An institution is defined by its ability to ask questions ... a report on the 2008 IKT congress in Montreal: renegotiating a critical curatorial practice in the face of new challenges.

When some 140 contemporary art curators met in Montreal for the 2008 International Association of Curators of Contemporary Art (IKT) Congress in May, it was the organization's first meeting outside Europe. IKT exists to stimulate innovation and debate within curatorial practice as well as to en gage with the evolving dynamics between the production, distribution and conservation of contemporary art. (1) Founded by the late Harald Szeeman, a highly regarded pioneer in curatorial practice, IKT will celebrate its 40th anniversary in 2009 and is the largest association of its kind, with a membership of more than 500 contemporary art curators, directors and cultural managers from non-profit exhibition spaces and museums as well as freelance curators, representing 50 countries.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

IKT began organizing international congresses on a regular and nomadic basis in 1994. It was at the 2005 meeting in Poland that Parachute Director Chantal Pontbriand proposed Montreal and Quebec City as host cities for the 2008 congress. (2) Pontbriand recognized that hosting the congress would provide an unprecedented opportunity for Canadian curators to connect to an international network and find potential partners for projects--something that is increasingly important given funding cuts like the slashing of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade's discretionary Public Diplomacy budget that provided support to artists and curators presenting exhibitions abroad. (3) Bringing IKT to Montreal and Quebec in 2008 was ideal, as it coincided with the new Triennale quebecoise at the Musee d'art contemporain de Montreal, Manif d'art and the 400th anniversary of Quebec City. Hosting IKT also served to increase awareness of the organization in Canada and to attract new Canadian members (myself included) and to introduce international curators to some of their Canadian counterparts, artists and institutions. The well-orchestrated program interspersed a members' forum, panel discussion and annual general assembly with a charged itinerary of visits to Montreal exhibition spaces, vernissages, a "Situationist" bus tour of Montreal and a day trip to exhibitions in Quebec City. (4) There was ample time for networking and conversation over organized breakfasts, lunches and dinners, and when bussing between venues. During the members' forum held on the first full day, a mic was passed around the packed auditorium, inviting everyone to introduce themselves and their projects in turn. I was struck by the array of countries and exhibition spaces represented as well as by the number of young constituents, many of whom are directors or leaders in their respective institutions and organizations. Generous support from government agencies (5) made the congress surprisingly affordable: the annual membership fee of 60 [euro] (or $80) was also the congress registration fee (and IKT also makes a number of travel bursaries available each year).

The topic for the 2008 panel discussion was "Economy and the Visual Arts." Adequate funding resources for the visual arts has always been a political struggle, but in recent years distinctly new parameters and challenges have come into play that shape curatorial practice on a day-to-day basis. There is an emerging discourse that analyzes what can be broadly characterized as a neo-liberal instrumentalization of art and its impact in various countries and regions across the art world. (6) Not only are neo-liberal economic policies of deregulation eroding the public sphere, but market principles are also being imposed upon ostensibly public-service institutions. (7) The corporatization of public art institutions morphs art and culture into "services" and "products" privileges managerial approaches over curatorial expertise, fixates on institutional branding and demands measurable outcomes and strategic plans, where value is assessed not by artistic quality but in economic terms and broad audience numbers that are based on an outdated populist conception of a homogenous public sphere. The Canada Council's drastic shift in focus "from creation production to 'career promotion' and 'market development'" can also be seen as symptomatic of this new paradigm. (8) Within cultural capitalism, publics have mutated into markets and private-sector funding and private-public partnerships are normalized or even a prerequisite. The convergence of public and private revenue and interests in the economization of culture renders ambiguous just whose interests are being served. Reminding us of Theodor Adorno's insight that "whoever speaks of culture, speaks of administration as well." Marko Karo and Marita Muukkonen asserted last year that we must "not only speak of administration, but to, with and against administration." (9)

While globalization has brought about unprecedented interest in and opportunities for cultural exchange, much activity is generated by a belief that investment in culture and "creative industries" and the development of "creative cities" will produce economic benefits. (10) Culture and creative industries are heralded by politicians and numerous cultural producers as a burgeoning "creative economy" prime for exploitation. But in contrast to the "culture industry" of the 1940s analyzed by Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno, today's creative industries are not mega-media corporations but rather clusters of micro-enterprises of cultural entrepreneurs. (11) The precarious model of the artist (or other cultural agent) as freelance entrepreneur with unlimited creativity, who subsidizes his or her own production in order to maintain autonomy and achieve self-realization, is the kind of flexible worker that neo-liberal economic policies idealize and have rendered all too mainstream. (12) While the creative industries hype has been slow to catch on in Canada, (13) Conservative funding cuts might be rationalized "under a paradigm that sees cultural producers as 'self-reliant' and 'self-organising' entrepreneurs--the core concept of the creative industries ideology based on an economy of 'talent' and self-initiative." (14)

As Canada's still-nascent commercial art market supports few artists and other art professionals, contemporary art practitioners and administrators rely extensively on public and private funding and must adapt to shifting support scenarios. Limited funding makes for an economy where access to resources and job opportunities is highly competitive. A growing number of curatorial studies programs and PhD programs for "artistic research" have sprung up in recent years, spurring a further level of professionalization in the field. In Canada such programs are for the most part still small and new, aiming to bring aspiring Canadian curators up to speed with their European counterparts. Arguably, artist-run centres and other public galleries with strong curatorial models have provided a fertile training ground for curators for decades and will continue to do so in an "on the ground" manner distinct from courses of study.

The forces redefining the microcosms in which contemporary art can thrive and interact within larger economic systems are among the issues the IKT is mandated to engage with. The panel discussion entitled "New Challenges for Curatorial and Museum Practice" sought to address how "on the one hand, the intertwinement of the market-economy, the visual arts and art institutions, and on the other hand, the changed balance between public and private" (15) are affecting curatorial practice. Three distinctly positioned curators, Louise Neri, Nina Montmann and Jo-Ann Kane, responded based on their respective circumstances, which span the non-profit to commercial spectrum. Neri drew upon a career that includes being founding director of an artists' space in Melbourne, New York, editor for Parkett, artistic director of London's White Cube and her current position with Gagosian Gallery, where she advises on artist acquisitions, exhibition programming, publications and collections while also actively working as a board member of several non-profit arts organizations. In particular, she highlighted conflicts of interest that can arise at the intersection of public and commercial spheres. As editor of Art and Its Institutions (Black Dog, 2006), curator at the Nordic Institute for Contemporary Art in Helsinki (2003-06) and presently Professor of Art Theory and the History of Ideas at the Royal College of Fine Arts in Stockholm, Montmann discussed ideological shifts in the museum's foie from: the inauguration of the British Museum in 1759 with its displays of colonial conquest and its project to create an enlightened citizenry, to the branded entertainment venues that have metamorphosed to facilitate a wholly different kind of consumption. Montmann also put forward progressive ideas of "relational institutions" that define themselves through creating and engaging with multiple, specific public spheres. Kane also addressed ethical issues and provided insights into corporate collecting and the role of contemporary art awards in creating a "brand image," based on her experience as curator of the Hydro Quebec Collection (1997-2000) and her current role as manager of the Bank of Canada Collection.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

A statement voiced by Chus Martinez (recently appointed chief curator at Museu d'Art Contemporani de Barcelona) during the lively audience response that followed resounds in my mind: "what defines an institution is its ability to ask questions" To me, this proposition strikes the nexus of critical curatorial practice and is what membership in IKT offers opportunities to reflect upon. But crucially, it is not institutions per se that pose questions but rather the individuals working within them--both those specific institutions with a name, mandate and board of directors, and the more nebulous institution that is the art world as a whole in which we all operate. Given the integral role that I feel art plays in shaping public life and our relation to the world, it is vital that we as contemporary art practitioners find strategic ways to pose critical questions through our daily practice and diverse projects. I say strategic because our ability to pose relevant or "difficult" questions is at rimes constrained by the very conditions that we seek to investigate, reveal or challenge. We need spaces and networks within which we can articulate oppositional enquiries that perhaps we can't voice under out regular circumstances. As cultural workers within changing structures, how can we "speak up against the increasing cultural political instrumentalisation and managerialism as a publicy funded institution?" (16) What are the means by which we can realize projects that address "counter publics" and create multiple or even "agonistic" public spheres (17) and still satisfy performance indicators? Participation in an association like IKT offers a platform for such discussions. As a network, IKT creates opportunities to connect and make alliances with other practitioners, to exchange information that can be useful in strategizing and to be inspired and challenged by ideas through learning how others are pushing boundaries. The 2008 Congress proved to be an enriching experience and seeded new questions that participants will take back to the spheres in which they work. IKT is open to new members, so consider making the trip to the 2009 Congress in Helsinki and Tallin, or to the 2010 congress in Athens.

(1.) http://www.iktsite.org/ about, accessed 28 June, 2008.

(2.) Parachute has continued to rosier international contemporary art activities since the magazine went on hiatus in 2007.

(3.) The Conservative government announced cuts of $11.9 million over two years to the DFAIT budget in September 2006 These cuts eradicate the discretionary Public Diplomacy budget above the base budget, already recognized as grossly insufficient. See the Canadian Conference of the Arts bulletins: http://www.ccarts.ca/en/ advocacy/bulletins/2007/0507.htm and http://www.ccarts.ca/en/ advocacy/bulletins/4006. htm, accessed 28 June 2008. Interestingly, the Conservative cuts are out of step with other countries' budget increases for the promotion of culture abroad. The US, for example, has tripled its cultural diplomacy budget since 2001.

(4.) There was an additional post-congress program of visits in Montreal, Ottawa and Toronto.

(5.) The congress was sponsored by the DFAIT, Canada Council for the Arts, Ministere de la Culture, des Communications et de la Condition feminine du Quebec, Ministere des Affaires municipales et des Regions du Quebec, Conseil des Arts et des Lettres du Quebec, La Ville de Montreal, Conseil des arts de Montreal and Tourisme Montreal. Parachute was joined by the Musee d'art contemporain de Montreal, the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, the Canadian Centre for Architecture, DHC/ART Foundation for Contemporary Art, the Cinematheque quebecoise, Musee national des beaux-arts du Quebec and Manif d'art in hosting the congress.

(6.) See, for example, the innovative curatorial project European Cultural Policies 2015 that was launched at the 2005 Frieze Art Fair. Published as a book edited by Maria Lind and Raimund Minichbauer (London, Stockholm and Vienna: Laspis and eipcp, 2005), it is also available for download on the website of the European Institute for Progressive Cultural Policies at http://eipcp.net.

(7.) As Jim McGuigan outlines, neo-liberalism has profound implications for all public "services" including culture. From a cultural policy point of view, World Trade Organization agreements such as the GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services) and TRIPS (Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights) are of fundamental significance. See Jim McGuigan, "Neo-liberalism, Culture and Policy," International Journal of Cultural Policy, Vol. 11, No. 3 (November, 2005): 229-241, and Jim McGuigan, Rethinking Cultural Policy (Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2004).

(8.) See Clive Robertson, "Launching a new ARTSWORLD Trusted? Connected? Canadian?" Fuse Magazine, Vol. 28, No. 1 (November, 2005): 8-13.

(9.) Marko Karo and Marita Muukkonen, "Titoreli's Cage: Confined Spaces at Work," Framework: The Finnish Art Review 6 (January, 2007): 64-67.

(10.) The UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport first adopted the concept of the creative industries in 1998, defining it as "those activities which have their origin in individual creativity, skill and talent and which have the potential for wealth and job creation through the generation and exploitation of intellectual property." http://www.nesta.org. uk/creative-industries/, accessed June 28, 2008. Critical discourse around creative industries and cultural policies has been developing in Europe through endeavours such as the symposium Critique of Creative Industries organized by FRAME (Finnish Fund for Art Exchange) and eipcp (European Institute for Progressive Cultural Policies) in Helsinki in 2006 as part of the European Cultural Policies 2015 workshop series.

(11.) Gerald Raunig, "Creative Industries as Mass Deception," Framework: The Finnish Art Review 6 (January, 2007): 8-12. Raunig is referring to the chapter "Culture Industry: Mass Deception as Enlightenment" in Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adomo's Dialectic of Enlightenment (1944).

(12.) See Raunig's text for a cogent analysis of how "self-precarization" is perpetuated in the cultural and academic fields through the acceptance of volunteerism and low-paid jobs as unchangeable facts.

(13.) See Kirsty Robertson, "Crude Culture: The Creative Industries in Canada," Fuse Magazine, Vol. 31, No. 2 (April, 2008): 12-21.

(14.) Marion Von Osten, "Unpredictable Outcomes: A Reflection After Some Years of Debates on Creativity and Creative Industries," in My Creativity Reader: A Critique of Creative Industries, ed. Geert Lovink and Ned Rossiter (Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2007): 55. http:// www.networkcultures. org/_uploads/32.pdf, accessed June 28, 2008.

(15.) Information handout for the session.

(16.) Karo and Muukkonen.

(17.) See Simon Sheikh, "The Trouble with Institutions, or Art and its Publics," in Art and its Institutions, ed. Nina Montmann (London: Black Dog Publishing, 2006): 142-149.

Heather Anderson is an assistant curator of contemporary art at the National Gallery of Canada.