katalog-overlapping voices - Ritesinstitute

about the Berlin wall. weiss’ work will to a large
degree have an educational function to those unfamiliar
with the history of the israeli wall.
in short: the difference is that in israel the artwork
primarily intervenes into a context whereas in austria
it also explains. this raises the question: does
the added pedagogical value that comes from
transplanting political art and showing it in a collective
exhibition abroad not demand that curators
somehow engage with this level?
one way of resolving this issue might be the creation
of a separate space that caters to the viewers’
desire to acquire information and learn about the
context of the artwork on display. this is not an issue
of explaining the individual works of art – of
adding, for example, a sign that explains how we
are supposed to read weiss’ installation. Rather, a
supplementary information section can unburden
the work of art from its function as a medium of
pedagogy, for which it is not well prepared. for the
exhibition in the essl museum, information on such
things as the history of the separation barrier being
built by the state of israel or a glossary can be
found in a separate room – an approach that gives
the works of art more space to develop their own
autonomous language.
at the same time, the disadvantage of such an arrangement
is that the art and information sections
can end up competing with each other. after all,
information and background can hardly remain
neutral. Both the pieces being exhibited and information
sections do political work. there is no easy
solution to this problem. at best, the information
section should aim to explain the context of the different
pieces of art in a reflexive manner by historically
situating the political debates to which they
refer. Rather than make overt political declarations
on “the wall” being built, it should show the history
of debates on the project, including the history
of the terminology (between “apartheid wall”,
“security barrier” and “separation fence”), and
competing arguments about its legitimacy and consequences
for the life of Palestinians and israelis.
the aim is neither to claim an apolitical form of objectivity
nor to suggest that works of art should remain
untouched by curatorial interventions so as
to preserve their authenticity. the intent is rather
to avoid reducing a work of art to a mere illustration
of a programmatic statement made by others.
what would be the point of showing a complex
work such as Yoav weiss’ if, next to it, there is a
long declaration (or indeed a confession of political
faith) by the curators on their opposition to the
wall?
Strange Meanings, Strange Allies
a second set of problems arises when, rather than
viewing a work of art as the point of departure for
an explanation, viewers see it as an intervention –
but one that addresses issues that would not occur
to the intended israeli or Palestinian viewer. at
34 OVERLAPPING VOICES
the core, the problem is that the political messages
of the exhibited pieces were often not made to
directly address an austrian audience. works such
as tal adler’s documentation of unrecognized Bedouin
villages might be interventions into multiple
contexts. adler certainly draws on languages that
are as familiar to audiences in tel aviv as they are
to viewers in london or vienna. Yet, he is not trying
to challenge current austrian images of israelis,
Jews, Palestinians, and Bedouins that are
informed by the austrian history of collective anti-
Jewish violence, the guilt discourses on complicity
in genocide, and anti-semitism.
indeed, even the choice of curators and the organization
of the exhibition have different meanings
in austria than they do within israeli and Palestinian
society. the very act of choosing a Jewish
israeli and a Palestinian as curators, as well as
showing the works of Palestinian and israeli artists
side by side, is a statement against those who oppose
such alliance-building. for israelis and Palestinians
alike, it can serve as a testimony to the
viability of a common struggle against the occupation.
Yet, that need not be the way it is read in
austria. in austria, the notion that curators and artists
have been recruited equally from “both sides”
can potentially reinforce the false sense that austrians
can constitute an uninvolved third party.
even if both curators share a particular vision of
opposition to occupation, there is still the sense
that the mere fact that both “identities” are present
makes austrians honest brokers; a role they
are, as noted above, badly equipped to assume in
this case.
the question is how an exhibition should account
for the fact that austrian media always deal with
israelis and thus also Palestinians through the lens
of the austrian past. indeed, perhaps the metaphor
of reading through a particular lens is too
weak: the important issue is not one of misreading
but of projection. Political art coming from israel/
Palestine can become an opportunity to negotiate
historical issues that are not always referenced in
any obvious manner. a recent discussion at an israeli
film festival organized in vienna can serve as
an illustration of this. after the screening of a movie
about a love affair between two women in the
israeli army, the organizers offered an opportunity
to discuss the work with the director. in the discussion
an austrian woman in the audience
brought up the suicide of her grandfather after he
fought for the german army, the wehrmacht. in reaction
another member of the audience accused
her of being a “fascist”. within minutes the discussion
moved from a conversation on sexual identities
in israel to a polemical exchange on austrian
involvement in nazi war crimes. the film was not
misread. instead it served as a mere occasion for
another debate.
in the context detailed above, any engagement with
israeli policies – and particularly those involving
human rights abuses such as those tal adler documents
in his work on “unrecognized” Bedouin
villages – has the potential to become part of the
renegotiation of a collective austrian history as well
as the family history of individual austrians. Part
of the argument for organizing the current exhibition
on Palestinian and israeli political art was that
it is exciting to see how these debates function in
austria. Unfortunately, these circumstances also
have the potential to impede a reception that allows
for a nuanced perspective on israeli and Palestinian
politics and struggles. working through
questions of austrian guilt and historical responsibility
can also undermine the aim of attempts to
move beyond simplistic narratives which reduce
complex realities to an uncomplicated situation of
perpetrators and victims in the middle east.
what can it mean to think about such an exhibition
politically in the austrian context under these
circumstances? should there be an extra section
and instructions to art educators on how to deal
with the reflection of the nazi past in pieces of art
that never wanted to address that subject? where
does this leave Palestinian art, which is only part
of this constellation indirectly? Rather than offer
straightforward answers, this essay can make a number
of concluding observations and suggestions:
1) although we presuppose that the perception of
israel in austria is strongly influenced by the history
of european Jewry and the genocide against
the european Jews, an exhibition about israel is
probably the least productive place to address the
history of anti-semitism. this is best done, rather,
in museums that aim to suggest new ways in which
visitors can think about difference in their own environment.
1 the aim should be to offer a space for
reflection on austrian perceptions that allows visitors
to understand the interventions of the artists,
not to use works of art on Palestinian and israeli
politics and life in order to rethink austrian
history.
2) furthermore, we can only presume that the history
of austrian anti-semitism is relevant for the
perception of visitors because the targeted viewers
are assumed to be a native austrians with no
migration background and a family history that
might implicate them in nazi crimes. Yet, audiences
for art exhibitions can come from diverse
backgrounds, which would make it a dubious move
on the side of the exhibition designers to suggest
that there is any typical or ideal viewer. the “space
for reflection” suggested above would thus be most
useful when created by museum educators in dialogue
with actual visitors.
3) it is commonly assumed by those organizing
events on israel or Palestine in austria that a discussion
was successful if nobody made any uncalled-for
references to national socialism. clearly
there is the danger that comparisons end up equating
nazi and israeli policies. naïve comparisons
are not just inappropriate in the austrian context;