? How should international cooperation be structured in the future between East and West, or between North and South?
Further information about the activities of the project network L’Internationale is available at http://internacionala.mg-lj.si/.