A special report on the art market

Suspended animation
Nov 26th 2009
From The Economist print edition

The art market has suffered from the recession, but globalisation should help it recover, say Fiammetta Rocco (interviewed here) and Sarah Thornton

Sothebys
THE longest bull run in a century of art-market history ended on a dramatic note with a sale of 56 works by Damien Hirst, “Beautiful Inside My Head Forever”, at Sotheby’s in London on September 15th 2008 (see picture). All but two pieces sold, fetching more than £70m, a record for a sale by a single artist. It was a last hurrah. As the auctioneer called out bids, in New York one of the oldest banks on Wall Street, Lehman Brothers, filed for bankruptcy.

The world art market had already been losing momentum for a while after rising vertiginously since 2003. At its peak in 2007 it was worth some $65 billion, reckons Clare McAndrew, founder of Arts Economics, a research firm—double the figure five years earlier. Since then it may have come down to $50 billion. But the market generates interest far beyond its size because it brings together great wealth, enormous egos, greed, passion and controversy in a way matched by few other industries.

In the weeks and months that followed Mr Hirst’s sale, spending of any sort became deeply unfashionable, especially in New York, where the bail-out of the banks coincided with the loss of thousands of jobs and the financial demise of many art-buying investors. In the art world that meant collectors stayed away from galleries and salerooms. Sales of contemporary art fell by two-thirds, and in the most overheated sector—for Chinese contemporary art—they were down by nearly 90% in the year to November 2008. Within weeks the world’s two biggest auction houses, Sotheby’s and Christie’s, had to pay out nearly $200m in guarantees to clients who had placed works for sale with them.

The current downturn in the art market is the worst since the Japanese stopped buying Impressionists at the end of 1989, a move that started the most serious contraction in the market since the second world war. This time experts reckon that prices are about 40% down on their peak on average, though some have been far more volatile. But Edward Dolman, Christie’s chief executive, says: “I’m pretty confident we’re at the bottom.”

What makes this slump different from the last, he says, is that there are still buyers in the market, whereas in the early 1990s, when interest rates were high, there was no demand even though many collectors wanted to sell. Christie’s revenues in the first half of 2009 were still higher than in the first half of 2006. Almost everyone who was interviewed for this special report said that the biggest problem at the moment is not a lack of demand but a lack of good work to sell. The three Ds—death, debt and divorce—still deliver works of art to the market. But anyone who does not have to sell is keeping away, waiting for confidence to return.

The best that can be said about the market at the moment is that it is holding its breath. But this special report will argue that it will bounce back, and that the key to its recovery lies in globalisation. The supply of the best works of art will always be limited, but in the longer run demand is bound to rise as wealth is spreading ever more widely across the globe.

The World Wealth Report, published by Capgemini and Merrill Lynch, charts the spending habits of the rich the world over. It includes art as one of a range of luxury items they like to buy. According to the report, in 2007 there were over 10m people with investible assets of $1m or more. Last year that number dropped to 8.6m and many rich people scaled back their “investments of passion”—yachts, jets, cars, jewellery and so on. But the proportion of all luxury spending that went on art increased as investors looked for assets that would hold their value in the longer term.


The regional spread of buyers also changed significantly as some parts of the world became relatively richer. During the boom the number of wealthy people in Russia, India, China and the Middle East rose rapidly. In 2003 Sotheby’s biggest buyers—those who purchased lots costing at least $500,000—came from 36 countries. By 2007 they were spread over 58 countries and their total number had tripled.

That upward trend is still continuing, and many of the new buyers take a particular interest in the art of their own place and time. Last year China overtook France as the world’s third-biggest art market after America and Britain (see chart 1), and some 25% by value of the 100,000-plus works of art sold by Christie’s went to buyers from Russia, Asia and the Middle East.

Click to enlarge
Auction records remain dominated by Impressionist and modern works (see table 2), but the biggest expansion in recent years has been in contemporary art. Prices of older works keep going up as more people have money to spend, but few such works become available because both collectors and museums tend to hold on to what they have. Old Master paintings, for example, have stuck at around 5% of both Sotheby’s and Christie’s sales for many years. By contrast, contemporary art, which in the early 1990s accounted for less than 10% of Sotheby’s revenues, grew to nearly 30% of greatly increased revenues by last year. Dealers and auction houses now sell more post-war and contemporary art than anything else. This report will concentrate on that part of the market, which accounts for about half the world’s art trade and most of the excitement.

Part of the extra demand has come from a large increase in the number of museums. Over the past 25 years more than 100 have been built, not only in America and Europe but also in the sheikhdoms of the Persian Gulf and the fast-growing cities in Asia; sometimes in partnership with Western institutions, such as the Guggenheim or the Louvre, sometimes on their own. Many of these institutions have made their mark by buying contemporary art.

Over the same period the number of wealthy private collectors has also increased many times over, and so has their diversity. The record price for one of Andy Warhol’s giant faces of Chairman Mao was $17.4m, paid by Joseph Lau, a Hong Kong property developer. It was the first major Warhol to go to the Far East. A month later the Qatar royal family bought a Hirst pill cabinet, entitled “Lullaby Spring”, for £9.7m, the first major Hirst bound for the Middle East. Everyone wants an iconic work, which helps explain the global demand for artists such as Warhol, Jeff Koons and Mr Hirst—and the eye-watering prices such work can command.

Masters of the art universe
Straddling all areas of the art market is a handful of individuals who have emerged as the key figures in the art world in recent years. Chief among them is François Pinault, a luxury-goods billionaire who is also a noted collector of contemporary art and the owner of Christie’s. Philippe Ségalot, his French-born adviser, was behind one of the biggest deals involving a single work of art, the private sale of Warhol’s 1963 painting, “Eight Elvises”, to an anonymous buyer for over $100m.

Mr Ségalot is also believed to be advising the royal family of Qatar, which in the past two years has spent large sums buying modern art at auction, including record-breaking works by Mark Rothko and Mr Hirst. Steven Cohen, an American hedge-fund billionaire, also owns works by Warhol, Mr Hirst and Mr Koons. Mr Cohen used to be a sizeable shareholder of Sotheby’s and is still an important provider of liquidity to art buyers.

The popularity of blockbuster art exhibitions and the emergence of buyers with a different cultural history have helped change tastes. Artists such as Edvard Munch and Vasily Kandinsky rose sharply after solo shows in London and New York. Alexei von Jawlensky and Emil Nolde were regarded as specialist interests until Russian collectors began seeking them out. Zhao Wuji used to be just another Chinese painter-in-exile; now he is recognised as an Abstract Expressionist master influenced by Paul Klee and praised by both Joan Miró and Pablo Picasso.

How to sell it
One of the biggest changes since the market last peaked in 1989 has been the expansion of the auction houses and the change in the nature of the dealer business. Twenty years ago auction houses sold to dealers, and dealers sold to private customers. Today many collectors are advised by auctioneers, both at sales and privately.

Rising costs brought trouble to many old-fashioned fine-art dealer emporiums. In London Christopher Gibbs has sold his stock and Partridge is in administration. In Paris Galerie Segoura has closed, as has Salvatore Romano in Florence. Many dealers now prefer to take art works on consignment, matching sellers to buyers for a commission rather than investing in stocks of art.

About half the market’s business, reckons Ms McAndrew of Arts Economics, is conducted at public auctions, with Christie’s and Sotheby’s taking the lion’s share. Smaller houses include Drouot in Paris, Bonhams, which is based in London but has several offices abroad, and Doyle in New York. The other half is generated by private dealers and galleries that are notoriously secretive. One of the biggest private deals in recent years came to light only because the details were disclosed in an American court following the Bernard Madoff scandal. Last July ten paintings by Rothko and two sculptures by Alberto Giacometti were sold by a New York financier to help repay Mr Madoff’s investors. A mystery buyer spent $310m on the works. Two dealers earned $37.5m in fees.

By comparison with that private world, Sotheby’s and Christie’s auction business looks like a model of transparency. Although buyers and sellers are rarely named, the auction price is public. Yet even here there are dark corners. The leading auctioneers offer inducements such as guaranteed prices to persuade sellers to part with their treasures, and generous terms of payment for buyers.

One thing that differentiates the two auction houses is their ownership structure. Sotheby’s is a quoted company whereas Christie’s, once listed, was taken private in 1999 by its current owner, Mr Pinault. Christie’s business has since expanded hugely, partly thanks to Mr Pinault’s pivotal position in the international art world. Even though the company can pick and choose what information it wants to reveal, it has in fact become more open over the past ten years.

Sotheby’s, for its part, is still smarting from the public beating it received in America nearly a decade ago when its chairman, Alfred Taubman, and its chief executive, Diana Brooks, were found guilty of conspiring with Christie’s to fix commissions. Mr Taubman served ten months of a one-year prison sentence; Mrs Brooks was given six months’ house arrest, a $350,000 fine and 1,000 hours of community service. No one was charged at Christie’s, which had blown the whistle on the commission-fixing. Sotheby’s lives in fear of the regulators and discloses only as much financial information as it has to.

In the decade since the scandal both auction houses have concentrated on expansion. Sotheby’s was the first auctioneer to become interested in Russia and remains bigger there than its rival. Christie’s, which has long been especially strong in the Far East, has put a lot of effort into China. Foreigners are not allowed to own auction houses there, but Christie’s has got around that by signing a licensing agreement with a leading Chinese auctioneer. Both houses have their eye on the Middle East. Christie’s holds regular auctions in Dubai, of which its art and jewellery sales are the most successful. Sotheby’s has opened an office in Qatar which is important for its relationship with the Qatar royal family, one of its biggest clients.

The response of both auction houses to the current slump has been broadly similar: staff cuts, unpaid leave, a squeeze on salaries, slashed marketing and travel budgets, and an edict that the glossy auction catalogues, which in the boom cost each of them £25m a year to produce, were no longer to be handed out like chocolate drops.

With a hugely expanded international client base, it was only a matter of time before both auctioneers started to muscle in on areas that had previously been the preserve of private dealers, matching buyers and sellers and selling new art rather than items that had already been in the market. Sotheby’s proved to be much the more ruthless of the two. All the lots in Mr Hirst’s September 2008 sale, for example, had been consigned to Sotheby’s directly from the artist’s workshop, which shocked dealers who had not previously thought of the auction houses as direct competitors.

In 2006 Sotheby’s paid $56.5m for Noortman Master Paintings, a leading dealer in Old Masters. Less than a year later Christie’s bought Haunch of Venison, another high-profile dealer set up in 2002, whose founders included a former director of Christie’s contemporary-art department. Noortman gave Sotheby’s an entry into the Maastricht Art Fair, the pre-eminent dealers’ fest, and Haunch of Venison helped make Christie’s Mr Pinault the biggest art trader in the market. Both galleries operate independently of the auction houses, but the relationships are close.

All things to all men
Both auction houses have also put a lot of effort into advising buyers on how to improve their collections. As Jussi Pylkkanen, Christie’s European president, says, “We’re much more than an auction house now.” The recession has made many collectors nervous about offering their treasures at auction, so they are selling them privately. In 2007 Christie’s chalked up private sales of $542m and Sotheby’s of $730m, which means the two auction houses are now among the world’s biggest private dealers. Both often get calls like the one Sotheby’s recently took from a Moscow collector with $2m to spend on an “optimistic” Chagall oil, “not too feminine” and no more than a metre in height. “We put out the word and immediately received several offers from our offices in London, Geneva and New York,” says Mikhail Kamensky, the firm’s head of CIS business.

In 2007 private deals accounted for 8.7% of Christie’s business. Mr Pylkkanen expects that figure to go up to 20% of its revenue within three years. That should put the wind up private dealers.

Double Entendre, Fay Ku’s exhibition at Eight Modern, is a crowd-pleaser. Or maybe just a crowd-teaser. Or maybe I’m a pervert. Whichever it is, I was left wanting more, both for the beauty of the art and, at only six drawings, the brevity of the show.

The unadorned figurative works nimbly fulfill the trifecta of contemporary drawing: They are well-crafted, inscrutable and sort of naughty. I found myself nodding my head at her line work, scratching my head at her motives and shaking my head at her lascivious subjects.

It is obvious that Ku can draw, but her craft never devolves into showiness. On the contrary, her compositions might be described as restrained or inhibited, if not for all the tomfoolery. She renders the forms with thin, curving contours, using just the faintest flicks to denote a fold in their flesh. For the most part, the subjects’ lithe limbs and torsos lack texture or detail, but Ku’s subtle watercolor washes warm the bodies, providing a sense of weight.

The large sheets of paper remain mostly empty, leaving the figures floating in off-white voids independent of gravity or architecture. The relationship to Asian woodblock prints is unmistakable, with its economy of line and sparse compositions, but the provocative imagery is a far cry from some Katsushika Hokusai desk calendar. Ku’s protagonists are all alone, and the lack of supervision is starting to get to them. It might be said that they lack perspective.

Art historical references aside, I also was reminded of a less academic tradition: those kids who sit and doodle through all their non-art classes, defacing their desks and weirding everybody out. Certainly Ku’s graphic style would find approval among the comic-book crowd, as would the graphic content. Indeed, most of these drawings would land Ku in detention.

After reading an interview with the artist, she seems to fit the bill. She is a self-described loner with a compulsion to make art. In a telling moment, she was asked what advice she had for up-and-coming artists. She replied, “Don’t become an artist unless you have to,” implying that her art helps her cope (with what I’m not sure, but it doesn’t seem too happy in there).

Several of the works depict figures in sexually suggestive poses, often children, often with non-human animals. Though the figures are typically nude, the subject matter is never explicit. Erogenous zones are either turned away from the viewer or covered—and by covered I mean suckled by a fish.

Strangely, except for one little boy in the work “Fish Sticks,” the figures derive little pleasure from their aquatic accompaniment. The twin drawings “Sea Bed” and “Nibble” depict the same adult female lying prone with an expression of utter indifference among schools of fish,
as though the phalanx of fins swarming at her nethers is starting to get boring.

The show’s title, Double Entendre, implies a tension between what is said and what is meant. Indeed, the innocuous titles do give way to jarring imagery, as though these ideas spring forth from Ku’s brain at the mildest provocation. This is a fairly sophomoric approach to content—and there is nothing I dislike more than when I feel someone is trying to be shocking—but the psychological weight of Ku’s subjects feels genuine. The images recall moments of sexual excitement that predate our understanding of sexuality and the way in which these events can develop into fully formed fetishes that defy our understanding of sexuality.

Alone on the west wall of the gallery is Ku’s punch line, “Mermaid,” a fish/woman hybrid born not of myth but of perversion. Is it just me, or is the artist being koi?

Stamp of approval


www.chinaview.cn 2009-11-23 14:06:41 Print

BEIJING, Nov. 23 -- Twenty-one Chinese artists - including Zeng Fanzhi, Yue Minjun and Fang Lijun - have become the first group of appointed artists at the newly founded Contemporary Art Academy of China (CAAC).

The appointments are viewed by many as official recognition of contemporary Chinese artists, many of whom used to be regarded as deviants.


The "Laughing" series by Yue Minjun. (Xinhua Photo)
Photo Gallery>>>



For example, Yue and Fang, whose "cynical realist style" works have been collected by museums throughout the world (though they are not well-known by the Chinese public) used to be members of Yuanmingyuan Artist Village, a community formed by artists in Beijing in the early 1990s, but dismissed by the government in 1995.

Founded by the Chinese National Academy of Arts, an institute subordinate to the Ministry of Culture, CAAC is the first official organization devoted to the research of contemporary Chinese art.

"A constituent part of socialist culture with Chinese characteristics, contemporary Chinese art has a significant place," says Wang Wenzhang, deputy minister of Culture and president of the Chinese National Academy of Arts. "Facing globalization, how China establishes cultural discourse and constructs its own standards of art remains to be seen. It is for this reason that the Chinese National Academy of Arts spent four years setting up the CAAC."

According to Luo Zhongli, CAAC president, the academy will continue to appoint artists and gradually build up a structure that includes facilities for art creation, research, and education.

The first group of appointed artists received a letter of appointment that reads: "In view of your achievements in contemporary art, you are appointed as an artist of the Contemporary Art Academy of China, with a tenure of four years."

Many of these artists, however, are not sure about the work of the academy and their roles in it.

"I think the academy just represents an attitude of the government," says Yue, who is known for his series of paintings depicting himself, in frozen laughter.


Mask by Zeng Fanzhi. (Xinhua Photo)
Photo Gallery>>>



"I don't know what I'll do at the academy, but I think art has its own rules and does not need too much involvement from the government."

Even the academy's artistic director, Ye Yongqing, does not have a clear agenda, but he says the relationship between the academy and artists will be different from that of other official art organizations.

"We have just started and do not know exactly what we will do, but we know what we will not do," Ye says. "The academy won't be a place where the artists are paid to do required works, but will be an incubator of art projects and a think tank for cultural policy makers."

For most of the past three decades, Chinese contemporary art has developed in an environment at variance with the West. Although some Chinese artists have made their names known to the world, a contemporary art system of public museums, galleries, foundations and collectors has not been fully formed in China. Instead, artists and art organizations have been working independently, Ye says.

He believes the CAAC will be able to contribute to the development of contemporary Chinese art as a whole and society's understanding of it.

Internationally famous Chinese artists have accumulated influence, experience and connections over the years, Ye says.

"If we can transform these personal resources into public resources, they will contribute to the promotion of contemporary art in Chinese society."

The appointed CAAC artists will not receive salaries, but will get budgets for art projects. Ye is planning to organize a group exhibition of the appointed artists for next year, and call on these artists for projects.

The academy will also recruit post-graduate and doctorate students in arts management and conduct research on contemporary Chinese art, which will serve as references for China's cultural policy makers, Ye says.

"In a way you can say we are a little like the American Academy of Arts and Sciences or the Institute of Contemporary Arts of the United Kingdom," he says.

CAAC appointee Zeng Fanzhi, known for his Masks series, is currently one of the most popular Chinese artists in the world art market. Zhang Xiaogang, Liu Xiaodong and Cai Guoqiang, who have held auction price records among contemporary Chinese artists, are also appointed artists.

Most of these artists are from Beijing, but Ye says the academy will expand in the future and appoint more artists from other areas in China.

"When I came back to China nine years ago, the state of contemporary Chinese artists was like that of roving bandits, as they often had to struggle to find a place to hold their exhibitions. I'm lucky to have witnessed a change of China's attitude toward contemporary art," says Chen Danqing, who lived in the United States for about two decades.

Chen says he is concerned about their destinies after being appointed by an official institute.

"The establishment of the Contemporary Art Academy of China is a test in Chinese art circles. Sometimes just one word, or one person, or one work will bring a breakthrough or retrogression. I want to say to the appointed artists, don't diminish your sharpness and play on," Chen says.

(Source: China Daily)

媒体艺术中心与电子艺术节7
zhangmoyimichelle | 媒体中心与艺术节 | 星期三, 一月 10th, 2007
LOCATION ONE CALENDAR

http://www.location1.org/




Location One 位在纽约时髦且繁华的苏活区，促进科技艺术的交流为该中心的宗旨

他们支持且带领民众进行创作
范围不局限于只有科技媒体艺术的合作，各种艺术型式的表现都乐于支持，以期望能达到全方位的艺术交流
他们成立技术部门，支持艺术家创作，并且也邀请各地艺术家来纽约作驻地艺术家，藉此鼓励创造新的艺术作品

并且，每年 Location One 也会举办媒体艺术展

Cloaude Closky 的 Television 就是2003年透过 Location One 展出的作品之一

Location One 的规模虽小，但锁定艺术范围较广，因此相较于其他的科技艺术来说，Location One 的发展面向却是十分多元化

透过 Location One 展出的作品之一：

Reconnaissance
by Floating Point Unit
Tomoe Shizune
Hakutobo
东京纽约视讯同步表演

媒体艺术中心与电子艺术节9
zhangmoyimichelle | 媒体中心与艺术节 | 星期二, 四月 10th, 2007
Dumb Type

http://dumbtype.com/



(哑巴型态) 是日本著名的表演艺术团体，他们跟许多媒体艺术的发展机构合作，举办各式各样的肢体表演与科技媒体结合的艺术展演

例如 2003 年他们曾在洛杉矶 WALT DISNEY CONCERT HALL 的前卫表演厅做开幕演出 ” Voyage ” 炫旅

Voyage 炫旅 (多媒体舞台剧)
by Dumb Type

Dumb Type 是 1984 年由创始人古桥悌二结合东京艺术大学不同科系的同学所组成的艺术团体
其中囊括了绘画, 建筑, 影视, 戏剧, 计算机设计等不同的艺术人士

如此的结合，是希望能为当代艺术开创出新的方向
他们的作品多半参杂着许多领域的元素，但也颠覆了那些艺术领域的传统定义

他们当初取 ” Dumb - 哑巴 ” 这个名字，一方面是想隐喻挣脱语言的包袱，另一方面是早期对主流艺术而言，他们是一群不入流的艺术家，因此取个哑巴团名，表示不想以语言来回映主流艺术的眼光，反而以创作行动来彰显自己的艺术理念。

媒体艺术中心与电子艺术节10–列表
zhangmoyimichelle | 媒体中心与艺术节 | 星期三, 四月 11th, 2007
在这里声明一下，关于媒体艺术中心的介绍并不是我本人写的，这里我只是补充了一些内容和例子，起到了一个总结的作用，希望和大家一起分享交流．发现可以找到的中文资料都非常有限，而且大部分都来自于台湾的网站，感谢www.digiarts.org.tw．这里提供了更多的信息，这些我自己也来不及看，再慢慢研究吧。不可能全面，有机会最好亲自去看看．




名 称 网 址
1 BAF 布列福动画艺术节 http://www.nmpft.org.uk/baf/2005/home.asp
Bradford Animation Festival
【英国】英国最大、最受喜爱的年度动画艺术节，专业课程、研讨会、工作坊、以及由业界顶尖所领导的特殊活动等。BAF 的大奖是每年艺术节的重头戏，来自于全球的顶尖最新的动画作品将在此展开。
2 「爱的字节」国际数字艺术节 http://www.lovebytes.org.uk
Lovebytes International Festival of Digital Art
【英国】Lovebytes（爱的字节）是个英国的艺术组织，设立于英国中部的雪菲尔市（Sheffield）。自 1994 年起开始举办「爱的字节」国际数字艺术节，藉由展览、活动与出版等，创造机会给数字媒体的产品与消费来寻找创意与文化的数字科技潜力。
3 「未来声」（Futuresonic）国际电音暨媒体艺术节 http://www.futuresonic.com
Futuresonic; UK International Festival of Electronic Music and Media Arts
【英国】在国际新音乐与电子文化的前端潮流，英国的 Futuresonic 提供一个丰富的交流平台，体验最前卫的新科技艺术家之绝妙创作，决不能错过未来声国际电音暨媒体艺术节。Futuresonic 国际电音暨媒体艺术节自 1996 起至今已迈入第 9 个年头依然热力不减。
4 泰国新媒体艺术节 http://culturebase.org/home/thailand/
Thailand New Media Art Festival
【泰国】第一届泰国的新媒体艺术节 (Thailand New Media Art Festival) 开始于 2003 年，至今已经连续办了三年，泰国的媒体艺术节主要由成立于 2002 年的 ICECA ( Initiative for Cultural Exchange and Computer Arts) 组织筹办，ICECA 是由媒体艺术家 Francis Wittenberger 催生而成。
5 微波国际媒体艺术节 http://www.microwavefest.net
Microwave International Media Art Festival
【中国 :: 香港】香港著名的微波国际媒体艺术节，将于 2005 年 10 月举行的微波国际媒体艺术节，今年的主题为 Culture as Play。
6 汉城国际动漫节 http://www.sicaf.or.kr/
SICAF; Seoul International Cartoon and Animation Festival
【南韩】SICAF 是韩国最大的动漫产业活动。自 1995 年举办以来，一直得到首尔市政府和韩国文化旅游观光部的支持，SICAF 努力历经 10 年的成果，已成为亚洲区重要的国际动画活动，仅次于历史悠久的日本广岛动画影展及市场性浓厚的东京国际动画展。它包括三个主要部分：动画电影节、展览、SICAF 项目推广市场。
7 日本文化厅媒体艺术祭 http://plaza.bunka.go.jp/index_o.html
Japan Media Arts Festival
【日本】日本的「文化厅媒体艺术祭」是全球广泛介绍先进的媒体艺术创作活动的媒体艺术祭典之ㄧ。日本的媒体艺术在艺术、漫画、动画及游戏等方面都受到全球的热烈注目，日本的文化厅媒体艺术祭希望在不受限于旧有创作的框架，建立起新的创作价值，所以招 募作品不仅限于日本而已，也同时高度关注全球的动向。
8 亚洲数字艺术大赛 ADAA http://www.adaa.jp/2005/
Asia Digital Art Awards
日本福冈举办的亚洲数字艺术大赛，原先还是福冈发展城市交流举办的国际数字艺术竞赛，举办了四年后，逐渐发展成完整的亚洲数字艺术竞赛，竞赛的内容清楚地以英、中(简)、日、韩四国语文介绍。
9 WRO 国际新媒体艺术双年展 http://wrocenter.pl/biennale.php
WRO International Media Art Biennale
【波兰】号称波兰与东欧最大的电子与计算机艺术的双年展：WRO 国际新媒体艺术双年展，展览举办于波兰的乐斯拉夫 (wroclaw)，WRO 的国际新媒体艺术双年展，至 2005 年为止已经举办 11 届了；双年展的内容包含竞赛、展览、演出、论坛等各项精彩的当代新媒体艺术的活动。
10 荷兰电子艺术节 http://www.deaf07.nl/
Dutch Electronic Art Festival, DEAF
【荷兰】由 V2_ 电子艺术中心策展，荷兰电子艺术节在鹿特丹举行，以双年展的方式举办，荷兰电子艺术节跨领域于艺术、科技与社会的各个面向，近年来已然成为欧洲数字艺术的重要发展据点。V2_ 与北京的新媒体艺术界有很多密切合作。

11 原起－新艺术形式与新媒体艺术节 http://www.festival-emergences.info/
Emergences–new artistic forms and new media festival
【法国】法国的原起_新艺术形式与新媒体艺术节 (Emergences–new artistic forms and new media festival) 由 Dedale 负责策展，目前至 2005 年举办了第三届，企图网罗法国与国际的数字创作领域的艺术家，范围包含跨领域与原始计划各方面。
12 柏林国际超媒体艺术节 http://www.transmediale.de/
transmediale
【德国】柏林国际媒体艺术节 transmediale 对于当今数字科技艺术表现与评论意见提供一个平台的角色，每年艺术节的论坛提供给艺术家、媒体及各领域的专家一个刺激的环境，藉此呈现出来自于数字文化的重要新计划。艺术节的主要核心来自于每年论坛的主题，还有双年主题展。此外由 CTM (club transmediale) 所主办的竞赛则专注于电子音乐以及相关的视觉艺术。
13 Reademe 媒体艺术节 http://readme.runme.org/
Readme festival
Reademe 媒体艺术节是一个旅行的媒体艺术节，专注于软件艺术。艺术节的任务是软件开发与评论文本，Readme 媒体艺术节几乎离不开 Runme.org 的网站，这个网站可说是软件艺术的宝库。Reademe 媒体艺术节 2002 年开始于俄罗斯莫斯科、2003 年展于芬兰赫尔辛基 (Helsinki)、2004 年展于丹麦?尔胡斯 (Aarhus)、2005 年于德国多特蒙德 (Dortmund) 举办 Runme100。
14 medi@terra 国际艺术科技节 http://www.mediaterra.org
medi@terra - International Art and Technology Festival
【希腊】位于希腊举办的艺术节，由 Fournos 创办的年度活动，与 Hellenic Ministry of Culture、Hellenic Cultural Heritage SA、Cultural Olympiad 2001-2004 合办。旨在建立一个媒体艺术与数字文化的全球创意交流平台，并关注于西南欧洲与地中海等地区。
15 Artmedia 国际艺术节 http://artmedia.maimonides.edu
Artmedia; VI Festival of Digital Art, Audiovisual Communication & Interactive Media
【意大利】由意大利 Maimonides 多媒体沟通学院（The School for Multimedia Communication of the Maimonides University）举办， 自 2000 年起的年度活动，集结艺术、设计与多媒体的创作交流平台。活动内容包含研讨会、座谈、课程、工作坊与展览。2005 年的 Artmedia 于 9 月举办，主题为「明日的界面 」。
16 ArtMedia 国际研讨会 http://www.artmedia.unisa.it
ArtMedia
【意大利】由萨莱纳大学（University of Salerno）自 1985 年起开始创办，致力于探索最新科技与艺术尝试的研究计划，试图寻找新媒体美学的理论定义和执行系统。
17 1.0 动态影像展 http://www.onedotzero.com
onedotzero - adventures in moving image
【英国】自 1996 年创设，onedotzero 聚集了世界最为顶尖创新的创作人才，横跨影片拍摄、音乐录像带、动态图像、计算机游戏和 club 视觉领域，透过年度在伦敦的当代艺术中心 ICA 的影展活动，意在探索动态影像的新表现、推展领衔潮流。
18 北京国际新媒体艺术展暨论坛 http://www.newmediabeijing.org/
Beijing International New Media Arts Exhibition & Symposium
【中国】
19 URBAN SCREENS 国际研讨会 http://www.urbanscreens.org
URBAN SCREENS - Discovering the potential of outdoor screens for urban society
【荷兰】主要在阐述日趋广泛的大型数字动态展示广告牌之公共建设，已不容漠视其对公共空间视觉氛围所带来的影响力。
20 奥地利 ARS 电子艺术节 http://www.aec.at/en/index.asp
Ars Electronica
【奥地利】林兹（Linz）的电子艺术中心（Ars Electronica Center）创办自 1979 年，为全球数字艺术重要指针活动。2005 年电子艺术节的主题「混种—生活在矛盾中」（HYBRID – Living in paradox），值得注意的是，艺术节形象识别是以国际知名的华人艺术家李小镜（Daniel Lee）的作品为主视觉。
21 ART+COMMUNICATION 艺术节 http://www.rixc.lv/info/festival.html
M?KSLA+KOMUNIK?CIJAS | ART+COMMUNICATION
【拉托维亚（Latvia）】由数字艺术中心 RIXC 主办，2004 年为第七届，主题为 Trans Cultural Mapping。
22 Avanto 赫尔辛基媒体艺术节 http://www.avantofestival.com/
Avanto Helsinki Media Art Festival
【芬兰】Avanto Festival 是芬兰的年度非营利视听艺术活动。第六届 Avanto 将于 2005 年 11 月 18 至20 日在赫尔辛基（Helsinki）举办。
23 巴西录像国际电子艺术节 http://www.sescsp.org.br/sesc/videobrasil/site/
Videobrasil International Electronic Art Festival
【巴西】简称「巴西录像节」（Videobrasil）于 1981 年成立，为巴西目前最具指针性的电子艺术中心。「巴西录像节」（Videobrasil）已搜集了近四千件的作品，完整记录观察电子艺术的快速变化历程。而 Videobrasil 最主要的活动即是国际电子艺术节的筹办，于圣保罗（Sao Paulo）每两年一次，着重于推展南半球的电子艺术发展。1983 年电子艺术甫登陆巴西，Videobrasil 即首次举办了相关活动，也就是日后的国际电子艺术节，集结当时巴西最顶尖的创作者。持续至今已有20多年历史，艺术节包括一项竞赛展览，以及整系列的相关活动，展秀、座谈会、研讨，引荐当代艺术的最新概念与作品。第 15 届的录像巴西国际电子艺术节于 2005 年 9 月 6 日至 25 日登场。
24 Musica Viva/Entr’Artes 音乐国际艺术节 http://www.misomusic.com/ingl/circul/mviva/2005.html
MUSICA VIVA / ENTR’ARTES Festival
【葡萄牙】2005 年 Musica Viva Festival 进入了活动举办的第 11 个年头，为了承先启后，主题定为 MUSICA VIVA/ENTR’ARTES。在崭新的名号下，Musica Viva/Entr’Artes 2005国际艺术节着重在多元活动的呈现，包括：舞蹈、影片、录像、以及系列装置，当然还有葡萄牙音乐，与特别关注音乐和技术之间互动的课题。
25 2:13 即兴音乐艺术节 http://www.2-13.co.uk
2:13 Festival
【伦敦、柏林、雅典】2:13 俱乐部（2:13club）是由电子吉他创作者 John Bisset 和萨克斯风手 Lester Moses 于 1992 年在英国伦敦所创设的。提供北伦敦 Stoke Newington 地区一间艺术画廊即兴电子音乐的演出。当每个月第一个周六下午，画廊墙上的古钟指到两点 13 分时将静止于那一刻，而演奏会即开始进行。静止的时钟象征着俱乐部的活动精神，也就是，当下即兴的音乐仅为当下演奏，音乐是当下集聚所有外在条件汇成的呈现。
26 404 国际电子艺术节 http://www.404festival.com/eng/home.htm
404 International Festival of Electronic Art
【阿根廷】404 艺术节是独立非营利项目，旨在推广和促进全球电子艺术领域的艺术制作，并营造出艺术家能于其中展出交流的环境平台，艺术节完全免费开放参加，由欧洲、北美和拉丁美洲的数个文化机构共同支持举办。第一届 404 国际电子艺术节于 2004 年 12 月，在阿根廷的 Rosario 城进行。
27 Radiator 新科技艺术节 http://radiator-festival.org
Radiator Festival
【英国】Radiator 艺术节，是英国中部地区的新技术艺术活动，探究数字艺术领域当前的创新创作技术，搜罗广泛的艺术活动、事件和放映、社群资源、网络机会。由 Trampoline（以 Broadway Cinema 为基地）策划，艺术节每两年于英国诺丁罕（Nottingham）举行一次。
28 DiVA 数字录像艺术博览会 http://www.divafair.com/
DiVA - Digital and Video Art Fair
【纽约、科隆、布鲁塞尔、巴黎】从纽约发起的 Digital & Video Art Fair（数字与录像艺术博览会）主办单位 FReRE iNDEPENDENT 今年扩大举办规模，与科隆、布鲁塞尔、巴黎等地主办单位策略结盟的联合展。（台湾画廊近年也参与这个博览会，提供国内画廊与艺术家直接面对交易市场－－点进首页可见台湾 ela-ASIA 亚洲电子艺术特区的介绍专页。）
29 议政府数字艺术节（Digital Playground） http://digitalart.ui4u.net/
Digital Playground; Uijeongbu International Digital Art Festival
【南韩】议政府是古朝鲜官职，类似中国的御史台。Digital Playground（数字乐园）则是韩国新崛起的女策展人 Nathalie Boseul SHIN 于 2005 年底所策的国际艺术节，囊括来自日、韩与欧美艺术家的互动作品，展现出有别于日本媒体艺术所表现之高科技风情，值得想了解南韩数字艺术现况的读者参考。
30 Pixelache 电子艺术节 http://www.pixelache.ac/
Pixelache
【芬兰】Pixelache 取自预言新兴字词的文章，形容在过量数字媒体内容下的结果感受。一年一度的 Pixelache 电子艺术与次文化艺术节由芬兰赫尔辛基的 Kiasma 当代艺术馆筹办研讨会、工作坊，呈现实验性的媒体与科技表现，邀集各领域人才聚集一堂。其目标是为传统创意管道与快速成长的电子次文化建立起桥梁。除赫尔辛基，也巡回跨国城市如：斯德哥尔摩、伯拉第斯拉瓦（捷克）、纽约和蒙特娄等。
31 Cybersonica 声响艺术节 http://www.cybersonica.org/
Cybersonica.org
【英国】Cybersonica 源自于 2001 年于英国当代艺术中心 ICA 一场极为成功的活动，后成为伦敦年度电音、声响艺术和视听交会的艺术盛事，结合音乐人、DJ、VJ、数字艺术家、软件研发者等老将新秀，并展示该领域最新创作。Cybersonica 是由一群在 Dana Centre 科学博物馆的驻村艺术家 Cybersalon 所主办。
32 AV Festival 音像双年展 http://www.avfest.co.uk/
AV Festival
【英国】AV Festival 是全英规模最大的双年展型态数字艺术、音乐与影像艺术节。第一届从 2003 年 11 月 8 日到 11 日举办超过百场相关活动并委托知名音乐、视觉艺术家创作。AV06 三月在 Newcastle Gateshead、Middlesbrough、Sunderland 三地举行； AV08 将在两年后的三月展开。
33 巴黎口袋影展 http://www.festivalpocketfilms.fr/
Pocket Film Festival
【法国】口袋影展为法国影像论坛（Forum des images）主办，2007 年 6 月 8 ~ 10 日迈入第三届，这可能是最后一次在庞毕度当代艺术中心映演的口袋影展。影像论坛为法国公立的电影馆藏与推广机构，口袋影展则为以国家资源致力推广新媒体与数字工具的新尝试。
34 Experimenta 媒体艺术中心与双年展 http://www.experimenta.org/

【澳洲】澳洲最重要的当代艺术中心，致力于媒体艺术委托创作、策展与推广。近二十年来，它透过墨尔本媒体艺术双年展、国际巡回展等不同规划推广新媒体艺术，并以委托艺术家与研究等方案促成国际与当地创作者的交流与能见度。下届双年展将于 2007/8/24 至 9/23 墨尔本，主题为 Experimenta Playground。


ArtLab

当代世界艺术批评的现状2009年11月24日 17:11:21 作者：亨利·梅里克·休斯 来源：《批评家》 字号：【大 中 小】
　　按：第三届“中国美术批评家年会”特邀来自英国伦敦的国际艺术批评家协会(AICA)前主席，现名誉主席亨利·梅里克·休斯(Henry Meyric Hughes)先生就国际艺术批评家协会的情况和国际艺术批评的总体形势进行大会发言。亨利为此进行了非常认真的准备，第一稿文本在会前一周就提交大会。出于现场翻译的考虑，亨利演讲的时间只有15分钟，内容有限，而第一稿文本基本集中在对机构的介绍上。于是我和他再次商量，能否调整一下讲稿内容，更多地补充一些他对当代批评的看法。亨利欣然同意，连夜赶稿，在大会前再次提交了第二稿文本，并依据第二稿进行了大会发言。虽然篇幅不长，但文中提到了当代批评一些非常重要的问题。现将亨利·梅里克·休斯两次发言的中英文本，借助《批评家》一同发表，以飨国内同仁。大会发言稿作为正文，第一稿关于AICA的介绍作为附件附于文后。两次发言的中译本均由李佳女士完成，特此表示感谢。

　　滕宇宁(2009年批评家年会学术秘书)

　　当代世界艺术批评的现状

　　——2009年“第三届中国美术批评家年会”大会发言

　　感谢尊敬的本届年会主席殷双喜先生、学术主持朱青生教授的邀请，使我有机会在诸位来自中国各地的著名批评家面前发表我的演说。感谢本次大会学术秘书滕宇宁女士，以及所有为本次大会付出努力的同仁，感谢你们出色的工作，以及为我参加本次盛会所提供的诸多便利。

　　在这篇文章的开头，我想请诸位同我重温奥斯卡·王尔德对于犬儒主义者的著名定义，“这种人对每一样东西的价格都了如指掌，对它们的价值却一无所知”。(这也是我们的前首相玛格丽特·撒切尔夫人常被诟病之处。)这里需要加以注意的是，价格与价值(或按诸位的习惯，在马克思主义的术语体系中它们表现为价值与使用价值)的差距正在缩减到几乎不辨彼此的地步。苏富比当代艺术部的主管托拜厄斯·梅耶在一次报道中曾评论如下，“最好的艺术肯定也是最贵的，因为市场实在是太精明了。”

　　此后不久，梅耶最主要的竞争对手，佳士得的同行也发表了类似的观点，“艺术价值是重要的，因为顾客需要明白自己买下的作品优劣何在，他们必须依据某种衡量标尺才能做出抉择：是否购买某位艺术家的作品?花在这件作品上的钱是不是值得?……人们紧紧盯住所谓的基准价格，想方设法使自己的出价和以往的其他出价基本保持一致。”价值?——的确有某些价值!判断力?——但却是某种完全以金钱度量的判断准则!价格与价值之间不断收缩的差距，在那些价格不完全由市场决定的国家，特别容易受到政治、意识形态、经济等外部压力的影响。它反映出这样的现实：随着艺术品价值与价格差别的日益趋近，留给批评家、评论家、史学家或策展人的活动空间也在日益紧缩。同样在不断紧缩的还有我们这些人能够支配的时间：无论是花在个人的专业领域进行研究、分析和批判上，还是仅仅用来思索生存的意义。

　　正如学者詹姆斯·埃金斯在一篇简短而富于争议性的文章中所指出的，“艺术批评到底怎么了?”。这篇文章引用了哥伦比亚大学国家艺术新闻项目在政府资助下进行的一项调查，据调查结果显示，最受欢迎和最常见的艺术批评是“描述性艺术报道”，其次受欢迎的是相关历史及背景介绍，然后才是所谓“散文式艺术批评”，艺术价值在这类批评中依赖于批评家本身的倾向和趣味(这种形式的艺术批评属于创作领域，我认为它类似于历史上的法国现代诗歌的“字母派”)。很明显，在美国(西欧的情况与之亦相差无几)，各种形态的艺术批评的中最少见且最少人问津的一类，正是那种试图以某种方式给出关键性判断的艺术批评。这个现象并不难理解。我们不妨想想展览图册上的那种所谓评论文章，无论是出自商业画廊的委托，还是为公立机构而作，都难得在其中找到哪怕一句略带否定语气的评价。艺术批评，就其作为一个学科和一类职业而言(但事实果真如此吗?)，关于它的写作实践实在是少得可怜。使人不禁要问：这门学科是否有一个发展历史可以追溯?是否有一些普遍原则可以遵循?从现在的情况看，恐怕我们将不得不承认，这二者目前仍是空白。不仅如此，迄今为止尚没有一套针对这个学科的专业训练方法，更不能提供任何成型的职业发展路线或规划。虽然这个行业里的众多批评家都有艺术史的背景知识，但他们求学时的专业几乎都是文学或其他人文学科(特别是哲学)，他们的职业生涯也多以作家、记者，或是过去的报刊评论员等身份作为起步。他们当中极少有人全职从事艺术批评工作，即使有也主要倾向于担任报刊的固定专栏作家。大多数人要养家糊口，还得靠其他专业的行当，或者从事策展、艺术管理或咨询、公关等具有一定关联性的其他工作。过去认为，批评职业强调的是批判性，是判断力，批评家必须同艺术家个人，同作为赞助人的画廊、收藏家、展览会、交易商等市场经济力量保持必要而恰当的距离。这种观念承袭自前卫艺术及其后裔所持的信条，同时也构成西方艺术史中一个特殊概念，其合法性源自趣味、感性等美学范畴。如今，这些观念已经失去了原先的重要性，语境在改变，现代主义叙述被文化(视觉)研究、身份政治、后殖民理论(更不必说女性主义和性别研究，以及各型各色的特殊诉求)所取代，同时，学科的边界也在大大地拓展，社会学、人类学、语言学、符号学、哲学、后结构主义及其他类似学科的方法和成果被不断地引入和吸收。针对上述种种纷乱复杂的局面，埃金斯在文中加以剖析并指出：“艺术批评正在世界范围内经历着一场危机。它的声音已经越来越微弱，即将消融在各种昙花一现的文化批评的背景之中。但……它的确在急速膨胀，这恰恰证明它其实行将没落，但它同时又无所不在。它被人所忽视，却在一个庞大的市场上举足轻重……艺术批评正在大规模地被制造出来，随即又大批大批地陷入遗忘。”

　　我本该深深地感到忧虑，如果艺术批评诚如本文开头的几段引文所言，已经被市场所禁锢和束缚，面对金钱价值至上的普遍信条而无能为力的话。但事实并非如此，市场不是一个孤立存在的绝缘体。它不过是关系到艺术生产的实质和接受条件的众多影响因素之一。即使在最彻底的新自由主义市场经济中，仍有不胜枚举的政治、文化、法律以及意识形态等限制条件存在，使艺术品的价值不能完全由市场因素决定。诚然，留给个人的批评空间不断受到挤压，同时值得注意的是，原先存在于艺术、批评以及公众三者之间的界限也在逐渐模糊，它们彼此吸收原属于对方的某些东西，使得“批评”一词在今天显得格外复杂，混合了艺术家(有时则是假定的艺术家身份)、市场体系及其营销策略、学科的专业训练以及其他限制因素在内。批评家伊雷特·罗戈夫曾详尽地描述了如上整个过程，“评论式批评”如何演变成“评价式批评”，又进一步演变成今天的“相互的批评活动”。与此同时，批评家本人也由学者和理论家的角色转而积极投身参与实践，甚至成为这一转变过程的倡导者。作者以她自己的经历证明了这个过程：最开始，她仅仅是发表批评做出判断，但现在一切已经不同，“我发现自己处于这样的状态，一方面必须承认和接受这个我生存于其中的现实世界，另一方面则需要用批判的眼光去观察和进行理论思考。批评活动就存在于当下，它正在发生。”

　　今天的批评家已不仅仅是居高临下地做出某些关键性判断，正如今天的艺术家也不再像过去那样单纯埋头于创作而与外界隔绝，或拒绝任何对其创作的诠释。同样，今天的公众亦不再满足于仅仅以传统的鉴赏者身份来接近艺术。发端于20世纪60年代的极简主义和观念艺术正是这一转变的最好例证，它也给学院批评领域带来深远的影响。自此之后，那些对当代艺术怀有兴趣的公众发现自己正在以观看者和消费者的双重身份，不可避免地参与和介入到当代艺术的整体进程和艺术创造过程之中;批评家和艺术家则发现自己必须依靠各种组织、机构，某些结构性的力量以及经济支持。现在，对于批评家来说，已经没有任何可见的杠杆可以用来左右大众的态度与认知。

　　此外，还有一些新的因素和力量影响着上述的转变过程。其中之一就是快速扩张的艺术市场本身。这个市场从传统的西欧——北美——日本轴心日益向周边扩展，伴随这一进程的还有俄罗斯与韩国的改革和政变，中国、印度和中东等地飞速发展的工业化及日益提升的生产水平。西方的拍卖机构早已瞄准并进入到上述国家和地区。这股由层出不穷的“双年展”和“艺术节”推波助澜的关于当代艺术的狂热情绪，当然不可能只满足于现有艺术市场的覆盖区域。在那些确有市场存在但较弱的地区，全球化的浪潮与当地根深蒂固的各种传统迎头相遇，一定程度上改变着这场冲击的传播和渗入方式。而某些新鲜的、不寻常的事物往往正是从这样的漩涡中浮现的。此处不加以一一详述，但今天最有意味的作品的确大多来自那些远离市场的边缘地带，呈现出一种带讽刺色彩的复杂面貌。这类作品及艺术家本人在“双年展”和“艺术节”上(比如在广州)格外抢眼，让我们不禁去追问其创新的原动力所在。

　　借用军事术语，我得承认，批评在西方国家已被诸如金钱、知名度、控制力等策略性市场力量从侧翼包抄。我们不妨看看YBA(青年英国艺术家)的例子，这一批艺术家以群体的姿态被艺术界的营销巨头查尔斯·萨奇于20世纪90年代推上舞台。无论是谁，只要他对市场和媒体在当今经济环境下的作用力有所关注，萨奇都是一个经典的研究个案。反思性和批判性的评价在这里遇到短路甚至被彻底取代。我们得承认这位非凡的萨奇自己作为半个批评家和策展人，的确为这些年轻艺术家提供了物质条件以及精神鼓励，帮助他们创造出富于冒险性和探索精神的新作品，这些艺术家的活动也随后显示出他们对当代艺术内含的“批评活动”(如伊雷特·罗戈夫所指出的)这一性质有所觉悟并积极利用。萨奇既是一位慷慨的赞助人和慈善家，同时又是名誉和财富的狂热追逐者，至少在一段时期内他成功地操纵了包括批评家、交易商、美术馆和拍卖行在内的艺术世界大部分力量，更不用提他对一般大众的影响。

　　我在这里不得不提到另外一个例子，关于市场策略和投机行为如何冲溃传统规则和批评的界限。2008年4月号的《艺术新闻》以这样一行字作为开卷第一篇文章的标题：“展览和销售：苏富比在“中国当代艺术展”结束后两日即将参展作品宣布拍卖”。文章缘起于2007年，哥本哈根附近一家知名美术馆——路易斯安那美术馆举办了一次中国当代艺术大展，展品来自中国当代艺术的新近私人收藏“埃斯特拉收藏”，包括了自2004至2007年间69位中国艺术家的超过200件作品。展览于路易斯安那美术馆结束之后，移至耶路撒冷的一家不知名的美术馆进行，就在这次展览结束后两天，苏富比宣布了拍卖作品的消息。显然，美国艺术商比尔·阿奎维拉已经获得了全部作品的特许权，决定将其同时拍卖。4月9日在香港的第一场拍卖就为他赚得1700万美元，接下来的第二场将于今年秋天在纽约举行，预计成交总额在1200万美元左右。这场关于中国当代艺术的追猎和抢购风潮，让一大批著名学者和美术机构大大地出了一回洋相，各方的信用(经济信用除外)几乎荡然无存，不由使我感到批评的价值已经彻底被改写。

　　这篇文章将以如下几点作结：

　　批评今天依然存在并活跃着，虽然它呈现出完全陌生的形式。(皮埃尔·雷斯塔尼便持此观点，他认为批评作为广受尊敬的职业已接近其尾声，即将并正在转化为一些残余的活动，其意义也随之扩展到创造性活动的整个领域。)

　　这意味着，批评功能仍将得到有效的实践，即使其表象是日渐消隐且难逃权力与财富的罗网。也许它在市场面前已经短路，但它仍有办法绕过市场以重估自身的独立价值。

　　市场仅仅是影响批评的众多力量之一，而这种种力量绝非孤立绝缘存在，它们均不可避免地处身于整个社会、经济语境之中并受其控制和影响。

　　虽然就批评事业的伦理规范和内在要求而言，批评应当以间接方式介入，并与事件保持一定程度的距离。但综合上述各点，我们应该认识到今日之批评的复杂局面其实具有其积极意义和必要性。

　　伊莎贝尔·格劳(德国艺术杂志Texte Zur Kunst’的主编)曾指出，批评家其实远非设想的那样彻底失去影响力。在以“商人—收藏家”体系为核心而建立的新型权力关系中，“商人—批评家”体系也被赋予了越来越重要的地位，这一体系主导着知识市场，后者在全球化时代及当下的传播过程中的影响力与日俱增。她这样写道：“没有独立存在的价值，价值永远存在于各种关系的网络中，依赖于各种力量之间的磋商，马克思主义已经无情地揭示了这一点。这说明价值同样极易被批评所影响，因为批评可以通过改变上述力量的作用环境及作用方式，进而改变价值。”我并不关心批评是否会消亡，只要它能够以某种其他方式重生。就像刘易斯·卡罗尔在《爱丽丝漫游奇境记》里面讲到的那只柴郡猫，当猫的身体逐渐消失，它的笑容却继续存在。只要根扎得深，遇到适宜的时刻它必将重现天日。
2002年至2008年，我担任AICA(国际艺术批评家协会)主席。在此期间，我一直梦想着有朝一日能够协助世界上两个伟大的民族——中国和印度——正式成为AICA的成员。现在，梦想似乎正在朝现实迈进，我相信就在不久之后，印度也将紧跟中国的脚步。

　　在2007年巴黎的AICA年会上，我有幸结识了我可敬的朋友，朱青生教授，随即达成共识。朱教授邀请我参加同年11月举办的中国批评家年会，遗憾的是，由于时间不巧冲突，此前AICA在开普敦已经定好举办研讨论坛，使我未能如愿成行。今天，我将以AICA荣誉主席的全新身份做出演讲，在我AICA国际主席的第二届任期也是最后一届任期届满之际，我很荣幸被推选为荣誉主席。现在，请允许我代表大家向新任AICA主席，来自科特迪瓦的Yacouba Konaté先生，以及新产生的本届巴黎秘书处全体成员，特别是行政主任Anne-Claude Morice女士，致以热烈的欢迎(开放分会)。我向各位保证，在AICA今年11月的都柏林年会上，我将向AICA国际委员会的全体成员作出报告，把此次北京大会全部三天的情况汇报给他们。与此同时，我将不遗余力推动建立贵协会同AICA巴黎总部的紧密关系，这仅仅是双方一个富于建设性的合作的开端，最终，它将引向AICA大会对中国的正式接纳，以及一个全新、完善的AICA分会在中国的建立。

　　AICA创建至今已有整整60周年。它是创建于1945与1946年间的联合国教科文组织UNESCO的一个分支。其时，在刚刚建立的联合国，各个成员普遍急切地希望，抚平刚刚结束的战争给世界文明造成的创伤，恢复秩序并在人类进步、和平、公正和自由的基础上建设美好未来。在这种乐观情绪的鼓舞下，战后最初的几年中，意识形态冲突、民族主义和狭隘自私尚未抬头，UNESCO等国际组织就是这一时期人类美好希望的产物。它作为联合国的分支机构，承担起守卫人类高尚道德的重任。这个脆弱的组织正是这种忠诚信念的忠实体现。(另一个例子是建立于1946年的国际美术馆协会ICOM，至今仍同AICA一起活跃在这个伟大的事业上。以及建立于1945年的国际造型艺术协会，该协会现已不存)。

　　从创建那一天起，AICA的最重要目标之一，便是在批评作为职业还缺少普遍认知之时，确定和保护批评家的权益，并在独立的经济和智力基础上争取和申明批评家的权利。这一目标，至今在世界的许多地方尚需我们为之不懈奋斗，以求解决批评事业在那里所遭遇的审查、忽视、经济困乏等诸种问题。最初的两个国际美术批评大会在UNESCO的协助下于1948和1949年在巴黎组办。它汇集了来自世界各地的一大批优秀的艺术史家、博物馆长、理论家、批评家，以及兼具理论和批评才能的艺术家。至今，我们的协会仍保持这种开放的临界状态，向多种学科和领域敞开我们的大门。随着其发展壮大，确有必要将AICA同国际美术馆协会ICOM，或称当代艺术收藏及美术馆国际委员会CIMAM，这两个角色分立开来，这意味着AICA将保持其创立的初衷，致力于全部和当代艺术及艺术家相关事业。而ICOM则将工作重心倾向于当代艺术的研究、保存、和展示。即使如此，这两个机构的角色及其成员的边界在某种程度上正在日益模糊。

　　AICA的会员标准60年来一直未变，尽管其国际章程的措辞经过2003年和2008年的两次修正，强调了协会对新兴学科、少数文化、偏远地区，以及世界和社会范围内经济弱势群体始终保持开放状态。

　　根据目前的国际章程，申请者只需要证明其连续三年批评活动的职业经历，由同行提供保证。并表示其拥护AICA基本目标的态度。根据章程，AICA基本目标为：

　　A 推进艺术批评作为一个学科的发展，及其方法论的建设

　　B 推进其会员的伦理和职业权益，共同维护批评家权利

　　C 促进其会员间积极的国际合作，提供有效技术支持，鼓励会员间的会面交流

　　D 促进各文化间对视觉艺术及美学的相互理解

　　E 推动跨越政治、地理、伦理、经济、宗教界限的职业交流

　　F 捍卫思想及言论自由，反对审查制度

　　新章程同过去相比更加清晰明了，将会员范围扩大到电视、录像、电子媒体、教育事业等领域，尤其重要的是，这个范围还将包括在上述领域从业的策展人，这一职业最近才得以界定，但AICA核心成员的涵盖范围仍自动包括章程书面列出的全部。

　　AICA是由各个协会组成的一个联盟，包括各国的分会以及一个国际自由分会，分会需向由全体AICA成员国代表组成的国际委员会报告。AICA的组成部分还包括其位于巴黎的办事处，其成员包括经选举任职的大会主席(无报酬)、总秘书长及财政官，以及只领取基本薪酬的工作人员，总数在二到三人之间。就其规模和组织结构而言，AICA与其1949年初创之时相比已有较大发展。那时的AICA仅有13个分会，其中较有声望、相互建立起良好关系的会员就更加屈指可数。今天，AICA已经有超过4000个付费会员(会员的会费之所以是重要考虑因素，是因为缴纳的会费将成为AICA运作的唯一财政来源)，以及覆盖世界各大洲的63个分会，以及我上面所谈及的一个小规模开放分会。低廉的旅行费用、新技术以及通讯费用的降低，大大地促进了各会员间面对面的交流(这也是AICA的一个首要目标)和实质性的沟通。大会目前正在积极吸收新会员的加入，特别是年轻新人，以及来自相对隔离、处于经济弱势、尚未卷入全球视觉艺术经济的地区的成员。

　　由于时间限制，无法将AICA的全部工作在这里介绍给大家，我在这里仅择其要略述：

　　——一年一度的AICA年会。年会在各个成员国之间轮换举行，每届年会将有来自30-40个不同国家及地区的100-250名会员参与，针对其职业中共同关注的某个特定议题(如全球化的冲击，及批评标准的建立)进行讨论，并共同学习研究东道国的文化的某个方面。(在我担任主席期间，AICA的年会分别在巴黎(原定计划为科特迪瓦，但因其国内动乱而最后转由巴黎承办)、加勒比海地区，斯洛文尼亚、西班牙四个不同地区举办，以及作为莫斯科双年展尾声的，在当地举办的一次大会会议。)

　　——保持同联合国教科文组织UNESCO的紧密联系，作为由前者正式创立的一个非政府组织，AICA保证其会员拥有经UNESCO认可和授权的记者证，享有自由进入博物馆、画廊、文化基金会等所有公立机构及大量私立机构的许可。基于UNESCO的正式承认，AICA会员还可以向UNESCO申请项目基金，这些基金已经帮助在达卡、雅的斯亚贝巴、开普敦、前南斯拉夫及亚美尼亚举办了这些地区的首次国际研讨论坛。

　　接下来我要介绍是AICA项目的常规活动，请各位注意，我将介绍的活动属于AICA总部组办，并不等同于各地分会频繁举行的各种活动暨项目。

　　网站：AICA的网站((www.aica-int.org)保持定期的更新，是向公众提供有关AICA的各种信息和参考的重要平台。在AICA的网站上，你们会看到有关AICA的组织结构、各种活动(例如AICA大会及会员大会的记录)的介绍，以及相似组织或活动主办机构的链接。网站还包括了成员之间的专属通道，包括成员地址录、各种形式文件、以及分会创建指南等。

　　出版：AICA以硬拷贝和正式排版两种形式，持续而稳定地出版印行。在这里，我带来了AICA最近的一些出版物给大家。它包括了针对某些国家或地区的当代艺术的专题研究系列，目前已出版的是波兰和阿尔及利亚，其余部分也将陆续出版。AICA定期出版有关某个主题的论集，例如‘L’Engagement’ (Commitment)，同时也出版各类长度不限的论文，包括南非和巴尔干的研讨会发言，以及各种会议及讨论的成果，例如在法兰克福举办的“第三届欧洲双年展”中有关版权、艺术与社会交往等诸多主题的讨论。AICA同时也以英文和法文出版大量有关艺术的文章，如配合欧洲青年艺术家巡展而出版的“从艺术学院到职业教育”一书。特别希望告诉大家的是，在下一个月，AICA将以在线文本和硬拷贝两种形式，首次推出AICA的历史综述。文章将以英文发表，题目为“全球化大潮中的AICA”，相关细节大家可以在我们的网站上找到。

　　除此之外，每届年会的主办方都会按照惯例将年会全部内容结集出版。最近一期由中国台湾出版，巴西和斯洛文尼亚不久也将出版自己的年会专辑。

　　上述所有活动都无法离开外界各项基金的支持，特别需要着重指出的是各个会员无私而艰苦的工作，他们自愿为AICA奉献出宝贵时间和专业技能。来自外部的基金支持，一直是AICA的可靠经济来源，每一个单独立项的价值都会被认真估量考虑。这些基金除了来自联合国教科文组织，还包括大量政府机构，如英国文化协会、法国文化协会(前身为AFAA)、歌德学院、塞万提斯学院、KulturKontakt 以及 Pro Helvetia。尽管如此，政府机构和文化代表处往往将其自身倾向加于AICA，而这与AICA超国家超民族的基本信条有时并不兼容。这使我们感到，或许我们应该更侧重于那些较少倾向性的经济支援。除了联合国教科文组织以外，目前还有大量的信托和基金会认同于我们的理念，支持着我们的工作，并对我们在欧洲以外其他地区的各项事业给予优先考虑。它们包括Africalia,美国Getty基金会，查尔斯王子基金会、以及荷兰的欧洲文化基金会等等。