Who's Behind the Curtain?

 Who's Behind the Curtain?

Part 2 of the Vancouver Biennale Investigation

In Part 1, I started following the money.

Now I want to follow the people.

Because when an organization puts art into the parks, waterfronts and public spaces where Vancouverites live, walk, cycle and play, I think it's reasonable to ask:

Who decides what we see?

Not because I believe there is some secret conspiracy.

Not because I think artists shouldn't make challenging work.

And not because I believe every piece of public art needs to be pretty.

I'm asking because someone makes these decisions.

And the Vancouver Biennale actually tells us who some of those people are.

Meet the founder

The Biennale identifies Barrie Mowatt as its Founder and President.

It also identifies him as the curator of its Open Air and Residencies program.

According to the Biennale, Mowatt founded the organization around the idea of bringing art into public spaces where people “live, work, play, and transit.”

He also founded the Buschlen Mowatt Fine Art Gallery and the Buschlen Mowatt Nichol Foundation, which the Biennale describes as a principal funder of various Biennale projects and programs.

That is important information.

Because we're not just talking about someone who sits on a board.

The organization's own website identifies its founder as both President and curator of the Open Air program.

So I want to understand how that curatorial authority works.

Who proposes an artwork?

Who evaluates it?

Who decides that it belongs in Vancouver?

Who decides where it goes?

And who has the final word?

Then there is the international curatorial team

The Biennale identifies Marcello Dantas as Senior Curator for Latin and South America and the Asia-Pacific region.

His résumé is extensive. He has curated public-art projects internationally and worked with artists including Ai Weiwei, Anish Kapoor, Jenny Holzer, Bill Viola and Laurie Anderson. The Biennale also identifies him as having organized projects in Brazil and internationally.

Again, I'm not presenting that as something sinister.

Quite the opposite.

It tells us that these aren't random choices.

There is considerable curatorial experience behind the exhibitions.

Which makes my question even more interesting:

What philosophy guides the choices?

And then there are the advisors

The Biennale lists numerous curatorial advisors, including people connected with major international galleries, museums, art institutions and festivals.

Among them are Hans Ulrich Obrist of London's Serpentine Galleries, Steve Nash, former Executive Director of Palm Springs Art Museum, Zheng Shengtian of the Vancouver Art Gallery, Sarah Fillmore of the Art Gallery of Nova Scotia and others.

This is an international network of people with serious experience in contemporary art.

So again:

What are the selection criteria?

What makes one artwork suitable for a Vancouver seawall, park or cycling route?

What makes another unsuitable?

Is emotional impact considered?

Is age appropriateness considered?

Are trauma and accessibility considered?

Is the surrounding neighbourhood considered?

Is the experience of cyclists and pedestrians considered?

Or is the primary consideration artistic merit?

And the Board

The current Board of Directors includes Barrie Mowatt, Murray Nichol, Jesse Saniuk, Marty Hasselbach, Skwetsimeltxw Willard “Buddy” Joseph, Shahrzad Khatami, Virginia Bremner and David Stein, according to the Biennale's published information.

Their backgrounds span philanthropy, real estate, business, education, architecture, landscape architecture, Indigenous arts and culture, community development and the arts.

That diversity is interesting.

And it raises another question:

Where does the final decision actually happen?

Is it with the curator?

The curatorial team?

The Board?

The municipality?

The Park Board?

The property owner?

Or some combination?

That's what I want to find out.

Because the public doesn't get to choose the artwork.

We encounter it.

Sometimes we love it.

Sometimes we walk past it without noticing.

Sometimes we laugh.

Sometimes we stop and take photographs.

And sometimes...

we are disturbed by it.

I have personally experienced some Biennale works as beautiful and joyful.

The enormous colourful Giants at Granville Island is one example.

But I've also encountered works that I found deeply unsettling.

The red Proud Youth sculpture was one.

The enormous laughing figures of A-maze-ing Laughter are another. I personally find those faces creepy rather than joyful.

And now I'm questioning Vancouver Novel, the electronic sign along Point Grey Road that displays changing statements including:

“He hides pills.”

“She is begging again.”

“They can see you.”

The Biennale describes Vancouver Novel as an exploration of public and private life and says its statements are deliberately sometimes “banal and ominous.”

That's an artistic concept.

But I'm interested in something else:

What happens when that concept meets an actual human being having an actual day?

A person who is grieving.

A teenager.

A person in recovery.

A parent.

Someone who has lost a loved one.

Someone who is unhoused.

Someone who simply went out for a bicycle ride because they needed an hour of peace.

That is where art becomes public policy.

Once you put art into a gallery, people can choose whether to enter.

Once you put it beside a public bike route, you've changed the audience.

The person experiencing the work may have no idea who the artist is.

They may not know the curatorial concept.

They may not have read the Biennale's explanation.

They may simply see the words.

And react.

That's not necessarily a failure of the artwork.

But it is something the people responsible for placing art in public spaces should consider.

So this investigation is getting more specific.

I want to know:

Who nominates the artists?

Who selects the works?

Who approves the final selection?

Who selects the location?

What criteria are used?

What role does the Board play?

What role do municipal governments play?

What public consultation is required?

How are complaints handled?

Can the public force reconsideration?

Who decides when something comes down?

And perhaps the biggest question:

Does the public have meaningful input — or are we simply the audience?

I'm not going to answer those questions before I have the documents.

That's the point of this series.

I'm going to follow the paper trail.

Part 3: WHO APPROVES THE ART?

That's where we're going into the municipal agreements, Park Board process, location approvals and the actual documents surrounding The Proud Youth.

Because I've already found something fascinating:

The City of Vancouver has released the FOI file.

Thirty pages of records about that artwork and the public-art process.

And that's where we can stop speculating and start reading what actually happened behind the scenes.

To be continued...